For an Attacker are you better running 20% Training Grounds or are you better running 10% training grounds and 10% stables
Printable View
For an Attacker are you better running 20% Training Grounds or are you better running 10% training grounds and 10% stables
How many offensive points do you want to have? How many units do you use for your offense?
Example: If my whole offensive is 1 halfer elite, then:
1 halfer elite + 1 horse => 16.67% offensive increase compared to the offensive without the pony.
Think about how much Stables space you would use to keep one pony. Ofc the equivalent in TG would not give such a huge offensive bonus.
You might want to think about BE as well. Stables hold horses regardless of BE, while TG is strongly affected. As a guideline, the more off points you have, the more units you use to provide these offensive points, and the better BE, the better TGs become over Stables.
For proper attackers other than halflings, don't use any stables; TG's are better because they give a better bonus, and losing land = losing stables = losing horses, i.e. stables' bonus is much less reliable.
Training grounds.
Steal horses.
Never let them stay around at home over a tick.
like other ppl said, it really depends on race. halfers make better use of stables then orcs but thats not to say after a certain % in TG orcs cant either.Quote:
Originally Posted by thebestever
give us your race and im sure someone can maximixe 20% of your buildings for max off with TG and stables.
20% homes. or if you're real pro, 50% homes. gogete has a few strats you could look at.
lol @ compulsive trolling :D
sigh...when youre rdy. race and personality please...I will max your off with 20% buildings...
Are you sure you don't need the number of elites and number of ospecs he's using? Are you sure you don't need his BE? Just wondering.Quote:
Originally Posted by E_Boko
He will just assume best case.
I wouldn't assume best case... Is that ever a useful assumption?
Best case for what goal? I guess you must also assume a goal. How about best case for best goal: biggest attacker in the best SKD... Take it one step further: Assume Best Race and Best Personality.
Ok, then I agree, you've assumed enough and you have all info you need. You are ready to provide useful information to the OP...
*EDIT* I'm suggesting we ask the OP to specify everything that is needed for a proper optimization...
He's hardly going to sim out every eventuality from 1-99% draft now is he?
Yeah, I agree with Danrelle.. Since the whole point of optimisation is to max out the diminishing marginal utility to be gained from moving nearer the optimum, it makes sense to obtain more accurate data, especially when they can be easily obtained/supplied.
Right, but people run pretty standard drafts (and BE as a result).
You dont really need someones draft and elites/specs to tell them what tgs to run, as you will be using optimal numbers. Anything else is a waste of time.
Not sure why forts entered the equation though.
I believe Forts are irrelevant... maybe that's why I did not notice Forts being mentioned...
There is a small reason why I insist that more info is needed than Race/Personality. Assuming the relevant case of a medium build attacker, like a hybrid or smthg, the difference in efficiency between Stables and TGs is really not THAT big.
In this case, the optimization is sensitive with respect to the number of offensive troops and the average offensive points/troop (for example if you want to optimize for War, when your offense may not be all elites or all ospecs). <-- All I'm going to say before we have more info from the OP.