The TeachU TW Textbook

mattcurr

Part of the Furniture
not everything is about the most efficient method - you need to go with the play style that suits you, and the situation you are in.
A lot of it is simply wrong.

Just a random sampling of things that are wrong, I literally just scrolled down and saw a list of things so decided to correct that section. If I wanted to correct everything wrong in this guide it would literally take me a day.

[spoil]
1) Hiding places are largely useless. Don’t bother with them and preferably demolish them on sight.
aside from rebuilding walls there are many defensive purposes to hp's





2) There is no need to build a HQ past level 20. Its only points you don’t need.
LoL, do I even have to explain why this is wrong?

3) You don’t need to build a siege workshop to max. Level 5 is often more than you will ever need.
Not really, depends on what you want especially in early world you need some flexibility in your village some cats, rebuilding rams and attacking with a weakened army because you have to. It is a great advantage to build rams quickly
4) A max pointed village isn't a good thing. In fact often times you shouldn't be much above 10k points per village MAX.
We got one thing right so far!

5) It isn't how many points a village is that determines its worth; rather the troop count is the deciding factor.
Not really, you can sacrifice troops to get a higher rax and stable level which in turn actually means you have a more sustainable army.
6) Things you should max without fail: Barracks, Farm, Warehouse, Mines
Ehh missing stable?! And why the heck would you max your warehouse talk about wasted points.[/spoil]
 
Last edited:

Muldie325

Contributing Poster
Max warehouse is needed late game if you're logging in only once every couple of days, otherwise I agree, 25 is sufficient.
 

bobby turnip

Guest
A lot of it is simply wrong.
i agree - but the main point of it still stands true. adapt to your situation.

[spoil]And why the heck would you max your warehouse talk about wasted points.[/spoil]
Ive seriously never understood this argument. Points mean very little. The warehouse does not cost me any troops. To go from level 25 to level 30 costs me roughly 7 coins worth of clay (ignoring other resources, as clay tends to be what you have a shortage of past 100 villages).

So, if on my 10m acc, i had never upped any warehouses off people i noble, if none of them were already at level 30, i would have another 5.6 nobles to use. cool! Or, i would have stored an extra 5589 coins

but wait. if i go and kill 1 of my nukes, that is roughly 20 coins worth of clay. I tend to play at around a 2:1 O:D ratio, so i have about 650 nukes currently. If i kill ALL my nukes off, just once, thats about 13000 coins. So just by killing an extra 300 nukes, i would already be behind where i was if i had kept lvl 25 warehouse.

Lets not forget the obvious advantage it gives you at late game. I personally prefer to store my nobles up and go nuts in 1 big run every 2 weeks or so. As my nukes take just under 1 week to build (2 speed world), i tend to get a large amount of iron build up where my nukes are lying at home, ie, i have 200k iron and 15k clay in 1 village right now, as we speak as the nuke has not died recently. The storage capacity of a level 25 wrehouse is: 142373. I would have red resources.

Further - as i mentioned earlier, i play a 2 speed world. world 50 to be precise. level 30 mines make 4800 resources per hour. in 1 day, thats 115200 resources. Like a lot of players - i MR and mint once daily. Just by letting 30k iron build up in my village, the next time i come to mint and MR - red resources.

ALSO. ive just taken a few very isolated villages in enemy territory, stacked them to hell and i am supplying them with resources as much as i can to build troops and nobles. Im sure you can tell where i am going with this as well. I can not be on all day. So i send what i can from the closest villages (which are 7 hours by merchant), then do other stuff. i am going to get red resources unless i am careful there, and that is 1 area i don't want that to happen.

For the record, i am aware of resource balancing. However, on a 10m account, this can be fairly tedious, so i do not do it every day. i do it about once every 3 or 4.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

A humble player

Contributing Poster
morale basically counters that argument. At 100 villages, 200 extra points per village is 20000 more points, that makes a difference in morale.
 

KillerKommando

Contributing Poster
If you're at 10m points, morale shouldn't be much of an issue regardless, just send extra nukes. Most players who are at that stage in the game which morale could be used more effectively have been wiped out, those that aren't generally don't make for great attack/noble targets anyways. Not to mention no morale worlds.

If he's at about 1000 villages, I don't think having the equivalent of 1002 is going to make that much of a difference, personally.

I'm with Bobby on this one, maxed warehouses are one of the key things to have on late worlds.
 

