40 Blood Furies or 3 Black Dragons?

[Banedon]

Now that DaemianLucifer has confirmed his intentions, the complete poll I create. The question is:

Which is more useful in general: 40 Blood Furies or 3 Black Dragons?

My stance: Black Dragons by a mile.
Reasons:

1. If you're up against neutrals Black Dragons are a lot more powerful. They have significant HP and can take retaliations where Blood Furies cannot (for example, if you're up against Hordes of Marksmen you can just deploy the Black Dragons, fly them over and be confident that the Marksmen will fail to kill any, even though they might deal enough damage to kill 1 Blood Fury). They deal more damage as well, and will survive a Castle's shots (giving the hero time to cast spells), unlike Blood Furies.

2. If you're up against another player Black Dragons are again a lot more powerful. They deal more damage and they have the higher speed - therefore they can threaten more units at a time. Their two-hex attack is more a blessing than a curse since they stop the opposing side from surrounding their creatures in a turtle formation. They are immune to magic except by another Warlock, but this is again more a blessing than a curse since the hero is likely to be spending more time casting Destructive magic than anything else.

Counterarguments:

1. Against neutrals the only real time when the 40 Blood Furies are better are when you are dealing with slow walkers (Zombies, Footmen). But then in these situations you can just as well make do with 10, and the Blood Furies cannot deal properly with lots of creatures as well.

2. Against human armies the Blood Furies have no real advantage. They may be harder to target, but if the opponents want to they will destroy them all anyway. Conversely, the Black Dragons die faster - but that's because they are so dangerous that the opponents naturally target them first.

Vote: Black Dragons by a mile.

[Mytical]

Well in general I agree that Dragons are dangerous, heck any dragon is dangerous. However, there are a couple advantages the Furies have that the dragons don't. Ammong them...

Can be split into more then 3 stacks if needed. If you only had either the 3 dragons or the 40 furies that is. If you split the dragons those 3 may or may not live long enough to matter. A high level hero attacking can kill 3 dragons in 3 hits (even if split) but could not kill all 40 furies if split into 5 stacks. Again advantage furies. Dragons get the advantage in castle combat hands down. Furies I would say in open field combat. Also pure brute force goes to the dragons, but remember this though they have a LOT more hp, they take retals AND normal attacks. Anyhow to make a long story short, the furies get my vote, if only by a small margin.

[Jolly Joker]

The truth is that you wouldn't have 3 Dragons without even half of those blood furies. Furthermore I don't see the comparison. By the time you have BLACK Dragons you'll have a lot more than 3 or 40 Blood Furies, so I don't think the comparison is even remotely ok.
Compare what you have ro pay:
10500 Gold + 10 O + 3 C for 40 Furies including buildings and
40500 Gold + 10 O + 30 C + 41 S für 3 Black Dragons.

[DaemianLucifer]

Furries for me.Unless its the castle battle furries will deal more damage than blackies because they act three times while blackies act just once.Furthermore,furries suffer no retaliation,whilce blackies do.So both have advantages and disadvantages.While dragons,unlike furries,cannot be blessed,they cannot be cursed either,while furries can.And yes,there is the fact that dragons breath can be abused against you,but thats not a very common thing.

The truth is that you wouldn't have 3 Dragons without even half of those blood furies. Furthermore I don't see the comparison. By the time you have BLACK Dragons you'll have a lot more than 3 or 40 Blood Furies, so I don't think the comparison is even remotely ok.
Compare what you have ro pay:
10500 Gold + 10 O + 3 C for 40 Furies including buildings and
40500 Gold + 10 O + 30 C + 41 S für 3 Black Dragons.

See,the debate came from me describing what I used in the cultist.It was aaeglrs strike force,thus I think I had only 40 furries(might be a bit more,cant remember),and only 3 blackies(might have been shadows)because I couldnt aford more.

[Gaidal Cain]

Mod note: Please respond to post in a separate one of yours, and not by editing the first one. The discussion will be much easier to follow then.

[Banedon]

So much for the new method of keeping the discussion short...

@Mytical -

1. A high level hero should not be physically attacking but rather be casting spells. Therefore though the hero can kill three Black Dragons in three attacks but not all 40 Blood Furies in those three attacks is not important.

2. You do not in general need to split Black Dragons into more than three stacks. Three is enough to block four Ranged creatures in battles against neutrals, and if you are against humans then you generally do not have space to split so many Black Dragons (besides, you need to split your Shadow Matriaches).

3. It is my opinion that Black Dragons take the crown in open combat against every stack except slow walkers. Can you explain why you think the reverse?

@JollyJoker - while it is indeed improbable, it was also the situation DaemianLucifer said will happen. It is not for me to argue against him if he is willing to risk such a disadvantage.

