Next Age Question!!! Help Me!

Hello, Utopians!

I was looking over the changes, some I don't like some I do. Humans ftw lol? Anyways I ran a Undead Heavy attacker which I loved very much. Next age I will be wanting to go Orc Heavy attacker I am torn between Tactician for the intel and added credits, or Cleric to not lose what I have trained. Debate this with me?

I also might want to go a Hybrid. What hybrid race do you think would be able to have a nice attacking force. What is the best to go as Hybrid attacker Thief or Mage? I am currently Leaning towards a Mystic/Elf with some attacking abilitys. I have been gone for a couple of years and, I am new to this hybrid mechanics. Mind you I was around when we used boats to attack other kingdom islands :). I am just worried having good TPA , and WPA while having a respectable attacking force. Humans also look good b/c you can go down both roads but wont have the power the Mystic Elf would.

For Orc, I see Tactician, Warrior, and Sage all as good options:

Tactician ~ Faster attack times are always good, and the extra Credits stacking with Orc's ability to train Elites via credits is a nice bloster to both military and economy.

Warrior ~ The extra 3% OME (or extra attack) from the additional General makes Orc's 9-pt Elite all the more formidable, and an extra 15% OME during War makes them downright pee-your-pants terrifying. The higher mods mean fewer troops needed for an attack and, by extension, fewer losses - which Orcs can replace for free anyways.

Sage ~ With the increased Science Effectiveness (plus Racial gains modifier), an Orc could very quickly rack up some ungodly Science bonuses.


For hybrids, Elf for a/M and Dwarf for A/m both look pretty solid. Halfers still look pretty good for a/T, but nothing looks promising as A/t - even though it looks as if Avians are meant to fill that role, they'd need their 6-point Dspecs back to even hope to accomplish that.

There are four aspects to cover (Offense, Defense, Wizards, and Thieves) and an individual Province can only hope to cover two exceedingly well. Racial mods will usually lend themselves to covering a third aspect, but there's simply no way to adequately cover all four aspects by yourself.

You think I could run a 1.5 Tpa and just max science and get 10% TD. TO also be defensive for thieves, while having an ability to strike heavy attackers? Thats what i am worrying about. I have never played Hybrid before, so I am wanting to give it a shot. I dont want to give up my ability to attack, I know i wont be effective like I am now but an active Mage will do wonders for my Kingdom. I never have ran a full T/M either so if it comes to it I might have to Faery for full T/M. I would just want to be able to hit a heavy attacker if they sent there army out. I am not looking to crack hard nuts just looking to atleast hit once a day.

Just came out of a war, and T/Ms did some wicked damage. Took my peasants down to 1.3 K on 2100 acres of land. It took till the last day of the war to finally get them back up so I could train troops. Next age looks like they are pushing Hybrids, so it will be even more crazy! With a Hybrid I can shield my self to an extent, while being able to dish it out and still attack. Side note we did win the war, but taking down peasants seems very effective on stopping them from training new recruits, and from fighting the dragon. That added with greed,riots,storms meteor showers is kind of why I want to be a hybrid was very annoying!

The pick of personality is more dependent on your kingdom's needs and strategy than anything. Tactician, Warrior, and Cleric are all viable picks for Orc, but Tactician drops off in usefulness if your kingdom doesn't need accurate intel, and Tactician can't do as much damage as warrior nor has the durability of Cleric. The attack time bonus is only as useful as your kingdom's organization, really... in sheer volume of hits, Tactician takes several days of war to produce an extra unique hit, and that is if your tactician isn't wrecked first.

Hybrid is crap - don't play it this age or next. Even if races are changed again, the issues with playing hybrid are part of the game's design at the moment... it can work, but most players who try to play hybrids wind up being crap. If I were to play hybrid I'd probably go with Dwarf and be really selective with my targets... Dwarf because they are have a good balance of attack power, speed, and economy, and their penalties don't hurt them in any role significantly. Free building helps with setting up the appropriate buildings and with their durability in war, though the lack of accelerated production does suck.

