Post by Deleted on Oct 17, 2021 20:53:41 GMT
There are separate threads for the 4 generals, although instead of me making each separate replies for them, I'll just make an updated thread on my thoughts on them. Even if Easytech releases more of them in the future, the current ones here won't be affected much, aside from recommendations on who to get. This should also atleast help in deciding who to buy, if you don't plan to buy them all. Also f2p friendly obviously 
.
1. Spartacus
Cost: $8.99
Rank upon purchase : General
Skills:
Roar, infantry commander, shield wall, intercept
Talent: gives 15% atk to infantry the general commands and infantry surrounding within 2 tiles.
Banner talent(Uprising) : always have the combat ability of 5 units. No wait time when recruiting
Unit score: 7/10 without uprising
:9.5/10 with uprising
If I remember correctly, I used to argue how Spartacus was overall worse than Pompey due to how great Pompey was as an infantry General. That's the reason for his 7/10 score, since there isn't too much incentive buying Spartacus with Pompey, that and other competent infantry generals like Vercingetorix and Labienus exists with some cheap alternatives like Flaminius and Ambiorix. With his banner talent, which is basically a better talent compared to the one Vercingetorix has, he is clearly better than Pompey combat wise,tho Pompey still can compete in other departments( Thanks to March) . The reason I don't rank him as a 10/10 unit is due to the lack of March, Pompey being a beast and how infantry generals are mostly competent. It's not really a big deal overall, he is a 10/10, just deducted a. 5 due to some minor flaws.
2. Hannibal
Cost: $9.99
Rank upon purchase: Marshall
Skills: cavalry commander, charge, guerilla, assault
Talent: same as Spartacus but for cavalry
Banner talent(Overlord) : deal 50% damage to 2 additional enemy units around when attacking.
Unit score: 9.5/10 without overlord
15/10 with overlord
Arguably the best IAP general, Hannibal is a monster. The difference why Hannibal is higher rated than Spartacus is due to how most cavalry generals either lack 1 or 2 crucial skills that make them Pompey tier, thus Hannibal hogs the cavalry spotlight as the undisputed best since the start of the game. Another thing to mention is how great cavalry units are in general, which further bridges the gap between him and sparty. The reason why he isn't a perfect 10 is due to lack of mobility, which isn't too bad due to being cavalry. You may say I might be a bit biased towards March, and to that I say guilty as charged, that's why I only take. 5 points, basically saying they're 10/10 but they don't have march. When his banner released, he gained a simple passive, but that passive made Hannibal from the undisputed best cavalry to a god of war, destroyer or worlds. A bit exaggerated, but that passive was the only passive he really needed to skyrocket him to even more heights. He makes fighting multiple infantry a joke, and makes difficult campaigns a lot easier as he can just brute force the majority of them, provided he has some cover. If he crits, then the surrounding enemies might as well commit sepuku before a nuke hits them. Basically, if Hannibal just equipped his banner, he might've defeated Rome and we would be talking about the Carthiginian empire today or something.
3. Julius Caesar
Cost: $10.99
Rank upon purchase: Consul
Skills: assault, besiege, plain fighting, archery commander
Talent: same as Hannibal but for archers
Banner talent(Strategist) : restore health by 12% after destroying enemy units, +3 mobity.
Unit score: 8/10 without strategist
9/10 with strategist
Used to be the best archer general, until someone dethroned him. You might as why Hannibal is a perfect 10 but Caesar isn't when during release he was the undisputed best. To put it simply, it's because archers aren't as good as cavalry. They're one trick ponies in that their primary use is to kill generals and elite units and help in sieges. Problem Is that they're too squishy, there isn't much incentive in building and spamming them compared to cavalry or infantry. Mithridates also exists, which has the same effect on Caesar similar to the Spartacus and Pompey situation but to a lesser extent. Strategist admittedly is great, but not for the reason you think. +3 mobility is great. And I know, I'm biased when it comes to mobility, but the reason why gaining health when destroying enemies isn't as good is due to how easy it is for enemy units to kill off units from your legion, rendering the health restored quite useless. Don't get me wrong, it's still useful when there is room to maneuver, which makes the +3 mov better. But when in tight areas and Caesar is gonna get hit a lot or by a general, it's not gonna be that great. He also needs to get the kill, which can be a problem in clutch situations. To make the best use of his passive, equip some armor on him. Not much to say, he's great, and he also has great cheekbones.
4. Attila
Cost: $11.99
Rank upon purchase: Consul
Skills: Archer commander, accuracy, Advantage, March
Talent: Overlord(Same as Hannibal's banner talent)
Banner talent(Plunder) : same as Caesar without the +3 movement and a higher heal percentage(16%)
Unit score without Plunder: 10/10
Unit score with Plunder: 11/10
Before anything else: yes, the reason he's 10/10 off the bat compared to Hannibal is simply because he has March. Jokes aside, his starting kit and talent makes him better than hannibal. Anyway, off the bat, Attila is definitely the best IAP general. He has Hannibal's overlord as his talent, which isn't as good, since again, archers aren't the most resilient units and it requires him to get up close and personal to be of maximum use. It does combo well with plunder, making engagements with non-elite units a breeze, as it makes him immortal, provided he gets the kill, same as Caesar, the difference being that Attila can hit more than one unit, which makes Attila more consistent. Another reason as to why Attila is better than Caesar is due to how Atilla can actually be used as a cavalry general, and be a competent one at that due to him being able reach 40 flat attack for cavalry( he can only reach 40 for either archer or cavalry, and I would suggest going for 9 points in cavalry over archery due to him needing more help in the cav department compared to archery). He basically becomes discount Hannibal in cavalry, which is still good. Basically, Attila just dunks on Caesar due to him being flexible, more mobile with March maxed, great talent combination, and ability to be used as a competent cavalry general. The only thing Caesar has over Attila is his talent that buffs his archer atk and archers around him, which isn't enough to level the playing field sadly. Speaking of cavalry general, the reason why Hannibal overall is better is due to the strengths of cavalry over archers. If Attila was a cavalry general, then he would be a better Hannibal. But since he's an archer, he has to carry the downsides of archers, which is heavy enough to drag him down as second best overall IAP, atleast in my opinion. Also costs a lot while being released too late,making the purchase of him not as good or appealing for developed accounts. He has the honor of probably being the best hard carry for new accounts, until the player gets Hannibal and his banner maxed out of course.
Rankings
Effectiveness in carrying a developed account(assuming banner talent) :
Hannibal>Attila/Spartacus>Caesar
Effectiveness in carrying a new account(assuming no banner talent) :
Attila>Hannibal >Caesar>Spartacus
Cost effectiveness:
Hannibal/Spartacus>Attila>Caesar
. 1. Spartacus
Cost: $8.99
Rank upon purchase : General
Skills:
Roar, infantry commander, shield wall, intercept
Talent: gives 15% atk to infantry the general commands and infantry surrounding within 2 tiles.
Banner talent(Uprising) : always have the combat ability of 5 units. No wait time when recruiting
Unit score: 7/10 without uprising
:9.5/10 with uprising
If I remember correctly, I used to argue how Spartacus was overall worse than Pompey due to how great Pompey was as an infantry General. That's the reason for his 7/10 score, since there isn't too much incentive buying Spartacus with Pompey, that and other competent infantry generals like Vercingetorix and Labienus exists with some cheap alternatives like Flaminius and Ambiorix. With his banner talent, which is basically a better talent compared to the one Vercingetorix has, he is clearly better than Pompey combat wise,tho Pompey still can compete in other departments( Thanks to March) . The reason I don't rank him as a 10/10 unit is due to the lack of March, Pompey being a beast and how infantry generals are mostly competent. It's not really a big deal overall, he is a 10/10, just deducted a. 5 due to some minor flaws.
2. Hannibal
Cost: $9.99
Rank upon purchase: Marshall
Skills: cavalry commander, charge, guerilla, assault
Talent: same as Spartacus but for cavalry
Banner talent(Overlord) : deal 50% damage to 2 additional enemy units around when attacking.
Unit score: 9.5/10 without overlord
15/10 with overlord
Arguably the best IAP general, Hannibal is a monster. The difference why Hannibal is higher rated than Spartacus is due to how most cavalry generals either lack 1 or 2 crucial skills that make them Pompey tier, thus Hannibal hogs the cavalry spotlight as the undisputed best since the start of the game. Another thing to mention is how great cavalry units are in general, which further bridges the gap between him and sparty. The reason why he isn't a perfect 10 is due to lack of mobility, which isn't too bad due to being cavalry. You may say I might be a bit biased towards March, and to that I say guilty as charged, that's why I only take. 5 points, basically saying they're 10/10 but they don't have march. When his banner released, he gained a simple passive, but that passive made Hannibal from the undisputed best cavalry to a god of war, destroyer or worlds. A bit exaggerated, but that passive was the only passive he really needed to skyrocket him to even more heights. He makes fighting multiple infantry a joke, and makes difficult campaigns a lot easier as he can just brute force the majority of them, provided he has some cover. If he crits, then the surrounding enemies might as well commit sepuku before a nuke hits them. Basically, if Hannibal just equipped his banner, he might've defeated Rome and we would be talking about the Carthiginian empire today or something.
