|
|
Post by Jean-Luc Picard on Jan 13, 2017 2:19:42 GMT
Assume hypothetically that I would be buying one or the other. Which should I buy?
|
|
|
|
Post by Desophaeus on Jan 13, 2017 2:33:25 GMT
If you're buying one and just only one, I would lean towards Napoleon in favor of his better stats and such.
I'm not sure which gives the best "bang for your buck" but they're both quite stronger than many other generals (which is kinda the point of IAPs' existence in the first place).
|
|
|
|
Post by best75 on Jan 13, 2017 3:42:05 GMT
If you can only get one than Washington.
Washington is very special. He's the only gold archer general in the game, has logistics which helps him stay alive greatly and at endgame he gains skills which give him bonus damage against infantry, cavalry and archers.
|
|
|
|
Post by Jean-Luc Picard on Jan 13, 2017 4:12:03 GMT
If you can only get one than Washington. Washington is very special. He's the only gold archer general in the game, has logistics which helps him stay alive greatly and at endgame he gains skills which give him bonus damage against infantry, cavalry and archers. Washington it is. Sorry, Napoleon Bonaparte, but at least you beat him in my mod (big-league) |
|
|
|
Post by kanue on Jan 13, 2017 4:15:24 GMT
Washington.
Napoleon is not special enough. He can be replaced with LiShimin or Bismarck.
Washington, on the other hand, is an anti-everything at level 6 unit. And that is a good combination with Logistics since he can kill everything effectively.
|
|
|
|
Post by Jean-Luc Picard on Jan 13, 2017 4:52:00 GMT
Washington's been quite impressive so far, but then again I'm just starting fresh
|
|
|
|
Post by Singlemalt on Jan 13, 2017 7:11:06 GMT
Washington's been quite impressive so far, but then again I'm just starting fresh Best iap i guess and nice to get him from the start. |
|
