Too early access to Ghoul Curse via Deathbringer too powerful – for all Classes!

We’ve moved over to the paradox forums. Please come visit us there to discuss:
You can still read the collective wisdom - and lolz - of the community here, but posting is no longer possible.

Home Forums Age of Wonders 3 Discussions Balance Suggestions Too early access to Ghoul Curse via Deathbringer too powerful – for all Classes!

This topic contains 159 replies, has 20 voices, and was last updated by  Jolly Joker 6 years, 10 months ago.

Viewing 30 posts - 61 through 90 (of 160 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #220325

    NINJEW
    Member

    wouldn’t normal racial support healing options, such as iron heart or nourishing meal or guardian flame, still heal your necro leader?

    #220328

    quo
    Member

    It isn’t without parallel. Bards, evangelists, Theocrats, Rogues, etc all can charm/seduce/convert. It’s equivalent is running to a gold mine with six bards at minimum and successfully charming every single enemy onto your side. And this method is technically easier to do than ghoul cursing which requires the enemy unit to die for it to be risen as your loyal puppet.

    This does not work with Bards, Charm has too low a chance to work and 6 Bards running together will constantly die due to their extremely low combat strength. Each Bard only has the ability to roll Charm against a single enemy. This is in total contrast to the Deathbringer.

    For the Deathbringer strategy to work, you only need one Deathbringer. It tags each enemy by attacking and then you kill them off using whatever combo of heroes/units you want. There is no tradeoff in combat strength. This unit is normally balanced by not appearing until later in the Necromancer game.

    6 Evangelists or Succubi doesn’t happen til mid-game. 6 Succubi in particular around the same time you could be building Deathbringers. Even so, the Evangelist and Succubus both have MCI to prevent being able to convert one and start a conversion wave, and unlike the Deathbringer, only get to roll once per combat each.

    The Deathbringer should have MCI. It very very plainly should have MCI.

    #220329

    Zaskow
    Member

    wouldn’t normal racial support healing options, such as iron heart or nourishing meal or guardian flame, still heal your necro leader?

    It heals necro heroes already because they’re living beings. When your heroes become archliches situation changes.

    #220331

    Ericridge
    Member

    It shouldn’t be possible that a non-Necro Class is out-ghouling the Necro.

    IMPOSSIBLE. There is a finite number of deathbringers on the map.

    It’s not. Not when you know what you are doing, at least, which is what I assume here. So that assumption doesn’t work.

    As long as necromancer don’t have 100% chance of success to control the deathbringer in manual combat, it isn’t guaranteed. Something which you still don’t understand.

    ere I want Control Undead gone or moved? No? IN that case – why are you making that point? It has no relevance whatsoever.

    Yes, you are arguing to remove a fun trick that I play with from time to time aka, control a deathbringer successfully then start using it to raise an undead horde. And I don’t want it gone.

    That would work for every problem, no matter which one: MAKE A HOUSE RULE. Therefore the point has no relevance either.

    I have made a kind suggestion here which you out flat rejected and is attempting to force your preferred version of age of wonders 3 onto me which I dislike. As long as there is threads calling for changes that I dislike onto the game will have me involved because I am playing the game as well and it is in my interest to make sure the game doesn’t become more boring.

    And that kind suggestion I made will have you enjoying the game and I get to enjoy controlling deathbringers in the tomb and use them to raise hordes of ghouls. But as it is, you’re telling me to obey you or languish in sadness.

    #220332

    Jolly Joker
    Member

    It isn’t without parallel. Bards, evangelists, Theocrats, Rogues, etc all can charm/seduce/convert. It’s equivalent is running to a gold mine with six bards at minimum and successfully charming every single enemy onto your side. And this method is technically easier to do than ghoul cursing which requires the enemy unit to die for it to be risen as your loyal puppet.

    This does not work with Bards, Charm has too low a chance to work and 6 Bards running together will constantly die due to their extremely low combat strength. Each Bard only has the ability to roll Charm against a single enemy. This is in total contrast to the Deathbringer.

    For the Deathbringer strategy to work, you only need one Deathbringer. It tags each enemy by attacking and then you kill them off using whatever combo of heroes/units you want. There is no tradeoff in combat strength. This unit is normally balanced by not appearing until later in the Necromancer game.

    6 Evangelists or Succubi doesn’t happen til mid-game. 6 Succubi in particular around the same time you could be building Deathbringers. Even so, the Evangelist and Succubus both have MCI to prevent being able to convert one and start a conversion wave, and unlike the Deathbringer, only get to roll once per combat each.

    The Deathbringer should have MCI. It very very plainly should have MCI.

    No, that doesn’t work. It would make Deathbringer WAY too expensive. Deathbringer costs 800 Res (and needs 800 to unlock), Evangelist costs 220 Res. Succubus cost 400 Res.
    Add to that as an MCI Convert and Seduce are way better than Inflict Ghoul Curse (you change the balance of the battle), it’s clear, that the Deathbringer comes so much later than especially an Evangelist, that the multiple Inflict chances are only fair.
    Comparing the stats, A Draconian Evangelist has 60/9/11 and otherwise support unit stats with a ranged attack and a buff plus Healing. A Draconian Succubus is considered Support and has 60/11/11 plus Throw Curse while Seduce is against 12 which is quite good. Also the Melee isn’t bad (for me it’s an Irregular). The Drac Deathbringer also has 60/11/11 and is Tireless and has total awareness, the latter being good for survival, the former being good for Inflicting.

    So simply, with Inflict Ghoul Curse as an MCI, the unit would be ridiculously overpriced in Research.

    It might become more expensive though (adding cost to procuce).

    #220333

    Jolly Joker
    Member

    ”I want to keep my imba stuff because it’s as much fun as hitting children.”

    I don’t discuss balance changes with people having this attitude.

    #220346

    Zaskow
    Member

    Add to that as an MCI Convert and Seduce are way better than Inflict Ghoul Curse (you change the balance of the battle), it’s clear, that the Deathbringer comes so much later than especially an Evangelist, that the multiple Inflict chances are only fair.

    Pfff. Break control or Dispel or kill caster and your Seduce or Charm goes to nowhere.
    Kill ghoulified unit and it will be yours. Guaranteed.

