Troop Analysis Including New Tribes

    This site uses cookies. By continuing to browse this site, you are agreeing to our Cookie Policy.

    • Troop Analysis Including New Tribes

      So, with the new tribes introduced we thought we'd go through the stats and see what the new ones really have to offer.

      Apologies if you're new to the game and those who are stuck in their ways, we understand this may be contradictory to the norm.

      Just to highlight we have considered things like the Trapper, cranny capacity space - but we don't think these are relevant considering the level of detail we are looking at things - we respect these things matter to people who are new to the game, but when you get past these stage they become useless. (Yes I know some people like to use the trapper to mess with people, but we're not paying attention to these things.)

      Note we're taking into consideration all factors here but ultimately this comes down to a unit's strength per build time. Perhaps in the start of the game cost of the unit matters, but this doesn't in our eye's this doesn't affect the late gate. Likewise, crop consumption is not as influential in the early game as it is at the end. For example, as we'll discuss in more detail later the Praetorian is terrible in comparison to Phalanx/Spearman at the mid game but can be useful at the WW stage.

      ALL data shown is assuming a 3x server with level 20 HDT, Level 20 Upgrade Level, Level 20 Training, 24hour train time. Most of this information is available through Kirilloid, but hopefully it's more relatable in the format we've used.
      __________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

      For starter's let's discuss Defence.

      Note for this, we are considering a troops worth throughout the full game, not just the start. We're also not considering Tribe class combinations (i.e. Phalanx/Druidrider's being built in the same village), as this complicates things further.

      A lot has changed here with the addition of the new troops, Gauls are no longer the outright winner with the introduction of the Egyptians Slave Milita, who now give more Defence points per hour.

      Going by purely Defence points per/time you can see that the Slave Militia comes out on top, but with this comes high up keep costs. Mercenary's place second but again face considerably higher consumption costs than what you would with places 3/4 (Phalanx/Spearman). Some may argue at this point that we're not considering travel time - whilst we would agree with you in the case of non-cat attacks speed is important, but if you're defender's are too far from you to reach you within the time it takes someone to reach you with catapults - this isn't the post for you.

      You'll notice that none of the conventionally considered defence troops of the Romans don't feature on this list and that after #4 the cost's start to get astronomical.

      After considering everything from crop consumption (this start's to become a real issue when you're making defence in 24 village's 24/7) This is our top 3:

      Display Spoiler

      1. Spearman
      2. Phalanx
      3. Praetorian


      Why?

      #1
      Firstly, Spearman have the best defence/ratio (Infantry/Cavalry) for the current make up of hammer's the game see's (admittedly, this may change with the addition of the new tribes, but this is yet to be seen), as it stand's the majority of player's are Roman resulting in Cavalry strong hammers. Additionally, they work out cheaper to produce per hour than Phalanx and also have a lower consumption cost (albeit marginally).

      Slave Militia (which were our immediate first choice) fail on this with having an extremely infantry heavy balance, additionally whilst their training time is the source of the power - it also appears to be there down fall - it's not sustainable to produce 3600 a day - you cannot maintain this amount of troop production without the need for excessive crop. Even with the 2x Oase bonus from the Waterworks, this equates to just over 700k crop an hour with a 150% 15c at level 19's, which is only 230k/hr more than the 472k/hr that's achievable by the other tribes. - So after 14day's training 24/7 in 10village's, you're worse off than you're worse off than the Teut/Gaul counterpart in terms of res production.
      So yes, they're a great troop for speedy Defence and they will be a menace at the start of the game, however when crop consumption starts to become a problem.

      #2
      Several year's ago the Phalanx would have been our number one pick, but for the reasons mentioned above - they've dropped down to number 2. They have the have the closest Infantry/Cavalry defence of our top top 10 going by Def points/time making them unappealing to any attacker, but with the decline in Teuton hammer's, they simply just aren't as needed as they used to be, yes they fair better against the Teuton's might - but the difference in losses they suffer when faced with a Teuton hammer just isn't enough to justify there place at the top.

