Drake too weak vs. Undead?

Website · Post by **Sapient** » March 25th, 2007, 11:28 pm

Mr. Lich, you seem more than a little bit biased towards the undead. (Wanting them to get traits, etc.) Maybe you should try playing with more different factions.

edit: delete incorrect stats mistake.. man, I should save my replays more

Post by **F8 Binds...** » March 26th, 2007, 3:27 am

Mr. Lich, also: I would like to test your skill in a simple 1v1 on blitz- choose any race you wish- note it's basic settings- and I'll choose random (maybe drakes) - feel free to pick undead, and find out that your adepts well... are whipped cream after they meet my clashers/fighters. Say a time, I'll try to be there. -6 hours GMT.

Konrad II · Post by **Konrad II** » March 26th, 2007, 5:38 am

Sapient wrote:Mr. Lich, you seem more than a little bit biased towards the undead. (Wanting them to get traits, etc.) Maybe you should try playing with more different factions.

edit: delete incorrect stats mistake.. man, I should save my replays more

Hm, Lich wants them to KEEP traits, whereas you want them to lose one (here). He's defending the Drake vs Undead balance, whereas you aren't totally doing so. I don't see the problem in that.

Roman Loyalist · Post by **Roman Loyalist** » March 26th, 2007, 6:13 am

UngeheuerLich wrote:
also you usually need two adepts to kill most dragons, if you hit 3 of 4 hits (average). only gliders are one shot kills

& all lizzards's & non-resilent Fighter's (35-36 HP) & (int+quick)Burner (38hp)

it's rounded near 66% of all Drake's population

Soliton wrote: It is the official definition of a balanced matchup.

It's official confirmation based on official statistics or subjective opinion?

reference in a studio please (if she was).

Website · Post by **Sapient** » March 26th, 2007, 6:37 am

Konrad II wrote:
Sapient wrote:Mr. Lich, you seem more than a little bit biased towards the undead. (Wanting them to get traits, etc.) Maybe you should try playing with more different factions.

edit: delete incorrect stats mistake.. man, I should save my replays more
Hm, Lich wants them to KEEP traits, whereas you want them to lose one (here). He's defending the Drake vs Undead balance, whereas you aren't totally doing so. I don't see the problem in that.

Lol... before you jump to any conclusions maybe you should read this thread: http://www.wesnoth.org/forum/viewtopic. ... 986#212986

Also, I am not saying that dark adepts should lose the quick trait. I was just throwing it out there as a better idea than the one that was proposed.

Haibane · Post by **Haibane** » March 26th, 2007, 8:56 am

Roman Loyalist wrote:
Soliton wrote: It is the official definition of a balanced matchup.
It's official confirmation based on official statistics or subjective opinion?

No, it's based on logic. Nothing common with statistic nor opinion. May you are not able to translate it right, try again

Post by **Soliton** » March 26th, 2007, 9:09 am

Roman Loyalist wrote:
Soliton wrote: It is the official definition of a balanced matchup. :roll:
It's official confirmation based on official statistics or subjective opinion? ;)
reference in a studio please (if she was). :)

Oh my, it pains my to read that answer but I'll try to explain it as simple as possible:

A balanced matchup means both sides have the same chance to win. Always winning would mean 100% of the times. 100%/2=50%. Ergo a balanced matchup has a 50% win chance for both sides (here Undead and Drakes).

Roman Loyalist · Post by **Roman Loyalist** » March 26th, 2007, 10:43 am

Haibane wrote:
Roman Loyalist wrote: It's official confirmation based on official statistics or subjective opinion?
No, it's based on logic. Nothing common with statistic nor opinion. May you are not able to translate it right, try again

Logic rule's only for drawned chance's to win!
I not sure in that, for this mutchup

Soliton wrote:
Oh my, it pains my to read that answer but I'll try to explain it as simple as possible:

A balanced matchup means both sides have the same chance to win. Always winning would mean 100% of the times. 100%/2=50%. Ergo a balanced matchup has a 50% win chance for both sides (here Undead and Drakes).

I am able to consider

For my stats this correlation ~90%(undead)-10%(drake). doesn't metter for what side i play

Post by **Soliton** » March 26th, 2007, 11:43 am

Roman Loyalist wrote: For my stats this correlation ~90%(undead)-10%(drake). doesn't metter for what side i play :(

Duly noted.

