wesnoth-dev
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Wesnoth-dev] The problem with Knalgans....

From: Richard Kettering
Subject: Re: [Wesnoth-dev] The problem with Knalgans....
Date: Sat, 26 Feb 2005 15:34:54 -0600 
Some preliminary comments regarding knalgans:
One of their primary weaknesses is to poison. This is because, not only do they have no portable healing, meaning that they must retreat to a village to remove the poison, but they also take a few more turns to do so, in almost all cases, than any other race.
Against enemies like northerners, this flattens them, since the northerners also have other units which exploit other weaknesses of the knalgans (trolls, who are cheap, get good defense in many terrains (or, "better defense than the dwarves", at least), and several more mobile units.
I am of the opinion that the troll whelp should have his cost increased to at least 14. Trolls are especially harsh against dwarves, because few dwarves can pelt them with ranged attacks. This would also have the side effect of making the Orcish grunt cheaper than the troll whelp, which I think would really help - I'd rather see hordes of orcs on the battlefield, than hordes of trolls. I think of trolls as being somewhat less numerous than orcs, although still great in number.
Elvish pillager also suggested increasing the cost of the assassin to 18, which I again think is a change long overdue. The unit is easily as powerful as the elvish archer, if not more so.
My comments are based mostly on watching AI vs AI or human vs AI battles, 
so take it for what it is worth in that regard:

On Sat, 26 Feb 2005, David White wrote:
After trying to play a few human vs human games as the Knalgan Alliance, 
I think I have a little better idea what is wrong with them.

IMHO, they are currently 'almost' powerful enough. Lots of people seem
to think Gryphon Riders are overpriced, but I think that at 25 gold they are pretty reasonable now. They only cost 25% more than ghosts, and they 
are alot more valuable than ghosts, being able to move 9 hexes vs the
ghost's 7. Their attack is also alot more powerful than a ghost's. A
ghost isn't much of a serious combat unit, but a gryphon rider or two
can turn the course of a battle by swooping in at an opportune moment.

One change I think does fit a gryphon rider is that I think it should
get some better defense on mountains. Probably 60%. I think it makes
sense for a gryphon to be more daunting and difficult to attack while
it's on a mountain.
This seems reasonable to me. The 9 movement really shines with fog-of-war 
and as you said they are useful support units to come in and mop up a
wounded unit that you expected to kill, or wound a unit that you want to 
get experience for another unit.
No deep opinion either way on the gryphon riders - I usually stick with footpads, as they seem to survive nearly as long, have a much better upgrade path, and cost half as much. Elvish Pillager has suggested changing the level-2 gryphon rider to having a 13-3 attack, which I think would be a fairly good idea.
The other big Knalgan unit is the Dwarvish Fighter. I think they are now pretty reasonable too. We could chop their cost down 1 piece to 16, but 
I'd be dubious about this: I think they are very powerful. This didn't
use to be so, but things have changed lately: we've made Dwarves move
fast through forest, and they have better defense in villages. There are 
situations where they are more maneuverable than their human, elvish,
orcish, and undead counterparts despite their 4 movement rate. They are 
also *very* tough fighters. My inclination is to say that they are
powerful enough already, though I guess we could make them a tiny amount 
more powerful with 1-2 more hitpoints, or a 1 cost reduction, or
increasing their secondary hammer attack from 9-2 -> 10-2.


The dwarvish fighter is all right, allthough I almost never use them
against the computer. They may be slightly under-powered or over-priced. 

Things to consider in comparing them to enemy troops.
a]  They move somewhat slow by comparison.
b] They potentially do slightly more damage, but not a LOT more damage - only 4 more than an elvish fighter, for example. c] They have no ranged attack. They shouldn't get one, but this really, really puts them at a disadvantage against a lot of units. d] They only get 30% defense on grass and forest, not 40% like everyone else.
My suggestion - switch the dwarven movetype to getting 40% defense on grass. A subtle change, but one that should *really* have a worthwhile effect. I mean, even _orcs_ get 40% defense on grass, and orcs are much cheaper than dwarves, move faster, have more hitpoints, etc. 