      #3
      So this isn't really number 3, we just couldn't find another troop worth mentioning in the top 3. The Slave Militia as discussed above eat to much to be considered a long term solution, and the Mercenary suffer costing more resources to train whilst still suffering from the crop problems -- without the added benefit of the waterworks that the Egyptians enjoy.
      We would never use the Praetorian on it's own, to put it simply - it is just pathetic when matched against anything but infantry. But they cost relatively little to build when compared to our top competitors and they are able they are able to give additional infantry points. (For clarification, we are justifying their use when the number's start to approach 800k Spears -- when crop is becoming to be a real problem. If we were rating these units based on there appeal for the start game, Praetorian's would not feature in the top 5.)

      ___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

      Now for Offense

      This will be a little different as we will be comparing the Tribe's various combinations and not just individual units, but we'll start in the same way by showing the total offence points possible in 24hrs. We've decided to only include each tribe's top hammer combination for the purposes of demonstration.(Note: [i]assuming a 3x server with level 20 HDT, Level 20 Upgrade Level, Level 20 Training, 24hour train time, no GB/GS).[/i]


      Unlike Defence, where Slave Militia and Mercanaries are arguably stronger than the existing tribes options when overall Defence power alone is considered, Teutons Club/Tk mix still remains the be all and end all when it comes to hammer strength, their Axe/Tk combo maintains it's #2 spot on this list to. What has changed however, is the offence weak link with Gauls no longer being the laughing stock and the Romans have been kicked off their #2 spot. But of-course this isn't the only factor which should be considered.

      Hence, Our Top 3 Hammer Combo's are:
      Display Spoiler

      1. Teuton: Maceman/Teutonic Knight
      2. Huns: Mercenary/Marauder
      3. Teuton: Axeman/Teutonic Knight


      #1
      We just couldn't not give Clubs the #1 one spot. Admittedly, the prowess of the Mercenary in defense did come close to swinging our decision - it just wasn't enough. Perhaps if you are playing solo or with little Defence, this may not be the case and Mercanaries may be the one for you - but we just cannot justify using offensive troops to defend. Follow homes are rare in the game now, they're harder to do because of the Hero Item's and the merging of the Smithy and the Armoury in the game have really reduced their feasibility. And we do recognise them as the most versatile troop in the game, having top stats in both defence and offence.

      Overall however, Clubs/Tk's give the most offense points possible with some 11000 more than the nearest competitor (of another tribe) whilst also coming with the raiding benefits of the 14fields/hr Club.

      #2
      This wasn't a hard choice, as mentioned above the defensive power of the Mercenary combined with the speed of the unit's makes this combination a great competitor to the Teuton possibilities, the speed of the Maurader as a Tier 3 unit is undoubtedly something which will cause problem's all server long - but it just can't quite compete with the shear power of the Maceman.

      #3
      Again, we struggled to conclude a third place. Arguably the Roman/EC combo should take this place due to their Strength when used in WWK situations, but the same can be said about the Axe/TK mix when talking about a WWKR. They come second only to the Maceman in attack points and easily out do any of the other combinations regardless of the additional 10% Brewery Bonus which is possible. Axes, also have the advantage of a significantly lower crop consumption when compared to both of the top 2 and cost significantly less to run, albeit there raiding potentially is significantly reduced (as is the case for the Roman EC mix).

      _____________________________________________________________

      So overall, we don't think the top units have changed dramatically with the Teut's still coming out on top on all fronts as it appears. We feel the spear will become even more empowered as the game switches to an even heavier Cavalry/Infantry ratio. As for offence, Egypt stack's up below even the Gaul's, who have notoriously weak offense - the Hun's however might shake some things up with the new influx in horse's - but ultimately, Teuton's are still the major player when it comes to this.



      We understand that of-course who does the best on a server comes down to the player's playing the account, and we strongly believe that the right team can take any Tribe to the top - but going purely by Efficiency and ease, this is our opinion.
      We have not discussed 'multi use troops', for the shear reason that we do not see them as of being value adding - in our view - yes it's great that the Mercanary can defend, but we'd never intentionally use an offensive troop to defend.