In your case, and your KDs, I would recommend running a Dwarf A/m. They have a nice elite for your attacking ability, 10% BE, and have free building. With free building, you can easily swap building strata to pump whatever you need. You can easily get 4rWPA and maintain a 65/45 opa/dpa army :)

Demascus, I think you sold me on Dwarf. My Kingdom is active, so if we have a abundance of T/M I will go Orc. If we are lacking the T/M I will go Dwarf. Dwarf has been my highest N/W Prov, but they don't look as good as they sue to be. Dwarf sage looks like it will be seriously nerfed. Demascus what personality for A/M should I go, I know depends on the Kingdom but, if i am evening going A/M should I go sage, cleric, or mystic?

I think it's a bit early to start picking a combo before the final changes are announced.

Party Pooper

If you like warring with a heavy attacker then Orc/Tact looks very good.

If you want to go hybrid then A/T might be a good choice. Most people find playing A/T easier than A/M but AM is better at gaining honor

Doesn't A/T require much more pop then a A/M? Then again you don't have to worry about runes. That is what I am hung up on is A/M, Full Attacker, or A/T. I have not been a Full T/M before for a full age. I don't know which one does more damage, or more benefit for the kingdom. I have always been a Full attacker, or Elf A/M back 6 years ago.

There really is no such thing as an a/m... you either have better wizards than your opponent, or you don't. Being mystic makes this much easier, but rune supply is always problematic for any attacker. Late age, any province that is still small and didn't have their wizzies targetted is going to have good wpa, which makes attacker-mage against those provinces very difficult no matter how much WPA you pump.

Best to wait on final changes, but there are some things which remain constant from age to age.

Well A/M and A/T require the same amount of pop. You want to run about 4 raw of your specialty and have about 1.5-2 of your back up, regardless of which hybrid you decide to go with. And nooblet is right, don't get your mind set on any set up quite yet.

Though as far as it goes, for Dwarf A/M, the only real choices in my opinion are Mystic aand Sage. And I have only ever played Sage once and it was only for half an age so I'm a little biases to lean towards Mystic because that one has perks right from the get go. Obviously better space management due to Guilds and Towers being twice as effective. That leads to getting your desired wpa faster when doing a wizzie pump.

Nooblet also has a good point. For A/Ms (or mages in general), it comes down to who has the better modded wpa. So what you can do with mystic is bust out a good wizzie pump oow and then when war comes, you can drop your Guilds down to 10% and make room for more TGs/Rax/Letskillalotofthingsbuilding.

Another thing about being Dwarf is with the free building perk, you can very cheaply jump into a science pump. Granted you wont have the same numbers as a Sage would, but hell, you have 3-4rWPA and still have a decent amount of sciences coming in :) just how I look at the situation.

i like dwarf/tact ... odd

youre oddly odd

Dw/tact has untapped potential.

Guys are making a good argument. We have 4-5 Declared Full T/M for next round. Dwarf Mystic could be over kill. With sage getting nerfed, I am more leaning on Orc. Although would really like to actually run a Hybrid, but as you guys are saying it would not be very effective. It would be better to pick either a Full attacker, or Full T/M. Will just have to wait till the changes come out, and discuss with you guys. Thank you guys for your input very much appreciated. I do like the idea of a Sage attacker, Orc/Dwarf Sage could be pretty fun with the crazy gains!

Orc Sage would be awesome with a good amount of gains science :) I also like D.A.'s Dwarf Tact. Tact with QF = absolutely no need for rax ;) I'm kind of thinking of trying that one out myself :)

u aint in the ghetto till u have one of these ...

http://a3.sphotos.ak.fbcdn.net/hphot...33307181_n.jpg

I don't think that playing hybrid is at all viable next age because you could only do it in a kingdom that doesn't go to war. I think that war kingdoms will have a mixture of pure undead/ork heavy heavy attackers plus a smaller amount of Faery full T/Ms.

If you are a hybrid and go into a war against a kingdom like this, then 1) The orks and undeads are going to hit you at least twice for every hit you make 2) The T/Ms of the other kingdom are going to completely wreck you because as a hybrid your tpa/wpa will not be able to compare.