@DaemianLucifer - The Blood Furies may get three moves, but it does not mean they will get three attacks. If it's a battle against neutral Cerberi for instance, you will have to move the Blood Furies instead of attack (in this case it'll be the Assassins / Shadow Matriaches killing).

[Demiurg]

So much for the new method of keeping the discussion short...

Lol @ the above considering the 7 pages overflowing with this debate in the original thread.

I'd say my vote goes for the Dragons, although not overwhelmingly so, as I find Blood Furies very useful if you have Tactics - almost all battles start with them decimating a stack, which of course is a neat opening.

[Mytical]

1. actually in the case of the black dragons that is exactly what they should do. Casting spells on a black (or shadow) dragon is about useless (except for maybe warlocks but then again since these are warlock creatures your side would have a warlock also). You can not hope to buff your own creatures (not tier 7's mind) to confront the dragons, so taking them down by physical attacks (there being only 3 of them) IS your best option. While physical attacks against the furies would produce less effect and therefore require magic.

3) Open field combat goes to the furies only slightly because of a couple things (even vs ranged but I will get to that), though I will grant you that casters the dragons would win hands down, and range is a small toss up, again get to that in a moment). One is Initiative, their quick initiative can grant them more attacks, more manuverabilty, and plus they can have their init inhanced while the dragons can't. Next is the stack situation. While the dragons do more damage (even split) you split the furies and they suddenly become actually more dangerous then they are non split. First more no retal attacks, second you can sacrifice one or two to tie up ranged units and slaughter them with the bigger stacks. 3rd more retals (this is a bad thing but if they have to retal at least you have a lot more chances to do so in split stacks). Now total damage and hp do go to the dragons, don't get me wrong. But if you are looking for less total losses (value wise) you want to go with the furies. Loosing 1 fury stack could be a joke, loosing 1 dragon stack could be devestating.

2) well I thought this poll was dragons or Furies, no mention was made of other creatures. So spliting them any number of times is an option. Still yes I agree 3 stacks of dragons can block range creatures easily, and even enable the dragons to do more over all damage (more retals). So we can agree on this. That is why I put this last. Now if including other creatures (say grim raiders) furies actually become even more dangerous, not less. You don't even have to have the raiders do anything besides sit next to a stack in defense mode, the furies would do all the work (love that bite attack hehe). So if I am wrong that there are other creatures let me know. Furies are more support (imo) while BD are more offense (imo).

[Banedon]

@Mytical -

1. I would contest that. Spells like Mass Endurance and Mass Haste and Mass Confusion would be much more valuable than killing one Black Dragon. We should be assuming of course that the Black Dragons are not the only creatures on the battlefield. They shouldn't be.

2. The problem is with 3 Black Dragons, you should never - yes, never - lose any against neutrals while you might very well lose one Blood Fury against Ranged creatures. I find it difficult to see the Warlock casting initiative-enhancing spells instead of his signature direct damage.

3. The question asked 'in general', and in general the 40 Blood Furies or 3 Black Dragons won't be alone. I think having Grim Raiders standing by the stack against neutrals is overkill - if you can afford to have the Grim Raiders there, you have essentially already won the battle (you can't afford Grim Raider losses any more than you can afford Blood Fury losses). So while Blood Furies become more dangerous, they do not need to be.

[Mytical]

Ah but here is the thing banedon. Furies are actually better with more creatures then the dragons are. Not only does the grim raiders bite help them more then it does the dragons (two non-retal attacks vs 1) the dragons can be used against you without spells, while spells would be the only way to use the furies against you. And yes you could just have the grim raiders just stand there (the defense bonus would help a lot) but I agree that they should also attack (and further decimate whatever stack the furies are picking on). Now true in a multi creature scenario the furies fall a little behind and the dragons step up because you would not be able to split the furies to better advantage. Also though the furies become not the only target, while most would still target those three dragons. Which actually makes the furies a little more dangerous. The longer they are arround the more damage they do, while the dragons get ganged up on (until dead) the furies most likely wont and much to the detriment of the enemy. Fury's strong suit is that they have a catch 22 working for them. Danged if you target them (then that frees up other stacks to wreck havoc), danged if you don't (then they get more turns to cause more no retal damage). Now dragons dont get that. They would be targeted automatically and taken down quickly. (By any means necessary). And if your opponit has a tier sevens like titans then the dragons might even fall before they do serious damage. Where as titans are not likely to target your furies enabling them to do more damage! Again I don't classify the furies as killers, not out of tier 2, but I do think that they can be far more useful then dragons when 13 to 1 (even though it would normally be higher). Now 130 furies to 10 dragons? Dragons every time (btw). In this single case, 40 vs 3 I pick the Furies. It is just an opinon. I am not trying to convince you or anybody else.

