View Full Version : Traitors
Sinister-King
18.03.13, 23:41
http://www.thesettlersonlinewiki.com/images/adv_teasers/traitors.png
Description:
Loyal men they were, but greed turned them into ruthless bandits. The nobles have turned to you for help against these deserters. Be careful if you approach them since these traitors are heavily armed, battle hardened men.
"Everything for the gold."
Cost:
165 http://www.thesettlersonlinewiki.com/images/icons/resources/gem.png
Player level:
26+
Duration:
3 days
Difficulty:
http://www.thesettlersonlinewiki.com/images/icons/adventure/skull.pnghttp://www.thesettlersonlinewiki.com/images/icons/adventure/skull.pnghttp://www.thesettlersonlinewiki.com/images/icons/adventure/skull.pnghttp://www.thesettlersonlinewiki.com/images/icons/adventure/skull.png 4/10
Players:
1
Bandits:
http://www.thesettlersonlinewiki.com/images/characters/militia.pnghttp://www.thesettlersonlinewiki.com/images/characters/cavalry.pnghttp://www.thesettlersonlinewiki.com/images/characters/soldier.pnghttp://www.thesettlersonlinewiki.com/images/characters/longbowman.pnghttp://www.thesettlersonlinewiki.com/images/characters/sirrobin.pnghttp://www.thesettlersonlinewiki.com/images/characters/bigbertha.png
Experience points
8,710 http://www.thesettlersonlinewiki.com/images/icons/adventure/exp.png
Loot:
Isn't this one a little 'underrated'?
I manage to finish all 4-skulls adventures easily, but this one a never managed to finish so far (being level 37).
Without a veteran general blocking is impossible. The only camp that could be blocked are the two in front of the caste, but there seems to be a bug when doing so.
Blocks are succeeding...my army walks into the castle...first battle lost of course...and then the battle report shows I fought the left camp.
Altogether I have to fight all the camps, which is very hard for a player of my level.
Isn't this one a little 'underrated'?
I manage to finish all 4-skulls adventures easily, but this one a never managed to finish so far (being level 37).
Without a veteran general blocking is impossible. The only camp that could be blocked are the two in front of the caste, but there seems to be a bug when doing so.
Blocks are succeeding...my army walks into the castle...first battle lost of course...and then the battle report shows I fought the left camp.
Altogether I have to fight all the camps, which is very hard for a player of my level.
If you feel you need a veteran general to do this adventure, then why not buy one?
Also, it's not that difficult to fight all the camps, I'm level 36 and I've managed it; I ran a combat simulator and came up with some good troop figures for most of the camps, although I'll have to refine other bits next time.
$$
Isn't this one a little 'underrated'?
I manage to finish all 4-skulls adventures easily, but this one a never managed to finish so far (being level 37).
Without a veteran general blocking is impossible. The only camp that could be blocked are the two in front of the caste, but there seems to be a bug when doing so.
Blocks are succeeding...my army walks into the castle...first battle lost of course...and then the battle report shows I fought the left camp.
Altogether I have to fight all the camps, which is very hard for a player of my level.
There are no bugs with blocking because blocking is not a supported tactic. All blocks are done at your own risk.
I'm aware that blocking is at own risk. I was just trying to point out that this adventure is close to impossible for a level 37 player when blocking is not possible.
Yes, with a veteran general it would be possible...but before getting more smart remarks: it's impossible to have enough gems for a veteran general when playing only three months unless buying one with physical money.
That is what brings me to comparing this 4-skulls adventure with the other 4-skulls adventures.
The other ones can be accomplished by me without a veteran general and without the use of blocking. This one is not. Therefore my remark that this one is under-rated.
I'm aware that blocking is at own risk. I was just trying to point out that this adventure is close to impossible for a level 37 player when blocking is not possible.
Yes, with a veteran general it would be possible...but before getting more smart remarks: it's impossible to have enough gems for a veteran general when playing only three months unless buying one with physical money.
That is what brings me to comparing this 4-skulls adventure with the other 4-skulls adventures.
The other ones can be accomplished by me without a veteran general and without the use of blocking. This one is not. Therefore my remark that this one is under-rated.
It's not impossible to get a veteran general without spending money - I got one from the Easter event, by trading every last bit of resources for eggs. It's not easy, but it is possible. I also got quite a few gems from the refund that Blue Byte gave all of us when they changed the rewards for levels 17-50. I saved all my weekly login gems and I've taken part in competitions. It might have taken me a bit longer than 3 months, but then I've been at level 36 for quite some time. Currently there is the 2-weekly 'wishing well' competition which gives you a chance to win up to 500 gems if you enter, and there have also been the competitions for the Birthday Event. It depends what you want to do to earn extra gems.
However, it is possible to do this adventure with a vet gen and without blocking. I did not use any blocks and I could have done it with one vet gen, but saved a bit of time by using my 2nd one. It was not impossible, although my troop losses could have been lighter.
