Battle for Middle Earth 2 - 1.08

Isengard Question and Answer Topic

Reply to this topic Start new topic
# 81FreedomX10A May 23 2009, 23:25 PM
QUOTE(HyperionsShrike @ May 23 2009, 17:36 PM) *

Ok thanks, I got another question.

Ok now i know what to do when getting isen out of random but if i'm PLAYING a random oppoenet and i don't know what i'm up against would it be better to use palentir to find out or wait until i have units to send?

You can use crebain to scout, I use crebain to scout very often. It should recharge by the time you battle the first time unless you went for a 1 or 2 RB build order. Once you find out what your opponent is its you're choice to play your own style or directly counter him.

Posts: 9,130

Clan: Prisoners Of War

Game: Battle for Middle Earth

+
# 82Centurion9 Aug 28 2010, 08:53 AM
Anyone agrees with me that they should reduce the cost of xbows in the coming patch? I mean a single orc archer battalion can kill them in 1v1 and they cost only 300 :\ Or thats not how I should look at it?

Posts: 13

+
# 83Deskwich Aug 28 2010, 19:04 PM
QUOTE(Centurion9 @ Aug 28 2010, 03:53 AM) *

Anyone agrees with me that they should reduce the cost of xbows in the coming patch? I mean a single orc archer battalion can kill them in 1v1 and they cost only 300 :\ Or thats not how I should look at it?

I think Xbows actually beat Orc Archers. They have farther range and get the first hit. Orc archers also have a bonus that makes them much stronger when they fight without needing to run. If you hit and run with xbows, they completely own orc archers. If you lose 1v1 to orc archers, you either failed to target them first or the orcs are leveled up or buffed by land or something. Or else I'm just thinking wrong, idk.

Wargs are Isengard's main counter to all archers anyway, not xbows. Xbows' main use is to kill pikes, so your wargs can kill the other units. So, it doesn't rly matter how strong xbows are vs archers, since they normally shouldn't be fighting archers anyway.

This post has been edited by d3sktipper^: Aug 28 2010, 19:05 PM

Posts: 15,211

Clan: vKo

Game: League of Legends

+
# 84Centurion9 Aug 29 2010, 00:34 AM
QUOTE(d3sktipper^ @ Aug 28 2010, 19:04 PM) *

I think Xbows actually beat Orc Archers. They have farther range and get the first hit. Orc archers also have a bonus that makes them much stronger when they fight without needing to run. If you hit and run with xbows, they completely own orc archers.
When we tried it, i didnt use hit and run so thats explains it.


QUOTE(d3sktipper^ @ Aug 28 2010, 19:04 PM) *
Wargs are Isengard's main counter to all archers anyway, not xbows. Xbows' main use is to kill pikes, so your wargs can kill the other units. So, it doesn't rly matter how strong xbows are vs archers, since they normally shouldn't be fighting archers anyway.

I know that of course, It never occurred to me using xbows against archers, that would be silly x) I just compared them to make a point. I guess what Im trying to say is that I would much rather pay 350 for uruk warriors and merely 300 for xbows because uruks are so much better than most of other swordsmen and xbows are not so the price would seem to me more realistic that way. But maybe im wrong.

This post has been edited by Centurion9: Aug 29 2010, 00:41 AM

Posts: 13

+
# 85Deskwich Aug 29 2010, 04:07 AM
Comparing one thing from one faction to something from another faction doesn't really work, because of faction design. Isengard isn't meant to be an archer-strong faction. Xbows' role is to counter pikes and flyers, which they do well at. They don't need to be any stronger.

Posts: 15,211

Clan: vKo

Game: League of Legends

+
# 86Centurion9 Aug 29 2010, 17:18 PM
I agree with that. But isnt that the main problem for isengard, that their units are more expensive than they are strong? And thats seems a quite easily solvable problem to me: lower their costs a little and see what happens with the balance. I mean increasing the health of the furnaces from 750 to 1080 and decreasing the costs of fortress upgrades and that kind of things doesent really cut the mustard. The RB-s still going to fall very quickly and against a decent rush you will never really get the chance to fully upgrade the fortress.

Posts: 13

+
# 87Turbo` Aug 29 2010, 17:30 PM
that would make Isen op. but i agree that isen is a little but to weak atm.. id say frn buildtime should be changed like it was in 2.4 and everything is ok. maybe a small zerknerf would be ok 2.. they r still op vs dwarves.

This post has been edited by Airsupreme: Aug 29 2010, 17:30 PM

Posts: 3,374

Game: Battle for Middle Earth 2 - 1.08

+
# 88Deskwich Aug 29 2010, 19:49 PM
QUOTE(Centurion9 @ Aug 29 2010, 12:18 PM) *

I agree with that. But isnt that the main problem for isengard, that their units are more expensive than they are strong? And thats seems a quite easily solvable problem to me: lower their costs a little and see what happens with the balance. I mean increasing the health of the furnaces from 750 to 1080 and decreasing the costs of fortress upgrades and that kind of things doesent really cut the mustard. The RB-s still going to fall very quickly and against a decent rush you will never really get the chance to fully upgrade the fortress.

Isengard's weakness is in cost. Their strength is in strong and fast units. Warriors and pikes are very hard to defend against, because they can 1v1 most units and run away from the units and armies they can't beat. Making them cheaper would just make Isengard op in certain match ups, especially against Men. I'm not in favor of moving the furn buildtime back either. Isen's midgame was a bit op because they could get too strong of an economy with powers. The furn build time increase fixed that and also got rid of the lameness of the 4furn build order. Though I don't think the 4furn was a solid build order myself, I have to admit it got annoying at times.

If there needs to be a change to make it easier to build an economy, it should be in Isengard's defense. Giving xbows a buff vs easterlings and half-trolls would maybe be a good idea. Then, xbows > pikes, so wargs can crush through the swords. The buff would have to only be vs eaterlings and half-trolls tho and idk if that's possible. Xbows owning mithlond sentries would completely ruin Isen vs Elves.

This post has been edited by d3sktipper^: Aug 29 2010, 21:38 PM

Posts: 15,211

Clan: vKo

Game: League of Legends

+
# 89Turbo` Aug 29 2010, 21:30 PM
yea buffing xbows vs easterlings/hts and making wargs more resistant to poison would be rlly good changes.

Posts: 3,374

Game: Battle for Middle Earth 2 - 1.08

+

1 User(s) are reading this topic (1 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)