Playing hybrid with the changes posted now, you will end up dog meat.

Quote:

---

Dw/tact has untapped potential.

---

I was toying with that combo a bit :)

Quote:

---

Playing hybrid with the changes posted now, you will end up dog meat.

---

It does look that way.

Its been that way for about 10 ages

Yes, and somehow I've managed to play hyb pretty successfully the last 3 ages ;)

This age does look a bit tougher to choose a good hyb than before. It's all good, we'll play with what we're given.

What do you mean by "successfully"? Were you in a kingdom that was at war all the time for the last 3 ages? What kind of kingdom do you play in?

I play in Warring KDs, Yes. We didn't get as many wars as we wanted last two ages, but yes, was a warring set-up.

The key to using any attacker's mage and thief potential is to pick your targets carefully... you will never have good enough tpa and wpa to target every province in ideal conditions, but you can check for enemy provinces that are underdefended in one or both of those areas and use your ops to do extra damage where you can. Chances are your go-to ops for magic will be storms, greed, and fools gold with dwarf... at the highest end you'll be able to pull off fireball on very landfat targets.

Also, do not fail to take advantage of your boosted wpa when you are hit in war - especially if you become a chain target. With extra effectiveness to LL and free building construction, dwarves have some good staying power in war against chain tactics. Likewise, Dwarves have no inherent or implied penalty to thief ops, so if you have tpa to burn, you can run some theft ops, maybe nightstrike against a weakly defended target.

I wouldn't pick Mystic for Dwarf, as Mystic's signature spell is difficult to pull off, and Dwarves will need all the help they can get to compete with Orc and Undead attackers. Warrior is looking like a good bet for Dwarf, like it is for everyone else.

Yeah as it is now, I am kind of dropping the Hybrid idea. You guys talked sense into me :). Now I am torn between Orc or Dwarf Warrior for both or Sage for both. It would be like having free 15% Libraries. With warrior it would be having 11.3% Training Grounds I don't know how the extra general works for percent so, it is added with out it. Again I will just have to wait for the final changes. I do like that dwarfs can switch between builds, and tweek builds Efficiently. Its a toss up with Orcs great Elite that trains with credits, and has awesome gains so hard to pick might have to flip a quarter!

The thing with warrior and its extra general, is that every "extra" general you send on an attack, it adds 3% OME. So your average attack with 4 generals nets you an extra 9%. With warrior next age, you'll get to send 5 generals, which will put you at 12% extra OME coupled with their 15% OME during war.

If you're honestly worried about sciences so much, go warrior, and just look at Kds with war wins for potential learn attacks ;)

SO I am guessing Orc>Dwarf this age for attacker. I just liked Dwarfs bonuses, and with sage was thinking a mid to late powerhouse but looks like they wouldn't not be as effective as orc.

Dwarf/Sage for A/m, but Orc wins hands-down as Attacker.

I don't wanna go against the grain, but is there anyways to make a competitive Dwarf Attacker? Sage even worth it for an attacker Dwarf. I would like a nice economy, with nice pumped science. While retaining an alright attack force. I understand Orc is a better attacker, any one think dwarf would be an alright pick or am I just crwazy.

I did some calculation on dwarf cleric as a durable pure attacker and this is what I came up with. I just put in the numbers, no effort was made to optimize the build.

Edit: Just noticed that the farm calculation is wrong due to input of wrong BE! (249 is correct)

Dwarf
+ 15% BE
+ 30% Spell Damage (Instant Spells)
Free Building Construction
Can use credits to raze buildings

+ 50% Food consumption
Accelerated Construction not available

Spell book: Quick Feet, Fanaticism, Fools Gold, Clearsight
Elite: 7/3, 750gc, 6.5NW

The Cleric
- 50% Your Military Casualties (on attack or defense)
Animate Dead spell always active

Goal: A

Assume: 2000 acres, 500 BPA, Lord and 200% wages.