1. 203 C 47 R - 16 R losses
2. 147 M 103 S - 36 M losses
3. 100 M 100 S 50 XB - 39 M losses
4. 100 C 100 S 50 XB - 11 S losses
5. 89 S 100 C 50 XB - 18 S losses
6. 71 S 100 C 50 XB - 40 C 21 S losses
7. 50 R 150 M 50 S - 50 R 50 M losses
8. 100 C 100 R 50 XB - 57 R losses
9. 100 C 100 M 50 XB - 66 R 100 M losses
10. 100 XB 43 R - 100 XB 43 R losses and 1 wounded general. This was a mistaken attack
10. 195 R 52 S - 71 R losses
11. 124 R 52 S 74 C - 124 R 52 S 74 C losses and 1 wounded general. Suicide attack
11. 100 M 100 R - 58 R losses.
Total losses 485 R 225 M 114 C 102 S 100 XB
Adventure completed, probably not very well and not efficiently, but successful as I got the XP and loot. Next time I will do better.
It does depend what you mean by impossible. I didn't do it to make a profit, but to have fun and see what strategies I could come up with. I enjoyed doing it and look forward to using a different strategy next time.
There has been no Easter event the last three months. I neither receive a gem-refund from BB. I did get some for the anniversary event, but not nearly enough to be at the veteran general already.
The problem is the couple of camps. They contain many soldiers. At level 37, that's your strongest unit. So, your opponent's army is always as strong as one full army of your own. With some smart playing you can manage several of them, but the rebuilding of your army and the travelling takes too much time.
Perhaps, with full time playing it can be done...but hey, I have a social life as well.
And still: I'm comparing with evenly rated adventures. They don't cost my any trouble at all.
No veteran general and no blocks.
Troops needed:
1246R
101S
195C
140B
114LB
Troops lost:
1058-1246R
140B
Expensive? Yes. Impossible? Not by a country mile.
Maybe spend some time with a combat sim and see for yourself.
There has been no Easter event the last three months. I neither receive a gem-refund from BB. I did get some for the anniversary event, but not nearly enough to be at the veteran general already.
The problem is the couple of camps. They contain many soldiers. At level 37, that's your strongest unit. So, your opponent's army is always as strong as one full army of your own. With some smart playing you can manage several of them, but the rebuilding of your army and the travelling takes too much time.
Perhaps, with full time playing it can be done...but hey, I have a social life as well.
And still: I'm comparing with evenly rated adventures. They don't cost my any trouble at all.
No, I didn't spend much time on the adventure. I had made troops in the past and decided to give traitors a go as it was a one-player adventure. I did have virtually all the troops available in advance, but that was something I had built up over time so that I could choose to do adventures or lootspots. Travelling and rebuilding army were not major problems, so maybe I did play fairly smartly. I attacked most of the camps one evening, and then came back to do the last camp the next day. It could have easily waited until the evening if I had not had a few minutes to login earlier in the day.
Oh, and I heard of another strategy for traitors, whereby you ignore the last three camps and just use it to get the XP, rather than the XP and loot. I don't know how this works as I don't follow the guides, but apparently it is doable.
Okay, so you missed the Easter Event, but everyone got the gems that they would have received for levelling up when Blue Byte changed the levelling rewards. If you didn't get them as a refund to compensate older players, you would have got them as gem rewards as you levelled up. If you didn't receive this refund, then Support would be able to help you receive it. There are 100 gems for every level up from 17 onwards, so you would have got 2100 gems for levels 17-37. 3 months of playing is about 12 weeks, and a maximum of another 1200 gems for login bonuses. That is a potential total of 3500 gems, which does fall short of 4999 gems for a veteran general, but reachable in about 6 months, though just playing the game.
Btw, I was probably typing this when Gytha posted, so it's nice to see another strategy for this adventure.
How often do I have to say that I didn't receive a refund? Perhaps the refund was done when I was not playing yet?
And yes, you gain about 7250 XP when only having the castle left (that's how far I got). That's not the point of an aventure rating I would say; the rating will be based on the efforts to complete it.
Gytha posted about 1400 units lost. Yes, I know it can be done with those losses...I know how to read walkthroughs.
I also know, that such is only feasible with either:
- non-stop travelling up and almost non-stop unit production in your barracks
- four or more generals + quite some additional noble residences (which is the same thing as buying the veteran general)
- 2 or 3 generals, quite some travelling and quite some additional noble residences
Once more: I have a social life and I do compare with evenly rated adventures.
This thread is not me complaining that it's too difficult; I like a challenge. So once more: this is about the 4-skulls rating of this adventure.
How often do I have to say that I didn't receive a refund? Perhaps the refund was done when I was not playing yet?
Actually you didn't bother to read what I posted about either getting a refund or having the gem rewards as part of the level ups. It would have been one or the other.
This thread is not me complaining that it's too difficult; I like a challenge. So once more: this is about the 4-skulls rating of this adventure.
Unfortunately it does sound rather like you are complaining that it is too difficult or you can't work out a way to do it without spending a lot of time on it. I didn't find it difficult, didn't spend much time on it, and certainly don't have non-stop unit production in my barracks. All I had done prior to starting it was to rebuild my troops in a way that I had a reasonable number of all the types of troops I could make, but in preparation for any adventure. Then I ran a few combat sims and decided to give it a go. I probably spent about an hour on the first ten camps (including travelling time), and about 20 minutes on the last one, because I had to transfer some additional troops that I had made overnight. This adventure is designed to last 3 days, which means you do have time to do it in small chunks and rebuild troops in between.
Your initial complaint was that you have never managed to finish this adventure and that it was hard for a player of your level. That is not my experience of it - I have finished it on my first go and I am only level 36. Yes I do have a veteran general, but it sounds as though you have done a lot more adventures than I have, and therefore you should have more experience than me, especially if you have read the walkthroughs (I haven't, I made up my own strategy).