    #220358

    quo
    Member

    So simply, with Inflict Ghoul Curse as an MCI, the unit would be ridiculously overpriced in Research.

    Why would it need a price increase? Undead are natively immune to most mind control already. The only Conversion abilities that currently work, to my knowledge, are Control Undead and Necro Aura. Giving them MCI hardly justifies a price increase.

    The unit needs MCI because conversion units (with the sole exception of the Bard, and that one only has Charm) get MCI. Even the lowly Nymphs and Mermaids get MCI.

    #220365

    ExNihil
    Member

    How about shifting control undead to level 5 on heroes / leader? except reducing the prevalence of deathbringers this seems like the most viable option.

    #220381

    lucidorf
    Member

    How about shifting control undead to level 5 on heroes / leader?

    It does sort of solve the title of this thread, does it not?

    …or was it that “too early access to Ghoul Curse” is only too powerful for non-necro leaders?

    #220382

    Jolly Joker
    Member

    So simply, with Inflict Ghoul Curse as an MCI, the unit would be ridiculously overpriced in Research.

    Why would it need a price increase? Undead are natively immune to most mind control already. The only Conversion abilities that currently work, to my knowledge, are Control Undead and Necro Aura. Giving them MCI hardly justifies a price increase.

    The unit needs MCI because conversion units (with the sole exception of the Bard, and that one only has Charm) get MCI. Even the lowly Nymphs and Mermaids get MCI.

    You misunderstand my post; with MCI the Deathbringer wouldn’t be worth the immense research costs anymore, compared with Evangelist and Succubus. The way it is NOW, it could have a higher price.

    Control Undead on level 5 is not something I would like, because the only problem is the Deathbringer, and that’s because the unit is so unique.

    Add to that as an MCI Convert and Seduce are way better than Inflict Ghoul Curse (you change the balance of the battle), it’s clear, that the Deathbringer comes so much later than especially an Evangelist, that the multiple Inflict chances are only fair.

    Pfff. Break control or Dispel or kill caster and your Seduce or Charm goes to nowhere.
    Kill ghoulified unit and it will be yours. Guaranteed.

    True only in PvP.
    Also, you must win the fight first.

    #220396

    lucidorf
    Member

    You misunderstand my post; with MCI the Deathbringer wouldn’t be worth the immense research costs anymore, compared with Evangelist and Succubus. The way it is NOW, it could have a higher price.

    I am just a poor novice, but we are talking about “Mind Control Immunity” here, right? If Deathbringers would get that, then your own city-produced Deathbringers would be buffed… which could very well warrant a higher price, or?

    I mean, the only “nerf” is if you prefer to grab Deathbringers from sites rather than build them… but if that is the case, is that not a sign that the deathbringers are actually too expensive to get by normal means?

    What I am driving at is that the baseline must be that you produce them normally, while the Control Undead grab should be more of a gimmick.

    #220408

    Jolly Joker
    Member

    I misunderstood that – probably the whole topic, simply because the undead already have Mind Control immunity- except against Control Undead.

    So, yes, Control Undead Immunity would solve the problem.

    #220427

    quo
    Member

    There is no “control undead immunity,” but MCI would cover it. As an Undead, it is already immune to Convert, Seduce, and Dominate, so all adding MCI would do is work as protection to Control Undead and Necro Aura.

    And in any case, the unit should have MCI because all “recruiting” units have it, even weak T2s like Nymphs. Only Bards don’t have it, probably because they aren’t really worth converting anyway.

    I’m generally against adding MCI where it isn’t needed, but recruiting units are an exception. They need MCI to prevent cascading conversions.

    #220436

    It shouldn’t be possible that a non-Necro Class is out-ghouling the Necro.

    Now, instead of arguing against my suggestion to remove the chance to early Ghoul a lot of units, you should just go ahead and try things yourself, both with a Necro and with a different Class (conveniently in SP). Might be an eye-opener. I mean, ghouling a couple of T3 defenders in that early stage is pretty powerful.

    It is not, the flaw of the scenario you construct, is a Necro failing to pull off his strategy, versus a non-Necro succeeeding. No matter what strategy employed, the one succeeding does naturally have an advantage after.
    Also you gloss over a lot of other factors, like how the non-Necro apparently has an easier time healing (why exactly? oh, because the non-Necro actually is a Theocrat or Arch Druid that gets easier healing access. Why not a Draconian Warlord as the non-Necro and a say Halfling Necromancer with Nourishing Meal on the other side?), then gloss over the fact that for a non-Necro the recruitment pool of undead healers is sharply limited to what can be controlled in some sites and recruited from a particular dwelling, while the Necro can pump them out of every city.
    You say that

    It’s certainly easier to Control Undead with a mercenary Necro and Control more that Heal Undead than playing the other way round with a Necro.

    Why is that? I see no logical path that leads to that conclusion, and I disagree with it. You also kinda neglect to consider that all this focus of the non-Necro on being a bargain bin Necro would take resources away from other aspects, making it a more even trade instead of a powerup.

    You are comparing a Necro at his worst against a Theocrat at its best. A true outghouling would be both succeeding equally and the Necro still having less.

    And I have played SP (and a bit of MP) and done that. It is a strategy that costs resources for an effect. Converting a Deathbringer is probably one of the best ways to get cannon fodder by ghouling lower tier units, with the occasional better one. At the same time similar effort could be poured into an AD hero to befriend and nurture serpents and spiders, leading to 2-3 stacks of T3-4 units (less if you don’t farm XP) that are certainly very powerful too. Or a Dreadnaught with 2 Rams and 3 Trebuchets (Overload, repair, resistances, and coming levels 5 and 7 slayers and reassemble as well as summoning) that can clear out a decent amount of neutral sites, even if you have to be more careful to pick your battles.
    And that’s ignoring class tactics like the famous early stack of exalted martyrs.

    My conclusion is that early Necro-ghouling is a strategy that faces a number of obstacles and and involves some risks and might fall to bad luck. And if it works out it gives you and advantage, same as other strategies. It does excel at the particular aspect of troop quantity it can bring in, but at the same time other approaches excel at other aspects.
    I consider it fun, and fine from a balance point, and while I wont make judgement, if it is perfectly balanced, it is close enough given the many variables of the game.

