VT2 - we need to talk..

[theuser]

Explain to me how DE is inferior to Elf.

I've been reading a lot of your posts and you seem to think Elf is vastly superior to DE for the purpose of...well just about everything.

As I see it Elve's may get that nice 73% compounding bonus on magic (30% strength +33% more spells) but lose out on getting rogue as an option.
If you're trying to use that extra mana recovery you need to play Mystic, which means now that the rogue option is closed off to you.

I'm playing DE rogue this age and I picked it for a couple of reasons:

I use 12% of my land to become a full fledged threat on the magic battlefield. I am referring to the fact that even with mystic bonus an elf still needs to divert a solid 7-10% of extra land to towers before science kicks in. That land is spent by DE rogues on Thieves Dens and makes being a rogue a very easy worthwhile option since you can compound it further by using invisibility.

I guess I'm angry with you, you so easily glance over DE's without acknowledging how dangerous they can truly be.
Picking someone apart as a DE is as simple as finding one hole to make it through on and capitolising.
weak magic? pretty freaking likely since DE is the only race to run with +magic effectiveness. Spam nightmares on them to drop their rogues and army out of the picture. That opens them up to being NS'd right away. An A/T hybrid doesn't often run WT's so once you've weakened their standing army and their TPA with Nightmares you can just unleash the fury of combining greater arson on hospitals + nightstrike. Ripening them up for an attack.

Strong Magic with WT's?
Well unless they are also DE just use magic through them.
Mystic Vortex a few times and smack them with Tornado spam. Greater arson more WT's and open the floodgates to the rogue. Use that opening to Arson farms and steal food and bam...person is starving to death. -50% losses doesn't stop your army from starving to death.

Don't even let me get started on how much you can strip a pure attacker.

You preach the power of flexibility and adaptability yet you cuss out the race that has the most of it. Co-ordinated players using nightmares is invaluable for taking a province out of the picture and Elves don't even get access to it. Playing DE rogue is like playing with a swiss army knife. You can do anything and everything and unless the person is a turtle T/M you're going to make an opening.
Elves don't have nightmares and they can't take advantage of the rogue personality without serious losses to their land efficiency.

Tell me what I'm missing. Elves run with clearsight and WT's with lots of magic making them pretty hard to take down, but I don't see them being more dangerous than a DE rogue....ever.

I'm not trying to be say I'm better than you, I just want to know what I am not seeing....you often make blanket statements that to me are just assertions that are not backed up by anything. Explain it to me please in it's fullest why an Elf is so much better than a DE.

[Ezzerland]

I use 12% of my land to become a full fledged threat on the magic battlefield. I am referring to the fact that even with mystic bonus an elf still needs to divert a solid 7-10% of extra land to towers before science kicks in. That land is spent by DE rogues on Thieves Dens and makes being a rogue a very easy worthwhile option since you can compound it further by using invisibility.

as DE/Rogue you need 2x as many guilds as Elf/Mystic. Afaik, you're running exactly the same amount of land as an elf is to keep up your wizards at the same rate and elf does, or the elf already pwns you in magic (not even counting the mana regen or extra spell strength)

If you want to talk about saving land space, Elf doesn't need hosp, and you do.

I guess I'm angry with you, you so easily glance over DE's without acknowledging how dangerous they can truly be.
Picking someone apart as a DE is as simple as finding one hole to make it through on and capitolising.
weak magic? pretty freaking likely since DE is the only race to run with +magic effectiveness. Spam nightmares on them to drop their rogues and army out of the picture. That opens them up to being NS'd right away. An A/T hybrid doesn't often run WT's so once you've weakened their standing army and their TPA with Nightmares you can just unleash the fury of combining greater arson on hospitals + nightstrike. Ripening them up for an attack.

This is essentially completely irrelevant in your points. DE can use NM, yes, but just the same an Elf can use pitfalls while MSing, or FB significantly more efficiently. But you're talking about a 1 on 1 basis, not actually kingdom play, which rogues one advantage here is AW, but you wouldn't be able to effectively AW even a semi-proper elf.