I'm sorry if I sound like I'm making 'smart remarks', but my point was to put a counter-argument to yours. I think I've probably made that point by now, so I should make this my final post on the subject.
You are countering your own counter remarks, simply by already stating that this adventures costs over 1400 units. All other 4-skulls adventures are costing several hundred units less or can be done with 2 players (such as Stealing from the Rich).
First, please stop comparing doing an adventure with a veteran general and without it. They can't be compared.
Did you perhaps buy several noble residences as well? If not, then please explain this not so intelligent player, how you are starting the adventure with 'let's say' 800 units. My total population is 870.
You are countering your own counter remarks, simply by already stating that this adventures costs over 1400 units. All other 4-skulls adventures are costing several hundred units less or can be done with 2 players (such as Stealing from the Rich).
Okay, well I wasn't aware of that, so that's a fair point. My point was actually that it wasn't impossible or that hard in my opinion.
First, please stop comparing doing an adventure with a veteran general and without it. They can't be compared.
Did you perhaps buy several noble residences as well? If not, then please explain this not so intelligent player, how you are starting the adventure with 'let's say' 800 units. My total population is 870.
Okay, a veteran general does make some things easier. I used one because I had one. I could try the adventure without one and see what happens. Gytha has stated it can be done.
No, I haven't bought any noble residences specifically for this adventure, but I do have a higher population count and probably more noble residences than you do.
I wasn't sure if I could tell you how many troops I had before I started the adventure, but I have found the answer in another thread:
I'm going to use the new smilies:
::R:: - 361 ::B:: - 212 ::M:: - 233 ::C:: - 203 ::LB:: - 200 ::S:: - 63 ::A:: - 150
Yes, not great numbers I know, but it gave me a few minutes of amusement to post this. :D
That is a total of 1422 troops to start with. Yes, it's higher than 800, but I have worked to get to this point. I also had settlers in star to replace those units that I lost, but to be honest, I could have done the first 6 camps with a starting position of 300 ::R:: 200 ::C:: 150 ::M:: 100 ::S:: and 50 ::A:: - a total of 800 units. Then I would have rebuild 16 ::R:: 40 ::C:: 75 ::M:: and 50 ::S:: overnight, before tackling a few more camps the next evening. Camps 7, 8 and 9 were high on recruit and militia losses, so I would have had to rebuild 173 ::R:: and 150 ::M:: after doing them, but then I could either do camps 10 and 11 or decide to keep the XP that I had gained so far and cancel the adventure there.
I haven't run through exact figures on everything, because I think you can do that yourself and work out a strategy that is feasible with what you have. It takes some thought and a bit of calculation, but that is half the point of a strategy game.
Wow, your army contains 150 crossbowmen, while the crossbowmen buildings become available at level 36. How can it be that you already own 150 crossbowmen, while still being level 36. You are never playing any adventures? It for sure explains why you started playing three months earlier and are at a lower level.
But, you have a great economy running. It is capable of supporting an army that 175% of my total population. I can't avoid having the impression that you cannot keep up when you start playing more adventures. Or did you perhaps invest a lot in buying extra building licenses? Could be...you seem to have gotten quite some additional gems compared to me.
Anyhow, your or my economy are besides the point here. I fear I'll have to make my point clear in a different way then:
Last time I played Stealing from the Rich I had a total loss of 931R, 46S. Yes, that's right: that's a 2-player 4-skulls adventure.
This cannot be compared with a 1400 units loss on a 1 player adventure.
I can only repeat where I started with: there is something wrong with the amount of skulls appointed to this adventure.
Isn't this one a little 'underrated'?
I manage to finish all 4-skulls adventures easily, but this one a never managed to finish so far (being level 37).
Without a veteran general blocking is impossible. The only camp that could be blocked are the two in front of the caste, but there seems to be a bug when doing so.
Blocks are succeeding...my army walks into the castle...first battle lost of course...and then the battle report shows I fought the left camp.
Altogether I have to fight all the camps, which is very hard for a player of my level.
I had the exact same thing happen to me this morning, Gen walked into castle,no intercept message, yet the combat was for the left camp.
Wow, your army contains 150 crossbowmen, while the crossbowmen buildings become available at level 36. How can it be that you already own 150 crossbowmen, while still being level 36. You are never playing any adventures? It for sure explains why you started playing three months earlier and are at a lower level.
No I haven't played many adventures, but I have managed to make 150 crossbowmen at level 36 because they are a unit that becomes available at that level, and I started training them as soon as I could.
But, you have a great economy running. It is capable of supporting an army that 175% of my total population. I can't avoid having the impression that you cannot keep up when you start playing more adventures. Or did you perhaps invest a lot in buying extra building licenses? Could be...you seem to have gotten quite some additional gems compared to me.
Thank you for the compliment - I hadn't really considered that I had a good economy! Possibly I won't be able to keep up if I play a lot of adventures, or I might have to change my strategy, I'm not sure. I haven't bought extra building licenses - all my gems went into buying a second veteran general. I was awarded about 2k gems in total for winning a competition so I have got some extra gems - but anyone can enter the TSO competitions. It is a combination of luck and saving up, but the gem login bonuses have increased to 100 gems now - I think it was about 45 gems in the past.
