Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 24

Thread: best of gaul defense

  1. #1

    Default best of gaul defense

    whats the best way to make the most of the gaul defense? whats your mix on troops and such?
    /noscorp or i am?

  2. #2
    New Poster MrWinde's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Ipswich , Suffolk
    Posts
    33

    Wink

    Gauls rule in defence i do a ratio of 3 to 1.
    Thats 3 phalanx for every 1 druid rider that usually gives good balance.
    I hope with the new upgrade the trapper actually becomes usefull

    Smurfs should definetly be a Travian Tribe!!!

  3. #3

    Default

    I know a lot of people use the Haeudins for offense, but for the wheat to defense capability, they beat the phalnx. If you have the time, and the resources, you can build Haeudins as an offensive, and a defensive unit. They have the highest defense vs calvary in the game, and a not to shabby infantry rating.

    My hero on the 3xSpeed server that just closed today was a heaudin. It was only meant for defense. It had close to 5K/10K defense, as well as a 10%-12% defense bonus, with 150regen rate. That hero, NEVER died, unless it was killed in a full on attack, but that unit alone cleared a GOOD bit of units.

  4. #4
    MemberMember Jon10's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    NW England
    Posts
    426

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Lintaglen View Post
    I know a lot of people use the Haeudins for offense, but for the wheat to defense capability, they beat the phalnx. If you have the time, and the resources, you can build Haeudins as an offensive, and a defensive unit. They have the highest defense vs calvary in the game, and a not to shabby infantry rating.
    Have to disagreee there, Haeudins have worse overall def\wheat rating than Phalanx.
    3 Phalanx = 270 overall def,
    1 Haeudin = 215 overall def
    FORTUNE PASSES EVERYWHERE

  5. #5
    i winz the *****s
    Epic MemberEpic MemberEpic MemberEpic MemberEpic MemberEpic Member
    dragon115's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Middlesbrough, UK
    Posts
    5,856

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Lintaglen View Post
    They have the highest defense vs calvary in the game, .
    actually... that would be the spear


  6. #6
    Junior Gaul Member Richy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Leicester, UK
    Posts
    69

    Default

    Well, as with most questions it's all subjective

    For effective use of resources a pure phalanx based defense is best (especially on iron usage), though you then can't quickly send any defense to nearby allies

    Ratio of 3:1 or 2:1 (Phalanx to Druidruder) is more costly and offers a little less defense; but you gain the flexibility of fast infantry def troops for allies, plus it offers higher infantry defence then cavalry defense, rather than the phalanx idea which provides more cavalry defence then infantry; something which may be more useful.

    A Haeduan/Druidrider mix is much less effective especially considering the significant increase in cost, but has the beauty of being purely cavalry based and having the flexibility that comes with it

    So i have to agree with MrWinde, a ratio of 3:1 is best (slightly more balanced then 2:1 ratio)

    (I've actually done a little bit of analysis.....Gawd!!!! i'm getting obsessed)

  7. #7
    Defender of the Faith
    Guest

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jon10 View Post
    Have to disagreee there, Haeudins have worse overall def\wheat rating than Phalanx. 3 Phalanx = 270 overall def, 1 Haeudin = 215 overall def
    There are loads of different ways to quantify this. For example although the above figures are correct it doesn't take into account the fact that for the price of 1 Haed you could get 6 Phalanxs (and change), or that the Phalanxs will only ever be of use in defense whereas the Haeds have a useful 140 Offense (versus 45 offense for the Phalanxs when you compare only on the basis of wheat consumption) or that the Haeds are almost twice as fast.

    The way I look at it / and play it (I am a new-ish player) I set my Gaul army up as purely defensive and I look to support an offensive player in my alliance. I build fully upgraded Phalanxs and Druidriders in a roughly 4:1 ratio (again this is just me). I rely on resources for my growth so don't invest in Swordsmen or TT's for raiding. However I reach a point when it makes sense to build Haeds as whilst I regard them as part of my defense (I will have upgraded them fully at the armory) they are the first troops I will have built that can be used (very effectively) as offense (I will also fully upgrade them at the blacksmith). This leaves me with a slow but highly effective generalist defensive force - Phalanxs. And my more mobile specialist defensive force - Druids/Haeds. Also as I am a player with a fairly limited time available to play it means I am not always worrying about my troops getting caught at home. TT's are great but if they get caught at home they will be decimated. That won't happen to Haeds

    Again just MHO

  8. #8

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jon10 View Post
    Have to disagreee there, Haeudins have worse overall def\wheat rating than Phalanx.
    3 Phalanx = 270 overall def,
    1 Haeudin = 215 overall def
    you would also have to have attack units as well as having phalanx tho, haeudin acts as both def and off.

