Page 1 of 11 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 152

Thread: homes

  1. #1
    Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Posts
    12

    homes

    I'm asking for the effectiveness of homes compared to forts and TGs. btw, I'm an avian so stables are no go.

    ty in advance

  2. #2
    Post Fiend
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Posts
    251
    The proper way to answer a question like that requires more info.

    What rough rate of sci are you planning/able to run?
    What personality are you?
    Are you trying for hybrid, heavy attacker, or T/M (ya unlikely for an avian but just the same)?

    A build strategy running homes is a strat centering around quantity (ie raw numbers) while a no-homes strat centers itself around quality (ie modified numbers). I myself don't use any homes as an attacker and stick to making the quality of the troops I have as effective as I can.

  3. #3
    Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Posts
    11
    Doesnt really matter what you want to do. You should ALWAYS run at a minimum 40% homes.

    /thread

  4. #4
    Regular
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    88
    Ignore anyone who tells you to run more than 30% of any one building... they are either Gojete, or do no understand diminishing returns. because your question is quite vague the answer wont be too thorough. homes will provide you with a slight economic and military boost but their strength is in fixing your BE if you keep it awfully low, anywhere from 0% to 10% or so is probably an ok ammount to keep around. now about tg's vs forts. unless you are a faery, or are already rocking 20%+ Tg's, i would not even begin to wonder about forts usefulness as it is mostly null.

  5. #5
    Sir Postalot Ordray's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    South East, USA
    Posts
    3,170
    If anyone ever tells you to run >15% homes, you should take their advise with a grain of salt. Anything over 20% homes merits a complete ignoring of their post.

    Anyhow, basically what Fenleone said holds true, what you've given us is not enough for us to go on to advise you about your build. For example, if you're an Avian/Cleric, then you're going to need a different build than say Avian/Rogue. Role and activity are also huge components of what you're asking about.

    Also, I'd like to think that you can have both quantity and quality if you play your province right ;)

    I disagree with Spamely about Forts/TG. You need to look what you have to work with. If you're going by rDPA like some people do, then all they do is increase your defense, but if you're using a goal mDPA, then forts could free up a sizable chunk of your army to train into elites. Again, it all depends. Forts are more effective the more TGs that you're already running. (you can boost your OPA by 0.5 simply by using the correct mix of forts/TGs @20% total rather than going 20% TGs only.)

    Anyhow, I've put together a spreadsheet that you might find useful. You can tinker around with builds and such to see their effects. I'll point you to it: http://sheet.zoho.com/public/ordray/...orkbook-v0-5-1
    P.S. I'll be uploading a new version in about 6-8 hours from now that will include a basic attack calculator. Just a bit of a shameless plug ;)
    Retired at one time but no longer retired.

  6. #6
    Regular Jeeps's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    Anfield
    Posts
    98
    Hey Ordray: A guy I used to know would run ~40% homes + really high pop science, getting him ~34+ ppa, seemed to work pretty well for him at least. Had massive amounts of troops/thieves/etc. So is that type of strat still viable or just ridiculous?? I know the guy who used it was like totally gung-ho about it
    LL THE BOBS!

  7. #7
    Enthusiast
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Posts
    486
    "do no understand diminishing returns."
    I didn't know the population bonus from homes suffered from diminishing returns...

  8. #8
    Regular
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    88
    @twitched
    ...
    @Ordray
    forts are less useful than they seem on paper.

  9. #9
    Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Posts
    12
    Thank you for the responses. I'm sorry to make my questien vague. Actually I'm going to try an Aves/Tact, going an attacker route.

    Right now I'm building a lot of homes, around 20%, do you think t's an ok number?

    I do aware that more homes means more units and that will make my nw/acre higher, but is higher nw would affect much for my lose/gain? how about making a semi suicidal attacks with fair amount of GS to balance the lose?

  10. #10
    Game Support Bishop's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    21,331
    don't build homes in war, they aren't great outside of it but they are useless inside.
    Support email: utopiasupport@utopia-game.com <- please use this and don't just PM me| Account Deleted/Inactive | Utopia Facebook Page | #tactics <-- click to join IRC|
    PM DavidC for test server access

  11. #11
    Forum Fanatic gergnub's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    2,525
    I would avoid homes, there is better use for the land. Except remember to have 1 home, a man needs a place to live in!

