Orcs vs. Humans — Stronghold

Mdance

9/29/2010 6:25 AM UTC

Auto-translated

Lordesat

I might be missing something, but the problem is that this first-strike tactic doesn't work at all for me with the Orcs.
...
Why is the result so absurd? Or is Mdance not telling us something?:confused:

The army ratio is completely off, which is why the result is predictable. If you have 300 Griffons with a growth of 5 per week, then there should be a corresponding number of Warlords and Daughters of Earth (the growth is the same).
In your replay, 2 stacks of Warlords with 30 units each push the Cyclops back twice by 0.3 in ATB. This is not enough for this scheme to work. There should be an adequate number of Warlords, in 3 stacks. The maximum push (0.6 in ATB) is achieved with at least 60 Warlords. Then we will get a total push of 1.8 in ATB before the enemy hero's turn, and the battle will be approximately like in my replay (see attachment).

Fireball

Undoubtedly, this is the main problem with the perk, but the Cyclops don't attack everyone at once. In principle, there are 2 attacks, and you will always have to choose who to attack. And in the Knight's army, there may be 5-6 units of level in a dangerous quantity. Will the Orc immediately start crushing the Griffons? I don't think so...

The Cyclops don't attack everyone, yes. However, with 3 large units (and often 4, because during the training of Paladins/Champions, they can be divided into 2 stacks) in the Knight's army, it is very difficult to arrange the troops so that several stacks are not immediately affected. And the Griffons can easily be hit by the splash damage.
If we talk about Axel, then it's a no-brainer - what level unit will be in a dangerous quantity, therefore, a level 5 unit will not pose a special threat. :)
Therefore, the main task of the Orc seems to me to be to destroy the trained uber-stack of the Knight, while capturing everyone possible.

Fireball

And I won't argue. I just assign the role of "anchor" to the Griffons (if, of course, they are not decided to be destroyed first) in a situation where the Cyclops have severely damaged the Knight's army, but they themselves have been affected by Subjugation. With that initiative ratio, the Daughters and Warlords will simply not have time to "get even" with the Cyclops.

They won't get even, almost guaranteed. Moreover, the Knight may not even have time to cast Vampirism, because in this case, he may miss the opportunity to take the Cyclops out of control. The Knight's SP, taking into account the reduction of his Spell Power by the Orc's perk, should be enough for at least 2 turns, so that the Subjugation-Vampirism-Subjugation combo works; otherwise, you can forget about Vampirism and just recast Subjugation.

Fireball

And it will be difficult, or even impossible, for the Orc to destroy a decent stack of alt. Griffons under Readiness and Vampirism without Cyclops. Low initiative and zero morale are only a plus in this approach - you can't scare them, the counter doesn't reset for longer. That is, the calculation is that the Griffons will be in Readiness before the 2nd (!) cast of the hero, and the Cyclops will not attack them.
Ideally, have 2 possible "anchors" and space them out. You can guess who can be used as the second one under Laslo.

Yes, under Readiness and Vampirism, the anchors (both the 1st and 2nd options) can be excellent. However, the Knight is not a caster. This is not Orson, who relies on an anchor of Zombies and destroys the enemy with magic, and not a Warlock with anchors of Minotaurs and Hydras, who pours Chaos on the enemy. Who will attack? Well, these 2 anchors will remain, which the Orc will not touch. He will cut down the rest of the troops, run away when he feels that "enough is enough," and return with the remaining unused army. :)

Attachments 1

1 file attached • Total size: 316.1 KB

sav

2010-09-29

316.1 KB 157

Я видел, как Небо окутала Тьма, и Небо смирилось с Судьбой,
Горящие реки сходили с ума, пытаясь остаться водой,
Земля пропустила коварный удар, раскрывшись на шаге вперёд,
Взлетел разъярённым драконом Огонь и понял, что тоже умрёт...

