Forum Replies Created

Viewing 30 posts - 1 through 30 (of 43 total)
  • Author
  • in reply to: Synergies for Archdruid #221479


    Why? For fun.

    Fun is important, nothing to say. But here we was asked what is better and not whaat is more funny.
    By the way, for me fun – it means to find an optimum, to find out the best way to play in each situation.

    Out of curiosity, how many armies do you usually have late game?

    Depends of the map settings. With the normal size I use to set 4 heroes as maximum, that means, I have 5 armies.

    in reply to: Combat Survey #221435


    AHR Voted disagree.

    I am lucky with current system and I really cann’t imagine the alternatives. But I trust to developers of Triumph and I am sure, they could offer a great new solution, which makes even more sense and brings more fun.

    Deployment. Voted strongly agree.

    I played with huge pleasure games of HOMM (2-5). So, I miss a deployment feature in AOW 3 very much.

    Bigger Battles. Voted agree.

    I am satisfied with battles we have now, but I would wish more units in the army and, perhaps, with weighting according to tier of units or with a limit for high tier units for each stack.

    Fewer more meaningful battles. Voted with agree.

    I like tactical battles, but with a time I am really boring with lot of battles on the same basics, so lot of them I let make automatically, even, if I loose more HPs or even units I could hold alive with manually battle. So, I voted for less boring monotony and I am open for something new.

    in reply to: Synergies for Archdruid #221289


    Really? Playing high elf or halfling with mastery of creation at king I actually don’t have any difficulties to summon strong army, even of horned gods.
    Besides of that, I don’t need only horned god army, at that time, I have already one or even some armies of spiders and shock snakes at queen size. They are as strong as most of t4.

    And you have access to excellent archers, hunters, shamans and supports, which are cheap and very efficient, if you need a mass production. Also for the mass you could spam the racial flyers, especially halflings flying riders with frontal ae makes a good job.

    Why should I play as a goblin with AD? In order to get at prophet a possibility to build mass of trolls while you opponent spams T-4 or even have a strong and leveled to veterans army of high end units?

    in reply to: Synergies for Archdruid #221266


    And goblin AD does have two advantages worth mentioning: major population growth between Goblin’s +10% and fertile domain, and tame trolls are monsters and therefore benefit from a lot of AD abilities.

    You are able to build tame trolls first with arrival to Prophet- Level in the governance, which is too late in order to change anything in the game play. Definitely, you are able to summon at that time the horned god, so you can build a troll, but just for the city museum. 😉

    in reply to: Synergies for Archdruid #221132


    The military governance affects fire melee damage from draconians. Shamans seems to be best at range, right?

    Champion Military

    All your Draconian Support units are 20% cheaper

    Champion Economic

    Your Leader and all your Draconian Heroes receive +10 casting points each

    Either cheaper Shamans or quicker summoning units/cast spells in tactical combat, both are very useful bonuses.

    Oha! Sounds nice, but… At champion… so so. At that time I already use to summon horned gods and build great palace, which gives also +10 points, so the price for supports isn’t interesting anymore and also +10 point are nice but not as significant anymore. Or let us say, this bonus of +10 point for every hero you have is interesting for each class and is not more useful for AD, than for any warlord or sorc.

    Elven gives at the first level already buff +1 damage for the hunters and archers, which is just in time and very useful on that stage of the game.

    Later they elven governance gives even +5 cast points for each great temple you have. But it is too late in order to play too big role in the game play.

    in reply to: Synergies for Archdruid #221116


    Thanks for all helpful answers.
    One further question: How does the racial governance (military) from the draconians help here?


    I don’t see it does. If any Governance provides something special for AD, it is eleves governance, which gives more damage to sisters, hunters and archers or/and gives more mana and research income on the economic path.

    in reply to: Synergies for Archdruid #221110


    AD is for me one of the strongest and most comfortable class. Easy Rider!
    You can use them successfully with each race. He supports the archers, summoned and support units which is for each race wonderful!
    I personally use the summoning way mainly. Just from the beginning research wild creature summoning and gain druidary till 40 casting points and summon for each army at least two spiders. Better, the hunter spiders, they haven 36 speed and phasing. And let them grow.

    Mainly, I have at least one army with 5 spiders. Due to net ability the spiders, heroes and other units in the stuck gains new levels very fast.

    And at queen size such armies are very powerful. Also the shock snake babies are wonderful and are the part of the main army.

    Afterwords I research strait ahead to Summon a Horned God and Druidary (Cast Points).
    Spiders, snakes and horned gods are units I only use to use as Druid in the high end army and very seldom use to build other units.

