Results 1 to 17 of 17

Thread: Warleader STats

  1. #1
    Backer Grits's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    East Coast
    Posts
    106

    Warleader STats

    To me it seems that the WL is handcuffed by higher than average minimum stats. There's not much room to play and thus, he gets pigeon holed. I suggest loosening the reins a bit.

    His min. STR is 9 and ARM 5. This seems counter intuitive to me...like it should be the other way around. The WL is more of a utility unit, you want him to stick around. I think he'd get more use out of a 14/15 ARM and low STR.

  2. #2
    Honestly I think he suffers mostly from force high will power and that his ability is a " sometimes useful, sometimes worthless, and sometimes a negative" more then his stats. Add to it that the other warrior builds are godly easy to use in comparison and have way more power in their optimal builds and you get a wildly swingy champion who can win you games with his ability... once every blue moon... or cost you the game with it.

    Id like to see its range increased at rank 1 from 1 to 3 ( 3/6/global) or even better would be to have it go to 1/2/3 and have the target instantly get his turn instead of waiting for the next turn to go. That way you are not outright losing a turn in hope of a better following turn.

    That and nerfs to the warhawk/warmaster of like -2 max hp each and forced higher willpower or extersion to make them a bit less easy to use and less generally powerful with the same damage potential but through will power use. A burst damage type of unit if you will.

  3. #3
    Backer Grits's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    East Coast
    Posts
    106
    I agree the range should more than 1 at rank 1. Does he whisper commands ;P
    Seriously though, yeah, more stat flexibility and maybe 2 range at rank 1?
    Instantly giving a turn would make him quite deadly, but maybe not broken...not sure.

  4. #4
    Well its more or less 1(+) WP to swap turns with another unit in my version. Currently its 1(+) wp to do nothing this turn ( maybe move to block) but getting the other unit a move up in the order.

    Compare that too say the shieldbanger class who can shove his own guys forward/through people or the other warrior classes who can 1 shot someone/multiple people and outright ignore the whole mechanic of armor on any but the toughest units...seems in line with those guys imo. Its mostly a whoever I need to use can go NOW instead of after me.

  5. #5
    Junior Member Micahh's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Posts
    7
    I'm pretty sure a full turn would be far too powerful, but I was thinking that granting an immediate melee attack might be a good compromise between the current system and a full extra turn. This opens up decent options and allows the WL to work well from behind the front line without his team getting a full extra move phase for a single WP.

  6. #6
    Quote Originally Posted by Micahh View Post
    I'm pretty sure a full turn would be far too powerful, but I was thinking that granting an immediate melee attack might be a good compromise between the current system and a full extra turn. This opens up decent options and allows the WL to work well from behind the front line without his team getting a full extra move phase for a single WP.
    I dont know. Again you are giving up a turn on a unit so another unit can go. At most its very powerful when you can send a warhawk into a double AOE or some such but is that really more powerful then fielding 2 warhawks or 2 of the other warrior types and what they can do? I might be biased but im fully against the current warhawk/master power lvls and think they need nerfs regardless of this guy, they are just too easy to use especially with people hold them back as clean up and they can go over armor so easily with out even needing will/extersion.

    Plus your idea fully removes the archers/non melee future classes from the war leader making him even more niche/ obscure.


    Like I said before. A range 1/2/3 for its 3 ranks and 1/2/3 will power to use said range along with not getting to use the WL to attack/break and if you are lucky he is blocking seems fair especially when you have WH/WM doing what they can do or any of the other units really. Not to mention the loss of range/extra break/damage from WP if you use the ability a lot and vice versa.

  7. #7
    Senior Member loveboof's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Posts
    137
    I think it depends how you use it. Giving up a turn at the beginning (for guerrilla tactics) is not a bad thing if you want to keep your WL alive for later turns, and giving up a turn when maimed for picking which unit goes next for you is a no brainer too imo...

  8. #8
    Junior Member vrolok83's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Location
    Austin, TX
    Posts
    28
    I've been toying with a WM/WL start and a Thrasher end. It's successful against newer players and doesn't work at all above 6 power. The usefulness of the WL over a second WM is that A) power doesn't go up for having 2x promo 2 WM and B) you can hit the exact same units twice. If you move the WM/WL combo side by side, you are blocking a line of 4 squares. When someone starts in a shield formation, this can completely shut down their raiders if the raiders are on the inside of the formation.

    The warleader in this situation is extremely useful as a blocker, and his turn is not wasted since he protects the WM from one and a half sides. Later in the game, he can forge ahead on the Thrasher so that he can take 2 quick turns and get some clean up done.

    Right now, I've been toying with WM / WL / SA / SA / SA / TH, but I'm wondering if 3TH would be better than 3SA.