Anyhow, your or my economy are besides the point here. I fear I'll have to make my point clear in a different way then:
Last time I played Stealing from the Rich I had a total loss of 931R, 46S. Yes, that's right: that's a 2-player 4-skulls adventure.
This cannot be compared with a 1400 units loss on a 1 player adventure.
I can only repeat where I started with: there is something wrong with the amount of skulls appointed to this adventure.
This is the bit that wasn't clear to me: I haven't really compared adventures on the skull rating. I was just arguing about whether it was hard or not. Probably it is, in which case I'm pretty pleased to have completed it - I'm not usually good at difficult battles; I tend to fail pretty badly. Hmm, maybe I ought to have a look at the other 4 skull adventures if they are easier and more fun. :D
Thank you for a good argument though, I think I learnt a lot from this.
Just finished Tropical Sun, also a 4-skulls adventure.
Total loss: 232R, 18M, 6C
Really, there's something completely off-rated here. That something is called Traitors!
(although 4 skulls for Tropical Sun should be 3 max.)
I have had little or no problems with Traitors when using a single Battle Hardened General as my Fast general.
The following troop configurations are based upon the garrison strategies and tactics indicated in Tage's guide for Traitors in the forum at http://forum.thesettlersonline.com/threads/16332-Guide-Killste-Collected-Adventure-Guides-by-Various-Authors?p=192371&viewfull=1#post192371.
Need to Send: 571R 137B 1M 301C 137S 45XB
Maximun Loss: 571R 137B 1M
I have not indicated Minimum and Average losses.
Garrison Position G1
From G1 to Camp 4) 40 Soldier Deserters, 60 Longbowman Deserters
ANY general: [27R 1S 157C 15XB (27R)]
Garrison Position G2
From G2 to Camp 5) 60 Soldier Deserters, 60 Longbowman Deserters
ANY general: [48R 1S 106C 45XB (48R)]
(BLOCKS and attack on CAMP 8)
(send all three generals right after each other)
From A to Camp 6) 40 Milita Deserters, 20 Soldier Deserters, 40 Cavalry Deserters, 60 Longbowman Deserters
SLOW general: [1M 195C (-)] {6 rounds min}
http://settlersonlinesimulator.com/dso_kampfsimulator/pr.php?m=1&c=195&u_2058=40&u_2059=40&u_2060=20&u_2062=60&roundsPlotData=8-925-5_9-228-88_7-845-1_6-44-0_11-12-0_10-29-23 (http://settlersonlinesimulator.com/dso_kampfsimulator/en/?m=1&c=195&u_2058=40&u_2059=40&u_2060=20&u_2062=60&adventure_id=9)
From B to Camp 7) 60 Milita Deserters, 60 Soldier Deserters, 60 Cavalry Deserters
SLOW general: [4R 118S (-)] {7 rounds min}
http://settlersonlinesimulator.com/dso_kampfsimulator/pr.php?r=4&s=118&u_2058=60&u_2059=60&u_2060=60&roundsPlotData=9-404-63_7-402-0_8-970-30_10-126-47_11-95-27_12-17-17_6-2-0 (http://settlersonlinesimulator.com/dso_kampfsimulator/en/?r=4&s=118&u_2058=60&u_2059=60&u_2060=60&adventure_id=9)
From C to Camp 8) 60 Soldier Deserters, 100 Longbowman Deserters
FAST general: [75R 1S 106C 18XB (75R)] {2 rounds max}
http://settlersonlinesimulator.com/dso_kampfsimulator/pr.php?r=75&s=1&c=106&a=18&u_2060=60&u_2062=100&roundsPlotData=2-2200-0 (http://settlersonlinesimulator.com/dso_kampfsimulator/en/?r=75&s=1&c=106&a=18&u_2060=60&u_2062=100&adventure_id=9)
Garrison Position G3
(CAMP 10)
From C or X to Camp 10) 100 Soldier Deserters, 100 Longbowman Deserters
ANY general: [137B (137B)]
From A to Camp 10)
ANY general: [65R 1S 128C 6XB (65R)]
(BLOCKS on CAMP 9 and ATTACKS on CAMP 11)
From X to Camp 9) 150 Soldier Deserters, 50 Cavalry Deserters
SLOW general: [1R (1R)]
From A to Camp 11) 60 Soldier Deserters, 60 Cavalry Deserters, 60 Longbowman Deserters, 1 Sir Robin, 1 Big Bertha
ANY general: [92R (92R)]
From Y to Camp 9) 150 Soldier Deserters, 50 Cavalry Deserters
SLOW general: [1R (1R)]
From B to Camp 11) 60 Soldier Deserters, 60 Longbowman Deserters, 1 Sir Robin, 1 Big Bertha
ANY general: [200R (200R)]
From Z to Camp 9) 150 Soldier Deserters, 50 Cavalry Deserters
SLOW general: [1R (1R)]
From C to Camp 11) 1 Sir Robin, 1 Big Bertha
ANY general: [62R 1M 137S (62R 1M)]
Bottlecap, did you read anything written before?
Just count your total losses and compare with other 4-skulls adventures. That is what the discussion is about.
Ow, and this is an adventure for low level players. You might want to compare results without battle hardened generals therefore.
Bottlecap, did you read anything written before?
