|
|
Post by SolidLight on Mar 23, 2020 19:36:04 GMT
19th Century
 20th Century (Ironclad)
|
|
|
|
Post by SolidLight on Mar 23, 2020 19:37:50 GMT
That Ironclad used to be called an Aboriginal Clipper too, but they are just basically the same unit. I wish Aboriginal Ironclads had armor, but they don't.
Oh, and I don't actually like them more than destroyers either.
|
|
|
|
Post by Svetozar Boroević von Bojna on Mar 24, 2020 3:11:21 GMT
That Ironclad used to be called an Aboriginal Clipper too, but they are just basically the same unit. I wish Aboriginal Ironclads had armor, but they don't. Oh, and I don't actually like them more than destroyers either. Giving them Heavy Armour actually makes them more proficient in naval battles as navy only deals 100% dmg to H. Armour and 120% to Armour Plate. However this also makes the aboriginal clippers more vulnerable to coastal arty as they deal 135% dmg to H. Armour opposed to 120% to Armour Plate. I mean you don't have a choice if you play as tribal union anyways. |
|
|
|
Post by Nobunaga Oda on Mar 24, 2020 3:28:05 GMT
Honestly, I hardly see any differences between the stats of the 2 ships from different eras.
|
|
|
|
Post by SolidLight on Mar 24, 2020 7:33:20 GMT
That Ironclad used to be called an Aboriginal Clipper too, but they are just basically the same unit. I wish Aboriginal Ironclads had armor, but they don't. Oh, and I don't actually like them more than destroyers either. Giving them Heavy Armour actually makes them more proficient in naval battles as navy only deals 100% dmg to H. Armour and 120% to Armour Plate. However this also makes the aboriginal clippers more vulnerable to coastal arty as they deal 135% dmg to H. Armour opposed to 120% to Armour Plate. I mean you don't have a choice if you play as tribal union anyways. I meant that armor ability that normal Ironclads have, which make them immune to fire. Maybe I should have specified that. |
|