  12. #12
    Veteran gojete's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Utopia
    Posts
    602
    You should go avian cleric is better and easier to run a high homes strat with it.

    Running 40% to 60% homes will give you High building efficency if combined with some 10% building science, which means that you can run very few buildings to get the most out of them.

    You can achieve 100 opa, 50 dpa home, 3 raw tpa and 1.5 raw wpa very easy and very fast .Good economy and strong army, unless you are playing in a top 80 KD you will probably have a better province than everyone else by running 40% homes .

    Its a proven and tested strategy, in war and out of war . It works and delivers.

    Most people reject the facts though, i tested it for 2 ages in a heavy warrying kd that won 13 war wins in a row and ended up top 120 in all 3 honor , land and nw in both ages.

    Most people will tell you they dont work just because they assume so, i have already tested it, big difference . You guys are all talk nothing more. Just because you "believe " that they dont work, it doesnt mean they dont, can you see the difference between facts and assumptions? grow up .
    - Get the best out of your gameplay, go 45% homes minimum .
    -Successfully tested over 13 war wins in a row and many that number of non war conflicts .
    7 out f 7 war wins age 50 guarantees.
    High homes = good

  13. #13
    Forum Fanatic E_Boko's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Posts
    2,655
    Quote Originally Posted by Jeeps View Post
    Hey Ordray: A guy I used to know would run ~40% homes + really high pop science, getting him ~34+ ppa, seemed to work pretty well for him at least. Had massive amounts of troops/thieves/etc. So is that type of strat still viable or just ridiculous?? I know the guy who used it was like totally gung-ho about it
    there are a few problems with this strat. one after a certain % you start to gain less money from having all those ppl. without jobs, which every other type of built acre is, you generate less money even though you have massive peasants. the other problem is if the enemy kingdom kills your peasants, now you make no income and only have 60% of your buildings doing something for your province. ie TG or forts or guild while ppl who dont run high homes will have 20-30% more land dedicated to more functional buildings.
    Icy 4 8

  14. #14
    Forum Fanatic gergnub's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    2,525
    You should ignore gojete and his love for over 50% homes strats.

  15. #15
    Veteran gojete's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Utopia
    Posts
    602
    I would really like to have a discussion about high homes , but most of you are just too closed minded for it.

    You are assuming that you will get fireballed , and that your income will drop, and that you will have 60% buildings having no function at all, like dead weight. You are assuming all those things.

    After 13 wars in a row , some of them which were utterly destructive for both sides . Where chains were performed, massacres, fireballs, meteor showers, chasitty, pitfalls, dragons from left to right.

    You are assuming that the wars were of random hits from highly inactive ghettos full of noobs running 50 opas . You are assuming too many things which are wrong. Again you are just assuming things over and over again.
    You are presenting to me, fictional scenarios that you imagine in your head, you are talking out of your imaginations, out of what you believe, out of your prejudice and ignorance, I am saying that high homes work because i have used them and tested them. If not see, can you at least understand the difference between facts and thoughts ? Do you know the difference between theorizing in your mind and having actually been there done that and seen the actual results out of the test?

    HAve you run high homes in an avian, halfling, orc and fairy yourself? HAve you, yourself tested in over 2 ages of continuous war and conflict the strat ? Have you seen the results of getting hit, of being fireballed, of being chained from 1400 down to 600 acres when running high homes?
    Have you seen the results in the economy by logging into your throne page, and seen the income, and the ammount of troops that you can train, and so on and so on.

    Have you done the clicking, seen the surveys, the science reports. Did you log in and built the homes?

    You are talking out of your fantasy im talking out of testing high homes for two ages .
    - Get the best out of your gameplay, go 45% homes minimum .
    -Successfully tested over 13 war wins in a row and many that number of non war conflicts .
    7 out f 7 war wins age 50 guarantees.
    High homes = good

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •