Neglected promotion paths

Share and discuss strategies for playing the game, and get help and tips from other players.

Moderators: Forum Moderators, Developers

Post Reply
energyman76c
Posts: 199
Joined: May 26th, 2004, 9:38 pm

Post by energyman76c » January 18th, 2008, 9:15 pm

maxgamer wrote:i think that the silver mages ability to provide fire power anywhere on the map (which is especially useful when your fighting in more than one area) is great, and it can also run away instantly, making it so hard to kill. also, they require less upkeep than great mages which is crucial in campains. It also is easier to train and you arn't hurt as bad if it dies, whereas you almost have to give up if u lose a great mage. Id rather have 2 silver mages than a great mage.

Over all, if u take note of the abilities a silver mage has and u know how to use it, i think the silver mage trumps arch mage and rivals great mage. you great mage fans can now have a tissy fit...
hissy fit? why? it is you silver-mage lovers who don't shut up :twisted:

the problem with the silver mage is not that he can run away, but he has to run away, while other mages are able to hold their ground.

Also great mages are not more expensive in upkeep then silver mages - ever heard of loyal? And to make it worse, two silver mages are much more expensive than one great mage. And you need at least two silver mages to replace a great mage...

Darth Jordius
Posts: 399
Joined: September 17th, 2007, 4:53 pm
Location: 2 miles southeast of the Middle of Nowhere

Post by Darth Jordius » January 18th, 2008, 9:25 pm

I thought the Silver Mage had 70% resist against fire.
Quiz wrote:You are a Dwarvish Fighter. You're surly and handy with an axe. Go chop some trees.
Check out Quietus's Minotaurs!

maxgamer
Posts: 19
Joined: January 17th, 2008, 7:47 pm

Post by maxgamer » January 18th, 2008, 9:31 pm

silver mages are the antimage since they have resistance to fire and cold so they wouldnt have to run from a mage, and 2 silv mage is just a little more upkeep than a great mage. 3 silver mages equal 2 great mages in upkeep if you wanna be exact. but really its just a matter of opinion and strategy on which is better.
MCISME

Grand Marshal Aditya
Posts: 134
Joined: August 1st, 2007, 1:37 am
Location: In the MOTHERLAND!

Post by Grand Marshal Aditya » January 18th, 2008, 11:23 pm

energyman76c wrote:
maxgamer wrote:i think that the silver mages ability to provide fire power anywhere on the map (which is especially useful when your fighting in more than one area) is great, and it can also run away instantly, making it so hard to kill. also, they require less upkeep than great mages which is crucial in campains. It also is easier to train and you arn't hurt as bad if it dies, whereas you almost have to give up if u lose a great mage. Id rather have 2 silver mages than a great mage.

Over all, if u take note of the abilities a silver mage has and u know how to use it, i think the silver mage trumps arch mage and rivals great mage. you great mage fans can now have a tissy fit...
hissy fit? why? it is you silver-mage lovers who don't shut up :twisted:

the problem with the silver mage is not that he can run away, but he has to run away, while other mages are able to hold their ground.

Also great mages are not more expensive in upkeep then silver mages - ever heard of loyal? And to make it worse, two silver mages are much more expensive than one great mage. And you need at least two silver mages to replace a great mage...

Silver mages are excellent units...they can actually run better than the rest and they are truly the best units at surprise attacks, especially with fog of war!

Maxgamer is correct in saying that silvers are great units. They only slightly weaker than Great Mages.
Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.

Dodgy Tactician
Posts: 39
Joined: December 10th, 2007, 10:41 am
Location: UK

Post by Dodgy Tactician » January 18th, 2008, 11:58 pm

the problem with the silver mage is not that he can run away, but he has to run away, while other mages are able to hold their ground.
Not really. A Royal Guard can do enough damage to a Great Mage in one turn that the Mage will have to run or be in serious risk of being killed and losing a Great Mage in the process makes any victory a Pyhrric victory. All Magi are offensive units rather than defensive ones (unless your opponent transcends normal stupidity and attacks them with something like Bowmen). Ideally, they should never have to use their staffs (but rarely does a whole campaign go so well).
And you need at least two silver mages to replace a great mage...
In terms of pure damage, yes. However, that doesn't tell the whole story.

