|
|
Post by Marshal Ney on Jun 14, 2017 16:52:02 GMT
I'll show you 4 reasons why (not 13 hahah) Sophia is better than Isabela:
1 When Sophia attacks forts uses spy+explosive while Isabela doesn't use anything
2 When Sophia attacks troops in cities uses explosive+siege master(no evasion) while Isabela uses only accurate(no evasion)
3 When Sophia attacks troops without evasion uses explosive while Isabela doesn't use anything
4 Sophia (trained) can be assigned to a cavalry or infantry unit while Isabela doesn't
You could say:"Isabela has more movement"
I'd replicate:"Sophia with 5 stars in movement, one movement item and warhorse can moves heavy/siege artillery 4 hexes, and that's enough, isn't it?
If you disagree with, all the opinions are well accepted.
|
|
|
|
Post by Banastre Tarleton on Jun 14, 2017 20:49:41 GMT
5. Sophia is far better with naval training than Isabela.
While it's fair to say that Isabela is better against troops and Sophia better against fortifications, I'm in agreement that Sophia is better overall. She's the first princess you get and, when considered from start to finish, is the MVP of the game.
|
|
|
|
Post by Torvesta on Jun 15, 2017 4:46:00 GMT
I agree with you, i prefer sophia over isabella. In campaigns, there will always be forts, or enemies in cities so you can always target them with sophia and isabella can attack any enemy that is not in a city. Both sophia and isabella can move 4 hexes for me and that's more than enough.
it's funny how noobs think sophia is bad because she is the easiest princess to get.
if i had to rank all the princesses in order from strongest to weakest, it would be:
Lan
Victoria/sophia
Isabella
Kate
I don't know about the other 3 because i never used them. I personally prefer sophia over victoria because i think art > infantry. Victoria has naval stars but if sophia had the same thing, they would both be as good as each other, Victoria being slightly better on that maybe because of assault and defense art.
|
|
|
|
Post by Marshal Ney on Jun 15, 2017 8:27:25 GMT
5. Sophia is far better with naval training than Isabela. While it's fair to say that Isabela is better against troops and Sophia better against fortifications, I'm in agreement that Sophia is better overall. She's the first princess you get and, when considered from start to finish, is the MVP of the game. Oh, yes, I forgot Sophia can be a naval general |
|
|
|
Post by Marshal Ney on Jun 15, 2017 8:39:46 GMT
I agree with you, i prefer sophia over isabella. In campaigns, there will always be forts, or enemies in cities so you can always target them with sophia and isabella can attack any enemy that is not in a city. Both sophia and isabella can move 4 hexes for me and that's more than enough. it's funny how noobs think sophia is bad because she is the easiest princess to get. if i had to rank all the princesses in order from strongest to weakest, it would be: Lan Victoria/sophia Isabella Kate I don't know about the other 3 because i never used them. I personally prefer sophia over victoria because i think art > infantry. Victoria has naval stars but if sophia had the same thing, they would both be as good as each other, Victoria being slightly better on that maybe because of assault and defense art. I also think that 4 hexes for artillery is enough. My list of princesses is: _Lan, the best general in the game _Victoria, assault art+defense art= she never dies, bugle+mass fire= strong in infantry _Sophia, already explained _Isabela, already explained _Sakurako, mediocre on all units, but if you are rich you can train her to 5 stars in every units _Kate, maybe the best on navy, but only if you have many slots _Maria, she has formation and 3 stars in infantry (equal to Buxhoeveden...ahah) _Fatimah, no fighting skills, no fighting stars, only economic master+architecture |
|
|
|
Post by Yi Sun Sin on Jun 15, 2017 9:50:02 GMT
Getting Sophia to 5 stars in movement is going to be a pain. Also, Isabela hits consistently in every type of terrain. I believe that explosion only gives plus 1 in damage which is close to nothing. The things that Sophia does better than Isabela are fortcracking and hybrid capability.
|
|
|
|
Post by Torvesta on Jun 15, 2017 9:58:28 GMT
Sophia is still better than isabella hands down. You need to know how to play her. Just target the enemy in cities then forts. In the campaigns, there will usually be the enemy gen in the city anyway. Cities and forts are usually in her range because she can move 4 hexes, and even if they arn't, she still hits good on normal enemies.
In my farm for medals, Britain builds loads of forts and i train my sophia on them. It's much faster to train her than isabella so thats a plus too.
