hmm, realest posted something i agree with, maybe i should fill that last spot in his kd while i can still stand the sight of him!Quote:
Originally Posted by Realest
Printable View
hmm, realest posted something i agree with, maybe i should fill that last spot in his kd while i can still stand the sight of him!Quote:
Originally Posted by Realest
Baiting me aint you, for a start it hasn't been decided what race(s) we'll be having in our kd, it's stupid to do so before the offical changes. I highlighted that if they was a bank and as such larger than the attackers in opp kd then there leets allow for multi-razing smaller ppl or end of chain targets to help reduce max pop futher still, there magic effectivness also helps when opping lower NW. You can compare human and orc at the same acres all you want, it is a look at a potentally different way of playing them.Quote:
Originally Posted by crease
So you can stop your bravado, I even said at the end that they do not look like a attacking race. If the sug of there leets being only 5NW is done then there would be no difference in them being 100% leet or def specs, playing as a TM Bank this wouldn't matter as much, still not NW effecient as Faes leets NW for def points and wont be as strong in the W/TPA area as well but they have there potential still.
you were suggesting that it would be good when chained, sure this i dont mind agreeing with, but it wont be chained imo. It is a weak prov with good econ, couple fbs from an elf or dwarf or a nap or 2 and its now a weak prov with nothing going for it, not even a hit wasted.
Banking is a different story to what you were suggesting entirely, and i will allow you to believe you are correct that it will do fairly as such. Since i have not banked nor studied strategies for doing so i agree that human/merch is probably the choice for banks
Okay.... Let's assume 120 OpA and 50 DpA (raw figures, DpA w/Elites away). For now, we'll disregard Wages, TGs, Forts, etc since that's available to everyone.
Undead needs 13.33 Elites and 10 Dspecs per acre (23.33 total) to attain these figures, totaling 156.66 NWpA for raw military. Avians would need 15 Elites and 8.33 Dspecs per acre (23.33 total) for the same figures, totaling 155 NWpA. Just for the record let's also figure for Orcs, also needing 13.33 Elites and 10 Dspecs per acre (23.33 total) for 150 NWpA.
All three have the same raw OP and DP, same number of troops needed to attain these figures, and are pretty damned close in NWpA. Undead have -50% Offensive Losses, Avians have -20% Attack Times, and Orcs have +20% Gains.
So where is the imbalance you speak of?
i just displayed the 2 provinces you described in ur proposed changes on the alst page, please refer back to it, post #269 if you are having trouble. Avian has MORE pop than an undead hence bigger army. Find me an undead that can run 23.33 apa and tpa wpa and pezz/a to run a province that has more than 60% BE and is capable of preventing an avian nsing or fbing you to sht?
Coupled with that, the provs you describe have the same army, avian STILL gets 25% more uniques.
Your math is so flawed I won't even bother to explain. Refer to Realest's post.
One other thing to factor into your equations: Food.Quote:
Originally Posted by crease
Though it can vary a lot depending on how well built Sciences are, Undead can use the 7.5% Farms that Avian needs for Homes instead for exactly the same population - in spite of the penalty to Housing Science. Also, since Avian needs Food Science and Undead does not, Undead can spend those extra Books in Housing for even more population... Or War for extra gains (where Avians need 120 BpA in War Science just to offset their Gains penalty)...
Starting to become a bit clearer now?
PS - Undead STILL have 50% lower offensive losses, 11% higher gains, and 14.29% fewer Sciences to divide their Books amongst.
