Footpad + ulf v undead, overpowered

[Tonepoet]

Playing a hard game (when typing this), UD has trouble offending and the pads are very versatile, hard to catch them, they stick for the win with luck, or run away with bad luck. Hard for UD to win on Freeland.

Hmm, y'know, that's actually interesting input, which I feel is somewhat congruent with the current replays. It gives me another thought. This could be because the map advances on all grass with the only high terrain in the middle being free flowing castle. Footpads can traverse very quickly over it with their high movement. Some sort of blockage to make them less free flowing might be in order. On a map like Waterloo Sunset, the 'pads wouldn't be able to advance or retreat so easily. And yes, I know it's a 6p map but it's the only example I can think of that'd hamper footpads with definitive blockages at the moment. And now to play a game with CookieBite because your war rages on so long. At 34 turns it makes me curious if one could actually segue into this strategy if they don't intend it from the start; it proves that there can be a lot of longevity to be had here.

[5dPZ]

After the game, I would say UD need certain amount of luck (more than normal) and large amount of defence to win against Pad/ulf spam on Freeland. Offense without any lv 2 is almost impossible for UD on that map.

[Doc Paterson]

Playing a hard game (when typing this), UD has trouble offending and the pads are very versatile, hard to catch them, they stick for the win with luck, or run away with bad luck. Hard for UD to win on Freeland.

Hmm, y'know, that's actually interesting input, which I feel is somewhat congruent with the current replays. It gives me another thought. This could be because the map advances on all grass with the only high terrain in the middle being free flowing castle. Footpads can traverse very quickly over it with their high movement. Some sort of blockage to make them less free flowing might be in order.

Noooo sir. That castle is there mainly for Undead to be able to advance quickly to relatively high-defense terrain without taking movement penalties. "Obstructions" in too high a concentration effect Undead's ability to compete with Drakes in particular and all of the other factions to varying degrees. I know you'd referenced Waterloo Sunset, but that would be massively unbalanced as a 1v1....the fact that it gives you so many factions will usually water down the imbalances of any one faction (would a team of all Drakes dominate though? In my opinion, they would). Anyways- If you want to try some modifications to Freelands and send them to me, of course I'll consider them.

Now don't get me wrong- I don't believe that there even necessarily is an imbalance here. Remember that these points are mostly revolving around an opponent knowing your faction and counter-recruiting, and I don't believe that we can, or should be able to balance that sort of thing. I'm most interested in the data that arrives from matches in which, at the very least, the Undead player has equal knowledge from the start (the "flatfooted" recruit versus the "I know your faction" recruit is just not going to be balanced.).

If, following very convincing data, we did want to tweak things, I personally would recommend a very, very small reduction in the Pad HP. I've always thought (since the HP was increased) that the Pads were a little too durable, and I don't think a very small decrease would affect the other matchups, at all.

[Caphriel]

I just want to point out, to those saying that this is unfeasible against random factions, that oesis said, in the first post, "It involves only recruiting footpads and ulf's and generally knowing that your opponent is undead beforehand."

However, I know of a few people who will open with all footpads...coughHODORcough

[Doc Paterson]

I just want to point out, to those saying that this is unfeasible against random factions, that oesis said, in the first post, "It involves only recruiting footpads and ulf's and generally knowing that your opponent is undead beforehand."

However, I know of a few people who will open with all footpads...coughHODORcough

Well, that is the gimmick-within-a-gimmick that we like to call Young David Hodorism.

[Tonepoet]

I'd like to add that just because it's done, doesn't necessarily make it a good idea: it's still risky. For instance I wouldn't like to be caught up against a small swarm of Drakes armed with nothing but footpads in much the same way I wouldn't want to be caught facing up against Spearmen/Clashers, (or any melee units for that matter but especially Spearmen/Clashers,) with nothing but Horsemen. Yes, both situations can end up just as disastrous: The Drakes get almost free hits against the footpads and the fighters could really push on them hard. This alone makes decision odds for it being good just as likely as they are for the decision being bad. (1/6 each) Now if you bring other factions into the mix and consider that they may have at least even if not better odds at winning against this monorecruit strategy than not, I think you should see where I'm starting to go with this... The Dwarves do have reasons for existing after all guys! XD

[tekelili]

If, following very convincing data, we did want to tweak things, I personally would recommend a very, very small reduction in the Pad HP. I've always thought (since the HP was increased) that the Pads were a little too durable, and I don't think a very small decrease would affect the other matchups, at all.

I think oesis tactic has some merit, as is in someway anoying that ud can´t react in a powerfull way to a tactic that involves just 2 units and ud player knows it from begining. If the experts in balancing issues are going to consider this threat as a possibility to slightly change a unit, I would suggest that ghost should also be watched carefully.

