Designing a War KD for OOW play

So with the new age quickly approaching my teammates and I have begun to debate things moving forward. This kingdom is a mixture of older players and new. Now I started this thread because as of late I've been looking at things from a different view and it seems to me that how I have picked or helped decide kd setups in the past is wrong. As I look back since my return in age 61 and my several ages as king, steward, or some branch of leadership I notice we make our choices based on a narrow view that war will come and we will fight. The fault with this mindset is that we spend 80% or more of the age in either normal or some other stance other than fighting in war. This generally leads to stagnation as we search for war.

So my questions would be: Is it better for a kingdom to pick their setup with the endgame being war OR is it better to pick based on where the bulk of one's time as a team will be. I have come to believe it would be better to pick based on where we spend most of our natural time as a kd as it seems the return on your investment is much greater when you pick a design that is geared towards non war play vs the two maybe three weeks of the age that we are actually fighting in war. I do play for war and we consider ourselves a war kingdom of ghetto caliber. This age we have fought 4 wars.

Thank you and I look forward to feedback on this topic

Opinion. More people can do the obvious in war stance than can actually play utopia.

Edit. Stick the f*ckers in normal.

Edit 2. You can define your own meta. I'd go position and diplomacy atm but meh. Someone big will take a total kicking if a flogger or coss is on it in an active KD.

If the goal is to win wars, I'd simply try to design the kd in a way where you're able to do well in wars and will be able to build up relatively fast oow.

at ghetto level simply have enougth attackers like 15-18 out of 22 or so, as activity is often the deciding factor in ghetto fights.

Also try to identify and weed out people who will absolutely not lift a finger to participate in war, like elfs on 75% draft on pure defenses and no tpa and wpa to speak of or that guy who defect the moment you hit war.

If you are going to be a full kingdom the chances are that war will find you even if you are trying to avoid them, so make choices from the assumption that you might be needing the capability later on.

Honestly; cost, imo.

You don't have the time or the protection to stack a ton of gc, draft super deep, etc as a warring KD. Go with something cheap and easy to rebuild.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Attero

: Is it better for a kingdom to pick their setup with the endgame being war
OR
is it better to pick based on where the bulk of one's time as a team will be.

---

This isnt really the right question. the concept should be you build a kd for the time in the age u'll have the most fun. If "most fun" is in war/winning wars then build a kd aimed at geting into and winning wars. If you enjoy just dicking around not in war, then build that and just "try your best' to win wars.

Our kd (divinity) usually comes up with 3-4 setups we think other War kds will run and then we build our strat around what will counter those. That's usually a good place to start. Another goel is have a mixture of heavy hitters like orc warrior with hybrid support like elf heretic and then tm backup like halfer rogue/elf mystic. Kds usually take out the top mod off first (the orcs) which gives u time to get your hybrids big and ub. Hybrid mages are very good at keeping their peasants so once they ub they can bottom feed and get decent income. They can also et most rogues..

All about balance really...

If a kd goes 20 heavy hitters and 5 pure tm support it's a instant fail when warring too War kds

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Smitty87

Our kd (divinity) usually comes up with 3-4 setups we think other War kds will run and then we build our strat around what will counter those. That's usually a good place to start. Another goel is have a mixture of heavy hitters like orc warrior with hybrid support like elf heretic and then tm backup like halfer rogue/elf mystic. Kds usually take out the top mod off first (the orcs) which gives u time to get your hybrids big and ub. Hybrid mages are very good at keeping their peasants so once they ub they can bottom feed and get decent income. They can also et most rogues..

All about balance really...

If a kd goes 20 heavy hitters and 5 pure tm support it's a instant fail when warring too War kds

---

Luke! u still playing utopia! lol...

The more things you do well as players the less dependent you need to be specifically for war.

Frankly I run cleric a lot because of the "infinity" feature. Most attributes in the game are tied to a relatively exhaustible resource, and most are on offense.

Of the other "infinity" features like elves innate spell resistance, the feature is relative to your surroundings. It's that great big opponents can circumvent your feature through power. Cleric is weaker in its wheelhouse than some but can mix it up with a greater number and larger opponents.

I've run undead clerics, orc clerics, human clerics, feary clerics, elf clerics, dwarf clerics and avian clerics. My favorite design is any age you can stack lower losses. I'm in a micro-kingdom this age and have had around 2-3-4 kingdoms attacking me at certain times. I'm not the CF type and enjoy these mashups, but it does drive my competitiveness.

Though I've spent much time fawning on clerics that's not the focus of my point. My point is to enjoy the game oow you might consider builds that are both meter efficient and hold an infinity feature. This is partly why I'm a proponent of undead sages, and why I frowned when the devs lowered their science to -20% again. I need my casting!

I love the ability to op off the back of UF and march with critical mourning effect. The combination of abduct & amnesia with low troop losses is one of my favorite normal stance weapons.