FOR ANYONE THAT IS NOT TWYLA: please ignore, this is regarding his own proposed changes and is irrelevant to rev 2 changes.
lol you just made a point about food.... since when was food even a point for undead. Avian has 33% more income tools and housing science numbers(assuming equal books, which is a joke, avian will have alot more)... 7.5% land is nothing.
plague and -50% off losses are why you pick undead, not no food req. But plague can be obtained from 2 undead/tacts attacking at the same rate as avian/cleric but undead needs a few rax to keep up, if avian has 15% rax then undead/tact is probably going to need 25-30% rax with lower BE from lower sci and fewer pezzies to get the same bonus from rax and the 5% extra they need to match avian base. Along with that, undead doesnt even have lower losses on defence?
edit refresh wars are fun!
you suggest that avian is going to spend 1/6 of its books into food. This amazes me lol. i have 100 bpa in food giving me 120% food production atm, if you want me to do this on my avian then i guess ill only need 4.5% farms! Pity i already answered the point about -50% losses in my last refresh:(
lets compare +11% gains to +25% uniques shall we?:D
one more note: avian gets +25% learns oow, compared to undeads -25% science fx and 11% gains, yup ud sci is going to be close to avian at all
tl:dr you describe an undead that can't exist vs an avian that can(23.33 apa)* and you cant explain how the other uses of the race outweigh the benefits of speed as they don't.
*(avian sage only, undead tact would be 86% draft for jokes!(94% draft with 2 raw tpa))
play nice guys...
Endgame, when Sciences become a much larger factor in the equation (and under static conditions), Avians would have the edge over Undead - as would any non-Undead Race. But once the dynamics come into play, they're fairly even.
Assuming an Avian Cleric and Undead Tactician start trading blows yes, the Avian will have the edge starting out, but it doesn't take long before the balance shifts - the difference in Gains takes its toll, the Undead's Animate Dead spell preserves troops to retrain while the Avian relies on an expensive trickle of Draftees to try to keep Military going - which the Undead can put a stop to by maintaining Chastity. Won't take long (maybe 3 days tops - even less if the Avian gets Plagued) before the Avian is dead in the water and the Undead feasts upon the corpse.
Yeah, if you're going to call other people stupid or whatever at least give an example why your aren't.
I would definitely not compare Avians to Orcs & Undead. Avians aren't pure attacker in the suggestions.
The suggested changes are fine, all races are competitive. Only one I would boost is humans (since their damage boost is only +15% compared to faerys), if not, I could still play it and do well. Can we see the final changes soon by chance?
You're all stupid. Okay? Okay.
I find it funny that people are getting into heavy mathematical analysis of something Twyla probably made up for the hell of it and start flaming her hypothetical changes - or just her - more than the actual changes.
I do think that for a race with no attacking ability whatsoever, a nearly unbreakable defense is only fair; but with warrior providing huge OME bonuses this age, even the currently proposed faeries aren't so safe against a really strong offensive province in war; and should that fail, they have enhanced conquests. I was thinking that with a 7 point defensive elite instead of 8 they'd be closer to the range of anyone who isn't undead or orc. Perhaps my math is just wrong somewhere, but I do think taking down a faery should be tough, and breaking a faery shouldn't be an everyday occurance. The original changes had the right idea by upping faerie elites to a proper networth... I really hate the notion of units that are specifically designed to manipulate nw-efficiency by being under- or over-valued so extremely, due to the kind of play it encourages. Same with 2/2 aggressive soldiers that are easily abusable.Quote:
Originally Posted by Landro
On War Hero - Scrap it and bring back Shepherd or Artisan, or even Freak. No one in their right mind is going to play WH, and the personalities/races with honor bonuses have historically been nub traps. This age's warrior is about the only exception that comes to mind, which is merely a decent personality.
I'm glad someone else is seeing an issue here...Quote:
Originally Posted by nooblet
Sage seems weak to me, maybe give it a little something like +25% gains on learn attacks.
The problem with Faeries is that they can't be targeted by attacks, spells or ops. There's very little you can do to stop them which is why I proposed to make their T/M bufs offensive only. That way T/Ms would at least be threatened by other T/Ms.Quote:
Originally Posted by Palem
I have to agree that T/Ms have to have extremely good defense against attacks because when T/Ms get chained, they're ****ed for the rest of the age.