A Great Mage has the best damage per hex (accounting for hit rates, assuming no resistances and at Dawn/Dusk) of any unit. On the other hand, it is slower than the Silver Mage, has inferior resistances and cannot teleport. In a long campaign, gaining XP is more of a challenge than paying an extra few gold per turn. However, a Great Mage can only use its awesome damage potential against one unit in one place. Two Silver Magi can simultaneously weaken two medium units and can threaten huge parts of the map at once. Therefore, the Silver Mage allows you to be more flexible.

It is definitely worth getting an Archmage/Great Mage for the damage per hex, but the flexibility and ease of training of Silver Magi mean that they are likely to benefit a campaign game more than all Archmagi/Great Magi. For example, for the same XP cost, you can get 10 Silver Magi compared to 4 Great Magi and a Red Mage (with 20 XP left over). I agree that the Silver Magi would cost more, but between they are vastly more powerful than the alternative arrangement unless you are limited more by the number of hexes (in a cavern scenario for example).

The optimum version though would be a mixture of Great and Silver Magi, which is what I tend to use - attempting where possible to build my army so that for every required task, I have the best possible unit to deal with it.

As a general rule of thumb, I consider there to never be a single greatest unit. There are units that I tend to avoid because my style of play doesn't favour them (Elvish Rangers in HttT for example - I to prefer Marksmen/Sharpshooters) but that doesn't necessarily make them bad units. I prefer the Knight to the Lancer for example because I don't like losing my units to defensive retaliations. That doesn't mean that I will never get Lancers if I consider there to be a job for them though.

User avatar
Federalist marshal
Art Contributor
Posts: 382
Joined: December 17th, 2007, 12:02 am

Post by Federalist marshal » January 19th, 2008, 12:53 am

As a general rule of thumb, I consider there to never be a single greatest unit.
I totally agree with this. Wesnoth has been designed so that every unit has strengths and weaknesses. And it shows painfully well in gameplay. Which, as said before, is probably why lancers and javelineers don't have lvl 3 counterparts; if they did, the result would be a unit that has far more advantages than disadvantages.
For me, I think it's best to get one or two great mages and have the rest be red mages. And as for the white mage line, I generally avoid that line unless I have an ample supply of gold; white mages are generally weaker than red mages.

Velensk
Multiplayer Contributor
Posts: 3988
Joined: January 24th, 2007, 12:56 am

Post by Velensk » January 19th, 2008, 1:51 am

If you avoid White mages then where do you get your healing from in TRoW, or simular campains?
"There are two kinds of old men in the world. The kind who didn't go to war and who say that they should have lived fast died young and left a handsome corpse and the old men who did go to war and who say that there is no such thing as a handsome corpse."

User avatar
Xandria
Posts: 230
Joined: April 23rd, 2006, 5:10 pm
Location: Heart of Europe

Post by Xandria » January 19th, 2008, 10:30 am

Due to Illuminate, a Mage of Light can give the equivalent of "leadership" even to a lvl 3 lawful unit. Actually, in HttT, I would get my healing almost exclusively from White Mages, as any Shaman that levels would have to become a Sorceress.
In TRoW, you don't have any other option, do you?
EI is similiar, with the utility of white mages increasing further because of fighting so many deaders.
Also, the MoL can inconspiciously stand next to a lich, not attacking, just blinding it to reduce its damage, and increasing that of two dudes attacking the thing.

With mages being easier to level than shamans, one can afford a few of them to become white mages.
The fight against human stupidity is endless, but we must never give it up.
- Jan Werich

energyman76c
Posts: 199
Joined: May 26th, 2004, 9:38 pm

Post by energyman76c » January 19th, 2008, 10:59 am

yeah, MoL are cool. But I like Shydes. They are easier to get than a Sorceress, can fly, heal AND their not too strong attack makes them ideal for weakening/slowing down enemies, so other units can level easily.

Shyde slows down, two other units kill the enemy AND get healed by the shyde at the start of the next round. Very economical. I always level my first Shaman in Httt to a druid/shyde. It is just a very practical unit. Even fast on mountains, water and in caves.