3. Julius Caesar
Cost: $10.99
Rank upon purchase: Consul
Skills: assault, besiege, plain fighting, archery commander
Talent: same as Hannibal but for archers
Banner talent(Strategist) : restore health by 12% after destroying enemy units, +3 mobity.
Unit score: 8/10 without strategist
9/10 with strategist
Used to be the best archer general, until someone dethroned him. You might as why Hannibal is a perfect 10 but Caesar isn't when during release he was the undisputed best. To put it simply, it's because archers aren't as good as cavalry. They're one trick ponies in that their primary use is to kill generals and elite units and help in sieges. Problem Is that they're too squishy, there isn't much incentive in building and spamming them compared to cavalry or infantry. Mithridates also exists, which has the same effect on Caesar similar to the Spartacus and Pompey situation but to a lesser extent. Strategist admittedly is great, but not for the reason you think. +3 mobility is great. And I know, I'm biased when it comes to mobility, but the reason why gaining health when destroying enemies isn't as good is due to how easy it is for enemy units to kill off units from your legion, rendering the health restored quite useless. Don't get me wrong, it's still useful when there is room to maneuver, which makes the +3 mov better. But when in tight areas and Caesar is gonna get hit a lot or by a general, it's not gonna be that great. He also needs to get the kill, which can be a problem in clutch situations. To make the best use of his passive, equip some armor on him. Not much to say, he's great, and he also has great cheekbones.
4. Attila
Cost: $11.99
Rank upon purchase: Consul
Skills: Archer commander, accuracy, Advantage, March
Talent: Overlord(Same as Hannibal's banner talent)
Banner talent(Plunder) : same as Caesar without the +3 movement and a higher heal percentage(16%)
Unit score without Plunder: 10/10
Unit score with Plunder: 11/10
Before anything else: yes, the reason he's 10/10 off the bat compared to Hannibal is simply because he has March. Jokes aside, his starting kit and talent makes him better than hannibal. Anyway, off the bat, Attila is definitely the best IAP general. He has Hannibal's overlord as his talent, which isn't as good, since again, archers aren't the most resilient units and it requires him to get up close and personal to be of maximum use. It does combo well with plunder, making engagements with non-elite units a breeze, as it makes him immortal, provided he gets the kill, same as Caesar, the difference being that Attila can hit more than one unit, which makes Attila more consistent. Another reason as to why Attila is better than Caesar is due to how Atilla can actually be used as a cavalry general, and be a competent one at that due to him being able reach 40 flat attack for cavalry( he can only reach 40 for either archer or cavalry, and I would suggest going for 9 points in cavalry over archery due to him needing more help in the cav department compared to archery). He basically becomes discount Hannibal in cavalry, which is still good. Basically, Attila just dunks on Caesar due to him being flexible, more mobile with March maxed, great talent combination, and ability to be used as a competent cavalry general. The only thing Caesar has over Attila is his talent that buffs his archer atk and archers around him, which isn't enough to level the playing field sadly. Speaking of cavalry general, the reason why Hannibal overall is better is due to the strengths of cavalry over archers. If Attila was a cavalry general, then he would be a better Hannibal. But since he's an archer, he has to carry the downsides of archers, which is heavy enough to drag him down as second best overall IAP, atleast in my opinion. Also costs a lot while being released too late,making the purchase of him not as good or appealing for developed accounts. He has the honor of probably being the best hard carry for new accounts, until the player gets Hannibal and his banner maxed out of course.
Rankings
Effectiveness in carrying a developed account(assuming banner talent) :
Hannibal>Attila/Spartacus>Caesar
Effectiveness in carrying a new account(assuming no banner talent) :
Attila>Hannibal >Caesar>Spartacus
Cost effectiveness:
Hannibal/Spartacus>Attila>Caesar
. Commander with innate 3+movement, combined with +4(or +6 with a lvl 5 March) makes the commander the best cavalry general funnily enough, slightly behind or just equal to Hannibal of course..Cavs not getting the Pompey treatment is unacceptable,the best we got in that role is Antony and he lacks guerilla or siege to make him the Pompey of cavalry. Archers are just too inconsistent, unless you're a javeliner or a horse archer, they usually just get relegated to guarding key cities or picking of lone targets. That's why Attila being able to command cavalry competently when necessary is great. Really useful in decisive battles as well, as he can command cavalry or archers depending on what's needed. +1 for Attila. 