      Thanks for your time,
      See you next Aux,
      Sam, Smoke, Markus.
    • Good thoughts sam, but a few thoughts to add on this:
      Firstly, like i said in skype :P, not only the cropper but all villas can have a 150%-300% bonus easily as Egyptians. If you are playing Egyptians and not placing villas according to max benefit from oasis then you are a fool. Keeping that in mind, Egyptians can survive much more than 14 days considering crop consumption. How much longer depends on the types of villas you settle. The more heavy crop based villas you max (7c/9c/15c) the more you can train.
      Secondly, since numbers are the main advantage of slaves, when under attack, a high number die as well. So, keeping in mind that Egyptians have an advantage in prod bonus, they are able to recover more easily compared to other tribes. And since many die at once, crop becomes a bit easier.
      Thirdly, I agree with the fact that up until artis, Egyptians do well and after that they struggle. However, a kind player who needs standing def or diet artis might just make Egyptians playable in mid to late game as well. Late game is pretty much a huge pain as Egyptians, and not much you can do to correct that.

      But keeping these in mind, i do regard Egyptians to be in top3 easily (def). Seeing that most people lose interest in late game, and that early to mid game is the most heavy action based days, Egyptians certainly have the edge there due to the reasons mentioned above (imo).

      A side note would be that play style would also effect rankings a lot. For example, if someone likes to go for multiple ghosts, and raiding. Huns clearly have an edge over all. With speed. capacity, and off/time (ik its not more than EC, but other 2 things surely make it the best cav unit for ghosts)

      So my preference would still be huns. Unless i want to go for a wwk/wwr or i want highest off points (which imo can still be matched by Huns, if you're good enough). Another reason for me for Huns would be the t1. I can simply run t1 in many villas, and use them consistently for either def or chiefings (1 of the reasons for my thought that off points can be matched by Huns). They are strong in both. Which makes it very efficient, you have your own def, and your many hammers don't need to be used for chiefings (not hammer chiefings of big players ofc :P)
      3 chiefs in every villa being built at same time, is just the cherry on top :D
      They see me rolling
      They hating
    • Fair points Arnav, and for a change I actually agree with some of what you've said there.

      Agree totally that the Slave's will definitely shake things up at the start of the game, but the amount of crop they consume just doesn't balance out their cheaper cost. Yes, they can get more resources by settling smart and using Crop oases and 7/9/15c's, but again you're forgetting that it isn't just one village that you're paying more in crop consumption, it's all of them - so in the best case scenario all these oases really do is pay for this extra loss in production you have.

      Furthermore, disagree with this statement: "They are able to recover more easily compared to other tribes". Ok, yes technically it's true - they can regrow to the same strength defensive army faster but this is no different from they make higher def points per time. As you will know also, we don't take it easy with Gold - but I just can't comprehend how much it would take to make Egypt feasable, even with all the gold in the world you can't escape the fact that to equal 100,000 phallanx in defence points you need 165,000 Slaves - aka enough resources to run another 3 villages running phalanx 24/7. -- For that reason they're not in our top 3.

      Again, I agree that play style affects these ranking's a lot, and we did consider this. Which is why Romans/ECs were removed, they simply do not compete when it comes to a Smashy hammer, whilst the Club/TK does that perfectly and can also compete with Roman WWKs.

