but you had nap with absalom!
Printable View
but you had nap with absalom!
Vines, you're so full of ****. You deleted your province before you'd fight me, you got owned by Dharan. You don't know **** about how to play the game and your "keeper" strategy sucks ass. You lack heavily in all 3 categories. If you buff up your tpa/wpa to 5 raw, you'd still get owned by a gnome or human with 3 raw or more. And even then, you'd get owned by any attacker simply because you cannot match their numbers.
it's beyond sad you wouldn't fight me on gen btw. You had 3 weeks of pumping/growth before I even made an account there to challenge you. Pathetic.
im glad vines returned :)
gosh i hate those freakin stupid log out thing when ur trying to post something, now my whole post is gone. thats just stupid. vines. im just using your plain logic,you have balls to say im full of it pretty much while im actually judging what you say on what you say and show rather than what other says of you. then you go around saying how al lthe others are wannabes and constant nag you and critise you for stuff. just dont reverse the medal k?
saying im full of it means nothing, saying 50% homes outdo everything means nothing, without proof there is nothing worth for you to say.
so far, none of your calc can show that you can have more income, more military, better trained troops and more tpa/wpa than a specialised pumped province.
and yes, ppl stronger than you can hit you without bottomfeeding, thats why homes is a bad idea. for someone ur land size, u might have a better nwpa when you will be more or less stronger than he, but you will indeed reach the nwth level of some guys that will definetly *uck you up easily which will overpop you in an instant.
also, yes, you can be protected from any types of ops that actually could de-stabilise your prov usually. 8tpa 8wpa could work, but raw, without modifiers is useless, its weak to massacres, but since those high numbers of tpa/wpa is 27.5% EACH of a 50% homes prov. i really doubt much defense is left for you to use and still have some kind of economy to withstand anything looking like a dragon, a hit, or a NS chain.
atleast he's trying to post calcs... compared to some other induviduals around in this thread.
dunno what ur talking about. im mentioning the same numbers he does. plus, if you were paying attention to what some people write, ud know that i did enough number calc and that vines IS making several statements. ive already showed my point in both oral and in numbers . i dont need to repeat myself...like some other in this thread..
Look I have lots of things to take care of and sometimes I don't always have time for this game so I go inactive. Ezzerland it has nothing to do with you.
Lordwarallied, greenie posted up some examples of provines that used high homes. Your ideas about a person with high homes can be over populated more so then a province with out many homes. Now that's just wrong. Homes give more ppa (people per acre). More people per acre means a person has to lose more population before they get overpopulated. A province becomes over population after being attack due to the loss of land. One can only lose so much land from an attack. Provinces using more homes need more land taken than one attack can take in order to begin to become overpopulated.
Lordwarallied believe what you want. There are so many things that you just don't understand. I'm find with people believe me to be a fool. I don't mind it.
Look vines:
A 1000 acre province running 50% homes will have:
+5000 population; +100% Birth rates
compared to a 1000 acre, 0% homes province.
Lets say that an attack takes away about 13% of your land. Then the province with 50% homes will lose 6.5% of its total homes, and 6.5% spread across its other buildings.
This means the effect of the homes will now be:
+4350 population; +100% birth rates
so
delta population is: -650 peasants
because you lose less than 650 peasants when getting trad marched at 1000 acres, the province with 50% homes is in deeper overpop than the ones with 0% homes.
q.e.d.
I know something you dont about overpop though :p besides overpop aint always a bad thing...
geln0r, but overpop % is still the same
Percentages are similar, but i dont think they are the same unless through pure coincidence. The prov running homes will always have slightly higher overpop.
Say, for example, the trad kills 200 peasants:
Then: (X+4800)/(Y+4350) > (X-200)/Y
if you define X and Y as
X: population before being attacked (assuming prov is at max population)
Y: population maximum after being attacked
==================
as example, i took
X:= 6750
Y:= 6075
which results in
1.1079 > 1.0782
granted, the difference is pretty small. All im saying is the effect is in fact there, because someone asked for formulas.
P.S. if my thinking is flawed somehow, let me know
Actully, it's +4,000 pop. Unless the province has sci or is gnome (gnome will have +5,750)Quote:
Originally Posted by geln0r
If you then got hit for 13% of your land, assuming everything was distributed perfectly evenly, you'd be at 3480 (you'd be at 870 acres)
I'm not sure if it is 4,000 or 5,000. Either way, even if, one gets hit for 13% of his or her land the troops he or she will lose willl be filled up fast by working class people due to the high birth rate.
So Red mist is so magical it actually GAINS peasants when it's lost 13% land, and should really be losing them, due to overpop?
You won't be over populated. 4000-3480 = a difference of only 500 toops. You will lose more troops in the battle so in fact may be underpopulated depends on how one runs a provinces with high homes. Me I would not be over pop or under populated.
<3 Vines :)
Yes, vines, you'll have more total population than your acres can support, due to having lost 13% of your total land, and thus you'll be ticking down on peasants.
I know you love your own fantasy world, but Red mist is only immune to reality while you keep it away from people.
why this thread on homes is still here????
homes should be in the range of 10%-15% (20% max)
plus you should know hwta you are building.... and in the right way
other then that i dont think there is anything that anyone can add
Bijo uses my strategy but yet talks mess about it in the forums. He and people like him are the reason I will no longer give out my own strategies out. They want to hog them for themselves.
what?! i didnt say anything against you.... it was only my idea about the case... so what if i dont agree to it? and i didnt used your strategy...Quote:
Originally Posted by vines
You are use my strategies and you try to act as if high homes are bad but without saying high homes are a bad thing. It has nothing to do with me agreeing with you. I'm just not going to share strategies any more. Now when the game chagnes you will not have me there to show you a bad-ass strategy.
I think we'll take our chances and develop a non-"bad-ass vines strategy" while you're gone.
That's quite an outburst, vines.
Sad that you got owned again?
what?!?!?!........Quote:
Originally Posted by vines
when did i ever use your strategies? O_o ?!
i didnt ask you to show me any of your "bad-ass strategy" ....
the only thing i ask a link to a post you said you post about high dpa/opa prov and that was it.....i dont need any strategies from you i have my own strategies ... sorry dude but i dont know what you are talking about
ignore him bijo, he's more noob that even you are :)
lol i guess i will stay forever noob :)Quote:
Originally Posted by Ezzerland
Just an easy target :)
sigh.
homes does not beat the % of any build whatsoever.
homes doesnt make you more immune to things than a no home users
homes isnt an actual bonus (besides BR), any way can be used to break it appart.
when using them, it makes you dependant and therefore in danger if u were to lose em!
if homes are neutralised and u used 50% of ur lands for it, ur ****ed! (MS+storm+FB or kidnap)
you can become severly underpoped or overpoped in any active environment (2.4 hits a day/2-3 hits retalled or unretalled) +war scenario.
homes is very long to get in any shape of readiness(and you need to keep ur homes up, no restrat are permissible) (tough pumping+suicide vs skilled known opponents)
Vines, its never been about how you felt or how we felt about how you felt. the things you say are so relative, debatable thats its like hard to comprehend. just understand that at least. i have proven a prov can work better and restrat+pump+be ready in a better fashion than a home prov. mathematicly, theoriticly, practicly.
nothing personal tho.
P.S: you dont need high wpa and tpa as a pure attacker, if you put it more in attacking power, which should be the role we are talking about, then the enemy wont be able to get unbrakables and be able to get dtap or ttap. high tpa and wpa (like 8) is dangerous, as i have mentioned, its 27.5% of ur pop if running 50% homes. thats so high it could seriously underpop you compared to your active federal employees.
new sig, right there....Quote:
Originally Posted by vines
MA - I only had NAP with 3 abs kds, I just stayed out of range of the others :)
Though I'm sure if vines is as pro-leet as he makes himself out to be, he could easily get a nap with a few kds in return for him offering to not raze down their entire kds by himself :p
On the overpop part, peasants lost is a flat rate, but troop desertions is variable dependent on how overpop'd you are.
Oh clampy, u made my day here.
yes we know about that overpoped factor, but home built lands that are losses leads to a faster overpop than non-homes land.
Lordwarallied you haven't gave any proof just common belief. And 8wpa is not ~27%. It can be but it depends on the province. One plalying high homes need high raw tpa and wpa. It's a different type of strategy so it is played differently. As I said before believe what you want. One day you maybe find yourself second guessing yourself.
And Vines, you haven't grasped the English language enough to not sound like an ignoramus.
Please explain why someone with high homes needs a high raw TPA/WPA, because I'm running a decent percentage of homes and I have maybe 2 TPA/WPA and no one has really hurt me in war.
flutterby he obviously meant, can afford higher wpa/tpa.. or? not that obvious maybe :p
Micke-
Yes, he meant it, and as much as i think his strategies is flawed on all sides, he isnt stupid to think that homes somehow gives all build benefits even tho the way he thinks about homes makes it look so. if not so.
if u have only homes, what is going to boost ur tpa and wpa versus a person that doesnt use homes and has modifiers? versatility and timing has always been the key in this game. i dont see how dependance, being dynamic and have a high level of a flat rate builds can out do that and why someone would try to do that...at least that way. so he has to havbe 8tpa - 8wpa to be any good which is madness.
but until i see ur strat being used by a kd to the level and the ranking of rage, then there is nothing else to say than good luck to you.
p.s: my 27.5% is based on a non gnome user. for a gnome it will be different. still very high considering all ur builds are in homes and that gnome player wont be able to use modifier build, with no hosps and enough troops to match the other guy's super elite strenght and superior low losses and economy.
I could have beaten that human/sage with a DE/(whatever, doesn't matter)at 700 acres. I know, because i've done it before.Quote:
Originally Posted by vines
A while back, I'd go for a higher percentage of homes (around 30% or so).
This is because each home increases per-acre population by 32%, and the added growth factor allows faster recovery from fireballs.
Plus, I ran 71% draft rate, so at 75% building efficiency, homes seemed like the most feasible choice.
However, now I run 16% guard stations. All wars lasting more than 2 days inevitably results in me getting razed down to minuscule proportions.
(Perks of being in a semi-active kingdom).
Anyway, my point being, while homes may seem the most decent and numerically pleasing option in terms of OPA/DPA/WPA/TPA, it does not provide substantial sustainability under duress.
Ever since Utopia had the idea of diminishing, a more 'rainbowy' building strat may be better.
mistake one: you had 30% homes and if you had 75% BE that tells me whether u were running a UD, or had no sci whatsoever.
mistake two: you had 70% draft rate and that doesnt include WPA. no wonders.
but what is al lthat opa,dpa,wpa,tpa if its all going to get beaten by a much more static, economicly stronger, better wpa-tpa modifiers ?
homes are artificially giving you those numbers which, you could just go straight for the bushes or the root of the problem, if i know ur running homes, everyone knows exactly what to do!
God that English hurts my brain.
Vines, I'd like to talk to you on a messaging program since I'm not a forum user, personally. Could you please message me. If not, no biggie.
email: Flicksand at yahoo.com
msn:Flicksand at yahoo.com
yahoo: Flicksand at yahoo.com
aim: Flicksand