|
|
|
 |

November 20th, 2007, 11:47 PM
|
Lieutenant Colonel
|
|
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 1,355
Thanks: 0
Thanked 5 Times in 4 Posts
|
|
Re: The Dominions of Khaldun
Niarg, you've played other strategy games.
In those other games, did you prefer the small but deadly elite force of warriors? Or did you prefer overwhelming hordes?
Do you prefer defeating your enemy by forcing a confrontation with their army and destroying them in the field, or do you find yourself avoiding direct conflict, raiding and attacking their infrastructure instead, leaving them incapable of victory despite their superior forces?
One common rule of thumb is to average one province a turn for your first year. For some nations, the number is higher. Don't feel compelled to attack an indie immediately, if another turn of recruitment well cut down on your recruitment. If not taking one now means taking two later, instead of taking one now, heading back for reinforcements, then moving out again...
Another guideline people go by is the number of provinces per player. If there are 10 land provinces per land player, try to get those ten by the end of your first year to be on an even footing. More is better, of course.
Attacking provinces adjacent to your capital is very important because it increases production. But after that, gold is a more important factor than resources- until you get other forts up or find very nice independents.
|

November 21st, 2007, 09:11 AM
|
 |
Corporal
|
|
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 93
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
|
|
Re: The Dominions of Khaldun
I know there are so many ways to play the game and that is what is making it so overwhelming at the moment, especially as I don't have a manual until my copy arrives.
My favourite startegy would be one based on troops (magic is way beyond me at the moment), they should be fairly strong but I'm not bothered about supercombaters (I get way too attached to individual units in really small armies and just don't care enough about units in large armies). A head on confrontation is most to my liking, especially if there are a few different types of armies I can use.
I've looked on the Dom3 wiki and I was thinking of C'tis or Ulm.
|

November 21st, 2007, 01:54 PM
|
Sergeant
|
|
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 254
Thanks: 5
Thanked 11 Times in 8 Posts
|
|
Re: The Dominions of Khaldun
Well, it's a good thing you're not being Agartha then
Their troops kinda suck and without strong magic support and heroes they kinda get owned big time.
basic infantry holds up ok for it's weight class, but can't hit a wall, trog's do good damage, but die really easy and everything else is expensive AND still doesn't hit anything (but if you get lucky they will at least kill most things in 1 hit when it lands) plus they suffer from outnumbering on their already low defense.
You need some good casters to ruin the opposing armies as Agartha. At least that's my initial impressions.
I guess I'll be sticking with the Agarthans.
I do so love the atmosphere of that race. So grim. 
|

November 21st, 2007, 02:30 PM
|
Lieutenant Colonel
|
|
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 1,355
Thanks: 0
Thanked 5 Times in 4 Posts
|
|
Re: The Dominions of Khaldun
Ctis is a great race. The early era host a distinct lack of archers and scouts, however. You can get those in independent provinces, and I recommend doing so. Defenders usually match the pop-type, so you can find archers that way. Scouts are a bit more of a hit-miss affair, so you'll want to summon undead scouts, i.e. a Black Servant. You have more than enough death gems to do so, and its a low-level spell. You can use them for other things later. As well, your nationals are all coldblooded. This won't effect you much in your own territory, but it does mean you'll have trouble invading (and they'll conversely have trouble invading you) colder nations such as Caelum and Niefelheim.
Ulms a nice race, lacks cavalry, but has quite a few archery and stealth options. No experience with them.
For both these races the resource cost per unit is fairly affordable. But you will want a lot of them, they're good and not high in gold cost. You'll need to put some care in the placement of your forts and the resulting resource production. Blesses can be useful in battle, but will not be central to your strategy. You have some useful sacreds, but you cannot (or should not) produce them in large numbers.
I don't know if they're right for you, but you may want to give Sauromatia a whirl. They've got plenty of unit choices, as long as what you're looking for is not infantry.
|

November 21st, 2007, 02:42 PM
|
 |
Sergeant
|
|
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: The Urban Wilderness
Posts: 258
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
|
|
Re: The Dominions of Khaldun
Their primary magic type is blood, however, which is fairly newbie-unfriendly.
You might really like T'ien C'hi, actually. They've got decent front line troops, access to almost every path of magic, and some of the best archers in the early age. I might be switching nations again anyway.
And yes, I'm planning on naming my pretender (and important units, probably) after a Kohan from the game  .
|

November 22nd, 2007, 08:21 AM
|
 |
Corporal
|
|
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 93
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
|
|
Re: The Dominions of Khaldun
I'll choose C'tis for now, there's quite a good wiki on them and they seem to be what I'm looking for.
Just need to wait for the game to arrive now, it's taking ages 
|

November 22nd, 2007, 10:49 PM
|
 |
Sergeant
|
|
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 397
Thanks: 14
Thanked 15 Times in 10 Posts
|
|
Re: The Dominions of Khaldun
I've just had to reorder the game, so I won't have it for another week or 2.

|
Thread Tools |
|
Display Modes |
Hybrid Mode
|
Posting Rules
|
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
HTML code is On
|
|
|
|
|