elves are more newbie-friendly than dwarves, due to the ever-powerful spell known as TOG.
core buildings for elf A/Ms - farms, guilds, towers. everything else is situational. i'm not advocating a strat that run only these 3 buildings btw.
elves are more newbie-friendly than dwarves, due to the ever-powerful spell known as TOG.
core buildings for elf A/Ms - farms, guilds, towers. everything else is situational. i'm not advocating a strat that run only these 3 buildings btw.
Awww, they moved it around again.
It was such an exciting change that I didn't even notice it. Too bad not a single serious person plays dark elf, still.
This pretty much puts dwarf/mystic in as the best choice for quality, while elf wins for quantity.
Catwalk's crusade for legalized cheating was a stunning success, with ghettos and low-tiered teams everywhere losing their wells of knowledge to better kingdoms in the process.
Step one: replace everything that works.
Step two: blame the predictable epic fail on outside forces.
Step three: keep the community informed that no progress has been made since the last update.
Step four: thank you for your patience.
In the magic aspect, elves easily beat dwarves in both quality and quantity.
I don't agree, and I never will.
Dwarf has bonuses that lets it suck away even more population, while still retaining massive BE. Their elites are also one point stronger offensively.
A dwarf can keep more offense than you, a stronger economy, and more wizards, all without compromising provincial stability.
Your elf's also not quite as good at staying power.
Fog owns your 50% lower losses, and since the dwarf's going to have equal - or better - WPA than you, you're not going to be be able to dispell it.
What you have over the dwarf is more mana, and that's it.
Catwalk's crusade for legalized cheating was a stunning success, with ghettos and low-tiered teams everywhere losing their wells of knowledge to better kingdoms in the process.
Step one: replace everything that works.
Step two: blame the predictable epic fail on outside forces.
Step three: keep the community informed that no progress has been made since the last update.
Step four: thank you for your patience.
for the +25% BE that dwarves have, they need to run more banks OOW (elves have superior income due to TOG), arms (if expensive elites are to be pumped in fast), hospitals, WTs than elves. so the +25% BE is not alot when comparing between these 2 races.
dwarves have a 7p leet, elves 6p leet. but elves can retain offence much better in war, that is the main thing. in a prolonged war, dwarves offence (replace 7p elite with 5p spec) will drop more than an elf's offence. dwarves need to run more thieves to compensate for their crap tpa, so the extra wizards that they can squeeze in, wont be by alot.
elves usually go high wpa, and dwarves high offence, to make use of their racial bonuses to the best.
i'm talking abt the magical aspect, so fog doesn't come into the equation as it is a purely attacker-based spell.
quality of elves magic comes from: +30% spell strength.
try it and u will know.
there's a reason why top kds use elves as mages and not dwarves.
You don't need banks, unless you're planning to raise an army.
Something tells me you've never played dwarf at all, to begin with.
Next!
Catwalk's crusade for legalized cheating was a stunning success, with ghettos and low-tiered teams everywhere losing their wells of knowledge to better kingdoms in the process.
Step one: replace everything that works.
Step two: blame the predictable epic fail on outside forces.
Step three: keep the community informed that no progress has been made since the last update.
Step four: thank you for your patience.
Dwarves can easily swap buildings OOW to pump so having to run more of anything OOW is a silly argument.
You realize dwarf BE affects both guilds and towers right? So a dwarf/mystic is going to always produce more runes/wizards than an elf/mystic.
As for durability in war: free build > -50% casualties. For self spells: Fog > clear sight or any other self spell elf has. Someone active enough when the other kingdom waves shouldn't have a problem putting fog back up if the enemy is fortunate enough to get a MV assuming you know their wave time. For army: 7 > 6 and it's not even close. I'll give you the extra mana an hour is useful as well as the spell strength, but other dwarven bonuses trump them in terms of an overall province (not just casting).
And -20% TPA is nothing. It's easily overcome with science or a few extra thieves. It's hardly noticeable anymore.
something in me tells me that u only use certain races and certain personalities.. :)
cheech, u're talking about the entire aspects of a dwarven province vs an elven province, and this is very much open to debate (more elves than dwarves at the top level this age tho)..
and i'm talking abt the magical aspects of the game, which race makes a better mage, something that VT2 challenge me to.
The best pure mage is DE, but they have nothing else going for them and no one plays pure anything.
If we're talking A/M I'd say dwarves have the slight advantage.
As far as "no dwarves on top" goes that doesn't represent how good they are. Using dwarves is a kingdomwide commitment since fog is virtually wasted with non dwarf provs mixed in. Looking around this age, I haven't seen a single full dwarf kingdom surprisingly.
KD Setup:
22 provinces, 1 T/M.
Rest supposed to be attacker & Hybrids.
We are NOT aiming to become a SKD, beeing top average is rather what we are aiming for I guess.
What would you suggest is the best setup?
Acre-wise? Do you try to get everyone at same acre-level?
Have some smaller, some larger guys? If so, why?
What strat do you follow in wars?
How do you pick targets for your attackers during war?
What do you do during wars - chain or go for max gain?
If you chain, till what extent do you chain a province?
Thatīs it so far.
Last edited by metriod; 07-06-2009 at 00:23.
#2
What do you tell someoen writing something like this
"Lol, u will kill me guys. The Monarch is not someone with unlimited responsibilities and rights. The position is NOT supposed to do all what he wants to, but rather coordinate 20-25 others and implement the decisions these people take."
