Cheri@
Auto-translated
elek34ka
The economy is key in the second stage. It's better to have creatures but lack funds than to have funds but no creatures to hire.
In the third game, I always developed this way, but when I started playing the fifth game, I noticed that if I don't develop the economy early on, I can't properly buy the growth, and then, as usual, a plague arrives (I think that during a plague week, the Necropolis's growth should logically double, but that's a topic for another discussion), and I lose all the meaning of developing an army. But if I build the economy, I lose one growth, let's say vampires and liches (by the way, I don't always manage to buy them), but then I can quickly buy further units, and as the army grows, I can defend myself against the competitor (in the early stages, they won't come anyway). In general, this way, the risk of losses is lower.
Remind me what "late game" means, and I'll answer you.
The economy is key in the second stage. It's better to have creatures but lack funds than to have funds but no creatures to hire.
In the third game, I always developed this way, but when I started playing the fifth game, I noticed that if I don't develop the economy early on, I can't properly buy the growth, and then, as usual, a plague arrives (I think that during a plague week, the Necropolis's growth should logically double, but that's a topic for another discussion), and I lose all the meaning of developing an army. But if I build the economy, I lose one growth, let's say vampires and liches (by the way, I don't always manage to buy them), but then I can quickly buy further units, and as the army grows, I can defend myself against the competitor (in the early stages, they won't come anyway). In general, this way, the risk of losses is lower.
Remind me what "late game" means, and I'll answer you.
Мне больно видеть белый свет,мне легче в полной темноте.
КиШ.
КиШ.
Ушел на неопределенный срок
