Why I do not play Drakes and do not like them

[Big Bad Joe]

Secondly, Drakes never have more than 40% defense, so although they have a lot of hp, they also need a lot of hp, because they take a lot of damage. They cannot hide in any particular terrain.

Some average defense modifiers ( without cave wall )
Drakes 49:14= 35% average defense
Dwarven fighter= 54:14= 38,6%
Elven fighter= 58:14= 41,4%
Spearman = 56:14= 40%
Orcish grunt= 56:14= 40% again
Skeleton fighter = 56:14 = 40% again
Is the five or seven percent in best really the big deal? - especially with super duper random hitting processor that creates long hit or long miss sequences??
Anyway Drakes have more than 10% more HP the normal lvl.1 and their resistances are not that bad 20% to most used attack type ( blade)..

[gunsnwoses]

Big Bad Joe wrote:

Some average defense modifiers ( without cave wall )
Drakes 49:14= 35% average defense
Dwarven fighter= 54:14= 38,6%
Elven fighter= 58:14= 41,4%
Spearman = 56:14= 40%
Orcish grunt= 56:14= 40% again
Skeleton fighter = 56:14 = 40% again
Is the five or seven percent in best really the big deal?

Like I said, Drakes defence is never more than 40%. It does not matter whether Drakes average defence is much lower than other
factions or not - I don't know any players who (for example) use
land units to attack from water, or vice versa (except the AI). The point is that every other faction has several terrains to choose from with good (60% or 70%) defence; Drakes don't have this. So the average defence rating is irrelevant. Drakes best defence is still bad, so they will take lots of damage because they'll be hit very often.


Big Bad Joe wrote:

Anyway Drakes have more than 10% more HP the normal lvl.1 and their resistances are not that bad 20% to most used attack type ( blade)..

Like I also said, you don't need to recruit units with blade attack against Drakes - primarily recruit units with pierce or cold.

[Elvish_Pillager]

'average defense' is nonsesne. It would have to be weighted based on the importance of terrains on a given map in order to be useful.

Gunsnwoses does not have a point here, either, because Drakes can just stay away from the defensive terrains, and then the high defense will cease to have value. Also, 40% defense is not bad; the Drakes are only truly weak on villages, and who wants to fight a Drake on a village anyway?

And why has nobody responded to my accusation that all of the Drake units just have better stats, never mind movetype, than their non-drake counterparts?

[gunsnwoses]

Elvish Pillager claimed

Drakes can just stay away from the defensive terrains, and then the high defense will cease to have value.

In which case the Drakes opponent just waits until the appropriate time of day. For instance, Loyalists wait in cover until dawn, whereupon they advance and attack the Drakes with their Bowmen & Spearmen, retreating to villages and good defensive terrain at dusk if necessary, and occupying villages.

Drakes cannot do this, as they have nowhere to retreat to.

Three Spearmen versus two Burners in this situation is no contest, and they cost the same gold. Spearman can do 30 damage each. If the Drakes then follow the Loyalists back into cover, they are at a considerable disadvantage, as mentioned repeatedly.

Even better, if you have two alignments available to you, you can cycle your attacks against the Drakes to take advantage of their lack of cover.

The reason the AI might do better with Drakes than other factions is, as has been pointed out, Drakes require the least skill to play well, and have the least tactical possibilities available to them. So it is harder to play badly with them. If the Drakes do need weakening, I would suggest lowering their movement allowance, as they may at present be a little bit too mobile.

My contention is that with all Drake units having the same vulnerability to pierce & cold, along with all Drakes having at best mediocre defensive ratings on all terrain (40% is pretty bad, and is the best a Drake can hope for), in addition to their being relatively expensive - these negatives outweigh the positives of more hp and their slightly more powerful attacks.

[Elvish_Pillager]

the Drakes opponent just waits until the appropriate time of day.

Upon which the Drakes will (A) have taken over the remaining villages and (B) retreated! Drakes can retreat just as well as humans, all they need is a bit of hills/mountains and they can get away.

Drakes cannot do this, as they have nowhere to retreat to.

No, Drakes can retreat to anywhere. No matter where they are, there'll always be terrain nearby that they take one move in and their enemies take more than one in.

Three Spearmen versus two Burners in this situation is no contest,

Of course there's no contest when you pit a unit against its greatest weakness during said weakness's most powerful moment! Sure, a Yeti can beat two Burners too, and the Yeti costs less! You should take note that the unit Loyalists can recruit is called "Spearman", not "Spearman +35% damage".

Even better, if you have two alignments available to you

Which you don't!

all Drake units having the same vulnerability to pierce

Which is false!

40% is pretty bad

40% is the difference between a Horseman killing all the time and a Horseman killing 1/3 of the time. 40% defense let you get missed almost half the time. This is a huge effect.

their being relatively expensive

Relative to what? To all those units I cited that are WEAKER? of COURSE units should cost more than other units that are much weaker than them! And not just a teensy bit more costly, a lot more costly! These things are ridiculous!

these negatives outweigh the positives of more hp and their slightly more powerful attacks.

Why don't you counter my specific examples instead of just making bland, general statements with little or no evidence to back them that simply contradict me without support!

