|
|
Post by ks on Jan 20, 2021 2:43:30 GMT
ks, what I meant to say was that Accurate works only on artillery - that I know. But if your general is on artillery, siege master works only on the cities, whereas if he has accurate, that skill works for all enemy units. I am talking in the viewpoint of the general, not the unit used. Ok I see. What I said originally is siege master PLUS explosives is better than just accurate. Accurate is better than either one individually, but together it is weaker. Thatβs why Kutaisov is a better artillerist than Yermolov, all stars equal. |
|
|
|
Post by John Marston on Jan 25, 2021 1:51:30 GMT
How about Wittgenstein? 5 stars on infantry and 4 on cavalry. That is not bad, but he dosen't have the necessary skills to be a good hybrid I think.
|
|
|
|
Post by ks on Jan 25, 2021 2:36:31 GMT
How about Wittgenstein? 5 stars on infantry and 4 on cavalry. That is not bad, but he dosen't have the necessary skills to be a good hybrid I think. Yep, he has no useful skills at all. The inf/cav market is scant though. Out of the princesses, Lan, Sakurako, and Sophia have potential, but require a lot of investment (Lan a bit less). Besides princesses, thereβs Ney I guess, and Lannes/Poni in tier 3 |
|
|
|
Post by John Marston on Jan 25, 2021 2:58:31 GMT
What are the best tier 2 hybrids?
|
|
|
|
Post by ks on Jan 25, 2021 3:25:21 GMT
What are the best tier 2 hybrids? Yermolov for art/inf Ushakov for navy/art Savary for navy/cav Ney for cav/inf Ney for cav/art? (Just use Sophia) There are not many, you are far better off using princesses as hybrids |
|
|
|
Post by John Marston on Jan 25, 2021 3:30:13 GMT
What are the best tier 2 hybrids? Yermolov for art/inf Ushakov for navy/art Savary for navy/cav Ney for cav/inf Ney for cav/art? (Just use Sophia) There are not many, you are far better off using princesses as hybrids They maybe good but not the best of tier 2 though. I feel that that Maria, Fathima and Sophia should take you through the first couple of campaign. In my case, I am now struck at the last few HRE missions. I think I will go for kate and Isabella now. |
|
|
|
Post by ππ³π°π΅π΄π¬πΊ on Jan 26, 2021 21:38:03 GMT
ks, what I meant to say was that Accurate works only on artillery - that I know. But if your general is on artillery, siege master works only on the cities, whereas if he has accurate, that skill works for all enemy units. I am talking in the viewpoint of the general, not the unit used. Ok I see. What I said originally is siege master PLUS explosives is better than just accurate. Accurate is better than either one individually, but together it is weaker. Thatβs why Kutaisov is a better artillerist than Yermolov, all stars equal. I read your post right now. I just explained two postings ago in another thread, why I valuate Accurate > Explosives+Siege Master: [...] Like Sophia, Sakurako starts also with two stars:
Sophia's Explosives raises the netMaximum +6 the netAverage +3
Sophia will loose in more than half the fieldbattles 5%-20%- due to topographic evasion (hills, trees)
Sophia looses on non 1798 conquests 1-2% on every fight
Sophia gets +50 against forts, Better: +20 - +50% Some forts are on a hex with a hill or tree |
|
|
|
Post by ks on Jan 26, 2021 21:56:40 GMT
Ok I see. What I said originally is siege master PLUS explosives is better than just accurate. Accurate is better than either one individually, but together it is weaker. Thatβs why Kutaisov is a better artillerist than Yermolov, all stars equal. I read your post right now. I just explained two postings ago in another thread, why I valuate Accurate > Explosives+Siege Master: [...] Like Sophia, Sakurako starts also with two stars:
Sophia's Explosives raises the netMaximum +6 the netAverage +3
Sophia will loose in more than half the fieldbattles 5%-20%- due to topographic evasion (hills, trees)
Sophia looses on non 1798 conquests 1-2% on every fight
Sophia gets +50 against forts, Better: +20 - +50% Some forts are on a hex with a hill or tree I guess it depends on how you use them. Artillery attack cities a lot, especially if itβs siege or rocket. In the field with <10% evasion, Sophia will still win |
