Warrior on impossible is easiest at least timewise with different playing style

[Keneth]

Haha, Switzerland, no language of their own per se so they decided to speak a different one in every part of the country. Also, slavic languages are in most cases more complex than italic or germanic ones so you should feel honored by the comparison.

Also I don't see what you mean by the value of leadership, leadership is a static value that limits the ammount of troops you can have proportional to the troops' leeadership requirement. Leadership requirements are identical for all three classes, hence the value of leadership is identical for all three classes.

And the Might tree is just as useful as the Magic tree, of course moreso if you play a warrior but the same goes for playing a mage. You have more than enough runes to max out everything you need, as well as what you don't need.

[Lari]

Having played both, i should admit that from my point of view, tjoepee is right to say that the warrior is stronger -timewise- . Overall there is no big difference, but from my esperience, it took considerably less (maybe 20%) to use the exploit for the warrior, than the exploit for the mage. Focusing first on the might tree and having a second weapon slot avaible right from the start, made the difference for me. Mage is not gimp, it just take a little more time to develop his true strenght (you can do incredible things with 2 spells per turn, even if u don't use chaos at all).

[jake21]

I found all the classes fairly easy on hard (warrior being easiest at end game and mage easier at start). I started an impossible game on warrior and find it a bit difficult - i've shelved it for now - not sure if I will finish it later - I'm level 7 or 8 - and I've gone to the land of the pirates to claim the map. I'm too weak to battle things there and I don't see a way to get stronger (hence the stalemate and a shelving for now). If I decide to finish it i'm not sure what I will do - I might pay for the map but then i won't have enough gold to buy dwarven or demon army. Hum. Have to think about it... Every game seems to have a 'hard' part that is the hump and once you get over it becomes easy - so I'm hopeful that this is the hard part for warrior on impossible and once I think of a way to get the map it will be much easier...

Originally Posted by Lari

Having played both, i should admit that from my point of view, tjoepee is right to say that the warrior is stronger -timewise- . Overall there is no big difference, but from my esperience, it took considerably less (maybe 20%) to use the exploit for the warrior, than the exploit for the mage. Focusing first on the might tree and having a second weapon slot avaible right from the start, made the difference for me. Mage is not gimp, it just take a little more time to develop his true strenght (you can do incredible things with 2 spells per turn, even if u don't use chaos at all).

[sector24]

Have any warriors topped 30,000 leadership? I think mages usually end the game in the very low 20s, paladins in the mid 20s, and warriors in the high 20s. It seems like the difference between mage and warrior is about 7-10k leadership which can be a lot more damage potential (~25-30%). The extra spell every turn needs to equal the average damage of the extra units in every stack of a player's army to say the mage is "better". Either that or the utility of a 2nd spell needs to be so great that the mage can do things the warrior can't. With the exception of a few tricks (hypnosis->sacrifice) I don't think this is really the case.

I'm not going to calculate the damage from an extra fire rain vs. the extra units from leadership, but that's essentially the main difference between the warrior and mage.

[Keneth]

Actually the average difference in leadership is more like 3-6k depending on how much you invest in it. But even if you get every single point of leadership available to you, it will just mean that your attack is lower hence lowering your damage by some 10% at least (if we assume you traded 3 points of attack for additional leadership) which would again even things out.

[sector24]

Originally Posted by Keneth

Actually the average difference in leadership is more like 3-6k depending on how much you invest in it. But even if you get every single point of leadership available to you, it will just mean that your attack is lower hence lowering your damage by some 10% at least (if we assume you traded 3 points of attack for additional leadership) which would again even things out.

Alright well I totally disagree with you, so I went into the high scores thread to compare leadership values:

Warrior
25,000
29,000
28,000
25,000
31,000 (MajorS)

Paladin
23,000
26,000
23,000
25,000 (me)

Mage
19,000
22,000
22,000
19,000
21,000
22,000

As you can see, the difference between the best warrior and the best mage is indeed 9,000 leadership, which is a roughly 30% increase in damage. The average is not quite so high, but still in the range of 6-9k difference between the mage and warrior.

Using info from the leadership, we can deduce that the warrior would have to sacrifice ~9 Attack to offset the increase in damage from leadership (assuming 1 Attack = 3.3% damage). I doubt this is the case, in fact in the screenshots where the mages have 22,000 leadership, they are wearing at least 3 artifacts that grant leadership to get that number so they are losing the same amount of potential attack points that the warrior would.

Now these numbers are very rough and there's a lot of interpretation and wiggle room involved. But again we come to the main distinction between the warrior and the mage. Is two spells in 1 combat round better than 6-9,000 leadership?

