Play Now Login Create Account
illyriad
  New Posts New Posts RSS Feed - 31Mar13 Military Unit Production Time Adjustments
  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Register Register  Login Login

Topic Closed31Mar13 Military Unit Production Time Adjustments

 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <1234 11>
Author
Winter_Shard View Drop Down
New Poster
New Poster
Avatar

Joined: 13 Apr 2013
Status: Offline
Points: 7
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 13 Apr 2013 at 00:10
I was hoping a GM or an established Orc player could assist me with working out what the production times are for making a Kobold Cohort are as I have delevelled my Lvl 20 Barrack and relevelled and the production time does not appear to have changed?

At the time of the production change I had 200 Kobold Cohorts in a queue. As instructed in the update I delevelled and relevelled back up to 20.

The production time change from 1000 to 370 confuses me in terms of how many per minute can be made. My Level 20 barracks states I can make 19.46 per/hr or one every 3m 5 sec which is the same it was when queued.

Any advice on whether this is correct or whether I have to delevel a second time or have a problem would be greatly appreciated.

I guess I am envious of a dwarf player who can build a Stalwart every 90 secs!

Thank you.
Back to Top
Salararius View Drop Down
Postmaster
Postmaster
Avatar

Joined: 26 Sep 2011
Location: USA
Status: Offline
Points: 519
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 02 Apr 2013 at 21:18
so, elves building T1 bow are probably planning to use them ASAP, elves building T2 bow are probably not.  Same could be said of other races and T1/T2 spear but orcs will just build T1 unless they very specifically plan to attack humans or others with large cavalry.  Seems like with these changes there is more possibility in certain instances to determine what a player intends (or believes will occur) based on what they are building.  That could be interesting?

Back to Top
opk View Drop Down
Greenhorn
Greenhorn


Joined: 23 Mar 2013
Status: Offline
Points: 60
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 02 Apr 2013 at 00:58
I've came up with interesting things about recovery.

I talked about recovery sooner. What is this concept: if 2 players start to build their army from 0 at the same time and send their armies to fight each other (defender and attacker have to be defined) on a certain terrain type, who would win? The winner is the one who recovers the faster. Interesting to know for periods during which players have to produce units constantly and send them constantly on the battlefield. The one with the more recovery overpowers the other one over time. 

For exemple now, if i only talk about basic training times, you produce 6912 Sentinels a month. You also produce 3240 Knights a month. If you make them fight on a Large Mountain, cavalry wins but with only 100 survivors (i would have thought knights would have lost actually). So on large mountain, knights has the same recovery as sentinels. Seen differently, sentinels will recover as fast as knights, but there is no comparison about their weapon demands, sentinels cost almost nothing, compared with knights. For that reason you can sustain a higher prod rate for sentinels (with sov) than for knights. So in reality, recovery of sentinels is better than knights on large mountains, and requires way fewer efforts too.

Recovery of knights is still good against sentinels on small mountains. So it might be still be interesting to break sieges with Knights on small mountains? But there are spears too:

You produce basically 14010 kobold cohorts a mounth. Your 3240 knights lose, leaving 3000 kobold alive. So even on small mountains, T1 orc spears's recovery is way better than Knights one... and same way, kobold are way cheaper than knights and can get more sov to unit prod than them, so that in reality, this recovery is even more advantageous for T1 orc spears. 

So it's not a good idea anymore to break sieges with cavalry, even on small mountains. On Large hills, we have the exact same result than on small mountain so not a good idea either to use knight there. And on small hill knight recovery roughly equals T1 orcs one... so it's very limit.... would still be a bad idea, but knights are the best to attack small hills. 

Well, it was just to explain the concept of recovery, as i think it wasnt very clear when i used that term earlier. It's an important factor. If you know your recovery will be longer and harder than the one of your opponent on that or that terrain, you may avoid to meet him there.




Edited by opk - 02 Apr 2013 at 01:05
Old Penitent Knight
Back to Top
opk View Drop Down
Greenhorn
Greenhorn


Joined: 23 Mar 2013
Status: Offline
Points: 60
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 01 Apr 2013 at 23:37
About if you have all your time to max out your army, Trueshots would be a bit better indeed.

Originally posted by Elmindra Elmindra wrote:

 To be quite honest, given the greater amount of terrain that swords are not assessed a negative terrain bonus the T2 sword should be a much larger part of the Elven offensive arsenal.

Indeed. Though, T2 elven inf is quite costy in weapons (2 swords+2chain Oo), so it's quite prohibitive seen like this, it'd be a challenge to sustain the basic prod rate of this unit, which just increased. But i think that an Elf building only Sentinels as ranged units could afford 2 or maybe 3 Inf towns. But Elven infantry is not the fastest produced compared to other races and the one with the lowest attack. 

Edit: though, real interest is in their speed, T2 elven inf getting 8. It's the only T2 inf faster than its T1, and the fastest inf overall if im right. Good for siege break.


Edited by opk - 01 Apr 2013 at 23:47
Old Penitent Knight
Back to Top
Elmindra View Drop Down
Forum Warrior
Forum Warrior
Avatar

Joined: 10 Sep 2012
Status: Offline
Points: 464
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 01 Apr 2013 at 23:26
I am sure many older players find the T2 required to build a merely trivial thing and not an influence on what to build, and even I find myself not really worrying about it.  The only thing I would say is they lack of leather required for the T1 may lead me to producing saddles in my archer towns, since you well know that I am not maxed out in troops so I will be giving my T1 a spin  :)

I also find myself rethinking my town design, since while I love cavalry I do believe I would like 2 sword towns now instead of 1 to take advantage of their superior terrain advantage.  Sigh, and our T2 spears are finally worth making but we only have 10 towns to work with.....
Back to Top
Kumomoto View Drop Down
Postmaster General
Postmaster General


Joined: 19 Oct 2009
Status: Offline
Points: 2224
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 01 Apr 2013 at 23:22
Totally agree Elmindra. That's my read on things.
Back to Top
Elmindra View Drop Down
Forum Warrior
Forum Warrior
Avatar

Joined: 10 Sep 2012
Status: Offline
Points: 464
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 01 Apr 2013 at 23:20
In comparing Elven T1 to T2 archers, it is very simple.  In the long run, the T2 gives slightly superior power per gold upkeep.  This means if you have infinite time to max troops, T2 is a better choice.  In the short term, T1 is even on attack per hour trained and slightly better in every type of defense per hour trained.

Your choice is simply do you have enough time to rebuild your troops to full before using again or not.  If yes, then T2 is a better choice.  If not, then T1 is a better choice.

What I think is the most dramatic change to elves is the massive boost their swords and spears received.  The elven T2 sword is now on par with the elven T2 cavalry in terms of offensive power per hour trained (1:1 ratio).  To be quite honest, given the greater amount of terrain that swords are not assessed a negative terrain bonus the T2 sword should be a much larger part of the Elven offensive arsenal.
Back to Top
opk View Drop Down
Greenhorn
Greenhorn


Joined: 23 Mar 2013
Status: Offline
Points: 60
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 01 Apr 2013 at 23:19
Originally posted by Kumomoto Kumomoto wrote:

??? The power/gld is better for Trueshots in 3 of the 5 and equal in 1 of the 5...

Indeed, but when i see this (see below), it doesnt make me feel it's actually significant. But that's my feeling, everyone can judge this differently. 

 
Power/goldSentinel10,011,511,512,08,0
 Trueshot10,712,011,312,08,3

To be accurate, in terms of gold/h (only important for full army), this is the bonus you'd get with trueshots compared with sentinels:

Attack: +7%
Sear def: +4%
sword def: -2%
bow def: 0%
cav def: +4%


Edited by opk - 01 Apr 2013 at 23:25
Old Penitent Knight
Back to Top
Kumomoto View Drop Down
Postmaster General
Postmaster General


Joined: 19 Oct 2009
Status: Offline
Points: 2224
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 01 Apr 2013 at 23:11
??? The power/gld is better for Trueshots in 3 of the 5 and equal in 1 of the 5...
Back to Top
opk View Drop Down
Greenhorn
Greenhorn


Joined: 23 Mar 2013
Status: Offline
Points: 60
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 01 Apr 2013 at 23:11
Sentinels are almost as fast as cavalry, and they have an excellent recovry time for mountain attack, for all the reasons developped in the preevious pages (less weapon restictions, more sov availability,...), so it's totally possible for them to replace cavalry in the role of siege breakers on mountains, and i agree even on forests. Poor cavalry... the problem about their decreasing usefulness is serious... while cavalry is a unit mainly used to defend onself.
Old Penitent Knight
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <1234 11>
  Share Topic   

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down

Forum Software by Web Wiz Forums® version 12.03
Copyright ©2001-2019 Web Wiz Ltd.