The most useful monster. — General

BASON

18 years ago

Auto-translated

No need! Berserkers aren't that fragile (18 hit points!) to be defeated in the very first battle! Besides, you can position them further away, and let them run around the hero and centaurs: they waste a turn, and you save lives. Also, you'll have to sacrifice infantry anyway in the early stages, no matter which faction you play!

In reply to BASON

Zybr

18 years ago

Auto-translated

BASON;118760

No need! Berserkers aren't that fragile (18 hit points!) to require healing in the very first battle! Besides, you can position them further away and let them run around the hero and centaurs: they waste an extra turn and conserve their lives. Also, you always have to sacrifice some infantry in the early stages, no matter which faction you play.

It's not about them being fragile, but when playing as the Champion or Magister, a large part of them will fall in the very first battle; this is definitely true, but other factions don't have this problem. Some have archers providing cover, some have magic, and some have numbers on their side (for example, with Death, you can split the imps into squads, take a couple of small squads with you (1-2 each), and a large group of skeletons. By the end of the first week, you can gather over a hundred of them, and sometimes even more, depending on the map. Let the imps take the initial hit, and attack with the large group of skeletons; in this case, the losses are minimal, if not reversed). And some have both magic and archers. In short, everyone except the barbarians manages better here. Although, maybe I just don't know how to play as the barbarians

In reply to Zybr

BASON

18 years ago

Auto-translated

By the way, I also enjoy playing as the Fortress. Sometimes, the advantages of this faction become apparent. Everyone criticizes Berserkers for their lack of intelligence. Yes, that's true! I don't argue. But at the same time, they can inflict significant damage on Bone Dragons. Their defense is mainly based on protection against ranged attacks and a retaliatory strike (fear). Berserkers ignore these defenses. There was a case in a battle against Death (the final battle) where Berserkers charged at the Bone Dragons, distracted their attention, and dealt a lot of damage thanks to their immunity to fear and double strike. This was enough to tip the scales in that encounter.

In reply to Zybr

OptiMAL

18 years ago

Auto-translated

ZYbr;118786

I'm not saying they're weak, but it's true that when playing as Champion or Magister, most of them will fall in the first battle; but that's not the case with others. Some have ranged units to cover...

I disagree here. Fortress has a powerful hero. Centaurs seem to shoot (although awkwardly, but up close, so it's quite effective).
And who would attack only with Berserkers? It's the same as just using skeletons, squires, etc.
Magic isn't very impressive at the beginning. A Barbarian hero will be stronger than that magic.
IMHO

In reply to OptiMAL

BASON

18 years ago

Auto-translated

I'm willing to put up with the stupidity of Berserkers for the sake of Cyclops! When they arrive, that's when problems start... ...for the opponent... ...serious problems, I must say!

General ZeT

18 years ago

Auto-translated

Cyclops are useful as ranged units. They are quite strong ranged attackers, but not very good in melee combat. If you gather 70-90 cyclops, that's a serious advantage and a good argument for victory. (And I'm not even talking about larger numbers.) But I usually don't go with such an army; I prefer a solo hero. At the beginning, of course, I have to use berserkers and centaurs. (playing as Fortress). But as soon as I feel that my hero can manage without an army, I buy a bunch of nectars and set off. It's useful to travel with a single hero. (it allows for exploration). And if there's an opportunity to "steal" an artifact or resource, it's worth taking. "Stealing" means picking up an artifact or resource without attacking the guard. And if the guard is strong, like a Champion, you can run away from the battlefield without any losses. But that's when the map is difficult. Playing as Necropolis is a different story.

In reply to General ZeT

Zybr

18 years ago

Auto-translated

Wow, so many Cyclops:eek: Well, in such numbers, any unit is useful (i.e., in equivalent numbers). IMHO, a Cyclops is a disgrace to a ranged unit, without accuracy or a black crossbow. And in melee combat, they just sweep everyone away...

In reply to Zybr

BASON

18 years ago

Auto-translated

ZYbr;119228

Wow, so many cyclops:eek: In such numbers, any unit is useful (i.e., in equivalent numbers). IMHO, a cyclops is a disgrace for an archer, without accuracy or a black crossbow. And in melee combat, they just sweep everyone away...

If cyclops are a disgrace for an archer, as you say, then what do you consider to be "not a disgrace for an archer"?:confused:

General ZeT

18 years ago

Auto-translated

Cyclops are not a disgrace for an archer. Among the 3rd-level creatures, they are among the best. But compared to the strongest archer, they... In short, they are far from Gargantua.

In reply to General ZeT

Zybr

18 years ago

Auto-translated

General ZeT;119417

Cyclops are not a disgrace for an archer. Among the 3rd-level creatures, they are among the leading ones. But compared to the strongest archer, they... In short, they are far from Gargantua.

Cyclops have a growth rate of 3, damage (12-18), which is less only than monks and knights, but twice as many of them are recruited, and knights attack twice; cyclops have average armor, not worse, but not better; the modifier is not bad, but considering its "accuracy" without external help... it's not enough, and the speed is very low, which affects both combat in the last rows and movement on the map...
So, what's good about them?:confused:

Well, various enclosures and lords can, of course, fix the first drawback of cyclops, but not always...

Starhan

18 years ago

Auto-translated

but it has splash damage :)

and it can attack the back rows without having a direct line of sight.

Arandor

18 years ago

Auto-translated

Orcs and Centaurs aren't very accurate either)) and they have fewer attacks__)) but Centaurs at least move a lot)).
Cyclops are better than Ogres)) even in Inferno, because they added spells to Ogres, but they have so little mana... only enough for one or two spells =( although they are good in melee combat).

In reply to Arandor

Zybr

18 years ago

Auto-translated

But there are many ogres, and even a lot of them; even though they have little mana, they have good spells against mages (on Equia:), and they are a strong unit...

Centaurs and orcs are monsters of the first level, so they can be not very strong:D

General ZeT

18 years ago

Auto-translated

It’s a pity that the Ogre Mage only knows one spell; if they added the spells “cat reflexes,” “sparks,” and “sorrow,” it would be more or less balanced. But that’s just my opinion.

In reply to General ZeT

Zybr

18 years ago

Auto-translated

General ZeT;119440

It's a pity that the Ogre-Mage only knows one spell. If they added the spells "cat reaction," "sparks," and "sadness," it would be more or less balanced. But that's just my opinion.

In Equilibrium, Ogres have gained many spells, some of which are quite useful. The Ogre-Mage has been given the following spells: Magic Resistance, Mana Drain, Spell Shackle, Snake Strike, Sparks. He now has a total of 5 mana (previously 6).
The Ogre-Mage's ability has been changed from "Bloodlust" to "Spellcaster" due to the expansion of the spell selection.
(c) From the mod developers' website.

Reading content in

Interface language

Posts from The most useful monster.

Statistics

Library

Users Online 8 users 1380 guests

Today's Visitors 13