** Effects Summary (Known Science Only) **
13.3% Income (180,000 books)
9.5% Building Effectiveness (180,000 books)
8.5% Population Limits (340,000 books)
49% Food Production (75,000 books)
4.9% Gains in Combat (25,000 books)
42.4% Thievery Effectiveness (100,000 books)
42.4% Magic Effectiveness & Rune Production (100,000 books)

Raw Living Space = 2000 * 25 = 50000

Mod Living Space = 50000 * 1,085 * 1,02 = 55335 or 27,67 People per Acre

Farms needed without using fertile land:

Farms = 55335 * 0,25 * 1,5 / 70 * 0,90 * 1,49 = 221

1. Farms: 221 (11.1%)
2. Banks: 300 (15%)
3. Training Grounds: 399 (19.9%)
4. Guard Stations: 400 (20%)
5. Guilds: 240 (12%)
6. Towers: 100 (5%)
7. Watch Towers: 300 (15%)
8. Dungeons: 40 (2%)

Total Land: 2,000 Acres (100% built)

** Effects Summary (Available Buildings Only) **
1. Produce 12,376 bushels (15,470 with FL)
2. 6,000gc, +12.75% income
3. +19.16% offense bonus
4. -25.6% losses when attacked
5. Training about 3.84 wizards per hour
6. Produce 960 runes per hour
7. Thieves: 20.4% catch, -30.6% damage
8. 800 prisoners (2,400 offense, 400gc, 400 jobs)

Workers (peasants + prisoners) = (0,80 / (0,5 * 1,095) - 1 - 0,15) * 2000 * 25 * 0,67 = 10425 workers --> 10025 peasants or 5,01 peasants per acre.

Raw WPA needed to get 2 mod WPA:

Raw WPA = 2 / (1,03 * 1,424) = 1,36

Raw TPA needed to get 2 mod TPA:

Raw TPA = 2 / (1,03 * 1,424) = 1,36

8 Defensive specialist per acre

Elites per Acre = 27,67 - 5,01 - 1,36 - 1,36 - 8 = 11,94

Mod DPA (Army out, Fanaticism) = 8 * 5 * 1,05 * 1,076 * 0,97 = 43,83

Mod OPA (Fanaticism) = (11,94 * 7 + 0,4 * 3) * 1,09 * 1,076 * 1,02 * 1,1916 * 1,05 = 126,89

NW/A = 500 / 92 + 55 + 5,01 + 1,36 * 4 + 1,36 * 4 + 8 * 5 + 11,94 * 635 = 193,93

OPNW = .6543
DPNW = .2260
MPNW = .8803

Summery

126,89 Mod OPA (4 gen, Fanaticism)
43,83 Mod DPA (Army out, Fanaticism)
2 Mod WPA
2 Mod TPA + 15% WT + CS

Note: 20% GS --> -25.6% losses when attacked

A dwarf cleric or tactician can be a very solid attacker with this field. Orcs can only have significantly more offense by sacrificing defense or economy. Dwarves have a nice spellbook and free building with credits for raze provides pumping options that no other race can compete with.

That is looking good, I might try that. Now I would just have to decide the personality either Cleric, Tactician, or Sage. I think Cleric would help with loses and free up hospitals. Tactician would build up tons of credits, so you could really switch around a build for free!, and replace those died D Specs when you get smashed by the Orc hordes! The 100% Intel never hurts! I know my kingdom will be filled with Tacticians though. I am taking a guess every one doesn't like the new sage changes, and Tact/Cleric will be better for a Attacker. With sciences you can always learn attack, and with the dwarf economy will be able to handle that as well.

kilava would you explain why you went with cleric instead of tactician thank you :)

Not that much thought went into that build , but the thought I had about tact as a dwarf was that I didn't need the extra building credits and QF already gives -10% attack time so I don't "need" another -15% to get to 2 attacks per day in wars. I like the fact that cleric always have -50% losses no matter what else happens.
I would like to point out that drafting until you have low peasants per acre as the calc above will take longer and your income will suffer.

Dwarf merchant? What do you think? Good early age growing. Good in long wars as heavy attacker with no income penalties.