Fireball

9/29/2010 1:47 PM UTC

Auto-translated

Cyclops don't attack everyone, that's true. However, with 3 large units (and often 4, because during the training of Paladins/Champions, they can be split into 2 stacks) in a Knight's army, it's very difficult to position troops so that several stacks aren't hit at once. And Griffons can easily be caught in the splash damage.
If we're talking about Axel, it's obvious that a unit of what level will be in dangerous numbers, therefore, a level 5 unit won't pose a special threat.
Therefore, I see the main task of the Orc as destroying the Knight's trained uber-stack, while capturing everyone possible.

Let's go into more detail here. :) Since we're talking about training, how much more expensive is it to have 10 Paladins compared to 4 Paladins and 6 Inquisitors? The amount isn't that important (it's something around 9000, I think, if with normal skills). That is, the presence of any secondary skill solves the economic problem. This means that for each Cyclops, there can be 5(!) Paladins. Let's say there are 150 necessary Chieftains, which means there are approximately 30 Cyclops, and 150 Paladins under Axel (in our model calculation). We position the horses so that, if desired, they can attack, they will respond to the one-eyed creatures (if, of course, there is no silence). Taking into account the distribution of parameters for the Orc and the Knight, and the fact that there are more artifacts for Attack than for Defense, let's assume that the Orc's Attack is 5 higher than the Knight's Defense, and the Orc's Defense and the Knight's Attack are equal. Now let's calculate the damage of the Cyclops during the first attack on the Paladins:
30 * 51 * 1.15 * 0.7 * 1.3 * 1.55 = 2482, i.e., approximately 25 Paladins minus (1.3 - the averaged model multiplier from Expert Luck)
And in response:
0.3 * 25 * 125 * 1.15 / 1.15 = 937.5, i.e., approximately 4 Cyclops minus
0.7 * 25 * 125 * (1.15 / 1.15) * 1100 / 6750 = 356.5 rage minus (i.e., with a decent probability, the rage is already less than zero)
It's not particularly great for the Orc... :rolleyes:
Now about the effectiveness of Crushing Blow. There is no strict description in the manual (maybe I had an old version?), but I assume that it is identical to Stun, but only in an area, i.e.
0.25 - 0.03(15000/6750) = 0.1834, which means that the probability of stunning, even with Soldier's Luck, is approximately 1/3.
I don't think it makes sense to accurately calculate the second attack of the Cyclops on the Paladins before the hero's turn; it's quite obvious that more than a hundred of them will remain alive, i.e., less than a third (!) of the stack will be killed. It doesn't really seem like a rout in the Knight's army. It turns out that even by focusing only on the uber-stack, it won't be possible to quickly remove it from the battle. Next, depending on the situation: either Subjugation on the Cyclops, or Vampirism on the Paladins, and game over for the Orc. Only resistance and a good roll will save him - Subjugation will not work, Vampirism will be cast too late or too early (silence, roar, etc.)
The main question is - how is it with training? Because, as the calculation shows, even a simple increase in monks can, with a decent probability, become an insurmountable obstacle for the Orc. Of course, if the focus is on 1 stack, then Darkness is our choice. Otherwise, Roar + Empathy, and it's unclear where the money went.

They won't return, almost guaranteed. Moreover, the Knight may not even have time to cast Vampirism, because in this case, he may miss the opportunity to control the Cyclops. The Knight's spell power, taking into account the reduction from the Orc's Spell Power perk, should be enough for at least 2 turns, so that the Subjugation-Vampirism-Subjugation combo works; otherwise, you can forget about Vampirism and just recast Subjugation.
Yes, with Readiness and Vampirism, anchors (both the 1st and 2nd options) can be excellent. However, the Knight is not a caster. He is not Orson, who relies on a Zombie anchor and defeats the enemy with magic, and he is not a Warlock with anchors of Minotaurs and Hydras, pouring Chaos on the enemy. Who will attack? Well, these 2 anchors will remain, which the Orc will not touch. He will cut down the rest of the troops, run away when he feels that "it's enough," and return with the remaining unused army.