    For the Deathbringer strategy to work, you only need one Deathbringer. It tags each enemy by attacking and then you kill them off using whatever combo of heroes/units you want. There is no tradeoff in combat strength.

    What you so simply call “tagging” is actually quite a bit of a difference.
    It involves getting the 60HP Def 11 Deathbringer into melee, in which it can take about 3-4 normal attacks, before the next one will kill it off. Then you have to maneuver the Deathbringer either into flanking positions with only 1 AP remaining, or engineer for the target to be unable to retaliate via soaking retaliations or status effect, otherwise the Deathbringer will take one of those few hits bringing it closer to death. Then you have to protect it from additional attack and ranged fire to the same degree. While every “tag” has a decent chance to not work, and you don’t get to retry.

    And after all extra effort to tag the enemies you still have to kill them off conventionally and win the entire battle.

    You say there is no tradeoff in combat strength, but that is wrong. The Deathbringer is not a strong combatant compared to its peers.
    Compare it to a firstborn or shocktrooper. By bringing a Deathbringer you are losing combat strength compared to other options. And if you use the Deathbringer to tag then you lose even more directed damage due to not using it to kill efficiently.
    Other conversion methods on the other hand give you extra combat power immediately if they proc, by providing the target unit to you.

    Pfff. Break control or Dispel or kill caster and your Seduce or Charm goes to nowhere.
    Kill ghoulified unit and it will be yours. Guaranteed.

    (Guarantee does not include losing battles, failures to apply ghoul curse, corpse destruction and similar complications)
    Also one big thing about conversion is that if you convert a stone giant your opponent has one less stone giant and you have one more, right now.
    If you ghoul a stone giant the opponent still has it and you don’t and you still need to deal another 80+ damage to it. And eve n hen you don’t have the extra firepower it provides on your side in the same battle. Quite a bit worse deal short term. And at best equal long-term.

    #220440

    quo
    Member

    Compare it to a firstborn or shocktrooper.

    Why? A Firstborn or Shocktrooper is not a recruitment unit.

    Compare it to a Evangelist, Succubus, Nymph, Mermaid, Siren, or Shaman. They all have MCI. MCI is standard on recruitment units. Bards are the exception and nowhere in the same class as these other units.

    Basically there isn’t any reason this situation should exist. You shouldn’t be able to convert a recruitment unit. Problem solved.

    #220446

    Ericridge
    Member

    “I want to keep my imba stuff because it’s as much fun as hitting children.”

    I don’t discuss balance changes with people having this attitude.

    You mean your attitude?

    #220447

    Jolly Joker
    Member

    It shouldn’t be possible that a non-Necro Class is out-ghouling the Necro…

    It is not, the flaw of the scenario you construct, is a Necro failing to pull off his strategy, versus a non-Necro succeeeding. No matter what strategy employed, the one succeeding does naturally have an advantage after.

    The point wasn’t having an advantage, the point is having an advantage in class-specifics.

    Also you gloss over a lot of other factors, like how the non-Necro apparently has an easier time healing (why exactly? oh, because the non-Necro actually is a Theocrat or Arch Druid that gets easier healing access. Why not a Draconian Warlord as the non-Necro and a say Halfling Necromancer with Nourishing Meal on the other side?), then gloss over the fact that for a non-Necro the recruitment pool of undead healers is sharply limited to what can be controlled in some sites and recruited from a particular dwelling, while the Necro can pump them out of every city.

    You would say that Necro Class has equal access to Healing than non Necro class?
    That the Necro can pump Heal undead out of every city is of no matter – that’s a given; the only question is whether non_Necro can get “enough” Heal Undead.

    It’s certainly easier to Control Undead with a mercenary Necro and Control more that Heal Undead than playing the other way round with a Necro.

    Why is that? I see no logical path that leads to that conclusion, and I disagree with it. You also kinda neglect to consider that all this focus of the non-Necro on being a bargain bin Necro would take resources away from other aspects, making it a more even trade instead of a powerup.

    Getting living units with a Necro (for a living hero) stops to work at all with Harbingers of Death (Ghouling all heroes and leaders and everything in the company of a hero), so you are either finished anyway at that point or forego a powerful tech.
    You can try to ghoul charmers, converters and seducers – which are pretty rare -, you must get healers (possible) you can develop certain heroes…
    but doing so is a lot more dangerous because if such tries fail (befriend animal against spiders is an extremely dangerous move and spider constellations are very dangerous anyway), while the Deathbringer does his magic when HITTING. (They are also tireless and have Total awareness; you DON’T lose them with a little care, and when they gain medals, things become easier and easier).

    You are comparing a Necro at his worst against a Theocrat at its best. A true outghouling would be both succeeding equally and the Necro still having less.

    That’s actually quite possible: if both get a DB, it’s a question of who is luckier and can get more “hits” in.

    And I have played SP (and a bit of MP) and done that. It is a strategy that costs resources for an effect. Converting a Deathbringer is probably one of the best ways to get cannon fodder by ghouling lower tier units, with the occasional better one.

    That’s the understatement of the year. If you take a (neutral) town, for example, you raise a garrison. And they are no cannon fodder at all. No idea why you have such a low opinion of ghouls and why you talk about LOWER tiers. Keep in mind that Shadowstep works like Phase/Sprint: you unengage, step into the back of the unit that just attacked, land a flanking hit – and there it’s ghouled. And there are lots of effects and ways to reduce their defense and resistance.
    It also doesn’t “cost” except upkeep – but saves units production gold/mana.

    At the same time similar effort could be poured into an AD hero to befriend and nurture serpents and spiders, leading to 2-3 stacks of T3-4 units (less if you don’t farm XP) that are certainly very powerful too.

    WAY too dangerous (see above).

    Or a Dreadnaught with 2 Rams and 3 Trebuchets (Overload, repair, resistances, and coming levels 5 and 7 slayers and reassemble as well as summoning) that can clear out a decent amount of neutral sites, even if you have to be more careful to pick your battles.

