Posts by Curtain

    To add to @Renuo#EN post above the individual power of scouts is roughly speaking:
    Defense in a village with HDT: Romans > Teutons > Gauls
    Defense in a village without HDT: Teutons > Gauls = Romans
    Offense (with HDT naturally): Romans > Teutons > Gauls


    Roman and Gaul scouts have identical stats in terms of scouting (thought they do have different speed and cost of course)
    Teuton scouts are individually weaker but are significantly stronger on crop consumption basis compared to roman and gaul scouts
    Roman scouts are king when they have the HDT bonus as with that they combine the high stats of the 2 crop scout with the crop consumption of a 1 crop scout beating out teutons easily on both defense and offense but of course only when HDT is available







    The three images above show the how romans and gauls have individually the same stats (which are higher than those of teuton scouts)



    These images demonstrates the superiority of teuton scouts on per crop basis (discounting HDT of course)

    They got a bit of a nerf in the T4 -> T5 but I think the biggest reason is the way kingdoms emphasizes teamplay and wonders over individual account power.
    Teutons are strongest when they can overpower individuals or small groups with large amount of offense power but in kingdoms each account matters lot less than they did in legends and big targets like treasuries and wonders will have massive defenses with them which makes it harder for teutons to contribute. Sure you can still hit the edge players and governors but your influence in the grand scheme of things is lot less compared to that roman WW hit when compared to the same in legends.
    In legends accounts were bigger and emphasis was more on fighting the enemy players which means teutons could roam free lot more effectively

    Probably because there isn't any out of the book tactics with the other two, you kinda build them and then that's it. With trapper you can stack them and it's not really in the path of normal gameplay but still interesting enough to make for a good secret achievo.
    If I had to suggest ones for romans and teutons maybe:
    Party animal: activate the brewery total of 30 times or more in one server (since one run is 72h that would be total of 90 days spent drunk which might or might not be too much)
    That's not my horse!: have more than 1k of each other cavalry units besides romans drinking on your pool


    I think the first idea is ok, maybe bit grindy while the second is definitely easy enough tho not sure if it's "cool" enough :D

    Don't have an ipone but you could try if the browser version works with the mobile browser

    A fine tuning for that idea could be a building called "farmer" (or something bit more generic like prospectors hut or what ever)
    How it would work is that it would allow you to terraform the fields to your liking and the limit to field of any one type would be the lvl -2 so lvl 20 would allow for the 18-0-0-0 setup while a lvl 9 would allow you to have max 7 of one type of field (like say adding one crop or making a 7-2-7-2 for example). Terraforming would be more expensive the more of any one type of field you have already in the village which would mean you can create those 3/4/5 for roman defense pretty cheaply while the 0-0-0-18 would be really expensive.


    Tho I do have to say I do enjoy the varied map as well :D

    As for winning this game is kind of poorly designed so those who win are forced to play the most boring and unfun game.

    This would be better put as new thread not as a side point as it's pretty real talk :D
    When the optimal way to have fun and optimal way to win aren't in line that usually does cause problems

    I dunno, at least I have seen more legit uses of vacation mode than clear abuse tho there have been some border line cases. I don't think the feature is bad but the rules could use some tuning. I kinda like the suggestion of disabling delete while on vacation to ensure that if you bust up a player there is always that 3 day period when you can reap the rewards.
    I think the only player who shouldn't have access to vacation mode is the wonder holder.

    They will sit in that village until


    1) someone covers your village and collects them as tributes
    2) someone attacks you and steals them away
    3) you activate your own treasury in which case they move there


    You can use the option 2 (or 1 if you are close) to get them to your king or dukes. Simply have either them or one of the govs that is inside the borders attack you. You can even attack yourself from one of the villages in borders if you like. Just remember to dodge :D

    @enjoymrban#EN


    For robbers there isn't any set number. So long as you are making a profit you should be ok (make sure to count the resource you get from the stolen goods as well), swordsmen are pretty efficient at clearing hideouts so you should just build them until you are comfortable with the number of losses, adding a hero to the raiding party will also help but don't use the phalanx to attack the robbers. I was using less than 50 swords and my hero to clear out the hideouts in this guide (I trained up the swords first and then made some phalanx before exiting beginners protection) but you will of course want increasingly more as time passes.


    It will be tough times with robbers untill you build your force up to 1000 swords, after that you can add a ram and use the siege mode which makes your clearing much more effective.


    >Troops vs buildings
    While the units have no immediate return to them, you can use them to clear out the robbers and the faster and with fewer losses you do it then more profit you get. Additionally while a field will indeed increase your income it will also be a significant investment upfront and takes few days to pay itself back. If you aren't certain on what's best for you, try to keep things in balance, build some units every day (especially scouts) and invest the other resources into your buildings and fields. It also depends on your situation in the game, if you feel your kingdom is strong then making bit less defense and more buildings should be ok and if your kingdom doesn't look too good getting some units out should be bigger priority.


