[mainline] Lancers suck!.... in Campaign

[WanderingHero]

I'm not sure what the proper tag is, so please excuse me.

I get the philosophy of Lancers in multiplayer , and they might work well there, where level 3s are harder to get and constant charging isn't such a liability.


In campaign mode, Lancers seem like absolute junk. The constant charging will make them easy to kill, and the fact they cannot promote absoultly cripples them in all but the shortest campaigns (might be worth using in Tale of 2 brothers or something...).

I don't know how to fix this. Maybe a CAMPAIGN only sword attack? Or a CAMPAIGN only promotion? Though I know the makers don't want them to be too much like Knights.

If I'm wrong about them, when are they good in campaign? A final level maybe, but I tend to get knights much earlier.

[Velensk]

I suppose it escaped your notice that they do more total damage than a grand knight (IIRC a strong one tips in at 90 damage total at day) and have a more movement than any other loyalist cavalry unit, and a more reliable charge despite costing only a level 2 worth of upkeep?

Lancers make excelent assassins (especially combined with silver mages) due to their speed and killing power. They are also easier to support (upkeepwise) than the level 3 knights and can be given leadership more easilly (which makes them even more ridicules killers).

They don't need fixing, they are plenty useful as they are as long as you are looking for very specific roles rather than a more versitile one. What is more, giving them qualities that only work in campaigns is very un-KISS.

If there is one advancement choice that I think is definately skewd when it comes to campigns vs multiplayer it is revenant vs deathblade. In campaigns you might need/want the ability to get draugs but in multiplayer you'll rarely see an undead passing up the extra movement (something undead are generally short on) and strike for a few extra hitpoints.

[zookeeper]

And most importantly (IMO) they're easier to replace. Whenever a throwaway Horseman survives long enough to advance (and when I don't particularly need more Knights), I usually make a Lancer out of them and use them in situations where I don't want to risk other high-level units but where massive damage output is needed. If a Lancer dies then it's not a big deal as I can replace them by recruiting a Horseman and feeding them only a few higher-level kills; not so with a Grand Knight.

[doofus-01]

Yeah, don't think of lancers as powerful heroes you don't want to lose. Think of them as cruise missiles (thanks, freeciv), or something like that - a tool in your arsenal/recall list for desperate times.

[Maiklas3000]

Try taking a Lancer after you have about three Grand Knights, and then compare the predicted combat outcomes as you encounter the enemy. Often, you'll see the Lancer is pretty much worthless (like when it would surely die.) However, other times you'll find the Lancer is the most effective choice and be glad you had it.

I second the points about leadership and assassination. And slightly different than assassination is where your regular troops have the enemy leader surrounded but he's such a bad ass that you're having trouble killing him while avoiding being killed - so slow him if you can, wound him, and then send in the Lancer supported by your leader for the coup de grâce. (It's a waste of XP, though, so it's a last resort.)

You need to be a little careful about the traits for a unit advancing to Lancer. Quick and non-resilient is going to give you a very brittle Lancer. Better to go non-quick and resilient. Intelligent would be a big waste. Strong is very desirable, because you get 3 attacks at double damage, so the +1 for strong becomes like +6, a bigger benefit than any other unit gets from "strong".

[Insinuator]

Strong is very desirable, because you get 3 attacks at double damage, so the +1 for strong becomes like +6, a bigger benefit than any other unit gets from "strong".

Unless Cuttlefish can be Strong...

[Skrim]

Two cents:
1. This should be in the Strategy & Tips forum, not the Ideas forum.
2. Cuttlefish benefit less from Strong because they lose strikes quite rapidly as they take damage.

[WanderingHero]

Well I was suggesting Lancer's get fixed up, because I didn't understand how to use them, then it became a strategy and tips thread when people explained their proper usage (which I understand now, thanks)

[Insinuator]

2. Cuttlefish benefit less from Strong because they lose strikes quite rapidly as they take damage.

Gah. Read more carefully.

Strong is very desirable, because you get 3 attacks at double damage, so the +1 for strong becomes like +6, a bigger benefit than any other unit gets from "strong".

I was contrasting numerical advantage of a +1 increase to 10 strikes (which is +10) to a +6 damage increase for Lancers.

But this is neither here nor there...

[Thrawn]

@Insinuator: so are they--the cuttlefish has swarm, so it will rarely get the full +10.

As the thread owner has said, his question/idea has been asked and answered, so I am locking this thread