Install Steam
login
|
language
简体中文 (Simplified Chinese)
繁體中文 (Traditional Chinese)
日本語 (Japanese)
한국어 (Korean)
ไทย (Thai)
Български (Bulgarian)
Čeština (Czech)
Dansk (Danish)
Deutsch (German)
Español - España (Spanish - Spain)
Español - Latinoamérica (Spanish - Latin America)
Ελληνικά (Greek)
Français (French)
Italiano (Italian)
Bahasa Indonesia (Indonesian)
Magyar (Hungarian)
Nederlands (Dutch)
Norsk (Norwegian)
Polski (Polish)
Português (Portuguese - Portugal)
Português - Brasil (Portuguese - Brazil)
Română (Romanian)
Русский (Russian)
Suomi (Finnish)
Svenska (Swedish)
Türkçe (Turkish)
Tiếng Việt (Vietnamese)
Українська (Ukrainian)
Report a translation problem
Discussions Rules and Guidelines
Report this post
I also have the slow horse atm, only on island 2, feels bad man, got the boat up and running and I was doing pretty well.
Oh cool, I didn't realize archers stuck with a knight even when not attacking. That explains a couple of odd behaviors I've spotted in the past.
As a quality of life thing, it would be kind of nice to be able to break down towers. Or especially to undesignate trees for chopping. But that might be overcomplicating things.
That's really bad advice. Towers have saved my ass on a several occaisons.
Firstly, if you have the capability to spam ballistae, it's no longer the early game and your income should be via farming. Secondly, your own general advice, which I agree with about 85% of the time is that you should avoid expanding on the cliff side of the map, so you're onlly looking at 2-3 towers on that side. Unlless it's island 5, building more than 1 ballista tower on the dock side is an excercise in pointlessness as you will probably only have 1 retalliation max on that side. A total of 3 to 4 towers is hardly a spam. Third, archers in towers are more effective than guys on the ground. Fourth, If your forward defenses fail, your hunters the cliff side are just going to stand there and get killed unless they get pretty lucky. Archer towers are one of only two ways to have any depth in your defenses, the other is with knights since they retreat and take archers with them.
I think it's better to have your archers concentrated at your front wall rather than gathered in depth through your kingdom. If you have one archer behind a stone wall, it can take much more shots because the Greeds aren't just passing by underneath like they do if you have a tower - they come to the wall and then try to knock it down, then they get to your archer. Greeds run pretty fast, so I don't think a tower gets that long to hit a column of Greeds moving beneath them compared to the same archers standing behind a wall in front of which there is a big cluster of Greeds which are standing still trying to knock down a wall.
So you might wonder: "Why not just put towers behind walls? Then surely the archers get the best of both methods?" You should put a tower up at your outermost wall, but not at the ones behind it. You want to break your enemies at the outer wall because it costs less money. If the wall breaks, you have to spend money recruiting your archers again, the builders manning the catapult, the actual catapult itself, and to build the wall again, since if the Greeds broke this wall this time, they will probably break the next wall the next time they come. You can get Knights, but that means spending more money. And this whole game is about money: the objective of the game is to get as much money as soon as possible and buy the boat and get the hell outta there. Apart from getting 1 or 2 Knights to break the ocean-side portals, this means building up your defense cost-efficiently - not cheaply, cost-efficiently. Instead, the most cost-effective option (and one that works) for surviving the night is keeping them at the wall. Apart from money, you don't have much daylight and you can't spend time fixing your defences you need to set them up and leave them there while you make money and cut down forests (very good way of making money early game) and build farms and recruit peasants and activate shrines and try to fit the most gold in your sack without it all falling out. Another good reason for keeping them at the wall is that your most powerful weapon after the ballista: the catapult (which can sometimes do more damage than a ballista in 1 shot, but is too inconsistent and only sometimes gets a really good hit) is there and you want it to get as many shots in as possible to hit the Greeds. The more archers you have shooting, the more Greeds die. This means less Greeds are breaking down the wall, so the wall stays up for longer. This means the catapult (which is protected by the wall) gets more shots in. This kills even more Greeds (and means that the wall lasts even longer etc... It's a positive feedback loop). That's why the catapult is really good with dealing with the giant Greeds, because they are too big to miss. I would say the catapult is as good as the Ballista against 1 Giant, but when you get several Giants, the ballista bolts go through all of them, so the ballista becomes more effective. Furthermore, towers aren't good near level 4 walls (which I assume you have by day 65) only the top archer on the most advanced tower gets the height bonus, the lower 2 don't (look at the massive collab community guide), so your third point isn't really that effective. So I'd say one tower max each side, and that's only near your outermost wall. Ballista towers are spam able since the builders don't contribute to the defence effort otherwise so you aren't losing out on defence (except if you haven't built catapults yet).
Builders don't contribute to defense, but the builder you used to man that ballista tower could have been an archer instead. However, when he's on the tower, he can do a lot more damage than he could as one archer, assuming enemies might reach him; so I consider it worth it to build as many ballista towers between my front line (cliff portal side) and the keep as possible. They're expensive, but by mid-game money isn't usually an issue at all. The two limiting factors are manpower and time. There are only so many peasants you can recruit each day, and if it isn't enough to hold the outer wall, then there needs to be a plan B.
So I've been debating whether it's worth building archer towers where I can, behind each wall (my hermit of tide was carried off). When a wall comes down, a lot of people often get killed while retreating, which means each wall in my kindgom that the Greed get through will be less defended than the one before. Another layer of wall only matters if there's someone behind it to cause damage to the Greed while they're knocking it down. If all of my troops were decimated at the front, the walls behind it become nearly useless with no one to defend them.
