Hi all.. first time as an A/M
do share your thoughts about the builds you'd recommend for an UD mystic. Cheers
also the ofspecs/acre and defspecs/acre
Printable View
Hi all.. first time as an A/M
do share your thoughts about the builds you'd recommend for an UD mystic. Cheers
also the ofspecs/acre and defspecs/acre
60% guilds 10% homes 20% banks 10% towers untill u get "enough" wpa. Once u get "enough" wpa build them just like you would any normal attacker but put the spare land u'd normally have in farms ->towers.
Standard training goals when i ran undead mystic was 4 wpa, 1 tpa, 10+ "offense" per acre 8 dspec/acre, 5 ppa. FOR ME low tpa was fine because i always ran high WT or sized my prov such that ns/aw weren't an issue and my desire was to get chained->massacred to be a pain in the ass to deal with. Alternatively u could try to go a bit more tanky with less offense and "enough" tpa to avoid ns from enemy cores, but my experience with that is limited as its not how i chose to fit undead mystick into my own kd.
I play similar. I don't run the same style suicide offense as the other undeads (persians right massacres can be a *****) but i avoid running too much defense. you might find success in gaining lots of land with running more defense, but this is mainly because your opponent doesn't view you as a big threat. You'll likely become a target for the opposing kingdoms thieves. Not to mention the fact that putting on lots of land in war makes your WPA pitiful. It's somewhat of a tightrope walk. You want to get hit and you want to hit to maximize your damage on the other kingdom. Try to avoid putting on too much land and stay towards the median of your kingdoms size and networth going into war. Consider well placed massacres yourself (especially on those bacons), though this may encourage the same response from your enemies. Thieves are going to get you. Run high WT's and just enough tpa to at least counter their attackers thieves.
I agree with persians build recommendation, but running a full attacking undead i run WT's but I don't run nearly as many as when i play A/M. AW can be brutal to an A/M and its something i recommend in a Undead/mystics build. Run as high a number as you can, especially when you start accruing honor and you become a bigger target.
Considering the lower defense (compared to t/m races) and the total amount of wizards on such a province, how will undead mystics be looking to recover from a chain?
Why would the total amount of wizards be important? With 70% guilds you need about 6 rl days to reach 4 wpa. Thats a worst case scenario. one question is, if you get chained at all. It might depend on your kingdom. If you have opa monster dryads and orcs and wpa moster dark elves in your kingdom, you might not be a priority. Especially since even chained you stay a dangerous attacker.
I see an undead-mystics mage role as a t/m supporter: mostly doing fireballs and max duration greeds against other attackers, casting rituals and denying enemy rituals.
You dont need a lot of wpa for this role.
LL and good incoming land and they should recover just the same as an orc/dryad who gets chained.Quote:
Originally Posted by Uhm hoi
@ MeIkor. That's my relative approach. My attempt is to not let my advantages become limits. At the end of the day you're undead with high sustain offense and plague. Plague is one of those things t/ms don't like even more than attackers, unless they're clerics.
I've played orc mystic and undead sage and I use the enemies actions as leverage, like a zone-read tactic. Instead of balancing myself I leave that to the enemy. If I'm not targeted as an attacker I understand how to regulate my acre intake, but I do it for more than wpa/tpa; I'll stop at a critical nw/acre sector with the intention of extending the gap. Thus forcing higher resource expenditure by the enemy to chain or reestablish themselves in the gap. I use my economic yield and activity to aid the chained provinces regularly which takes pressure off my kingdom t/ms.
If I'm targeted as an attacker then the predictable takes place, as mentioned above. The massacres that follow should be seen as opportunities to vanquish another enemies defenses. I'm well into raze and nominal acre yield and don't mind abducting to draw aggression toward myself. A good zero sum game with an eye for the chain process may allow you to interfere with the enemy war doctrine. If you're in the mud(chained) you should make the enemies biggest attackers feel like they're sliding down there with you.
I do not understand the servers love of Undead Mystic.Quote:
Originally Posted by Agrath
It seems to be a case of using a wrench to dive a screw into the wall instead of a hammer and a nail.
