How do you use Clashers?

Share and discuss strategies for playing the game, and get help and tips from other players.

Moderators: Forum Moderators, Developers

Lone_Isle
Posts: 60
Joined: November 2nd, 2006, 2:36 am

Post by Lone_Isle »

ok i see. so clashers are better for being able to do more damage in one go.

Gus
Posts: 520
Joined: May 16th, 2005, 5:40 pm
Location: France

Post by Gus »

AND receiving more punishment (better resistance and HP than the Fighter).
Hard work may pay off in the long run, but laziness always pays off right away.

User avatar
JW
Posts: 5046
Joined: November 10th, 2005, 7:06 am
Location: Chicago-ish, Illinois

Post by JW »

Rhuvaen wrote: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.
Lone_Isle wrote:ok i see. so clashers are better for being able to do more damage in one go.
THANK YOU!!!

Yes.

Sometimes it's more important to kill a unit to open a hole than it is to prepare to deal retaliation damage next turn because you didn't kil the unit.

Maximum Damage Potential (MDP) for Clasher/Fighter at Night-Dawn-Day, non-Strong v Strong:

non-Strong: 15/20 - 21/24 - 27/28
.......Strong: 18/20 - 24/28 - 30/36

You can see that at all times the Clasher does more damage. Average these damages out you'll get:

non-Strong/Strong Fighter: 21/24
non-Strong/Strong Clasher: 24/28

Since there's a 50% chance to get Strong on any Drake recruit, average damages are now:

Fighter: 22.5, Clasher: 26

Divide that by their cost:

Fighter: 1.32 dmg/gold
Clasher: 1.37 dmg/gold

Ad to the fact that Clashers are still just as mobile as Orcish Grunts (if Grunts took 1mp to cross mountains and sand), have more hp than D.Fighters, better resistancies than D.Fighters, and deal more MDP on any given attack than D.Fighters, and I think you can see why Clashers are often the unit of choice in many circumstances.

IB
Posts: 330
Joined: September 28th, 2006, 11:38 am

Post by IB »

I'd rather the Clasher wore super anti-piercing armour [+20%/+30%], instead of a general 10% physical armour. If you have such an obvious weakness that your enemies will exploit, you would think they would try and cover it.

Gus
Posts: 520
Joined: May 16th, 2005, 5:40 pm
Location: France

Post by Gus »

Well, then maybe there should be no weaknesses but to fire and cold, because it is so easy to cover them...
Hard work may pay off in the long run, but laziness always pays off right away.

IB
Posts: 330
Joined: September 28th, 2006, 11:38 am

Post by IB »

Clashers aren't weak to fire...

Their current armour is counterbalanced by slowing them down, turning them into drakes in HI armour isn't what I'm suggesting.

Gus
Posts: 520
Joined: May 16th, 2005, 5:40 pm
Location: France

Post by Gus »

IB wrote:Clashers aren't weak to fire...
If that was aimed at me: i was speaking of all the weaknesses in the game. If you go by the reasoning that Clashers should easily counter their piercing weakness, then every unit in the game could arguably wear more armour... So that doesn't stand.
Hard work may pay off in the long run, but laziness always pays off right away.

User avatar
Xandria
Posts: 230
Joined: April 23rd, 2006, 5:10 pm
Location: Heart of Europe

Post by Xandria »

The weaknesses of the units often originate from the kind of armor they're wearing, as well as their physiology. Trolls are made of rock, thus they resist blades and arrows well, but are brittle -> thus zero resist to crush. The horseman and knight have decent armor, but are large targets, hence the weakness to pierce. Elusive foot units wear next to zero armor, thus all the physical weaknesses... but if they put on more armor, they'd no longer be elusive.

The clasher is a large target, no denying that, thus he can armor himself against blades and mauls, but... well, t'was an arrow that killed Smaug himself, no sword nor rock! Being large and slow, the weakness to arrows is understandable. His brethren who fly have a pierce weakness because of the large wings that cannot be armored, plus lighter armor they were as to be able to fly, plus they're large targets too :D
The fight against human stupidity is endless, but we must never give it up.
- Jan Werich

User avatar
JW
Posts: 5046
Joined: November 10th, 2005, 7:06 am
Location: Chicago-ish, Illinois

Post by JW »

I don't believe Trolls are made of rock......

