EP's Knalgan Strategy (Sort Of) Guide.

[Elvish_Pillager]

The knalgans are a faction of moderation. Virtually the best Knalgan army is of one of each unit. This moderation is their greatest strength, as they have virtually no weaknesses.

However, they can't scout. Even on a solid mountain map. Gryphon Riders make you go broke and Footpads are slow. Ulfserkers get defeated by enemy scouts AND are slow. This leaves you with a lack of money, with which you must pay for an army of somewhat overcosted units. Then, you fight an attrition war and inevitably lose.

Or, you can go for an all-out assault. Charge! Given that most of your decent units are charging at 4-5 speed, this is also a loss.

Now that you know that the two most common strategies are guaranteed failures, let's look at a third strategy: Visit the forums and ask the devs for improvements. I have decided to employ that strategy.

I suggest that the Dwarvish Fighter is the most atrociously overcosted; its resistances are counteracted by its defenses, and its stats are barely better than an Orcish Grunt's. It's also slower. I propose a cost reduction by 3, to 14.

Now for the Thunderer. I'm comparing it to the Bowman. It has 4 lower melee attack, same ranged damage, 1 more HP and XP/lev (insignificant), and they're SLOWER! Less melee, slower, and higher cost! I propose a cost reduction by 4, to 15.

(never mind the Ulfserk and the Guard--- they have weird powerful abilities, and seem reasonable.)

(never mind the Outlaws, they're supposed to be mediocre.)

The Gryphon Rider! Did I say the Fighter was the worse? I was wrong! The Gryphon Rider costs 32 gold! Thirty two whole gold pieces! This is ridiculous!
Human Scout: cost 23, *powerful* attack, move 8
Human Scout: cost 17, resistant, move 8
Orc scout: cost 17, move 8, 60%def in village
Elf scout: cost 18, move 9, ranged attack
Undead scout: cost 13, move 8, wimpy
Knalgan scout: cost 32, move 9, slightly powerful attack
this is crazy! Attacks: 18+charge,15,15,12/8,24. Not ridiculously high, like the cost. It doesn't even have an alignment or a preferred terrain to advantage it. I propose a cost reduction by 10, to 22, still costing ~5 more than most scouts.

I believe that these three changes will make the Knalgans a much more balanced and fun to play faction.

[MadMax]

But Gryphons (and bats) are not blocked by terrain, although 22 is still reasonable.

[scott]

I would actually raise their hit points so they can last a little longer out on their own while scouting. It won't make them such a waste since scouts tend to get entangled in the early skirmishes and killed. Think - you have to kill the ferocious mount and the rider. It would also justify the cost. Lowering their cost to ~22 would homogenize them and not justify their attack power. I would raise HP and make it 28 gold.

[turin]

I think perhaps, instead of reducing dwarvish fighter and thunderer costs, you should increase hp. so decrease both costs by 2, not 3 and 4, and increase HP apropriately.

as for gryphon riders, I completely agree with you. here is my opinion on it: an expensive scout, unless VERY powerful (in which case its not really a scout at all), is worthless because the point of a scout is to gain you gold for new units.

for any scout, IMHO, the cost should not be more than twice the cost of the cheapest 1st level unit on the team (in this cast 2*12=24). if its more expensive than this, you're usually better off getting the two units. although that costs more upkeep, you can sometimes get more villages with 2 slow units than one fast unit, depending on the map.

also, the two cheaper units contribute more to your ultimate goal, fighting, than the scout which is not that good at fighting.

But Gryphons (and bats) are not blocked by terrain, although 22 is still reasonable.

bats don't cost upkeep, have a almost as powerful an attack (drain is awesome), and the same movement, IIRC. is more HP but upkeep worth 20 gold?

[Popito]

(never mind the Outlaws, they're supposed to be mediocre.)
Human Scout: cost 23, *powerful* attack, move 8
Human Scout: cost 17, resistant, move 8
Orc scout: cost 17, move 8, 60%def in village
Elf scout: cost 18, move 9, ranged attack
Undead scout: cost 13, move 8, wimpy

Footpad: cost 14, move 7, elusivefoot crippled attack (weaker than a lvl 0 goblin!!??)
Bat aside it doesnt seem too bad.
We should look at Outlaws as long as they are avaible for recruitment??
And i will point as human scout the fencer (unless in a mainly grassland map of course). cost 18, move 7?, skirmish, elusivefoot average attack power. Not too far from the outlaw.

I will point his best scout (and also his best aviable troop) is thief.
Nice defense and a good hitting power, if backstab comes to play, and cheap and easy to level and 2 level has skrimish and ... its cool .
But i agree a 6mov troop isn't a fast scout :S.

And about the griffons... i agree they are bad bussines and a lower cost over 22-24 will do them a maybe good investment.
32 gold is over 1/3 of the standard starting gold. While 17 it close to the 1/6.
The remaining gold means your "fighting" guys will be few. And you cannot count the griffon as a faighting guy (he can get in combat as a mage for the ending blow, but cant hold the line in a fight ... he really is a scout!).

[Elvish_Pillager]

Dwarves, yes, an HP increase is a good idea. *hacks up some stats*
Dwarvish Fighter: 36->44, 17->15
Dwarvish Thunderer: 34->40, 18->16

Now, the Gryphon Rider:

Some sort of fighter/scout. When scouting, it doesn't pay its cost back. When fighting, it isn't worth it either. Doing both, it still isn't worth it.

Let's look what happens when it fights its cost worth of Poachers: Instant ZoC and then shoot it to death. For a good fighter, it is ridiculously vulnerable to ranged attackers. Thus, I suggest we give it a ranged attack:

swoop(blade)
marksman
12-1 ranged

This would make it more powerful on its own, which is necessary since it tends to be on its own. It would also support realism arguments in several ways. (Eagles swoop down and seize prey, not likely to miss even if the prey is hiding in defensive terrain... and prey gets no chance to melee-attack them.)

Oh, and by the way: You Cannot Have A Truly Powerful Unit With Normal HP And A Missing Attack. (32 gold should pay for a powerful unit.)

Also, I suggest we increase its HP to 46. It seems odd having a large beast which is less tough than a Dwarf, and it helps give the Gryphons the power they need.

These changes should make the Gryphon Rider into a powerful unit which can both scout and fight, without any glaring weaknesses. (This is what it wishes it were now.) I still think the cost could use a bit of decreasing, but that wouldn't really be necessary.

[Rhuvaen]

The knalgans are a faction of moderation. Virtually the best Knalgan army is of one of each unit. This moderation is their greatest strength, as they have virtually no weaknesses.

Complete agreement. Unlike other posts which claim that the Knalgans lack a variety of abilities, I think this hits the nail on the head. I love Knalgans for the way their various units work together effectively...

BUT as EP points out, the low move rates make it very hard to play Knalgans effectively. Besides the economic scout/gold issue, it's relatively harder to get your units in the right place, finish off that low-hp enemy unit before it heals/retreats, level your units up, and so on, with a lower move rate. To me it seems that when balancing units the devs compare all the combat stats, hp, advancement tree, unit abilities, etc very well, but what about movement? Some powerful units like Woses are obviously balanced through their movement, but the Knalgan dwarvish units just seem to be accepted to be slow on average.

I'm not sure that this is an issue that will be resolved through unit cost (although I agree the fighter is not worth as much as it costs now). I think the Knalgan flavour of an army is one of few tough units with specific abilities.

Nor do I think they need a quick scout (they are meant to be slow as a faction). Better do away with the Gryphon as a Knalgan unit - it's useless. (of course, having affordable gryphon scouts would make the faction much more playable on bigger maps in MP)

Instead of placing the Knalgans more in line with everyone else (and making them more bland a faction in the process), I think we need to look at increasing strengths that are thematic for them a little more:

1. resistances: could increase those a little (*especially magic resistances which seem to be thematic for a lot of dwarves in myth and literature*). Dwarves have fairly poor defense on the most usual terrains so there is still some scope here without making them too powerful.

2. a more useful mix of units: yes, the outlaws help, but they are mostly a cheaper and non-dwarf alternatives to what's there already (except the thief and footpad). I liked the idea of gnomish units posted elsewhere, and I think the Knalgans would do well to have a skirmisher unit to counter their tactical weaknesses due to move rates. Also give them a tank unit - one that can deal a lot of melee damage in one place - like a golem or such. It would also help to break through enemy lines. Knalgans can't really swarm one enemy unit effectively to create a breach like most other factions can (the ulfserkers help here but if used on the front of an enemy formation they usually get finished on the other player's round).

