Elf or DE T/M?

I've been wavering back and forth between Elf and DE for being a T/M. Anyone have any input (aside from "being tm is a stupid idea")?

Elf Pros:

- Clear sight/Reflect Magic/Fog/Science spells -> Ability to turtle
- 50% wages
- Better success rate on spells (From DE)
- More mana

DE Pros:

-Extra stealth
-Stronger Spells
-TOG
-Stronger defensive elites


The question becomes, which one is better for being a pure T/M with mystic personality? Although, I had considered artisan as well, but mystic still seems better.

They both suck as T/M, because T/M sucks in general.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by VT2

They both suck as T/M, because T/M sucks in general.

---

Yeah..... see:

Quote:

---

(aside from "being tm is a stupid idea")?

---

T/Ms may suck, but it is beneficial to have 2-3 in a kingdom, me being one of those 2. I didn't ask if T/M's suck, I asked which one was BETTER. Take it as "which one doesn't suck as much" if you must.

firstly, your pro's/cons suck =)
ability to turtle, CS/RM for elves? wtf?
with mystic, elves
with rogue, DE
simple, depends what you want to do :-)

how many times do i have to say that if you run T/Ms in your kd your gonna get raped? i meen seriously.....anyone who tries to be a T/M and thinks he will be "beneficial" deserves to get whats coming to him.

Elf can convert to an A/M easier if needed too. Will be harder to chain down with conquests if your trying to become unbreakable.

DE has more defence and your ops will do more damage, assuming you can hit.

Elf is definitely the more resistant to ops, but as a T/M that shouldnt be too important. DE has a much better economy for getting pumped.




I would say they are each better in different scenarios and probably best when paired together in a KD.

In my opinion it wouldn't be wise to be a t/m this age. Most ppl in the game will play Elf ( I think) Elf have Reflect magic. SO... if you count 1+1 than you know that it will be very hard for t/m to be played this age.

I'm not saying a t/m is useless or crappy, I love the work that can be done with them.

I would suggest to play DE/Mystic if you want to play full t/m this age.

It's not beneficial to blow my limited slots on useless things.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Isamith

In my opinion it wouldn't be wise to be a t/m this age. Most ppl in the game will play Elf ( I think) Elf have Reflect magic. SO... if you count 1+1 than you know that it will be very hard for t/m to be played this age.

....

I would suggest to play DE/Mystic if you want to play full t/m this age.

---

and for that very reason, thievery will be better =)
so wouldnt it make more sense to go DE/rogue, the extra stealth can/will prove in-valuable
depends if you need the extra MS spell caster

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by _greenie

firstly, your pro's/cons suck =)
ability to turtle, CS/RM for elves? wtf?
with mystic, elves
with rogue, DE
simple, depends what you want to do :-)

---

Ability to turtle, as in higher defense for ops (CS + RM) and fog (I think). It is definitely a plus to have these spells available.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ishandra

Elf can convert to an A/M easier if needed too. Will be harder to chain down with conquests if your trying to become unbreakable.

DE has more defence and your ops will do more damage, assuming you can hit.

Elf is definitely the more resistant to ops, but as a T/M that shouldnt be too important. DE has a much better economy for getting pumped.

I would say they are each better in different scenarios and probably best when paired together in a KD.

---

Yeah, unfortunately that's what I was thinking too, so I'm still no closer to a decision lol. I'd have to say, being more resilient to ops is of large benefit when your one of two tm's in the kingdom.

I'm leaning towards Elf/Mystic, just because while having stronger spells is nice, being able to land hits with those spells is more important :) That and I was hit pretty hard with AW last age, even running a 4tpa due to facing an opposing superthief, and Wizards are hard to train back in a war. Catching 25% of thieves due to CS is huge.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Isamith

In my opinion it wouldn't be wise to be a t/m this age. Most ppl in the game will play Elf ( I think) Elf have Reflect magic. SO... if you count 1+1 than you know that it will be very hard for t/m to be played this age.