    WL: 12 / 9 / 5 / 2 /3
    Last edited by vrolok83; 03-19-2013 at 08:20 AM.

  9. #9
    If Warhawk gets nerfed... then it's dead to me. I'm switching to Bowmasters for my late-game damage.

    It's not like Backbiter. Backbiter's an early-game damage dealer, he shouldn't be one-shotting unharmed archers. He can still take them down to two strength and four or five armor. But Warhawk is an end-game unit, he should be chopping down elusive archers and partially-damaged melee once you bring him to bear. I already lose a lot of games because my Warhawk gets hit before he can do much.

  10. #10
    Quote Originally Posted by Jade Dragon View Post
    If Warhawk gets nerfed... then it's dead to me. I'm switching to Bowmasters for my late-game damage.

    It's not like Backbiter. Backbiter's an early-game damage dealer, he shouldn't be one-shotting unharmed archers. He can still take them down to two strength and four or five armor. But Warhawk is an end-game unit, he should be chopping down elusive archers and partially-damaged melee once you bring him to bear. I already lose a lot of games because my Warhawk gets hit before he can do much.
    My question to you is why? Why are WH or even WM late game units? How does a warrior hiding in the back and acting as a clean sweeper to weak units make since especially with their ability sets? I can understand its very effective and what not but wouldn't it make much more sense for a big brace warmaster to stride into combat and drop its axe into someone and taking them out of the game at the start or a hawk marching into a group and wonding them all instead of holding thim back like little children till its safe?

    I know you play Pox, and its the same as bastion right now. They have too much power and are too easy to use. They need to be nerfed down a bit and all we can do is hope that they target the right tnings nad not strip them of their unique stuff in order to keep their power hitting.

  11. #11
    Superbacker netnazgul's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    Belarus
    Posts
    456
    Quote Originally Posted by Gramalian View Post
    My question to you is why? Why are WH or even WM late game units? How does a warrior hiding in the back and acting as a clean sweeper to weak units make since especially with their ability sets? I can understand its very effective and what not but wouldn't it make much more sense for a big brace warmaster to stride into combat and drop its axe into someone and taking them out of the game at the start or a hawk marching into a group and wonding them all instead of holding thim back like little children till its safe?
    Don't argue, just try it
    When attacking first, warrior kills, or more likely maims, one character. Then he gets stomped.
    When attacking last, warrior a) has more chances to kill than maim (you've already lowered enemy armor by the time) b) has more chances to survive till the next strike (enemy has more targets to choose from).
    Also catch-me-if-you-can minigame is popular among top players when too opposite warriors (or warrior/raider) are moved just barely being able to reach the opponent but not within his own move range to decide who deals the first blow.
    If you don't know where to put it - put it in the pillage

    Steelhammer Tribune issues collected here
    Some of my Factions games can be observed here
    Also possible streaming at http://www.twitch.tv/netnazgul

  12. #12
    I have tried it. I clearly said I can see why its effective, it just doesnt make sense flavor wise or role wise based on the stated point of the unit.

  13. #13
    Backer Grits's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    East Coast
    Posts
    106
    ^ I feel you but maybe you just have to see it as they are the leaders and the peons go first to soften.

  14. #14
    Quote Originally Posted by Grits View Post
    ^ I feel you but maybe you just have to see it as they are the leaders and the peons go first to soften.
    Looks at warLEADER and cries.

  15. #15
    Quote Originally Posted by Gramalian View Post
    I know you play Pox, and its the same as bastion right now.
    ...I don't understand this sentence at all.
    They have too much power and are too easy to use. They need to be nerfed down a bit
    A warhawk can be devastating. But to be like that, he has to move exactly right, so that he's out of the range of the archers, in range to charge, etc. etc. The rest of the team also has to maim and kill the right guys so they don't drop his strength from 16 to 10 in one hit. Sometimes, I think playing Bowmasters would be easier.

  16. #16
    You play Poxnora dont you jade? Its that or you have the very same name as a player, like exactly.

    If not, there is a champion in that game named bastion the avenger. Its able to ignore a lot of defensive abilities and sorta auto kill anything not immune to him which lead to a lot of balance issues and nerfs to the guy. Its the same with those other warrior types, they just outright kill things or maim them regardless of armor value. They are just too strong and when you play them as clean up sweepers they dont seem to function as their stated design would indicate. I.E. They are overly powerful or at the very least their ease of use it too high.

  17. #17
    Quote Originally Posted by Gramalian View Post
    You play Poxnora dont you jade? Its that or you have the very same name as a player, like exactly.
    Nope. Jade Dragon is just the name I use on one forum, which has some members in this forum. I use the same name as my Steam for pretty much everything else.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •