Orc go smash? (build)

[Ursuul]

What are the thoughts on this build for Orc Cleric? My aim is to be an UB killer

9% Farms
9% Guilds
5% Towers
___________ = 23
+
14% Hospitals
27% TGs
12% Stables
20% Barracks
___________ = 96 With 4 % left over.

I have a strong feeling that I could be getting a good bit more out of my province with a different build. For example I have no Banks but dont really know what I would sacrifice in place of them.

I am active enough to make use of the barracks, and would build incoming land to GS. Do you just scrap some of the guilds and towers and go like 8% Guilds 4% Towers or something? Or no towers altogether? 23% of my land to non-attacking related buildings at all seems high.

Best way to build an Orc (cleric) for max OPa and chain resist in war?

[Palem]

Why are you running hospitals? Stables are pretty weak on Orc too.

[smercjd]

To resist chain in war you need GS. As a cleric you don't really need those hospitals (especially w/o GS) because you'll end up needing to release troops to control over population.

Change the 14% Hospitals to 14% GS and it already looks better.
I get that you're trying to maximize OPA. So I guess stables are something...but it might be better to go with 12% Homes and have more population to train as elites. 12% Homes will give you about 1.2 more elites per acre.
Running over 25% of a non-capacity building is usually not very effective.
Going with the build you posted, I would aim for something like.

9% Farms/9%Guilds/5% Towers = 23
20% Training Grounds
20% Barracks
15% Guard Stations
15% Homes
7% Dungeons

The homes/dungeons will additionally help your econ a bit. Each 10% homes adds 1 ___ per acre. So you're adding 1.5 Elites per acre (10.5 more raw offense per acre). You will also be able to use your your prisoners (with fight at 3/0).

At 500 acres with 70% Draft with 200% Wages you're at 80% BE, 2K gc/tick, 7dspecs per acre 11elites per acre (116 mOPA, 34 mDPA armies out), 1 raw TPA, and 1 raw WPA. (Assuming 20 books per acre on every science).

[noobium]

sub hospitals for wt and you're good. gs are a silly overrated building. orc/cleric sucks though, would rather have tactician and sub 20% barracks for 20% hosps - or run barracks and hosps and drop some stables if the attack power is unnecessary. get CS and the option for building heavy rax in war in exchange for some offensive sustain... orc can't get a lot out of stacking hospitals with the cleric bonus.

i think warrior is a little better than cleric for offensive sustain anyway... not in sheer numbers, but they sustain offense without eating up population and get a lot more value out of their offense at start of war. tactician is still better though.

[darzu]

if it;s the nick i remember, not from uto, but from aion, then i know he is very, extra active untill he get;s drunk. :))) leave me a message on mail/skype if u want old time friend.

[Cry0]

sub hospitals for wt and you're good. gs are a silly overrated building.

Would love to see you expand on that statement more. In the back of my head I have had a similar feeling in that 15% GS would be -20% losses from being attacked while 15% WT would be ~20% thief catch -30% thief damage.

Feel like on a typical HA once you are chain target you are generally going down unless the other kd is weak on chains.. however the 20% thief catch -30% loss stacked ontop of a tactician core with clear sight can make opping into your attackers devastating on any t/m province intent on doing anything more than occasional riots or intel gathering.

[noobium]

gs are more useful for kingdoms that care about acres oow. gs to deter chain damage isn't very useful - would only use gs against certain setups that are reliant on defense and deep chains, and even then it's arguable that better offensive tactics are worth more than gs. since most kingdoms will drop 2 out of necessity or are just bad at chaining, the value of those gs is much diminished, as a few extra hits will account for the extra land loss easily enough. it is much better to put that 10-15% acres into stuff that helps the orc (or avian, or undead) do more offensively or economically.

during war gs have uses, but for the inital phases of war they're pretty much irrelevant... attacker don't care about holding acres as long as they can keep smacking things, but building gs to deny enemies acres is useful in some spots, and in wars where attackers have degraded to 4-taps and 5-taps it can make sense to go heavy on gs at that point and control the balance of acres at bottom. for a bloated attacker i wouldn't care about holding on to all those acres unless there was a tactical reason i had to delay chain damage or limit incoming acres on provinces.

most kingdoms outside of the top warring tier don't chain efficiently enough for gs to be really useful for chain mitigation. the gs might be useful for retaining acres or denying incoming if a wave is expected. for most ghetto setups (like say, orcs) i'd rather be giving buttons than receiving buttons, and if i want to receive button i'd want to have my orcs sending out fairly often when not at war.

[Ursuul]

Why are stables bad on an Orc? Assuming full elite army and enough horses to mount your elites...

#Elites = x
Horses = 1
Raw Off with horses. = 7(x) + 1(x) = 8
Raw offense boost --> 8/7 = +14% more offense.

Now if you throw in a hypothetical +30% attack modifiers before counting horsies (7*1.3), and then recalculate, horses still give you an additive +10% more offense on top of your MO. If you want to get fancy you could even kill the Stables and maintain army in/out. But the question is still what do you put those Stables and other Acres into??

What about
22% TG
13% Stables
17% Barracks
15% WTs
9% Farms
9% Guilds
5% Towers
= 90%

but then I still dont know what to do with the last 10%.

Or maybe:

21% Barracks
22% TGs
22% GS
10% Farms
10% Guilds
15% WTs
=100%

ANd just get aided Runes? That looks pretty solid to me. Ive never played ORc so i dont know if banks/homes are necessary.

[noobium]

stables are extra raw offense that doesn't care about overpop. arguably not worth it but 5% goes a long way to sustaining offense in longer wars.

orcs, undeads actually get more value out of stables than other races, because other races have a ton of other things they would rather build, while ponies have good synergy with the racial bonuses of orc/undead (+gains and -losses/plague are better with more offense to work with). homes on either race are problematic because of overpop and having the same vulnerabilities as any troop, while stables are only vulnerable to one op and only in a small window. since ponies stay after the stables are lost, they're really useful in situations where the attacker is expected to lose acres (meaning: almost every war and most hostiles).

it isn't a question of whether stables are better than something else for producing offense, it's a matter of whether you can sacrifice build space for raw offense. (hint: you probably can). having more offense to work with is always going to be better. for very heavily drafted provinces that use build rotation to max BE stables might have problems, but even there it is likely that stables can be worked into a high draft and build rotation strategy.

[tetley]

Stables aren't weak on any province.

[Rigid]

id rather ride than fly :)