Five Tribes Five Tribes

Forums

Search
Forums » BattleLore - English » Warrior - Above level 1 = "useless"?
Show: Today's Posts 
  
AuthorTopic
Sublett
Junior Member

Posts: 1
Registered:
October 2007
  Warrior - Above level 1 = "useless"? Thu, 18 October 2007 12:29
Hi.

This is my first post on this forum, and it's quite sad that it's a negative one, but ah well.. Smile

So I bought BattleLore this week, and I've been playing it quite a bit now. Gone through all the scenarios detailed in the core game quite a few times.

And currently, my biggest gripe with the game is the Warrior. I looked through the lore deck the other day and I could only find 2 (!) lore cards that is affected by the warrior's level. What the?
So I began to count each council's "level dependent cards" and here is the list I came up with:

Warrior - 2
Wizard - 4
Cleric - 7 (! But 3 of them are FF, RR and HR.. but still)
Rogue - 5

Judging by this list alone, I see NO reason to pick a level 3 warrior for example. Not even for the training grounds special. But what I DO see is a strong reason to pick a level 3 cleric.

Is there something that I've missed with the warrior level 3 vs cleric level 3, or is the game just severely unbalanced at that point?
      
ColtsFan76
Senior Member

User Pages
Posts: 3326
Registered:
February 2006
Re:Warrior - Above level 1 = "useless"? Thu, 18 October 2007 14:37
Your research is mostly correct. I think you will see in time that this will swing back as more Lore cards may be published. Also, when you get into CtA, I believe the Warrior's card is level dependent (though they aren't in front of me so I may have that mixed up with the commander).

Anyway, a Level 3 Warrior is a waste of resources in most cases. But don't look at it as a negative. Look at it as you can have a Level 1 warrior and save 2 "free" lore master levels to distribute elsewhere!
      
toddrew
Senior Member
Cadet

Posts: 830
Registered:
October 2006
Re:Warrior - Above level 1 = "useless"? Thu, 18 October 2007 14:57
Don't worry, soon your biggest gripe will be that the Cleric spells are severely unbalanced - unless you've already worked past that, usually that's the progression: Cleric Spells ruin the game (and some do not get past that one), why would anyone take a l3 Warrior, creatures are insanely hard to destroy/creatures are insanely hard to keep on the board,...

Sorry, being a little facetious there Very Happy, but, agree or disagree, here are my reasons for taking a level 3 Warrior:

Berserk and Cry Havoc! are extremely devestating cards at l3 (in fact, if one draws Cry Havoc! one may come to the realization [and mistakenly so] that one should always take a level 3 Warrior Laughing ). Granted the chances of drawing one of those is low compared to taking a different l3 lore master and drawing one of their level dependent cards, but you will find throughout the game that one of the checks and balances is risk/reward. On the whole, the Warrior is a "safe" lore master to take, in that most of the lore cards are low to moderately priced and useful in many situations. Where the risk comes in is in using war council resources to take a level 3 Warrior in the hopes of being able to use those two cards during the game.

Training Camp is a useful lore master landmark. Aside from turning blue troops red (or upgrading ranged units, if that sorta thing is allowed: red arbalestiers, anyone?), it is also helpful in shoring up weak spots/blocking line of sight along one's lines at the beginning of the game (especially useful in CTA when not going first).

This reason applies to all lore masters: Choosing any level 3 lore master is a good idea as it allows for the flexibility of beginning the game with three cards to chose from and a jumpstart of 3 lore to play them with. A subtle advantage more suited to the Warrior is that more of the Warrior's cards are low cost cards (3 or less lore), so an early foothold may be gained (especially with cards like strength and take aim in conjunction with Leadership, Mounted Charge, or Darken the Skies). Also, being able to carry four lore cards during the game is also a huge advantage in the flexibility department. Not only allows one many cards to choose from, but also allows one to hoard cards that are killers if in the opponent's hands (i.e. Cry Havoc! if opponent has a l3 Warrior Wink ).

Finally (for this post anyway, I'm sure there are now and will come later more reasons to choose a l3 Warrior), in Call to Arms, the King's Allies specialist card is boffo at level 3: 2 extra mounted unit figures. May not sound game changing, but it is. And that's without using it with a level 3 Wizard's Illusionary Troops and ending up with three red banner mounted units with 4 figures each! EDIT: or two red banner mounted units with 5 figures each!! (Though, in the risk/reward department, only 3 cc's with which to work Wink - and in that case, maybe going with the 2 of 5 is the better choice... ).

Oops, I misled: One more reason: Variety is the spice of life. Transitively, as life encompasses BattleLore (though from this post one could reasonably conclude that they are on even holding with me Very Happy ), variety is the spice of BattleLore.

EDIT: See, you people should be on Vassal playing BL with me so you don't have to be subjected to these marathon posts Wink I mean, three winks, two cheshire grins, and belly laugh is a bit much in the smiley department...

[Updated on: Thu, 18 October 2007 15:54]

      
Johnny Awesome
Junior Member

User Pages
Posts: 28
Registered:
October 2006
Re:Warrior - Above level 1 = "useless"? Thu, 18 October 2007 16:00
The other thing Todd forgot to mention is that because everyone think you get most of the benefit from a level 1 warrior, a lot of people put one level in warrior, which means when you take a level 3 warrior there are 14 warrior cards in the deck. Often level 3 clerics only have 8 cards to work with.
      
