Is there any High Point Strategy

[k_mihai]

i also play mixed strategy. usually starting with 2-3 provinces, 800 sp +200 archers, which can allow one to get 5 provinces asap is wisely used. the invest 50/50 in eco and med, get 7-8 provinces, invest in high levels of med+granaries; medium university, architecture and bureaucracy; all required mil researches; high spy and mil med levels. after the ingenious IIIIII war strategy, i kept my forts at lv 1, or at level 3, on the condition of having enough troops to kill IIIII style armies and still being in the point range. main fort usually at lv 6, ft 7 is useless in the last month.
this allows in the last month an army of  2-250 k elites+1100 trebs, max 230-250 k net.

[Radooo]

after the ingenious IIIIII war strategy, i kept my forts at lv 1, or at level 3, on the condition of having enough troops to kill IIIII style armies and still being in the point range.

if you catch them

[k_mihai]

if you catch them

i was talking in general terms. catching someone is tactics and depends a lot on luck, as you know

[Radooo]

i was talking in general terms. catching someone is tactics and depends a lot on luck, as you know

it is very very hard...in 5 seconds you can move the army

[Naylrod]

i kept my forts at lv 1, or at level 3, on the condition of having enough troops to kill IIIII style armies and still being in the point range. main fort usually at lv 6, ft 7 is useless in the last month.

Now that is interesting, since I do my outer forts level 4 and my main 7.

The reason behind the level 4 ones is to increase the production rate as far as I can/dare without having forts that are interesting as pointgainers in a war. Later on (last 3d or so) I might increase them to level 5 since even 16p is a pretty small point-gain when the wars include bigger hits.

The reason I go all the way to level 7 on my main is to be able to win war-points even if I lose the defense and I think (have not calculated, never do) a level 6 fort will not hold to give my archers a chance to kill more then they are worth.

But, with this I might not stay in range of the IIIIIIIII-style guys. Which after all is not my thingie!

[Hiske]

The reason I go all the way to level 7 on my main is to be able to win war-points even if I lose the defense and I think (have not calculated, never do) a level 6 fort will not hold to give my archers a chance to kill more then they are worth.

actually a lvl 6 fort is enough for that... I tested it last era R1

[Naylrod]

actually a lvl 6 fort is enough for that... I tested it last era R1

With how many Archers? I usually have 5000 in my level 7.

[k_mihai]

well, with enough pals and trebs, one can smash any fort, and lose less than the defender

[Radooo]

With how many Archers? I usually have 5000 in my level 7.

if the attacker comes with no phalanx and with 1000 trebuchets, your archers won't do too much damage

[k_mihai]

and cav, to kill the archers asap, after the fort falls. also, high mil med is good here

30 k pals, 20 k guards+500 trebs smash any ft 7, even with 14 k archers inside, and the attacked loses less than the defender.

[Hiske]

I don't remember the details; but I know for sure that I had more than 1 hits where the attacker lost as much as my fort+archers... so it kinda convinced me that a fort 7 is not that necessary when you do army saves all the time... of course an empty f7 is much more points so you also need to kill more enemy soldiers to make up those points... so I guess a f6 or f7 doesn't matter much in this of course this is just my assumption based on my experience; which means that it's not necessarily true

and any fort with archers can be killed with pals and trebs without heavy losses... it doesn't matter if it's f6 or f7

[k_mihai]

the formula of pals+treb makes this type of maths irrelevant   cause the result doesn`t depends on the defender`s planning, but on the noobishness of the attacker

[Naylrod]

but on the noobishness of the attacker

I play in R9, so it works all the time. 

even with 14 k archers inside, and the attacked loses less than the defender.

14k = Yes, the thing is to have fewer Archers so they wont give as much points as they are killing. I never fill my fort nowadays.

this is just my assumption based on my experience; which means that it's not necessarily true

That is how I do it all the time, calculations are for cowards. The moment you download the battle-calc is the moment you should stop playing.

if the attacker comes with no phalanx and with 1000 trebuchets, your archers won't do too much damage

I play in R9, so this never happens. 

[k_mihai]

I play in R9, so it works all the time. 

14k = Yes, the thing is to have fewer Archers so they wont give as much points as they are killing. I never fill my fort nowadays.

That is how I do it all the time, calculations are for cowards. The moment you download the battle-calc is the moment you shoud stop playing.

I play in R9, so this never happens. 

Naylord, it works with any amount of archers including your 5000, even if you had fortifications 14 that`s because pals and guards have bonuses against archers

calculations are for good players.

[Hiske]

calculations are for good players.

not necessarily not everything works out the same as theoratically... I'm sure you can calculate that a f7 is better than a f6; but in practice I really doubt it (when playing low points of course...)! calculations are good; but not too much! but that's just my humble noobish opinion of course