I'm not saying a t/m is useless or crappy, I love the work that can be done with them.

I would suggest to play DE/Mystic if you want to play full t/m this age.

---

Good point. DE Rogue would be better than DE Mystic though, no? Although DE/Mystic is more balanced... And it would be better to pair Extra Magic Damage and Mystic together, I would think.

Lucky75 you seem like a good guy but you must understand that its not smart to play a T/M with the current races. If you like i will show you next age. I promise you my kd's 25 hybrids out hits your 23 attackers and 2 T/Ms.

With your other attackers out numbered they will lose ground against any kd that can match your kd's activity and as your attackers lose size your opponent's attackers gain in size and in some kd's cases they can aid a few of those provs just to take out those T/M.

My kd ran into 4 gnome unbreakables last age and was able to take them down in this way. Its better to have a ballence of attacking and maging/thieving ability

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lucky75

Ability to turtle, as in higher defense for ops (CS + RM) and fog (I think). It is definitely a plus to have these spells available

---

um, you are asking about T/M's, right?
so, why are you worried about
a) ability to turtle
b) CS and RM

turtling is only for attackers
and if my T/M's need to use CS and/or RM i would be seriously worried about them

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by cookie

Lucky75 you seem like a good guy but you must understand that its not smart to play a T/M with the current races. If you like i will show you next age. I promise you my kd's 25 hybrids out hits your 23 attackers and 2 T/Ms.

With your other attackers out numbered they will lose ground against any kd that can match your kd's activity and as your attackers lose size your opponent's attackers gain in size and in some kd's cases they can aid a few of those provs just to take out those T/M.

My kd ran into 4 gnome unbreakables last age and was able to take them down in this way. Its better to have a ballence of attacking and maging/thieving ability

---

I see where your coming from, but personally, I still think one or two TM's is beneficial to have.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by _greenie

um, you are asking about T/M's, right?
so, why are you worried about
a) ability to turtle
b) CS and RM

turtling is only for attackers
and if my T/M's need to use CS and/or RM i would be seriously worried about them

---

Generally, I agree. T/M's shouldn't need them. However, they can be useful when facing an opposing T/M who has a better tpa or wpa then you, or when you get chained down by massacres and have very few wizzies left ;)

And with CS, you wouldn't need any WTS, which frees up your buildings for other purposes.

Lucky whats the highest acres you have ever been?

T/Ms can sometimes be the quickest way to bring down an unbreakable heavy attacker who is bottomfeeding on your KD.

It would take two hybrids to do the same damage (in theory) and you wont be able to land attacks yet.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ishandra

T/Ms can sometimes be the quickest way to bring down an unbreakable heavy attacker who is bottomfeeding on your KD.

It would take two hybrids to do the same damage (in theory) and you wont be able to land attacks yet.

---

pray tell what happens when you have expended your mana and stealth then and still not taken down that attacker?

plus even you have to admit that 25 hybrids FBing and nsing the same target with good wpa would be better then using only 2 T/Ms

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by cookie

Lucky whats the highest acres you have ever been?

---

Well, I just started playing midway though last age after about a 4 year break, but way back when I hit about 3500-4000 or so a couple of times I think. What does this have to do with the discussion?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by cookie

pray tell what happens when you have expended your mana and stealth then and still not taken down that attacker?

plus even you have to admit that 25 hybrids FBing and nsing the same target with good wpa would be better then using only 2 T/Ms

---

Of course, generally there is more than one target.... What happens when your hybrids can't break the target? Call in the tm's to hit them until they are a little easier to break.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by cookie

plus even you have to admit that 25 hybrids FBing and nsing the same target with good wpa would be better then using only 2 T/Ms

---

Like I said, 1 T/M can do what it takes 2 hybrids to do, when you not using attacks.