A humble player

Contributing Poster
If you're at 10m points, morale shouldn't be much of an issue regardless, just send extra nukes. Most players who are at that stage in the game which morale could be used more effectively have been wiped out, those that aren't generally don't make for great attack/noble targets anyways. Not to mention no morale worlds.

If he's at about 1000 villages, I don't think having the equivalent of 1002 is going to make that much of a difference, personally.

I'm with Bobby on this one, maxed warehouses are one of the key things to have on late worlds.
at 1000 villages, you have the equivalent of 1020, 200000 more points, and of course that is low, since it is closer to 500000 points, or 50 extra villages. (using actual numbers)
 

Muldie325

Contributing Poster
at 1000 villages, you have the equivalent of 1020, 200000 more points, and of course that is low, since it is closer to 500000 points, or 50 extra villages. (using actual numbers)
It's actually closer to 710,000 points or 76.4 extra vills. :p (10,000 - 710 points per vill)

@KK and bobby turnip: Yes, late game players generally play totally inefficiently (You have mentioned at least 4 ways in your posts). But in the early game when people are still playing efficiently the warehouse makes a big difference, regardless of the factor of points, the warehouses cost 4 packets per village, which is the equivalent of 4 villages. That means at 10 villages, you could actually have 13 villages and close to 14. Don't tell me that isn't a big deal.
 

sailAnAsIsihT

Guest
Unless less, like w50, you play a world without morale of course...
 

KillerKommando

Contributing Poster
It's actually closer to 710,000 points or 76.4 extra vills. :p (10,000 - 710 points per vill)

@KK and bobby turnip: Yes, late game players generally play totally inefficiently (You have mentioned at least 4 ways in your posts). But in the early game when people are still playing efficiently the warehouse makes a big difference, regardless of the factor of points, the warehouses cost 4 packets per village, which is the equivalent of 4 villages. That means at 10 villages, you could actually have 13 villages and close to 14. Don't tell me that isn't a big deal.
Which is why Bobby molded his post by saying his account was 10m. I continued that line of thinking.

During startup, it makes absolutely no sense to, that is correct. It's been so long since I've read the original posts, but I don't think that Openeye was saying you should max those first, just that they should be maxed out at some point.


*EDIT*

at 1000 villages, you have the equivalent of 1020, 200000 more points, and of course that is low, since it is closer to 500000 points, or 50 extra villages. (using actual numbers)
Doesn't change my post. If you're that large and morale is still a problem, use more nukes.
 

Muldie325

Contributing Poster
If you're that large and morale is still a problem, use more nukes.
Correction: If you're that large and morale is still a problem, noble something else until they go barb, then noble the barbs. Using more nukes not only costs a lot in terms of resources, but also in rebuilding time that could be used to build defence.
 

KillerKommando

Contributing Poster
Correction: If you're that large and morale is still a problem, noble something else until they go barb, then noble the barbs. Using more nukes not only costs a lot in terms of resources, but also in rebuilding time that could be used to build defence.
That's not really a correction, lol. A lot of the time, players who stick around that late generally intend to stick it out. Nobling their barbs isn't exactly helpful late game, either. Most people just try ending the world as quick as possible around then. :/

AHP posted that morale countered his argument. I posted that morale isn't an issue when a majority of player are above 5m points because they're still at 100% morale, whereas many of the players with morale penalties have barbed long ago. I'm honestly wondering at what point morale actually has enough impact to make it 'not worth it' to nuke someone because of morale. I mean literal points, not metaphorical. (I.E. if he's 10m, how large is someone going to have to be to have it at 75% morale? 50? 30?)

I still stand by my post, though. If a player is 10m points, he should have more than enough nukes to spend, regardless of how inefficient it is to use them.

Also; I misread AHP's numbers before, thought he posted 1000, not 100. That was my bad. :icon_redface:
 

Muldie325

Contributing Poster
I still stand by my post, though. If a player is 10m points, he should have more than enough nukes to spend, regardless of how inefficient it is to use them.
No he shouldn't because he's better off with mostly D.

They may wish to end the world as fast as possible but they also want to win right?
 

KillerKommando

Contributing Poster
In your opinion (and some others), D is a better choice late game. I, personally, had roughly a 2/3 D/O ratio of villages on large, endgame accounts.

But we're getting off the main topic. The warehouse should be maxed late game purely because it's not made to be played every second of every day like startup accounts are (exaggeration, sue me). Nobody with 10m points is going to be rimmed overnight, in a week, or even at all in most cases. There's no need to be on the account unless you're under attack or have some other pressing business like op attacks to send, so most endgame players just let their accounts sit for 12+ hours a day. Not being on for that long, warehouses fill up. Like Bobby pointed out, smaller warehouses force people to have to be online more to send them, or risk losing resources.

Personally, I'd rather have a higher morale penalty late game than bother with that much time on the account.
 

Doctor Jeroen

Guest
No he shouldn't because he's better off with mostly D.

They may wish to end the world as fast as possible but they also want to win right?
I still love bashing... My last large account was 43 mil. I loved having 3700 offensive villages on that account. Just to throw 3700 nukes at someone in one day, and see how they respond... With speed 2 or higher, that does mean he'll probably stack the frontline well, but when catting down his other villages to shreds, keeping up with doing that weekly is indeed rather time-consuming yet very very effective to take down your opponents.

In combination with nobling deep into enemy territory to greatly enlarge their front, they will still have to spread their D, no matter how much defensive units they have... In the end, offense is always the best defense. It just takes a true nolifer to use that playing style...
 

twenty-five

Contributing Poster
But we're getting off the main topic. The warehouse should be maxed late game purely because it's not made to be played every second of every day like startup accounts are (exaggeration, sue me). Nobody with 10m points is going to be rimmed overnight, in a week, or even at all in most cases. There's no need to be on the account unless you're under attack or have some other pressing business like op attacks to send, so most endgame players just let their accounts sit for 12+ hours a day. Not being on for that long, warehouses fill up. Like Bobby pointed out, smaller warehouses force people to have to be online more to send them, or risk losing resources.

Personally, I'd rather have a higher morale penalty late game than bother with that much time on the account.
So yes, you take a real life benefit (time off) but incur an in-game problem (lower morale). That makes the account inefficient, as the warehouse is of no "true" in-game value to you.


in the end, offense is always the best defense.
No it isn't. Your argument for why it is is non-nonsensical, mainly because your argument only mentions attacking - not defending. How would you, with maybe 600-650 D villages defend an account where you have 7 times as many villages to defense as you do nukes (call for, no, more like, demand, tribal support probably). Also if you fake properly there is no need to attack all of their villages at once with nukes to spread defence - they don't know what it is for certain until it's hit. Although granted a fake does no lasting long term damage.
 

KillerKommando

Contributing Poster
So yes, you take a real life benefit (time off) but incur an in-game problem (lower morale). That makes the account inefficient, as the warehouse is of no "true" in-game value to you.
Call it whatever you want, mate. Being inefficient is usually the only way to make any real progress late-game. And yes, it does have a 'true' in-game value, it lets my resources pile up instead of waste themselves. It also lets me pointwhore, apparently. :icon_razz:
 

twenty-five

Contributing Poster
Call it whatever you want, mate. Being inefficient is usually the only way to make any real progress late-game. And yes, it does have a 'true' in-game value, it lets my resources pile up instead of waste themselves. It also lets me pointwhore, apparently. :icon_razz:
Oh, don't get me wrong - I'm lazy myself, I use 30 warehouse sometimes. It does have no ingame value really, letting your res pile up serves no useful purpose beyond laziness which isn't really of ingame value.
 

Doctor Jeroen

Guest
No it isn't. Your argument for why it is is non-nonsensical, mainly because your argument only mentions attacking - not defending. How would you, with maybe 600-650 D villages defend an account where you have 7 times as many villages to defense as you do nukes (call for, no, more like, demand, tribal support probably). Also if you fake properly there is no need to attack all of their villages at once with nukes to spread defence - they don't know what it is for certain until it's hit. Although granted a fake does no lasting long term damage.
Point is, you can easily defend with sniping and recapping without needing more than 100 def. Basically, the only def I do have, is for tribal support at close range. As for the faking: yes, it can be active, but I prefer the lovely effect of catting their villages to shreds :lol:

Honestly, I had this guy with 2300 villages, and he was under 8 mil in points, when I had finished with him. Catting is fun :icon_biggrin:
 

A humble player

Contributing Poster
Point is, you can easily defend with sniping and recapping without needing more than 100 def. Basically, the only def I do have, is for tribal support at close range. As for the faking: yes, it can be active, but I prefer the lovely effect of catting their villages to shreds :lol:

Honestly, I had this guy with 2300 villages, and he was under 8 mil in points, when I had finished with him. Catting is fun :icon_biggrin:
And if someone did that to you with your 100 defense villages at 10 mil :icon_rolleyes:
or whatever the stupid idea you had was?