|
|
|
Post by ππ³π°π΅π΄π¬πΊ on Jan 26, 2021 22:41:01 GMT
I read your post right now. I just explained two postings ago in another thread, why I valuate Accurate > Explosives+Siege Master: [...] Like Sophia, Sakurako starts also with two stars:
Sophia's Explosives raises the netMaximum +6 the netAverage +3
Sophia will loose in more than half the fieldbattles 5%-20%- due to topographic evasion (hills, trees)
Sophia looses on non 1798 conquests 1-2% on every fight
Sophia gets +50 against forts, Better: +20 - +50% Some forts are on a hex with a hill or tree I guess it depends on how you use them. Artillery attack cities a lot, especially if itβs siege or rocket. In the field with <10% evasion, Sophia will still win +3 netAverage damage is not so much. Except forts this is her only advantage. In the American conquest this is exact what untrained sophia looses every fight. Siege Master has no effect on the hidden map evasion. With just 5% evasion she has already a lower average than Sakurako. Throw Sakurako on your Siege and attack a city - only 6HP is the average advantage for Sophia. It is the unit that causes high dammages - not the general! And again:Only in case of 0 evasion, not all cities are placed on flat and empty fields! (load another conquest and check the hex - the topography is always the same (map) - not the location of cities) |
|
|
|
Post by John Marston on Jan 27, 2021 1:53:31 GMT
"Sophia looses on non 1798 conquests 1-2% on every fight". Why?
|
|
|
|
Post by ππ³π°π΅π΄π¬πΊ on Jan 27, 2021 8:56:19 GMT
"Sophia looses on non 1798 conquests 1-2% on every fight". Why? This is called hidden evasion. Mapwide 1%-2% (or 1-3% ?) Accurate eliminates it, Siege Master not. Invisible, but I could test it once with conquests. Iirc 1775 had the highest, 1806 1% I think. The topographic evasion of forts can be checked by clicing on it - 1798 and 1815 almost all forts are without, 1806 and 1809 it is qite common that forts can have evasion. |
|
|
|
Post by John Marston on Jan 27, 2021 9:20:01 GMT
"Sophia looses on non 1798 conquests 1-2% on every fight". Why? This is called hidden evasion. Mapwide 1%-2% (or 1-3% ?) Accurate eliminates it, Siege Master not. Invisible, but I could test it once with conquests. Iirc 1775 had the highest, 1806 1% I think. The topographic evasion of forts can be checked by clicing on it - 1798 and 1815 almost all forts are without, 1806 and 1809 it is qite common that forts can have evasion. That looks interesting. How did you find it? |
|
|
|
Post by Erich von Manstein on Jan 27, 2021 10:18:21 GMT
"Sophia looses on non 1798 conquests 1-2% on every fight". Why? This is called hidden evasion. Mapwide 1%-2% (or 1-3% ?) Accurate eliminates it, Siege Master not. Invisible, but I could test it once with conquests. Iirc 1775 had the highest, 1806 1% I think. The topographic evasion of forts can be checked by clicing on it - 1798 and 1815 almost all forts are without, 1806 and 1809 it is qite common that forts can have evasion. I think it might be higher. Probably up to 10%? |
|
|
|
Post by ππ³π°π΅π΄π¬πΊ on Jan 27, 2021 11:33:58 GMT
This is called hidden evasion. Mapwide 1%-2% (or 1-3% ?) Accurate eliminates it, Siege Master not. Invisible, but I could test it once with conquests. Iirc 1775 had the highest, 1806 1% I think. The topographic evasion of forts can be checked by clicing on it - 1798 and 1815 almost all forts are without, 1806 and 1809 it is qite common that forts can have evasion. I think it might be higher. Probably up to 10%? Wow! This is huge. I thought less. But you can feel it. I can read the btl - files but I have not the info where it is coded. 10% is much worse than I thought, poor Sophia. |
|
|
|
Post by John Marston on Jan 27, 2021 11:39:25 GMT
I think it might be higher. Probably up to 10%? Wow! This is huge. I thought less. But you can feel it. I can read the btl - files but I have not the info where it is coded. 10% is much worse than I thought, poor Sophia. Let's hand it to the expert Darth Vader |
|