If you want to use 25 hybrids to take out one prov, your expectation of a T/M are too high or your hybrids just plain suck ;)


And there's this thing called regeneration, it happens to stealth and mana. Wars tend to last more than an hour ;)

your not understanding what i am trying to say.......ok this is simple......would you rather have 2 T/Ms with say 10 mod wpa and 8 mod tpa to take down that heavy attacker or

would you rather have 4 hybrids with 7-8 mod wpa and 4 mod tpa but also with enough offense to break the attacker after the ops are done?

What kind of insane T/M will be running 10 mod wpa? Thats just asking to be chained down.

An intelligent T/M will be running the same mods as a hybrid, but both of them rather than 1. This leaves enough military for a good military, unbreakable in most cases.



And having 2 T/Ms doesnt take away 4 hybrids. It takes away 2 hybrids.


You need to understand in your KD you have room for 25 provinces. Each province can successfully run 2 strategies out of the 3.

The best use of this is probably ~22 Attackers, ~15 Thieves, ~13 Mages, split over 20+ hybrids.

For every extra attacker you require you give up another strategy slot. Any pure attackers reduce your overall strategy slots per KD but mean some of your hybrids can afford to run their T or M strategies heavier at the expense of offensive power.

Ishandra you have to realise that my kd has been larger then probably either you or Lucky's in the last two ages and they fact that any compitent kd can take out on "unbreakable".

There is no such thing as a perfect strat nore a such thing as a province that can't be broken.

In the end if you run pure anything then your going to have a larger weakness then if you were running hybrids. And btw i have ran a human with 7 mod tpa and 4 wpa while leaving 60 dpa home when attacking. Also note that that human was 9.5k acres and was in age 39 :P

Your numbers mean nothing to me since I have no age 39 values or experience with which to compare them.

I said the best use is probably, not the best use is.

I think everyone here knows you cant stick with 1 set up and win all wars, it varies a lot on who your playing.

And a pure attacker wont have a larger weakness than a hybrid, but you will have 2 of them. Similarly a T/M will have 1 less weakness than a hybrid. It all balances out in the end, but yes as I said you want mostly hybrids.

They tend to be a lot more flexible so its easier for the KD to get things done. Your not as dependant on individuals logging in at certain times etc.

anyway i am done arguing. You do what you think is best and we will compare kd stats at eoa

Cookie is right its more about the 2 attacks a day you loose in war that a T/M cannot make.

The longer the war the more a T/M has to work in short if you play a T/M you are playing a selfish game and not a team game. You want to sit back and let your team mates put themselves in danger and you do not. Your team mates are automatically outnumbered in the attacking stakes before the war even starts.

If you have 2 T/M in a kingdom and each attack gains 100 acres then your kingdom is already down 400 acres in the first day.

And if either of you mention the words land lust or propaganda you will prove my case

T/M's lose wars. Its that simple.

For those who wish to play one though, DE will be the superior T/M this age.

Lack of attacks lose wars, not the T/Ms themselves.

Its just as bad if your attacker or hybrid gets economy crippled and cant attack. At least a T/M has the potential to disable twice as many provinces as a hybrid does. Assuming all things equal I'd rather have 2 T/Ms in my KD than 0.

I certainly wouldnt want more than 3 though.

no province can single handedly disable another someone has delusions of grandeur.

The quickest way to disable a province is by chaining not be T/M opps.

If the T/M does not attack then they are contributing to the loss of the war, no? Nice wording of the sentence does not change the fact that T/M put their kingdom at a serious disadvantage before the war even starts.

Quote:

---

Lack of attacks lose wars

---

So lack of attacks lose wars, but you don't think its a bad thing to have 4-6 less attacks a day? In my experience, any close war will easily be determined by an extra 4-6 attacks every day, far more so than some additional AW or NS. Especially considering those two provinces who added those attacks are STILL performing the same amount of T/M job as one of your dedicated T/M's. So essentially you gain 4-6 attacks a day for the loss of 1 pure T/M. I'll say it again, T/M's lose wars.

