Undead Tactician vs Undead Warrior

[igotnomilk]

I will make things as concise as possible. Here is the scenario:

- I know the game well but I am still learning. Please treat me as a newbie.
- In a warring KD
- 6 wars of which 4 was won this age (finish at about 7Mil GC networth)
- We have about 3-4 highly active attackers, attacks 3 times a day or more.
- The other attackers (about 10 of them) are less inclined (2 attacks per day is minimum activity level required)
- Monarch and war general suggest all attackers go UD/warrior. We do have some halfer and human hybrids, and faery t/m support.
- I disagree with all UD/warrior.

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++
SO, my argument - attackers should be all Tacticians rather than all Warriors for Undead.
Why I think so:

Tactician
1. Economy
+30% Spec and build creds - Tacticians have the economic edge over warriors in war. Buildings cost next to nothing.

2. Attack speed, training speed
Obvious advantage. Speed win wars. However as I mentioned above, there are some who can't make 3 attacks per day. Still, I argue - they can treat the -15% attack time as saving rax acres to be spent in other buildings - maybe hospitals or WTs - whichever. A tactician attacking only twice a day isn't really a waste of personality choice is it?

3. +50% bonuses from honor
We are not a top honor whoring KD or anything like that - is this bonus really worth the personality choice? -50% losses from ambush makes more sense, Undeads do get ambushed a lot.

4. -15% losses
This is only useful for UD defense. A tactician can obtain this with hospitals, no sweat. Heck, with the help of spec credits and reduced training time killed defense can be replenished pretty fast. Only 9 hour training time in war with IA.

5. +15% enemy losses
Is it even anything to write home about? Pitfalls and bribe gens do the trick just as nicely.

6. +10% OME in war
I don't think this is crucial to the UD attacking power. Especially since leets can now be trained. We will also be throwing Plague around plenty, offsetting the need for this bonus - which may I add, does not even work OOW?

+++++++++++++++++++++++

TL;DR -
Why would anyone choose warrior over tactician in a warring kingdom? To put it even more concisely, why go warrior at all?

Lets limit the discussion to only Tacticians and Warriors. And for the most part the topic centers around Undead. I appreciate any feedback.

[NoseBlood]

wait for the final changes...they should be out tomorrow i hope. But ye atm, tact is prolly better for undead. Tho 10-15 ud warriors would be scary on hostile waves along with PF. High honor UD's would get pretty scary ome in war aswell, but not too often you see high hnor ud's around :P

[Sadliar]

+15% losses is on TOP of pf / bribe gens (for a total of average 25% + enemy losses if they add, more if they multiply). When doing attack chains you bring the province into double / triple / quad tap range a lot quicker, and Plague just adds to that.

Heck, with the help of spec credits and reduced training time killed defense can be replenished pretty fast. Only 9 hour training time in war with IA.

Training costs are never an issue when it comes to defensive troop losses. -losses are there to keep them from dying too quickly while defending against chains, which will keep you from getting double / triple / quad tapped as quickly (they have to wait for overpop). You make the enemy kingdom spend a lot more resources attacking you for lower gains.

-15% def losses for Undead is actually quite useful, since they are so extremely vulnerable to chains and typically run 0 or at least very low hospitals %.

6. +10% OME in war
I don't think this is crucial to the UD attacking power. Especially since leets can now be trained.

How can you possibly think this? The better your raw off is, the more useful OME bonuses are, so you're just undermining your own argument here.

Other than that, I agree that Tact is probably a better personality for warring Undead kingdoms at low honor levels. Their economy is very strong due to building credits, even when getting chained, and the Ambush modifier is nice when you're not using Anon.

Warrior is a lot better than Tact if you can accumulate some honor.

[zercousy]

HI there,

what you see and what you said is looking at a provinces level, but try to look at a kingdom level...

you should ask...should kd runs more undead warrior or undead tactician better for warring?

in war, off is most crucial, extra boost of off can definitely help...
- extra off in war, will break enemy unbreakable, turtle provinces

we knew that tactician can be useful in credit and attack speed ,but does it really that concern kd?

take also consideration on kd mate plays in activity, experience, war style, attacking mode...if kd is strong honor bonus can help a lot too..:D

its never best attacking combo you can see, there only best suitable attacking combo pick your kd play..:D

enjoy with your kd mate ya..hahaha

[zercousy]

If all going to tactician, everyone should take advantages on the speed with 10-15% rax with tactician as well..and cope it up with army in army out...
if kd activity can do that, ya should go tactician instead better...but...does your kd activity meet that?

[zercousy]

1 advice for you to persuade your kd in using tactician, its about enhaced Conquest and -50% ambush..

BTW, wait for final changes bro...:p

[Sharaf]

1 advice for you to persuade your kd in using tactician, its about enhaced Conquest and -50% ambush..

BTW, wait for final changes bro...:p

well, i dont agree on saying things like "the all kd should play ud\tectic"...
i always thougth that there is no such thing as best race\persona combo - there is best race\persona to fit into a player play style and his job in the kd...

[[MaNIaC]]

if a kd isn;t going for honour, isn;t it better to be tactician? though subject to final changes

[blanked]

Well the +15% losses for enemy is really useful for undead when you're chaining someone as a kd. If you guys chain successfully, you can triple that the guy in no time with warrior's perk.
While tact's reduced army time might be useful, it won't be that much of a use if your kd mates can't make more than 4 uniques in 2 days. Some people don't have access to internet all the while so they might as well go for +10% OME to ensure their double or triple tap.
And as for the -50%, if you use war spoils you won't really have to concern yourself with being ambushed. When you're being chained war spoils does wonders to ensure that you're not so severely overpop.
But the honour thing is not so useful unless you can guarantee that you're at least a baron most of the time. No point in getting extra bonuses from Lord aye?

[KuhaN]

Cleric or Merchant.

[sctsn5]

I was looking into it. I'm thinking with the changes to Undead that Warrior might be the better choice?

-15% Your Military Casualties -50% loses on attacks + 7%ish hospitals = about -95% losses on attacks
then
-15% Your Military Casualties + 7% hospitals = about -35% loses when attacked.

Would put undead about back to where they were and possibly better off than cleric/tact?
Thoughts?

[igotnomilk]

I agree.. warrior looks more feasible now that UD has offense losses. Except I might not consider including hospitals in the build. Maybe something along these lines for UD warrior in War:

10 homes
15 banks
15 GS
10 TG
20 Rax
15 WT
10 Guild
4 Tower
1 Dung

Possibly raze towers altogether, and rely on aid for self spells.