How do you use Clashers?

[Sapient]

Clashers (and saurians) are a nice way of turning the table on those opponents who try to take advantage of the drakes' pierce vulnerablity. Upgrading to the slasher line also helps in this regard.

BTW, if you're attacking elvish archers in forest then you'll have trouble with just about any unit... not just the clasher.

Also, you should listen to JW. I agree totally with what he said. Thanks!

[Airk]

Believe it or not, but i encountered many situations where a ranged wounded unit attacked my all-melee unit just because it was sure not to take any counter damage. Besides, if its attack is strong it can wound the melee unit enough, so that it is killed by another unit right away..

To me, that just means you're not doing an effective job of threatening that ranged unit. This really shouldn't be an issue for drakes with the extremely quick and pesky saurian skirmishers. A skirmisher in any battle should ensure that wounded units are unlikely to risk hanging around and dying to pesky pokey spears just to wound other units.

[Martinus]

I'm not talking only about clashers, but any unit with melee only attack (most orcish troops, some undead, fencer, some dwarves).

[Sapient]

Thanks to ZoC and multiple recruits, you can defend against ranged attack specialists with ranged defender units, then counter with melee specialists such as the clasher. Ah... tactics.

[zookeeper]

Believe it or not, but i encountered many situations where a ranged wounded unit attacked my all-melee unit just because it was sure not to take any counter damage. Besides, if its attack is strong it can wound the melee unit enough, so that it is killed by another unit right away..

To me, that just means you're not doing an effective job of threatening that ranged unit.

Yeah. The trick, as always (IMHO), is to leave some openings for your opponent to attack into, while making sure that if he does so, he'll get a bigger beating next turn than he can give you. So leaving a clasher available for an archer or two to reach can be perfectly fine, just like leaving a dark adept available for an ulfserker to reach can be, provided that you do it in a situation where you gain more than your opponent does if he decides to go for it.

[elricz]

I'm not talking only about clashers, but any unit with melee only attack (most orcish troops, some undead, fencer, some dwarves).

Then you will feel the same about Dark Adepts, as they lack melee attack. Do you also have issues with them?

[5dPZ]

leaving a dark adept available for an ulfserker to reach can be, provided that you do it in a situation where you gain more than your opponent does if he decides to go for it

that's some cool idea....never thought of that before. Usually my adepts run from ulf like there is no tomorrow.... anyway, it sounds very reasonable and i could try it out sometime

[Martinus]

I'm not talking only about clashers, but any unit with melee only attack (most orcish troops, some undead, fencer, some dwarves).

Then you will feel the same about Dark Adepts, as they lack melee attack. Do you also have issues with them?

Of course more people would attack melee dark adept then for example an archer, a drake burner or a thunderguard. I don't have any issue with any unit. I'm just constating the facts. I'm glad with the way the game is right now.

[Lone_Isle]

Obviously you are thinking about this in the entirely wrong way.

Clasher: 6-4 Pierce, 7-4 Strong, 9-4 Strong in daytime = 36 damage for a level 1 unit.

Any other questions?

yea. A fighter with strong trait will do 10-3 in daytime = 30. Only 6 less than a clasher. Then when he gets shot at by those archers he deals back abit more in turn. The total damage he dishes out from being able to retal may even be more than what a clasher may do.

Did you realize that the only other units that deal as much damage as the Clasher are the Wose, Burner, and Horseman (only when he charges)? For 19g, a potential 36 damage is a BARGAIN, not to mention the additional lifespan he'll receive.

Fair enough, but you would never use horsemen against units safe in high def % terrain, so what you're saying is that clashers are little better than a slower type of horsemen.
The wose has regen +8 and a whooping 60% piercing resist. I'd use these over clashers against units in defensive cover any day.

Your argument about ranged attacks is useless. If I have a 4-3 ranged attack on a Horseman, or an 8-4 attack on a Horseman at day, which do you think I'll choose?

Answer: the one that kills it so it doesn't have a chance to attack me next turn.

Nothing out there kills other units in one go unless we're talking about something like adepts vs drakes or drakes vs woses.

Even with their massive damage potential I rarely see clashers taking out anything in good cover. When it rolls out to my opponents turn, the clasher becomes target practice for all manner of ranged units.

Honestly, you really need to change your perspective drastically if you can't see the value of the Clasher.

I see the value of clashers certainly, especially against say loyalists.
What I'm saying is that I don't think clashers are worth it for the gold. They are a melee only unit in a unit roster full of versatile units that have both melee and ranged potential and better mobility. You would expect them to have better defense as a trade-off, but this doesn't seem to be the case. They are just as vulnerable, if even more due to inability to retaliate, against ranged.

[Lone_Isle]

i'd like to see some replays wherein clashers contribute significantly to victory.

[Sapient]

Surely even you, Lone Isle, can imagine a situation where you'd be willing to trade one of your drake fighter's mobility and ranged attack for a breif survival and damage boost? And that is exactly what the clasher is: it doesn't replace the versatile drake fighter, instead, it fills a specific role. And for the ability to fill that role, a good player will gladly sacrifice a couple of gold pieces.

You probably never recruit heavy infantry either? Considering JW is one of the best players in multiplayer, I'm surprised you brush away his arguments so lightly.

[Dragonking]

I prefer clasher over fighter usually... 4 swings are imho much more reliable than 3. Everything else what is important was mentioned in this thread earlier..

I think you underestimate power of clashers' ability to deal really tremendous damage thanks to possesing two attacks of different type. Also 10% resistance thing is really a lot.

[PingPangQui]

Lone_Isle, it seems like that you view a unit isolated and by that judge it as being an isolated unit, but none is. You can do that for RPG-like campaigns, i.e. where you have only one unit, like Darwish Treasure but not for mp-games or normal campaigns.

You have always to see its role within a faction. Yes, you tried that but it wasn't very convincing to me. Thinking recruiting a clasher doesn't sound reasonable in specific situations (which surly exist), doesn't mean that there are no situation where it is reasonable to recruit one. Sure clashers shouldn't be the core of you army in most cases since there are quite immobile but to have one or two is usually not bad (same applies to burners btw). As it has already been said, the only other unit than can deal pierce damage in the Drake factions are saurian spearman. Furthermore this unit is like a swisstool especially when being advanced to a gladiator.

Furthermore, usually it's best to have a mixed army (It can't be said often enough).

Factions against which you don't want to miss clashers: Drakes , Loyelsits, Northerns, Dwarves, Elves, Undead

Oh, seems that there are all in. Anyway, you can see that as a personal postion table of mine if you like (others might see that differently).

[Rhuvaen]

I think you overvalue retaliation damage. The fact is, when a unit dies it gives the opponent xp. You'll see your enemies advancing and healing before your attrition by retaliation works.

It's worth much more to deal deadly damage on YOUR turn than doing a little retaliation change to units that will either level or be ZOC-protected by the time it's your turn.

So yes, units specialising in either melee or ranged attacks are typically more deadly than those who have a modicum of both.

[Xandria]

I tried Clashers - they simply munch adepts during the day. Yum. Of course, they rather fail against skeletons, but that's what the Burner is for.