Page 4 of 4 FirstFirst ... 234
Results 46 to 58 of 58

Thread: Horses, are they worth it?

  1. #46
    Post Demon lastunicorn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Posts
    1,458
    Maybe I never found the right targets, but I could never get very many horses from stealing.

  2. #47
    Post Demon
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    noobtopia
    Posts
    1,836
    Based on my ops earlier today, it's about 3 horses to steal 1 pony, half of which you get to keep... so quite expensive if you fail and don't have thief dens.

  3. #48
    Post Demon
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    noobtopia
    Posts
    1,836
    Quote Originally Posted by Ethan View Post
    The main factors in favor of TGs:
    1st - High rOPA, 2nd - low total% to offense buildings, 3rd - high BE

    The main factors in favor of stables:
    1st - Low rOPA, 2nd - high total% to offense buildings, 3rd - low BE


    For all that most people site BE as a big concern for TG vs. stables, it is usually the least concern. Total Raw OPA is *far* more important a factor. In light of this...

    UD attacker generally should have the following characteristics (exception, "breaker" attackers have high/very high offense buildings):

    rOPA - very high
    total% offense buildings - moderate (high at war start, but needs moderately high overbuild)
    BE - moderate to low


    This gives us recommendations for:
    TG - very strong
    Stables - mild
    Stables - very mild

    Thus we reach the conclusion that, if an UD is better with stables... it was probably doing things wrong. (Excluding breaker roles - if you are playing one at kingdom request I assume you don't need my advise.) Cause the only way to overcome the bias towards TGs is to be running middling to low rOPA... and then what, precisely, are you doing with UD anyway?


    Please note - all those hating on the static analysis - yes, that came from a static formula. Notice the adjustment to the available land for offense? Sure, UD off_build% starts high, but it churns a lot, just like nooblet has pointed out. I'm not mindlessly applying math for static situations... I'm deriving a formula to give me an idea where to start modifying *from*. Did you know rOPA was *far* more important than BE? I didn't till the formula told me.

    And to anyone citing the elite strength of the races... not relevant. The closest you get is that high elite races tend to have high rOPA. But if you have a 80 rOPA faery somehow... stables are no better for it than for a 80 rOPA UD. Offense/unit is a pointless measure for this discussion. [Aka - if you're going to do math, please do it right. The vines gag gets old fast around here.]
    Oh god... if you saw my current war, you would realize just how utterly wrong this is. Apparently my mere 100 opa/30 dpa on a small acreage makes me a terrible province compared to the enemy's 120-130opa juggernauts at start of war.

    Guess which kingdom got about 5 of its players chained into the ground by min time. Also guess which kingdom got fireballed to hell and, as a result, has most of their provinces hovering around 70-75% BE if they're lucky.

    ...and I used ponies, nyah.

  4. #49
    Post Demon
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    1,524
    Quote Originally Posted by nooblet View Post
    Oh god... if you saw my current war, you would realize just how utterly wrong this is. Apparently my mere 100 opa/30 dpa on a small acreage makes me a terrible province compared to the enemy's 120-130opa juggernauts at start of war.

    Guess which kingdom got about 5 of its players chained into the ground by min time. Also guess which kingdom got fireballed to hell and, as a result, has most of their provinces hovering around 70-75% BE if they're lucky.

    ...and I used ponies, nyah.
    At loose estimate, I show UD with reasonable science (aka, small prov) should be able to get about 120 mOPA, 40 mDPA. 30% land split between TG/Forts, so plenty of land for GS/hospitals/rax/Wt's etc. No personality. 2mWPA, 3mTPA. So ya, 100/30 o/dpa is pretty lame for a straight attacker.

    Not that I have any idea what the 120 opa provs opposing you looked like either. For all you've said, they've got 10 dpa, and of course they got trashed. Better than god awful ain't saying much. For that matter... even if you *had* proven you were good (in place of flinging some random numbers around), you haven't demonstrated you wouldn't be better with more TGs instead. All this final optimization boils down to single %s at best usually, so measuring "skill" and attempting to show it means you are right is a sucker's game.

    Of course, you could well be trying to say you are an A/M, without ever bothering to actually say so. What an A/M has to do with anything, I'm not too clear, but I'm sure it makes perfect sense if you look at things from that perfect angle. (Find Jesus in the pancake!) So I'll assume your numbers do make sense and represent something approximating a well built province, and thus claim you probably are an A/M.

    First, I think you are wasting your race's potential. Unless your kingdom is desperately short on T/Ms, you should just let the T/Ms deal with all the tough targets, and run an A/m or so to FB the weak targets. Would let you fix that sad defense. (it only takes 1 d-spec/acre to get passable, 2 to get solid!) But yes, *someone* ought to be FBing the non-chain targets... and maybe it really does need to be you.

    On the point of hybrids more generally, while rOPA is clearly lower for them, so is their available build space. A/M needs lots of towers and guilds, A/T needs dens. So the #1 factor falls, making stables look much better. But factor #2, offensive building %, also falls significantly, mostly counterbalancing the effect. Aka - if you only have 10% build space to spare... are you really gonna do 10% stables over 10% TGs?