      As for Hun's, yes I agree the extra chief slot in each village is useful and it will definitely save you a lot of resources, along with the speed being great for ghosts. I don't think these are going to be as useful as before, as more player's influx to Hun's Ghost's will become even more obsolete than they have become after the Smithy and Armoury were merged. It's quite paradoxical really, the Hun's have made the Ghost possible again with their speed and high attack points, but they will also be the end of them with the defensive power of the Mercenary marking them virtually useless.
    • Just a reminder that new tribe are introduced for regional map, which will be 400x400 with near half of it water. I seriously doubt it will be possible to have half of villages with an oasis leave alone mostly croppers with 3 oases.
      On the other hand chiefing is much more common on this type of servers i.e. having 3 chiefs is more significant.
    • Okej, here we go with the problems for slaves. Blaze i know where you are coming from just checking the production of the capital which should match the extra consumption for the slaves. However what happens when you need to defend someone that is not yourself, if you are protecting an artifact for example i can tell you that the any player would rather have 100k spears then 200k slaves for about the same def value. So what about trade routes, most defensive players will use their cap to feed troop production in their villages. This means that you need your cap merchants in order to keep ques running and in order to NPC trade in the capital and save gold, not needing to NPC trade in every single village. Going on from there since you want to be able to use your capital production to make defense troops in your other villages you will also want to carpet bomb villages over a small area in order to speed up the process of sending resources and building ques, you will by doing this reduce the bonus given to you by the oasis. Then you have moving troops which becomes an even bigger mess with the slaves. A good defender should have anywhere from 5-15 villages with 100-150k spears late game this will be about 175-250k slaves which will cause major headache moving resources even with 9/15c you will have 50-90k more crop consumption per hour moving troops depending on village type and amount of troops.
      Lets move on to the defensive vales for slaves. So in the past few years we have seen very few good sized Teuton hammers, what we have been seeing is a majority roman hammers. Roman hammers are cavalry heavy with most offence points coming from cavalry and not infantry. Slaves are balanced for more heavy infantry. Looking at what has been disclosed as the best offence with the mace/tk being best there is still some issues. During the past few years i've played defense only and there have been very few good Teuton hammers, what we have seen are about 200k mace which when you have close to or more then 1 mil spears balance the ratio out. For the past 7 rounds i have played the roman hammers haven't only been stronger in attack strength they have had more troops then the Teutons. Seeing how we are getting new races we will most likely see a lot of Huns offensive which is also cavalry heavy.
    • There are many correct information in the initial post, but important premises are wrong thus resulting in chaos and wrong conclusions.


      Naughty wrote:

      Thanks for your time,
      See you next Aux,
      Sam, Smoke, Markus
      I can imagine that aux looks like dex, in terms of player numbers and engagement.
      What do you think, maybe better start on comx?
      More players = better players = more fun

      jotheold_COM wrote:

      opinion is opinion you can't be wrong.

      TurkC wrote:

      Last time the subject was WW and our WW get banned unfortunately. I think we will just sing in the forum :). We banned because of sharing password. The purpose of prevent sharing passwords is, prevent using multi account. In here, its obvious this isnt multi account so i think that ban was amateur work
    • Blaze wrote:

      Care to elaborate?
      Yes, but I'm not sure this is the right thread. As I said, we already have a thread... I don't want to confuse the TG staff.

      jotheold_COM wrote:

      opinion is opinion you can't be wrong.

      TurkC wrote:

      Last time the subject was WW and our WW get banned unfortunately. I think we will just sing in the forum :). We banned because of sharing password. The purpose of prevent sharing passwords is, prevent using multi account. In here, its obvious this isnt multi account so i think that ban was amateur work
    • Schneeente wrote:

      There are many correct information in the initial post, but important premises are wrong thus resulting in chaos and wrong conclusions.


      Naughty wrote:

      Thanks for your time,
      See you next Aux,
      Sam, Smoke, Markus
      I can imagine that aux looks like dex, in terms of player numbers and engagement.What do you think, maybe better start on comx?
      More players = better players = more fun

      We only play English Language servers. We would have preffered to play Comx because of the higher player numbers - but due to my work pattern I can only play server's at certain times. Aux fit's in perfectly, whilst with comx I wouldn't be able to play for a month or to.
    • Schneeente wrote:

      Blaze wrote:

      Care to elaborate?
      Yes, but I'm not sure this is the right thread. As I said, we already have a thread... I don't want to confuse the TG staff.
      This is definitely the right thread. I am not a representative of TG and am in no way related to them.

      If you think my analysis is wrong then here is the only place I'm going to see it. -- If you have any criticisms please post it here where you'll get a response :)
    • Allright. We can make endless discussions about what's the best, but there is 1 logical way to explain.

      MCCFire wrote:

      Hello everybody,

      The forum is back online, the Huns and Egypts are finally alive. Beside that I've spent a lot of time to compare all the troops in every way. Indivually, combined, the scouts and the siege. The last column of all the images below represent the efficiency. How many does a troop cost per power. See below all the images, let's talk about these troops. Are the Egypts overpowerd, maybe? Let me hear your opinions about the new tribes.



      Alright. The horses.

