![]() |
Re: Fire vs. Death heavy bless
Quote:
|
Re: Fire vs. Death heavy bless
It's erratic. They can shoot twice but often shoot move instead.
|
Re: Fire vs. Death heavy bless
Quote:
The conclusion I see from this thread so far is that in a straight, melee sacred comparison (the area that attracts the heaviest blesses) fire is better. If you are playing a nation that cannot depend so completely on its melee sacreds (meaning most nations) this kind of comparison is meaningless. |
Re: Fire vs. Death heavy bless
Quote:
But, I do understand how people's strategy to winning the game is often just "win more battles", making more complex strategies seem impossible. Quote:
That being said, an amount of Fire Resistance or just armor to essentially cancel the Fire Weapons effect is pitifully easy to get in the middle and late game, so a Fire bless is basically just an attack bonus by then. By comparison, the Death bless is weaker in the early game but it never goes out of style; MR tends to ramp up slightly overall as people use summons, but the AN damage will still be useful even into the late game. Add that to the increasing importance of Thugs and SCs in the middle to late game and the affliction bonus becomes dramatically more useful. So if you want to take anything away from this thread, take this: Fire for early game, Death for late, and both are not that useful in either if you are using a nation that hits really hard already like Lanka or Neifleheim. |
Re: Fire vs. Death heavy bless
Basing a strat around alchemizing 200 gems to empower someone up to D1 to site search so your pretender has D gems is pretty absurd.
|
Re: Fire vs. Death heavy bless
Quote:
And 200 gems is just a worse-case scenario. With Astral gems, a little luck from random events, or just some lucky site searching by finding a mixed-type site and the actual number of gems might be a lot less (and that doesn't even count the chance that you might get a Death random on a Wolf Shaman or some other indie recruitable mage or site mage). I'm surprised that you consider it absurd. Afraid people might actually win games where you have the superior army and lands? |
Re: Fire vs. Death heavy bless
It's not like Utterdark = you win. If you're facing Ermor, the darkness will be irrelevant to them for instance, and they may not worry about the income loss either. Blood nations will be happy with it too. Spending hundreds of gems to empwoer someone so your pretender can cast a spell which is not a game-winner by itself looks a bit excessive, but it is a strategy. I'm not sure it's necessarily a better strategy than rushing your neighbour with sacreds and killing them before turn 32 and then use a bigger army, gold and gem income to win.
|
Re: Fire vs. Death heavy bless
Quote:
I'm not saying that you auto-win. By turn 35 or 40 a few well-scripted mages or thugs/SCs can still turn your armies into goo, but I'd put it in the top three tactics that let you steamroll nations or break the hearts of your enemies and cause them to go AI. As for Bless Rushes, they are not the top three tactics. Having broken the back of more than one bless rush with such exotic tactics as "archers" or "level 2 magic", I don't rate it terribly high. |
Re: Fire vs. Death heavy bless
Quote:
|
Re: Fire vs. Death heavy bless
Quote:
Why wouldn't they have an army? Many blood nations have units that don't care about darkness (abysia, lanka's kalamukha and Mictlan moon or rain warriors). Furhtermore Agarthans, undead hordes from Ermor or Pangaea, R'lyeh autosummons and mind blasts, that's a lot of units that won't be affected a lot by the Utterdark. |
All times are GMT -4. The time now is 11:46 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.1
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©1999 - 2025, Shrapnel Games, Inc. - All Rights Reserved.