3. poison resistance: unlike the other two this is a new proposal. I think dwarves handle poison the worst of all the factions... they have too few units to have them poisoned, they can't get them to villages quickly enough because of low move rates (and once there, the wounded ones don't defend too well), they can't readjust their fighting formations easily to cover poisoned and wounded units, and they don't have healersl! Poison is pretty much the #1 tactic (apart from swarming villages and an economic victory) against the dwarvish Knalgans[1].
How about we gave them some form of poison resistance? Such as that they have a chance to recover (for instance equal to their defense in that particular terrain) from their poisoning after being damaged? Or have the poison act for two rounds, after which they recover if not poisoned again? Call this the "stout" ability and give it to most/all dwarvish units?

Anyway, I feel the Knalgan's dwarves have much potential and shouldn't only be fixed by way of pricing units...

[1] EDIT: forgot to mention that low defenses also makes them more likely to be affected by poison.

[telly]

Scout units are overrated. On most maps the cost of their recruitment and upkeep is much greater than the gold they generate by capturing villages and a lot are so weak its practically free xp if they're caught by the enemy.

[Invisible Philosopher]

Capturing villages is the key to almost all MP games. Often scouts help, but so do faster fighters, which allow you to go farther to get to the battle, leaving more villages within your territory. The Knalgans have neither a good scout nor fast fighting units, and not even particularly cost-efficient ones to make up for that.

Since Knalgans are not much of a scouting faction, and I agree that they should stay that way, I propose upping their income in another way to give them a chance on most maps. That is, their faction always has X more income [1]. As an 'excuse', let's say they're mining for gold or valuables or something.


[1] This is done by adding the line

Code: Select all

income=7

(or whatever amount) inside the Knalgans' [multiplayer_side] tag. Increasing their gold-per-village is probably impossible because it can be set separately in a multiplayer game, although village_gold is an attribute in a [side] tag (see SideWML)

[Circon]

Ow.
That is the single most game-beraking, ludicrous, crazy, idea nine from outer space ever..

Let's add it.

[Burnsaber]

quite intresting idea, dwarwes mine all the time and because of that they have more gold in battle than other factions.

It`s hard to balance thought and even if it gets in-game`, the gryphon rider still could use fixin´

[pg]

Complete agreement. Unlike other posts which claim that the Knalgans lack a variety of abilities, I think this hits the nail on the head. I love Knalgans for the way their various units work together effectively...

Heh, they do lack abilities, mainly speed which hurts them in many ways from finishing off units, to moving in water, to scouting. You even covered some of their lack of abilities in your next paragraph. The units they have work in harmony fairly well but they are overall the slowest faction. I don't mind them staying slow but factions are supposed to be balanced and even drakes have those speedy little saurians to help them and drakes are already a bit more mobile than dwarves. Outlaws are ok but they are weak compared to most other units.

(*especially magic resistances which seem to be thematic for a lot of dwarves in myth and literature*)

Maybe, but it seems like a big change when there are easier ways to adjust Knalgans.

3. poison resistance: unlike the other two this is a new proposal.

I've mentioned this before in the poison problem thread but like magic resistance it's a big change when there are easier ways to do it.

Scout units are overrated. On most maps the cost of their recruitment and upkeep is much greater than the gold they generate by capturing villages and a lot are so weak its practically free xp if they're caught by the enemy.

This is true especially on smaller maps but usually having at least one scout on a small map is useful for the mobility and the options that brings(taking far away villages, finishing off wounded enemies, etc).

Since Knalgans are not much of a scouting faction, and I agree that they should stay that way, I propose upping their income in another way to give them a chance on most maps. That is, their faction always has X more income.

How would you balance that? This sounds like the idea to balance maps based on their terrain by adjusting unit cost. I think Knalgan Alliance can be balanced within existing gameplay.

Anyhow, I do think Knalgans could use a bit of help. At the very least something should be done about the gryphon because as it is now it's the least used unit in multiplayer and rightly so.

[Elvish_Pillager]

I'd suggested giving the Gryphon Rider a 12-1 blade marksman ranged attack and 46 HP, any comments?

And we kind of need some developer opinions in this thread, too.

[autolycus]

I'd suggested giving the Gryphon Rider a 12-1 blade marksman ranged attack and 46 HP, any comments?

This sounds like a rider with a cavalry sabre - if piercing, would be a lance. How about a charge attack? I mean, if this is going to be such a hefty scout, might as well make it med/light cavalry.

[Elvish_Pillager]

I'd suggested giving the Gryphon Rider a 12-1 blade marksman ranged attack and 46 HP, any comments?

This sounds like a rider with a cavalry sabre - if piercing, would be a lance. How about a charge attack? I mean, if this is going to be such a hefty scout, might as well make it med/light cavalry.

You don't throw sabres and lances.