    Had you read my initial post (or not forgotten the contents) I actually wrote that too – the difference is, you need a town to produce the stuff. Imagine, the Dread could “whisper” an engineer at a Magma Forge, and because there were sites with machines defending, and Engineers could reassemble destroyed machines (Engineers being an expensive T3)…

    My conclusion is that early Necro-ghouling is a strategy that faces a number of obstacles and and involves some risks and might fall to bad luck.

    No. There is no – or just MINIMAL risk (which would be different if the DB would ghoul you there and then).

    And if it works out it gives you and advantage, same as other strategies. It does excel at the particular aspect of troop quantity it can bring in, but at the same time other approaches excel at other aspects.

    Think about the missing costs.

    For the Deathbringer strategy to work, you only need one Deathbringer. It tags each enemy by attacking and then you kill them off using whatever combo of heroes/units you want. There is no tradeoff in combat strength.

    What you so simply call “tagging” is actually quite a bit of a difference.
    It involves getting the 60HP Def 11 Deathbringer into melee, in which it can take about 3-4 normal attacks, before the next one will kill it off. Then you have to maneuver the Deathbringer either into flanking positions with only 1 AP remaining, or engineer for the target to be unable to retaliate via soaking retaliations or status effect, otherwise the Deathbringer will take one of those few hits bringing it closer to death. Then you have to protect it from additional attack and ranged fire to the same degree. While every “tag” has a decent chance to not work, and you don’t get to retry.

    And after all extra effort to tag the enemies you still have to kill them off conventionally and win the entire battle.

    You say there is no tradeoff in combat strength, but that is wrong. The Deathbringer is not a strong combatant compared to its peers.
    Compare it to a firstborn or shocktrooper. By bringing a Deathbringer you are losing combat strength compared to other options. And if you use the Deathbringer to tag then you lose even more directed damage due to not using it to kill efficiently.
    Other conversion methods on the other hand give you extra combat power immediately if they proc, by providing the target unit to you.

    Wrong analysis, simple and easy. DB has Tireless, Total Awareness and Shadowstep on a 1-turn cooldown (usable every other turn). You CAN disengage (every other turn) and flank with 1 AP (what Shadow step does). You HOP along and try to ghoul units.

    Pfff. Break control or Dispel or kill caster and your Seduce or Charm goes to nowhere.
    Kill ghoulified unit and it will be yours. Guaranteed.

    (Guarantee does not include losing battles, failures to apply ghoul curse, corpse destruction and similar complications)
    Also one big thing about conversion is that if you convert a stone giant your opponent has one less stone giant and you have one more, right now.
    If you ghoul a stone giant the opponent still has it and you don’t and you still need to deal another 80+ damage to it. And eve n hen you don’t have the extra firepower it provides on your side in the same battle. Quite a bit worse deal short term. And at best equal long-term.

    That’s another wrong analysis, because you KNOW what you are facing; it doesn’t come as a surprise, and since Ghouling doesn’t help in battle, you know, you’ll win when you start it, otherwise you don’t.

    #220454

    Gloweye
    Member

    I must say i support giving Mind Control Immunity to Deathbringers. Would also make them a bit more useful in Necro vs Necro matchup, as you’d be able to use them to attack Necromantic Aura units – that’s one potential nightmare right there in the late game.

    #220495

    The point wasn’t having an advantage, the point is having an advantage in class-specifics.

    How would you define that advantage, because I’m not seeing it.

    You would say that Necro Class has equal access to Healing than non Necro class?
    That the Necro can pump Heal undead out of every city is of no matter – that’s a given; the only question is whether non_Necro can get “enough” Heal Undead.

    Yes, it had full access to racial healing, like every other class. And it does get type-specific healing more than the Sorcerer Dreadnaught. The only classes that have more “normal” healing are the AD, because hero upgrade, and the Theocrat, which is part of it’s class shtick.

    But compared to a Warlord, Rogue, AD and Dreadnaught the Necro has the same amount of ordinary healing access.

    It is a matter. For the non-Necro it is a strategic consideration that requires seeking out certain sites, trying to control specific units and hoping there’s enough around. That is a big difference.

    Getting living units with a Necro (for a living hero) stops to work at all with Harbingers of Death (Ghouling all heroes and leaders and everything in the company of a hero), so you are either finished anyway at that point or forego a powerful tech.
    You can try to ghoul charmers, converters and seducers – which are pretty rare -, you must get healers (possible) you can develop certain heroes…
    but doing so is a lot more dangerous because if such tries fail (befriend animal against spiders is an extremely dangerous move and spider constellations are very dangerous anyway), while the Deathbringer does his magic when HITTING. (They are also tireless and have Total awareness; you DON’T lose them with a little care, and when they gain medals, things become easier and easier).

    So, befriending a spider is dangerous, but marching up a DB to it and hitting it is easy and riskless?
    And now I think I get what you said. But the question isn’t if a Necro better at collecting living units (when it has a dozen ways to make them undead and is in multiple ways restricted from getting them) than a living class at collecting ghouls. That is false equivalency.

    That’s actually quite possible: if both get a DB, it’s a question of who is luckier and can get more “hits” in.

    Except the Necro gets more durable ghouls via Vampiric Hunger, and Reanimator production. The Necro will keep more ghouls around if it generates the same amount.

    That’s the understatement of the year. If you take a (neutral) town, for example, you raise a garrison. And they are no cannon fodder at all. No idea why you have such a low opinion of ghouls and why you talk about LOWER tiers. Keep in mind that Shadowstep works like Phase/Sprint: you unengage, step into the back of the unit that just attacked, land a flanking hit – and there it’s ghouled. And there are lots of effects and ways to reduce their defense and resistance.
    It also doesn’t “cost” except upkeep – but saves units production gold/mana.

    Higher tier units tend to have decent resistance to ghoul curse. You argue as if ghouling was always 100%, which it isn’t. Sure you can up your chances, but when you do that, a Charm will do a better job in the battle. And you can’t simply just debuff enemies as you want against any meaningful opposition.