It's clear that the "anchor" + Darkness tactic was honestly stolen from the Necropolis. And no one can apply it better than the undead, but if the artifacts are not for Attack/Defense, but for Magic (don't forget about +5 for Darkness), then it may turn out to be viable for the Knight. Of course, the slow (and therefore "anchor") Cyclops will attack, and not pure magic.

There is no point in commenting on the replay from Lordesat. In a rush, 2 "adjustments" MUST give a turn (after morale - one). So, 30 Chieftains in a stack is not an option.:smile38:

Soljie

9/29/2010 5:26 PM UTC

Auto-translated

And what if, in this battle, you deploy **only** a huge stack of Incas with vampirism and under the effect of the "Curse" spell? Even if the stun works, the next attack won't guarantee it, and the retaliation will be significant, and the melee units (especially Cyclops) will take a beating. Artifacts don't affect initiative, so on the offensive unit, Haven might get lucky, and the "Frightful Howl" spell won't be a problem. Plus, you can deploy another stack, like archers, and shoot down the Centaurs. With 120 Warlords, you'll have about (with good luck on gold mines and gold artifacts) 300-400 Incas, and I think the Orcs will think twice before attacking them.

Там бугага - там Ктулху бродит, Креведко на ветвях висит...

antonag07

9/29/2010 5:28 PM UTC

Auto-translated

I'll chime in on the discussion – the "Readiness" skill for Knights (and probably not just for them) has a significant bug, so using it with combat griffons (and especially with armored knights/zealots) is a rather questionable undertaking...

Ganseng

9/29/2010 5:31 PM UTC

Auto-translated

The "Readiness" skill for Knights (probably not just for them) has a serious bug.

Could you please elaborate on this?

In reply to Soljie

antonag07

9/29/2010 5:36 PM UTC

Auto-translated

Soljie

What if, in this battle, you deploy only a huge stack of Incas under vampirism and with a Watcher? Even if the stun works, the next attack won't guarantee it, and the counterattack will be significant, and melee units (especially Cyclops) will take a beating. Artifacts don't affect the hero's initiative, so there might be luck with the Offensive Unit and Haven => Frightful Howl won't be scary + you can deploy another stack, like archers, and shoot down the Centaurs. With 120 Warlords, there will be about (with good luck on gold mines, artifacts with gold) 300-400 Incas, and I think the Orc will think twice before attacking them.

You probably read the heated discussion that unfolded above, but not from the beginning - the Centaurs are temporarily grazing in their training grounds (and waiting for news from the front lines :) )

Added 4 minutes ago

Ganseng

And could you please elaborate on this part?

It's a well-known bug - "Preparedness" only works when you click "Defense" and triggers on the first counterattack - subsequent attacks are made by the opponent without fear of receiving a preemptive strike; "Wait" completely removes "Preparedness." In addition, it seems that "Endless Retaliation" of the Battle Griffons does not allow for a repeated "Preparedness" (i.e., there will only be the primary one when their turn comes). So the "double option" described above - unfortunately, is unlikely to make the battle easier for the Knights...

Fireball

9/29/2010 9:39 PM UTC

Auto-translated

2 antonag07
Either I didn't express myself clearly enough, or I'm not aware of the bug you mentioned.
Personally, I always assumed that the first attacker after the "Defend" command would retaliate before the attack, and then after it. The rest would only retaliate after the attack and once. I just wrote this with the thought in mind of a battle against 1 stack (Cyclops), then it turned out to be a kind of double retaliation constantly due to close initiative (morale doesn't count). Is that how the perk was described in the English manual, or am I missing something? They definitely won't retaliate twice, that would be too overpowered and essentially unkillable except with magic.

antonag07

9/30/2010 5:30 PM UTC

Auto-translated

I don't have the English version of the manual right now (nor do I have the beta version 3.1) - in the Russian version, it says about the ability "Enemy Doesn't Resist" (Daughters of Earth after applying "Slow") - and in this case, "Readiness" doesn't work (at all!). So, with an average initiative of 10 (adjusting for "Storm" and artifacts), it's risky for combat griffons to press "Defend" - because when "Wait," as I mentioned above, "Readiness" also won't work. In general, all the signs of a bug are present.

