Dark Adept VS Mage

[NightBlade]

Why does adept get traits like resilient but mage doesnt? and is there anyone who think the mage cost is abit too high?

[Dragonking]

Why does adept get traits like resilient but mage doesnt?

Mages can get resilient too..

and is there anyone who think the mage cost is abit too high?

Probably someone think so, but IMO mage is very well balanced unit.

[NightBlade]

Yes, mage is indeed very well balanced, the problem comes with adepts, 4g less but just about as powerful as mage with no melee.

[NightBlade]

Sorry about all the complaining DK, but i think it is my job as a player to point out things that i think might not be right. hope you'll get used to the massive complaining made by me

[Dragonking]

Sorry about all the complaining DK, but i think it is my job as a player to point out things that i think might not be right. hope you'll get used to the massive complaining made by me

I have no problem with that

Just one request: use "edit" button - don't write post under post.

I think complaing is important part of comunication between players -> developers. So fell free to complain (just please not overdo with this )

Yes, mage is indeed very well balanced, the problem comes with adepts, 4g less but just about as powerful as mage with no melee.

Yes, maybe indeed Adepts are little too good (but I used to think that 10-2 is worse than 7-3). But no meele really hurts - you can finish adept with 1hp unit without fear that you will lose this unit. Ulf-killer case is too very good example of adept's weakness. But of course we will consider your (and others too) opinions. (maybe little less hp for adept?)

[NightBlade]

Ah...the old goodie goodie ulfserker example, i used that example to debate against Tippsey about mage and adept but in the end he proved me wrong(including a test battle). i think the adept cost should increase that's probably a better option than changing stats, since adept has good stats already.


P.S. where is the edit bottom?

[Tippsey]

Sure the no melee attack is a weakness for the adept but it only becomes truly noticeable when facing an ulf. Otherwise the 5-1 of a mage is barely noticeable. Currently 10-2 is weaker then 7-3 by 1 damage both regularly and at peak hours. But then lowering hp may not solve the problem as the adept also needs a whole 8 less exp to level up making it quite a bit more formidable in the long run. Perhaps merely an increase in cost would do it because as is at 16 gold, it discourages undead users to make skeleton archers. Perhaps a modest increase of 1 or 2 for now. The upgrades of the adept also need powered down as they are quite a bit more powerful then there mage counterparts butthat can be got to after all lv 1 and 0 balancing is done.

[NightBlade]

Yea, increase the cost and see what happens.

[Cuyo Quiz]

I wanted a 4-4 attack undead archer... x.x...

Then we could bring costs up for the adept and make it a less seen presence in the battlefield.

[olof]

we are all the time underpowering undeads, and it's now easy to win against them.
Ok to say that there is something wrong : most players prefere recruit adepts and only adepts. Maybe it could be possible to increase a little adept price, but then it's necessary to give an other advantage to an other unit (does someone use bats now ? we now are sure to lose them at first attack...)

[NightBlade]

Yea, i use bats only for grabbing villages not attacking, i recon an undead rider would be more useful than a bat.

[Sciolist]

If adepts were weakened, it's hard to see where Undead wins are going to come from. Sure, they're a good unit, but this makes up for the fact their other units are not as good.

[NightBlade]

that is why we are tuning up other units like ghoul, skeletons and tune down adepts.

[Elvish_Pillager]

Otherwise the 5-1 of a mage is barely noticeable.

Until the AI kills your leader with it!

[Tippsey]

Heh true true but ussually you see your leader burninated by them.