The problem for the Knalgans, though, is that this is where their good
units end. The Ulfserker is kinda expensive, at 18, and more
importantly, you don't want a unit that has 'beserker frenzy' when their attack is only 4-4. There is no way I would recruit an Ulfserker against 
human opponents with current stats, because they die far too easily. I
think that to be useful, this unit has to have its cost substantially
reduced, and/or have its attack power increased: to 5-4 or possibly 6-3. 

The problem with berserker frenzy is that the unit almost always dies,
either in combat or immediatly after.  As a result, they really end up
serving only two purposes: weakening a high-level unit so another unit can 
get the kill/xp, or as part of an assasination squad.  Currently it
typically takes two Ulfs(cost 18) to kill a wose(cost 20), and at the cost 
of one of the ulfs.  Reducing the ulfs cost to ~12 or 13 would give the
Knalgans a dangerous cannon-fodder unit, which all said, might not be a
bad thing.  Increasing its damage a little would not really address its
biggest weakness, namely that they are essentially suicide units.
Increasing it's damage wouldn't hurt. Personally, I save them as special weapons - I use them for the express purpose of finishing enemy units who need to go down, NOW. For example, they are reasonably good at removing orcish assassins from the game. 

A more radical change would be:
a]  Make the berserker frenzy work only on attack.
b] Up the defense value of the berserker (he can, after all, move much more freely than other dwarves). I would take his "low defense" to mean his forgoing heavy armor. 
c]  Make the unit more expensive.


The Dwarvish Guardsman is also just not worth the price of 19 gold --
not with only 3 movement. Having 3 movement means a unit must be very
powerful in other areas to make up for it, and the Guardsman doesn't
come even close to this. Sure, the steadfast thing is kinda nice, but
enemies can easily just march around the guardsmen and concentrate on
other enemies. When someone really does want to kill a guardsman, it's
not *that* hard anyway. Guardsmen cost just one less than woses, and
move at the same rate, but woses are much more powerful in so many
respects. Even in terms of special abilities, the wose's invisibility + 
regeneration is probably more powerful than steadfast.
I think that guardsmen need to have their movement increased to 4, and
be given some real attack power...like their 4-3 attack being increased 
to 6-3.
Against the computer, guardsmen serve well. Placed on a village they can resist two woses for quite a while, although three woses will make short order of them. In the open, woses regeneration make them superior and I 
don't know that two guardsmen could kill an isolated wose before it
levels.  Increasing their speed would be good as well as the increased
attack. You might consider giving them an alternate melee attack. Say a 
6-2 axe(blade) attack that would allow them to bypass some (like the
wose) units' resistances.
Yeah, I agree very strongly with the increase in movement. The attack damage increase would probably be good, too. 


Then there are Thunderers. I largely don't like them because of their
unreliability.....but I think that's part and parcel of them. I think at 
this stage they don't need to be changed.


I don't end up using them much either, but I'm not sure how to improve
them without making them too powerful. Perhaps giving them an alterante 
range attack with different damage type might make them more useful.  A
while ago it had been proposed that one of the dwarven characteristics was 
their use of multiple weapon types, and I think that adding the second
ranged attack would fit in with that quite well.
As radical as it might sound, how about reducing the attack damage of the thunderer to 15, and giving it marksman? 
(the upgrades would also be reduced in damage).
This would give it less potential damage than other units, but a palatable chance of hitting. Right now, the thunderers are lousy because not only do they have a low chance of doing any damage, but they also do less total damage than other units.
Right now, thunderers are only useful against those that they can hit >50% of the time. Drakes are the only thing I really use them against, and even there I really pay for doing so (the thunderers will win out, eventually, but quite a few of them die in the process). They are useful against drakes because not only do they have an 80% chance of hitting, but they also do more than the straight 20 damage that an elf does, or the 18 damage that a human bowman does (Which increases during the day to 21, I might add. (the elven bowman and human bowman would also have a good damage boost under these conditions.
Keep in mind that the dwarves have no lawful bonus to help them, nor do they get the advantage of leadership.
reply via email to
[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]