Just count your total losses and compare with other 4-skulls adventures. That is what the discussion is about.
Ow, and this is an adventure for low level players. You might want to compare results without battle hardened generals therefore.
For the question about my reading abilities, here goes ...
Isn't this one a little 'underrated'?
I manage to finish all 4-skulls adventures easily, but this one a never managed to finish so far (being level 37).
Without a veteran general blocking is impossible. The only camp that could be blocked are the two in front of the caste, but there seems to be a bug when doing so.
Blocks are succeeding...my army walks into the castle...first battle lost of course...and then the battle report shows I fought the left camp.
Altogether I have to fight all the camps, which is very hard for a player of my level.
... it is possible to complete without a veteran
... camp 8 is not in front of the castle and it can be blocked
... this adventure is close to impossible for a level 37 player when blocking is not possible.
... it's impossible to have enough gems for a veteran general when playing only three months...
... traitors is possible at level 37 (also with longbow instead of crossbow, try it with camp simulator if you like a challenge)
... it takes less than 12 weeks to collect gems for a BHG
... I did get some for the anniversary event, but not nearly enough ...
... soldiers. At level 37, that's your strongest unit. ... the rebuilding of your army and the travelling takes too much time. ...
... you can also get additional gems as a bonus for logging in 7 days in a row. Gems may also be received when reaching certain levels in the game or even for some quest rewards.
... a BHG travels faster than a normal general.
... crossbows become available at level 36
... This thread is not me complaining that it's too difficult; I like a challenge. So once more: this is about the 4-skulls rating of this adventure.
This thread (http://forum.thesettlersonline.com/threads/23140-Traitors)is the actual Adventure Catalogue item for Traitors.
Perfect example of: let's take some fragments and take them out of the discussion context.
May I guess that you are either in politics or a journalist?
In the end, still no answer from you on the question: "should this adventure have 4 skulls?"
Outlaws easily consumes more resources than Traitors, yet it also is a 4 skull adventure.
Using Tage's guides, the Maximum losses using only NORMAL generals are currently indicated to be:
Traitors (http://forum.thesettlersonline.com/threads/16332-Guide-Killste-Collected-Adventure-Guides-by-Various-Authors?p=192371#post192371): 1088R 7S
Outlaws (http://forum.thesettlersonline.com/threads/16332-Guide-Killste-Collected-Adventure-Guides-by-Various-Authors?p=193188&#post193188): 2062R 8M 5C
EternalPink
11.08.13, 22:52
How often do I have to say that I didn't receive a refund? Perhaps the refund was done when I was not playing yet?
And yes, you gain about 7250 XP when only having the castle left (that's how far I got). That's not the point of an aventure rating I would say; the rating will be based on the efforts to complete it.
Gytha posted about 1400 units lost. Yes, I know it can be done with those losses...I know how to read walkthroughs.
I also know, that such is only feasible with either:
- non-stop travelling up and almost non-stop unit production in your barracks
- four or more generals + quite some additional noble residences (which is the same thing as buying the veteran general)
- 2 or 3 generals, quite some travelling and quite some additional noble residences
Once more: I have a social life and I do compare with evenly rated adventures.
This thread is not me complaining that it's too difficult; I like a challenge. So once more: this is about the 4-skulls rating of this adventure.
Sounds like you complaining :)
Traitors is a 3 day adventure so even with only a couple of generals you can move troops there over day 1 and day 2 assuming you have the capacity to hold enough troops and then do the adventure on day 3.
If you are without the capacity to hold enough troops then you can still send 400 on day 1, use those on day 2 while another 200 travel across etc but as the round trip time is only 1 hour the only way you would have difficulty moving troops there is if you played for less than an hour each day (which considering with all the troops on the island it will still take that long anyway to do all the walking/attacking etc)
Traitors has 2 chances of granite so with this adventure there is a 50% chance you will come away with atleast 500 granite (600 if your lucky) which at current prices would easily pay for the majority if not all of the losses (done right you should only lose recruits)
Finally traitors has one of the best unit loss to XP ratio's doing the quick 2 camp and cancel (as described by SidV - http://img9.imageshack.us/img9/3326/sidvtraitors14vrlb.jpg)
So I think 4 stars is correct for an adventure with good loot and only recruit losses that doesn't require a vet or blocking (though of cause both can be used)
Traitors has to worst unit loss ratio (BY FAR!) for completing the adventure of all 4-skulls adventures.
Don't you think that's a better criteria than:
- you can stop after killing two camps
- you have three days to do it
Traitors has to worst unit loss ratio (BY FAR!) for completing the adventure of all 4-skulls adventures.
Don't you think that's a better criteria than:
- you can stop after killing two camps
- you have three days to do it
I think if you only need to kill two camps and you get three days to do it that the number of skulls should be reduced. That sounds a bit like a 1 or 2 skull adventure to me; very easy. Even the tutorial adventure Bounty Hunter (a 1 star, 3-day adventure) requires you to kill more than 2 camps and that's hardly difficult by any stretch of the imagination. What's wrong with 4 stars being a reasonable challenge?
4 stars is fine by me, but then Tropical Sun and friends should be reduced to 3 max.
The criterium to rate all of them equally is unclear to me. I would expect a direct relation between the rating and total amount of units lost (when completing the full adventure!)
It's clear that this is not the criterium, but I cannot imagine any better criterium. So far I've seen no clearification on this.
I don't understand how this argument has gone one so long.
I've picked another 4 skull adventure at random - Stealing From the Rich. I'm sure I could pick out any number of other adventures, too.
Using the simulator, you can find troop losses for attacking every camp, which has to serve as the basis for deciding how difficult an adventrue is, irrespective of that fact that some very clever players have found good strategies for blocking/dodging/whatever to reduce losses.
200 unit general, no crossbows, elites or cannons:
Stealing from the Rich max losses (http://settlersonlinesimulator.com/dso_kampfsimulator/en/adventures/beutelschneider/?my_r=200&my_m=200&my_s=200&my_e=0&my_c=200&my_b=200&my_lb=200&my_a=0&my_k=0&wave=0&limit_user_units=200): 1211 ::R:: 6 ::M::
Traitors max losses (http://settlersonlinesimulator.com/dso_kampfsimulator/en/adventures/verraeter/?my_r=200&my_m=200&my_s=200&my_e=0&my_c=200&my_b=200&my_lb=200&my_a=0&my_k=0&wave=0&limit_user_units=200): 1153 ::R:: 1 ::M:: 375 ::B::
200 extra bowmen needed. Seems totally comparable to me. So, please, can we end the discussion about whether it's a 4 skull adventure or not...
The only problem with traitors is there are no effective strategies for dealing with the last few camps. That makes it unpopular, not hard. If you're finding the adventure hard at level 37, you're doing something wrong...
Think I'd prefer a loss of 931R + 46S for Stealing from the Rich. That's realised and not max. losses.
With Traitors I don't get realised losses below 1400.
But okay, one could discuss if 46S is equal to about 200R and 200B.
Where no discussion is possible: Stealing from the Rich is 2-player adventure. So not even close to comparable.
With Traitors I don't get realised losses below 1400.
As I've already said: you're doing something wrong.
if you can't follow a guide or use a simulator, maybe you should stick to tropical sun...
So you come up with losses of 1500+ max. and you find it weird that someone has average losses of 1400?
You are even telling that person that he can't follow guides or simulators. Please tell the same to Sto_Helit. He'll love hearing it, since he reports also losses around 1400. Ah well...guess he can't read them either.
And then you tell me to stick with tropical sun which is also a 4-skulls adventure. Also comparable to you? Losses are 232R, 18M, 6C.
Still nothing off-rated here?
EternalPink
12.08.13, 21:51
So you come up with losses of 1500+ max. and you find it weird that someone has average losses of 1400?
You are even telling that person that he can't follow guides or simulators. Please tell the same to Sto_Helit. He'll love hearing it, since he reports also losses around 1400. Ah well...guess he can't read them either.
And then you tell me to stick with tropical sun which is also a 4-skulls adventure. Also comparable to you? Losses are 232R, 18M, 6C.
Still nothing off-rated here?
Sorry but is there a point to this thread now since i'm totally failing (probably my fault) to see your point other than you want some adventures to have 1 less star or 1 more which in the grand scheme of things is going to make no difference to anybody.
If adventures have longer timers so you can build more/take longer then it is going to be of comparable difficulty to an adventure with a shorter timer (less chance to build, less time to take attacking) so going just by the losses is a poor way of comparing since again some adventures give better/more desired loot than others.
The valiant little tailor adventure I have is meant to have losses of around 5,000 recruits which I could suddenly say is the worst adventure ever due to the losses etc but it also has a 12 day timer (417 recruits per day to kill/rebuild) and is 3 player so taking those into account its now not the worst adventure ever
I'm on MrBranch's team with this - I've wondered for a long time how adventures get the ratings they do. I'm not complaining about the timer of the adv, or the troops required to complete (killing all camps or just whatever's required to satisfy the quest and get max xp/loot), it's just a comment on a bizarre and inexplicable rating system. Well, maybe it's not inexplicable to everyone - maybe I just haven't found the explanation yet, but I don't understand it. I've never been quite clear on how the skull ratings are allocated, or what the beige/green/blue etc rosettes mean. I generally don't think much about it and therefore it doesn't bother me, but reading this thread has reminded me that I've asked myself the same questions MB is posting here.
There's quite a big jump for new players from Bounty Hunter (which should in theory only be done the once as you can't find it with explorers or buy it for mf in the shop, though I know you can get another with a code, or theoretically from TO) at 1 skull, to even Lost Skull at 2 skulls and on to the likes of IOTP with 3. Personally I'd do 10 Tropical Suns with 4 skulls before I'd attempt Traitors which has the same rating of difficulty. On a related note, I'd quite like to see another couple of 1 and 2 skull adventures to help introduce new players to adventuring (and to give the rest of us something quick and easy to do to pass the time if we felt like it) - there's not a lot of choice in the lower levels.
Anyway, seems like there's a bit of hostility going MB's way over the issue (perhaps misunderstanding of the point of the original post?) so just thought I'd throw my penny in to balance things out a bit.
Anyway, seems like there's a bit of hostility going MB's way over the issue (perhaps misunderstanding of the point of the original post?) so just thought I'd throw my penny in to balance things out a bit.
Ah, the reason the argument has gone on so long is partly because MrBranch has been replying to all the posts. From my point of view, I just wanted to know why he seemed to think it was hard, and I had fun arguing that I didn't think it was that hard; just expensive.
