Best level 4 unit

[Wolfsburg]

Mind passing me the maps? I don't feel like fiddling with the map editor (which somehow seems extremely hard to use, compared to the previous version) but I'm fairly sure the Imperial Griffins can win a straight duel.

Sorry for the late response Bane, I was out for a couple of days, there you go: this is my unit-testing map http://www.sendspace.com/file/ubhjna

And by the way, I plain SUCK at map editing, so this is pure cannon fodder. Please dont laugh at my pathetic attempt to create a scenario.

(Btw. I have further tested the IG X VL Duel in the past few days, and the results kept pointing vamps as the winners in almost every game. Factors that seemed to determine the scarce IG victories was: 1 - several activations of high morale in the same combat, 2 - Near to maximum damage in the first blow).

Let me know what kind of results you got. Cheers,
W.

[blizzardboy]

I'm so off base with everybody else on tier 4 and 5. I can understand where people are coming from with vampires, but how can you see griffins or grim raiders as better than archmages or druids or succubi or vampires? All four of those units are immensely important with creeping as well as devastating in player combat. Grim raiders and griffins are nice an all, but gesh. I wouldn't put either of them above the previous 4 units.

I'm amazed griffin got 7 votes.

[John.Galt]

Sigh... if only all tiers of creature were as balanced as tier 4... then we wouldn't have things like Arcane Archers.

[PhoenixReborn]

Sigh... if only all tiers of creature were as balanced as tier 4... then we wouldn't have things like Arcane Archers.

Sure arcane archers hit too hard. I admit they're imbalanced. But it's not like there are no counters. They have shitty hit points and confusion makes them useless.

[Asheera]

If you'll do some maths, you'll see that Succubi are very underpowered (they have crappy Att&Def for a tier 4, very low hit points and not-so-excellent damage)

[PhoenixReborn]

you'll see that Succubi are very underpowered

They are tough as a neutral sometimes but they are not influential in the inferno army in a final fight.

[KiOwA]

you'll see that Succubi are very underpowered

They are tough as a neutral sometimes but they are not influential in the inferno army in a final fight.

Their chain shot ability makes coming out of a fight without any casualties hard. I usually only fight them when I can overcome them with just one stack.

Haven't had the pleasure of fighting Succubi Seducers, though...

[Banedon]

Sorry for the late response Bane, I was out for a couple of days, there you go: this is my unit-testing map http://www.sendspace.com/file/ubhjna

And by the way, I plain SUCK at map editing, so this is pure cannon fodder. Please dont laugh at my pathetic attempt to create a scenario.

(Btw. I have further tested the IG X VL Duel in the past few days, and the results kept pointing vamps as the winners in almost every game. Factors that seemed to determine the scarce IG victories was: 1 - several activations of high morale in the same combat, 2 - Near to maximum damage in the first blow).

Let me know what kind of results you got. Cheers,
W.

I tested 25 Imperial Griffins vs. 25 Vampire Lords; the Vampire Lords win with the last Vampire Lord killing the last Imperial Griffin. Heroes involved had 0 attack 0 defense 0 luck 0 morale, and did not move.

Three things should be stated however ...

1. The Imperial Griffins would have won if, at that final stage of the duel, they Battle Dived and the hero did the finishing shot.
2. I think when heroes are factored in the Imperial Griffins get significantly stronger. Under Leadership + Retribution + Luck + Cleansing, as you might expect on a Might-based hero, they're not going to lose; even if the heroes did nothing other than attack each round I think the Imperial Griffins would gain a lot just from the last few Battle Dives / hits.
3. A 1v1 fight isn't meaningless when it comes to comparing creatures, but this 1v1 fight also plays right into the Vampire Lords' strengths: they have no retaliation (a huge advantage in 1v1) and life drain (another large advantage when you cannot mass sufficient firepower against them).

Here's an alternative situation when the Imperial Griffins would clearly be favoured. You have 25 Imperial Griffins / Vampire Lords against 1000 Master Hunters. Which unit kills more of the Master Hunters? Here the Griffins win effortlessly. Even with less ridiculous numbers, the Imperial Griffins would be priveleged; this is their area of strength after all.

[Metathron]

The Vampires and Griffins both have two upgrades, you know.

[Asheera]

I agree here, the other vampire upgrade is a lot more powerful than the Vampire Lord. Torpor is simply too strong (triggers too much)

But Imperial Griffin is also a lot stronger versus an entire enemy army than against a Vampire stack. The Battle Dive is very powerful against enemy archers.

[Metathron]

After 3.1 Torpor does trigger a whole lot and it definitely makes the vampire princes a better pick than the lords, which wasn't the case before IMO (they were more or less equal).

And you mean the Battle Griffin is stronger against a whole army? I guess it should make sense, since they can hit creatures on four tiles, but to me it doesn't seem to - the Imperial Griffin feels stronger even then. Bottom line, I prefer damage to be concentrated, which is why I think the Imperials are better by leaps and bounds, and why I think chain lightning is one of the worst spells relative to level.

[Asheera]

No I meant the Imperials, and with "whole army" I meant that enemy shooters are also included, not that these Griffins are good at dealing "mass" damage

Battle Griffin's special is great as well, but too bad it has 10 Initiative (and that's what makes it a lot worse than the other Griffin IMO)

[John.Galt]

I think chain lightning is one of the worst spells relative to level.

I hate it when you people hate on destructive magic :-(.

Chain lightning is my favorite spell - channeling, imbue arrow, rain of arrows = 6k aoe damage. =D

[Asheera]

Well I have to agree that Chain Lightning sucks though (without Imbue Arrow that is)

[Metathron]

No one is "hating" on destructive magic, just on this one spell.

[John.Galt]

Chain lightning is one of the best for Sylvan - Imbuing implosion deals so much damage that a lot of it is wasted - chain lightning destroys their entire army.

[Asheera]

But it can hit your own creatures as well, and with Rain of Arrows you can't be sure what targets will hit since it will be pretty chaotic

[Lord Lakely]

Sorrow is great too, if you have Dark Magic. My Fav Combo is Rain of Arrows + Mass Decay or Vulnerability. Dark Works Exceptionally well with Rangers, so does light.. but why is this in this thread?

[Asheera]

I think it started from the Shaman's Chain Lightning spell

[Lord Lakely]

I think it started from the Shaman's Chain Lightning spell

Sky Daughter + Refined Mana Combo ftw!!!!