Quark Games forums

Post by **Poisonousdeath** » Thu May 16, 2013 4:57 am

DutchDuke wrote:Guardians are the most versatile units without a doubt. They are fast and can get any job done. I use them for quick support, looting and joining siege weapons in attacks. However knights are better at attacking sentries, when you take costs and food consumption into account. Zerks are better at attacking lancers. Lancers and sentries are better for static defense. And lancers, sentries and zerks can be trained at barbs, which shouldn't be neglected.

Nobody can deny guardians have the best stats overall. But this game is about focussing on your goals. If your goal is taking barbs fast, guardians aren't the best units. If your goal is to take out other players fast, guardians aren't the best units either. The only two jobs they excel at is sending support fast and not having to make choices..

It's like saying "Ferrari is better than Ford". It might drive faster, but what do you want to use it for?

Strongly disagree with that comment about Guards taking barbs fast in the early stages if you have guards to work with when capping barbs use them as it will be a lot faster, as an attack unit throwing 3k guards at a city is almost the equivalent of throwing 10k zerks at a city.

Post by **DutchDuke** » Thu Apr 25, 2013 9:24 am

MyName999 wrote:That's why I created my tables with power/food needs. This way, you've got a city and fill it with any unit, you see the "city's power", for offense, or defense against mounted unit, or defense against cavalry unit, or defense against mixed unit (mixed defense...).

But you're right, if to have the best unit in each case you only had to recruit guardians, Valor would be annoying.
The diversity makes the fun, and create diverses strategies. But fact is that MEAN best unit is guardians..,

Guardians are the most versatile units without a doubt. They are fast and can get any job done. I use them for quick support, looting and joining siege weapons in attacks. However knights are better at attacking sentries, when you take costs and food consumption into account. Zerks are better at attacking lancers. Lancers and sentries are better for static defense. And lancers, sentries and zerks can be trained at barbs, which shouldn't be neglected.

Nobody can deny guardians have the best stats overall. But this game is about focussing on your goals. If your goal is taking barbs fast, guardians aren't the best units. If your goal is to take out other players fast, guardians aren't the best units either. The only two jobs they excel at is sending support fast and not having to make choices..

It's like saying "Ferrari is better than Ford". It might drive faster, but what do you want to use it for?

Post by **MyName999** » Mon Feb 25, 2013 5:45 am

Marlo0826 wrote:Btw... I forgot to add, for a single city, the best defense AGINST guards are Lancers, not guards. Everyone thinks guards are the best for defense... Well they kind of are. But take into account population for a single city, and time of training, and you will see that the best way to defend against attacking guards are not with guards at all.

In a infanty defensive city, you can hold about 20k lancers. In a cavalry defensive city, you can hold around 5500 guards, and that's pushing it. That being said, against attacking knights or guards, the 20k lance will have a MUCH more devastating effect than the 5500 guards. Don't believe me? Run a sim.

That's why I created my tables with power/food needs. This way, you've got a city and fill it with any unit, you see the "city's power", for offense, or defense against mounted unit, or defense against cavalry unit, or defense against mixed unit (mixed defense...).

But you're right, if to have the best unit in each case you only had to recruit guardians, Valor would be annoying.
The diversity makes the fun, and create diverses strategies. But fact is that MEAN best unit is guardians..,

Post by **Marlo0826** » Sun Feb 24, 2013 8:01 am

Btw... I forgot to add, for a single city, the best defense AGINST guards are Lancers, not guards. Everyone thinks guards are the best for defense... Well they kind of are. But take into account population for a single city, and time of training, and you will see that the best way to defend against attacking guards are not with guards at all.

In a infanty defensive city, you can hold about 20k lancers. In a cavalry defensive city, you can hold around 5500 guards, and that's pushing it. That being said, against attacking knights or guards, the 20k lance will have a MUCH more devastating effect than the 5500 guards. Don't believe me? Run a sim.

Post by **Marlo0826** » Sun Feb 24, 2013 7:53 am

Guards, hands down. Knights have virtually no defense.

Post by **MyName999** » Fri Feb 01, 2013 5:21 am

CreatorPrime wrote:@OP - Guardians, period. No other discussion is necessary.

@MyName999 - I have several issues with your last 2 tables, the strength/build time and strength/build time+cost graphs. First of all, if cost is not a factor and you are only considering build time, there is no point in comparing cavalry units with infantry units because they come out of separate buildings. The strength/build time chart is useless and a moot point. You should only be comparing guardians vs knights and sentries vs lancers vs berserkers and in those cases the answers are obvious.

Second, the strength/build time + cost graph doesn't really work. "Strength per resource per time" doesn't make sense - the value of cost versus the value of time is arbitrary and cannot be compared. If cost efficiency is more important to me than time efficiency (even though time efficiency is still considered), the results of my chart may end up being different.

I agree that every case lead to another way of viewing the results...

On another hand, you still can take a paper sheet and hide the side you don't want to see ;-P

Post by **The00Drew** » Fri Jan 25, 2013 9:37 am

O.o......mighty lion of valor has spoken.

Post by **CreatorPrime** » Fri Jan 25, 2013 7:42 am

@OP - Guardians, period. No other discussion is necessary.

@MyName999 - I have several issues with your last 2 tables, the strength/build time and strength/build time+cost graphs. First of all, if cost is not a factor and you are only considering build time, there is no point in comparing cavalry units with infantry units because they come out of separate buildings. The strength/build time chart is useless and a moot point. You should only be comparing guardians vs knights and sentries vs lancers vs berserkers and in those cases the answers are obvious.

Second, the strength/build time + cost graph doesn't really work. "Strength per resource per time" doesn't make sense - the value of cost versus the value of time is arbitrary and cannot be compared. If cost efficiency is more important to me than time efficiency (even though time efficiency is still considered), the results of my chart may end up being different.

Post by **Slaskio** » Fri Jan 25, 2013 5:46 am

Actually of you do the math I was right in what I said.
Lancers 20k = 400,000 attack force
Zerks 20k = 1,000,000 attack force.
Guards 5k = 575,000 attack force
Knights 6666 = 733,260 attack force
Lancers are 40% as effective as zerks while guards are 58% as effective. Why you'd waste them on attacks, I'd really hop it's to kill them to make room for knights.

No it not as bad, but I said almost as bad.
Plus knights are 75% faster to build, but doing the math you're only looking at an hour at most difference when building pure knights or pure guards for a full city.

Post by **Powerbang** » Thu Jan 17, 2013 1:22 pm

... Someone suggested in a previous post...

Now if you're talking about overall farm efficiency, A knight is better than a guard.

If you're so truly concerned with the numbers, why not build a 20,000 zerk city? By far the best offense you can get.

Quark Games forums

Knights or Guardians for defense?

Post a reply

Expand view Topic review: Knights or Guardians for defense?