Best Ulm troops early/mid? ArmorPierce v ArmorNeg
 

Hi,

I am playing Ulm for the first time. I know what leaders I want to build, but I'm not sure which of their troops to build. I want to use gold on leaders so am hoping to save on my troop buys a little (i.e. don't want to buy a lot of cavalry)

Btw, how do shields affect missile hit/damage?

BP Inf (morningstar+shield) - seem like the best buy to me.
BP Pikeneer - better morale but no shield, will do great vs indy troops but will die vs indy archers. Probly a no-buy?
Crossbowman - 1 attk every 3 rounds is weak. Probly a no-buy?
Guardian - better morale, great weapon, but twice the gold cost. Probly a no-buy?
Cav - great but expensive. Probly a no-buy?
Other units of note?

Any deep thoughts?

Thanks,
John

P.S. Does Armor Negate mean protection is not used at all while Armor Pierce means 1/2 protection is used?

Re: Best Ulm troops early/mid? ArmorPierce v Armor
 

I like guardians, but i'm always a sucker for good morale, and since i usually try to minimize any levels in productivity...

sappers are a good unit. great for sieges, and otherwise a normal crossbow, which doesn't have enough force to seriously endanger your bp inf., and fires every 2nd round.

Re: Best Ulm troops early/mid? ArmorPierce v Armor
 

Shields add their protection just like any other piece of armour. Their defense bonus adds that number against the roll that the missile makes to hit.

I tend to purchase these alot myself.

They have a protection of 18, so almost no arrows will ever hurt them. Only crossbows are dangerous.

The only problem with arbalests is that they are so expensive in resources and that they can actually damage your own troops. Other than that, they have devastating damage potential.

Buy these once you have enough gold income to fill out the queue and still but enough master smith's. Their morale is extremely important for Ulm.

I've never used them myself, but they probably have a role.

Black Lords make half-decent thugs if you give them something like a fire brand and elemental armour.

That's exactly correct.

Re: Best Ulm troops early/mid? ArmorPierce v Armor
 

Yes.

Re: shields, they reduce the chance of missiles hitting.

Re: unit prefs, I'm partial to the Guardians (for their superior morale and weapon), and flail-armed troops (two attacks).

Re: Best Ulm troops early/mid? ArmorPierce v Armor
 

graemes advice is great http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/happy.gif

my use for ulmish cav is the following :
they and sappers have 2 strat movement as only ulmish units .
mastersmith have 2 strat move too .

since sappers count as 5 units when sieging i buy as ulm only sappers , mastersmith + cavalry .

the sappers shoot more often than the arlabests but don't harm my cav normally .
this way i have strat 2 movement , thnx to the sapper ability can storm every castle and i have a small but powerful force which doesn't need to care much about supply .



against indeps i put the knights on flanking attacks .
against humans the knights are normally on hold + attack while my mastersmith + my sappers do quite nice damage especially the mastersmiths http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/smile.gif

Re: Best Ulm troops early/mid? ArmorPierce v Armor
 

My favorite Ulm infantry is also the morningstar+shield, although I use the pikemen extensively also. Pikemen are good for when you are facing enemy cavalry, because they break up cavalry charges fairly well with their long weapons (most knights will make their morale roll vs repel, but not all of them). Against other infantry, having a bunch of pikemen in front will stall the troops while your cavalry or archers kill them. And pikemen remain interesting into the late game against summoned troops without 30/50 morale, as always some of them will fail to attack. This series of small advantages makes them worth having as a part of your army.

The Ulm knights are great, because they have exceptional protection, strat move 2, and very good morale also. Being mounted, they suffer less encumbrance for their enormous armor. Unless your enemy has designed their force to beat you, knights will often take no losses. Finally, knights are effective against many SCs, as the standard banelord+wraithsword without a heroic ability will have trouble with a bunch of knights and sappers.

Of course, vs. heavy magic Users, you don't fare so well, but them's the breaks... Watch out for lightning and fire damage especially, and things like Drain Life. Ulms have extra HPs compared to normal humans, but compared to what else is out there, they don't have that many.

Re: Best Ulm troops early/mid? ArmorPierce v Armor
 

yes I definitely buy armies such as you put forth boron. those black knights hold a lot of conventional punch. smiths for magma/blade. small force of sappers to pepper the opponent and provide a frightening degree of siegery.

however, I don't ever start w/ knights because of the outrageous resource costs for hvy Cav in this game, and I don't go production, or little. After a few castles, though, this immediately becomes plausible.

otherwise the guardians to flank ;P and a mixture of BP inf heading straight up. flails are better against lightly armored opponents. Axes against hvy armor w/out shields. Morningstars against hvy armor w/ shields.

