Makes #27 seem really formidable doesn't it?

They really know how to exploit certain race benefits.
Or so I've been told.

you don't need a home-kill, 3 sets of 8x vikings HnR/razes will decimate 100% of any tribe's military

btw can we please have loss reduction from walls coded soon? :p

anyways imo, raze needs fixing (reduce defender military loss). viking damage is fine as this is a special case where you have 12 of them in close range.

however i don't like how an under-militarized tribe can deal military/home damage on a tribe half his size by sending half of the target's defence. that's like HnR, but no size restriction, then add home damage on top

exactly..!vikings damage on homes is already devastating,adding the insane number of military loss is bankruptcy!

followed by death

it's not viking damage, it's raze damage. It deals a sick lot more damage than HnR while it is supposed to kill, what, homes?

and as Halcyon says viking damage is fine for the simple reason it was never changed in the whole history of orkfia :P

Comparison:

Viking raze kills 13k units
Viking HnR kills 4k units.

Both with 60% of required defense sent.

And you can't lose both military and your life, so with vikings you generally lose the military... sorry xP

so what is the point of having raze in the game if some people are only using it too destroy an enemies military

it's purpose was too kill an enemy and if you are targeting a smaller tribe all you are doing is destroying the army just like HnR does but worse with no size restriction

I have no clue viper. We are just benefiting from it ;)

Note that it has been like this for over 5 ages.

what do you mean you have no clue

you are on the Dev team so surely you must know what the sole purpose of raze was when you guys came up with the idea

not actually 13k normal military loss bolle..you had mortality spell on me that's why..but with raze alone(no Mort),it's only around 7k(which still hurts though) plus the fact that most of you are within my range so you guys cause maximum damage..havn't tried HnR to compare military loss.

I believe raze military losses was made similar to BC military losses, which sucks because for BC you need 100% victory, for raze 50%.

So the point of dev was to make it destroy homes. Am I supposed to check every single aspect that is coded? It's called miscommunication, or just overlooking details ^^

And frankly, the fact no one has complained about it for over 6 ages does make one wonder whether it wasn't very useful for them for surviving KAs.

Aren't losses based on the amount of military send by the attacker and the amount of troops the defender has?
So if you send 50% the defended also just loses 50% of normal losses.

But yes raze is same as BC. It also has about the same properties in general.
The big difference with HnR is the amount of losses the attacker has.
Also, if you want to destroy the most of military per tick you're best off using Standards.

It's hard to defend against the military of an alliance full with attackers.
However, in theory it should also be hard for the 12 person alliance to defend against T/M. Since T/M alliances wouldn't need any much protection against it.
Obviously Vikings are just very strong attackers(and we all knew it when 27 started with them)

I only suggest walls to be more worth it.(20% walls+FoR should almost or completely nullify the losses imho) Where only HnR can still do some damage to military.
Just has to be balanced for Dwarfs and any other race that already has some advantage in running walls.

Only feasible if their use as t/m defense is removed imo.

EDIT: I'm referring to this indirect use:

# 1% walls gives 1.5% lower land losses (when attacked)
# 1% walls gives 1.5% lower building damage (when attacked)

So, in short, immunity to BCs mostly.

i have not been playing for 6 ages but i guess no one has complained before as razes have been generally used to actually kill a tribe not kill all there military

it's not their military damage. it's the 50% thingy that makes it the best choice and overpowered for the purpose.

20% walls+FoR

i don't think walls really help in military losses which has been mentioned before

and FoR is useless if you get Mortality casted on you

Maybe, but as I see it weaps are still way more useful than walls.

can't agree more.

can't we just refer to the “walls give 20% defense weaps give 20% offense” and skip the rest except maybe the “1% walls gives 1.5% lower military losses (when attacked)”? I like that much more -.-

hehehe damn nice to watch atleast from a distance...

You did not need to be a genious to understand what was about to happen or would when KP went all bc/HnR/raze monster race vikings... Just happy that something acctually happens in old orkfia :)

well no i pictured them HnRing a tribe's military away/tick-kill with mass razes - not mix and match ;)

it's not mix and match, it's purely the military :/ we kill too much military to kill the tribe, especially with those walls reducing the amount of homes demolished :P

aw. i feel your pain ;)

so bolle what you are saying is KP cannot kill anyone with those vikings and with your guys keep hitting a certain alliance the rest of us can grow past your vikings with ease

Predator any news on 62? i wouldn't mind seeing them back right now

that would be telling

It's not like we're growing atm no.. We're berserking xD