Okay FINE... I Tested Philip As PRIMARY in Rise of Kingdoms (Early Prerelease Results)

Summary

This video delves into the early performance analysis of the new commander, Phil, in *Rise of Kingdoms*. The content explores Phil's strengths and weaknesses as a primary commander, particularly in a multi-march lineup. While Phil's support abilities are respectable, his performance as a primary commander appears limited compared to other top-tier commanders like YSG. The video concludes that Phil is best suited as a secondary commander in a seven-march setup, where his buffs can maximize effectiveness. Viewers are encouraged to engage with the content and share their thoughts on Phil's viability.

Takeaways

• 😀 Phil is a support commander, not a primary DPS commander, meaning his strength lies in aiding other armies rather than dealing direct damage.
• 😀 Testing data suggests that running Phil as a primary commander for a single troop type does not provide a significant performance boost over other commanders like YSG.
• 😀 Phil’s damage increase as primary is minimal (around 1%), which might not justify the high investment in Legendary Commander Sculptures (690).
• 😀 Phil is best suited as a micro-optimization tool for a seven-army lineup, rather than as a primary commander in smaller setups (e.g., five or six armies).
• 😀 The potential for Phil as a primary commander is questioned due to the downside of his kit, especially when compared to the performance of other primary commanders.
• 😀 While Phil provides a 20% all-damage buff to allies when used as a primary commander, the timing of this buff may not always align perfectly in real-world battles, reducing its effectiveness.
• 😀 The battle simulator data is highly reliable in testing commanders’ potential, and players who disregard this data might be overlooking valuable insights.
• 😀 Even though Phil's kit is relatively straightforward, early results from the simulator indicate that his role as a primary commander might not hold up against other commanders in competitive scenarios.
• 😀 There may be niche uses for Phil as a primary commander in certain marches, but these are likely to be limited to highly specific army setups, such as in ranged or cavalry-based marches.
• 😀 Phil's role could evolve in the future based on real-world testing, but as of now, his performance as a primary commander is not seen as a top-tier option for most players.
• 😀 The conclusion is that while Phil may be useful as part of a larger, optimized army lineup, his role as a primary commander for individual marches may not be the most effective use of resources.

Q & A

What is the primary purpose of Phil in Rise of Kingdoms?

Phil is designed to be a support commander, not a DPS (damage dealer) commander. His abilities focus on providing buffs to allied armies, especially in a large, multi-army setup, rather than dealing high damage on his own.

Why does the speaker believe Phil is not suited as a primary commander?

Phil’s abilities as a primary commander are not seen as strong enough. His buffs to allied armies depend on perfect timing, and his overall damage output is lower compared to other commanders in the same role. The speaker concludes that the downsides of running Phil as a primary commander outweigh the benefits.

What is the impact of Phil’s 20% all-damage buff?

Phil’s 20% all-damage buff can provide a slight advantage in certain situations, but its effectiveness relies on precise timing. The speaker notes that this buff may be difficult to execute effectively in real-world scenarios, where perfect timing isn't always achievable.

What does the speaker think of using Phil in a '7 Army' lineup?

Phil is viewed as a good option for a '7 Army' lineup, as his support abilities can enhance the performance of other commanders in large, multi-army setups. However, his utility is limited to being a support commander rather than a primary damage dealer.

How does the battle simulator data influence the speaker's conclusions?

The speaker heavily relies on data from the battle simulator, which has historically been accurate in predicting a commander’s effectiveness. Even though the data is from pre-release testing, the speaker trusts the simulator’s results to make informed predictions about Phil’s viability in-game.

What is the role of perfect timing in Phil’s performance?

Phil’s ability to provide a 20% all-damage buff to allied armies depends on perfect timing, which is difficult to achieve in actual gameplay. In theory, this buff would occur at the ideal moment, but in practice, it may not always be consistent or reliable.

Why does the speaker not recommend investing heavily in Phil as a primary commander?

The speaker believes that spending significant resources to make Phil a primary commander is not worth it, as the damage increase is modest and the timing-dependent buffs may not be as effective in real-world combat. It is suggested that players with resources to spare might be better suited to focusing on optimizing a seven-army lineup.

What is the main conclusion about Phil’s potential as a primary commander?

The main conclusion is that Phil is unlikely to be a strong choice as a primary commander. Although he can provide some value in specific scenarios, the speaker feels that there are better options available for players who want to maximize damage output in their primary armies.

How does the speaker feel about the future use of Phil in Rise of Kingdoms?

The speaker is uncertain about Phil’s future use, suggesting that while he might find a niche in specific large-army strategies, he won’t be a top choice for most players. They stress the importance of testing Phil in real-world conditions, as early data might not fully capture his potential.

What is the speaker's final recommendation for players considering Phil?

The speaker recommends using Phil primarily as a secondary commander in a seven-army lineup rather than as a primary commander. This approach allows Phil’s buffs to support other armies without the need for excessive investment in making him a frontline damage dealer.