muller1942
Major
King of Imperial Ostwynne
Posts: 172
|
Post by muller1942 on Oct 6, 2018 1:01:20 GMT
To anyone who needs to get so for generals play new policy in Cairo for expedition to Egypt.
|
|
|
|
Post by Cyrus the Great on Feb 15, 2019 1:09:52 GMT
Everything about him is ok, but not good. 3 star
|
|
|
|
Post by Gone on Aug 22, 2019 0:31:43 GMT
How come he’s cheaper than a silver- tier general, Mahmud II? Maybe because Mahmud II is miles better, but it seems kinda... wrong...
|
|
|
|
Post by Friedrich “Fried Rice” Paulus on Aug 22, 2019 0:55:14 GMT
How come he’s cheaper than a silver- tier general, Mahmud II? Maybe because Mahmud II is miles better, but it seems kinda... wrong... He ain’t a bad general. Just john is better, and he is 800 medals. Same with sophia. He is like a slightly stronger jourdan. Not to mention maria who can attack forts twice (but isn’t worth getting due to having only 2 useful skills) |
|
|
|
Post by Gone on Aug 22, 2019 1:00:20 GMT
How come he’s cheaper than a silver- tier general, Mahmud II? Maybe because Mahmud II is miles better, but it seems kinda... wrong... He ain’t a bad general. Just john is better, and he is 800 medals. Same with sophia. He is like a slightly stronger jourdan. Not to mention maria who can attack forts twice (but isn’t worth getting due to having only 2 useful skills) “Slightly stronger Jourdan”. You mean “1370 Medal waste” because Jourdan is free. Well, not a waste, but seriously, Jourdan is FREE... |
|
|
|
Post by Friedrich “Fried Rice” Paulus on Aug 22, 2019 1:02:17 GMT
He ain’t a bad general. Just john is better, and he is 800 medals. Same with sophia. He is like a slightly stronger jourdan. Not to mention maria who can attack forts twice (but isn’t worth getting due to having only 2 useful skills) “Slightly stronger Jourdan”. You mean “1370 Medal waste” because Jourdan is free. Well, not a waste, but seriously, Jourdan is FREE... You want a slightly stronger jourdan? Get alexander 1st or john! |
|
|
|
Post by Gone on Aug 22, 2019 1:20:48 GMT
“Slightly stronger Jourdan”. You mean “1370 Medal waste” because Jourdan is free. Well, not a waste, but seriously, Jourdan is FREE... You want a slightly stronger jourdan? Get alexander 1st or john! Alexander I. |
|
|
|
Post by Gone on Aug 23, 2019 2:20:28 GMT
He’s ok, but for a gold tier he isn’t that good. You don’t need him as you get Jourdan, who is free, during the game's first campaign. 3 stars.
|
|
|
|
Post by Friedrich “Fried Rice” Paulus on Sept 21, 2019 17:27:23 GMT
I think scott is superior to moltke. He has 4/5 good skills and for his price he is pretty good. Problem is john exists
|
|
|
|
Post by SolidLight on Sept 21, 2019 17:40:45 GMT
I think scott is superior to moltke. He has 4/5 good skills and for his price he is pretty good. Problem is john exists Scott vs Moltke is Salvo+Counterattack vs Forest+Cover. Neither Counterattack or Cover are ideal skills for artillery folks, and forest is for sure better than salvo. Forest is one of the strongest skills in the game imo, almost on par with plain because +25% damage is absolutely huge and forests are everywhere. Moltke has also +8 stats and way higher BA (Hybrid potential) than Scott. Moltke is also capped at King where as Scott is capped at Prince. But they're both bad. If Moltke had Salvo instead of stupid explosives or cover he could be a serious contender for being the best non-aura artilleryman, but he doesn't, oh well. |
|
|
|
Post by Friedrich “Fried Rice” Paulus on Sept 21, 2019 18:04:57 GMT
I think scott is superior to moltke. He has 4/5 good skills and for his price he is pretty good. Problem is john exists Scott vs Moltke is Salvo+Counterattack vs Forest+Cover. Neither Counterattack or Cover are ideal skills for artillery folks, and forest is for sure better than salvo. Forest is one of the strongest skills in the game imo, almost on par with plain because +25% damage is absolutely huge and forests are everywhere. Moltke has also +8 stats and way higher BA (Hybrid potential) than Scott. Moltke is also capped at King where as Scott is capped at Prince. But they're both bad. If Moltke had Salvo instead of stupid explosives or cover he could be a serious contender for being the best non-aura artilleryman, but he doesn't, oh well. Imo personally, salvo is the second best artillery skill behind artillery expert. It triggers consistently, works regardless of the tile you are on, and adds quite a bit of damage to your general. Counterattack is decent on artillery imo. Agreed about moltke. But cover and explosives are garbage. If 3/5ths out of his skill set is bad, he isn’t really worth considering. |
|
|
|
Post by Gone on Oct 7, 2019 16:09:33 GMT
Scott vs Moltke is Salvo+Counterattack vs Forest+Cover. Neither Counterattack or Cover are ideal skills for artillery folks, and forest is for sure better than salvo. Forest is one of the strongest skills in the game imo, almost on par with plain because +25% damage is absolutely huge and forests are everywhere. Moltke has also +8 stats and way higher BA (Hybrid potential) than Scott. Moltke is also capped at King where as Scott is capped at Prince. But they're both bad. If Moltke had Salvo instead of stupid explosives or cover he could be a serious contender for being the best non-aura artilleryman, but he doesn't, oh well. Imo personally, salvo is the second best artillery skill behind artillery expert. It triggers consistently, works regardless of the tile you are on, and adds quite a bit of damage to your general. Counterattack is decent on artillery imo. Agreed about moltke. But cover and explosives are garbage. If 3/5ths out of his skill set is bad, he isn’t really worth considering. Salvo = Assault/Line of Battle/Precision Strike. |
|
|
|
Post by Gone on Oct 26, 2019 18:49:30 GMT
Even though I’m never buying him, Scott is really good when maxed, judging by my experiences from USA conquests. True, Napoleon, Mahmud II etc. are better, but Scott is probably the most cost-effective, non-IAP, gold tier artillery general you can buy. Moltke is 200 medals more expensive yet he lacks Salvo. Kutuzov costs 800 medals more yet his performance is on par with Scott's. Old Fuss and Feathers has never disappointed me.
So, if anyone wants to buy a gold-tier artillery that is quite cost-effective, this is your guy.
|
|
|
|
Post by SolidLight on Oct 26, 2019 18:56:16 GMT
Even though I’m never buying him, Scott is really good when maxed, judging by my experiences from USA conquests. True, Napoleon, Mahmud II etc. are better, but Scott is probably the most cost-effective, non-IAP, gold tier artillery general you can buy. Moltke is 200 medals more expensive yet he lacks Salvo. Kutuzov costs 800 medals more yet his performance is on par with Scott's. Old Fuss and Feathers has never disappointed me. So, if anyone wants to buy a gold-tier artillery that is quite cost-effective, this is your guy. Being a gold tier means absolutely nothing aside from being a nice color on the nametag though. He’s pointless unfortunately, considering that Scharnhorst exists. |
|
|
|
Post by Gone on Oct 26, 2019 19:06:07 GMT
Even though I’m never buying him, Scott is really good when maxed, judging by my experiences from USA conquests. True, Napoleon, Mahmud II etc. are better, but Scott is probably the most cost-effective, non-IAP, gold tier artillery general you can buy. Moltke is 200 medals more expensive yet he lacks Salvo. Kutuzov costs 800 medals more yet his performance is on par with Scott's. Old Fuss and Feathers has never disappointed me. So, if anyone wants to buy a gold-tier artillery that is quite cost-effective, this is your guy. Being a gold tier means absolutely nothing aside from being a nice color on the nametag though. He’s pointless unfortunately, considering that Scharnhorst exists. I know. But there are people that literally buy gold-tier generals just because they’re gold tiers. And yes, he is unnecessary, sadly. |
|