Strong Magic with WT's?
Well unless they are also DE just use magic through them.
Mystic Vortex a few times and smack them with Tornado spam. Greater arson more WT's and open the floodgates to the rogue. Use that opening to Arson farms and steal food and bam...person is starving to death. -50% losses doesn't stop your army from starving to death.

You must be foolish if you think a DE/Rogue is going to MV and tornado run an Elf/Mystic. Since this is what you are comparing, you should pin them against eachother. Guaranteed the Elf/Mystic will overpower the DE/Rogue when it comes to mage ability. Mainly because for every 1% guilds the elf runs, the DE needs 2% to maintain a relative wpa so that their effectiveness bonus can prevail.

You preach the power of flexibility and adaptability yet you cuss out the race that has the most of it. Co-ordinated players using nightmares is invaluable for taking a province out of the picture and Elves don't even get access to it. Playing DE rogue is like playing with a swiss army knife. You can do anything and everything and unless the person is a turtle T/M you're going to make an opening.
Elves don't have nightmares and they can't take advantage of the rogue personality without serious losses to their land efficiency.

Now, this is where you talk about kingdom co-ordination eh? ok, so imagine a kd with a few gnome/rogues. Then you have the A/M elves for the magic side of things. and tada, you have more hitting power because you're spread less thin between the 3 types of things, and likely far more thief/mage power.

Tell me what I'm missing. Elves run with clearsight and WT's with lots of magic making them pretty hard to take down, but I don't see them being more dangerous than a DE rogue....ever.

Well. Lets focus on that clearsight for a second. The bonus of that, even without watchtowers, is pretty powerful. If they add watchtowers, you think your DE/Rogue is gonna break through with thievery? How about magic if the elf is mystic, which fyi is what you are knocking atm? And you think your army is going to keep up with theirs? They have 50% losses without hosp, and since they are able to focus more heavily on magic and still maintain a solid thief defense, they can still successfully cast spells on you, while preventing a lot of the return ops, and then they have more troops in their army to focus on.


So, what are you missing?

Well, you're missing the fact that even if a DE's army is home, his defense is still as low as it is completely out. And elf, on the otherhand, has the ability to make use of his elites in more than one way. Now, you could too, but that would weaken the potential of your offense, and since you're spread between thieves/mages and THEN army, this hurts you more than it does an elf. Never underestimate the ability to keep defense home.

Elves will also save more land than you, because you assume elves still need hosp. They don't, on the other hand, you do.

Their elites are 200gc cheaper than yours; easier to afford and train. Their economy is vastly stronger, not because of the ability to ToG (DE have this too) but because they will lose far less troops.

You can be angry all you want about VT2 or anyone else knocking DE for all you want. But it's not really something to dispute about which is stronger. DE is playable, but its definitely not stronger.

[theuser]

as DE/Rogue you need 2x as many guilds as Elf/Mystic. Afaik, you're running exactly the same amount of land as an elf is to keep up your wizards at the same rate and elf does, or the elf already pwns you in magic (not even counting the mana regen or extra spell strength)

If you want to talk about saving land space, Elf doesn't need hosp, and you do.



This is essentially completely irrelevant in your points. DE can use NM, yes, but just the same an Elf can use pitfalls while MSing, or FB significantly more efficiently. But you're talking about a 1 on 1 basis, not actually kingdom play, which rogues one advantage here is AW, but you wouldn't be able to effectively AW even a semi-proper elf.

This right here is why I wanted to talk to VT2.

I'm not talking about DE's attacking Elf, I'm talking about DE attacking anyone, and Elf attacking anyone. The -50% losses is referring to any kind of loss prevention, aka hospitals, elves, cleric etc. This isn't a cage match of Elf vs DE it's an analysis of the two functioning in a war.

Nightmares + Rogue ops to me is too strong to overlook and you're not contesting that to me except in the case of a DE attacking an Elf Mystic.

edit: Also (AW + Nightmares) or (Tornadoes + Greater Arson + Rob Granaries) or (Fireball + Massacre + MS, Storms + Rob Vaults + Arson Banks) look at all those F***ING OPTIONS, all from being a rogue....which an elf can't be.

