|
|
Post by Torvesta on Jun 27, 2016 18:42:53 GMT
Dearborn sounds good but what about Washington. He has leadership and mass fire, both great skills.
I don't know which skill is better architecture or economic master.
|
|
|
|
Post by Jean-Luc Picard on Jun 27, 2016 18:44:38 GMT
Dearborn sounds good but what about Washington. He has leadership and mass fire, both great skills. I don't know which skill is better architecture or economic master. Econ Master is replaced by Napoleonic Code, so it's only good for early-mid game. That leaves Architecture. To me, Washington's uber-survivability makes up for Dearborn's architecture advantage. But Kosciusko is tier-2, and he's great, so I like him |
|
|
|
Post by Torvesta on Jun 27, 2016 18:48:28 GMT
so who do you think is better in your opinion, Dearborn or Washington? Assuming that they both go on triple guards, that would make the most of Dearborn's formation skill and bugle is the second best infantry skill after mass fire.
Washington would have 2 rifles 12+ whereas Dearborn would have 1 snaredrum and 1 rifle.
|
|
|
|
Post by Jean-Luc Picard on Jun 27, 2016 18:52:26 GMT
so who do you think is better in your opinion, Dearborn or Washington? Assuming that they both go on triple guards, that would make the most of Dearborn's formation skill and bugle is the second best infantry skill after mass fire. Washington would have 2 rifles 12+ whereas Dearborn would have 1 snaredrum and 1 rifle. I prefer Washington, because Leadership |
|
|
|
Post by Laurent de Gouvion on Jun 28, 2016 0:54:29 GMT
Dearborn sounds good but what about Washington. He has leadership and mass fire, both great skills. Washington can effectively defend cities and bring out their potential. Even with snare drum Dearborn could still be encircled and put into confusion. Dearborn is more effective econ-wise running around cities and upgrading them. Washington, since he has effective combat ability. He's basically a Lannes with econ skills but still with huge survivability. |
|
|
|
Post by Laurent de Gouvion on Jun 28, 2016 1:39:35 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by Jean-Luc Picard on Jun 28, 2016 2:58:34 GMT
OK. We have guides for both if you need 'em |
|
|
|
Post by Laurent de Gouvion on Jun 28, 2016 3:12:45 GMT
OK. We have guides for both if you need 'em No need, I just tend to be lazy with campaigns. |
|
|
|
Post by Laurent de Gouvion on Jun 29, 2016 10:47:23 GMT
so who do you think is better in your opinion, Dearborn or Washington? Assuming that they both go on triple guards, that would make the most of Dearborn's formation skill and bugle is the second best infantry skill after mass fire. Washington would have 2 rifles 12+ whereas Dearborn would have 1 snaredrum and 1 rifle. Combat-wise Washington is better. I tested econ-wise by upgrading two level 1 cities to level 6 in USA 1775, compared the gold output. Suffice to say, Washington ends up with -123 gold and Dearborn -82 gold. Dearborn wins by a margin of 41 gold. However, the data does not count both level 1 and 6 income. If it counts level 6 and 1 income for one turn, Dearborn only wins by a margin of 4 gold. Is 41 gold worth far less combat ability than Washington? You can't even buy a single formation militia with that. |
|
|
|
Post by Erich von Manstein on Jun 29, 2016 12:18:42 GMT
so who do you think is better in your opinion, Dearborn or Washington? Assuming that they both go on triple guards, that would make the most of Dearborn's formation skill and bugle is the second best infantry skill after mass fire. Washington would have 2 rifles 12+ whereas Dearborn would have 1 snaredrum and 1 rifle. Depends. If I am in a tough situation, and I need someone to be at the front of my line, that's Washington, Washington is the infantry general with the best survivalability. If I have a lot of low lvl cities, and I could make sure no cav will charge towards here, Dearborn, Dearborn has nice output, and good econ ability. BTW I always believe Bugle is the best infantry skill. |
|
|
|
Post by Mountbatten on Jul 1, 2016 17:12:15 GMT
I didn't know people had trouble with this level. I use no strategy at all, I just kill. One of the easier ones in Coalition I think
|
|
|
|
Post by Torvesta on Jul 1, 2016 17:39:48 GMT
i don't think it was easy. I just thought that it was going to be a hard mission because i don't like naval battles.
|
|
|
|
Post by Jean-Luc Picard on Jul 1, 2016 17:43:28 GMT
Naval is always a little tougher, but this one seems easy since Austerlitz comes right after
|
|
|
|
Post by kyokusanagi on Jul 29, 2016 7:56:10 GMT
Kutaisov+ Sulkoski was enough fr me to get *****. If you count precisely maximum/probable movement of the enemy you will be always in advantage with encircling and shooing.
Btw . this is one of the merriest mission that I saw in this game. (Sea Battle  |
|
|
|
Post by Admiral Aleksandr Kolchak on Jan 22, 2018 2:07:32 GMT
Thanks a lot! This plan really helped me out! The first time I played he game I aced the battle first try but after that I couldn’t get it and It became really difficult. This plan is really well done and I reccomend it.
|
|