Added 25 minutes later

Fireball

2 antonag07
They definitely won't answer twice, that would be too much, and essentially, it can't be killed except with magic.

Whether it's "too much" or not, but essentially, this is also a bug (although I can agree that we are simply dealing with an incorrect description of how the "Readiness" ability works).

Саня Изи

10/2/2010 7:12 AM UTC

Auto-translated

I apologize for the inadequate replay. After testing the tactic on 3 stacks of 60 warlords each, it proved effective. Indeed, it's an excellent tactic for the Orc, but the Knight can still win by using Subjugation. However, the problem is that, as Mdance correctly pointed out, the Orcish invasion won't end there, because there are still Warmongers, Paoka, and Centaurs. By that time, the Knight will have at most a couple of surviving stacks (at least, according to the results of my battle; I won't post the replay this time). Nevertheless, there are many questions about the tactic, such as the hero's skills must be at a decent level, and there should be several secondary skills, and the game should be played exclusively for a long late game. But what if, for example, the Knight decides to stay in the castle?
P.S. Here's another thought. What if the Knight has Shackles and defeats the Orc with Cyclops? Then the main hero is lost, and the remaining Orcish stacks can be dealt with even with what the Knight has left, if he has Vampirism and Subjugation.

Смысла нет, но вы держитесь там. Удачи, здоровья, хорошего настроения!
И пока в кармане пачка милкиуэйев - значит все не так уж плохо на сегодняшний день

Ganseng

10/2/2010 8:35 AM UTC

Auto-translated

In any "hit-and-run" tactic, there's a chance of encountering shackles. But firstly, this chance is quite small, and secondly, you can send a disposable hero to check for shackles.

In reply to Ganseng

Саня Изи

10/2/2010 12:35 PM UTC

Auto-translated

Ganseng

In any "hit-and-run" tactic, there's a chance of running into Shackles of Pain. But firstly, this chance is quite small, and secondly, you can send a suicide hero to check for the presence of Shackles of Pain.

Hmm. So, for example, you send a suicide hero to attack the main hero. Let's assume you discover that he has Shackles of Pain. And what will that give you?

Смысла нет, но вы держитесь там. Удачи, здоровья, хорошего настроения!
И пока в кармане пачка милкиуэйев - значит все не так уж плохо на сегодняшний день

Ganseng

10/2/2010 2:46 PM UTC

Auto-translated

This will let you know whether or not it's worth trying that "uber tactic" with a rush. In that case, it's better to attack with all your forces than to lose your main hero, which is a very real possibility.

Саня Изи

10/2/2010 3:52 PM UTC

Auto-translated

In that case, I would say that the probability of you defeating everyone at once is much higher than when using the cyclops tactic, because from the very first turn, the Knight will subdue the cyclops, and they won't be able to kill anyone. There won't be anyone left to push forward. And the Berserker is here to help. So, when this tactic was devised, it was intended to be much more effective than attacking with everyone at once.

Смысла нет, но вы держитесь там. Удачи, здоровья, хорошего настроения!
И пока в кармане пачка милкиуэйев - значит все не так уж плохо на сегодняшний день

Ereb

10/2/2010 6:46 PM UTC

Auto-translated

I'm a bit confused about how you can take down a Knight in the late game with that tactic. Or is it some kind of hit-and-run strategy? You say that shackles are needed, but in a different scenario, the Knight's horses can (manage to go and) gain speed and cause more trouble. You need to be confident in your abilities to attack like that; if you eliminate all the Cyclops, you'll lose the battle. There's always a chance that 100 horses + Axel + speed boost + luck could turn the tide.

За кланы! За кровь!

In reply to Ereb

KillAndAction

10/2/2010 7:54 PM UTC

Auto-translated

I still believe that there isn't a clear advantage of Haven over the Stronghold in general. Perhaps we should organize a special tournament for a late-game match: "Stronghold vs. Haven." :smile30: