Drake too weak vs. Undead?

Roman Loyalist · Post by **Roman Loyalist** » March 23rd, 2007, 1:49 pm

Soliton wrote: How is it an example if it doesn't show the actual problem?

How many examples u need,what to understand problem?
next one (vers. may be 1.2.0 or 1.1.last)
http://www.wesnoth.org/forum/download.php?id=13080

Post by **Soliton** » March 23rd, 2007, 2:43 pm

Roman Loyalist wrote:
Soliton wrote: How is it an example if it doesn't show the actual problem?
How many examples u need,what to understand problem?

Examples of that quality? That many games haven't yet been played..

You need to further realise that not every game where a Drake player loses automatically points to an imbalance.

Roman Loyalist wrote: next one (vers. may be 1.2.0 or 1.1.last)
http://www.wesnoth.org/forum/download.php?id=13080

The mistake here is again a too aggressive drake at dawn (turn 4). He stayed in the center where 2 ghosts and one adept could reach the Burner. And that risk for one village you get there in the center. It's going downhill from there, since the drake is constantly being chased he can not exercise his superior mobility anymore and consequentially loses.

It's interesting to notice your comment in that game were you state you thought about choosing drakes after you lost the archer. That, in my opinion, nicely shows the quality of your balancing judgement.

Gus · Post by **Gus** » March 23rd, 2007, 3:15 pm

Could i know which moderator erased my message, so that i can contact him, please? Thank you =)

EDIT: nah, i'm sure there's a reason, but i would like to know who did it so i can know them. Nothing else =)

Darn Penguin · Post by **Darn Penguin** » March 23rd, 2007, 3:29 pm

Well, they probably don't want little pink cows posting on the forums. However, Saurian religious zealots who spell "fate" with an 8 seem to be perfectly welcome. Hmm...

Post by **Doc Paterson** » March 23rd, 2007, 3:43 pm

Roman Loyalist wrote:
Doc Paterson wrote:
Do you think that it's at all unrealistic and/or cocky to assume that you know better than the group of experts that balanced this matchup?
how balanced? I not see this. In the nigth 1 adepts may do 19*2=38 Damage for 70% of luck. It's enough for killing lizarrd's, scout, fighter. Only burner & clasher survive. In day under protection bone bowmens not easy kill adepts

I'm guessing that this is a language issue, and that you don't actually have such poor reading comprehension. I asked "Why do you assume to understand this match better than the best players," and you answered with "The match isn't balanced." I'll try to make it as simple as possible. Players that are much better than you (and I think you'd agree that they are much better) think that the Drake versus Undead match is balanced. They have specifically and directly stated, "This match is commonly misunderstood, but is perfectly fair." Who would be more likely to fully understand an abuse in a particular matchup- a good player, or a great player?

I also love how you proceed to describe a night-time scenario that no good player would even get themselves into. Furthermore, the "bone bowmens" AKA skeletal archers, will be blown away by burners if they try to hold their ground during the day.

Roman Loyalist wrote:
Doc Paterson wrote: Why exactly would anyone want believe that you are right, and the best players, who think that this match is balanced, are wrong?
Do you really think that just because you don't know how to play the match properly that all of these other players are wrong?
indeed. I see how these best players die in this mutchup

Simplified: I asked you "Why would someone think that you know better than the best players (like Soliton or Pietro or Dragonking, who don't think that the match is unbalaced)?"

You answered with something along the lines of "I've seen them lose this match," with which you seem to imply "They're wrong, and I'm right."

Roman Loyalist wrote: ps: i hope my english not too bad for understanding.

We can understand most of what you mean, but your responses always seem to indicate that you don't fully understand what we're trying to tell you. The problem seems to be with your English reading comprehension.

UngeheuerLich · Post by **UngeheuerLich** » March 24th, 2007, 3:28 am

I really do think the match undead vs drakes is very funny, because you play a very slow race vs a very very fast.

you canÃ‚Â´t protect your adepts from skirmishers.

you get hit hard at day and get finished at night... but you also have a very hard strikng adept which has 50% chance to do 38 damage at night.

your magcal attack is no big advantage. I would not touch the drakes or undead in 1.2.3.

Maybe you could try to switch the holy and coldresistance in 1.3.x so that ghosts still do much damage, but adepts are slightly worse. But is you reduce both general vulnerabilities to ghosts and adepts, undead could get serious problems.

removing fast trait from adepts should be not an option. The undead race is slow enough as it is (and it is good as it is now) and taking away their only possible 6 move non scout unit would hurt just too much.

UngeheuerLich · Post by **UngeheuerLich** » March 24th, 2007, 3:31 am

Roman Loyalist wrote:
Do you really think that just because you don't know how to play the match properly that all of these other players are wrong?
indeed. I see how these best players die in this mutchup
if anybody want to prove me reverse , welcome to lobby (but last time i'am not often guest there. too busy )

ps: i hope my english not too bad for understanding.

If Dragon players would not die in this matchup, then there would be an imbalance.

The optimal result is 50% wins and 50% losses for both dragons and undead. draws are rather unikely in wesnoth. Especially in this matchup.

JW · Post by JW » March 24th, 2007, 4:03 am

UngeheuerLich wrote:
Roman Loyalist wrote:
Do you really think that just because you don't know how to play the match properly that all of these other players are wrong?
indeed. I see how these best players die in this mutchup
if anybody want to prove me reverse , welcome to lobby (but last time i'am not often guest there. too busy )

ps: i hope my english not too bad for understanding.
If Dragon players would not die in this matchup, then there would be an imbalance.

The optimal result is 50% wins and 50% losses for both dragons and undead. draws are rather unikely in wesnoth. Especially in this matchup.

Very well said.

IB · Post by IB » March 24th, 2007, 5:35 am

F8 Binds... wrote:you think that drake movement is too powerful against a slow race in general then, I suppose? in that respect, drakes should win more than not against loyalists as well?

Yes, I believe in drake mobility against the undead. Your argument that it should work against loyalist however fails to take into account 3 points.

1. Loyalist are fast, quick spearmen and quick bowman can catch up with drakes. Horsemen and Cav can outrun drakes.

2. Time of Day. The same time of day as drakes makes it very painful to kill them.

3. Cheap pierce. Yeah argue adepts are cheap, but they can't retal to melee damage like bowmen can.

Imp · Post by **Imp** » March 24th, 2007, 5:36 am

I don't have much of a problem with this match-up. It does call for very different strategies to normal. Whenever I play drakes against UD, it feels like my units are leaves against the UD gale on the first night hovering just at the tip of the gust.

Roman Loyalist · Post by **Roman Loyalist** » March 24th, 2007, 8:45 am

UngeheuerLich wrote:
The optimal result is 50% wins and 50% losses for both dragons and undead. draws are rather unikely in wesnoth. Especially in this matchup.

is it official statistics or supposition ? if official, where I can at her look ?

Post by **Soliton** » March 24th, 2007, 10:30 am

Roman Loyalist wrote:
UngeheuerLich wrote:
The optimal result is 50% wins and 50% losses for both dragons and undead. draws are rather unikely in wesnoth. Especially in this matchup.
is it official statistics or supposition ? if official, where I can at her look ?

It is the official definition of a balanced matchup.

Website · Post by **Sapient** » March 24th, 2007, 4:40 pm

My point is that it's very hard to use a mobility strategy against a unit that has 6 movement points and can kill you in one swift motion. Removing quick from adepts would emphasize the intended dynamic.

Post by **Doc Paterson** » March 24th, 2007, 4:50 pm

Sapient wrote:My point is that it's very hard to use a mobility strategy against a unit that has 6 movement points and can kill you in one swift motion.

That would only hold true on an all-grassland map. When you're talking about chasing or escaping from Drakes, the adept's movement penalties over hills, mountains and forest are very significant.

UngeheuerLich · Post by **UngeheuerLich** » March 25th, 2007, 10:22 pm

Sapient wrote:My point is that it's very hard to use a mobility strategy against a unit that has 6 movement points and can kill you in one swift motion. Removing quick from adepts would emphasize the intended dynamic.

yes, but if you donÃ‚Â´t have any quick adepts, you have serious problems, because you never can catch up at night.

also you usually need two adepts to kill most dragons, if you hit 3 of 4 hits (average). only gliders are one shot kills, but they are scouts and counter to skelli archers, so what.