Guide-HeavyCavalary

[DeletedUser]

Er... no. I'm arguing because you're wrong. Isn't that was arguing is?

ar·gue Verb /ˈärgyo͞o/
Synonyms:
verb: dispute, debate, discuss, reason, contend, quarrel, wrangle
arguing present participle; argued past tense; argued past participle; argues 3rd person singular present
Give reasons or cite evidence in support of an idea, action, or theory, typically with the aim of persuading others to share one's view
defense attorneys argue that the police lacked “probable cause” to arrest the driver
“It stands to reason,” she argued
Persuade someone to do or not to do (something) by giving reasons
I tried to argue him out of it
Exchange or express diverging or opposite views, typically in a heated or angry way
don't argue with me
I wasn't going to argue with a gun
she was too tired to argue the point

 

[DeletedUser]

Er... no. I'm arguing because you're wrong. Isn't that was arguing is?

ar·gue Verb /ˈärgyo͞o/
Synonyms:
verb: dispute, debate, discuss, reason, contend, quarrel, wrangle
arguing present participle; argued past tense; argued past participle; argues 3rd person singular present
Give reasons or cite evidence in support of an idea, action, or theory, typically with the aim of persuading others to share one's view
defense attorneys argue that the police lacked “probable cause” to arrest the driver
“It stands to reason,” she argued
Persuade someone to do or not to do (something) by giving reasons
I tried to argue him out of it
Exchange or express diverging or opposite views, typically in a heated or angry way
don't argue with me
I wasn't going to argue with a gun
she was too tired to argue the point

Ppl argue for different reasons, I for example argue to pass the time.

 

[DeletedUser]

Ppl argue for different reasons, I for example argue to pass the time.

So am I, as well as proving somebody wrong. :rules:

 

[DeletedUser]

Er... no. I'm arguing because you're wrong. Isn't that was arguing is?

1) your definition was terrible and if your going to do that again try not to post an essay.

2) Arguing does not mean someones wrong it means your opinion is different then there's and you disagree.



Saying someone's wrong is saying its a fact which its not your's is infact an opinion and i provided stats for why your my way is better and you cant provide stats to back your claim so why dont you find a way to claim your mouth shut with your glow stick

 

[DeletedUser]

Well.. back to our argument, after you getting us so off-topic. If you'll realize, HC nukes are great, 'specially for late-game.

 

[DeletedUser]

In my post i said HC nukes are good late game if you know how to snipe and its true...

If you dont know how to snipe your going to be lost.


Explain why its not great and ill tell you why it is.

 

[DeletedUser]

HC nukes are great, 'specially for late-game.

Explain why its not great and ill tell you why it is.

...:rp::att:...Can't disagree with you since you're supporting my point.

 

[DeletedUser]

I personally wouldn't sacrifice a stronger nuke for more versatile sniping capabilities. You can effectively snipe a classic noble train (100 axe, 1 noble) with only 100 LC, and 0 walls. In this case, using HC in your nukes solely for greater sniping capabilities becomes slightly redundant.

 

[DeletedUser]

I personally wouldn't sacrifice a stronger nuke for more versatile sniping capabilities. You can effectively snipe a classic noble train (100 axe, 1 noble) with only 100 LC, and 0 walls. In this case, using HC in your nukes solely for greater sniping capabilities becomes slightly redundant.

It's not for sniping, it's for stacking quick support...

 

[DeletedUser]

I personally wouldn't sacrifice a stronger nuke for more versatile sniping capabilities. You can effectively snipe a classic noble train (100 axe, 1 noble) with only 100 LC, and 0 walls. In this case, using HC in your nukes solely for greater sniping capabilities becomes slightly redundant.

But what your not looking at are a few other facts like if you use defense with your offense (HC and AXES) then it allows you build more Offense which means you will have more nukes and can clear more even tho your Defense is slightly weaker. For example normally in a 10 village cluster you would have about 5 offense 4 defense and 1 scout or something along tho lines.

Which allows you to snipe still but say two or three of your villages are under attack the ability to stack will not be great. For this example we will say its a none archer world. So say your normal Defense is 8000 spears and 200 HC and your normal offense is 7k axes and 3k LC. You have two villages under attack you can use your LC to snipe so your main worry is stacking.