Dodgy Tactician
Posts: 39
Joined: December 10th, 2007, 10:41 am
Location: UK

Post by Dodgy Tactician » January 19th, 2008, 12:54 pm

And as for the white mage line, I generally avoid that line unless I have an ample supply of gold; white mages are generally weaker than red mages.
I like a mixture. In HttT, White Magi are useful underground if you don't have many Shydes. I like to have at least four greater healers in campaigns (if I can recruit them, preferably more) and especially with the White Mage and Mermaid Priestess lines, they are also very useful against the Undead (and Drakes, Trolls, Woses and Elves except the Sorceress line). The illumination also makes lawful allies stronger and prevents chaotic enemies from attacking them effectively (25% penalty from Dawn until Dusk and no bonus overnight) although they are still weak in melee. As a downside, it also weakens chaotic allies and makes lawful enemies stronger.

TruePurple
Posts: 198
Joined: January 6th, 2008, 7:39 am

Post by TruePurple » January 19th, 2008, 11:02 pm

The value of silver mage depends partially on the map. Some maps whether single player or multiplayer requires you to split your forces.

Especially in multiplayer it can become about juggling forces back and forth trying to find points of weakness where you can over whelm the enemy holding line or reenforce your own line about to be overwhelmed. With most units the time movement of shifting them to the other line can be too much. But if there is a village or more on either side a silver mage can be great for that.

As well as retreating if your line does unexpectedly collapse. Near or on a village they are untrappable usually.(sometimes units etc can get trapped even if your line hasn't completely collapsed)

And sometimes they can be moved foreward to attack even without a defending lines. Simply because they can escape right away the next turn.

Also nice if a enemy unit slipped behind your lines and is taking villages. They can take out the intruder then go right back to the front lines.

In short their teleport ability (as well as extra movement) allows them to be played more aggressively and in more spots. Though that is balanced out a bit by less HP then great mage.

Also sometimes foes require alot of firepower to kill, and theres only so many places to place units. Sometimes its key for to take out a unit in one or two attacks to open up a spot for a defending unit to then protect. Which is where a power house like great mage can shine. But in multiplayer its difficult enough to get a level 3, never mind a level 4. So I'm not entirely sure then why to choose a arch mage over a silver mage. It aught to be intelligent at least then to contemplate arch mage with experience set at 70%

User avatar
Federalist marshal
Art Contributor
Posts: 382
Joined: December 17th, 2007, 12:02 am

Post by Federalist marshal » January 20th, 2008, 1:41 am

I generally prefer the more combat-suited red mage line over the white mage line, but some campaigns are a lot easier with white mages. If nothing else, the weakness of mages in general is their physical frailty, which is more significant in white mages.
Besides, fire still works on undead, even if not as effectively as arcane/holy (and has uses against other units besides undead except drakes).

Velensk
Multiplayer Contributor
Posts: 3988
Joined: January 24th, 2007, 12:56 am

Post by Velensk » January 20th, 2008, 11:58 am

So don't place them where they can be attacked, and their frailty will not matter, but their 8hp healing can still keep you alive.
"There are two kinds of old men in the world. The kind who didn't go to war and who say that they should have lived fast died young and left a handsome corpse and the old men who did go to war and who say that there is no such thing as a handsome corpse."

Grand Marshal Aditya
Posts: 134
Joined: August 1st, 2007, 1:37 am
Location: In the MOTHERLAND!

Post by Grand Marshal Aditya » January 20th, 2008, 8:00 pm

Yeah...the answer goes for Dark Adepts too...you don't send it out in the front lines...instead you kill using the mage and move a melee unit in front to protect. That is the basic strategy really...
Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.

Sly
Posts: 258
Joined: October 10th, 2005, 11:59 am
Location: Montrouge (Fr, 92)
Contact:

Post by Sly » January 21st, 2008, 3:43 pm

Weeksy wrote:The best thing about silver mages is their wonderful ability to kick the ass of other mages, with their 50% fire/cold resists (although now that the sorceress line does arcane, a 30% or 40% resist there might be nice as well.)
To be more consistant, I would give him 50% resist vs Arcane too :wink:

Post Reply