ask noobium

[noobium]

Okay so continuing on from that topic and into Science: what is the category I should be prioritising here as an Attacker, given I started late in the age (Yr9-10)? I have put high amounts in Tools/Military (60-70 bpa) {you stated high BE wasn't that important}, and then even amounts in Housing, Crime and Channeling (15-25 bpa). These numbers are very diluted because I grew 400-500 acres in the last two days. Also how do our priorities change depending on the point in the age? I assume Food and Income are very good early in the age for Races other than Undead.

If you start late, just get military science and learn attack for the rest.

In the early age, housing and alchemy are worth more than they are later, and that is where I usually dump the first war win's science.

Most attackers do well by going for housing and military science, since they lead to the best direct bonuses to attacking power and help in attaining the other sciences faster. I like to have roughly even levels of both and alchemy, and about 1/3 of my housing investment in tools+food, at least up until YR4-5. Aside from that, it depends on race and personality picks. Also note that food science becomes less and less valuable at higher bpas, but it's still a valuable science for anyone. After the first month of the age is when you should assess where you are and who you are going to fight, and diversify your sciences according to your kingdom strategy.
Also note that early age you might want to crash invest in channeling or crime in order to help your first war, and even if you don't, you should still attain basic levels in all sciences. Generally I like to get up to 16-25 bpa in everything before prioritizing housing (or, use the first war win to get housing+alchemy and backfill the rest).
Also, if you plan to invest in crime/channeling, or are uncertain what you are going to do, you should not invest your books until they are needed, since crime/channeling aren't very useful oow.

By mid-age (YR6 or so), avian and dwarf attackers should look at even investment in everything, as should any Sages (at least in war kingdoms). Elves should be roughly even on everything as well, and rely on their racial and likely personality bonus to stay effective as casters. Orcs should be going mostly for housing+military and learn attack for crime/channeling they need, but they should have at least 1/5 as many crime/channeling books as they have housing+military. Undeads favor channeling science, which they can attain from not needing or wanting alchemy+food+crime. Halfers should just go straight for housing+crime in order to maximize their racial attributes, with that they can either have the mTPA needed to op other t/m or drop some rTPA for extra military.

It is better to look at ratios of science rather than bpa in each category, though bpa per category is a good marker to know when to shift your priorities. You generally don't need more than 256 bpa in housing for instance, and alchemy shouldn't go much past 100-120 bpa unless playing Merchant. Also helpful is investment at the right time... the best time to pick up housing+alchemy is just after a war win, while backfilling the others to your desired ratio.

By late age I like having crime if I'm Avian, balanced science if I'm Dwarf (and a higher priority to tools+food early on), military if I'm Orc, and channeling if I'm Undead. If playing Sage, you should aim for level science in everything from an early point, in order to get the most bonuses for the least investment, while Mystics and Rogues obviously benefit from crash investment in their specialties. If I'm Elf, I like to have level investment in everything early, even if I'm Mystic, so I can rely on my racial bonus, likely personality bonus, and priority to wpa pumping to be effective for the first month or so; having good bases is useful for not falling behind other attackers early, even if I play a pure t/m. Human favors housing and alchemy, but they're horrible if not playing a true cow. Halflings want housing and crime from a very early point, in order to be able to better op t/ms - using high crime mods alternatively allows for a reduction in rTPA in exchange for military, while still being able to op attackers.

[noobium]

It's funny. 8 of the top 10 kds on the war charts disagree. Others, yes they do have Orcs but they are secondary to Undeads. The vast majority at the top of the chart's heavy attackers are undead.

If the most veteran kingdoms choose to make a bad decision, they'll still likely win because experience.

Undead are okay but majority undead is bad, and undead/merchant is bad. I much prefer Dwarf or Avian over both Orcs and Undead if I'm in a warring kingdom that expects to fight often, but warring kingdoms this age should be primarily defensive provinces anyway. For a race that uses less than a normal number of attackers, Undead are fine since they require less support, but still, it's one province that is permanently locked out of thievery, and that sucks when trying to be a warring kingdom.

If you want to be a warring kingdom, you really should try not to rely on attrition to win your wars anyway. While Undead has more than just attrition working in their favor, they have some serious liabilities too, which means using more than a few is a bad idea.

Of course it's easy to win against some of the badplay that is prevalent in the modern game with just about any setup, but against equally matched kingdoms in terms of skill and activity (and sometimes presumably worse skill/activity), undeads aren't all that good, as the close wars have shown. Sustaining doesn't help when they can't hit a good defense and can't thieve.

The only Undead I'd want to run in large numbers, Undead/Rogue, has its own set of problems. But fielding 4-5 undead tacticians, warriors, or mystics is perfectly fine, but they really have to be casting in order to be worthwhile.

[UtopiaExpert]

If the most veteran kingdoms choose to make a bad decision, they'll still likely win because experience.

This guy, he gets it.

If Real Madrid decides to play some retarded system, they're still going to beat a 3rd division team because... well because they have better players.