    As a gaul you don't have to worry too much about your defense as most people will be highly discouraged from attacking you because of the trapper and your cranny capacity is bigger if you do get raided. Units will of course still be needed but you aren't in such immediate danger as romans and teutons. Make sure to build enough scouts so you aren't easy pickings though.


    >Second village timing.
    Settlers are indeed pretty expensive but there are lot of quests to help you out. Don't worry though, with adventures (which can give resources) and killing robbers the wait for the resources most likely won't be quite 24h and once you do get your 3rd settler built you get a quest reward that is about the price of the last settler + another reward for actually settling a new village. The new village itself will help a lot as well so building the settlers is definitely worth it. You can also use the second village if you need to switch kingdoms should your current king be inactive for example.


    On the topic of field payouts In this guide I recommended lvl 5 fields while you went up to lvl 7's which gives much better income but you also had to pay for the fields as well. It's not a bad strategy though you simply trade some time on the second village for better starter village. The cost of upgrading a woodcutter from lvl 5 to lvl 7 is about 8700 resources while the production increase is about 40 to 45 depending on your oasis. That means it takes 8 days for this field to pay off it's build cost (though this improves as you unlock the sawmill building and improve your oasis bonuses and the quest rewards could also be subtracted out making for about 5 day payoff time).

    Settlers can be trained in the residence or the palace. I recommend the residence for the first village as it's lot cheaper :)
    You will also have few quests to help you out the first time you build one and train the settlers

    The defense increase is fairly minuscule and won't turn any actual fights around, though it can be effective against small raids. If you like you can examine the defense points in the battle simulator, but for reference the lvl 10 provides 200 defense points which is about the same as 4-5 unupgraded phalanx and the lvl 20 version is 800 points (worth about 16 to 20 phalanx). This power is of course boosted by walls and ditch but as you might imagine having the effective power of maybe 10 fully upgraded and hero boosted phalanx isn't much.


    That being said residence has other benefits
    1) it produces nice culture
    2) it makes your village more resistance to being chiefed (the enemy has to destroy the residence first)
    3) if you later need the residence to make settlers or chiefs or such you have to rebuild it and you can't gold it up either


    Residence is usually quite high on my "replace when needed" list though as the chief protection is questionable at best and the culture production is nice but usually by that point I don't mind losing some culture generation to put up a granary or a great stable for example. The third benefit is only useful if you have free slots or plan to chief from yourself at some point.


    My verdict: Remove if you need the space



    Other buildings you might want to remove are:
    Smithy (once you have researched all the upgrades you need)
    Academy (once all the units are built)
    Crannies (if any)

    @Jak I think you misunderstood.
    1 cropper per account limit does nothing to stop people from getting that one cropper by multi accounting which is the biggest problem of moving croppers to start out with.

    @Jak there is lots to gain, it allows people who didn't get croppers to multi account them inside their kingdoms like it's pizza delivery, that is the main issue and it still works even if there was 1 cropper per account limit.

    The yellow kingdom area (called borders) emanates from all active treasuries of the king and dukes (and later vice king as well) and can include oasis that are in direct contact with existing border (corner to corner is fine for that as well)


    The maximum reach of the borders is determined by the population of the treasury village. The maximum borders increase when the village reaches 100, 250, 500 and 1000 population. When there are multiple treasuries in the area and the borders are bit confusing you can check the maximum spread by hovering over any treasury. Pictured below is the maximum spread of the borders from single village. Notice the wood+crop oasis in the top left area which has been included in the borders as the player has captured it)


    When there are more than one treasury competing for any single tile (such as different kingdoms early game or even overlapping king and duke area) then who controls that tile is determined by influence. Influence is based on distance to the treasury, the treasury village population and then number of treasuries inside. Sometimes competing treasuries cause the area to be less than the maximum but no matter if there is or is not competition the area won't ever reach beyond this maximum area.


    Compare your location to the maximum area shown below and you will know if your village will be in reach or not



    The flags are language flags, for most part they just happen to match national flags as well but English, Arabic and Spanish especially have lot of folks not from those countries
    I would also say that hiding your timezone behind a bit of ambiguity is just good.

    To answer the first question, the reason why you need more TT's to not lose any is because casualties are percentage based. The units don't have any HP, the system simply takes into account the fighting power of defense and offense side and then assigns loss percentage based on that. As you can see in your image the larger TT stack with more total attack power gets lower casualty percentage but since the stack is bigger the -1 keeps on biting for longer. The stronger the unit the less units you need for any particular attack power and as a result the minimum threshold of death increases
    For example if you were using fully upgraded EC's you would only need 5 to not lose anything. In this scenario your army takes 9% casualties but because 9% of 5 is less than 0.5 it just rounds down to 0 losses.



    Also unit strength doesn't much matter for raids since you either raid villages without residences, you take the residence out before farming or you are willing to lose the 1 unit to raid successfully.
    Since the grey isn't exactly going to defend itself you might as well remove the residence with some catapults for easy farming.




    With the balance of power being very close the system assigns a 48% casualty percentage but since 48% is less than one unit on both stacks, all units survive

    @Triptox#EN There is no official announcement but they time is always the same, day 40 for the tier 2 gear and day 80 for the tier 3, you can check the auction house on these days to confirm new items are popping up if you want to be sure as well :)

    Fancy idea but I don't like it for 2 reasons


    1) It makes it so that bigger teams have even bigger advantage than they do now (especially the ones with lot of gold spenders)
    2) It makes attacking even more difficult than it is now


    Right now I think think attacking is bit too difficult and the only way to really succeed in offense is either by being significantly larger so you can sustain the attrition warfare longer or by utilizing lot of fakes. Incidentally lot of fakes is one of the tools smaller team can utilize to beat a bigger teams defense number advantage. With this change it would make it so that not only do you have to scale the number of fakes to the enemy size, you would have to scale the size of the fakes to enemy member count as well. This creates a nasty double dip and exponentially increases the cost of offense operations based on the enemy size when right now the relation is mostly linear.


    Lets take an example. Lets say that you are confident that right now your offense operation is capable of taking out enemy defense and reaching the goal (be it chief, cata waves or treasures) trough a force that is approximately worth 10 enemy players. This means if you attack a kingdom with 10 players you would need 2 targets to have about a 50% chance of success in your operation (one fake and one real). Against a kingdom of 50 you would instead need 10 targets (9 fakes and one real) as the enemy is capable of defending with 5 of these 10 man blocks on 5 separate targets. The cost of these 2 operations would hence be 50 (lets use round numbers for convenience) in fake units per player and 450 per player
    Now lets imagine that out of 10 players there are 2 that are both online and capable of using a spyglass worth of 10 units lets compare the 2 situations again. In the assault against 10 players you would need about 70 units in fakes now since you can assume 2 additional heroes will be used to look at your army meaning that instead of 50 you need 70 per target. Now this isn't so bad. Against the kingdom of 50 however you need 150 units per target as there are potentially 10 extra heroes that will attempt to scout you out. Now the cost for a single player is 1350 for this operation just in fakes
    This even gets worse if you assume more active players, larger kingdom, longer travel time, more gold users and the fact that real spyglass works up to 25 units


    Sure the enemies probably won't have time to check every village if you send 10 attacks like in the above example but they will be able to scout at least a couple and if those villages are revealed then your entire operation might be in ruins (this is why you fake with 45 even though you are pretty sure the enemy doesn't have maxed out spyglass because if they get one, even one visible fake might ruin an offense operation for everyone)


    This isn't even taking into account problems like multi accounting or how large treasuries would have 10 heroes just sitting there meaning even the least active members are able to effectively contribute to this strategy





    Even though I'm bashing on the idea a bit, I would actually prefer if there was less fakes in the game, the fantasy of army vs army, man vs man (or woman) is really powerful one. The reality of modern attacking against a competent enemy is that it mostly boils down to luck, either enemy makes a mistake or you have to guess and that's not as fun fantasy, it doesn't feel that great when you are the one doing the attacking either when you know that enemy has to defend at random. This change would naturally force that kind of situation (fakes without hundreds, possibly even thousand troops would be useless so might as well just attack full force), but it does nothing to change the inherent balance of power between defense and offense, which in this game is "if you know 100% where the attack lands you are almost guaranteed to win unless the enemy is significantly larger than you are". I just feel this isn't the way to achieve that but rather changes that drive the game more towards smaller kingdoms and more skill.

    Test server is as the name suggests a testing ground for new changes to kingdoms.


    The 2 main differences between a normal round and a test round is that
    1) Test server can end at any moment and could contain more bugs and new features might have issues that are fixed for the proper servers
    2) Everyone gets a set amount of gold semi regularly (especially if there are some nice posts for the gold fairy!)


    Reason number 2 is why some people prefer the test server to normal rounds as it does make everyone stand on much even grounds and allows people who otherwise couldn't buy gold to experiment with gold features
    Reason number 1 is why it's not recommend for beginners as it might be pretty sad to see a round end prematurely which can happen on test


    Additionally test is a speed round so it would be better if you compare it to a comX3. Speed or lack of speed can be critical for some players as well. Personally I prefer to stick to the slow rounds but there are others who never play the slow rounds as well. So if you like the speed rounds maybe give test a go, if you detest them test isn't for you :D