Dud units / monsters / summons

[quantum_mechani]

I agree with most of the things mentioned here, with three exceptions:

1. Flagellants, they are not the best sacreds out there, but for 10 gold, non-capital only, and two attacks, they really can be worthwhile. Admittedly the crossbows kind of overshadow them, but they overshadow almost any human troop.

2. Basalt Guards. They certainly pale to many other sacreds, and are not generally something to build a strategy around, but they are quite viable as a resource sink. There comes a point very quickly where you can't afford to use other troops to use up all your resources, and slowly building an elite corps of these is fairly cheap and useful to have given the vulnerability of all your other troops to arrows if you venture on land.

2. EA Ulm two weapon warriors. It's true, for the most part they suck compared to the women, but compared to human troops on average they are actually fine, if somewhat niche. I suppose a little extra attack skill wouldn't hurt, but with the CB nerf to the women warriors I can see using them in cases where you have low defense and high armor foes.

Now, as far as adding to the dud options list, that seems a rather ambitious task given that I would estimate at least 75% of pretenders/spells/units/etc. apply.

[Sombre]

QM: I don't think it's true that 75% of the stuff in the game is 'dud'. Maybe not for preferred use in highly competative MP, but most things still have their uses or are merely below average. What I'm looking for is units which flat out bite and punish you for using them,.. and make them a bit more usable.

It seems people find the flagellents to be ok, so if I were to change them all I would do is remove the random affliction.

I use the CB mod and I think a lot has been done there to increase variety (some disagree). But there are still dud units which could be made less so. Not looking to even everything out, but if a unit is a dud it might as well not even be in the game and that's no good for anyone.

[HoneyBadger]

I agree-most units have *some* use. My deciding factor is usually whether or not the unit is interesting enough that the time I need to find a use for it is worth the trouble of doing so. So a really interesting unit might be worth more time than one that's dull, if both are stats-equal.

[quantum_mechani]

Sombre said:
QM: I don't think it's true that 75% of the stuff in the game is 'dud'. Maybe not for preferred use in highly competative MP, but most things still have their uses or are merely below average. What I'm looking for is units which flat out bite and punish you for using them,.. and make them a bit more usable.

It's amounts to the same thing, just a matter of degree of disadvantage. If something is only a little worse than your other options (but very similar in function) it might as well be a lot worse.

And that aside, few of the thing mentioned here fall into the extreme 'bite me' catagory. Things like Wrath of the Sea, Light Cavalry without lances, Amulet of Vengeance, Call Lesser Horror, Bonds of Fire, Dragon Master, Iron Pigs, Serpent Cataphracts, Bell of Cleansing, The Sphinx, Son of the Sun & Co., etc.

[HoneyBadger]

Again, it's completely besides the point that they're a powerful unit, as I said. The point is that they're a dud, a dead end. They're fine for a few things, but they're expensive, limited, and pretty much the only game in town. Why waste money on them? If you've got a good bless, recruit Jarls.

[Juzza]

HoneyBadger said:
Again, it's completely besides the point that they're a powerful unit, as I said. The point is that they're a dud, a dead end. They're fine for a few things, but they're expensive, limited, and pretty much the only game in town. Why waste money on them? If you've got a good bless, recruit Jarls.

I totaly disagree these troops are exteremly useful for what their worth, when I play Nefilhiem I usaly rely on the nefil soldiers and unfronzen to do all my battles, they are however only desined to fight in cold provinces, they gain +1 to attack, Defence Strength and + even more protection for every cold in value in the province and their with that much cold in a province it makes your enermies encoumbered terribly, +3 for an average human, and then you add their chill to the equation and they are so fatigued that they practicaly lay down and die to a few nefil soldiers, and of core you only need a few of them maybe, five in a large army of other giants and they make a huge impact and if your still not convinced by that, actauly try a few stragies yourself and tell me how they keep to fail your expectations.

[Dedas]

I completely agree with Juzza.

