Avian Viability Age 61

[Beago]

Hey everyone I'm relatively new to the game and I've played a bit of Avian and a bit of Orc. With the release of the proposed changes for next age I was wondering about the viability of the avian. Avian looks to be getting a +5% to their birth rate bringing them up to 20% and a nerf on gains of -10%. Is the addition of the +5% birth rate enough to balance the nerf in gains? Orc and UD seem to be the preferred attackers in the game with avian being more of a support type attacker. I guess the biggest question I am posing is what the best use for the avian race? Or if should one just forgo the option of playing avian and instead go for a race that seems to be more specialized in order to play a pure attacker or pure mage.

[Cry0]

When considering avian first ask yourself if you are going to actually hit 3 times a day to actually make use of their speed bonus?

If the answer is no, pick something else.

Dwarf is looking nice this age.

[noobium]

avians have to do more than hit fast in order to be viable. it's more like "are you willing to reschedule your life around utopia so you can hit at the exact right time" rather than "are you willing to hit 3-4 times a day?" just hitting 3x a day and landgrabbing every time is a fast way for avian to get bloated and useless.

avian/tactician is quite effective as attacker/thief, if they are willing to take some big risks. whether as pure attacker or anything else, avian is better off forgoing most defensive buildings and focusing on improving their power gap and economy. avians are good for using non-land attacks due to their speed, and using massacre limits the amount of bloat they would suffer. these traits and the lack of a t/m penalty make them effective for fighting other attackers, whether by landchains or by using massacre to open up attackers to more op spam and economic damage (including ops from the avians themselves, of course).
since raze and massacre are supposedly being improved next age this is something to bear in mind.

the lack of power on avian makes them hard to justify, when orcs and undeads have much easier bonuses to use and relatively minor drawbacks. -10% gains sucks but given a greater frequency of hits and landchains their damage in wars is more than balanced out.

[tiggis]

Question.
Would you consider this race to be crappy?


+15% BE
-15% Attack Times
+20% Birth Rate

No Access to Stables
-10% gains on attacks

Fanaticism, Greater Protection
Elite: 6/2, 500gc, 5NW

It takes about 50% stables to get -30% attack times.

If I use the attack speed bonus as land savings instead of trying to actually hit 3 times a day I can effectively become a different province that trades some attack speed for land efficiency.

Where attackers need to build about 15% Barracks I can put that land into another building.
I still keep about 15% of my attack speed bonus also.

Avian Build would look something like.

1. Farms: (7%)
2. Banks: (15%)
3. Training Grounds: (15%)
4. Guard Stations: (15%)
5. Hospitals: (14%)
6. Guilds: (12%)
7. Towers: (7%)
8. Watch Towers: (15%)

I hit twice a day and that never lowers due to incoming acres or loss of land.
My personality choice would be Warrior.

The Warrior
+1 General
+10% OME in war
Enhanced Conquest range
Access to Bloodlust
Starts with +800 soldiers and +800 specialist credits

For the average player this is a good attacker to play with.
Does not require super active, has a decent economy.

This idea that you MUST use the speed bonus as speed is the weakpoint in people's thinking.

[topsy's revenge]

avian is only really top tier when cleric is the op personality. Since tact is the op war personality this age/next age it's better to go something with inherent sustain aka undead.

[noobium]

fast attacking does not need sustain necessarily. every attack should inflict more damage than the troops lost, otherwise you have bigger problems than sustainability... while cleric does help to maximize that efficiency hit-for-hit (and more importantly saves a lot of acres), cleric is sustaining an offense that is already weaker than normal.

for the past two ages i'd rather have played avian as merchant than cleric if i wanted a sustainable attacker.

way back when Merch was +40% income and riot immunity, and Cleric was -50% losses and +1 general, most Avians were picking Merch over Cleric, sooo... hmm.

[tiggis]

fast attacking does not need sustain necessarily. every attack should inflict more damage than the troops lost, otherwise you have bigger problems than sustainability... while cleric does help to maximize that efficiency hit-for-hit (and more importantly saves a lot of acres), cleric is sustaining an offense that is already weaker than normal.

for the past two ages i'd rather have played avian as merchant than cleric if i wanted a sustainable attacker.

Two ages ago Avian Merchant was very good.