I'm not sure that the 'hostility' is all directed towards MrBranch either: I've been suspected of doing the adventure with more advantages than I have and apparently also accused of not being able to read a combat simulator. For the record, I've only done Traitors once and I admit that it wasn't terribly efficent; I attacked all the camps so my losses were high. However, I have a target to beat for the next time that I do it.
I'm not sure that anyone will get anywhere with changing the skull rating for this adventure, but it might be nice to have a bit more choice of adventures to do that are reasonable before you get as far as having crossbows. There are lots of challenging adventures for the higher levels now, how about some that are more fun for lower levels?
I'd quite like to see another couple of 1 and 2 skull adventures to help introduce new players to adventuring (and to give the rest of us something quick and easy to do to pass the time if we felt like it) - there's not a lot of choice in the lower levels.
+1
Also give the rest of us an 'easy' way to complete the adventure guild quests when time/troops are short. The anniversary event maps were great for that!
I'm not sure that anyone will get anywhere with changing the skull rating for this adventure, but it might be nice to have a bit more choice of adventures to do that are reasonable before you get as far as having crossbows. There are lots of challenging adventures for the higher levels now, how about some that are more fun for lower levels?
Agreed - but not even below the level for crossbows. When I started adventuring I did the Bounty Hunter, and then basically couldn't do anything but Lost Skull for ages because my economy and population couldn't support anything else in line with the time I have available to play. I then upgraded to Tropical Sun (ironically, yes, with 4 skulls), and now I mostly do Pirates or Witch of the Swamp, or share SFTR with a friend - she has a vet (seems like EVERYTHING is much MUCH easier with a vet - hope we can get one at Halloween, I wasn't playing at Easter and I don't buy gems!) and stuff so she does the harder camps, I pick up xp from the easier camps/traps/watchtowers. I'd have liked a bit more variety to get me started, with more of a gradual increase to the more difficult adventures! :D
Saying that, I read the forum. I know that 50+ content has been a sore point for a LONG time so it's right that the new stuff should concentrate on them first, just don't forget the little people ;)
I don't understand how this argument has gone one so long.
Who is arguing :rolleyes:
EternalPink
13.08.13, 22:00
I'm on MrBranch's team with this - I've wondered for a long time how adventures get the ratings they do. I'm not complaining about the timer of the adv, or the troops required to complete (killing all camps or just whatever's required to satisfy the quest and get max xp/loot), it's just a comment on a bizarre and inexplicable rating system. Well, maybe it's not inexplicable to everyone - maybe I just haven't found the explanation yet, but I don't understand it. I've never been quite clear on how the skull ratings are allocated, or what the beige/green/blue etc rosettes mean. I generally don't think much about it and therefore it doesn't bother me, but reading this thread has reminded me that I've asked myself the same questions MB is posting here.
There's quite a big jump for new players from Bounty Hunter (which should in theory only be done the once as you can't find it with explorers or buy it for mf in the shop, though I know you can get another with a code, or theoretically from TO) at 1 skull, to even Lost Skull at 2 skulls and on to the likes of IOTP with 3. Personally I'd do 10 Tropical Suns with 4 skulls before I'd attempt Traitors which has the same rating of difficulty. On a related note, I'd quite like to see another couple of 1 and 2 skull adventures to help introduce new players to adventuring (and to give the rest of us something quick and easy to do to pass the time if we felt like it) - there's not a lot of choice in the lower levels.
Anyway, seems like there's a bit of hostility going MB's way over the issue (perhaps misunderstanding of the point of the original post?) so just thought I'd throw my penny in to balance things out a bit.
http://s24.postimg.org/vmvdffout/tutorialadventure.jpg
Bounty hunter isn't a real adventure though its the tutorial adventure that's meant to show you how adventures work in principle, send troops on a general, move troops on a general, kill stuff with troops on general, finish the mission in quest book (its surprising the number of people that use to come to help after doing an adventure and sending all the troops home that hadn't done that) and then get returned home
You can do it with 80 cav (maybe less so long since I did that one) with zero losses and you get a small amount of XP.
So if we wish to compare then you need to start with the proper adventures such as horseback, island of pirates, witch of the swamps and so on.
Let's do so. But perhaps one of the moderators can transfer this whole discussion to a seperate thread then, since this is no longer only about Traitors.
To begin with. Compare Horseback (3 skulls), Tropical Sun (4 skulls), Dark Priests (3 skulls), The Loss Skull (2 skulls)
I followed the same strategy: only normal generals, no blocking, defeat mimimum number of camps to complete the adventure, best unit is soldier.
Total loss Horseback: 304R, 34M, 2B, 127B, 3LB
Total loss Tropical Sun: 232R, 18M, 6C
Total loss Dark Priests: 109R, 60S, 50C
Total loss The Lost Skull: 239R, 8M, 1S
It's clear that Tropical Sun and the Lost Skull are in the same league. TWO(!!!) skulls difference however.
Horseback and Dark Priests are also comparable, both more difficult than Tropical Sun, but one skull less than Tropical Sun.
First conclusion: Tropical Sun to be revaluated to 2-skulls?
Disagree/Agree?
EternalPink
14.08.13, 21:57
I don't have a tropical sun to hand, what's the timer on it?
