Undeads v/s Orcs Attackers

ok, saying i was undead cleric, i no longer would need the 16% hosps that i usually would be useing, and build 16% GS instead of the hosps, would this help to counter chaining and/or be effective in slowing the chains also, thx for the info. guys is helping me to better understand how the mechanics actually work and i don't mind being in the ghetto as long as the battles are well played and i kinda prefer the challenges it presents :)

also which do you feel is more effective , most people say chaining is best for winning wars, i'm thinking semi chains would work best, esp. in the ghettos, my kdm is doubtful we'll ever have 10 or more provinces on with in the two hr time span for effective chaining strats, i was thinking more along the lines of running teams of 3-5 working together on targets , and to keep attacks spread out more , not concentrating on a single target , allowing the rest a chance to grow stronger.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Hell Fire

also which do you feel is more effective , most people say chaining is best for winning wars, i'm thinking semi chains would work best, esp. in the ghettos, my kdm is doubtful we'll ever have 10 or more provinces on with in the two hr time span for effective chaining strats, i was thinking more along the lines of running teams of 3-5 working together on targets , and to keep attacks spread out more , not concentrating on a single target , allowing the rest a chance to grow stronger.

---

thats another misconception about war, having ALL your attackers attack a single prov to chain from 2000->500 in a single hour is not some magical benefit. As long as your players are smart and your leaders are good you can run succesfull full chains with a war start of 10 players and a steady stream of hitters.

This was supposed to be about orcs vs undeads I think to many people are out of track there.
As I see it the main Orc advantage is that they can run 100% elites as offenses while the undead will always have some off specs mixed in.
The orcs have an advantage when it comes to chaining and can almost get normal gains from a half chained province.
The orcs also have the better spellbook when it comes to adding offensive bonuses aswell as greater science.
On the other hand the undeads are less vunerable to ambushes and way more durable in a competition when no ones uses chaining.
Undeads have a lot of free space they don't need for farms and hospitals and are more flexible and able to pull of extreame building strategies.
Undeads as opposite to orcs can also do some t/m stuff against opponents, and they are the suiciders best pick.

I would want to leave out numbers and such, but for kingdoms not planning on running one race only I suggest that undeads and orcs can compliment each others very well giving several edges on the opponent. There should be slightly less orcs and their pick should be either War hero or Cleric while the undeads should be Warrior or Tactician, and it might even be worth to have a couple of undead/mercenaries.

^Undead/mercenaries?

How would an undead+orc kd complement each other? One is immune to plague and the other not. The only reason I can think of is that orc will be more sustainable late age because they don't have a science penalty.. otherwise why wouldn't an all undead kd work?

undead spread plague, orcs and everyone else reap the benefits of plague immediately afterwards. that's the basic idea.
it is contingent on a big if, so with that setup you have to be ready for what happens when plague doesn't connect.

a pure undead kingdom's science penalty and lack of a gains bonus means that they will be outgained by an orc kingdom, and the slight edge undeads have in offensive strength (numerically) fades as science becomes more important. Orcs with reflect magic have some extra protection against being fireballed as well, which becomes a big factor in longer wars.

Thanks for the input. This UD vs Orc argument is going on in my KD. They keep insisting all Undeads are better because of their hybrid potential, which I think is just wrong. The science penalty is already a severe handicap for an Undead. To be really serious in a hybrid role an undead would have to go either Rogue or Mystic which are really a waste of personality choice for a powerful attacking race.

Undead's ability to use t/m ops is very, very situational. 90% of the time your undeads are going to be no better at opping than an orc, because the ops will fail with high frequency, no matter how much effort is put into making the undead a "hybrid". Wasting a personality on "hybrid" is basically a guarantee that the undead will get chained hard, sooner or later.

If, however, you can see someone dropped to .5 tpa or something like that, then the undead has a serious case for using nightstrike. This happens far more often than you'd think in long wars.

having 3-4 rogues chain proping attackers w/o wt's or CS can be amazingly effective at removing targets tpa and opening it to NS's from attackers.

Chain propping.. lol

i'm thinking now undeads with hosps will do better one on one against the orc in long wars, simply because the undead should be able to last longer, yes orcs will come on strongest in the beginning but as war progresses undeads will start pulling ahead with more troops still in tact, elite conversions not much use if you have no troops to train, which is usually the case in long wars , orcs may have science adv. but undeads match with plagues and sci. tho is important late age, isn't what it used to be.

really depends on the quality of people and kingdoms playing the provinces. an organized kingdom with orc attackers chains the undeads before their offensive loss reduction becomes a factor, and undead's science penalty borks them before the war even starts around mid-late age. orc of course can retrain their good offensive units if they can find soldiers, and has a measure of resistance against being fireballed. the edge goes more and more in favor of orcs as the age progresses, but even late age the quality of the players matters heavily. i figure a lot of nubs will screw up with Orc somewhere, while a good undead player will play to their advantages as much as possible against orcs. of course the two can coexist this age... i am surprised people don't want to consider that a possibility, and sometimes invent reasons to do so that make no sense (like blowback from undead plague... that happens so infrequently that it's practically a non-factor, might have happened to me once the whole time I've been playing).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Hell Fire

i'm thinking now undeads with hosps will do better one on one against the orc in long wars, simply because the undead should be able to last longer, yes orcs will come on strongest in the beginning but as war progresses undeads will start pulling ahead with more troops still in tact, elite conversions not much use if you have no troops to train, which is usually the case in long wars , orcs may have science adv. but undeads match with plagues and sci. tho is important late age, isn't what it used to be.

---

Another thing people have to look into with this is an Orc Cleric at a decent size, gains more credits than actual troop losses allowing them to maintain their offensive edge as well.

thx nooblet, you have helped alot with your input on the subject, and actually my kdm is looking to be a mix of both undeads and orc, we are just a ghetto kdm yes, i'm thinking war-war-war all age for us, i'm wanting us to first learn how to fight before we even can think of going any further, you orcs gonna chain my udeads, i'm thinking , i'm gonna learn you orcs to death first, lol , i'm an undead -always have been, i see where you're coming from , makes sense to me, hopefully my orcs will balance things out abit, thx again for your advice ;)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Hell Fire

i'm thinking now undeads with hosps will do better one on one against the orc in long wars, simply because the undead should be able to last longer, yes orcs will come on strongest in the beginning but as war progresses undeads will start pulling ahead with more troops still in tact, elite conversions not much use if you have no troops to train, which is usually the case in long wars , orcs may have science adv. but undeads match with plagues and sci. tho is important late age, isn't what it used to be.

---

As with this age, next age will have the same concept, if you can feed the orcs in your kd solds all war undead s simply cant keep up with the fight. That is in concept if you can feed an orc cleric solds they have effectively zero offensive losses. Early wars Undead>orc in strait 1v1 while late orc>undead due to science, however with support all the "negatives" about orc compared to undead get washed away if the orc has support from the non orcs in the kd via that sold aid..

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Avenger

You're making me lose faith in humanity. But who am I to judge; I'm guessing Cleric can only be a hidden penalty personality in ghetto mentality.
Tho people should know better than to argue with your math after what we've seen in the "Age 54 Potential Changes Rev II" racial discussion.

---

Undead Mystic FTW. If you're active throw in some TG / Rax / GS / Hospitals and always have your elites out and LL to hell when you've been chained to stop overpop. Can easily LL 100+acres mid war at 400 acres as your WPA will increase.

Rogues as an attackers I've always thought useless as if you're overpopped they do not work like wizzards do due to house shortages.

Always prefered undead to orc due to plague. You get it on the it can make the difference of a double tap to a triple tap or triple to quad tap!

Lots of people, including a few in my kd, played UD/Mystic this age. The results weren't pretty.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by nooblet

Lots of people, including a few in my kd, played UD/Mystic this age. The results weren't pretty.

---

gonna be worse next age without NM

If used in the right way and you mainly LL low NWPA targets with crap WPA in your NW range they can be quite effective especially if you've been chained to hell and you still have a large amount of elites due back. You need to LL before your troops get home with Land and your WPA declines...

Yeah loss of NM sucks but they can still screw up provs at beggining with Chas and FB. Theyre only good at opping attackers though, no one else. I'd have been interested running an undead/rogue but "Your thieves refuse to go to work due to house shortages" would make them pointless...

*Edit*

Another benefit of undead over orc is no food which is another 8-12% (depending on how much science you have) So being from a ghetto I spose you wouldn't need to worry about your prov or others starving through lack of aid...

Think the obvious personality for both races should be warrior. +10% OME was sweet but +15% and an extra general?! I think this game is going more towards frequent wars with the changes so 5 taps in a war will be lethal and with conquest enhanced and undead the chances of plagueging a turtler makes them ever sweeter than orc in my eyes. + outside war plundering and learning to grow is a way forward for an undead. Thats why the warrior is good as you get an extra general all age.

The chief ops the UD/Mystics were using were fireball and chastity, later in the age once they realized that Meteors is a hella difficult spell. NM is nice if it can be coordinated, but also quite difficult and expensive, and doesn't always connect for big damage.
I'd say UD/Mystic is okay, but magic is situational while the undead attack power is consistently good, so you'd have to devote considerable resources to play undead with a more defensive posture. I'd actually think this age UD/Mystic has it better due to the huge buffs for mystic and the Undead inheriting Town Watch and Animate Dead to boost their defense, but they suffer from the same problems all a/ms do - the difficulty of getting a good wpa and rune supply, while still being a competent attacker. Having a science penalty makes this even more problematic.

UD/Rogue is crap no matter how it's played. Don't do it.

LOL give undead no runes needed would just be A LEET RACE!

I miss my Dark Elf :'(

i think its deppend on what kind of your kingdoms role. orcs are great if u realy active player ( food and -15% attack time), UD if u re playing safe and have good deff... im playing UD this age, and the problem is my peasant down to fast, hard to build science... so next age orc is best choise.

Personally love Undead. Cant pass up Orc with the new War Win Rules.

think they felt sorry for orcs so tried to make them invincible this age, nerf us and nerf us some more if you want, undeads will still be the orcs biggest nightmares, oh wait you took that from us also , lol

Orc need food. Undead no food. I'll leave you all with that thought. Both BE sucks in war fully pumped.