Heavy Infantry

[LPhillips]

Well, I'll simply stop discussing Heavy Infantry.

KGB isn't infallible. But I do like to call on the authority of other experienced players when someone won't accept logical arguments.

[kenc80]

I have a lot of respect for KGB. But, isn't he the same guy who didn't know catapults took 3 hits?

good one

[Igor]

I agree with KGB that Pikeman and Dwarf have too high price to buy. So high, that almost nobody buy them.

One thing that I didn't say before. Attacker's bonus is difficultly realized for Dwarf because of his short movement. For to use attacker's bonus, a unit need to reach a defenders, but if attackers has only 8 movement point he has much difficulties to reach any unit. So Dwarf more probably will be under attack than to attack other units.

I tried to use Dwarf for attack, and successfully made it on water where his movement was increased to 22. But on land I never had success to attack opponent's units with Dwarf. Mostly he was as a defender in city.
He need to increase his movement to use his +5 bonus successfully.

What about Heavy Infantry, practice shows that almost all players used them very often. I am not agree with LPhillips at all. Theory is only theory but game is a firstly practice, where HI rules.

[Igor]

LPhilips, HI's upkeep which seems to you too much, is not really much.
Just compare this with the same-class units (one-turn powerful units): Light Cavalry +3, Wood elf +3, Pikeman +3, Dwarf +5. Heavy infantry's +4 don't seem to much, really.
Too much is Red Dragon's +17

[LPhillips]

I said I wouldn't discuss Heavy Infantry anymore, but I guess I'm incorrigible. I won't discuss it with Magian certainly. We've each beaten that horse to death with each other.

We're on different pages. I'm playing a guy who thinks Heavy Infantry is the solution to his problem, but he's playing defense while I control more of the map than he does. That just means he's being foolish. It doesn't matter how many people use them; they're still wrong. Remember my example: people mass Marines in Starcraft 2 because they aren't capable of better play, but no matter how many of them do it their strategy is still inferior to that of players who don't mass marines, and it shows when they lose.

I just march stacks past him and take his other cities. Working great. He can't do anything about it with units that are 10 on attack. When he retook one with his Heavy Infantry (losing a spider and 6 HI to kill a mammoth and 3 elves), I took the one he removed them from with Dwarfs. Haha! All on a poor map, while my income continues to exceed his, and he keeps massing upkeep. Another example: Hatch massed Heavy Infantry in a +15 city to hold out for help, and I managed to smash it with better units. The only thing wrong with Heavy Infantry is that they're not very useful.

Igor, Heavy Infantry are for defense. The upkeep of units not used for defense, ie not kept and paid for endlessly, is not nearly as important. Light Cavalry, Wood Elfs, and Dwarf are not the same class of units. They're not meant solely to defend. Also, a +33% increase is not small. It's big. So 4 as opposed to 3 is a big deal. 4 as opposed to 1 (Light Infantry, its real competitor) is 300%.

[magian]

[KGB]

ROTFLMAO!

KGB

[LPhillips]

Well said, magian!

Finally we agree. And

[Igor]

Lphilips, to put big final point to discussion with you, I say to you next things.
First. +1 to upkeep per unit means nothing. Does not matter. If that matters for you, that means that you are more bookkeeper than warlord, really

Second. If you played with a beginner and had victory, this does not give you right to call him foolish. He has the same rights to call you a stupid speaker. Right? But if he didn't do it, and you don't need that, too.
Just remember how you were afraid of my Valkyri and escaped the game, having more than 20 cities And nobody called you a coward. Moonknight won that game.

And finally third. All that you wrote above is your personal strategy and tactic. Another player may combine Heavy Infantry with attackers and have success because HI is very powerfull unit, too powerfull as he is. That is why this unit the most popular from powerful 1-turners.
Your example with upkeep means nothing, as I show above.
That's all, man. Be correct in your words and good luck in games!

[LPhillips]

Thanks Igor! Good luck to you too.
Believe me, I'm not calling the person foolish to insult him. I'm trying to make a point about the relative strength of tactics. You can't argue that the strength of my personal tactics is not relevant to the argument, because the whole discussion is about whether a specific unit and tactics employing it are overpowered. Therefor the only relevant argument at all is the strength of said tactics. If my basic tactics are stronger, then the point is made that Heavy Infantry is not overpowered.

I did leave our game after losing an 84% battle and a 65% battle against your valkeria in the same turn, but I lost two heroes with 19 UL each in level two ruins the turn before that (what are the chances?), and lost my level 7 hero near Moonknight in a ruin a few turns before that. Remember that I apologized for the poor sportsmanship of leaving, but I had enough of it. I was frustrated with my luck, and it had nothing to do with being afraid of you. I knew Moonknight was going to win and I couldn't stop him because I couldn't get a fair roll. Before the final Valkeria fights I had hope of taking your lands while he took mine, and coming out on good footing, but it seemed fate itself conspired against me that game. I couldn't seem to have any fun. In the end it's a game to have fun, so if luck takes all of the fun out of it I don't wish to continue playing. Yes, with 20 cities and my good production I might have survived and even won, but the fun was gone for me.