Page 1 of 4 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 46

Thread: Which of these setups is more advantageous?

  1. #1
    I like to post KuhaN's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    tracy, california
    Posts
    4,730

    Which of these setups is more advantageous?

    - Assume a standard 18-20 heavy attackers, 5-7 t/m (or hybrid mix) setup.

    - Assume UBs are T/Ms or Hybrid (so basically Faery, or Halfling, going by this round)

    - Assume every province has a nwpa of 175 (midround).

    - Assume every heavy attacker is running 90+opa, but the UBs are still UB.

    - Objective is to win a war against another kingdom the same size and nw as yours.

    - Kingdoms A, B, and C are equal in total kingdom land size.


    Which of the following Kingdoms - A, B, or C - is a better setup, or in a more advantageous situation, and why? Thanks.

    Kingdom (A)

    Prov 1 - 2660a (UB)
    Prov 2 - 2660a (UB)
    Prov 3 - 2660a (UB)
    Prov 4 - 2000a
    Prov 5 - 2000a
    Prov 6 - 2000a
    Prov 7 - 2000a
    Prov 8 - 2000a
    Prov 9 - 2000a
    Prov 10 - 2000a
    Prov 11 - 2000a
    Prov 12 - 2000a
    Prov 13 - 2000a
    Prov 14 - 2000a
    Prov 15 - 2000a
    Prov 16 - 2000a
    Prov 17 - 2000a
    Prov 18 - 2000a
    Prov 19 - 2000a
    Prov 20 - 2000a
    Prov 21 - 2000a
    Prov 22 - 2000a
    Prov 23 - 2000a
    Prov 24 - 2000a
    Prov 25 - 2000a

    Kingdom (B)

    Prov 1 - 2080a
    Prov 2 - 2080a
    Prov 3 - 2080a
    Prov 4 - 2080a
    Prov 5 - 2080a
    Prov 6 - 2080a
    Prov 7 - 2080a
    Prov 8 - 2080a
    Prov 9 - 2080a
    Prov 10 - 2080a
    Prov 11 - 2080a
    Prov 12 - 2080a
    Prov 13 - 2080a
    Prov 14 - 2080a
    Prov 15 - 2080a
    Prov 16 - 2080a
    Prov 17 - 2080a
    Prov 18 - 2080a
    Prov 19 - 2080a
    Prov 20 - 2080a
    Prov 21 - 2080a
    Prov 22 - 2080a
    Prov 23 - 2080a
    Prov 24 - 2080a
    Prov 25 - 2080a

    Kingdom (C)

    Prov 1 - 2330a
    Prov 2 - 2330a
    Prov 3 - 2330a
    Prov 4 - 2330a
    Prov 5 - 2330a
    Prov 6 - 2330a
    Prov 7 - 2330a
    Prov 8 - 2330a
    Prov 9 - 2330a
    Prov 10 - 2330a
    Prov 11 - 2330a
    Prov 12 - 2330a
    Prov 13 - 2330a
    Prov 14 - 1805a
    Prov 15 - 1805a
    Prov 16 - 1805a
    Prov 17 - 1805a
    Prov 18 - 1805a
    Prov 19 - 1805a
    Prov 20 - 1805a
    Prov 21 - 1805a
    Prov 22 - 1805a
    Prov 23 - 1805a
    Prov 24 - 1805a
    Prov 25 - 1805a

    Bouncing + Conquest + Fireballs are all fair game.

    Reason for making this thread: I'm in an argument with another player.
    "Go back to the gym because you f'king suck at utopia, noob." -Godly



    My classic black theme for Utopia - Updated 5/13/15

    Quote Originally Posted by darkl1ght View Post
    Unfortunately, no amount of razes will improve your war record
    Greatest strategy thread/question of all-time.

  2. #2
    I like to post Realest's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    4,360
    How does my opponent look? A, B, or C?

    General answer:

    In hostile, I want to be B
    In war, I want to be C
    The End of an Era

  3. #3
    Moderator for:
    Utopia Forums
    Palem's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    22,010
    175 nwpa will be pretty weak for Faery midround, but whatever lol

    I'd say A. Win the war with econ.

    Who's the argument with?

  4. #4
    Post Demon
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Posts
    1,726
    A. setup is terrible

    C is best

  5. #5
    Post Demon
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Posts
    1,726
    sorry i didnt give any details on the "why", part... but its a daunting task to explain since u'd have to get into detail regarding race matchups and strategy and stuff, and different people play different ways. so i shouldnt have stated the previous post with such finality i guess...

    in my humble opinion, C is best, based on the way i picture wars and the strategy we would enter a war with against one of those kingdoms.

    to give a little opinion on A... they have a "cap" on the other kingdoms in the form of larger faeries, but they have provinces that need to grow a LOT in order to

  6. #6
    I like to post Realest's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    4,360
    it all depends on how your enemy looks, thats why in hostile, B is the best since its the most flexible. For example, if you have a C setup, and your enemy is a B setup, then in hostile, they are unbreakable to your bottom half, while being **** gains for your top half, so C actually really sucks for you. In war, thats another story. Staggered setup is the best since thats how you build unbreakables and complete chains.