Post by **Soliton** » March 26th, 2007, 2:29 pm

So we played a game of Drakes vs Undead. The replay can be found here.

CoolGoose · Post by **CoolGoose** » March 26th, 2007, 5:47 pm

If you can't play the game you should learn how to do it.
This game IS balanced. Should i whine that rebels are overwhelmed by northerens ? Every strategy has a counter in this game. And you forget an essential thing. You can have a leader with leadership as drake

Roman Loyalist · Post by **Roman Loyalist** » March 27th, 2007, 12:17 pm

After some 'hard' argument's from the side of Soliton

i was surrender.
Now i know Kung Fu

UngeheuerLich · Post by **UngeheuerLich** » March 28th, 2007, 10:24 pm

F8 Binds... wrote:Mr. Lich, also: I would like to test your skill in a simple 1v1 on blitz- choose any race you wish- note it's basic settings- and I'll choose random (maybe drakes) - feel free to pick undead, and find out that your adepts well... are whipped cream after they meet my clashers/fighters. Say a time, I'll try to be there. -6 hours GMT.

Mr F8, if you read my posts again, i never said adepts are the ultimate weapon. i said nerving them does not help balance any matchup.

Indeed i even think recruiting only adepts is one of the most stupid things you can do. you should have at least some ghouls to defend them and a ghost and some walking corpses for special tasks...

UngeheuerLich · Post by **UngeheuerLich** » March 28th, 2007, 10:32 pm

Sapient wrote:
Konrad II wrote: Hm, Lich wants them to KEEP traits, whereas you want them to lose one (here). He's defending the Drake vs Undead balance, whereas you aren't totally doing so. I don't see the problem in that.
Lol... before you jump to any conclusions maybe you should read this thread: http://www.wesnoth.org/forum/viewtopic. ... 986#212986

Also, I am not saying that dark adepts should lose the quick trait. I was just throwing it out there as a better idea than the one that was proposed.

In fact, this post is one year old.

Second: walking corpses got a trait, i like their variations. The game has changed a lot since then, and I still think that taking away traits from units for no reasons is dumb.

One replay on one map from 2 players is no proof for nothing, most probalbe that the winner was the better player. EDIT: now that i am on a computer where wesnoth is installed i watched the game. Dragon won, Undead dinÃ‚Â´t try to prove that only adepts wins easily vs drakes. (just for sapient: i think the way the undead played was better than only adepts)
I still like to see an only adept using undead slaughtered by drakes. And F8, if you are really interested in a game, i will play undead vs drakes and one drakes vs undead match if you like. But be sure that i wonÃ‚Â´t use only adepts, only if we do a third game to provethat this is a bad idea!

And just to put an end to the speculations: (a lot of the readers got the point):

As Soliton (a Mp developer) said:
The definition of a balanced matchup is: both factions have the same chances to win.

If one faction loses some games, then there is no imbalance if the also win some games. Maybe I am a little bit biased towards undead. But i lost alot of games versus drakes on old versions of maps, where the movement advantage of drakes helps them a lot.

Zlodzei · Post by **Zlodzei** » March 29th, 2007, 1:35 pm

Soliton wrote:
Roman Loyalist wrote: in that is a problem that without the special tactical devices fight was won.
Nevermind apparently I'm unable to decipher your meaning. I was refering to the bruteforce attack Gallifax made at turn 9 which made the whole game pointless as any evidence to the balance between Drakes and Undead. If you actually analyze that game a bit that should be quite obvious.

(Not meaning to discredit Gallifax btw, I know he is a good player.)

2Soliton: Don't u think that by the time of Gallifax's suicide the game was almost solved, as soon as the day was over, undead got much extra-money and concentrated ENOUGH forces for, at least, repeating stealing of 4 villages. And against 5 adepts 2 archers and 4 ghosts (ok, 1 of them was quite far from battle) Galli needed to retreat too far from castle.

So, it's quite obvious that saying "bruteforce attack" RL meant undead 1st night pressure. In spite nobody was killed during it, 4 villages were lost and drakes retreated too far for effective counterattack.