    And we talked before how ghouls get weaknesses, weaknesses that add up. T1 and T2 unembalmed ghouls, without Necro empire upgrades simply aren’t good units. They work, and they are functional, but you still pay the same upkeep you would pay for their better living versions. They don’t cost production, but that’s why they are useful, not good.
    And ghouling higher tier units takes a bit more effort or luck which makes them less of a guarantee.
    I mean what are you fighting? You port in the back of a strong melee unit (that assumedly walked up to engage the DB) and then your DB is safe and out of harms way? Does it immediately die? Does it have no allies that could attack your DB?
    And frankly, upkeep is quite a cost. The DB takes a goldmine on its own to keep around, all the ghouls it makes will impact your economy. And you can only get what is around, no prodcung counters or adapting strategies.

    WAY too dangerous (see above).

    But a 11 def 60HP unit never is in any danger and a surefire way to success? Strange metric.

    Had you read my initial post (or not forgotten the contents) I actually wrote that too – the difference is, you need a town to produce the stuff. Imagine, the Dread could “whisper” an engineer at a Magma Forge, and because there were sites with machines defending, and Engineers could reassemble destroyed machines (Engineers being an expensive T3)…

    The difference is not that you need to build a couple machines, but the amount by which they are made stronger due to the Dread. By your metrics it is really negligible a price for the reward.
    And Imagine, a counterexample that doesn’t literally do a “imagine if” for every single element of it. It is kinda silly that way.

    No. There is no – or just MINIMAL risk (which would be different if the DB would ghoul you there and then).

    Why do you keep saying that without elaborating why? Running a AD against a couple T2 units is highly dangerous, but running a Necro or DB against T3 is no risk? You make no sense, your classifications of costs and risks are arbitrary and their only point is to non-sequiturially support the argument the make.
    Nothing is dangerous to fight if you have a DB, but every other conversion unit will get murdered and eaten by anything it fights.

    Elaborate why you think Necro-hero and DB conversiosn are so hilariously easy against everything and why any other approach isn’t.

    Think about the missing costs.

    I do, that the slight edge in quantity. And you think about the risks, costs and opportunity costs that the approach does take, and not just those it can reduce.
    Your argument is essentially “It costs less money, if you pay in goods. Therefore it is cheaper” And that is simply not true. It just is a different kind of cost you pay.

    Wrong analysis, simple and easy. DB has Tireless, Total Awareness and Shadowstep on a 1-turn cooldown (usable every other turn). You CAN disengage (every other turn) and flank with 1 AP (what Shadow step does). You HOP along and try to ghoul units.

    And enemies are all permastunned and simply ignore you?
    The analysis includes all these aspects. It just also assumes that the enemy units try to fight you.

    That’s another wrong analysis, because you KNOW what you are facing; it doesn’t come as a surprise, and since Ghouling doesn’t help in battle, you know, you’ll win when you start it, otherwise you don’t.

    Just because you don’t like what I say doesn’t make it wrong. You know what you are facing when fighting neutral units, but part of your complaint was as to the result of a PvP fight, was it not?
    And even if you fight neutral units, do you only ever take the easy fights? Do enemies never crit? Is ghoul curse always applying 100%? Etc.. You are applying optimal conditions to your examples and ignoring anything that could be detrimental, when that is exactly why the strategy is not as imba as you claim it to be. That is why your argument is lacking and why I disagree with you. You found your issue and simplify it to the degree where you are blind to the negatives and then complain about the big number of positives. Balance doesn’t work that way.

    Why? A Firstborn or Shocktrooper is not a recruitment unit.

    Compare it to a Evangelist, Succubus, Nymph, Mermaid, Siren, or Shaman. They all have MCI. MCI is standard on recruitment units. Bards are the exception and nowhere in the same class as these other units.

    Basically there isn’t any reason this situation should exist. You shouldn’t be able to convert a recruitment unit. Problem solved.

    You claimed there was no tradeoff in combat strength. For a similar price you could either bring a better combat unit than the Deathbringer, or a conversion unit (assuming free selection) that if it procs its conversion immediately shifts the battle to your favor. The Deathbringer is neither of those and by including it you are actually trading combat strength for after-combat conversion. The argument you made and I replied to is simply wrong.

    As to consistence with MCI, I disagree, as I see no problem that needs solving, and that is a different argument. The Deathbringer doesn’t work as the other recruitment units, so why should a rule of thumb that doesn’t even apply to all of them apply to it? That is just trying to draw parallels for the sake of it.

    #220521

    Lack of life stealing and power ritual is a big draw back for non necro classes useing a deathbringer. Life stealing and total awareness and tireless are a big part of its viability.

    Indeed, you can take one with life stealing, put on a stone skin, and curse an entire dungenon (in manual). Of course, other classes can do things like that. AD when paired with theocrats can get ridiculous warbreed (beast mastery and wildlife refuge and savage rage) from the same site (or some nodes at high defender levels).

    Not to mention the asinine things a theocrat can do with Templar knights being retroactive.

    #220527

    quo
    Member

    For a similar price you could either bring a better combat unit than the Deathbringer, or a conversion unit…

    Did you miss the part we’re talking about converting an enemy unit? There is no “price” other than the investment required to have the power required to grab the unit. The point of this thread, and the reason behind the request for MCI, is that grabbing one of these units early gives you a very large advantage. Specifically, the ability to convert other units, an which ability is expressly guarded by MCI for all other recruitment units minus the very weak Bard.

    The best defense of the current situation is that it may not always work. But it’s not like there is any huge investment you lose if it doesn’t. It’s more like:
    – It worked: Get a big leg up
    – It’d didn’t: Lose nothing and play as normal

    There is no need to discuss grabbing an enemy Evangelist or Succubus because it doesn’t work. They have MCI that prevents it.

    This unit needs MCI. Period.

    #220534

    Jolly Joker
    Member

    Agreed, and that’s that, no need to discuss this further.

    Just one correction:

    You know what you are facing when fighting neutral units, but part of your complaint was as to the result of a PvP fight, was it not?

    No, it was PvP in a PBEM game which means, it was an Autocombat result (6 lower quality plus Deathbringer against 5 higher quality units including 1 good hero; result: Deathbringer sole survivor against a Dire Bear a Mature Serpent and a good hero, among others, so even in AUTO the DB survives; and in AUTO it Ghouled 4 of the 5 units, ending the battle with 5 undead units. As a Theocrat.)

