too much spam to wade through, if someone wants to gather up the questions I'll address em. Otherwise, i'm gonna answer stuff from here forward.
too much spam to wade through, if someone wants to gather up the questions I'll address em. Otherwise, i'm gonna answer stuff from here forward.
What is the best way to find a target to attack or steal from? I used to use a site where you could search provinces by land, nw, nwpa etc and also by how close they are to your island.
The best targets to steal from would be scanning the top land charts and going from there. Most whore kingdoms stock immense resource piles to prepare for conflict and their tpa is often not great. Try dwarf kingdoms as they have a thievery penalty to make things easier.
(Complete noob talking here) If I wanted to go avian/merchant, with the goal of just being a fair-sized, effective attacker, how should I go about doing that? What army composition should I go for, where should I pour my science, what is a good TPA/WPA? Is there any general thought process that I should have?
Same as above + what would be your typical War strat?
Hi Realest, I really like the max-gains-all-war strat. Because adopting such a strat seems to entail a significant paradigm shift, I would appreciate your thoughts on how the manner in which individual provinces are currently managed (in most noob to semi-pro kingdoms) must change to suit the strat.
As an example, many kingdoms tend to think of *rebuilding* as something that only happens after the war. This means that they would not properly utilise the awesome land-gains advantage of the max-gains-all-war strat. Am I right to think that to be effective in a max-gains-all-war strat, provinces should focus on building up their incoming acres while in the heat of battle?
Also, one immediate limitation to the max-gains-all-war strat seems to be that the opposing kingdom can blanket fireballs/kidnaps, so that the extra land gained would not be of much use. What would be the best response to such a tactic?
PS. @tpyo: nice typo in your username :P
Last edited by hydroxon; 07-09-2011 at 21:39.
You need to work on a rewards system so people will ask better questions.
∙ Shadowlight ∙ A Mothers Advice ∙ Force ∙ Pansies .
Kingdom Crown Winner with Pansies, Brute Force, Sonata, Dreams
Province Crown Winner with Brute Force
∙ Brute Force ∙ Playboys ∙. Sonata ∙ Dreams ∙ Retired .
My KD is currently (on our 5th war of the age) trying out the max gains strategy. One of the evolving problems is of course growing into your acres! One of the ways we have subsidized this is having the 2-3 provinces that have been chained release troops and send soldiers to our guys that have grown.
We are up almost 200k NW now and 1.9k acres on them, but the fact that they have fully disabled 2 provinces with chains, and that although the rest of us have grown on them, leaves me with an odd feeling. Do we keep growing? or do we cap our acres and start massacring. Max gaining makes it easy to gain a ****-ton of acres, some of us could gain around 1k alone, but at that point the NWPA is going to be around 110 and very difficult to actually grow into the acres.
I would just love some more insight into how to properly pull off this strategy. REALEST: feel free to PM me if you'd like instead of posting here. I've recieved some awesome advice from you in PM's in the past and in the midst of this war i'm in could really use some now, since we are "winning" but in an awkward spot.
No fair DDodge, I asked first :P
I asked better ^_^
And more relative since I'm right in the thick of things!
Good question, and the best response I can give you in terms of building your acres is that it depends. But yes, you always build your acres. In a nutshell, you can't go wrong with Homes, Banks, Forts to solidify your standing and acres. Then, upkeep rax and TG as necessary. This is where experience has to come in and you decide what works. Maybe, you wanna rotate in WT if your kd decides this is the thing to do. However, banks rule because nothing beats cold hard cash, and forts are better than TG, if you didnt have any to begin with. Homes will fill up some of your population that is bound to be undermanned.Originally Posted by hydroxon
Your thinking is kind of amiss in regards to ops. Whether or not you max gain, there will be provinces subjected to them. If you are underpopped, it no longer matters if its by 20K or 30k or 40K. However, with a larger peasant base, you technically have a bit more leeway to withstand ops. Ultimately, land is power, and you cant go wrong with the potential it brings.
I'd need to see the kdpages to tell you more. Because if they managed to disable 2 provinces, and you have not wrestled away an advantage with your other provinces, you might be making some wrong decisions.
