[Xietor]

Meg,

(i only play ma, so all of my comments by default, are limited to ma).

it depends. MP if you are argatha and start out next to vanaheim on a smaller map, and the person playing vanaheim is your equal, you can forget about reaching stage 2 of the game.

Ulm, I do think ulms low mr is backwards. And I do think they should should be able to produce heavily armored troops at a lower esource cost.

Ideally, Ulm is a warrior race, a race of steel. They should get mr bonus, and their troops morale should be high, not average. They should really have the best infantry in the game, but they have among the worst. Their description makes me think of Sparta, highly trained troops. But for some reason, arcosphale has better infantry, better armor, mr, morale.

I think ulm should have such good melee units, it does not need magic. But they are extremely vulnerable to magic, their troops take tons of resources to build, despite the forge bonus etc, they are slow, their supposed great strength and training still does not allow them to do more than plod under the weight of their armor, and their morale is a lowly 10 with no way to boost it(low priests, no standard bearer).

I have played ulm, and can do well with ulm sp. Good players can do well with any set of cards dealt. But I am disappointed from a role playing standpoint, that Ulm is not the master of melee combat.

Take away their spies, seige engineers, drain scale bonus, and make their troops the best the humans have to offer. If any race should be able to ignore research and march to victory based solely on its armies it should be ulm, not vanaheim!