|
|
Post by STILETT0 on Jun 19, 2021 18:12:43 GMT
I would like to outline a few opinions I have of generals in EW4 that may differ from everyone else:
Yorck is a decent infantry general for his price.
Blucher is overrated
Murat is overrated
Palafox sucks. He is an infantry/cavalry hybrid, but there is little else he has skillwise.
Beresford sucks even more. One infantry skill usually won't cut it.
Andrade is the best general in the game.
Diez obviously sucks
Cotton is a good cavalry general
Radetzky and Dombrowski are exponentially better than Blucher
Why Lannes vs Suvorov? Where is Dobeln for my F2P virgins?
Gazan sucks. Nothing you can do to make him not suck.
Rosenberg is the worst general in the game. Try me, Caradja.
Real content coming later.
|
|
|
|
Post by littlecorporal on Jun 21, 2021 3:36:52 GMT
I would like to outline a few opinions I have of generals in EW4 that may differ from everyone else: Yorck is a decent infantry general for his price. Blucher is overrated Murat is overrated Palafox sucks. He is an infantry/cavalry hybrid, but there is little else he has skillwise. Beresford sucks even more. One infantry skill usually won't cut it. Andrade is the best general in the game. Diez obviously sucks Cotton is a good cavalry general Radetzky and Dombrowski are exponentially better than Blucher Why Lannes vs Suvorov? Where is Dobeln for my F2P virgins? Gazan sucks. Nothing you can do to make him not suck. Rosenberg is the worst general in the game. Try me, Caradja. Real content coming later. We like controversial takes! Andrade was my first general because early in the game I'd play 60+round conquests that involved huge pitched battles between infantry. I would build lots of fortifications so Andrade seemed like a good choice. But really his skills are just extremely limited economic skills. They save resources but only at specific points (wherever Andrade is) for specific purposes (fortifications). Architecture is similar though potentially more valuable because you can upgrade a facility before and after movement. And the resources produced can be used for everything. The value of Architecture decreases as your economy improves, eventually losing all value once accessible facilities are upgraded. Economic expert/ master and the items (Napoleonic code) also only provide a limited benefit (at most an extra city 's worth of income). All that pales in comparison to the value of a 5 star trader. Since a 4 star trader gets 10 gold for 3 iron and 5 star gets 2, we can see right away that 5 Stars are 33% better than 4! No where is that fifth star more important than trading. The value of that one less iron is immense, it means that your Level iv factories making 20 iron produce 100 gold per round Instead of 67. If you have just 3 factories, that is equal to 100 extra gold. No other economic skill is more valuable, as long as you have access to a market. Without a trading Stars you get 10 gold for 6 iron, meaning a level iv factory only provides 33 gold, meaning a 5 star general triples its value! We can say then that a five star trader is better than having an economic master at every factory on the map. |
|
|
|
Post by John Marston on Jun 21, 2021 8:01:03 GMT
I would like to outline a few opinions I have of generals in EW4 that may differ from everyone else: Yorck is a decent infantry general for his price. Blucher is overrated Murat is overrated Palafox sucks. He is an infantry/cavalry hybrid, but there is little else he has skillwise. Beresford sucks even more. One infantry skill usually won't cut it. Andrade is the best general in the game. Diez obviously sucks Cotton is a good cavalry general Radetzky and Dombrowski are exponentially better than Blucher Why Lannes vs Suvorov? Where is Dobeln for my F2P virgins? Gazan sucks. Nothing you can do to make him not suck. Rosenberg is the worst general in the game. Try me, Caradja. Real content coming later. 1. Probably 2. I've never seen that. 3. See above 4. True, but that's the "Upper limit" Spanish generals 5. Better than nothing 6. Why? Arnold is better 7. He's the cheapest move general. But he obviously has no combat capabilities. 8. See 1 9. Of course 10. Because they are the ultimate infantry generals (Probably? Don't know) Coming to 11...  |
|
|
|
Post by STILETT0 on Jun 21, 2021 12:26:07 GMT