Undead Mystics are pretty good, mainly because they do get the racial +1 mana, and they have one of the highest offences in the game atm. So if your kingdom is looking to run more hybrid type of setups, then UD/Mystic is a decent one to run. Similar to running Undead Paladin, the mana helps.
@StratOcastle. I dont know anything about zone-read tactics, but I strongly agree with everything else. I see it as a chess game, where I prepare a countermove depending on the enemies move. Undead Mystic gives these options due to insanely strong synergies as A/M and an ebb and flow like transformation between A/m and a/M.
An orc/dryad (or non-mystic undead) has considerably less total wizards to make overpopulation worse and can landlust too, mystic only gives a small damage bonus on that. You cant do much about incoming land from attacks after you've made them and a few ticks later get chained.Quote:
Originally Posted by Persain
Last age I ran an Undead/mystic.
Theres alot of potential in it, but needs a clear KD strat to work great.
Off always grew in war, great FB power to controll econ and LL if chained.
Just avoid the massacers and you will be fine.
On the other hand as we dont run them this age :-)Quote:
Originally Posted by czen
High elite defences are a pain to take down with nightmares especially later on in war when wpa have gone down (at least that was last age, dont know if changes adress it)
Early massacres on the smallest undead can put them out of NM abililty. With fewer provinces doing NM the defence will not go down as much as needed to really cripple the target.
They are very dependent on runes, any number of towers you are running is probably half of what you need. Opponents should Lightning strike, burn towers, steal their runes as undead wont have the best of tpa.
If you see a specific wave time do sabotage wizards prewave to drop the available manapool.
higher elite casualties will indeed be interesting to see. Depending on the numbers undead/mystic could be brutal. Bit of a gamble with a good amount of rogues still this round. Any kingdom running undead/mystics will want to squish Bacons asap.
Undead mystic doesn't work vs competitive kingdoms. Fun ghetto play though if you want to do one man nm waves. When being chained you just release your wizards........ for the record it is a better combo then undead rogue. Lol
I laughed pretty hard when the survey of the world showed undead being the race of choice for rogues next age.Quote:
Originally Posted by Coldhearted
they wont ll as easily or as succesfully. as for incoming land, you have to plan your hits for geting chained. its more work, you cant just blindly go...ooh im top off go smash. You have to say hrm..im likely to get chained now, who can i hit to make sure i have good incoming acres, the chain target wont give me enough, hey leader can u plan for me to do an off target hit so i dont get !@#$ if i get chained.Quote:
Originally Posted by Uhm hoi
undead mystic works fine v compettitve kds. i ran it in an age where we went 5/5 and then had them en masse in a decent setup that we had 3 wins with. Undead in innately a support race, going mystic for a little MS support is fine if u dont want to desync your kd with 1/2 tact, 1/2 non tact, or warrior doesnt have "enough" to provide a real benefit.Quote:
Originally Posted by Coldhearted
UD mystic works fine vs competitive KDs when you have 4+ combined with DEs. A/m + a/M is nasty combo
@Persian any pro can run about anything and make it work. But is the combo the best?
This age I would say undead mystic would work but compare it to DE they don't make much sense overall. At least that's my opinion Haha.
its a cheap way to get MS into the kd. since warrior doesnt have +1 general, cleric isnt that amazing on undead, and tact as always is a garbage pick i'd say warhero and mystic are the best options for undead this age.Quote:
Originally Posted by Coldhearted
Why is tact garbage? Newish player here and genuinely curious.Quote:
Originally Posted by Persain
On topic, I went undead mystic last age and Persain in first reply makes good points :-)Quote:
Originally Posted by Agrath
actually you might not need that high amount of banks, spec armies are cheap, as long as you keep hitting for credits and conversions. Though you wont be funding any dragons.
Im sure maxing wpa as soon as possible is the best tactic, personally i went a little slower, started with 40% guilds but we went to war early (and lost due to low towers).
I stress for war you need much towers for whatever spells you are going for. Even late in age we used 20% towers or more, earlier double that is not enough to really spend your mana. No runes in war does not make a wizard happy... 4wpa is a sweetspot with max channeling, breaks attackers and quite a few hybrids.