Re: Best Ulm troops early/mid? ArmorPierce v Armor
 

Do flails fatigue twice as fast or not?

Re: Best Ulm troops early/mid? ArmorPierce v Armor
 

They cause fatigue at the normal rate. Fatigue is acrued on a per turn basis, or twice per turn for quickened units.

Re: Best Ulm troops early/mid? ArmorPierce v Armor
 

hm it is 2 black steel plate infanteries or 1 knight resourcewise .
or 3 normal ulm infanteries vs 1 knight resourcewise .

the problem is the light ulmish infantry you get probably more losses due to your arlabests then to enemy fire then.
the heavy ulmish infantry though has so high encumberance and is so slow that when it goes to battle a few round it is so fatigued that it almost doesn't hit an opponent after the first few rounds .
morale is quite low too .

so spearmen are already quite evil for ulmish infantry because of repel .


against marignon / arco or man e.g. ulmish infantry should suck bigtime .

many indies are infantry with spear too .

so at high indep settings in my practice games with ulm for me really the sapper + knights only combo worked better than e.g. arlabests + ulmish infantry .

it will take for the ulmish infantry about 2-4 turns to meet the opponent .
so 6-12 fatigue .
then each combat round for the heavy ulmish infantry +8-10 fatigue , for the light ulmish infantry 6-8 fatigue .
at 20 -1 att , at 40 -2 etc.

all ulmish inf have 10 base attack .
so soon they fight with 9 or 8 attack .

this makes it almost impossible for them to hit highdef troops like vans .

Re: Best Ulm troops early/mid? ArmorPierce v Armor
 

No, fatigue only comes when units do close combat attacks, or cast spells. Marching doesn't cause fatigue. Still, the heavy plate does cause fatigue that can make the chainmail Ulmish infantry better in some situations than the plate infantry. Also because you get more of them.

They're all tough, so when you need more numbers, like at the beginning, I tend to go for the fastest builds: Maul/Axe Chainmail troops, with some shield/mail troops to block arrows.

PvK

Re: Best Ulm troops early/mid? ArmorPierce v Armor
 

whats base encumberance then ?
there is base encumberance , lowest value
melee encumberance , midvalue .
and spell casting encumberance , highest value .

so do you get the base encumberance then by missile weapons like bows ?

Re: Best Ulm troops early/mid? ArmorPierce v Armor
 

No. Base encumbrance is the encumbrance of the unit when it is nude. Encumbrance values of equipment are added to this to get effective encumbrance.

PvK

Re: Best Ulm troops early/mid? ArmorPierce v Armor
 

.. and twice the equipment encumbrance is added to get the effective spellcasting encumbrance.

So wearing heavy armor is a no-no for a spellcaster, usually.

Re: Best Ulm troops early/mid? ArmorPierce v Armor
 

Except Clockwork Horrors anyway. I just found out the hard way those things get 15 fatigue per turn even if they just stand there doing nothing.

Re: Best Ulm troops early/mid? ArmorPierce v Armor
 

I didn't think to add, "... for units that don't run on wind-up springs ..." http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/happy.gif

PvK

Re: Best Ulm troops early/mid? ArmorPierce v Armor
 

heh. That's *magical*, not wound-up, springs. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/smirk.gif

Re: Best Ulm troops early/mid? ArmorPierce v Armor
 

I like the arbelists a lot, especially for beginning expansion. They do immense damage...the problem being that they can hurt your own troops, so I usually set them to 'fire archers'.

Re: Best Ulm troops early/mid? ArmorPierce v Armor
 

The key thing with missile troops is to put them on your wings (flanks) firing towards the enemy (the AI almost always places its troops along the centerline). That way, your missileers won't be directly shooting over (or into the backs of) your own troops. The "firing archers" command is nice for making sure your volleys try to avoid your own troops, but it also has the drawback that it won't cut down the number of enemy troops charging your own, nor hurting them so they'll fail morale faster. I find that very frequently the enemy unit charging me will break morale and rout just as it's reaching my front line, due to the massive storm of arrows coming from both of my rear flanks. It's quite nice when they do that and your own swordsmen don't have to risk their skins, the archers (and mages) having done all the dirty work. It's especially important as Caelum, since the winged folk aren't even remotely (except for iceclads) as tough as Ulms are.