I would like to outline a few opinions I have of generals in EW4 that may differ from everyone else: Yorck is a decent infantry general for his price. Blucher is overrated Murat is overrated Palafox sucks. He is an infantry/cavalry hybrid, but there is little else he has skillwise. Beresford sucks even more. One infantry skill usually won't cut it. Andrade is the best general in the game. Diez obviously sucks Cotton is a good cavalry general Radetzky and Dombrowski are exponentially better than Blucher Why Lannes vs Suvorov? Where is Dobeln for my F2P virgins? Gazan sucks. Nothing you can do to make him not suck. Rosenberg is the worst general in the game. Try me, Caradja. Real content coming later. 1. Probably 2. I've never seen that. 3. See above 4. True, but that's the "Upper limit" Spanish generals 5. Better than nothing 6. Why? Arnold is better 7. He's the cheapest move general. But he obviously has no combat capabilities. 8. See 1 9. Of course 10. Because they are the ultimate infantry generals (Probably? Don't know) Coming to 11... The Andrade thing was a joke. However I like his marching and his fortification. He makes Portugal 1806 especially fun. |
|
|
|
Post by Gerd von Rundstedt on Jun 21, 2021 14:22:11 GMT
1. Probably 2. I've never seen that. 3. See above 4. True, but that's the "Upper limit" Spanish generals 5. Better than nothing 6. Why? Arnold is better 7. He's the cheapest move general. But he obviously has no combat capabilities. 8. See 1 9. Of course 10. Because they are the ultimate infantry generals (Probably? Don't know) Coming to 11... The Andrade thing was a joke. However I like his marching and his fortification. He makes Portugal 1806 especially fun. The fortification skills are bugged, I thought. |
|
|
|
Post by 𝘛𝘳𝘰𝘵𝘴𝘬𝘺 on Jun 21, 2021 17:17:56 GMT
I would like to outline a few opinions I have of generals in EW4 that may differ from everyone else: Yorck is a decent infantry general for his price. Blucher is overrated Murat is overrated Palafox sucks. He is an infantry/cavalry hybrid, but there is little else he has skillwise. Beresford sucks even more. One infantry skill usually won't cut it. Andrade is the best general in the game. Diez obviously sucks Cotton is a good cavalry general Radetzky and Dombrowski are exponentially better than Blucher Why Lannes vs Suvorov? Where is Dobeln for my F2P virgins? Gazan sucks. Nothing you can do to make him not suck. Rosenberg is the worst general in the game. Try me, Caradja. Real content coming later. Andrade - what is this? I agree to all, except Diez: You never want to miss him - the movement trainer is the most precious, and he is the only one. Untill you buy the next trainer and regroup Diez, he stays on the last slot. Diez is a better cavalary general than duomirez or Agha - usable with good movement. You need items ! - there more important than general skills, and can be used by sharing. |
|
|
|
Post by 𝘛𝘳𝘰𝘵𝘴𝘬𝘺 on Jun 21, 2021 17:37:33 GMT
We like controversial takes! Andrade was my first general because early in the game I'd play 60+round conquests that involved huge pitched battles between infantry. I would build lots of fortifications so Andrade seemed like a good choice. But really his skills are just extremely limited economic skills. They save resources but only at specific points (wherever Andrade is) for specific purposes (fortifications). Architecture is similar though potentially more valuable because you can upgrade a facility before and after movement. And the resources produced can be used for everything. The value of Architecture decreases as your economy improves, eventually losing all value once accessible facilities are upgraded. Economic expert/ master and the items (Napoleonic code) also only provide a limited benefit (at most an extra city 's worth of income). All that pales in comparison to the value of a 5 star trader. Since a 4 star trader gets 10 gold for 3 iron and 5 star gets 2, we can see right away that 5 Stars are 33% better than 4! No where is that fifth star more important than trading. The value of that one less iron is immense, it means that your Level iv factories making 20 iron produce 100 gold per round Instead of 67. If you have just 3 factories, that is equal to 100 extra gold. No other economic skill is more valuable, as long as you have access to a market. Without a trading Stars you get 10 gold for 6 iron, meaning a level iv factory only provides 33 gold, meaning a 5 star general triples its value! We can say then that a five star trader is better than having an economic master at every factory on the map. I thought this is a joke with Andrade. Your analysis is exact. I just want to add that for trading 4⭐ = 2⭐ +  With one nobility grind, every general with at least 2⭐, gets the same deal. (IE: Napoleon 1809) |
|