      If you want pure power for the horses, you take Romans, only if you don't care about the costs.
      If you want to farm a lot, you take the Huns. They also have strong horses and are a lot cheaper.
      If you want to be a hybrid, you take the Gauls. Medium off, medium deff.
      If you want to def purely, you take the Egypts, very strong horses
      If you are caring about crop consumption, take the Romans. Most off per crop consumption.



      Infantry:

      As always the clubs are still the strongest and the cheapest. If you want pure power, choose this. Although the TK's are less powerfull.
      If you want to have medium infantry, but a strong horse-army. Take the Huns. Merc's are on spot 4, but consume a lot.
      If you care a lot about consumption. Take the Romans. They are weak in infantry, but you care about the consumption.
      If you want to be a pure deffer: Egypts are yours. Take care about their cropconsumption. They are good for mobile def which won't last long.
      If you want to be deffer, but you care about this consumption. Take the Romans. However, their strength is bad...
      Gauls are always good as deffer. Powerfull infantry and medium cavalry.


      You want to be a scouter? Take Romans... Easy.


      Combination offensive:

      Teutons are still the best, but consume a lot.
      Huns are second best, consume less, but are a little more expensive. The best about this are the other horses that the teutons don't have.
      Romans consume more than the Huns, can carry less, are more expensive and are weaker. Why do you want to be a Roman offender???
      Gauls, same. Aren't the best in anything.
      Egypts. Don't even try...


      Defensively combinations.

      Romans: Don't have defensive cavalry. I won't choose it.
      Egypts: Best deffer ever. Slaves with Rash are by far the best, but Ash + Anhur don't consume a lot, aren't expensive and are still powerfull.
      Gauls: Are a little cheaper, but they don't excellate in anything. Egypts are better in everything.
      Teutons: Nice for the hybrid players, but aren't good in anything
      Huns: Average deffers. Their hammer can be used for the defensive ops...


      Siege. Always funny.
      Rams hammer: Teutons or Huns
      Cata hammer: Roman of Gauls

      Tadaa. Offensive combinations.
      Same story. Everyone is good in something:

      Cropconsumption: Gauls/Egypts
      Costs: Teutons or Huns or Romans
      Power: Teutons or Huns

      Let's hear it!
      NLX: Team Rocket, Zinderin, V-Vogels (Mr. De Uil)
      COMX: N&C (Thomas de Trein)
      RoA COM: Twelve Monkeys (Harambe)
    • MCCFire wrote:

      Allright. We can make endless discussions about what's the best, but there is 1 logical way to explain.

      MCCFire wrote:

      Hello everybody,

      The forum is back online, the Huns and Egypts are finally alive. Beside that I've spent a lot of time to compare all the troops in every way. Indivually, combined, the scouts and the siege. The last column of all the images below represent the efficiency. How many does a troop cost per power. See below all the images, let's talk about these troops. Are the Egypts overpowerd, maybe? Let me hear your opinions about the new tribes.



      Alright. The horses.
      If you want pure power for the horses, you take Romans, only if you don't care about the costs.
      If you want to farm a lot, you take the Huns. They also have strong horses and are a lot cheaper.
      If you want to be a hybrid, you take the Gauls. Medium off, medium deff.
      If you want to def purely, you take the Egypts, very strong horses
      If you are caring about crop consumption, take the Romans. Most off per crop consumption.



      Infantry:
      As always the clubs are still the strongest and the cheapest. If you want pure power, choose this. Although the TK's are less powerfull.
      If you want to have medium infantry, but a strong horse-army. Take the Huns. Merc's are on spot 4, but consume a lot.
      If you care a lot about consumption. Take the Romans. They are weak in infantry, but you care about the consumption.
      If you want to be a pure deffer: Egypts are yours. Take care about their cropconsumption. They are good for mobile def which won't last long.
      If you want to be deffer, but you care about this consumption. Take the Romans. However, their strength is bad...
      Gauls are always good as deffer. Powerfull infantry and medium cavalry.


      You want to be a scouter? Take Romans... Easy.

      Combination offensive:
      Teutons are still the best, but consume a lot.
      Huns are second best, consume less, but are a little more expensive. The best about this are the other horses that the teutons don't have.
      Romans consume more than the Huns, can carry less, are more expensive and are weaker. Why do you want to be a Roman offender???
      Gauls, same. Aren't the best in anything.
      Egypts. Don't even try...