Also I never use the low attack ambidex axemen by themselves as some people seems to, because if you do they won't hit a thing. Instead I let the enemy fight themselves tired first with a small group of shield maidens whom are excellent at this. These troops will hardly kill anything armored with their low strength and their short sword, but they got excellent defense and wield a shield. After a some rounds I throw in the axes, and as the shield maidens now built up some fatigue on the enemy (10 = -1 to defense) my axemen will have a field day. As a bonus the shield maidens will rarely get hit by the throwing axes.
This tactic works quite well against high protection, high defense troops such as knights of this early age.

[Sombre]

quantum_mechani said:
It's amounts to the same thing, just a matter of degree of disadvantage. If something is only a little worse than your other options (but very similar in function) it might as well be a lot worse.

And that aside, few of the thing mentioned here fall into the extreme 'bite me' catagory. Things like Wrath of the Sea, Light Cavalry without lances, Amulet of Vengeance, Call Lesser Horror, Bonds of Fire, Dragon Master, Iron Pigs, Serpent Cataphracts, Bell of Cleansing, The Sphinx, Son of the Sun & Co., etc.

Well if it's just about degrees of disadvantage, you might say that you should never use anything that isn't the hands down best unit or nation in the game. But people want to, both for variety and because the use of different units and nations changes depending on the situation you're in. I mean there are times when unit A, though generally worse than unit B, will be a better choice. What I want to 'fix' is unit C, which has a clear purpose (it's got AP weapons, good mapmove, fire resistance or some other ability which fits into rock paper scissors balance) but still sucks. While I'm at it I figure unit D, which is just a worse version of another unit, could do with either being given a new ability or at least made to be roughly average so it doesn't punish the AI which seems to build at random, or the player who wants to use it for flavour's sake.

The stuff you mention there is 'fixed' in the CB mod is it not? I personally think that if a unit is just bad, severely underpowered, it should be improved. Useless units add nothing to the game and are fairly easy to turn into units which provide more variety (gameplay, flavour, graphics) with a little stat tweak.

[quantum_mechani]

Sombre said:


Well if it's just about degrees of disadvantage, you might say that you should never use anything that isn't the hands down best unit or nation in the game. But people want to, both for variety and because the use of different units and nations changes depending on the situation you're in. I mean there are times when unit A, though generally worse than unit B, will be a better choice. What I want to 'fix' is unit C, which has a clear purpose (it's got AP weapons, good mapmove, fire resistance or some other ability which fits into rock paper scissors balance) but still sucks. While I'm at it I figure unit D, which is just a worse version of another unit, could do with either being given a new ability or at least made to be roughly average so it doesn't punish the AI which seems to build at random, or the player who wants to use it for flavour's sake.

That is pretty much the philosophy of CB. The problem is the rather extreme numbers of type Ds, especially among recruitable troops. It can be extremely difficult to find thematic, balanced, and different solutions for the legions of them.

[Sir_Dr_D]

quantum_mechani said:

And that aside, few of the thing mentioned here fall into the extreme 'bite me' catagory. Things like Wrath of the Sea, Light Cavalry without lances, Amulet of Vengeance, Call Lesser Horror, Bonds of Fire, Dragon Master, Iron Pigs, Serpent Cataphracts, Bell of Cleansing, The Sphinx, Son of the Sun & Co., etc.

You have Serpent Cataphracts listed as one of the extreme 'bite me's. I don't find them that bad.If you compare them to the independant knight, the knight has an extra point of defense and attack, but the Serpent Cataphract is tougher and ,because it turns into a regular lizard after, you have to kill it twice. The knight due to the lance has a greater damage potential for the first strike, but the Serpent Cataphract has slightly higher damage for all strikes after that, and they have lower encumbance. But then it is true that knights are cheaper, and they are faster.

And themetically, Pythium is supposed to have lower calibre calvary then other nations. Their strength is their infantry. Still the Serpent Cataphracts are only slightly inferior, and if you are unable to mass up independent knights, I find your army is better with them then without them. There is just times when you need faster troops.

If I was going to balance them I would simply give them one thing, swamp survival. (and i would consider a small poison resistance) I wouldn't want to change either their cost, or their stats, since the stats do seem to match there description. But swamp survial almost seems like something they should have, and would be enough to give them more of a use.

QM, I am curious on your take on it.