Printable View
Doesn't give me much incentive to play hybrid then. Why would I op my opponent and have to retrain all those expensive thieves I just lost if I can just go ahead and break them with my military? Seems to be counter-productive for all the effort into trying to make it work.
he said that top kds use hybrids, so i listed the top kds from last age for him. Do you wish to argue semantics on this one as well? Would you be happier if I used your kd as an example instead? Alas, i doubt your kd is top. I promise.Quote:
Originally Posted by Eigenvector
whats the point of lowering your enemy's ratios to match your own, when you can just use the space to get higher ratios to begin with?Quote:
Originally Posted by Eigenvector
"Hybrids have weaker militaries than attackers."
If that's how you run them, you're not running proper hybrids.
They do have weaker militaries, since attackers have less concern over dedicating land to TDs, Guilds and towers. They also have more population to play with since they do not need as much wpa and tpa. The question is whether the hybrid's military would be so much weaker than that of an attacker to the point of being outgunned ridiculously, which if they are then the hybrid is not being ran properly.
I've never seen a proper hybrid with a weaker army than an 'attacker.'
What you sacrifice is the ability to make money - not the ability to destroy people with hits.
No my kingdom's not top, however you define top, so that would not make me happier. How you defined top is top networth, in which case I said it doesn't make sense to me that you're looking for war strats rather than growth strats, considering wars generally lower the networth of both kingdoms, unless it's a total ownage. So it would make more sense to me that a top networth kingdoms would attempt to avoid wars or play fake wars. So it doesn't necessarily mean that the top networth kingdoms are the top war kingdoms, because it's not necessarily their priority war. What would make me happier is for you to find kingdoms with high war wins.Quote:
Originally Posted by Realest
You take every one of my comments as an attack on yours. Neither of them actually was. If I'm a noob and I don't know that top kingdom means top networth, then please explain to me how top networth is connected to best at warring.
The point is that rate of decrease always beats initial increase for time approaches infinity. The break even point in utopia varies, but I find it to be around 2-3 days. After that point, attackers are already weaker than the hybrids and will only continue to weaken at a faster rate.
Funny thing that VT2's first comment is against something I said. Hybrids are weaker than attackers for the same race and personality with the same build, the same science and the same peasants because you spend more population on thieves and wizards that you could otherwise have used for offense and defense. Pretty objective.
If you'd rather sacrifice peasants for the thieves and wizards, note that the attacker can do the same thing. In the end, each wizard and thief you have more is each elite and def spec you have less.
OK so you have a guy in love with hybrids and a guy who thinks hybrids are useless and they're both bashing me in the middle because I'm the one who pointed the facts out.
Defense is meaningless past a certain point.
Realest is an ass, because he's trying to assert his position as 'top.' That means you should ignore or belittle him.
He's not trying. Last I checked he IS one of the 'top', or do you not think Sonata deserved the win?Quote:
he's trying to assert his position as 'top.'
hybrids are useless for top kds with 0-1 wars per age, they are useless in peaceQuote:
Originally Posted by Realest
hybrids give you power to set defence on enemy's province to the number which you need to chain it effectively. How can it help to pure attacker if his huge offense let him make 1.6 successful attack on chain target? While hybrids can make from their initial poor 1.3 2 or 3 successfull hits per province. More hits per province => more chain targets per wave.Quote:
Originally Posted by Realest
Higher utilisation is more important than bigger numbers.
elf/warrior a/t with 3-4 raw tpa must be able to pk 15-20 max-gaining 2.5 tpa orcs within 4 days of ideal war last age..
only prob that hybrids represent are that they are not super easy to play. Specialization is easy...if im a thief, as many thieves + TDs as possible, same with mages and attackers, but with hybrids, having ratios and builds that are effective are not always simple.
Either having sharp players or a monarch + a few others micromanaging and checking up on all provinces in the KD through pimp are required to make sure the hybrid is playing right! :)
Sigh. Age 18 pansies won with 1 war. Age 19 pansies were t5 honor and #1 nw/land -- they claimed the nw crown on the last day of the age. iirc, they had 5 wars. Age 20, pansies were t5 honor again. The #2 kd (us, serenity) were also t5 or t10 honor; we both had 4-6 wins. Age 21, the top kd warred the #2 kd (that would be boa warring ZZ [the halfling rogue kd] and beating them). Age 22, the top kd (pansies) had 0 wars, by virtue of the fact that no one wanted to war their a/t strategy. It was perhaps the most dominant win in the history of uto. The #2 kd (us again) had 4 wars.Quote:
Originally Posted by Eigenvector
Age 23, the top 3 or 4 kds all had 0 wars. Age 24, was screwy because of the abs-spirit awar. Age 25, the #1 kd (halfling / human / undead mix iirc?) warred playboys (the #2) for the #1. PBs were 25 undead mystic. Age 26, the #1 kd only had one war (vs BoA, which they lost). The #1 kd wasn't a/t or a/m. The #2 kd was undead rogue -- BoA. We won honor that age with our 4 t/m and 21 a/m hitters. Age 27, the #1 kd had one war -- early on against a prior #1 kd. Also screwy because of the abs-spirit awar.
In that ^^ timeframe, we see 4 wins by Pansies, 1 win by BoA, 1 win by Playboys, 1 win by Force, 1 win by Brute Force, and 1 win by Desire.
Pansies always considered wars, as did Brute Force.
Yes. You intentionally stayed small to bash ghettos. That makes you a ghetto.Quote:
However, I do know the #1 honor (would you call that a ghetto on today's terms?), I think from 2 ages or so before battlefields and WoL merged, Legendary Empires with 11/11 wars, 23 provinces, 19 attackers and 4 T/Ms (my memory is a little dodgy on these, but not on the elite data =D).
See?Quote:
We were very small throughout the age, ending up at around 1200 acres average, in order to own ****ty kingdoms, but we did war some better small kingdoms later, including a few from the top 10 honor, because you can't expect a ghetto to voluntarily fight a 7/7.
We did the same. The only difference is we didn't war ghettos for our honor. We also didn't require a/t or a/m strats to pull it off. We also warred every time we got declared -- that's where the majority of our war wins came from, even in our honor ages; kingdoms that declared us because they were more pumped than us and wanted our honor.Quote:
We actually still gained honor from wars when we were baron-viscount average and opp was lord average (remember 1200 starting honor for knight back then), in which opp probably expected to lose the war but gain some honor.
More proof of ghetto qualities? You went vm for a week to protect your honor #1 because you know you didn't deserve it and would lose it otherwise. I remember the age we won honor (and we finished t10 land as well), the #3 honor kd farmed about 20k honor in the last hour of the age.Quote:
We only hit #1 for the last week or so and went into kingdom-wide vacation after the final war to prevent random people from vulturing. =D
That's how it's always been. The real competition is in the nw/land charts.Quote:
If it's the ghettos that go for honor and top kingdoms that go for land now, then I might as well be a total noob to this world. I'll shut up then. =D
Aww.. 4 Dwarf Mystics, 4 Elf Rogues and Human Rogues core (All Elite, 4TPA + Schools) tore through the "age of Orcs" like no other. People swallowed our hostile waves all age, begged for CFs in return for more hits. Perfect age played.Quote:
Originally Posted by Zauper
Shoutout to Sid and the Pansy crew. <3
From your statistics, I see that honor, size and war wins don't coincide at all and that my hypothesis of little warfare was pretty close to correct. I'll take it from you that kingdoms are ranked by size. Most of the single wars per age you've described were to determine the biggest kingdom by oea. It then seems like growth is the priority with a war strat for backup in case you need to war. You spend the majority of the age not warring. Therefore, it just seems odd to me that these kingdoms spend so much time arguing over war strats and planning on war builds.
VM is a tactical move to maintain #1 honor spot. #1 always shifts during the age. Princes get razed for no reason other than they're princes. However good you are, if you're #1, there's a good chance too many people are going to try wack you out of #1 if you're not in war or vacation, even when honor was a little more stable at the time. Enough of that if it doesn't mean anything to you.
So you rule out honor for honor whoring and war wins for ghetto bashing. Only thing left is size; only thing I don't understand about that is size doesn't mean best at warring either and is actually even less of an indicator of the ability to war than honor or war wins.
To be fair, Zauper, up there it is more like power politics than actual comparison of how builds work. Going to is war simply a bad idea for maintaining top-end size and NW. How useful builds are compared to each other is almost based specifically on how much land they can whore and how much land they can keep.
As long as you do not go to war, hybrids are a horrible idea. You are wasting a lot of space and population for /M and /T which are impractical outside of hostile and war. As a result, we have actually just wasted time on an entirely pointless discussion.
The skill and organization it takes to compete with the kd's going for nw and land is bigger than that it takes to bash ghettoes. Most of the nw whoring kd's are quite good at warring tooQuote:
Originally Posted by Eigenvector