    Hybrids *do* have reason to consider stables. In fact, they have reason to consider them exactly *because* of the 3 factors I listed. The only major point that I can find being labeled "wrong" is my implicit assumption that UD would run a pure attacker instead of A/M. I advise against UD A/M, but not so strongly as to claim it is wrong, just questionable. Other than that - you seem intent on basing my post... by talking about random stuff.
    it's vs. its is ambiguous - from now on I'm attempting to use the proper possessive it's, and the contraction 'tis. (Its will just be the plural.)

    Think Different

  5. #50
    Strategy Moderator
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    4,201
    Quote Originally Posted by Ethan View Post
    At loose estimate, I show UD with reasonable science (aka, small prov) should be able to get about 120 mOPA, 40 mDPA. 30% land split between TG/Forts, so plenty of land for GS/hospitals/rax/Wt's etc. No personality. 2mWPA, 3mTPA. So ya, 100/30 o/dpa is pretty lame for a straight attacker.
    lol, runing insane numbers is easy on all races, for example....undead , easily pull off
    Total Modified Offense:(148 per acre) ( no generals, just pulled from pimp)
    Practical Defense (0% elites): (39 per acre)
    Thieves:3.3 mod
    Wizards: 2.4 mod

    with ZERO land in forts, and only 23% land dedicated to tg/stables so plenty of land in other ****.

    and
    Quote Originally Posted by nooblet View Post
    Guess which kingdom got about 5 of its players chained into the ground by min time. Also guess which kingdom got fireballed to hell and, as a result, has most of their provinces hovering around 70-75% BE if they're lucky.
    this is irrelevant as a single pumped prov isnt indicative of how a kd wars. Still, stables give flexibility for a small pre war raze cost...edit lol i'd kill for 75% BE outside war
    Last edited by Persain; 30-04-2012 at 20:59.

  6. #51
    Post Demon
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    noobtopia
    Posts
    1,836
    Most of them had 30 dpa, and were running appropriate building strategies. They weren't idiots in how they operated their provinces, but they were all at very high draftrates and had weak magic defenses.

    My point is - offense is only good if you use it properly, and for whatever reason they couldn't use it properly. I came into war with only 100 opa and well below the average kingdom size, yet somehow I am far from the most worthless province. I do suppose I was running higher offense but far less defense than most of my kingdom.

    How does this relate to stables? Well, early in the war I took a 4x from the first chain target, and lost around 300 acres from a starting point of 940. My incoming land was around 220a. You can see there, how that kind of land exchange can screw up plans for TG. War Horse offense, as I've stated before, is immune to this kind of fluctuation, and throughout the war I have been able to retain about 90% of my original mounts, having long ago razed off my stables. Having 5k raw offense extra that has yet to be touched has been quite beneficial in making extra hits, given that I haven't bothered to train much offense from where I started.

    As to a/m... there is no such thing as a/m in this game. I had superior wizards to most of their guys, so I ran with it and used FB/Chastity/Storms selectively to aid in depopulating the enemy. Since I didn't do anything special to be an a/m, it's not like I'm wasting potential, except possibly sending the runes to an actual mage in my kingdom. If I were playing to emphasize a magic advantage, then I sure as hell wouldn't bother with stables, because I would be needing towers/guilds/watchtowers in much higher quantities to do my job. I dunno, you brought it up.

  7. #52
    Post Fiend
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    236
    Age 53 I played Human/Merchant banker and was funding >half of each dragon. 87dpa, 6.9raw(17mod) tpa, 3.2raw(>6mod) wpa, >50opa(goes crazily higher with mercs). Hybrid banker/a/t/m. Bottom line, I stole a huge part of my offense from their attackers via their horses. While I gain the offense to break many of their attackers(even double tapping suiciding undeads), I also cut down their offense(twice as much as I stole). Boost stables please! (so that I'd have more options to steal from once it becomes more favorable) :D

    No one ever agrees with my built strats, but everyone is always amazed. I've run over 60% homes playing Halfling/Rouge A/T/m with BE still unaffected at draft >80% People wanted to report me for exploiting some sort of bug XD

  8. #53
    Post Demon lastunicorn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Posts
    1,458
    Another vines follower?

  9. #54
    Post Demon
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    noobtopia
    Posts
    1,836
    It's Rogue, not Rouge.

  10. #55
    Regular Moredhel's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    Netherlands
    Posts
    51
    Indeed. I never understood why loads of people misspell that :\

  11. #56
    Strategy Moderator
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    4,201
    Quote Originally Posted by Moredhel View Post
    Indeed. I never understood why loads of people misspell that :\
    because i want to be a halfer rouge, u know dress up in drag and try to pass for a short human woman ;)

  12. #57
    Regular Moredhel's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    Netherlands
    Posts
    51
    Quote Originally Posted by Persain View Post
    because i want to be a halfer rouge, u know dress up in drag and try to pass for a short human woman ;)
    Perv.

    j/k :P

  13. #58
    Post Fiend
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    236
    Quote Originally Posted by lastunicorn View Post
    Another vines follower?
    Nope, I might even say vines probably followed me :P

    Quote Originally Posted by nooblet View Post
    It's Rogue, not Rouge.
    Sorry, typo :/

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
  •