You can effectively get 16k spears and 4k HC in each village as long as he's not faking your other villages. Which isnt bad but your also forgetting he's only attacking two villages if he was attack 4 or 5 villages then you would be screwed when it comes to stacking.





Now lets go to HC offense and HC defense firstly because your going to have Defense in your Offense your going to want to have more spears in your Defense and less HC to Even out the Ratio when you stack. So around 11k spears and 1.2K HC would be a good ratio. Now your offense is what your Defense would normally be but with rams so lets say 8k axes 1.8k HC and 250 rams. Say tho's same two villages are under attack not you can effectively stack them with 22k spears and around 8k HC in each village which is not only a better stack but this also gives you the chance to leave about 100 HC at home in each of your offensive villages for sniping purposes. (forgot to add that doing the HC offense would alloy you go more of a 6 offensive villages 3 defensive villages and 1 scout in a 10 village cluster due to the Defense in the offense which may not seem like alot but it would add up if every 10 villages you have an extra nuke + if your really good at sniping you can risk taking a bigger ratio)


So in the end for a slightly less powerful nuke and i mean slightly...

Spoiler

Attacker Units: 0 0 8000 0 0 0 0 1800 250 0 0 0
Losses: 0 0 8000 0 0 0 0 1800 250 0 0 0


Defender Units: 8000 0 0 0 0 0 0 2000 0 0 0 0
Losses: 5608 0 0 0 0 0 0 1402 0 0 0 0
Damage by rams: The wall has been damaged and downgraded from level 20 to level 12







Attacker Units: 0 0 7000 0 0 2400 400 0 250 0 0 0
Losses: 0 0 7000 0 0 2400 400 0 250 0 0 0


Defender Units: 8000 0 0 0 0 0 0 2000 0 0 0 0
Losses: 6335 0 0 0 0 0 0 1584 0 0 0 0
Damage by rams: The wall has been damaged and downgraded from level 20 to level 11

So in the end both nukes are going to take two but the HC nuke allows you to build more nukes so in the end if would hurt you to lose a nuke less. BUT i would suggest two things before doing this strat if you choose to.


1) Be VERY good at snipe as that will become your main Defense

2) Be fairly late in the game like around 1,000,000 points or higher


Reason being is if you do it to early you will stunt your growth for farming reasons and minting coins.

It's not for sniping, it's for stacking quick support...

You are clueless princess

 

[DeletedUser]

Scientist you won me over
Didn't think about the fact that having HC nukes means capability to build more nukes to begin with. But yes, this is definitely a mid-late game strategy.

 

[DeletedUser]

One thing I will add to Scientist's post, in relation to this part:

So in the end both nukes are going to take two but the HC nuke allows you to build more nukes so in the end if would hurt you to lose a nuke less. BUT i would suggest two things before doing this strat if you choose to.


1) Be VERY good at snipe as that will become your main Defense

2) Be fairly late in the game like around 1,000,000 points or higher


Reason being is if you do it to early you will stunt your growth for farming reasons and minting coins.

The nuke ratio depends entirely upon your off/def balance, in my opinion. I rarely ever use the HC strategy fully - only for defensive villages.
But, because I often have 80-90% offence, it makes more sense for me to use an LC-Axe nuke without HC, as I can do more damage with more nukes.

Also, some top players switch to HC strategy before they have 2 villages, and that still works well. I believe I read a post by PeRvIs somewhere on the .net forums where he mentioned he starts going for HC after 1k LC in his main village. This would be a good tactic, as it would give a good defence in the main village, making it harder to take you out during start-up. It really depends on your style of play though.

Everything else that Scientist said, except that he needs to edit his typo to say 8000 spear and 2000 HC, instead of 200

 

[DeletedUser]

The nuke ratio depends entirely upon your off/def balance, in my opinion. I rarely ever use the HC strategy fully - only for defensive villages.
But, because I often have 80-90% offence, it makes more sense for me to use an LC-Axe nuke without HC, as I can do more damage with more nukes.