After face oesis tactic in 2 games, I am not sure the footpad swarm is the really problem. I think a da spam beat them easy. the problem for da is ulf and ghost is suposed to be a logical counter for it. In my test games, we soon reached a point where more or less I had a ghost for every ulf of oesis, but I felt like an overall superiority of ulf over ghost. they were threating themselves depending of tod in a balanced way, but ulf was also a threat to my whole army, while my ghost werent such as problem for footpads. If, as oesis said, ulf has strong trait, the threat over ghost is even bigger. One of the problems I had, was the chance oesis had to soft my ghost with footpads range and disable him as ulf threat at some moments depending of tod. So I become to think during those games :"why my ghost is one gold more expensive than his ulf?" As I have intended (sorry if I am wrong), ghost is a very especific ud weapon vs knalgans and have a lesser use in other match ups. So perhaps a slightly improve of ghost would help vs knalgans and would have no impact in other match ups.

I am not an expert in these issues, just wanted ask the real ones a second watch to ghost.

[5dPZ]

Played 5-6 games with me as pad + Ulf against different players, 2 on Caves of Balisks, rest on Freelands. I managed to win them all and some of them are 0 loss game - enemy couldn't even have a pad kill. In all games, I warned the other player before turn 1 recruitment that I will mainly recruit foodpads.

I think there is something to be fixed.

(note: in some games, I have +25% dmg taken and still won,
note2: some of the enemies may be less skilled than me, but it's hard to imagine in any other match up, having >90% recruit to be ONE unit with a single complement unit; with warning to enemy beforehand, can have unchallenged, easy, fast wins like this)

[oesis]

There is now a replay up against nani.

[nani]

Priceless Excuses :

• Wearing the lucker-shirt is cheating.
• There has been limited time to play so I played the east wrong.
• Fight me when I'm satiated. (The reason to leave was lunch.)

Seriously, I'm fine with losing vs hodor & friends-subsets.
Keep gloating over this!

[Rigor]

i also tried it out, random gave me dwarves but i warned my opponent as well. he had received UD randomly, so my first reaction was...joy

all in all id say that this strategy is pretty ridiculous, just like grunt spam on the same map unfortunately i didnt save this one but ill post it when its on the RP server.

[Tonepoet]

Lost a game on turn 11 7 losses, no kills against 5dPZ, on a specially modified version of the map. Adepts alone or possibly ghouls could probably beat footpads alone. The Ulfserker eats both. I thought ghosts might work as a tank against both but the footpads can gang-bang 'em rather effectively when set out alone to the point where they don't even last a turn. The ghost may heal a lot but it doesn't matter of they never get the chance to. So village theft alone doesn't quite work, at least not using ghosts. Bats might possibly work since they're cheaper but you'd have to use them knowing they'd be a sacrifice to begin with and work accordingly.

The footpads seem rather omnipresent since when one wave passes, the next wave is already there, so while I could've employed more stealth tactics, doing such

After experiencing it myself though, I've been able to give it additional thought and I do believe the following two strategies might be effective:

Strategy A: Build up ghosts until you can form a solid line or ZoC daisy chain to shield your adepts with. If only two can be attacked in each turn, the footpads won't be able to kill them all at once; they can then retreat to a village and heal more quickly than a skeleton fighter would. Potential problem: Economics. The ghost costs more than the footpad, so you'll face great initial pressure.

Strategy B: Utilize an old fashioned Undead strategy known as Corpse/Adept, except possibly using Bats instead. The idea is to wrap your adepts around in level zeroes so the ulfserker cannot come into direct contact with your adepts. Proceed to wipe out footpads with adepts if unit densities allow and wipe out ulfserker with accompanying melee unit. Potential problem: Your meat shields could be easily killed by even footpads before ulfserkers are forced to utilize your attacks and multiple ulfserkers could require meat shields multiple layers thick.

The resistances of the undead are geared to make them all about cover kill 'n cover essentially.

I forgot to turn obs. back on: (meant to post it here anyway, so there's no point) but here's the replay if anybody's interested:

Concept Phase.gz

(40.19 KiB) Downloaded 248 times

5dPZ had to eat dinner by the way so while I waited a while for him, we didn't have a rematch yet, incase you're wondering.

If, following very convincing data, we did want to tweak things, I personally would recommend a very, very small reduction in the Pad HP. I've always thought (since the HP was increased) that the Pads were a little too durable, and I don't think a very small decrease would affect the other matchups, at all.

I think oesis tactic has some merit, as is in someway anoying that ud can´t react in a powerfull way to a tactic that involves just 2 units and ud player knows it from begining. If the experts in balancing issues are going to consider this threat as a possibility to slightly change a unit, I would suggest that ghost should also be watched carefully.

After face oesis tactic in 2 games, I am not sure the footpad swarm is the really problem. I think a da spam beat them easy. the problem for da is ulf and ghost is suposed to be a logical counter for it. In my test games, we soon reached a point where more or less I had a ghost for every ulf of oesis, but I felt like an overall superiority of ulf over ghost. they were threating themselves depending of tod in a balanced way, but ulf was also a threat to my whole army, while my ghost werent such as problem for footpads. If, as oesis said, ulf has strong trait, the threat over ghost is even bigger. One of the problems I had, was the chance oesis had to soft my ghost with footpads range and disable him as ulf threat at some moments depending of tod. So I become to think during those games :"why my ghost is one gold more expensive than his ulf?" As I have intended (sorry if I am wrong), ghost is a very especific ud weapon vs knalgans and have a lesser use in other match ups. So perhaps a slightly improve of ghost would help vs knalgans and would have no impact in other match ups.

I am not an expert in these issues, just wanted ask the real ones a second watch to ghost.

As mentioned above, I think undead can react with just two units: Ghosts and Adepts. Adepts to kill, ghosts to cover. That's all that's needed. Nobody yet has actually tried just ghost and adepts yet though because they deem that the opening recruit to be unfair. I think an actually unfair opening recruit might be needed to demonstrate that this tactic isn't realistically feasible though because it's unfair in and of itself. Unit spam should be met with counter-spam because that's how it works in the actual game: If somebody recruits a disproportionate number of Wose, you meet them with mages. If somebody recruits a disproportional number of Horsemen, you meet them with Clashers or Skirmishers. Against a random faction, you have to consider every possibility and are forced into proportion and rework numbers later based upon how your opponent flexes once they realize which units you're using. If you start recruiting Wose, I'll pick out a mage or two, if you start recruiting Horsemen, I'll pick out Clashers or Skirmishers. Eventually if you keep on recruiting along these lines, the opponent is then forced to pick something else out instead.

Sooo if I get a second chance, there are several openers I'm considering to this effect, if anybody's willing to try them with me.

[tekelili]

As mentioned above, I think undead can react with just two units: Ghosts and Adepts. Adepts to kill, ghosts to cover. That's all that's needed. Nobody yet has actually tried just ghost and adepts yet though because they deem that the opening recruit to be unfair. I think an actually unfair opening recruit might be needed to demonstrate that this tactic isn't realistically feasible though because it's unfair in and of itself. Unit spam should be met with counter-spam because that's how it works in the actual game: If somebody recruits a disproportionate number of Wose, you meet them with mages. If somebody recruits a disproportional number of Horsemen, you meet them with Clashers or Skirmishers. Against a random faction, you have to consider every possibility and are forced into proportion and rework numbers later based upon how your opponent flexes once they realize which units you're using.

I just tried just ghost, adepts and bats in my first test with oesis. It´s true that my skills were low in that game and perhaps that tactic could be perfomed sucesfully, but my analysis after that game was that skulls in front villages to protect them from ulf at day are necesary (wich has the side effect of reduce your army to just defend until you can build enougth big army to counter footpads mobility)

EDIT: I played that game offensive, I dont think you have enougth gold to build a quick defense with just ghost and da, but well, try it, it would have some test value I imagine

[Rigor]

here it is...even without luck, the whole idea of going out of the keep was already a BAD idea.. XD

too easy to play it that way. maybe its the map?

[Tonepoet]

I just tried just ghost, adepts and bats in my first test with oesis. It´s true that my skills were low in that game and perhaps that tactic could be perfomed sucesfully, but my analysis after that game was that skulls in front villages to protect them from ulf at day are necesary (wich has the side effect of reduce your army to just defend until you can build enougth big army to counter footpads mobility)

EDIT: I played that game offensive, I dont think you have enougth gold to build a quick defense with just ghost and da, but well, try it, it would have some test value I imagine

Perhaps not but it always opens with 6 footpads and the more I look at it, the more it resembles a Drakes vs. Undead match. I may not have to actually defend the villages if I pull my adepts back to kill the footpads that take it. Not sure though. I think I'd likely open with 5 ghosts. You do raise an interesting point about economics though, by midgame you've usually collected all of your villages so you can position your units better. If I just used ghosts or if I just used adepts for instance, I'd be a few villages short and my opponent would start with perhaps, say, a 6 gold advantage and superior positioning? That doesn't normally happen in normal games, at least, not if you know what you're doing.

Maybe for these purposes Den of Onis or Hamlets would be better to test on. The reduced keeps mean if I leaned heavily in the favor of ghosts, that I should be able to collect my villages at the same rates he does, keeping us on a more even basis prior to first combat thus better emulating a traditionally styled game as one can with such uniquely specialized setups. I've recruited 5 ghosts on Hamlets before, when knowing my opponent was Knalgans and the terrain blockers aren't so indiscriminate as impassible mountains so the differences between flight vs. walking should better come into play, better contrasting the two units roles.

So does 5 ghosts opening vs. 6 footpads on opening in Hamlets sound like fair testing grounds? I think it would be best.