    Look, you continue to insist that a DB is in danger of getting killed; I assure you it isn’t, not when you know what you are doing. The sole investment you make is buying the Necro instead of rejecting him and giving him battle participation. Then, if you get a chance, it either works or not: your Necro hero waits for the appropriate moment to try and Control the DB, and when it works, both team up, because the Necro has Heal undead. Depending on the lay (Necromantic Circle, Lost Library, Tomb), your necro has actually two taks: Controlling Reanimators (and more DBs, if possible) and guarding the DB; the DBs task is, to select worthwhile targets to hit. Once you have a working fighting stack, this is a rolling express: it didn’t cost you any production capacity or gold/mana except that you have to pay higher upkeep – but you’d have that anyway, since you can’t just run with your initial forces. Keep also in mind, that some interesting empire upgrades work for Undead as well, for example the AD upgrade that gives Archers and Supports +8 MP (Long Strider, I think); works perfectly fine on Ghouls…

    #220537

    Ericridge
    Member

    No, it was PvP in a PBEM game which means, it was an Autocombat result (6 lower quality plus Deathbringer against 5 higher quality units including 1 good hero; result: Deathbringer sole survivor against a Dire Bear a Mature Serpent and a good hero, among others, so even in AUTO the DB survives; and in AUTO it Ghouled 4 of the 5 units, ending the battle with 5 undead units. As a Theocrat.)

    What exactly is wrong with that at all. Dude lost a bunch of units but gained a bunch of new units as well. Just kill that deathbringer and you don’t have to worry about him getting more ghouls. And plus, the map will eventually run out of independents for deathbringer to farm. That is the limit of deathbringer’s power.

    #220580

    Did you miss the part we’re talking about converting an enemy unit? There is no “price” other than the investment required to have the power required to grab the unit. The point of this thread, and the reason behind the request for MCI, is that grabbing one of these units early gives you a very large advantage. Specifically, the ability to convert other units, an which ability is expressly guarded by MCI for all other recruitment units minus the very weak Bard.

    Did you miss the part where I addressed that? Twice?

    You make an argument and then ignore everything that contradicts it. That’s silly. Do you actually have any interest in any discussion or do you just want to feel validated in being wrong?
    The Deathbringer is worse in combat power than any non-conversion of similar value.
    And the Deathbringer is worse in combat power than any conversion unit of comparable value.
    That is a combat power tradeoff. And even if you ignore it, it still is.

    The best defense of the current situation is that it may not always work. But it’s not like there is any huge investment you lose if it doesn’t. It’s more like:
    – It worked: Get a big leg up
    – It’d didn’t: Lose nothing and play as normal

    Except when it works you need to start investing in that strategy to benefit from it, and if it doesn’t you have forgone some other advantage.

    And that puts it perfectly in line with a ton of similar strategies.

    This unit needs MCI. Period.

    If this is the level of discussion:
    This unit doesn’t need MCI. Double Period..

    Agreed, and that’s that, no need to discuss this further.

    Yeah, but here you are still discussing and not admitting being wrong. Silly, really.

    No, it was PvP in a PBEM game which means, it was an Autocombat result (6 lower quality plus Deathbringer against 5 higher quality units including 1 good hero; result: Deathbringer sole survivor against a Dire Bear a Mature Serpent and a good hero, among others, so even in AUTO the DB survives; and in AUTO it Ghouled 4 of the 5 units, ending the battle with 5 undead units. As a Theocrat.)

    So where exactly does the problem here lie?
    That the Theocrats army won?
    Or that it was still at fighting strength after?

    That is simply a lucky outcome, and against that opposition that was a number of really lucky rolls.
    So is the non-halfling variant of luck now a balance issue?
    You are complaining about an improbably battle result that includes at lest 3 50% or less chances succeeding as a balance issue.
    That is not a balance issue, that is simply being lucky. That’s what happens in this game.

    You entire complaint is that someone got lucky and you don’t like and and therefore you want to ruin the game for anyone who doesn’t have that problem with chances.

    Look, you continue to insist that a DB is in danger of getting killed; I assure you it isn’t, not when you know what you are doing.

    When you know what you’re doing to the degree to feasibly minimize the danger to a DB, spider groups and other similar things are also a minimal danger. Yet you consider those risky. You can’t have it both ways. Either the player is highly capable and minimizes risk, or he isn’t. Not one for when it suits you and the other for when it suits you.

    [quote=220527]The sole investment you make is buying the Necro instead of rejecting him and giving him battle participation. Then, if you get a chance, it either works or not: your Necro hero waits for the appropriate moment to try and Control the DB, and when it works, both team up, because the Necro has Heal undead. Depending on the lay (Necromantic Circle, Lost Library, Tomb), your necro has actually two taks: Controlling Reanimators (and more DBs, if possible) and guarding the DB; the DBs task is, to select worthwhile targets to hit. Once you have a working fighting stack, this is a rolling express: it didn’t cost you any production capacity or gold/mana except that you have to pay higher upkeep – but you’d have that anyway, since you can’t just run with your initial forces.

    Have you ever looked at the Necromancer abilities besides Control Undead?
    A number of its abilities and spell only work on undead. Using the Necro hero in a living army like any other hero wastes half his potential and makes him a weaker option than another hero of the same level. By recruiting a Necro you are already either committing to taking a less than good hero or getting a small undead army for him to lead.
    That is a significant investment because of the opportunity costs you pay.

    And well, and argument of as to why this strategy works and how you can easily manage every combat to benefit of it, works just the same for any other conversion tactic. AD animals as an example. And they are just as much of a rolling express and cost as little in production, gold and mana for the same apparently negligible upkeep.

    Why do you insist to pretend I don’t understand how it works? I do, and because I do I am disagreeing with you. If you really have such a hard time accepting that someone can disagree with you wwile understanding, you really shouldn’t argue balance, and should first put the same effort into understanding my arguments, which you seem to have trouble with.

    Keep also in mind, that some interesting empire upgrades work for Undead as well, for example the AD upgrade that gives Archers and Supports +8 MP (Long Strider, I think); works perfectly fine on Ghouls…

    It also works on the same units non-ghouled. “It works on everyone equally, including the worse option, therefore the option is not worse” is a stupid argument.
    Next you tell me ghouled cavalry is better than normal cavalry because the Warlord has Toroughbred Mounts.

    #220584

    Jolly Joker
    Member

    You continue to write things that are blatantly false:

    The Deathbringer is worse in combat power than any non-conversion of similar value.
    And the Deathbringer is worse in combat power than any conversion unit of comparable value.
    That is a combat power tradeoff. And even if you ignore it, it still is.

    There is no trade-off, because there was no trade. You went into a fight, early, and controlled the guy, for which you now pay an upgrade (which is the tradeoff). At that point in game – what better unit COULD you even get? And considering that IF you have a Necro hero who has Heal Undead you can make good use of that when you do have one or more undead fighting in your army – WHAT BETTER UNIT COULD THERE BE? So there is no tradeoff, because you didn’t trade anything, but got a gift that fits your Necro hero like a second skin.

    The best defense of the current situation is that it may not always work. But it’s not like there is any huge investment you lose if it doesn’t. It’s more like:
    – It worked: Get a big leg up
    – It’d didn’t: Lose nothing and play as normal

    Except when it works you need to start investing in that strategy to benefit from it, and if it doesn’t you have forgone some other advantage.

    Well, come on then: What do you have to invest into that strategy and what benefit is supposed to be not forthcoming?Enlighten us.

    No, it was PvP in a PBEM game which means, it was an Autocombat result (6 lower quality plus Deathbringer against 5 higher quality units including 1 good hero; result: Deathbringer sole survivor against a Dire Bear a Mature Serpent and a good hero, among others, so even in AUTO the DB survives; and in AUTO it Ghouled 4 of the 5 units, ending the battle with 5 undead units. As a Theocrat.)

    So where exactly does the problem here lie?
    That the Theocrats army won?
    Or that it was still at fighting strength after?

    That is simply a lucky outcome, and against that opposition that was a number of really lucky rolls.
    So is the non-halfling variant of luck now a balance issue?
    You are complaining about an improbably battle result that includes at lest 3 50% or less chances succeeding as a balance issue.
    That is not a balance issue, that is simply being lucky. That’s what happens in this game.

    You entire complaint is that someone got lucky and you don’t like and and therefore you want to ruin the game for anyone who doesn’t have that problem with chances.

    That’s simply NONSENSE, pure and unbridled. It’s polemic for polemics’s sake, nothing else. And it’s not true either – it’s just the top of the iceberg, because in the end that one battle doesn’t matter, but only the constant EARLY output of units. If making that impossible, “ruins the game for everyone”, I wonder what kind of lame, sucky games you are playing, and as I told Eric already, whether your idea of fun and second hobby is hitting children.

    Look, you continue to insist that a DB is in danger of getting killed; I assure you it isn’t, not when you know what you are doing. </blockquote<

    When you know what you’re doing to the degree to feasibly minimize the danger to a DB, spider groups and other similar things are also a minimal danger. Yet you consider those risky. You can’t have it both ways. Either the player is highly capable and minimizes risk, or he isn’t. Not one for when it suits you and the other for when it suits you.

    Again, wrong argument, because those two don’t compare. Spider groups are never minimal danger, except when you can halfway guarantee that they don’t web you – which you can’t. Those hunters have Phase and 36 MP, and facing 2 of them – which happens – in addition to what else is in that group ALWAYS is a risk, because if you are webbed, you are extremely vulnerable. Now, keep in mind that your intention is not to KILL the things, but to BEFRIEND with them (or at least one) – which you can’t, if your hero gets webbed.
    With a DB, the only important thing is that the DB hits something, preferably everything. You WANT to kill stuff, and when in doubt, you’ll be satisfied with a fight the DB has hit only 2 opponents instead of 4. So those fights are way easier than those where you try to control something.

    The sole investment you make is buying the Necro instead of rejecting him and giving him battle participation. Then, if you get a chance, it either works or not: your Necro hero waits for the appropriate moment to try and Control the DB, and when it works, both team up, because the Necro has Heal undead. Depending on the lay (Necromantic Circle, Lost Library, Tomb), your necro has actually two taks: Controlling Reanimators (and more DBs, if possible) and guarding the DB; the DBs task is, to select worthwhile targets to hit. Once you have a working fighting stack, this is a rolling express: it didn’t cost you any production capacity or gold/mana except that you have to pay higher upkeep – but you’d have that anyway, since you can’t just run with your initial forces.

    Have you ever looked at the Necromancer abilities besides Control Undead?
    A number of its abilities and spell only work on undead. Using the Necro hero in a living army like any other hero wastes half his potential and makes him a weaker option than another hero of the same level. By recruiting a Necro you are already either committing to taking a less than good hero or getting a small undead army for him to lead.
    That is a significant investment because of the opportunity costs you pay.

    What is that supposed to mean? That you should have a chance to get a steamroller undead army when you decide to invest into a Necro hero? I don’t think you NEED them to lead an army, they make good fighters, since – as others complained about – they are not good in leading armies anyway, undead or not. Hiring a Necro pays off with an Archon dwelling. You can also use wells to give him undead stuff to work with, and you can try and recruit via controlling, which works fine, for example with Wraiths and Wraith Kings and even Titans if you are lucky, and when the hero reaches level 9, they can Inflict Ghoul Curse all by themselves.

    However, what is really not cool – and what you are not getting, actually – is when you control a DB turn 15 or so, and can transfer all that using wells for produced units to what is a mass conversion unit, which is what you conveniently ignore. A Deathbringer is a MASS conversion unit, that has a chance to convert every ghoulable unit on the battlefield. No matter what your strategy is playing NECRO class, Produce Deathbringer won’t be easy to bring to bear, and reaching level 9 will also take some time AND will involve risking the (Main) HERO’s life (or unlife) instead of that of a unit and thereby 3 days in the void.
    So why should it be possible for OTHER classes to beat Necro class to it? Why should it be possible to shorten things so much? And keep in mind, you can Ghoul the other conversion units as well. Ghouling an Evangelist in a lost Library will allow you to try and CONVERT a living unit first (from a distance) and after that try and Ghould the rest – the only way to actually convert converters, possible easily before turn 20.

