Age 79 Virtual Kingdom Draft

[RedPanda]

I'm on a short break, but I'll start. To my eye I find nothing wrong, other than a missing undead, but that's not really a point of critique. You have solid understanding from what I see.

Dwarf war hero is capable of churning out productive acres at an astonishing rate. This feature is widely ignored in that an organized kingdom could ape some aspects of cowing in war. All it takes is two stage thinking. Many of the same resources we use to fund and fight dragons could be pressed toward buffing these war heroes. Why? Because they can WS and build in 6 ticks free. If the dwarves then exercised relay taps(return time divided by generals) off elliptical heretic NM runs you'd have fluid acre intake. Follow up with nominal aid so resource accumulation wouldn't be lost to enemy micro.

My break is over.

Anyway, my approach to strategy is based in maliable tactic packs. While I feel chaining is an effective regional tactic, it is a brittle theater macro. If your opponent is superior in chain vs chain execution then there must be a plan B. While pure UBs are the most valued asset we can imagine virtual UBs based in resource cardiovascularity. These aren't individual provinces as much as a push-pull network that moves zero sum resources to center leverage where desired. Sometimes this is an excercise of strength vs enemy strength and other times a surge vs enemy weakness.

Personally I prefer a Dwarf with a personality that has a guild bonus, being Dwarves not building towers is wasteful (basically Mystic/Heretic/Paladin/Rogue)


Some of my thoughts echo's your thoughts..... yet some diverges:
My preference for attackers
Durability: sustain offense/def - if it be TPA to block intel & dmg ops, WPA to prevent FB and dmg spells, Def to prevent getting hit, having right buildings for attack with high BE, not losing much troops on att/def, or training to replace or overtake your prior off/def
Attack speed: Unless it is an alpha striker wild card, all attackers needs to match attack speed with each other - so if you have Avians, I prefer to not mix it up with another race unless you pair the other one with a Tact or go heavy on barracks on the non-avians.
Stealth/Mana personalities/races - I see unused stealth/mana as a waste so i tend to have a heavy preference for attackers to have a T/M personality instead of an attacker personality. while T/M races into attacker personalities. I dont see having max off so high that you cant use it all and have to oversend to keep them from getting hit at home useful (a waste in my opinion), which the extra pez goes into pumping either TPA/WPA instead.

I agree pack tactics is vital in strategy which lies more on the leadership, and less so on the lineup side has some relation but in the grand scheme of things leadership takes the cake.

[StratOcastle]

Personally I prefer a Dwarf with a personality that has a guild bonus, being Dwarves not building towers is wasteful (basically Mystic/Heretic/Paladin/Rogue)


Some of my thoughts echo's your thoughts..... yet some diverges:
My preference for attackers
Durability: sustain offense/def - if it be TPA to block intel & dmg ops, WPA to prevent FB and dmg spells, Def to prevent getting hit, having right buildings for attack with high BE, not losing much troops on att/def, or training to replace or overtake your prior off/def
Attack speed: Unless it is an alpha striker wild card, all attackers needs to match attack speed with each other - so if you have Avians, I prefer to not mix it up with another race unless you pair the other one with a Tact or go heavy on barracks on the non-avians.
Stealth/Mana personalities/races - I see unused stealth/mana as a waste so i tend to have a heavy preference for attackers to have a T/M personality instead of an attacker personality. while T/M races into attacker personalities. I dont see having max off so high that you cant use it all and have to oversend to keep them from getting hit at home useful (a waste in my opinion), which the extra pez goes into pumping either TPA/WPA instead.

I agree pack tactics is vital in strategy which lies more on the leadership, and less so on the lineup side has some relation but in the grand scheme of things leadership takes the cake.

Thank you.

Maybe I can reflect on my past to give perspective. I consider my builds charmingly archaic, but even my semi-ghetto monarchs have ordered me to change strats and I've had friends cuss me out after seeing my survey intel. It's funny to me because I feel perfectly province-fit and I do fine in and out of war. I specifically remember the reaction when guys saw my undead cleric with hospitals and GS with no TGs or stables. My traditional war readiness is switching something(banks) to WTs and the only reason I look at enemy kingdom pages before war is if someone asks. I'm not really defensive minded as much as having durability OCD.

My personal tactics seem awkward when written, but I do relay taps, train thieves because MS don't hit them, and have released these same thieves for a self generated soldier block. In reference to undead cleric I'd plunder tap in war since I couldn't steal and notably used nw zone hyjinx to resist chaining.

As much as I enjoy my style I equally enjoy seeing how the other half lives. Once I got to adopt Maxin of Mythos's dwarf rogue; a real honor deviner. It was gleamingly flawless compared to my train wreck builds. It was conceptually complete and honed for execution. My builds are like digging through junk till you find a screwdriver for a good knife.

The fact is we need players, like yourself, to crystalize ideas into working art.