I used higher defence than I would usually run as undead attacker but we did NM to take down most defence so could get away with smaller offence if our ops and chain worked. Good for war, not good out of war...
Early age if i would change i think id run smaller defence and hit much more for conversions. Science, channeling population tools production is really good, need to get BE up and the more runes the better.
Tact isn't garbage that's just one opinion. It did get nerfed, but Clear Sights a powerful spell and shouldn't be overlooked. Take advantage it and just make sure to make the most of your 10 hour attack time. That being said, I'd still pick mystic or warhero before tact but it's not a waste.Quote:
Originally Posted by clairec
I think that's a dig at my setup the age we fought, but realisticly undead tact is noob proof and is far from garbage. ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by Persain
its not a dig at anyone, i generally think any competent kd would benefit from shifting away from tact at towards something like cleric/warrior/warhero on their pure attackers en masse (mystic on undead is a support race so not a "pure" attacker, and a couple of avain tact finishers or something doesnt count). I know plenty of people have had succecss using tact and DESTROYING kds with it, but from my experience destroying kds with tact over and over if the only difference they made to their setup was to go tact->cleric if non undead or tact->warrior/warhero if undead they would instantly improve and be harder to deal with and beat.Quote:
Originally Posted by Coldhearted
because simply attacking faster isnt a good bonus unless you can do something with that speed. And speed doesn't give enough of an advantage to outweigh the military losses you experience simply from attacking...not when you compare it to a real bonus like the historical +1 general warrior bonus, the cleric bonus,+gains/dragon immunity, or say MS from mystic.Quote:
Originally Posted by clairec
Tact is especially damaging if its not being done at a kd wide level....having 1/2 a kd at 10 hour attack times and 1/2 a kd at 12 hour attack times is actually detrimental to a kd as it makes things like chaining or nm waving much more difficult. i.e. mixing say undead tact with orc cleric just means your attackers get outa sync really quickly. You try chaining someone (or just not burning out as a leader/war coordinator) when your attackers core is spread out such that 2 people get in army in like every hour.
If/When you start to argue things like well we'd get another wave in at min time..blah blah blah, the thing people miss is you aren't chaining fast enough. The "extra" people you are chaining down dont amount to allowing your attackers to help deal with the enemy t/m's or hybrids since top mod off went down on both sides anyway. If you took a 100% simplictic aproach of each kd chains 2 attackers/wave at the 48-50 hour mark a tact kd has chained 10 to a normal kds what 8? How is that helping. By the 48 hour mark ops/chaining should have made both sides t/m's and hybrids mostly unbreakable anyway and 2 "extra" attackers (who started out small, chain top mod off down) who cant do anything but conquest arent helping you win. On top of that the extra wave has cost you 3.5-7% additional lost offense simply by attacking.
My personal arguement is that i'd RATHER face tacts who are chaining me down faster. You are building my low end for me, you are seting me up so when i chain you im actually able to finish off chains better because i have that extra 1-2-3 small attackers. THose small attackers may not have enough offense to break hybrids or t/m's but they are perfect for chaining pure attackers. And if each of my chains ends with you at 400 after incoming land but your chains end with me at 500 after incoming guess what im gaining an advantage.
^^^
this here is so right im crying
:-)
ahh thanks for the feed back i reckon i made a wrong start then....
as of this moment my builds are
Banks 24.5%
guilds 37%
towers 17.5%
Labs 20%
1% inprogress
Depends on if you are warring oop :-) if you are staying out of it for a while that works very nice!Quote:
Originally Posted by Agrath
More science is good and if you should get new acres in or (as i suspect) you notice you have a lot of gold lying around you can always convert banks to more guilds or universities. When you are all trained you dont have much use of gold out of war, mostly just sets you up to be plundered.
Persain, are you trolling or do you really not see the use of getting your second wave in before your opponent's so you can use your highest offense attackers in more t/m hits before they get chained? (Not before min time, before your opponent's second wave!) Or being able to hit in between your opponents attacks so you're hitting their lowered defense on army out vs them being forced to hit your higher defense on army in? Or the other tact bonusses, clear sight and not losing thieves on intel are not useful in your opinion either?
