Undead Cleric

[tletc]

Hi! So I've played Utopia for about 10 years...but not for the last several years; thanks for the emailed invite back. I've looked around the forum and reread the guide and am trying to decide what I would do for a restart, which has led to this post.

Why isn't every attacker (or indeed any that I've read about) playing Undead cleric? As unlikely a combination as that sounds like...would the -50% off losses, coupled with the -50% own casualties translate to no offensive losses? Best age ever when that was offered once before...or do the two bonuses not stack? Anyone? Thank you in advance!

[Arrhenius]

Nah, I'm pretty sure the effects are multiplied, not added. So it ends up being -75% offensive losses.

[Topsy]

casualty mods multiply. 2 ages ago when cleric also had the +1 general it was very good on undead. This age, I think there are better choices.

[tletc]

Okay, not what I hoped but what I expected. And the 75% max on hospitals, could that go over and beyond the 75% losses from undead/cleric bonuses or would hospitals be ineffective since you are already at their cap from other means?

[tletc]

Hi Topsy, thanks for your response! Tell me, what is better than almost no losses? I am not up with current economics/environmental conditions in the game and would love to better understand before I restart...

[Topsy]

hospitals are another mod. So if you had -25% losses from hospitals your looking at .5 * .5 * .75 = .1875% losses
After 24 hours of war, add another .75 to that equation to get .5 * .5 * .75 * .75 = .14

[nooblet]

It translates to -75% offensive losses.

It's still a good combination, but this age Warrior is much better in war. Undead/Cleric is better in hostile and random-grabbing, and still decent at war. The key for undead cleric is not just the inherent bonuses, but the benefits of not needing to build farms or hospitals and still having a durable offensive force.

[Topsy]

Low losses are great! I tend to think the 3 ways to go in this game(for standard warring kd's) are an offensively minded attacker with lots of sustainability, a defensive minded attacker with easy UB potential, or a t/m. Being one of these(normally the turtle races, but not always) that can situationally op is also nice. Reduced offensive losses are a massive + for the first of these(sustainability), but so are being able to hit, hit hard, and be hit hard over the course of a (long)war.

The best mod for saving elites is -50% losses, and the best mod for being chained is +1 general. Orc just destroys any other core for offensive minded attacking this age imo, but if you wanted undead i'd get the extra 15% ome(very nice!) and the +1 general of warrior. For orc, tact synergizes with the elite credits to give you a little sustainability of elites, while also giving building credits, perfect intel(nice because you only have to over send by 1.04 instead of 1.07, giving you a little more offense), and obviously the time bonus(which is terrific for surviving chains, and obviously attacking more). I actually prefer cleric on orc, just for sustainability of offensive ability.

edit: and welcome back!

[tletc]

Awesome food for thought, thank you!

On a related note, how powerful are sciences these days? I've seen ages where they are incredibly overpowered and others where they are useless. Orc has a definite advantage over undead in not having the -25% in that category, particularly if sciences are in a peak. Similarly, what's the ratio of hard core attackers to tms these days? I've been trying to download angel to play around with some numbers but for some reason am having difficulty (it loads but won't play!).

Thanks also for the welcome back. I had forgotten how much I loved talking the strat with people!

[E_Boko]

they are ok. def dont want to overlook them.

[khronosschoty]

they are ok. def dont want to overlook them.

More then okay, in my book, I suggest pumping science as hard as possible all age long!!