For example, you dont want to have your guys release troops -EVER-, unless its because of overpopulation. It doesnt make sense to make your enemy's job easier in taking down your provinces, yea?
Another problem might be you didn't pick the right buildings to build on your first wave of land. On that note, You might have gone into war without the proper setup.
Nevertheless, the fact that you are up acres and land should prove to you that this strat works and you are trending in the right direction. Its about making the strategic choices to push that advantage that makes you scratch your head. I can tell you all sorts of things, but you have to learn this on your own through experimenting so you know what to do and what not to do next time. There is no 2 wars that are alike even if you get the same outcome in the end.
There are a lot of factors that need to be addressed and I can't really tell you based on what you wrote. PM me your loc and I'll tell you what to do next.
is it an attacker for warring, or one that just annoys people?
Thanks Realest, and nice answers indeed.
Sharp criticism! Hmm, I did realise the fact that those ops would be done whether or not I max-gain. Was thinking in terms of the extent that blanket fireballs/kidnaps would decrease my incentive to max-gain. Through your response, I understand that if the enemy only subjects a few of my kingdom's provinces to fireballs/kidnaps, it would be a mere minor irritant, and the rest of my kingdom would still benefit greatly from max-gaining.
However, I imagine that the benefits of a max-gain strat could be significantly diminished by an opposing kingdom that is built to consistently blanket my whole kingdom with fireballs/kidnaps.
Because most buildings are %-based, more land does not directly improve building bonuses. The very powerful potential of a max-gain strat seems based on the fact that more land = higher population ceiling, meaning the max-gaining kingdom can really grow their peasants, which immediately leads to exponentially higher income (since peasant-growth is %-based), along with a gradual increase in Building Efficiency. That's why it seems that a smart opponent would spend their mana/stealth on fireballs/kidnaps.
My main intention was to point out that when playing against an opposing kingdom that already plans to blanket fireballs/kidnap my kingdom anyway, the max-gains strat might work less effectively than if my kingdom was fighting an enemy that is incapable of limiting our peasant-growth. In spite of the above concerns, it does appear to me that ultimately, max-gaining is probably still the best strat that a kingdom could employ in war. At this point, I think I just realised that fireballs/kidnaps are probably an even smaller concern because of how much the max-gaining provinces would outgrow the enemy T/M's, especially after they are trad-marched down to size anyway (I wonder if you prefer to leave T/M's alone or trad them anyway?).
Thank you for your time :D
PS. Looks like the Merchant personality would work extremely well with the max-gains strat, which is all the more reason to play Merchant. Having said that, do you think the Shepherd personality might be a decent alternative, given the fact that it saves you some money in the short-term (cheaper buildings), and buildings build faster so their benefits are felt significantly earlier? Also factor in the free food from all that land, along with immunity to plague/storms/drought, and Shepherd might seem like a competitive alternative (immunity to storms could be a valuable bonus if the enemy has the capability to MV+Storms our provinces).
Last edited by hydroxon; 08-09-2011 at 12:19.
Its situational, but for the most part, hitting t/ms to start are bad business. They simply have too much defense to make it worth your while. If you can break t/ms, might as well spend your hostile massacaring them, to reduce the effectiveness of peasant stunting tactics.
I think you're understanding the big picture. Even though everyone runs their own province, war is ultimately a team thing. If one province is receiving the brunt of ops, it means the others are relatively at peace. If the ops are spread out where everyone eats a little, then your enemy is wasting time and you have nothing to fear. The idea behind max gaining all war like you said, is to create the buffer zone between you and enemy, and after you open up a myriad of options, you adapt and adjust. For example, sometimes people see the gains disparity and overextend, then you can quickly choose to semi-chain that target. Max gains all war is not rigid; if you see a situation that calls for making less than optimal max gains, you still do it if you feel it will help you in war.
Merchant is just too good, because it gives you more powerful banks and econ wins wars. The fact you are immune to income penalties is gravy. Your kingdom would then raise cash to continually drake your enemy. Nothing beats cold hard cash. Immunity to Storms/Drough comes in a very cheap spell call NB, so its not really that good. Plague I agree is annoying, but the trade off is too much versus Merchant.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