Gus
Posts: 520
Joined: May 16th, 2005, 5:40 pm
Location: France

Post by Gus »

Neither do i, but apart from that, the thinking behind Xandria's post is pretty much what i think.
Hard work may pay off in the long run, but laziness always pays off right away.

IB
Posts: 330
Joined: September 28th, 2006, 11:38 am

Post by IB »

I believe the 40% def max represents the the size of the clasher, not its resistance to pierce.

User avatar
Xandria
Posts: 230
Joined: April 23rd, 2006, 5:10 pm
Location: Heart of Europe

Post by Xandria »

Okay, then he wears a Funny Hat of Arrow Attraction (+1).
The fight against human stupidity is endless, but we must never give it up.
- Jan Werich

Zentgraf
Posts: 2
Joined: December 9th, 2006, 12:53 am

Post by Zentgraf »

The main reason you'll want Clashers is for their hard hitting melee pierce damage. Don't get them for their slash damage, their sword is next to useless. The only time the Clasher's sword will do more damage than his spear is against Woes, Ghouls, and Skeletons. And if you arn't burninating those units, then you might want to reconsider your career as a Drake player.

The Clasher's greatest weakness is their mobility. In a faction where you have to keep shifting your forces, the Clasher's speed can be a liability. Their hitting power does you no good if you can't get to the enemy when and where you need to. While Fighters might not hit as hard, they can do something far more destructive; they can ZOC trap. The Clasher's extra 4 HP and 10% resistance to slash/bash/pierce do not make up for the lost mobility. In most cases I find Fighters better at taking damage because they can heal so easily. When shifting forces around, it's easy to put a Fighter on a town or next to a healer along the way. In some cases, I find I can jump a Fighter from one town to the next, all the way to where I need them. Trying to heal a Clasher and getting them back into the fight takes far longer. And Clashers do not soak up damage well. With only 30-40% defense like the rest of the Drakes, Clasher's HP drop fast. And the resistance boost generally only saves you 0-5 HP, depending on what your fighting, before dying or needing to flee.

While Clashers might not be worth their value compared to the Loyalist Spearman, they do fill a role in the Drake faction. Ironically, the best faction to use Clashers against is another Drake. A rare sight. They also tear up mounted units well. Its also good to attack berserkers with them, or kiss your Burners good-bye. So you'll have to make Clashers as need see fits. But for me, I find I usually make one Clasher for every 2-3 Fighters. That means usually 1-2 Clashers in a game at a time. I like to keep my Clashers off the front line when I can. About a few hexes behind it and use them as rear guard. By doing this, it makes it harder for the enemy to ZOC trap me. And if they do try, most of the units that are good at ZOC trapping, are weak to Clashers and get quickly killed. This also prevents the enemy from using archers on my Clashers. And speaking of archers, when the enemy see Clashers, they like to make archers. Archer units tend to be slow, and are easily picked off by Fighters. Helping to give your faction the edge. Another reason to keep Clashers in the rear is so they have a head start when time for fallback comes. This way they won't become isolated and get picked off. When attacking, I like to attack first with Clashers. (After luring the enemy out of 60-70% defense first!) Then mop up with other units. By doing this, the hope is the enemy unit will be killed and the front line will move up, leaving the Clasher in the rear again. Or the enemy units are in a ZOC trap and I don't have to worry about archers. No strategy ever works out the way you want it. But for the most part that's how I tend to use Clashers.

Becephalus
Inactive Developer
Posts: 521
Joined: October 27th, 2005, 5:30 am
Location: St. Paul, Minnesota, USA, Earth

Post by Becephalus »

Mainly I use them to attack enemy units. I find that is a much better use than having them play hopscotch in the rear areas.

On a more serious note, they are terrific vs other drakes, and anythign which lacks strong melee. They are about as good against ranged pierce as fighters (higher resist, no retal). Having lots of hp helps a lot. Also can beat up a skele archer when needed.

I don't know i use them the way anyone would use a high attack high hp low def melee unit. Also they have a great movetype, not quite as good as the other drakes, but still on of the best in the game.
There are three roads to ruin: by gambling, which is the quickest; through women, which is the most pleasurable; and through taking the advice of experts, which is the most certain. -de Gaulle

Post Reply