By having a T/M, one of your hybrids can swap to a heavy attacker, making 3 hits a day with QF/Rax/Warrior, possibly even double tapping if its a DW with Rax/Warr, as opposed to only making 2 hits a day and no double taps, as a hybrid.

And a T/M can still bottomfeed on the guys your attackers have "disabled" with their chaining. If you didnt keep hits on them they would easily claw their way back up as well as topfeeding honour from you.




I'm not trying to advocate T/M as being some kind of almighty superpower, but if you use them properly they are not a wasted slot.

If ops were that weak everyone would be running Heavy attackers with a max of 2 tpa/wpa for defensive purposes. The fact they dont shows that ops are important.





I think its fair to allocate around 10% of your provinces to T/M positions to take out enemies that are extremely weak to ops, or extremely resistant or unreachable with hits. If you dont, then by all means dont run any.

I get in 2.5 attacks each day, and I'm neither playing warrior nor a race that has quick feet.
Get out of here, you stupid n00b, and take your T/M with you.

Is this last age or next VT2? Cos we're not really in one at the mo :P

And how are your T/M defences while running these 25% Rax?

Your average hybrid is not going to be making 2.5 hits a day on equal-+20% NW opponents.

2 raw WPA, 5+ raw TPA.

So your incredibly highly drafted then if you have a real offence. Certainly if you had enough offence to break an equal sized T/M, without leaving a suiciders defence at home.

Again, I wouldn't says thats an average hybrid.

You don't understand.
There is no breaking T/M's, because it's illogical to do so. I take their honor when I'm done beating down the resistance - until then, they can have it, and keep on farming those on my side who weren't smart enough to protect themselves from them.

No, I'm not horribly overdrafted drafted, and yes, I have offense and defense. It's called being A/T outside the ghetto.
Homes and science, idiot.

now now VT2 ;) go easy on the fellow. (eat his face ingame instead ;)

elf t/m vs DE t/m:

pros for elf:

better mod wpa (can crack tougher targets)
+1 mana
-50% wage means u can aid ur teammates better in war
-50% loss means u r slightly less screwed when u r broken (minor bonus)


pros for DE:
better spellbook (very very important)
more damage per spell and +1 stealth (better for damaging mid-range attackers)
better defense


its also a good idea to add gnome t/m. gnomes have superior defense compare to those 2, plus they have much better thievery and can crack open high tpa targets (as oppose to DE who does more damage to easy targets)


conclusion:
they can all be good depending on what u use it for


EDIT: in terms of dragon slaying, gnome can donate the MOST because they start with more defense. DE is at disadvantage because u have to balance elite/spec ratio for defense/dragon slay. also, gnomes can keep resource without the fear of getting stolen, whereas elf and DE are still prone to other gnomes stealing from them

Ishandra thats an A/T. And again i am suprised because VT2 has again proven he isn't as nub as i thought

but yes for a kd that knows hybrids that is a normal hybrid

Gnome makes a horrible T/M - even worse than the other two.

What's next? Someone claiming you can run human as a T/M?

just because u do not understand the importance of t/m and the benefit of gnomes doesnt mean there are no importance. its not exactly a theory, several kingdoms have proved the importance of t/m in top wars and more kingdoms are including t/m in their setup. if u continue to insist t/m are useless then u r either ignorant or u havent met any kingdom skilled enough to use t/m

Hmmm, let's see...
The game now has three races that are very durable, and those three will be played very heavily the next age.

Gnome, on the other hand, is a very, very, very soft race, that's naturally very networth-inefficient.
The only real power it has is the 300 monies thieves, but the other three all save cash from one source or another, and so even that power is virtually nullified.

Gnome blows this age, blew the age before, will blow the next age, and has always blown.
Yeah, you go ahead and play your gnomes, your dark elf T/M's, and your elf T/M's.
When I lay a smackdown on you, or farm you for land late in the age, don't cry - you were repeatedly told it wouldn't work out for you.