    And well, and argument of as to why this strategy works and how you can easily manage every combat to benefit of it, works just the same for any other conversion tactic. AD animals as an example. And they are just as much of a rolling express and cost as little in production, gold and mana for the same apparently negligible upkeep.

    And of course that’s bullshit.

    Why do you insist to pretend I don’t understand how it works?

    Because the above shows you don’t. I can see your AD trying to befriend a lot with Boars and Wargs and Fell Horses, but what you don’t see is, that, no matter what, it will always be the AD sticking out their neck trying to befriend, and if it doesn’t work the AD will always be in trouble, not to mention that Boars and Wargs aren’t actually cutting it – you will have to try for stuff like Polar and Dire Bears eventually, which may come with a couple of hazards.

    Keep also in mind, that some interesting empire upgrades work for Undead as well, for example the AD upgrade that gives Archers and Supports +8 MP (Long Strider, I think); works perfectly fine on Ghouls…

    It also works on the same units non-ghouled. “It works on everyone equally, including the worse option, therefore the option is not worse” is a stupid argument.
    Next you tell me ghouled cavalry is better than normal cavalry because the Warlord has Toroughbred Mounts.

    And lastly an example for your dishonest way of arguing: this is in return to the claim that “Necro tech is missing, so Ghouls are weak”. Well, surprise, Necro Tech may indeed be missing, but other Class’s techs work as well, like the afore mentioned.

    The bottom line is, the Death bringer is a unit of mass conversion, and the Necromancer Class is very carefully geared to getting mass conversion instruments only late. Heroes get it available at level 9, Deathbringers are as expensive to develop as Warbreeds (and in the WL thread the question was raised whether people would use Warbreeds at all or go directly to Manticore Riders which goes to show HOW late this tech is supposed to come – when a lot of the independents are already killed, in other words.
    Getting a Deathbringer therefore, when you just start to kill independents and guards en gros, therefore seems wrong and totally imba, even more so, when you condider that this option is open to every class.

    #220589

    quo
    Member

    Have you ever looked at the Necromancer abilities besides Control Undead?
    A number of its abilities and spell only work on undead. Using the Necro hero in a living army like any other hero wastes half his potential and makes him a weaker option than another hero of the same level. By recruiting a Necro you are already either committing to taking a less than good hero or getting a small undead army for him to lead.
    That is a significant investment because of the opportunity costs you pay.

    Necromancer heroes are incredible for Theocrats and pretty good for everyone else except (IMO) Dreadnought.

    And well, and argument of as to why this strategy works and how you can easily manage every combat to benefit of it, works just the same for any other conversion tactic. AD animals as an example. And they are just as much of a rolling express and cost as little in production, gold and mana for the same apparently negligible upkeep.

    Well for one thing Befriend Animal only works on Animals. Ghoul Curse works on every living unit, humanoid or not. You may or may not be able to find enemies to convert with Convert or Befriend Animal. That isn’t going to happen with Ghoul Curse at the stage of the game we’re talking about.

    Meanwhile you keep making a bigish deal about the Deathbringer being at risk of death. But the Deathbringer’s stats (60 HP, 11 Def 11 Resist) are better than an Evangelist and identical to a Succubus, and both of those units give up their entire turn while standing at melee or close range to trigger their conversion. The DB also has Tireless, so you can just park it in guard mode and nobody can AP drain it. The Deathbringer also does more damage than a Succubus, not that it really matters, because you aren’t using the unit for damage. The Deathbringer is basically a way to trigger conversion checks, and the way to do that is teleport behind the unit and spin them around so they can’t strike back. Unless you are simply terrible at this game, or exclusively play autocombat, you should be able to procure a huge number of units from doing that. It’s like getting to roll Seduce multiple times from a single Succubus instead of having to bring multiples.

    #220595

    quo
    Member

    So why should it be possible for OTHER classes to beat Necro class to it? Why should it be possible to shorten things so much? And keep in mind, you can Ghoul the other conversion units as well. Ghouling an Evangelist in a lost Library will allow you to try and CONVERT a living unit first (from a distance) and after that try and Ghould the rest – the only way to actually convert converters, possible easily before turn 20.

    Is this true? I thought MCI prevented Ghouling. I fought an Evangelist with my Necromancer today but didn’t pay attention to whether Ghoul Curse would work on him. Maybe I just failed the roll.

    #220601

    Gloweye
    Member

    Is this true? I thought MCI prevented Ghouling.

    Nah, it doesn’t – I’ve Ghouled enough Manticores to be sure of that. This possibility is a big part of the reason why the 2nd and 3rd levels from the Necro campaign aren’t that hard – both have treasure sites where you can Ghoul T4’s.

    #220617

    lucidorf
    Member

    Is this true? I thought MCI prevented Ghouling. I fought an Evangelist with my Necromancer today but didn’t pay attention to whether Ghoul Curse would work on him. Maybe I just failed the roll.

    *Ahem*… I do not want to take any sides in this discussion, but I think you might want to revise your stance that “MCI” is the only logical solution.

    I mean, as I read your argument, then you list Evangelist, Succubus etc and that they have Mind Control Immunity in order to stop a spree of “snowball”-recruits running around the map. If we accept this, then it is obvious an oversight by Triumph studios to not add the Deathbringer to the list of immune units.

    However, Gloweye has just pointed out that the Deathbringer does not abide by this rule. I.e. the moment you have a Deathbringer (or more), then you can theoretically grab every Evangelist you see.

    Personally I believe that the Mind Control Immunity for Evangelists etc. is more of a technical solution to avoid a mind control battle between mind controllers. After all, if it is allowed, then the first “Mind Control”-ability that goes off, will immediately spawn another “Mind Control”-ability, creating a chain reaction.

    So, in short… If early access to Deathbringers is a balance issue, then Mind Control Immunity is one possible solution. It is not the only solution though. It might not even be the best solution either, especially if we want to let non-Necro leaders start the zombie apocalypse.

Viewing 30 posts - 61 through 90 (of 160 total)

You must be logged in to reply to this topic.