Be quiet and let the person who've I've requested enlighten me as to what I'm not getting.

[Ezzerland]

So basically what you're saying is that nobody except vt2 is allowed to pwn you. its ok, I'm sure he can just quote my post and then you'll be stuck with it anyway.

afaik, if you read further down, I did contest it on other setups :) With gnomes and elves :p

[SillyPanda]

Having DE's in our KD last age, Nightmares + NS was nice, every single last one of them counted off almost 620K per hit in war. Having the elite serv as def is nice... up until they get hit, after which its just more pump time.

Even at the relatively same NW, MV versus MA is a harsh and rugged road most don't even want to speak about. Because at that point your left down to personal play style... who pumped harder versus who has what build isn't really an option at that point. The only real given to that reference is whether your waring a bunch of inactive scrubs.... and even then, why would you talk about it later on?

In terms of stripping a pure attacker... who the F*** can't? Seriously, other attackers can strip an attacker if they ran their prov that way.

Besides which, talking about war in terms of resources.... is utter fail... there is 99.9999999999999999999999% of the time always someone you can rob blind the hour update before your army comes home. no one starving + army paid = army out.

In every realistic war I've maintained accountability for my KD we've found that CS is roughly equivalent to having 13% WT @ +106% BE. Ergo, Elf + WT's... hurt your TE. At the same time DE with the same amount of WT, just sucks.

As for DE/Rogue versus Elf/Rogue... we're back to personal play style. One takes more to pump than the other. Ergo, whoever pumps hardest wins.

Can DE's be dangerous, sure.
Can Elfs be dangerous, sure.

Which one is more dangerous is in the hands of the player, and I don't honestly see anything about the original post that leans the argument one way or the other.

[VT2]

Let's see.
Dark elf gets the following: static defense, increased wages, only the regular defensive magic, one handy offensive spell, that's too hard to use unless you can kill a ton of wizards before you spam it, cheap offense, and little else.

It's like Ezzer said - I could just quote him, but that's not fun.

Dark elves aren't dangerous at all.
They either build themselves into bunkers, in which case they don't attack at all, or they run offense, which means they have almost no defense.
If I want your chocolate elf to bleed, I massacre it. They like it about as much as gnome, and they're always open to it, too.

[_greenie]

ok... im trying to understand what we are comparing here....
elf A/M vs DE A/M?
elf T/M vs DE T/M?
elf A/T/M vs DE A/T/M?

or just elf Vs DE in everything?

[VT2]

I get gangster vibes from the title.
"VT2, we gotta talk. Ya see, dere's this guy, lesse call 'im Tony. Tony needsta take a dirt nap."

[SillyPanda]

@ _greenie

Elf vs DE in everything.

@ VT2

You made me spill my beer you bastage.

[buka]

"VT2, we gotta talk. Ya see, dere's this guy, lesse call 'im Tony. Tony needsta take a dirt nap."

I just had Jack Daniel's shoot out of my nose laughing at that one.

[SillyPanda]

See... I'm not the only one. You need like 2K posts taken off your count for that blatant abuse of forum humor.

[Ezzerland]

/me currently crying over spilled beer

[Jobolob]

At one with the keyboard.

007 licence to post was better.

[Bano]

beer? jack daniels?

you mean coca cola

[_greenie]

[QUOTE=SillyPanda;14873085]@ _greenie

Elf vs DE in everything.QUOTE]

General bonuses:
elf has vasty superiour econ, based purely on 33% more ToG and 30% more effective ToG
DE also has more expensive elite, with higher losses

offensive mage, the ONLY reason you would want to go DE is because of NM
for all other spells, ie FB/tornado/duration spells elf > DE
and the rune thing is not that big a deal really =)

Defensive mage
30% more effective wizzie defense VS MA

as an attacker, elf > DE
in theory DE has better numbers... but the ability to turtle cannot be undervalued (and -50% losses = win!)

offensive, thief
well, elf should have more science, Vs DE's invisibility

defensive thief
CS vs no CS

as a T/M
DE and elf are about the same, ASSUMING you want your T/M doing NM, and they go rogue =)