[Keneth]

But these are still the absolute values of purist mages and purist warriors, a mage investing in leadership gets around 21-24k of leadership whereas a warrior investing less in leadership gets 24-28k. I know because I never play purist classes, hence my warrior ended up 35 Int and my mage with over 24k leadership. The argument is not how big a difference can be because I agree, it can be huge, it's how small the difference can get if you play a mage like a warrior. So let's assume that 25k is the most leadership a mage can get and take MajorS' whooping 31k for the warrior, depending on the equipment and type of army, the warrior will do roughly 20% more damage. Whether or not an average mage can top that with a nuke is a topic for a different discussion but I guarantee you that the only difference in speed when playing at top efficiency will be the time spent waiting for your mana to recharge and it won't ammount to 15 hours when rushing, not with mana potions at every second vendor.

[tjoepee]

[QUOTE=Keneth;60512]B]identical[/B] for all three classes, hence the value of leadership is identical for all three classes.
QUOTE]

So what u are saying is europe use euros, america uses dollars and china yuan. They are all money so the value is identical?
Your warrior knights has always higher attack no matter what u do or if ur mage playing like warrior. That' s impossible u don' t get offered attack as much as warrior and u don' t find the attack bonus on the map as much as possible and u can' t equip 4 weapons. Thus the ld of warrior has more value than the othes classes imho.

Not to mention playing mage as a warrior u totally screw up ur mage. Having higher attack screwing ur intelect is not worth with the mage.
For fun I pimped up my warrior to intelect 41, if u watch the screen shots I didn' t have the best of the best weapons also.
Thus making the warrior and mage difference only the high magic the warrior can have same amount of intelect I believe with still much higher attack and LD.

Iron Fist just kick ass!

[Keneth]

Europe and the States have different currencies, Warriors and Mages have the same currency with the same value. A warrior gets a bonus from Iron fist though, that's true, but it only works on human knight-type units and it's not that huge - if you max Iron Fist you can get 20% more knights, a decent bonus if you like human armies. Warriors get no bonuses for demons, iirc the only reduction in leadership requirements comes from Demetrius and a mage can use that just fine so I guess you need new glasses. Also, a mage can have well over 60 Int, buffing yours to 40 means nothing, a mage can get his attack up to 40 also and the only difference between him a and a warrior will be that the warrior has more troops and a mage can cast more spells. Good thing you tripple-posted to prove nothing that we haven't already conceded on.

[tjoepee]

Originally Posted by Keneth

Europe and the States have different currencies, Warriors and Mages have the same currency with the same value. A warrior gets a bonus from Iron fist though, that's true, but it only works on human knight-type units and it's not that huge - if you max Iron Fist you can get 20% more knights, a decent bonus if you like human armies. Warriors get no bonuses for demons, iirc the only reduction in leadership requirements comes from Demetrius and a mage can use that just fine so I guess you need new glasses. Also, a mage can have well over 60 Int, buffing yours to 40 means nothing, a mage can get his attack up to 40 also and the only difference between him a and a warrior will be that the warrior has more troops and a mage can cast more spells. Good thing you tripple-posted to prove nothing that we haven't already conceded on.

lmao either way u r completely dumb or try to piss ppl off for now I take it as the later. U don' t post any proofs and lack examples of whatever u say.

A warrior' s LD>Mage LD because my army have higher attack and usually deal the extra capped maximum damage whereas the mage same army deals less damage (hence my demon doing higher damage, not only doing higher damage the first attack but also the second third and so on). I posted it about this in the first post already I think u don' t think deep when u read other ppl post. And this LD only increase with not only the iron fist bonus but also the knight set bonus or dwarf hammer bonus. 20% discount meants more units and yes these units have higher attack also and does close to the max extra damage whereas ur mage plain simply don' t. If u buff up ur attack u will never reach the attack of the warrior, not to mention the LD u miss and hence u screw ur mage

A mage can' t cast more spells the spellbook is the same u get to caste twice for 3 turns which IMHO doesn' t weight as much as the 2 warrior specific bonusses.

And check the high score section u will see the warrior always have higher stats. Instead of thinking MAGE just rocks play the game with warrior on impossible at a high level and then talk.

to quote u in other section
Yes, the only way to get rage after round 20 is rage drain and chargers.
great way to use rage drain and chargers considering u have no rage income, lol....... u missed the post completely about using poison cloud being useless to get infinite money.

Every post of u so far I have read u only try to proof to some newbies u have better knowledge throwing words or things that u think r cool. Most of the time they are useless IMHO. At least i post few combo and tricks.

my 2 cents I won' t be responding to u anymore as u always miss the point of posts anyway.