twenty-five
Guest
No you can't sniping is a method to halt attackers, not to stop them as for recapping well that's just a dumb method to rely on as a defensive method, it's useful, yes, but only in specific circumstances.
No you can't sniping is a method to halt attackers, not to stop them as for recapping well that's just a dumb method to rely on as a defensive method, it's useful, yes, but only in specific circumstances.
Muldie325
Guest
If you're relying on recapping then whenever outnumbered you'll lose due to being unable to produce nobles as fast.
DeletedUser
Guest
Well, it's not that hard really. Sniping takes out about 90% of the trains. Of course cats can hit you pretty bad, but if you always keep your enemy front under fire (since you have rather a lot of offense), you can take out 90% of the enemy shortrange cat attacks. For the longer range cats, the AM will have rebuilt all buildings before the new cats arrive.
Also, as I said before, I used an example of when I had 43 mil. So you don't usually really have front with more than 4 enemies at a time, which makes recapping a splendid method when you can take out most trains with sniping.
Really, it works for me on most occasions. Not saying it works on any occasion, but as was said before a thousand times: TW is a game of adaption.
Also, as I said before, I used an example of when I had 43 mil. So you don't usually really have front with more than 4 enemies at a time, which makes recapping a splendid method when you can take out most trains with sniping.
Really, it works for me on most occasions. Not saying it works on any occasion, but as was said before a thousand times: TW is a game of adaption.
Muldie325
Guest
It's survivable if you'r incredibly active and your enemies aren't that great. But survivable does not always mean its a good option. Defending with proper defence is 100 times more efficient than just sniping and recapping. Proper attacks are a lot more efficient than just showering your enemies with nukes.
The only argument against is that most late game players don't strive for efficiency.. that's their problem. This is a discussion on how to play PROPERLY.
The only argument against is that most late game players don't strive for efficiency.. that's their problem. This is a discussion on how to play PROPERLY.
Last edited:
DeletedUser
Guest
When under heavy attack, and outnumbered, you'll have to be very active either way.
Also, you call it survivable. However, this is in the situation where you're under constant attack when being outnumbered. Of course, I am not always under heavy fire, since I'm not always at war, and the large operations tend to not last really long when there is no progress being made.
And when not having a large scale op against you, I think it's rather obvious that 95% offense gives better options to attack someone than 30-40% off.
But I agree, if you'd always be under heavy fire, no pause in between attacks, there is no tribal support whatsoever and you have front with 3 or more enemies, my tactic is probably not the most effective.
Also, you call it survivable. However, this is in the situation where you're under constant attack when being outnumbered. Of course, I am not always under heavy fire, since I'm not always at war, and the large operations tend to not last really long when there is no progress being made.
And when not having a large scale op against you, I think it's rather obvious that 95% offense gives better options to attack someone than 30-40% off.
But I agree, if you'd always be under heavy fire, no pause in between attacks, there is no tribal support whatsoever and you have front with 3 or more enemies, my tactic is probably not the most effective.
Muldie325
Guest
Because of increasing noble prices you should be making a steady 2 nobles per day at speed 1, once the effects of farming, and village maintenance costs become negligible. Your nukes rebuild in 2 weeks, giving you 3700 divided by 14 = 264 nukes per day.. so 132 nukes per noble.
Does it really take you 132 nukes to conquer a village? Is it really worth it?
What's the cost of upgrading a 26 point vill to 10k points? About the same as 3 nukes. So it's costing you 43 times the amount of resources to conquer a built vill rather than building up a barb.
Yes this is a simplification.. but the amount (43 times) is incredibly significant.
Does it really take you 132 nukes to conquer a village? Is it really worth it?
What's the cost of upgrading a 26 point vill to 10k points? About the same as 3 nukes. So it's costing you 43 times the amount of resources to conquer a built vill rather than building up a barb.
Yes this is a simplification.. but the amount (43 times) is incredibly significant.
DeletedUser54677
Guest
And you do this by have level 25 warehouses across the board at 10m points? :lol:
I'm not saying that efficiency doesn't have a place, I'm saying that there's a point as the world gets older when it becomes moot. I'd gladly waste 100+ nukes on a single village if it was along the frontline of a war. With 10m points, I'd have nukes being rebuilt often enough that they're just simply not missed. For the record, it's my personal opinion that accounts that swing 75% or more towards O or D aren't usually effective. If you're heavy on O, you have to dodge because your defense isn't capable of stacking yourself save for few key villages. Likewise, when you turtle D to extremes, you aren't able to attack nearly as often or as much (except fakes), which is one of the most fun aspects of TW.
When it's early world, you don't have the luxury of expendable firepower or defense. You literally have to pick and choose your battles carefully, or you risk losing weeks, even months of work. Playing 'properly', as you say, is more or less a requirement to get ahead during startup through the first few months. It's kind of the same reason you don't farm when you hit 10m, 20m, 30m (because there are some masochists who still farm at those stages, I'm talking about normal players :icon_wink
. It becomes redundant. Your villages are usually making enough resources to supply your entire account without with some swapping of resources. With a higher warehouses, you're able to contain and distribute more resources.
FYI, since I know there'd be someone who tries saying "It's the markets that distribute!", I mean that the resources wouldn't have been sent because they wouldn't have been there to begin with, being redlined and wasted.
I'm not saying that efficiency doesn't have a place, I'm saying that there's a point as the world gets older when it becomes moot. I'd gladly waste 100+ nukes on a single village if it was along the frontline of a war. With 10m points, I'd have nukes being rebuilt often enough that they're just simply not missed. For the record, it's my personal opinion that accounts that swing 75% or more towards O or D aren't usually effective. If you're heavy on O, you have to dodge because your defense isn't capable of stacking yourself save for few key villages. Likewise, when you turtle D to extremes, you aren't able to attack nearly as often or as much (except fakes), which is one of the most fun aspects of TW.
When it's early world, you don't have the luxury of expendable firepower or defense. You literally have to pick and choose your battles carefully, or you risk losing weeks, even months of work. Playing 'properly', as you say, is more or less a requirement to get ahead during startup through the first few months. It's kind of the same reason you don't farm when you hit 10m, 20m, 30m (because there are some masochists who still farm at those stages, I'm talking about normal players :icon_wink
. It becomes redundant. Your villages are usually making enough resources to supply your entire account without with some swapping of resources. With a higher warehouses, you're able to contain and distribute more resources. FYI, since I know there'd be someone who tries saying "It's the markets that distribute!", I mean that the resources wouldn't have been sent because they wouldn't have been there to begin with, being redlined and wasted.
Muldie325
Guest
Stacking 100 vills is a hell of a lot less demanding than sniping 100 trains. There's no timing involved, and they have to rebuild their nukes, so they wont be resending right away as they would if sniped.
No.. under a constant attack when being outnumbered this strategy is not survivable at all.
I don't find it fun. :/
I find working out the best ways to do things fun. The actual carrying it out is tedious.
Last edited:
DeletedUser54677
Guest
Fair enough. I thought I prefaced that statement by saying I thought it was fun. :icon_redface:
twenty-five
Guest
Sniping is not a long term method to defense, you lose loyalty and the wall. Trying to snipe every train as a method of defense will result in villages being lost. Sniping is used when you can't stack, not as a primary method to defend.
Recapping means you now have a village with - no troops, no wall and 25 loyalty.
The fact it "works" for some occasions does not mean it is even good for those occasions.
mattcurr
Guest
Ughh useless arguments had people read they would have seen that was an excerpt from early world building strategies. Meaning all your arguments are dumb. Did any of you read the initial posts or going with the talking from ass approach?
Strange I play 80% D villages and am always top 5 ODA:icon_confused: TBH I have no clue what everyone with 50% O does with their O can't be all that much. Though I also refuse to take blue villages in nearly all situations.
Last edited:
DeletedUser
Guest
Is there in this thread a description of the so-called counterattack technique? I missed it.
DeletedUser93439
Guest
You must mean backtiming?