Tact a garbage pick?Quote:
Originally Posted by Persain
Yeah.. thats some stupid with bacon on it right there.
Tact with -attack time bonus, only needing 1 thief for intel (no losses), and CS is incredible for an attacker in a warring kingdom.
Attacking speed is god for undead... if your worried about getting out of sync with your other non tacts, add hour or two.. voila now your speed bonus is a gains bonus.
You like Undead Mage.. but find Undead tact garbage.. are you drunk?
I agree with persain. CS is irrelevant on attacker as it is mvd off by any decent KD before ops start. Espionage is really nice, but nothing that can't be done by anyone else (albeit with a few thief losses). The ONLY value i see in tact is trying to get that second wave in before your opponent during war.
Age 72 and before you got an attack times reduction of 20%. So after some hours in war you had 12*0.8=9.6h attack time. If you sync yourself with your kingdommates in a 12h attack rhythm, you can choose +2h for 5-8% gains (I think) and yout troops are back right after an tick, if you attack at x:30 hours. This means that you can raze your stables and rather easily calculate and manage your attack times in a way that keeps your horses out in the field from one tick to the next.Quote:
Originally Posted by s0830887
Acres and BE fluctuations makes it really hard sometimes to do something similar with barracks.
And its cast back on.Quote:
Originally Posted by s0830887
+ then you have to burn runes and mana replacing it every time I put it back on if you dont fail and get it first cast .. and I got lots of mana and runes are easy to grow or ask for. Plus my kingom will not be just sitting around while you take time, mana, runes, to keep it down.
We can tit for tat ways to deal with any strategy, but dismissing anything with.. "It can be dealt with this way by any decent KD" its silly.. everything can be dealt with by any decent KD.. but doing it in tandem on time every time is the rub and that is why we play this game.
If i full waved you with 18 attackers on a 16 hour attack time (decent # of hits will have gbp) and you push a button, get 2 full waves in before i can attack again, yes thats decently powerfull. However any competent kd can plan out a hostile or even an instant declare such that most of that damage can be mitigated for example ONE way could beQuote:
Originally Posted by Uhm hoi
As for no theives lost on INTEL or CS, you saying putting a spell on that requires 2-3 casts to MV or loosing a few theives to intell is on par with say -35% total military losses? 50% more converts on undead, dragon immunity, +1 general if warrior had that again? if you really think that and you have a say on your kds setup, then your kd is much weaker than it could be if it had different leadership.Quote:
Originally Posted by Persain
You know i got made the strategy mod for a reason, i dont insult others and i try to clearly state good solid strategy. The funny thing is the game owners were asking me why i thought tact was terrible too because they think its incredibly strong. And i went though my arguments and they disagreed and explain why tact is strong. That explanation didn't help I fully understand how tact is supposed to be use, i understand its benefits, the nuance it gives the way you use extra speed on a core as a whole to gain advantage...i just fundamentally disagree that its a good pick.Quote:
Originally Posted by tiggis
When others hear my arguments and dont agree i always hear some wishy washy reason as to why im simple wrong, or like u just get called stupid. The closest thing i've herd to argements are like Uhm hoi or the owners arguments "but that extra speed helps u on declare", "that extra speed gives you another wave by min time"......what i dont hear is how you translate any of that into a winning strategy. Speed doesn't "win", If u want to win via attacking you have to translate ability to attack faster into the t/m-hybrid-unbrekable battle. And i can give basic easy examples to illustrate why that speed doesnt help u win. i.e.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Persain
No undead tact isnt garbage, tact is garbage. Undead tact is a meh whatever pick simply because undead is strong right now. However if you kd is using undead tact as a "core" attacker en masse you would instantly improve your kds setup this age if you switched to war hero.Quote:
Originally Posted by tiggis
If alternatively you are running 2-3 undead tacts and plan to make them go undead tact+lots of rax and position them small and try to use them to consonantly lap the enemy trying to chain extra deep i would argue the 15% attack time bonus of undead isnt enough to matter. u'd be better off with the -25% attack time on avain cleric since both have similar offense and sustain but avain gets you attacking even faster. Heck i'd actually debate saying Avain tact in that roll would be viable (and stronger) as u are almost always garenteed then to be able to hit a chained prov and "Finish" them off nicely. BUT that again is a support roll for a kd and 1-2 of them is enough just like undead mystic (4-5 though is probubly beter there) is a support race to pull some pressure off the mana of real hybrid+t/ms via a little NM/MS/FB before losing wpa. Thing is in the case of a support roll you are actually purposefully running a worse combination than the standard OP in hopes that the gimmick can provide extra power to your kd overall, you arent simply picking the strongest personality possible.