Sophia should be unlocked at 750 years, not 250 tbh.
|
|
|
|
Post by Marshal Ney on Jun 15, 2017 12:03:25 GMT
Sophia is still better than isabella hands down. You need to know how to play her. Just target the enemy in cities then forts. In the campaigns, there will usually be the enemy gen in the city anyway. Cities and forts are usually in her range because she can move 4 hexes, and even if they arn't, she still hits good on normal enemies. In my farm for medals, Britain builds loads of forts and i train my sophia on them. It's much faster to train her than isabella so thats a plus too. Sophia should be unlocked at 750 years, not 250 tbh. I agree... but unfortunately I've regruped Sophia into another general a long time ago...terrible mistake!!! |
|
|
|
Post by Yi Sun Sin on Jun 15, 2017 20:40:49 GMT
Sophia is still better than isabella hands down. You need to know how to play her. Just target the enemy in cities then forts. In the campaigns, there will usually be the enemy gen in the city anyway. Cities and forts are usually in her range because she can move 4 hexes, and even if they arn't, she still hits good on normal enemies. In my farm for medals, Britain builds loads of forts and i train my sophia on them. It's much faster to train her than isabella so thats a plus too. Sophia should be unlocked at 750 years, not 250 tbh. Siege master is inferior to accuracy. In campaigns there may be a general in cities but there will always be a general in other types of terrain. Isabela hits normal units better though. |
|
|
|
Post by Torvesta on Jun 16, 2017 3:19:05 GMT
ik but on average, sophia hits more, because there will be most of the time soldiers in cities or forts that sophia can hit
|
|
|
|
Post by Marshal Ney on Jun 17, 2017 17:48:50 GMT
Sophia is still better than isabella hands down. You need to know how to play her. Just target the enemy in cities then forts. In the campaigns, there will usually be the enemy gen in the city anyway. Cities and forts are usually in her range because she can move 4 hexes, and even if they arn't, she still hits good on normal enemies. In my farm for medals, Britain builds loads of forts and i train my sophia on them. It's much faster to train her than isabella so thats a plus too. Sophia should be unlocked at 750 years, not 250 tbh. Siege master is inferior to accuracy. In campaigns there may be a general in cities but there will always be a general in other types of terrain. Isabela hits normal units better though. Ok, but siege master+explosive is better than accurate. Furthermore Sophia has spy -extremely useful- while Isabela has 2 skills that increase ONLY movement |
|
|
|
Post by Torvesta on Jun 17, 2017 18:12:38 GMT
I agree, Isabella has accurate which is the best artillery skill but she also has ballistics which is inferior to explosive.
If you compare the skills that adds damage, isabella has accuracy and ballistics, and sophia has seige master, explosive and spy. Sophia clearly deals more damage. The only advantage isabella has is movement.
If you are comparing the max hexes they can move, it's 4 for sophia and 5 for isaebella. 3 movement = 1 hex. Sophia can move 4 hexes on heavy artillery if she has 5 movement stars, warhorse and 2+ movement item. 5 + 5 + 2 = 12.
Moving 1 more hex does not make a difference if you are already moving 4 hexes. Sophia is just better because she deals more damage.
|
|
|
|
Post by Marshal Ney on Jun 17, 2017 23:29:27 GMT
I agree, Isabella has accurate which is the best artillery skill but she also has ballistics which is inferior to explosive. If you compare the skills that adds damage, isabella has accuracy and ballistics, and sophia has seige master, explosive and spy. Sophia clearly deals more damage. The only advantage isabella has is movement. If you are comparing the max hexes they can move, it's 4 for sophia and 5 for isaebella. 3 movement = 1 hex. Sophia can move 4 hexes on heavy artillery if she has 5 movement stars, warhorse and 2+ movement item. 5 + 5 + 2 = 12. Moving 1 more hex does not make a difference if you are already moving 4 hexes. Sophia is just better because she deals more damage. Exactly what I meant |
|
|
|
Post by Louis-Alexandre Berthier on Jul 11, 2017 19:02:12 GMT
This is the difference here guys: it's not a matter of importance- that was not the question.
Who is better? Isabella by a wide margin- best artillery general in the game (besides maybe Moreau).
Is Sophia more versatile? Better at navy? Best fort-cracker in the game besides Murat? The first princess you get and therefore the most USEFUL?
The answer is yes to all of those. But that makes her more important, more useful. But it does not make her better.
|
|
|
|
Post by Louis-Alexandre Berthier on Jul 11, 2017 19:09:39 GMT
5 movement stars is at least 5 Diez's: 540 times 5= 2700. If you're willing to farm that many medals, go ahead.
Sophia needs a warhorse to compensate for Geography, so her explosive is made up by a +6 artillery attack item.
Spy is a good skill, but way too specific. Sophia in a conquest, especially if you're planning to rush, is going to be used for a lot more than mopping up forts.
I doubt any of you actually want to farm that much to get Sophia incredibly OP.
|
|