Also, some top players switch to HC strategy before they have 2 villages, and that still works well. I believe I read a post by PeRvIs somewhere on the .net forums where he mentioned he starts going for HC after 1k LC in his main village. This would be a good tactic, as it would give a good defence in the main village, making it harder to take you out during start-up. It really depends on your style of play though.

Everything else that Scientist said, except that he needs to edit his typo to say 8000 spear and 2000 HC, instead of 200

Generally unless your a dare devil and play world to world instead of focusing on one world you would build a 1.5:1 ratio offense to defense (well in this area at least) this is standard offense (LC and axes) if you go with a HC ratio it would be pointless to keep this same ratio as you will have defense in your nukes. So generally people go more to a 2:1 or 3:1 ratio.


As for people using it at start up and being successful not saying its impossible as i know it is. But it is very pointless to do with only one village in my opinion. You would have a weak Defense to defend with and Weak Offense to clear with and not as good of farming trips due to having HC and LC rather then just LC.

In order to have a speedy/good start up you need to have a alot of LC in my opinion, altho iv seen players go defense and still have a nice start up due to extreme activity and farming with mass spears. But generally this is a strat you want to take up on after you have at least 50+ villages when i did it on world 24 i had i think around 60 villages and it worked out very nicely.


But in the end it depends how you play and what your good at BUT no matter your offense or defense i would suggest having at least 1/3 of your defensive villages be quick Defense (8k spears 2k HC)

But thats only a suggestion.

 

[DeletedUser]

As for people using it at start up and being successful not saying its impossible as i know it is. But it is very pointless to do with only one village in my opinion. You would have a weak Defense to defend with and Weak Offense to clear with and not as good of farming trips due to having HC and LC rather then just LC.

Nah, not true. I've seen people get rank 1 with a defensive startup and 400 LC... after nobling 300 point villages. It isn't pointless.

 

[DeletedUser]

Nah, not true. I've seen people get rank 1 with a defensive startup and 400 LC... after nobling 300 point villages. It isn't pointless.

Rank one after start up does not mean your good at all noob.....
Not to mention nobling 300 point villages is fairly easy to do

Every post you make, makes you look stupider then the last you should do a few things before posting..


A) Think

B) think again

C) Think about what you just thought about

Then you can post

 

[DeletedUser]

Rank one after start up does not mean your good at all noob.....
Not to mention nobling 300 point villages is fairly easy to do

Every post you make, makes you look stupider then the last you should do a few things before posting..


A) Think

B) think again

C) Think about what you just thought about

Then you can post

Well... then in that case, how does this strategy fail? :if:

 

[DeletedUser]

Generally unless your a dare devil and play world to world instead of focusing on one world you would build a 1.5:1 ratio offense to defense (well in this area at least) this is standard offense (LC and axes) if you go with a HC ratio it would be pointless to keep this same ratio as you will have defense in your nukes. So generally people go more to a 2:1 or 3:1 ratio.

But in the end it depends how you play and what your good at BUT no matter your offense or defense i would suggest having at least 1/3 of your defensive villages be quick Defense (8k spears 2k HC)

But thats only a suggestion.

At the moment on one of my worlds I am not making more than 1 defensive village for every 5-6 I take. I have yet to lose a village, and I have little issue with morale because I have lots of offence flying around constantly. I would agree that I am a bit of a daredevil type player, as you probably saw in W51, but I do try to stick to worlds if I am motivated enough. Plus, more offence = more fun, in my opinion.

1/3 defence is more than enough defence, with quick Defence (8k spears 2k HC, roughly speaking). 1/5 defence works for me, so I am personally sticking by it.


I am in no way disagreeing with your well-written guide - just adding that if you are able to snipe and defend efficiently, you don't need much defence. And that if you are a heavily offensive player, like myself, then it is better to focus on the Axe/LC nuke method, in my opinion


Also, I would agree with Scientist:
KGS - please think through before you post, and stop posting for the sake of it, as it is really annoying, especially given that quite often your posts are factually ignorant/completely wrong. And please don't quote this and respond to it, as there is little/no point in doing so.