My last game ended when a retaliaton attack broke through the outer wall, and there was really nothing behind that that could stop the giants. It's not that there weren't enough archers to kill them, it's just that with at least 4 of them at once, they took down the wall too fast for those shots to happen. So this game, on the current land, I'm debating using archer towers behind the front line. There's no archer's shrine, and no hermit to help me build ballistae. Obviously, I would make those if I could, but the other towers seem like a viable alternative. Assuming they are placed directly behind a wall. [except for my outer wall, as I dislike having my archers carried off by trappers every day]
I don't actually know whether giants can attack towers directly, or if it's only trappers that do that....
But the main reason I'd like to be able to break down towers is that once or twice I've built one by accident when I meant to do something else.
You miss the point. The methods you are advocating leave *zero* opportunity to stop greed if they break through. My methods are about redundancy. Again, towers are 1 of 2 methods of having a reserve force that can keep fighting. Use both.
Nope. Aside from the very early game, and arguably even then, money is the least valuable resource in the game. The most valuable resource is almost always *time*, but sometimes it's labor. Once you have ramped up 2-3 farms, money is nearly totally worthless as there's almost always more than you can actually carry available for collection at any given time. The only limiter on how fast you can spend it is how fast you can collect it and move between the places where you need to spend it. In the very early segment of the game, money can be a limiter (especially for a noob that doesn't know how to rabbit farm), but in my experience, it's usually more about getting enough people to do the work. Even if you had more money to spend, you couldn't get the people you need to fill the jobs.
Catapults are mostly terrible. I lose a *lot* less guys since I stopped using them. They are also overly expensive and labor intensive if you make the mistake of getting them too early. The only time I would recommend getting one is when both the archer shrine *and* the ballista hermit is unavailable. In this specific situation, their firepower is a real boon, but even then, they're kinda iffy.
Go for the exact opposite. A ballista cannot shoot backwards. 3 archers on a tower that can rain fire with impunity at passing hordes can really do a *lot* of damage. Since they're not arcing their shots, they basically never miss and they do shoot pretty quick. As you say, a tower is *less* effective behind a wall, but the community guide isn't really 100% on that one. There's no real bonus, just the way the angles work so use your eyes. Depending on the exact positioning of the tower, those lower guys work out a lot like archers behind a level 1 wall. Individually less effective than if there was no wall, but still more effective than if there was a lvl 2 wall because there is less arc in their shots. The most effective archer configuration I have seen is a maxed archer tower on the greed side of a wall, shooting into their backs with impunity. You obviously don't want to do that on the outer wall though because the flyers will pick them off. It's a great option for interior defenses though.
This *really* depends. If the greed are breaking through your walls nightly, then you're hosed. You didn't recruit enough archers or something. The real reason that defense in depth is important has nothing to do with those attacks though. It's about dealing with retaliations and blood moons. In both cases, you really want to have some depth to your defenses in order to stop them if they break through a layer or two.
So here's a situation to contemplate:
You have access to the knight and baker hermit. You have access to the archer, farmer, and knight shrines. You are riding the unicorn. You have 8 giants and a bit over a dozen fliers inbound. It's late in the game, so you can have really any build you want with those resources by this point.
If you have a catapult, the giants are going to be throwing boulders your way at the outer wall. You are going to lose a *lot* of guys. Worse, those guys are permadead (squish), not just robbed of their bows.
Either way, that many giants are very likely to break through your outer wall. Let's say the archers take down most of the fliers and 5 of the giants before the outer wall falls. Half of your hunters are now vagrants. The question now is how to take down those last couple of giants. If you have built multiple walls, and knights, your knights will retreat with their archers and whittle them down at every wall. If you have maximized your towers, that will also help significantly. My ideal defense would look something like the below:
OuterWall Tower4 KnightTower WhateverSpaceTheRNGDictates Wall Tower4 Wall Tower4 YourCamp Bakery Wall Tower4 Wall
The knight tower in the middle there would yield 4 knights (1 from boat, 2 from castle, tower) which gives 16 archers. If they breach the outer wall, the knights will retreat to the camp walls and you will have 19 archers still shooting. This will certainly take down the last of the fliers. If the giants break through that wall, you will have 22 archers shooting, 3 from behind. They are very likely to be dead at this point, but if they're not, your knights will retreat again and you will again have 19 archers shooting. If they somehow manage to break through *that wall*, you will still have 19 archers shooting. I wouldn't say it's impossible, but I have never had something breach that last wall there with defenses set up like this.
Also, no, giants can't attack towers, except maybe the lvl 1 version, I'm not 100% sure on that. Only fliers.
My methods are pretty effective. I have run through the campaign several times now, even with some quite severe self imposed restrictions to increase the difficulty and I haven't actually lost my crown since I was new to the game. I have since had a few instances where a retaliation has rampaged into my base, but I recovered and won every time.
edit:
Oh, and here's yet another argument for knights. In addition to the benifits above, they let you maximise the number of archers you have on a specific side!
Let's use the power of math to find out how.
Suppose you have 50 archers (excluding tower guys) and you have the 3 knights you brought from the boat. This means you have 27 archers on the dock side (8 with knights) and 23 archers on the cliff side (4 with a knight). You have 1 portal left to smash on the dock side, but want to have as many archers as possible on the cliff side to stop the imminent retaliation.
If you purchase the two knights at the castle for the cliff side, that takes 8 archers out of the hunter pool and puts them on the cliff side. This changes the number of archers to 23 archers on the dock side (8 with knights) and 27 on the cliff side (12 with knights). Thus, you have added 4 archers on the side that still matters for the cost of 2 recruits (would have otherwise taken 8).
Now the boats on the way to the dock but suppose you put down 2 knight towers to help ensure you will survive till the end of the level. This changes the number of archers on each side to 19 on the dock side and 31 on the cliff side. Again, gaining 4 archers on the side that actually matters for the cost of 2 recruits.