  9. #9
    Tullia
    Guest

    Default

    I'm afraid my personal opinion is that worrying about a ratio is pointless. Trying to achieve some perfect ratio implies that there are periods when your barracks or stables are NOT producing troops. And that is just.... well.... pointless.

    The only finite resource in the game is TIME, not wheat, not iron/wood/clay. You can - and the good players do - find these if you need them.

    So you make as many troops as you can, as quickly as you can, for as long as you can. If your barracks and stable is running 24/7, start building in the next village. Once that is running 24/7, move on to the next.

    There is no such thing as too many troops.

  10. #10
    MemberMember Jon10's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    NW England
    Posts
    426

    Default

    My reply was about the def values only, not the relative value of off\def or build costs.
    FORTUNE PASSES EVERYWHERE

  11. #11

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Tullia View Post

    There is no such thing as too many troops.

    The vast majority of Travian players wont have all their villages running Barracks and Stables flat out though will they ?

    There are good reasons to specialise in either inf defence or off defence at various stages of the game, or depending on your location, or your style of play, and just by having a matched number of Stables and Barracks you tend to come up with a decent ratio anyway.

    But, Yes you are certainly right, there IS no such thing as too many troops
    I need help, not ridicule!

  12. #12
    Tullia
    Guest

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Fizzy View Post
    The vast majority of Travian players wont have all their villages running Barracks and Stables flat out though will they ?

    There are good reasons to specialise in either inf defence or off defence at various stages of the game, or depending on your location, or your style of play, and just by having a matched number of Stables and Barracks you tend to come up with a decent ratio anyway.

    But, Yes you are certainly right, there IS no such thing as too many troops

    No but surely they should be aiming to? Why aim for anything less? Although I agree, it does tend to end up with a nice-ish ratio. Unless you are like me and like attacking with pretty numbers.

  13. #13
    New Poster Spidra's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Leeds
    Posts
    28

    Default

    I must say I've yet to need defensive play.
    I have nothing but TT's and hope....... and too much time spare.
    *grins vacantly*
    ___________________________
    Love and lollipops. xxxx
    ___________________________

  14. #14

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Tullia View Post
    No but surely they should be aiming to? Why aim for anything less? Although I agree, it does tend to end up with a nice-ish ratio. Unless you are like me and like attacking with pretty numbers.
    we all aim to, but practically speaking its just not possible, so some villages can be designated as infantry and some as Cavalry, and if you find you are a long way from the action you can build more cavalry units (pallys and DRs) so they can get to where they're needed in time

    Of course if you're a roman, you just have to wait for them to plod into view
    I need help, not ridicule!

  15. #15
    Tullia
    Guest

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Fizzy View Post
    we all aim to, but practically speaking its just not possible, so some villages can be designated as infantry and some as Cavalry, and if you find you are a long way from the action you can build more cavalry units (pallys and DRs) so they can get to where they're needed in time

    Of course if you're a roman, you just have to wait for them to plod into view
    I would never build a village for just cavalry or infantry.

    I would build a village designed to build troops, or to support another village. Or I would build a village designed to produce off troops, or defence troops.

    IMO building cavalry in one village and infantry in another just means you have to upgrade your armoury/blacksmith to level 20 twice - aka waste of resources to make more troops with. Let's face it, your stable queue doesn't impact on your barracks queue in any way, why make them in two different villages?

  16. #16
    Defender of the Faith
    Guest

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Tullia View Post
    Unless you are like me and like attacking with pretty numbers.

    My ex-sitter, a fantastically talented, almost winner of the recent speed server used to get very upset with me if I set builds up with odd numbers

  17. #17
    Tullia
    Guest

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Defender of the Faith View Post
    My ex-sitter, a fantastically talented, almost winner of the recent speed server used to get very upset with me if I set builds up with odd numbers
    yes... and I bet your ex-sitter also likes the buildings in the right places in every village too

  18. #18

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Tullia View Post
    yes... and I bet your ex-sitter also likes the buildings in the right places in every village too
    well that just makes sense!

    I start twitching uncontrollably when I capture an illogically laid out village...

  19. #19
    Panda Knight Honoured Roman MemberHonoured Roman MemberHonoured Roman MemberHonoured Roman Member
    Koloth's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Dyslexic pimp's warehouse.
    Posts
    1,909

    Default

    Wouldn't it be the weirdest if you captured a village that was laid out exactly like yours?
    Quote Originally Posted by horse View Post
    This actually makes you the nearest thing to Harry Potter on the forum \o/

  20. #20
    ickledevil
    Guest

    Default

    if i can i do 3:2:1 (phalanx : DR : Haed)

    or phalanx and DR

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •