|
|
Post by Archduke Charles on Feb 17, 2016 18:32:36 GMT
I understand, lets not talk more about this trigger thing, I get the point!
|
|
|
|
Post by Desophaeus on Feb 19, 2016 7:34:22 GMT
Just wondering, why compare those two guys if at all...?
The two most medal cost-effective generals would be something like Badogilo and Ozwana. The end-game generals are powerful but expensive, worthwhile after you have gained a large stockpile of medals, and built many wonders, teched up your troops to gain the upper hand even more.
|
|
|
|
Post by kanue on Feb 20, 2016 4:44:32 GMT
I moved this thread to Military Intel Compound.
|
|
|
|
Post by Moreau on Feb 21, 2016 21:37:10 GMT
Because easytech logic
Maybe because he is more known then other generals?
|
|
|
|
Post by Horatio Nelson on Mar 1, 2016 2:56:37 GMT
Yes yes, lets not be mad about that  what i ment to present was that Cunningham was a very underrated general, based on his pricetag, and comparisoned him with De Gaulle, which has almost the same pricetag as him 50 medal diffrence. I used Cunningham when I played WC3. It was fun letting him controll the Mediterranian during conquests. Good naval general imo. |
|
|
|
Post by General Macarthur on Mar 1, 2016 3:04:34 GMT
Oh yeah he totally wrecked those 3 italian generals in 1943.
|
|
|
|
Post by Archduke Charles on Mar 1, 2016 20:27:29 GMT
Just wondering, why compare those two guys if at all...? The two most medal cost-effective generals would be something like Badogilo and Ozwana. The end-game generals are powerful but expensive, worthwhile after you have gained a large stockpile of medals, and built many wonders, teched up your troops to gain the upper hand even more. My answer to your question. I compared De Gaulle and Cunningham because they had almost the same pricetag, and I wanted to show the Easytech logic of having two generals, where one is much better than the other and cost almost the same, why is it so hard to understand? Anyway I think that Badoglio is very good for early, to mid game, however when you're in the same stage as I am you need the best generals in the game, and I agree on you that Osawa is good, He's good in stars but I must say his abilities suck. my strategy is this: when buying strong generals I would recommend getting a navy/air general with 4-5 stars, everything below is not worth to keep to the endgame. Indeed end-game generals are expensive, thats why they're for the endgame, untill you reach it, make some good combo's like Guderian tank, Yamamoto navy, Mannerheim Infantery, Govorov Art. Beginner tips from me, pick the 4 best generals in every category buy them then conquest will be much easier promise! List of my top picks for each navy/air tier listed by me. (own opinion) Acceptable Navy/air tier 1: UK-Pound UK-Mountbatten (No air) Turin-Riccardi JPN-Koga US-Kinkaid US-King Acceptable Navy/air tier 2: JPN-Nagumo JPN-Ozawa US-Fletcher US-Spruance US-Clark US-Halsey GER-Raeder RUS-Kuznetsov Acceptable Navy/air tier 3: JPN-Nagano JPN-Yamamoto USA-Nimitz USA-Eisenhower GER-Donitz As mentioned above its my own opinion, and I know there are ultra hybrid generals (No-eyes) and there might be generals I didn't include because they were good in air but not navy and the other way around. And there are also generals being good in everything ehmmm.. Eisenhower, but he is very focused on navy. |
|
|
|
Post by Erich von Manstein on Mar 1, 2016 21:02:42 GMT
Just wondering, why compare those two guys if at all...? The two most medal cost-effective generals would be something like Badogilo and Ozwana. The end-game generals are powerful but expensive, worthwhile after you have gained a large stockpile of medals, and built many wonders, teched up your troops to gain the upper hand even more. My answer to your question. I compared De Gaulle and Cunningham because they had almost the same pricetag, and I wanted to show the Easytech logic of having two generals, where one is much better than the other and cost almost the same, why is it so hard to understand? Anyway I think that Badoglio is very good for early, to mid game, however when you're in the same stage as I am you need the best generals in the game, and I agree on you that Osawa is good, He's good in stars but I must say his abilities suck. my strategy is this: when buying strong generals I would recommend getting a navy/air general with 4-5 stars, everything below is not worth to keep to the endgame. Indeed end-game generals are expensive, thats why they're for the endgame, untill you reach it, make some good combo's like Guderian tank, Yamamoto navy, Mannerheim Infantery, Govorov Art. Beginner tips from me, pick the 4 best generals in every category buy them then conquest will be much easier promise! List of my top picks for each navy/air tier listed by me. (own opinion) Acceptable Navy/air tier 1: UK-Pound UK-Mountbatten (No air) Turin-Riccardi JPN-Koga US-Kinkaid US-King Acceptable Navy/air tier 2: JPN-Nagumo JPN-Ozawa US-Fletcher US-Spruance US-Clark US-Halsey GER-Raeder RUS-Kuznetsov Acceptable Navy/air tier 3: JPN-Nagano JPN-Yamamoto USA-Nimitz USA-Eisenhower GER-Donitz As mentioned above its my own opinion, and I know there are ultra hybrid generals (No-eyes) and there might be generals I didn't include because they were good in air but not navy and the other way around. And there are also generals being good in everything ehmmm.. Eisenhower, but he is very focused on navy. I'm stating mine then... Out of tier: USA-Eisenhower(too good, beats everyone) 1st tier: JPN-Yamamoto JPN-Nagano GER-Donitz USA-Nimitz 2nd tier: USA-Bradley USA-Clark USA-Halsey 3rd tier: JPN-Nagumo GBR-Cunningham USA-Spruance GER-Raeder ITA-Riccardi USA-Fletcher JPN-Ozawa USA-King The others are crap. Really worths buying: Out of tier: USA-Eisenhower 1st tier: JPN-Yamamoto JPN-Ozawa 2nd tier: JPN-Nagano USA-King USA-Clark 3rd tier: USA-Halsey USA-Bradley GBR-Cunningham USA-Fletcher |
|
what i ment to present was that Cunningham was a very underrated general, based on his pricetag, and comparisoned him with De Gaulle, which has almost the same pricetag as him 50 medal diffrence.