    And A just really sucks for anything since those 3 provs arent big enough to contribute, and are perfect candidates for NS/Ops, day 2 max gains.
    The End of an Era

  7. #7
    Post Demon
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Posts
    1,726
    yea thanks for summing it up. C is by far the best in war cause ur staggered enough to coordinate chains super well.

  8. #8
    Post Demon
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Posts
    1,407
    I'd pick C from sugested answers but I dont really like either setup. nw spread on C isnt wide enough and there is a big nw gap in the middle that can be abused. Even spread from 2500 to 1500 would be superior to all 3 ofered setups imo with some superpumped suiciders at the bottom runing 20%+ gs's ...

  9. #9
    Strategy Moderator
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    4,179
    Quote Originally Posted by DDodge View Post
    A. setup is terrible
    C is best
    In war
    C>A
    C>B
    B>A
    However IF you have a LONG hostile
    Quote Originally Posted by Realest View Post
    if you have a C setup, and your enemy is a B setup, then in hostile, they are unbreakable to your bottom half, while being **** gains for your top half, so C actually really sucks for you. In war, thats another story. Staggered setup is the best since thats how you build unbreakables and complete chains.
    Best setup If u can find a kd to war u is
    Prov 1-3 - 2850(UB) T/M
    Prov 4 2500
    50 acres less each prov
    Prov 25 1450

    Make the top hitters so powerful/suicidal with high WT/GS that u force the other kd to chain them. same total acres as A, B, C
    Last edited by Persain; 28-02-2012 at 21:52.

  10. #10
    Needs to get out more DHaran's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Maryland, USA
    Posts
    8,367
    UBs. Always.

    So either A or C, since A already has them and C has more potential to create more.

    EDIT: Actually I just read the assumptions, if the UBs are T/Ms they aren't much good for winning the war as an attacker trapping acres would be. I'd want C I suppose.
    Last edited by DHaran; 29-02-2012 at 01:10.
    < I moderate drinkly >
    || #tactics <- Click Me! || Utopia Wiki || utopiasupport@utopia-game.com || Utopia Blog || Utopia on Facebook ||

  11. #11
    I like to post KuhaN's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    tracy, california
    Posts
    4,730
    Quote Originally Posted by Realest View Post
    it all depends on how your enemy looks, thats why in hostile, B is the best since its the most flexible. For example, if you have a C setup, and your enemy is a B setup, then in hostile, they are unbreakable to your bottom half, while being **** gains for your top half, so C actually really sucks for you. In war, thats another story. Staggered setup is the best since thats how you build unbreakables and complete chains.

    And A just really sucks for anything since those 3 provs arent big enough to contribute, and are perfect candidates for NS/Ops, day 2 max gains.
    Thx.

    Quote Originally Posted by Palem View Post
    175 nwpa will be pretty weak for Faery midround, but whatever lol

    I'd say A. Win the war with econ.

    Who's the argument with?
    A dude on MSN.

    Thanks everyone else for their opinions also.
    "Go back to the gym because you f'king suck at utopia, noob." -Godly



    My classic black theme for Utopia - Updated 5/13/15

    Quote Originally Posted by darkl1ght View Post
    Unfortunately, no amount of razes will improve your war record
    Greatest strategy thread/question of all-time.

  12. #12
    Enthusiast
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Posts
    390
    so who won the argument?

    You pick A?...I have a feeling you picked A

  13. #13
    Post Demon
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    1,750
    Is your definition of a war win to get the enemy to withdraw? It's kind of an important point imo, since different setups would work better for different goals. If you want to leave the war with land, and consider that a win, you'd pick differently from a kd that just wants the enemy to withdraw. A kd that wants land wants a setup that can clear out enemy provinces within range of their own provs fast, and then withdraw. A kd that wants the enemy to wd wants to be efficient at chaining and doing more long term damage.
    Last edited by Luc; 01-03-2012 at 13:03.

  14. #14
    Postaholic
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    951
    With the way war works these days (shifting of acres), war can only be "won" in the strictest of sense when all provinces are disabled.

    In such a scenario then, the best KD to go in to war with is Kingdom A setup.

    Reason for this is in a few folds:

    1) UB's allow less acreage shifting towards the next KD
    2) 'Core' are all of the same size meaning a much more consistent chaining on their top
    3) There are no 'main targets' as opposed to Kingdom C... the 1805 provinces will all get to grow which is actually a problem because their tpa and wpa will drop automatically as well leading them to be easy fodder later in war
    4) UB's also allow more gc/solds to be generated to aid chained provinces.

    In today's war.. if you really are looking for just the win and not for acres. The way to go is to control the top. By deep chaining provinces and disabling them but at the same time shifting acres upwards so that more and more UB's can be built. As more are built, the more the bottom can be supported.

    However, often a rift will be made on your middle where you have insanely grown provinces and severely deep chained provinces on bot. That's the nature of war these days and it's a race to see who builds a bigger group of tops as opposed to a bigger group in the bottom.

  15. #15
    Regular
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Posts
    95
    I'm gonna go against the tide and say b. The reason for this is that you enter the hostile with the greatest flexibility and as time goes by your setup will look more and more like Persain's setup.

    Also, a much more compressed kd will also be more efficient when going after targets since every province can get a relative top feed while the top provinces in a more divided kd will have to bottomfeed.

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
  •