edit....
You talk like i need to MV cs off of 5 attackers and keep it off perminately because the kd is tickly nsing 5 differnt people, and its going to cost SOO much mana. No, the kd will eitherQuote:
Originally Posted by tiggis
1.mass NS 1 person post NM wave where your eating 100 ops in 1-2 min as soon as the MV is cast, and you simply trying to hit F5 over and over to see if u got MV may at best catch 1/3 of those ns ops ooh no you cost me 30*.25=7-8 failed NS's....sooo broken
2. Nsing/proping offline targets. If your good enough to be awake nearly 24/7 recasting CS the second it gets Mv'ed congrats you win at the game, actualy kd strategies shouldnt try to plan against that level of activity, no kd currently is that active.
+-hours have higher base losses. If you are always using +2 hours on every hit you are destroying your offense, its a BAD way to function as a kd level strategy.Quote:
Originally Posted by MeIkor
"As for no theives lost on INTEL or CS, you saying putting a spell on that requires 2-3 casts to MV or loosing a few theives to intell is on par with say -35% total military losses? 50% more converts on undead, dragon immunity, +1 general if warrior had that again? if you really think that and you have a say on your kds setup, then your kd is much weaker than it could be if it had different leadership."
Please quote where I claimed CS or no thieves lost on intel are on par with the bonusses above. I'm pretty sure I never said anything like that. I do think they are nice bonusses on top of the attack speed though and I brought them up because you disregarded them completely.
I thought we were talking about undead tactician. I definately hat no problem keeping my offense with +2h attack times, but I dropped about 14% stables and turned it into TGs and Hospitals. Hospitals rather to make a chain against me a very little bit harder than to keep more offense.Quote:
Originally Posted by Persain
Undead tact strength is being able to hurt enemy tms without having to worry about losing too many at once. Last time I ran a kingdom wide setup we focused on chaining and massacring tms. We focused our tms on gutting attackers. My opinion is all tact or no tacts because you have to line military up to chain efficiently. Let's face it having kingdom wide cs is extremely nice. Plus it's noob proof, give a noob undead mystic and I bet you would see 10 wpa with 4 tpa and no offense or defense. Shoot I ran human heretics last age and put out strict limits on tpa and wpa. Went into AVarice war with humans having like 6 tpa 1 wpa and no magic or thief science. Point is noobs will mess up something like undead mystic but can't mess up undead tact. We beat avarice with undead tacts but lost with human heretics. ;)
im saying attacking faster isn't innatly a bonus. In fact it actually hurts you more than helps you after you've been chained because you dont have enough offense to help out on the hybrid+t/m battle post chain AND every hit you make your kiling your own offense. The only way extra speed would help is if its enough speed that u can get your attacker core to chain the other attacker core fast enough that you still have enough big offense left to bring down t/m's. But given kd sizes and it being a 15-20% bonus and not a 50% bonus the extra speed simply isnt a bonus. So when you compare the bonus's of the personalities what your comparing is CS+intell V the bonus's of the other races.Quote:
Originally Posted by Uhm hoi
Losses add up over a 6-7-8 day battle (either by attacking more or using +hours). A "good" example of that would b when my kd wared the kd taged "detroit." They were insanely hard to beat, really good, and used undead tacts. After 7-8 days of war, 1 succesfull chain via conquests and a another attempt to conquest wave they simply didnt have any offense left. Our chained dwarfs actually had MORE offense because of conquests and litterally outhitting our core by something like 22-12....losses add up.Quote:
Originally Posted by MeIkor
Coldhearted i dont remember the last time we wared you but the issue is you cant deal with enemy t/m's early simply by having tacts. I may have used an average of 2 attackers per wave as an example, but if your single taping t/m's down your going to instantly lose because you'll get down ONE t/m per wave while nming an attacker can drop 4-5 per wave. Even if u do 1+spare thats 1 t/m+1 attacker...u'll get at most 2 t/m's and 2 attackers that way before i chain 4.5+3.5 of your attackers in my opening waves. The differnce between 8 chained attackers and 2 at the 24 hour mark is significantly differnt than if both sides just went attackers and it was like 15 v 13 at the 48-50 hour mark.Quote:
Originally Posted by Coldhearted
I gave 2 examples in which the speed bonus of the tactician is very strong. I have not disregarded the speedbonus to compare CS+Intel to the -35% losses of the cleric, to entire personalities or races. (I'm hoping you meant to say personalities there.) You claim I have and I should therefor not lead anymore. I'd like to challenge you again to find the post of me saying only CS+intel without the speed bonus is on par with -35% unit losses. Show me where I said this and I will do as you suggest and never lead again.Quote:
Originally Posted by Persain
...edit.....and addon
For what its worth, i really didn't mean "you suck, quit as a leader". if it was read that way it wasnt my intent, and Im sorry. Obviously if someone is willing to lead and try its a good thing, the only issue with leading is if someone is doing things like claiming 80% homes all war is a "Good" build and enforcing it on a kd they are making the kd much weaker than it should b.
....end edit..
sory yea i did mean personalities. and i was trying to speak in an over the top manor...i guess it all got a bit muddled. My point is the example you give where speed is strong aren't good. And they are so not good, that the only claim u should/could be making is that CS+intell are the only real "bonus" that Tact is getting. IF you were "bad" enough to claim cs+intell was on par with the other personality bonus's you'd have to be a bad player...and thus a bad leader. Again the point was to talk in an over the top way to be dismissive of the speed bonus in a way that'd would sound absurd enough to get the point across. i.e.the take away shoulda read something likeQuote:
Originally Posted by Uhm hoi
"As the speed bonus of tact isnt good you saying tact is good is as absurd as comparing cs+intell to say the personality bonus of a cleric and obviously doing that would only be done by bad players/leaders"
For what its worth you made 2 cases
1.The initial early wave--
can done cleric v cleric because war bonus instantly gives a speed bonus. Tact doesnt magically give you 2 waves before the enemy does in war if planing out a good engagement. Even IF it is the case that both kds would use for example auto declare the tact kd geting 2 waves in before the second wave of a non tact kd waves can easily be a good thing for the non tact kd the leadership understands its comming and planns for it. i.e. you are placing more of their attackers as finishers so they deep chain you harder andbetter than you can deep chain them in the first 24 hours and THEY actually have an advantage over you.
2. the ability to lap a kd and get a full extra wave in at min time
again isnt a bonus because your not actually chaining enough more people at min time or even in total as a tact to start working on the enemy t/m's before you lose offense to overpopulation. And since this is the case the extra speed just means you have more offensive losses as you deal with the enemies attackers over time. For what its worth my experience with tact is that even with an extra wave tacts chain the exact same number of attackers at min time as a non tact setup becuse of NM waving. A tact kd is attacking every 10 hours, where a non tact kd is hitting every 12. 2 hours with 8 casters is typically about 24 casts of NM. 24 casts of nm is about how many it takes to lower 1 extra hitter into multitaps. So if both kds are nm waveing tacts do 4.5, 2.5, 3, 2, 2= 14 chains... Whereas non tacts can pull off 4.5 3.5 3 3=14 chains. AT min time. Since 14 is is just starting to hit how many attackers 2 kds run, and 48 hours in is enough to start building unbreakables but not early enough that all the "threats" are down theres never quite a time that a tact kd can leverage the speed advantage into a long term military advantage.