:D
#3 What do you tell an active province, who resists updating pimp during rebuild time, cause "there is no need to"?...
Meh, I know good and enough answers to that, but my english sucks.
I need something that I can copy and just say "PWNED"
If you're not part of the solution, you're part of the problem.
No willingness to cooperate equals no spot on my crew. If I tell a dumb gnome to convert all his elites to soldiers, so we can destroy a dragon before it's even started doing damage to us, I expect that to be carried out to the letter.
The point here is, you don't have to give a reason for your orders. You don't have to defend your decisions. There's no need for you to tell people why you expect them to do something - only what you want them to do.
Anything besides short, barked commands is fanservice.
Just don't expect people to work as a team when you're not around to whip them if you never explain how your strategies are superior, and why they worked so awesomely in this war or that war.
Don't repeat yourself, and don't accept slacking - they both tell people it's okay to not work at max effectiveness.
Have a goal that you stick to like glue. Make rules so simple, people start referring to them as guidelines, and consider them sacred.
By far the most important part of being 'top' is that your life outside the game will suffer.
The more it suffers, the higher up the ladder you are.
-
Personally, I don't bother with fixed 'strats,' land-sizes, networths, or what have you.
It's just one more silly thing that must be taken into account whenever I make a plan, and it's one of those things that cause lots of confusion when you have so many people to boss around.
The rule of thumb is: there is no power of one.
One huge guy will end up destroyed, while two huge guys will lend support to each other, and three huge guys will not draw fire - except from people significantly larger.
This is true for small provinces, too.
I sorts targets based on initial and theoretical levels of damage, then I dismantle the biggest damage-givers first, and work my way down from the top.
Any weaknesses, whether they be to attacking, thievery, economical warfare, or magic, will be heavily capitalized on, to cut down the time needed to disable the target.
The type of attacks used depends on what I want to accomplish.
If it's clear right from the start that the people we're warring are stubborn, they'll be allowed to grow fat, while we dismantle their provinces, then we pick them apart with landhits later.
There's never a fixed 'best attack' in this game - it all comes down to what you have on your team, what you're up against, and what you're aiming for.
The 'best' setup is also not a fixed thing, and varies depending on what you want to accomplish, what your players are capable on, and what your goals are.
As of right now, the strongest races are dwarf, elf, and human. The strongest personalities are warrior, rogue, mystic, and sage.
T/M's are useless.
Kick him out, or force him to convert to something that can actually add to the war in a direct fashion.
Catwalk's crusade for legalized cheating was a stunning success, with ghettos and low-tiered teams everywhere losing their wells of knowledge to better kingdoms in the process.
Step one: replace everything that works.
Step two: blame the predictable epic fail on outside forces.
Step three: keep the community informed that no progress has been made since the last update.
Step four: thank you for your patience.
1) No best setup :)
But if I must say one its all dwarf mystic haha. Requires hyperactivity to destroy.
2) Everyone at same acreage is good if you chain well and you are going for honor. If honor is not your goal, variation in acreage should not impede your war performance.
Your overgrowns would have to resort to razes though, which cuts into your gains from war. Still, the edge they give in military and economy makes them useful.
Small ones, especially those recently chained, can be extremely useful to help your KD chain deeper. However, they require army in army out activity for merely survival, if your opposing KD knows what they are doing.
3) Chaining is but one way of disabling enemy provinces. Focus Ops can destroy very well too. Do not overdo attention on any province. Apply enough and bring as many to the brink as possible.
Gauge your KD potential to the enemy KD. If you are superior in activity, and max gains will bring the win, by all means. If ur equal, you chain/focus. Once you have sufficient superiority and is confident of the win, you might max gains to apply pressure. Against better KDs tho, dun think about max gains unless you just wanna withdraw.
Chaining provinces is about timing. It is not necessary that I chain the provinces in order of threat level. I rather chain the average province at the right time, than a superior province at the wrong time.
Say a target bounces or uses warspoils. Thats a GOLDEN opportunity to chain to the ground. The target has no incoming land, and how far I chain is how low he gets. Typically, I quarter his land, all his defense and most of his offense is as good as dead.
Say a 100 opa orc double trads at the beginning of war. Thats a STUPID time to chain. However low you take him, once his land comes in with his army, he will not be overpop. Watch as he quad taps your small ones. Think bout it, what has changed? Not much. He takes as much land per wave as he would when big, the chain doesnt achieve its purpose.
Also, chaining is only valuable on the first go. Achieve your chain BEFORE the target army returns home. Take a 800 acres to 200 acres, his army returns to a 200 acre with 40 ppa, the overpop process deserts most of his army. He is finished. If you do in two waves, 800 -> 400, enemy attacks again, 400 -> 200, each of your short 400 acre chains removed mostly peasants. At 200 acres, he would be deprived of his peasantry, but most certainly fighting fit given some gc aid from his KD mates.
4) Depth of chain depends. Quarter his land is a good rule of thumb. Wizards dun leave, so a 2 wpa would end up as 8 wpa below, while keeping lots of peasants+thieves as well. As you can imagine, there isnt much space for army, hence the chain is deadly.
Early age, when wpa is low, and for enemies with poor tpa/wpa, chaining will be more limited in potential. Such targets are better dismantled with ops.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)