Also DP with only 109 recruit losses?, even with a vet I can't manage that so i'm curious how you are and same for horseback
http://img442.imageshack.us/img442/276/mimodarkpriestnew.jpg
http://img442.imageshack.us/img442/276/mimodarkpriestnew.jpg
You're asking this to me? You are aware that Gerontius believes that I can't read walkthoughs and that I'm not capable of using the simulator?
But, if you really want to know..
For Dark Priests, did you see that I lost 60 soldiers and 50 cavalry?
Two main things explaining it:
Some of the camps in the witch sector can be attacked with mainly cavalry, if you're willing to accept the losses of some cavalry with each fight.
Also the last camp could exlain some: 40 Cultists, 40 Dark Priests, 40 Shadowsneakers, 1 Dark High Priest. You could throw in a high amount of recruits, but you could also chose to attack with 50R, 150S and accept a loss of about 32 soldiers in this fight.
For Horseback, I recently added my walkthrough in this post:
EternalPink
14.08.13, 23:25
Don't see a horseback walkthrough from you in this thread (or you link's not appearing)
Total loss Horseback: 304R, 34M, 2B, 127B, 3LB
Total loss Tropical Sun: 232R, 18M, 6C
Total loss Dark Priests: 109R, 60S, 50C
Total loss The Lost Skull: 239R, 8M, 1S
Why are you choosing to lose higher value units that are more expensive and time consuming to train over recruits? (thought you'd written that wrong originally which is why I asked about the 109 recruits)
Agreed - but not even below the level for crossbows. When I started adventuring I did the Bounty Hunter, and then basically couldn't do anything but Lost Skull for ages because my economy and population couldn't support anything else in line with the time I have available to play. I then upgraded to Tropical Sun (ironically, yes, with 4 skulls), and now I mostly do Pirates or Witch of the Swamp, or share SFTR with a friend - she has a vet (seems like EVERYTHING is much MUCH easier with a vet - hope we can get one at Halloween, I wasn't playing at Easter and I don't buy gems!) and stuff so she does the harder camps, I pick up xp from the easier camps/traps/watchtowers. I'd have liked a bit more variety to get me started, with more of a gradual increase to the more difficult adventures! :D
Saying that, I read the forum. I know that 50+ content has been a sore point for a LONG time so it's right that the new stuff should concentrate on them first, just don't forget the little people ;)
Yes, +1 to that. :)
Although I have done Traitors, and also just done Outlaws, they were costly and it has taken me a long time to recover; not really something that I want to try often at this level. I don't use guides, but have checked up on Killste for these two adventures and they both ask for a large number of recruits and a large number of recruit losses - not something that I can do without a good deal of work on my economy and my population. As I couldn't do them by using lots of cheap troops, I decided to use expensive troops instead just to see if I could actually complete the adventures, which was just about possible.
For Traitors, Killste suggests that you can lose between 929 units and 1095 units with normal generals and blocking; I lost 1026 units with veteran generals but also with attacking every camp. For Outlaws Killste suggests that you can lose between 1636 units and 2075 units with normal generals and no blocking; I lost 1177 units with veteran generals and attacking all but three camps. As first attempts at these maps, they were probably okay, but not stunning by any means. I didn't have much of a strategy apart from trying to complete the adventures with the troops I had available at the time and I didn't make much effort to see if I could either skip camps or work out some blocks. It's not a strategy I would recommend unless you don't mind risking failure and a very depleted army. It does give me a lot of room for improvement, especially if I want to aim to have the losses for veteran generals rather than those for normal generals, but it isn't something that I want to try more than occasionally at the moment.
I would like a bigger choice of lower level adventures, as the choice is a bit limited unless you go for lootspots and to be honest it's not very interesting just sending off a few recruits to kill one bandit. High level players now have a challenge with the Fairytale adventures, could we also have a bit of variety?
In my opinion, Traitors is not worth doing without a veteran general.
For a player without a veteran, I agree the 4 ::skull:: rating is low compared to other 4 skulls.
Now I have a veteran (from easter) I like this adventure & wish my [removed] would find it more often.
Blocks are succeeding...my army walks into the castle...first battle lost of course...and then the battle report shows I fought the left camp.
You are not the only person that has happened to. (I'd call it a bug...)
Hairy,
Do not use such words in a derogatory way.
Sinister-King
Don't see a horseback walkthrough from you in this thread (or you link's not appearing)
Sorry, here's the link: http://forum.thesettlersonline.com/threads/15207-SidV-s-adventure-journal/page47?highlight=adventure+walkthrough
Why are you choosing to lose higher value units that are more expensive and time consuming to train over recruits? (thought you'd written that wrong originally which is why I asked about the 109 recruits)
I don't care for the training time. First I finish the adventure, then I go to bed while rebuilding the troops.
The choice for cavalry is easy for me. For all 1 to 4 skulls adventures applies that you hardly lose cavalry. Therefore I have thousands of horses being impatiently waiting for finally one of my horsemen to die. So whenever I have a choice of losing 8 cavalry or 50 recruits, then I might choose the first option.
Soldiers is a different story. I'd rather not lose them, but when facing the choice between 200 recruits or 50 soldiers than that's sometimes a difficult choice. 200 recruits is a huge gap in your bronzen swords. When I want to play another adventure next requiring a lot of recruits, then I sometimes pick soldiers.
Powered by vBulletin™ Version 4.0.4 Copyright © 2025 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.