      Defensively combinations.
      Romans: Don't have defensive cavalry. I won't choose it.
      Egypts: Best deffer ever. Slaves with Rash are by far the best, but Ash + Anhur don't consume a lot, aren't expensive and are still powerfull.
      Gauls: Are a little cheaper, but they don't excellate in anything. Egypts are better in everything.
      Teutons: Nice for the hybrid players, but aren't good in anything
      Huns: Average deffers. Their hammer can be used for the defensive ops...


      Siege. Always funny.Rams hammer: Teutons or Huns
      Cata hammer: Roman of Gauls

      Tadaa. Offensive combinations.Same story. Everyone is good in something:

      Cropconsumption: Gauls/Egypts
      Costs: Teutons or Huns or Romans
      Power: Teutons or Huns

      Let's hear it!
      This is why we considered troops grouped as opposed to individually as all you've really done here is copied meaningless data which doesn't really argue with the Original post.

      "If you want pure power for horses".
      - In what scenario do you actually want this? You want most power for the overall hammer, I'm not arguing that EC aren't the best horse unit in the game, but the Imperian let's that hammer down.

      "If you want to farm a lot, you take the huns."
      Why? No argument here at all.
      If you go with the Hun's you have to sacrifice either attack power or raiding when training a hammer (when you decide between either of the horses to train). This is the same problem with the Romans.

      "If you want def purely you take Egypt."
      No, you certainly do not. Yes, the horse's may be better but as I argued in the original post you end up paying double in crop consumption which does not take long to balance out the extra production you get from the waterworks.

      As for "caring about crop consumption" yes, this is true but again yous till can't argue the case for a tribe based on one unit.

      "Clubs are still the strongest and cheapest."
      -- You can't have it both ways here, you then go on to argue that TKs aren't as strong -- without also stating that regardless of this the club/tk hammer is the strongest.
      .. I'm not going to continue with this infantry/cavalry argument as I don't see how its relevant to the OP.

      Scout's, yes I agree Romans are still on top because of the HDT.

      As for "combination offensive", I stand by our top 3 in the original post.
      What you consider at no point here in your argument is troop speed, carry capacity, and the fact that you get a 10% bonus with the Teuton Brewery.

      "Defensive Combination"
      I'd argue again this is badly argued as Defence can be trained in multiple villages not just one, which normally makes it cheaper to run the infantry unit only with the exception of one village to give you the hero 20% bonus.
      Even still, Slave's consume double that of what the other tribes units (when you factor training time), Gauls give you an extremely balanced ratio against Infantry/Cavalry, whilst Teuts give you a more biased cavalry defence.

      Again for your siege Combo's your not considering that Teut's get 10% brewery bonus, I also believe hero item's mess with your numbers slightly throughout.

      I do appreciate the time you took to reply to this thread however, thanks for the insight :)

      //Sam
    • Naughty wrote:

      For starter's let's discuss Defence.


      Note for this, we are considering a troops worth throughout the full game, not just the start. We're also not considering Tribe class combinations (i.e. Phalanx/Druidrider's being built in the same village), as this complicates things further.

      A lot has changed here with the addition of the new troops, Gauls are no longer the outright winner with the introduction of the Egyptians Slave Milita, who now give more Defence points per hour.

      Going by purely Defence points per/time you can see that the Slave Militia comes out on top, but with this comes high up keep costs. Mercenary's place second but again face considerably higher consumption costs than what you would with places 3/4 (Phalanx/Spearman). Some may argue at this point that we're not considering travel time - whilst we would agree with you in the case of non-cat attacks speed is important, but if you're defender's are too far from you to reach you within the time it takes someone to reach you with catapults - this isn't the post for you.

      You'll notice that none of the conventionally considered defence troops of the Romans don't feature on this list and that after #4 the cost's start to get astronomical.

      After considering everything from crop consumption (this start's to become a real issue when you're making defence in 24 village's 24/7) This is our top 3:

      Display Spoiler

      1. Spearman
      2. Phalanx
      3. Praetorian


      Why?