Take the Heavy Infantryman, for instance. Is he incredibly crippled by his near inability to reach 50% defense?[1] And your average Drake is almost as tough as he is! Not to mention that said average drake has a nigh irresistible ranged attack and strong melee! And costs less than he does!

Now, tell me that the Clasher is not overpowered. Compare it with some other units. Try playing against yourself, if you're good at that. Find some evidence, real evidence, gameplay evidence, not just speculation, and then once you have actual data from the game, or a reliable comparison[2], then, if you still believe the Clasher to be a balanced unit, tell me why.


[1] If you're fighting on castle, you've probably already lost.
[2] The Heavy Infantryman is not reliable. Almost any comparable unit, when compared with it, looks overpowered.

[MadMax]

Lawful?!? Drakes would be lawful?

No, drakes are mean-tempered brutes. At least that is my perception of them.

[Dragonking]

I just play online, and I'm losing in forest playing elves against drakes I bought archers and fighters. -10% to pierce gives elvish archer NOTHING (5 dmg + 10% = 5 dmg ).
I couldn't kill Drake Fighter in village with 3 archers and fighter, 40% def of drake worked very good. Because small amount of hp my archers were owned by clashers and tribalists during night (tribalist in forest - 60% def + magic attack = no chances)
My answer is get mage and fighter (no more gold) and pray that my allies would help me.
I didn't made any stupid mistakes, just with only a LITTLE luck (my dmg taken was 20 hp greater than EV, and inflicted 20hp less, so not big thing)drakes can easly win in forest agains elves.
I'm going continue this game.

[turin]

And why has nobody responded to my accusation that all of the Drake units just have better stats, never mind movetype, than their non-drake counterparts?

I agree with that assessment...

The Drakes' movement type, although not very good, is extraordinarily easy to use effectively, because there is very little difference between 30% and 40%. This makes there be one less factor to account for. Along with drakes being neutral, IMHO this makes playing with or against them rather boring.

[Dragonking]

Ok. My mage was able to kill Icecaster during day. But my team wasn't able to kill tribalist in forest with Elvish Hero, Captain and Fighter (with leadersip) - Tribalist left alive with 6 hp.
Game became easier after I leveled archer to marksman. His 9 points of dmg (8 vs clashers, 10 vs other drakes) wreacked havoc there, but thx to the night and tribalists it was only alive unit on first line of attack.
In this forest alive left (besides marksam) only Enemy drakes and Allied drakes. Only Marksman was good enought archer to help deafeat them.

[Phyvo]

I think that Drakes are just bland. Bland, bland, bland. Drakes, as it has been established, are easy to play, and this comes together with blandness. They are nigh unbalanceable because of this. They have nearly no weaknesses, aren't affected by the time of day, and are nearly all able to use ranged attacks, and all have high hp. So, what do you do to weaken them? Get pierce, attack at the time of day when you're strong. Either your piercing power will save you, or it won't. There is no in-between, and the only interesting part comes in if the drake player uses Saurons. You never say, "My opponent is getting this type of drake, so I'll need to get this -other- unit to counter it." You just get pierce.

Drakes need to be reworked. If you added a little variety in the unit's weaknesses (terrain, weapon type, whatever), then the problem would be solved. Make the net weakness a little more, or whatever. But don't just say "These dudes need to be more weak to pierce" or "They all need less HP." Because if you make all of their units suck and weak to the exact same thing, you get not only a bland race, but a useless one.

[gunsnwoses]

Okay. Rework them. I suppose Drakes have had the least time spent on them anyway. Yes, they are pretty boring. Incidentally, I just beat Drakes in 13 turns recruiting only Goblin Spearmen. Yawn. Drakes are the equivalent of the long ball game in football (soccer). Undead are Germany (when Germany were good) and Loyalists are Brazil. And I guess Rebels are England, because they always lose..

[Burnsaber]

Lawful?!? Drakes would be lawful?

No, drakes are mean-tempered brutes. At least that is my perception of them.

IIRC, Chaotic & Lawful in wesnoth had nothing to with being morally good & bad, Chaotic units are just fight better at night & vice versa.

[Dragonking]

I know that this is Wesnoth, but I'm really used to think about colour drakes as about bad drakes (red, green, black) and metal-coloured drakes as about good drakes (gold, silver).

[turin]

Lawful?!? Drakes would be lawful?

No, drakes are mean-tempered brutes. At least that is my perception of them.

IIRC, Chaotic & Lawful in wesnoth had nothing to with being morally good & bad, Chaotic units are just fight better at night & vice versa.

This is technically correct, but I think that most new players initially assume that lawful=good, chaotic=evil, neutral=... neutral*. I also don't think there is a problem with this, because in most cases good guys WOULD fight better in day, bad guys WOULD fight better at night, and neutral* units are considered people of the twilight, unaffected by night or day.

However, if drakes become lawful, what is the reasoning behind that? It seems like if anything, they should be chaotic, because their fire breath allows them to see better at night. I know that gameplay-wise its better for them to be lawful, but it just doesn't make sense.

*: The faerie people, like elves and dwarves.

[Monkey]

Lawful?!? Drakes would be lawful?

No, drakes are mean-tempered brutes. At least that is my perception of them.

IIRC, Chaotic & Lawful in wesnoth had nothing to with being morally good & bad, Chaotic units are just fight better at night & vice versa.

Drakes attack villages at night.