Guide to Artefacts; the facts

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

    • Question:

      The lvl 10 diet artifact, does that work like the WW, eg all troops in said village are on 50% less crop consumption, or is it that the troops produced by said village use up 50% less crop?
    • Fred Easey wrote:

      Question:

      The lvl 10 diet artifact, does that work like the WW, eg all troops in said village are on 50% less crop consumption, or is it that the troops produced by said village use up 50% less crop?


      Fairly certain in saying yes, thats correct.
    • Fred Easey wrote:

      Question: The lvl 10 diet artifact, does that work like the WW, eg all troops in said village are on 50% less crop consumption, or is it that the troops produced by said village use up 50% less crop?

      I'd agree with Lucid and say as the affect is village specific, not troop-specific, it would apply to any troops in that village at that current time.

      Enterprise1 wrote:

      It would be the account wide artifact for it to work in the WW as you can't and don't build a TC in a WW village

      Kudos !

      Second to this question, if an account-wide artefact has 50% crop reduction - is that an additional 50% to the WW 50%, making it 100% and crop consumption being 0. Or 50% of the 50%, making it 25%. Outlandish theories and thoughts welcome.
    • Avi wrote:

      I'd agree with Lucid and say as the affect is village specific, not troop-specific, it would apply to any troops in that village at that current time.


      Are we assuming here then that that includes all troops being fed by the village? So troops travelling to attack somewhere, or stored in its oasis would be reduced consumption too?
    • Fabs wrote:

      Are we assuming here then that that includes all troops being fed by the village? So troops travelling to attack somewhere, or stored in its oasis would be reduced consumption too?

      Yes I'd assume so, that is how I'd interpret the village artefact. But it is just an assumption.
    • Avi wrote:

      Second to this question, if an account-wide artefact has 50% crop reduction - is that an additional 50% to the WW 50%, making it 100% and crop consumption being 0. Or 50% of the 50%, making it 25%. Outlandish theories and thoughts welcome.


      You're the one with the answers :p
    • Avi wrote:


      Second to this question, if an account-wide artefact has 50% crop reduction - is that an additional 50% to the WW 50%, making it 100% and crop consumption being 0. Or 50% of the 50%, making it 25%. Outlandish theories and thoughts welcome.


      Would imagine they'd make WW villages void of Artefact powers, just like gold usage
    • wuvarien wrote:

      Would imagine they'd make WW villages void of Artefact powers, just like gold usage


      So why have a unique artifact which makes it impossible to target the WW (and everything else) .

      But then again, I do see your point.
    • Avi wrote:

      Kudos !

      Second to this question, if an account-wide artefact has 50% crop reduction - is that an additional 50% to the WW 50%, making it 100% and crop consumption being 0. Or 50% of the 50%, making it 25%. Outlandish theories and thoughts welcome.


      Ooo, I got a Kudos, YAY!

      On a more serious note, I would think that it would be 50% of the 50% that already exists as there is no special building/artifact that already reduces the wheat consumption of a WW village (except for the WW of course but that isn't moveable) so therefore it would be 50% of the wheat consumption that is already placed in the WW... making it 75%.
    • Enterprise1 wrote:



      On a more serious note, I would think that it would be 50% of the 50% that already exists as there is no special building/artifact that already reduces the wheat consumption of a WW village (except for the WW of course but that isn't moveable) so therefore it would be 50% of the wheat consumption that is already placed in the WW... making it 75%.


      Or the 50% WW power overrights the Artefact 50%, therefore no artefact effect.

      We'll have to find out :P
    • wuvarien wrote:

      Would imagine they'd make WW villages void of Artefact powers, just like gold usage


      I do hope so.
      A unique stronger building artefact affecting the WW village would be a bit harsh. I'm pretty sure they will affect them, however. The alliances on s4 who are getting ready for endgame have tried to take as many of those account-wide artefacts as possible.
      Realistically, you'll only see armies 1.5x bigger come endgame, whilst the leading WWs are likely to be 3x stronger. I think that will unbalance things somewhat.
    • Bloodcurdled wrote:

      I do hope so.
      A unique stronger building artefact affecting the WW village would be a bit harsh. I'm pretty sure they will affect them, however. The alliances on s4 who are getting ready for endgame have tried to take as many of those account-wide artefacts as possible.
      Realistically, you'll only see armies 1.5x bigger come endgame, whilst the leading WWs are likely to be 3x stronger. I think that will unbalance things somewhat.


      plus there wont be as many huge armies, due to people losing them getting the artefacts.

      The unique which stops targetting the WW is over powered as well imo, anyone who gets that has basically won (as long as they can keep GWs/GG/MB up), but then again not many people target the WW so i'm not too sure about this one.

      But defo agree with the stronger buildings
    • wuvarien wrote:

      plus there wont be as many huge armies, due to people losing them getting the artefacts.

      The unique which stops targetting the WW is over powered as well imo, anyone who gets that has basically won (as long as they can keep GWs/GG/MB up), but then again not many people target the WW so i'm not too sure about this one.

      But defo agree with the stronger buildings


      The unique random aim one doesn't work on WWs. That's why I'd assume the other artefacts do, cause if it's specified on one that it is ineffective, then why not the others?

      Still think you'll see bigger armies on average.
      Those who go after the faster troop building ones will obviously have larger armies come endgame, and possibly those with the wheat consumption artefacts.
    • Bloodcurdled wrote:

      The unique random aim one doesn't work on WWs. That's why I'd assume the other artefacts do, cause if it's specified on one that it is ineffective, then why not the others?

      Still think you'll see bigger armies on average.
      Those who go after the faster troop building ones will obviously have larger armies come endgame, and possibly those with the wheat consumption artefacts.


      ● Rival's Confusion - 2 EFFECTS
      Village = Crannies hold 200x more resources in this specific village
      Village = Enemy catas cannot aim at buildings in this specific village (doesn't apply to TC or WW)
      Account = Crannies hold 100x more resources in all villages
      Account = Enemy catas cannot aim at buildings in all villages (doesn't apply to TC or WW)
      Unique = Crannies hold 500x more resources in all villages
      Unique = Enemy catas cannot aim at buildings INCLUDING the TC and WW in all villages
    • wuvarien wrote:

      ● Rival's Confusion - 2 EFFECTS
      Village = Crannies hold 200x more resources in this specific village
      Village = Enemy catas cannot aim at buildings in this specific village (doesn't apply to TC or WW)
      Account = Crannies hold 100x more resources in all villages
      Account = Enemy catas cannot aim at buildings in all villages (doesn't apply to TC or WW)
      Unique = Crannies hold 500x more resources in all villages
      Unique = Enemy catas cannot aim at buildings INCLUDING the TC and WW in all villages


      T'is wrong that.
      You can aim at the TC or WW, try anything else and it'll hit a random building.
      Says so in the TC;
      "In additon, enemy catapults can only aim at the treasure chamber or wonder of the world, or at random."