      #1
      Firstly, Spearman have the best defence/ratio (Infantry/Cavalry) for the current make up of hammer's the game see's (admittedly, this may change with the addition of the new tribes, but this is yet to be seen), as it stand's the majority of player's are Roman resulting in Cavalry strong hammers. Additionally, they work out cheaper to produce per hour than Phalanx and also have a lower consumption cost (albeit marginally).

      Slave Militia (which were our immediate first choice) fail on this with having an extremely infantry heavy balance, additionally whilst their training time is the source of the power - it also appears to be there down fall - it's not sustainable to produce 3600 a day - you cannot maintain this amount of troop production without the need for excessive crop. Even with the 2x Oase bonus from the Waterworks, this equates to just over 700k crop an hour with a 150% 15c at level 19's, which is only 230k/hr more than the 472k/hr that's achievable by the other tribes. - So after 14day's training 24/7 in 10village's, you're worse off than you're worse off than the Teut/Gaul counterpart in terms of res production.
      So yes, they're a great troop for speedy Defence and they will be a menace at the start of the game, however when crop consumption starts to become a problem.

      #2
      Several year's ago the Phalanx would have been our number one pick, but for the reasons mentioned above - they've dropped down to number 2. They have the have the closest Infantry/Cavalry defence of our top top 10 going by Def points/time making them unappealing to any attacker, but with the decline in Teuton hammer's, they simply just aren't as needed as they used to be, yes they fair better against the Teuton's might - but the difference in losses they suffer when faced with a Teuton hammer just isn't enough to justify there place at the top.

      #3
      So this isn't really number 3, we just couldn't find another troop worth mentioning in the top 3. The Slave Militia as discussed above eat to much to be considered a long term solution, and the Mercenary suffer costing more resources to train whilst still suffering from the crop problems -- without the added benefit of the waterworks that the Egyptians enjoy.
      We would never use the Praetorian on it's own, to put it simply - it is just pathetic when matched against anything but infantry. But they cost relatively little to build when compared to our top competitors and they are able they are able to give additional infantry points. (For clarification, we are justifying their use when the number's start to approach 800k Spears -- when crop is becoming to be a real problem. If we were rating these units based on there appeal for the start game, Praetorian's would not feature in the top 5.)

      Okay. You obviously have put a lot of thought into this so let's have a polite, nice discussion:

      First of all: Praetos are not #3.
      They are more expensive than Ash Warriors (9,5%)
      Their building time is significantly worse (32% longer building time)
      They are slower (20%)
      Ash Warrior carry 250% more.
      And the only thing they are better in is 5 defense more in total (5%)

      But that's not really important right now, because as you said yourself, you see Spears and Phalanxes far superior to Praetos. So let's not dwell on it.

      What I want to show in the following is that Egyptian's are comparable to Gauls in terms of defensive units and superior to Teutons.
      And then I'll show you why that is such a big problem (you totally neglected the most important aspect of the whole discussion.)

      While I admit that on footsoldiers alone the Spear and Phalanx are slightly (I stress that word) ahead, you neglected to even mention horses.
      Ash Warrior might be slightly (5%?) worse than Spears/Phalanxes but their horses are so much better than the Teuton horse.. (Paladin)
      That alone evens it out easily. Because having a "second druid" (I know, slightly worse than Druids but significantly better than Paladins) is worth a lot to every defensive-account.
      And if you argue that speed is not important because you only use stationary defense and don't get attacked anyway, than Ash Warriors are even better than Spears and Phalanxes because:
      You need 18 Phalanxes (5670 res) to get 1620 defense in total.
      But you need 17 Ash Warriors (7140 res) to get 1615 defense in total.
      Those 1470 res difference need 61 days and then Ash Warden break even and are more efficient than Phalanxes. Additionally another minor point you neglected:
      Imagine you have a dedicated defensive account who wants to invest all its res into defense. You have a Teuton defender and an Egyptian.
      Because Spears are so great he want's to build Spears in all his villages, no love for Paladins since Druids are so much better.
      Now, the player has a big account, lets say 200k production per hour.
      If he wants to invest all his res into Spears, he'd need 24 villages. (194543 res per day for Spears in 1 village)
      The Egyptian builds Ash Warden and Anhur Guard (since they are close to Druids) he only needs 10 villages. (Ash Warden 203865 and Anhur Guard 272184 res per day)
      That means he saves 14 smithies and 14 TS.
      I know, small fry, but since those foot troops are so close to each other (Phalanx/Spear/Ash Warden) I think even the small stuff matters. Well, not really, let's just say they are all good.