    As a race I would prefer the elves – strong support and archers, forestry for the conventional units and heroes and research-buff as a racial trait. Or, perhaps, the halflings – two racial archers, good support with bard ability on gold, druids with bard ability.
    As a sec – mastery of creation for the heal (or at least adept), for the bless for the nodes upgrade with +10 research, the tempered empire and domain of life. Other(s) are just for own wish – adept of water is good against the machines, adept of fire gives us the wonderful cast combo – Oiled skin and fireball which is most efficient from the beginning and till the end of the game! And cheap.

    in reply to: Help with specializations #220501


    My best early rush game I made with humans.

    You expect to produce quickly your units. Dwarves could get problems with gold with quick production.

    Humans racial trait – + 10 production for each city, so they are ready for the quick rush earlier as opponents at the same situation at the same map constellation. They have support with heal and buff. The marine ability is also great for the quick rush.
    T2 cavalry is able to evolve to t3 knights, knights becomes from the beginning slayer of monsters and dragons. Most of units is armored.

    As for me, it is the best race for the early rush.

    in reply to: Cooler statistics suggestions #220477


    Well, I see that I am out of power also without any statistic reports, you don’t?
    It is not a Civilization or SimCity, lets make things not more complicated as they are, here is enough to have good military statistics.
    Besides of that, your “Eagle Eye” method is not applicable in this game, due to the huge random factor. Quests, rewards from cleared sites, looted gold, mana, items and units, specific of the map, which neighbours you got etc.
    And there are lot of situations, you income comes mainly from loot and not you production, so, it is more significant how strong and how quick are your troops and not how much temples you have.

    Just my opinion.

    in reply to: Cooler statistics suggestions #220424


    Ah… and what do you expect to do according to “eagle-eye” statistics?

    Build more farms, mines, nodes or ruins in the empire?

    Or build more slingers, because they was very effective in the beginning part of the game?

    No, you won’t. Because you can’t. Its not an economical simulation.

    More statistics will be fine, but it should be reasonable statistics, which affects a game play.

    in reply to: Cooler statistics suggestions #220357


    +1 definitely

    Wanted to suggest the same thing. Considering the debth of the game and the time it takes and epicness playing on big maps a.s.o. the game statistics in the end are a joke.

    There is not even an economy related tab…

    Further suggestions:
    – income (mana, gold etc) per time!
    – most popular unit (unit built most often)
    – most efficient unit (dmg dealt per cost, dmg taken per cost or similar)

    Lot of ways for such a complex game to come up with meaningful statistics, that also help improving ones play style.

    Remark: This goes along with the fact that there should be the possibility to show a leaderboard with similar statistics during the game

    Statistics has to have a usability. I would like to have more statistics in game, but such suggestions are just in order to have. They are not useful at all.
    For me are reasonable for example statistics which sorts units in the overview
    by class
    by level
    by type (flying, swimming etc.) of and range of movement
    by damage type.
    These will help to build or reorganize our armies.

    The same with heroes.

    Statistics, which are just in order to show “Mammy-Mammy, look, I won already 100 battles!”
    are worse for the game.
    Because of opportunity costs. In the same time, our developers could improve any reasonable part of the game, like terraforming, diplomacy, AI, RMG etc instead to loose the time with implementation of the useless for the game play statistics.

    in reply to: Terraforming ease-of-use #220355


    For my opinion, we have now not a terraforming, it is a some kind of agriculture. Terraforming should be able to change mountains, rivers and other water.

    in reply to: Terraforming ease-of-use #220291


    The only thing I wish with improvement of current form of terraforming – be able to use it on mountains, water, the mines and farms aso. And on hexes just around the central city tail and on this one as itself.
    I use to use teraforming very often. Not only because of happiness, it improves our army chances inside the empire.


    That’s true. But you understood, I mean useless in point of build them, what I never do. It is just possible to utilize everything we get.


    It will be better, for sure.

    But much more important for me would be the adjustment of RMG in a point of a starting position and terrain.
    At the moment the settler (which is my preferred start) starts in the middle of the terrain, he does not like. I mean, he does not hate it, but also doesn’t prefer.

    Why should my elves build a capitol of empire not in the forest they love?
    Why my halflings must start in the swamp, they have difficulty with?
    Why my goblins settle between mountains in a deep forest, where they cannot even move good enough, I dont tell about lucky live?

    This is for me far more important point to be improved.


    There is absolutly no sence to build them.
    But you dont have to build each unit the game offers to you.

    Its just a ballast. Absolutely useless unit. But, at the very beginning they can be usefull, becouse you simply dont have enough (stronger) units in the army.
    Usually, I place them at my cities, just becouse bandits mainly doesnt attak cities with any unit inside, doesnot matter, how weak it is.

    in reply to: Morale and Mind Control #218954


    Only the poor devepoler works with nerf, the better one empoves the weaker one! 😉

    in reply to: Help with specializations #218946


    I love the creation mastery. It gives a possibility to convert power nodes with additional power AND research, wich is great for the rush development and has very cheap bless and heal spells.

    As the third spec is a fire adept with cheap and very efficient combo:
    Fire resist debuff + firball very good.
    This combo is really great as for the beginnung as for the late game as well. Even the hardest enemy let them kill very quick with this spell combo.
    If your has units with the fire damage, it makes the combo amaizing efficient!
    Additional, you get passive more power from the fire nodes.

    The air aadept might be good for the dread with his cannons only. But I am not sure whether the fire debuff is less mighty for them!

    in reply to: Morale and Mind Control #218936


    I mean, the happyness helps already now against the mind control.
    Mind Control as itself is compaired with other abilities and damage and each mind control ability has a own power and own type andd number of damage, wich is shown in the unit/hero describtion with a figure after them, for example “seduce 11 (damage type)”.
    As for the normal damage, the resistance AND the happieness helps to avoid them.

    Is it not enough?

    I like to play halflings and I am very satisfied, how often my happy units avoid the damage, and also the mind control.


    I go mainly to t4-unit-spell. All other lines are more or less random.

    And, naturally, the prelist is: T1 spec unit -> t2 -> and so on.

    I research at the beginning two times spellpoints growing spells, afterwords one of spec-unit spell, one spell-points spell one after another. Sometimes I take any needed other spells, if they are payble (takes not too long) and avaluble.

    in reply to: Random Map Survey #218806


    Stange questions…

    in reply to: Cool feature suggestion for skills list #216063


    Nice idea! Very usefull!

    in reply to: Proposal: Have some fixed starting units #216061


    If there would be given an option to choose starting units by the points and strating skills from the avaluble pool, will be very nice.

    I like the system with a starting game setting from the Beyond Eath. “Start with soldier? with clinics? with worker? additional energy? additional technology?” etc.

    in reply to: Proposal: More realistic city defense #216060


    I dont think, this idea will bring somthing especial for the game. Just work for the developer.
    But to the topic. I dont like way of handling with satisfaction and general relation. If I see, the cty is perfect for another race, its, lets say, in feiry plants and wonderfull for halflings, why it should be not a good thing to settle them in this city?

    in reply to: Races Survey and Terraria Wonders #216057


    I love hobbits…. eeehm.. halflings, they is my absolutely favorit race.

    But I cannt see them. For my opinion they was made not so seccessfully. Also the music theme… If I play halflings, I hear in my ears a mysic from AOW1!
    The idea with an additional race unit for each race is also very nice. Perhaps more healer, buffer and debuffer in the game, they are very rare here.

    in reply to: Races Survey and Terraria Wonders #216052


    As for me, the races should be more different, with possibility to play a special race based strategy, also visual they should be more individual.
    Also units shuld be more race unique, has own benefits, own abilities and own line of level-upgrades.

    Besides of that I like very much the concept of the upgrade of some units, but, as for me, they make sence only for the spiders and snakes currently. Would be wonderfull to develop this idea.

    But I think the class should dominate in the strategy.

    in reply to: Races Survey and Terraria Wonders #216022


    Not sure, whether I understand the statment:


    The races are to be different for my opinion. Sure not only in the outfit. So, I think, they are to be asymetrical.
    Otheside, if a race meet a “uncomfortable” race and just loose without any chance is also more than very bad.
    So, they are to be assymetrical, unique, but also well-balanced as well.

    in reply to: Mystical city upgrades, they suck/need changed #215724


    Stop trolling. Lets speak about the game, bot about my self, please.

    in reply to: Mystical city upgrades, they suck/need changed #215719


    I strongly disagree. MCUs (as they are now) are one of the beste features in this game. There is no need to change them! If you aren’t able to take advantage of them, maybe you should optimize your gameplay…

    Or you should optimize your game play.
    Children, children…
    There are two general strategies in the game play in order to win optimal:

    1. Early rush with couple of t1-t2 armies,
    2. Quick research strait ahead to t4 and rush with army of t4, or mixed army with t4 as a basement.
    Both of them are deadly for each enemy. And in both of them is no space for mystical upgrades. They are – lost time, gold and production in both cases.

    And ones more. No t1 has a chance against t3-t4. Thats why a would prefere the system with site upgrades, wich I like as idea very much shuld be reorganized in order to give a chance for t1,t2 in the late game and make different strategies possible.

    Sure there are some exeptions in the best case, but, exeption is exeption only.

    in reply to: Mystical city upgrades, they suck/need changed #215611


    T1 and T2 units ARE reasonable for the whole game.

    Yes, the are, and they are as well just one shot for each t3 or t4. So, where is the reason, to have them in the group? Just for the first turn of a battle???

    And what settings do you mean? Siplest difficulty? You are right, there they are kings. But no, thanks.

    And please, dont tell me, what I should like and what dislike, just tell you meaning, that’s enough. 😉

Viewing 30 posts - 1 through 30 (of 43 total)