Vasilis
Member

Posts: 36
Registered:
December 2006
Re:Warrior - Above level 1 = "useless"? Thu, 18 October 2007 16:47
toddrew wrote on Thu, 18 October 2007 15:57

Don't worry, soon your biggest gripe will be that the Cleric spells are severely unbalanced - unless you've already worked past that, usually that's the progression: Cleric Spells ruin the game (and some do not get past that one), why would anyone take a l3 Warrior, creatures are insanely hard to destroy/creatures are insanely hard to keep on the board,...


LOL! Good one!!!

(And what makes this comment even funnier is that it's absolutely true!!!)

By the way, my biggest gripe right now with the game is the berserk tactics employed by the player who needs just 1 banner to win the game. It's totally unrealistic. So we have a house rule that in order for a player to win he must do so with a 2 banner difference after a player reaches the victory condition.

Hmmm... maybe this needs a new thread to discuss... Anyone?
      
toddrew
Senior Member
Cadet

Posts: 830
Registered:
October 2006
Re:Warrior - Above level 1 = "useless"? Thu, 18 October 2007 18:43
Johnny Awesome wrote on Thu, 18 October 2007 08:00

The other thing Todd forgot to mention is that because everyone think you get most of the benefit from a level 1 warrior, a lot of people put one level in warrior, which means when you take a level 3 warrior there are 14 warrior cards in the deck. Often level 3 clerics only have 8 cards to work with.


Very good point that I left out to be kind to readers, but yeah, often times players take l1 warriors, and taking l3 where opponent has l1 usually bodes well for one. I rarely take a cleric just to nerf those who take an l2 or 3 as that is the most level dependent(ant?) lore master.
      
toddrew
Senior Member
Cadet

Posts: 830
Registered:
October 2006
Re:Warrior - Above level 1 = "useless"? Fri, 19 October 2007 01:39
Vasilis wrote on Thu, 18 October 2007 08:47

By the way, my biggest gripe right now with the game is the berserk tactics employed by the player who needs just 1 banner to win the game. It's totally unrealistic. So we have a house rule that in order for a player to win he must do so with a 2 banner difference after a player reaches the victory condition.


I might be misconstruing what you mean, but are you poopooing the use of the lore card berserk to end a game, or the tactic of attacking without abandon towards the end of a game in an effort to reach the required # of banners for victory?

Either way I don't see the problem - each player knows aforehand how many banners are needed and plays out their hand accordingly. I do know that at first the games could end rather abruptly as combos like mounted charge and enchanted mass might could take out 4 or more units.

Winning by 1 banner can be viewed as "realistic" (as much as anything else in this game Smile ) as the tipping point at which the army's spirit is broken. If you don't like that, then by all means, winning by two may be the rule, but games may drag at the end as both sides become weaker.

Quote:

Hmmm... maybe this needs a new thread to discuss... Anyone?
And I'll leave that to someone else, as I just follow the thread as it weaves... Smile

[Updated on: Fri, 19 October 2007 01:42]

      
ColtsFan76
Senior Member

User Pages
Posts: 3326
Registered:
February 2006
Re:Warrior - Above level 1 = "useless"? Fri, 19 October 2007 05:55
toddrew wrote on Thu, 18 October 2007 11:43

Johnny Awesome wrote on Thu, 18 October 2007 08:00

The other thing Todd forgot to mention is that because everyone think you get most of the benefit from a level 1 warrior, a lot of people put one level in warrior, which means when you take a level 3 warrior there are 14 warrior cards in the deck. Often level 3 clerics only have 8 cards to work with.


Very good point that I left out to be kind to readers, but yeah, often times players take l1 warriors, and taking l3 where opponent has l1 usually bodes well for one. I rarely take a cleric just to nerf those who take an l2 or 3 as that is the most level dependent(ant?) lore master.


I am not sure this is a valid argument. It actually plays into the thought that a Level 1 Warrior is OK. The number of cards in the deck is not Level dependent so if both sides have a Level 1 warrior, you still get 14 Warrior cards. And as pointed out by the OP, most of the Warrior cards aren't level dependent so you are each helped out equally.
      
toddrew
Senior Member
Cadet

Posts: 830
Registered:
October 2006
Re:Warrior - Above level 1 = "useless"? Fri, 19 October 2007 06:29
But, Cry Havoc! is an expensive way to get the extra hit on lore at l1, and a game ender under the right circumstances at l3 (mounted charge, forward, advance, etc.). Berserk is a nice card at l1, but if judiciously played at l3, almost guarantees two vp (beware of opponent's lore plays though: slow/parry, backstab, ambush/first strike, evade/scatter are all good counter-plays). Not touting this as a high probability reason to go with L3 warrior, but definitely one that can pay off in a big way. Having 14 of the 15 cards in the deck gives a very high probability that both cards are present, and guarantees that one of them is. Having a level 3 lore master gives one at worst even odds of drawing those cards, and if opponent does not chose a level 3 lore master, that tilts the odds more in one's favor of being able to draw one or both of them.

Due to there being fewer level dependent cards in the warrior deck, of course the advantage of having a l3 warrior to an opponent's l1 isn't as great as with the other lore masters, but it is still an edge.

EDIT: I thought of a better way to voice this aspect as a "valid" argument (let's see if written it is actually a better way Laughing ): Since the advantage of having a level 3 warrior while an opponent has a level 1 warrior is the smallest such advantage in relation to the other lore masters (maybe even including the commander in this instance, for once Wink ), it is more likely that an opponent will, in fact, choose a level one warrior in the face of that knowledge, and therefore more likely that such an advantage will be realized with the warrior than for the other lore masters.

Nope, just as clunky Very Happy

[Updated on: Fri, 19 October 2007 13:45]

      
    
Previous Topic:lick my decals off baby
Next Topic:Can ranged units move when ordered using "Darken the Skies"?
Goto Forum: