|
|
Post by Iron Duke on May 13, 2019 12:55:56 GMT
How do they work exactly please?
How much should John be for example with full discount?
|
|
|
|
Post by Seger on May 13, 2019 13:22:25 GMT
How do they work exactly please? How much should John be for example with full discount? with each lv you get 10% discount ( with the First you unlock them ) 1755-50%=877,5. so john is with all discount 877/878 |
|
|
|
Discounts
May 13, 2019 14:13:31 GMT
via mobile
Post by stoic on May 13, 2019 14:13:31 GMT
How do they work exactly please? How much should John be for example with full discount? But you have to be patient to get 50%. Last missions are quite tough and some planning is needed... |
|
|
|
Post by Seger on May 13, 2019 14:28:40 GMT
How do they work exactly please? How much should John be for example with full discount? But you have to be patient to get 50%. Last missions are quite tough and some planning is needed... indeed and most of the generals with discount aren't that good. |
|
|
|
Post by stoic on May 13, 2019 15:44:50 GMT
But you have to be patient to get 50%. Last missions are quite tough and some planning is needed... indeed and most of the generals with discount aren't that good. Well, it is debatable especially in case of John. I completed the game using him as my second Artillery general (together with Alex). It is really impressive how his two terrain bonuses stack together. This time I plan to build an Infantry lineup, so Lannes now on my list as well. But probably Sophia is better than John. And a pair Alex I-Mahmud II is also an attractive choice (or, maybe, even a trio for those who have Napoleon). |
|
|
|
Post by Iron Duke on May 13, 2019 16:03:55 GMT
Thanks both.
|
|
|
|
Post by Seger on May 13, 2019 17:10:30 GMT
indeed and most of the generals with discount aren't that good. Well, it is debatable especially in case of John. I completed the game using him as my second Artillery general (together with Alex). It is really impressive how his two terrain bonuses stack together. This time I plan to build an Infantry lineup, so Lannes now on my list as well. But probably Sophia is better than John. And a pair Alex I-Mahmud II is also an attractive choice (or, maybe, even a trio for those who have Napoleon). they are good but you just don't need them |
|
|
|
Discounts
May 13, 2019 19:48:01 GMT
via mobile
Post by stoic on May 13, 2019 19:48:01 GMT
Well, it is debatable especially in case of John. I completed the game using him as my second Artillery general (together with Alex). It is really impressive how his two terrain bonuses stack together. This time I plan to build an Infantry lineup, so Lannes now on my list as well. But probably Sophia is better than John. And a pair Alex I-Mahmud II is also an attractive choice (or, maybe, even a trio for those who have Napoleon). they are good but you just don't need them It really depends... For example, what to do with our Artillery generals (especially if we don't have Napoleon)? I recall it was a hot debate. Many players bought Kutuzov, but one good Artillery general without support of Artillery experts was of little help even in the middle game. I was among those players who quite early recognized Alex's potential. He was a blue tier general and had only 3 skills, but with some upgrades he was very helpful on the battlefield. But what to do next? Well, Mahmud II is very similar to Alex in many respects, but his Desert fighting was a very situational skill (useless 97% of the time). So, maybe, another general? Sophia looks great, but that means we loose her as a princess. And that is not a minor issue because in some Crimean war missions (including the last one) we can deploy more than one princess. And Sophia is only second to Louise. So, maybe, John is not such a bad idea after all. 1. He is cheap. 2. He doesn't have weak skills. 3. He has unique ability - his two terrain bonuses stack together. So with support of one Artillery expert he can do wonders on the battlefield when used properly. |
|
|
|
Post by Seger on May 13, 2019 19:57:15 GMT
It really depends... For example, what to do with our Artillery generals (especially if we don't have Napoleon)? I recall it was a hot debate. Many players bought Kutuzov, but one good Artillery general without support of Artillery experts was of little help even in the middle game. I was among those players who quite early recognized Alex's potential. He was a blue tier general and had only 3 skills, but with some upgrades he was very helpful on the battlefield. But what to do next? Well, Mahmud II is very similar to Alex in many respects, but his Desert fighting was a very situational skill (useless 97% of the time). So, maybe, another general? Sophia looks great, but that means we loose her as a princess. And that is not a minor issue because in some Crimean war missions (including the last one) we can deploy more than one princess. And Sophia is only second to Louise. So, maybe, John is not such a bad idea after all. 1. He is cheap. 2. He doesn't have weak skills. 3. He has unique ability - his two terrain bonuses stack together. So with support of one Artillery expert he can do wonders on the battlefield when used properly. Mahmud is better then John but i get your point he is good and you don't need the best one good is good enough. |
|
|
|
Post by stoic on May 13, 2019 20:20:12 GMT
It really depends... For example, what to do with our Artillery generals (especially if we don't have Napoleon)? I recall it was a hot debate. Many players bought Kutuzov, but one good Artillery general without support of Artillery experts was of little help even in the middle game. I was among those players who quite early recognized Alex's potential. He was a blue tier general and had only 3 skills, but with some upgrades he was very helpful on the battlefield. But what to do next? Well, Mahmud II is very similar to Alex in many respects, but his Desert fighting was a very situational skill (useless 97% of the time). So, maybe, another general? Sophia looks great, but that means we loose her as a princess. And that is not a minor issue because in some Crimean war missions (including the last one) we can deploy more than one princess. And Sophia is only second to Louise. So, maybe, John is not such a bad idea after all. 1. He is cheap. 2. He doesn't have weak skills. 3. He has unique ability - his two terrain bonuses stack together. So with support of one Artillery expert he can do wonders on the battlefield when used properly. Mahmud is better then John but i get your point he is good and you don't need the best one good is good enough. Yep, especially if the price is right. The same about Lannes. Is Bismarck better than Lannes? Well... Lannes has his trumps, but it would be ridiculous if Bismarck were inferior to Lannes. Yet, if we compare the price then the situation changes drastically. Is Bismarck twice as good as Lannes? No way! Therefore relation price/quality is always important in ET games. |
|
|
|
Discounts
May 13, 2019 20:41:50 GMT
via mobile
Post by Seger on May 13, 2019 20:41:50 GMT
Mahmud is better then John but i get your point he is good and you don't need the best one good is good enough. Yep, especially if the price is right. The same about Lannes. Is Bismarck better than Lannes? Well... Lannes has his trumps, but it would be ridiculous if Bismarck were inferior to Lannes. Yet, if we compare the price then the situation changes drastically. Is Bismarck twice as good as Lannes? No way! Therefore relation price/quality is always important in ET games. But still you already have the three aura inf gens. So lannes is useless even if you want 4 inf generals you can take Washington, suvorov of bolivar. |
|
|
|
Post by stoic on May 13, 2019 20:52:47 GMT
Yep, especially if the price is right. The same about Lannes. Is Bismarck better than Lannes? Well... Lannes has his trumps, but it would be ridiculous if Bismarck were inferior to Lannes. Yet, if we compare the price then the situation changes drastically. Is Bismarck twice as good as Lannes? No way! Therefore relation price/quality is always important in ET games. But still you already have the three aura inf gens. So lannes is useless even if you want 4 inf generals you can take Washington, suvorov of bolivar. I personally want 6  So Lannes is on my list, because I need another cavalry killer (besides Karl). But I agree, of course, that there are better Infantry generals (even without Infantry masters). |
|
|
|
Discounts
May 13, 2019 21:04:45 GMT
via mobile
Post by Seger on May 13, 2019 21:04:45 GMT
But still you already have the three aura inf gens. So lannes is useless even if you want 4 inf generals you can take Washington, suvorov of bolivar. I personally want 6 So Lannes is on my list, because I need another cavalry killer (besides Karl). But I agree, of course, that there are better Infantry generals (even without Infantry masters). 6 infantry? That must look impressive, you're playing the game for the second time right? Wich do you already have and what's going to be your composition? |
|
|
|
Discounts
May 13, 2019 21:34:42 GMT
via mobile
Post by silvercreek on May 13, 2019 21:34:42 GMT
How do they work exactly please? How much should John be for example with full discount? John will be 50% cheaper. And with his terrain skills that's a great deal. You will need to upgrade him though. |
|
|
|
Post by stoic on May 14, 2019 2:58:14 GMT
I personally want 6 So Lannes is on my list, because I need another cavalry killer (besides Karl). But I agree, of course, that there are better Infantry generals (even without Infantry masters). 6 infantry? That must look impressive, you're playing the game for the second time right? Wich do you already have and what's going to be your composition? I had: Murat-Dabrowski Alexander-John Massena-Karl-Barclay-Suvorov. I completed all missions with 3 stars except Siege, The battle of Balaclava and The Baltic campaign. I completed these 3 missions with two stars. Unfortunately, it is close to impossible to complete missions like Balaclava with 3 stars using only 8 free slots. We are allowed to use up to 12 generals in this mission and moreover have ban on using cavalry. So to complete it with 3 stars if you have only 8 men in the team (and a couple of those are cavalry generals) is very unlikely. Therefore now I can be more relaxed (while we are waiting for Rome) and just to play it for fun. My goals are: - to try to complete all naval missions with 3 stars (thus proving that it is possible to win all see battles without an Admiral). - to complete the game with 3 stars for each mission (with only two exceptions - Siege and Balaclava). - and, maybe, to challenge some of new records as well. I decided to make a full use of my 3 Infantry masters this time. So my strategy is to keep all my Infantry generals together whenever possible, while Alexander and Murat will play supportive roles. Most likely my Infantry generals would be: Massena-Karl-Barclay-Suvorov-Bolivar-Lannes. Maybe I will replace Lannes later in the game with someone more suited for see battles (Louise with Tactics master and counterattack could be a decent Admiral, but for reasons mentioned above, I will use her in his primary role as a Princess). On the other hand, Lannes has + 40 damage bonus against cavalry (20+20 and this damage is not absorbed by defense), Plain fighting and he is another city's cracker (alongside Massena and Barclay). Many players underestimate Tunnel, but I personally rate it very high. All his 4 skills could be potentially very useful (especially with 3 Infantry masters around) so it is possible that I will keep him until the very end... |
|
So Lannes is on my list, because I need another cavalry killer (besides Karl). But I agree, of course, that there are better Infantry generals (even without Infantry masters).