      And your argument concerning "Spears are better because there are significantly more Roman hammers than Teuton hammers" is flawed. At least from my personal experience. And I just checked the latest comx speed and there are 5 Romans, 14 Teutons and 1 Gaul in the "top 20 best attacker". Feel free to count the whole top100 but I seriously doubt you'll find "significantly more Roman hammers than Teuton hammers".
      But again, not really important. What is important is, that those 3 basic units of Gauls, Teutons and Egyptians are pretty close to each other.


      Okay, now the argument you completely neglected. But it is the most important one to make:
      When you take the Egyptians you have a significantly production boost. Your account produces (without raiding) 20-30% more than a Gaul or Teuton would.
      New Features & New Troops - Feedback & Discussion

      And now, while the Ash Warden and Anhur guard might be a little bit behind in terms of individual strength compared to Phalanx/Druid, if you have even 5% more production, you are already even.
      But if your account has between 20 and 30% more, you are sooo far ahead.. It's is not even a real contest anymore.
      Taking Gaul/Teuton for a regular defensive account would just be stupid. Same as taking Gaul as an offensive account.
      You can obviously still do it, and someone in the comx even did it and is #1 at the moment with it, but that is no counter-argument because the numbers don't change only because a Gaul is #1 in Offensive points.


      And now I talked so much about defensive stuff, that I don't feel like writing anymore to the offensive part of your analysis.
      Have a nice Monday :p

      jotheold_COM wrote:

      opinion is opinion you can't be wrong.

      TurkC wrote:

      Last time the subject was WW and our WW get banned unfortunately. I think we will just sing in the forum :). We banned because of sharing password. The purpose of prevent sharing passwords is, prevent using multi account. In here, its obvious this isnt multi account so i think that ban was amateur work
    • "If you want pure power for horses".
      - In what scenario do you actually want this? You want most power for the overall hammer, I'm not arguing that EC aren't the best horse unit in the game, but the Imperian let's that hammer down.
      Depends what you want. Do you want to clear a WW? Arti-power? Natars are weak against horses. That's why a teuton hammer is less effective against the Natars.
      And horses are effective against Romans.

      "If you want to farm a lot, you take the huns."
      Why? No argument here at all.
      If you go with the Hun's you have to sacrifice either attack power or raiding when training a hammer (when you decide between either of the horses to train). This is the same problem with the Romans.
      If you purely look at the farmstats (speed, carry and costs) the Huns are better than the Gauls. You don't sacrifice attack power with Mercs + Steppes. They are still stronger than the Romans (imps + EI).

      "If you want def purely you take Egypt."
      No, you certainly do not. Yes, the horse's may be better but as I argued in the original post you end up paying double in crop consumption which does not take long to balance out the extra production you get from the waterworks.

      The slaves are by far the strongest def-units, despite their cropconsumption. And if you care about the consumption, you take the Ash Warden in combination with the Anhur Guard. Their consumption is less than the Romans.

      As for "caring about crop consumption" yes, this is true but again yous till can't argue the case for a tribe based on one unit.


      Scout's, yes I agree Romans are still on top because of the HDT.

      No, because they are just the strongest. 314 vs 251 power per hour.

      About the rest. I think it's kinda confusion with all these posts.
      Numbers are nice and everybody has a different style of playing.

      The numbers say that the Romans are the worst deffers, but they could be effective.
      And everything Enti says in the previous post, you can see in the tables.

      I personally think the costs per power is the most important. Maybe I should add a colomn Power per upkeep per costs or something like that. Should that be worth the trouble?
      NLX: Team Rocket, Zinderin, V-Vogels (Mr. De Uil)
      COMX: N&C (Thomas de Trein)
      RoA COM: Twelve Monkeys (Harambe)