[Kalah]

I'd have to say the dragons, but it's a close call. Those dragons cost a lot, and they're not accessible early in the game, whereas the furies are not only accessible right away, they're also quite good for a low level creature. They fall quickly though, but their no retaliation ability enables you to conserve your forces.
Still, if faced with a choice between dragons and furies, e.g. by a script giving them to you, thus negating dwelling building etc., it's the dragons.

[Orfinn]

No time to dwindle between the two, Blackies are my choice, they are more competent in sieges (obviously) can toast 40 BF in a short time of matter and their magical immunity are useful against 6 other factions, except another warlock of course. They are alot more expensive but worth it nontheless.

[Mightor Magic]

Dragons for me as well. In any real clash, the Furies are the first to go and don't even think about bringing them to a siege. Hit and Stay will always beat Hit and Run, Hit and Run, Dead {If I'm lucky, the Furies get three attacks in}.

For neutral stacks, either works.

[Gaidal Cain]

If you can afford to have the Grim Raiders there, you have essentially already won the battle (you can't afford Grim Raider losses any more than you can afford Blood Fury losses). So while Blood Furies become more dangerous, they do not need to be.

Not quite- you could have used the Grim raiders to obliterate one stack now use their ability to help kill of a second one (which is a extremely offensive strategy, but also one that Dungeon is suited for).

[winterfate]

Gaidal Cain wrote:

As DL has already demonstrated that the Dragons will win hands down, I see no further need to keep this particular poll open. Use for example this thread for discussing the merits of one over the other.

I agree. Just opened it to see what people thought (the argument going on over at the other thread between Banedon and DL is awe-inspiring ).

In this poll, I voted for Furies. You get them earlier, they have No Retaliation, Strike and Return, and are virtually untouchable by most non-ranged units. However, I'll concede that Black Dragons rule later in the game, at which point the Blood Furies should, IMO, be relegated to defense duty in your town (so they can accumulate in preparation of the final battle).

[Banedon]

Everyone - we must assume a script that offers you both for free. DaemianLucifer's original post was:

Even if there were 3 dragons,furries would still be a bigger threat.

in response to my:

Zero. Why? If I fight a battle against Dungeon without Black Dragons the Blood Furies will certainly be targetted soon. That's not because they are killers, that's because the rest of Dungeon's army is generally even less dangerous (aside from Grim Raiders).

The way I interpreted it was, if you fight Dungeon and he has 3 Black Dragons and 40 Blood Furies, the stack you should target first are the Blood Furies.

Not quite- you could have used the Grim raiders to obliterate one stack now use their ability to help kill of a second one (which is a extremely offensive strategy, but also one that Dungeon is suited for).

True, but then situations when this is the only way to win a neutral fight are rare indeed.

[DaemianLucifer]

Everyone - we must assume a script that offers you both for free. DaemianLucifer's original post was:

No we dont,because I said even if.That means tha even when thats the case they are more usefull,but they are more usefull when thats not the case either.You asked me before making the poll what do I think,I told you in general.In general covers all situations.

[Banedon]

Sorry but I can't understand your first sentence. What exactly do you mean?

[Lyan]

For sure furries are a wonderfull unit, still i think i would take the black dragons, the sole excpetion would be if i had already some Furries in my army and no black dragons.

Magic imunity, flyer, Hpbox, firebreath says a lot of it. The BD can quickly make a fearfullgroup of shooters useless, by attaking and staying arm to arm, when the furries can only damage em. If playing VS AI it's almost sure the comp will destroy your furries whatever it will cost him, making your chance to take them to the next battle close to 0. If your opponent decide to focus your dragons, their high def, high hp will give your units a precious time, furries won't.

[Banedon]

The way I see it, there are three types of battles: against neutrals, a seige battle and against another faction.

Against neutrals: This can be subdivided into against Ranged, against fast / slow walkers, against Casters.

Against Ranged - Black Dragons win.
Against Casters - Black Dragons win by a huge margin.
Against fast walkers - Black Dragons win.
Against slow walkers - Blood Furies win by a big margin.

A seige battle: Though a serious seige battle hardly ever happens, this is one that the Black Dragons win by a huge margin.

Against another faction: Black Dragons win.

Truth be told I find it difficult to see any reason why the Blood Furies are preferable, unless it has something to do with costs and the time it takes to achieve them.

Oh and Mytical, I just noticed this:

And if your opponit has a tier sevens like titans then the dragons might even fall before they do serious damage. Where as titans are not likely to target your furies enabling them to do more damage!

You're falling into the same trap as DaemianLucifer did (and still is). The Black Dragons die quickly because they are targetted. The Blood Furies can still do damage because they aren't targetted. Why aren't they targetted, especially if your opponent has Titans? Simply, it's because they are less dangerous. Then consider the case where you don't have Black Dragons. What will the Titans' target be then?

It's just your opinion, but I think it is flawed.