Why on earth would you care?
Who is retarded enough to send a wave of naked ballistas at someone?
Fun note, go to your rally, add 1 unit of every type to both sides, and then give one side 2000 ballistas and the other side 10000 archers and see how they fare.
Anyway, go play for yourself and let others play the way they want to. I use each and every one of my tens of thousands of ballistae, and they've paid for themselves 100-fold over what any amount of archers would have.
Saying dont build Ballista on this forum or dont do this or do that has little weight. Server 1 people would be well within thier bounds to make Ballista. Server 6 people should stick to the hack and slash 50K Archer system untill more people get thier cities defended in some form that actually works.
Saying dont build Ballistas is misguided at best.
archer are pretty weak...they are quite useless...
i might try a different approach on this game...
what is important here is who is attacking who
the levels of research(lev10archery lol) is whats gonna give you a major advantage over someone who has a lower level, the hero of course
effectively using range
then u take into consideration the troop size
we all know how to attack with ballistas and have 0 casualties, becasue we know who we are attacking
Writing for me is difficult. I often over think and write in ways where people become confused. If only I could write as well as I can look at data and draw conclusions from the data.
Cataphracts also cost almost 4 times the upkeep that archers do. That means you would need a 1:4 ratio of cataphracts to archers to be cost effective; your ratio is 3:5. I can build archers and lose over half of them in battle and still be more cost effective than cataphracts.
Last edited by BBQ_Sauce; 05-22-2009 at 02:09 AM.
Er... In a way don't you think you made it a bit of an unfair contest? I mean 10,000 archers v 2000 ballista. Outnumbering much?![]()
Bookmarks