[FATstrat]

Hey man, I understand that dwarfs are not a popular core, but why are they the least picked race when people talk so highly of them? Also, what personality would you go for with dwarf? i'm looking to gain acres, create a nw gap, then shut up shop and create some gold. Currently on a dwarf merchant and its working pretty decent.

[noobium]

Hey man, I understand that dwarfs are not a popular core, but why are they the least picked race when people talk so highly of them? Also, what personality would you go for with dwarf? i'm looking to gain acres, create a nw gap, then shut up shop and create some gold. Currently on a dwarf merchant and its working pretty decent.

Because Dwarves are seen as boring and dull? I dunno.
They're not as good as they were last age but they're still pretty good.

Just bear in mind that Dwarves are pretty weak for short-term wars, and it takes some work to prevent Dwarf from turning into a landfarm. That said the easiest way to prevent that is to pick Cleric, now that it's buffed back to -50% losses. Merchant works fine too, mostly for how easy it is to rebuild with them.

Forget about "building a nw gap" - if people need to topfeed to bring down a breakable province, they will - or they'll just massacre so it's left a very large landfarm in prime nw range. Think more about being unbreakable or 1-tappable if you can, and handling a chain if you can't (which is more often the case in warring kingdoms). You don't want to drop too low in nw that you can't hit a target, but that usually only happens if you get chained from a really bad position (something which your racial bonuses are pretty good at preventing actually). The tradeoff is that Dwarves have the weakest or second-weakest set of offensive outputs, depending on how good Avian would be for you.

Training defense too early can be a mistake, if your defense is too far from secure - better to train offspec or nothing at all than to throw money and soldiers away.

[Feint]

Which race/personality make the best bank? Taking into consideration the ease of growing right after oop, and later in age. Also during war, which type of bank can be effective and versatile.

[noobium]

I'm not really qualified to answer questions that apply to top kingdoms, but word of flogger is Faery cannot bank (loses as attacker in bank vs. bank situations). I would imagine that it follows that Human is the best for bank vs. bank fights. Being able to tog and fok as a bank without picking Merch would put those two well above others, assuming they can be raised. The problem with Human is that if they're a fail bank they suck, while Faery and Dwarf are safe options for t/m or attacker.

The cows I saw all used exploration to grow during the early game. It's more important to have strong support oop, and killers to threaten others' cows.

For everyone who isn't a growth kingdom, forget about cows or "banks". It's a good idea to approach t/ms like cows though, and fight wars in a way that acres flow to them.
On that point, one of the most infuriating habits in the ghetto is landphobia on t/ms. Chances are, if your t/m can't handle 20% acre bloat, they were a crappy t/m at their base size. Acres on defensive provinces are way more good than bad, especially in early wars.
Usually the problem with ghettos is that they are absolutely horrible at handling enemy t/ms, but most times this is counterbalanced by ghettos being horrible at utilizing t/ms in the first place. Sometimes you can't take in acres without being exposed too much defensively, and you might want a province held back for MS... but offensively, it's better to have a lower success rate and economy, than to have no economy but a 10-20% higher success rate. Economy and military don't have fail rates, and anything without a fail rate is much more reliable.

[Feint]

I am contemplating to try for growth next age..so i reckon human sage as a better option?

[pukusam]

any1 knows the math behind bouncing??

[noobium]

the math is bouncing is dumb and so are you.

[pukusam]

the math is bouncing is dumb and so are you.

heh thanks alot. :) a player like you who just throws personal insults shld just f off.

[noobium]

your kingdom is still stupid for trying to bounce in your position.

[Elit]

Which race/personality make the best bank? Taking into consideration the ease of growing right after oop, and later in age. Also during war, which type of bank can be effective and versatile.

I am contemplating to try for growth next age..so i reckon human sage as a better option?

You cant get correct answer when we don't know next age changes. Still here is more from one correct answer. No perfect setups all depend from how you manage your kingdom and your politic.

[noobium]

I'm basing assumption on "what would i do if i started this age", next age can be a totally different beast.

I should also have said, don't bother with a bank if you aren't a competitive growth kingdom. Fail banks are just waiting to get farmed. The most common setup I'm seeing is raising 3-4 large provinces, and hoping at least 2 survive to grow huge.

In ghettoplay though, I like to play my t/ms with the expectation that they can stack acres, economy, and thus win, and it works quite well. Faery is obviously the best at it, but Elf can do good too. It is not without dangers and needs to be approached with care, but fighting wars this way is a lot better for your long-term positioning for a lot of setups. It is often better to tolerate a higher fail rate on spells, so long as you're defensively sound. (And I'm talking about a bad defense being something which gets fireballed, nadoed, LL'd, and thieved to pieces, not "omg someone cast meteors on me". You're going to get meteors at some point, if only because the RNG hates you and gives some mystic a lucky roll.)

[Hunting]

New question;
How much libraries should i run at certain points. For example what %libraries should i run with;
a) 100bpa
b) 500bpa
c) 750bpa