strategic army Planning

I know this is probably not the proper place for this but I am not allowed to post a new topic anywhere else so it could be moved if necessary.
I have been asking and asking for help with how to improve my military score and have not gotten much in the way of a response. So I did a little of my own checking and found this....

.3.0 Military/Naval Scores
Military

* Slinger .8
* Swordsmen 1.28
* Phalanx 1.96
* Archer 2.62
* Marksmen 3.92
* Gyrocopter 5.12
* Steam Giant 6.18
* Bombardier 19.2


Siege

* Battering Ram 4.2
* Catapult 9.12
* Mortar 19.8


Support

* Doctor 14.12
* Cook 9.06


Navy

* Ram 2.88
* Ballista 3.08
* Flame-Thrower 3.8
* Catapult 5.14
* Paddle-Wheel-Ram 6.92
* Mortar 7.34
* Diving Boat 9.14


Now my thought, and forgive me if you all know this as you have been playing much longer, is that it is wiser to have say 150 archers as opposed to 150 phalanx because the points are higher for an archer. So, if the powers that be were to help the slow growers by giving them tips such as this it may help them to grow a bit faster. I had no way of knowing this information until I started researching it on my own...something that I am sure many of the elders already knew. The time spent on my building phalanx is surely a waste as it is certainly clear that for the same cost per man I could get almost a point per archer more than I was getting for phalanx.

I am wondering what else the new players such as myself are missing.
It just seems that by helping the young and slow growers you also help the alliance as a whole.

Palas, while it's true that the archer's would give you more points. Phalanx are far better for their purposes. Archers simply don't cut it on defense which is where they belong, and if you have them on offense, you're better off with gunsmen in stead. The very last thing you want is to have a Military score that will be over estimated. Sure you don't want to be underestimated and it may cost you a bit more for a smaller MS, but you sure as hell don't want faulty troops in comparison to what pirates who know what they're doing and will attack regardless of MS score will bring to the table.

However if you wanted to (very temporarily) boost your MS, you might want to choose what gets you the most MS for the least gold. But in the end archer's suck, phalanx are better ;P

It's a very good question.

Thank you very much for that response. I am trying very hard to build my score and am at a loss about how to do it while still being able to fund my army. I feel I have progressed will in my short time but always want to do better. I cannot seem to make my villages grow, therefore my funds do not grow, therefore my army cannot grow either. I seem to be at a plateau of sorts. Any, advice is appreciated.

Phalanx are better because they have more stamina. Dont listen to the guys that says that phalanx sux at attacking. LOL they dont know how to breach attack. Theres one time where my farm laughed at me when i attacked him with phalanx. He said im gonna lose coz i got no attack. Then in round 2 he was surprised to see my gunsman and boom. Instant 260% more attack power. he immediately ran

So I will say. Build fodders and breachers. Also build some support to go with it. You must also build assaults such as gunsman. Its up to you to decide how many of each you must build.

If your wondering. Its one of my old servers and its not in theta