Jump to content



Photo

The new vampire - a misconception?


  • Please log in to reply
7 replies to this topic

#1 Graf

Graf

    Member

  • Members
  • 304 posts

Posted 25 October 2011 - 07:05 AM

The Vampire's special ability seems to be a misconception: It will be an initiative 3 unit that replaces the initiative 2 unit and it will need routed enemy units. Thus, the only own unit that will be able to cause those routes will be the Skeleton Archer (and maybe a Necromancer). With other words: Most time there won't be any routed units before the Vampire's attack.
(Otherwise, Razorwings will become very essential for an Undead-Player who wants to focus on Vampires.)


Moreover, the Roc seems to be better than the Siege Towers at nearly all points. I don't think there will be much Siege Towers on the board anymore...



#2 Katsue

Katsue

    Member

  • Members
  • 93 posts

Posted 25 October 2011 - 07:07 AM

I think they needed to give the Vampire a fairly hefty drawback to compensate for the fact that it's 2 Life, whereas a Necromancer has 1 Life.



#3 sigmazero13

sigmazero13

    Rules Geek

  • Members
  • 1,928 posts

Posted 25 October 2011 - 08:48 AM

It's also a Rectangle unit (the only Waiqar rectangle), which will do more damage than the Necromancers.

I think one thing that can help, though, is if Waiqar gets a city with the Triangle icon, it may be worthwhile to recruit Razorwings to help them get some of those routed units in time to let the Vampires work their magic!  Also, the Latari will have to be careful when using their Leonx Riders with their Sorceresses (if the Latari are attacking), because since the Sorceress orbs go first, the Vampires could potentially pounce on any Leonx Riders that are used to kill the units the Sorceresses drive off.

 

The Rocs are definitely better than the Siege Towers, especially if you have lots of Tactics cards.  However, there are still times when you may want to chance that +2 strength for key battles!



#4 Steve-O

Steve-O

    Member

  • Members
  • 4,648 posts

Posted 26 October 2011 - 12:59 PM

sigmazero13 said:

The Rocs are definitely better than the Siege Towers, especially if you have lots of Tactics cards.  However, there are still times when you may want to chance that +2 strength for key battles!

I was of the impression that replacing old units with new ones was a decision you had to make before the game starts.  Is that not so?  As in, you replace your ability to build siege engines with the ability to build rocs.



#5 sigmazero13

sigmazero13

    Rules Geek

  • Members
  • 1,928 posts

Posted 26 October 2011 - 04:58 PM

 The first preview article says this:

"Each new unit has a base game counterpart that it can replace, at your discretion, whenever you execute a Recruit Order."

I interpret that to mean that you make the decision at the time you execute the Recruit, and even then my guess is the intent that it's "mix and match" with the replacements.

If it was for the entire game, nobody would take the Vampire - the Necromancer is the core of the Waiqar army.



#6 Steve-O

Steve-O

    Member

  • Members
  • 4,648 posts

Posted 27 October 2011 - 12:07 PM

sigmazero13 said:

If it was for the entire game, nobody would take the Vampire - the Necromancer is the core of the Waiqar army.

Indeed, I had been thinking the very same thing.

Well, that's much more powerful than I had thought, good to know.



#7 GreatOldOneHimself

GreatOldOneHimself

    Member

  • Members
  • 2 posts

Posted 27 October 2011 - 10:44 PM

You can recruit both of the units, the new recruits article is very specific on that point. Ex: "The Obscene is a bloated, disgusting abomination that gorges itself on the flesh of the fallen, its cannibalistic atrocities demoralizing all who look upon them. With an initiative rating of four, these bulbous warriors can be recruited as an alternative to the mighty Chaos Lords, but the most effective armies will include one of each."



#8 Latari

Latari

    Member

  • Members
  • 2 posts

Posted 31 October 2011 - 06:01 AM

GreatOldOneHimself said:

You can recruit both of the units, the new recruits article is very specific on that point. Ex: "The Obscene is a bloated, disgusting abomination that gorges itself on the flesh of the fallen, its cannibalistic atrocities demoralizing all who look upon them. With an initiative rating of four, these bulbous warriors can be recruited as an alternative to the mighty Chaos Lords, but the most effective armies will include one of each."

 

Good quote, there:) I don't see any of the new units making any of the old obsolete. As previously mentioned, the key to tactics in Runewars is adaptability. Players committed to a certain troop type or strategy will be handicapped when certain circumstances arise. Similarly, smart players will begin to pick up on redundant Recruit picks, etc., and respond to that threat. What these new troops offer is a chance to resist becoming predictable. As an Elf player (for example), the ability for Waiqar to pick Vamps over Necros will lead me to reconsider how many Archers I take into battle vs. Waiqar, where before it was simple. I skipped the Sorceress and went heavy with Archers/Warriors. 

Runewars is nothing if not complex, but that's why striving to master it forces us as players to adapt, adapt, then adapt again to what our opponents are doing. Though frustrating at times and hard to pin down, how refreshing is it to not know that "Waiqar will always recruit X,Y, and Z" so therefore "Latari will always recruit A, B, and C." 

Great questions and helpful responses, all. Thank you for what you guys are contributing.

 






© 2013 Fantasy Flight Publishing, Inc. Fantasy Flight Games and the FFG logo are ® of Fantasy Flight Publishing, Inc.  All rights reserved.
Privacy Policy | Terms of Use | Contact | User Support | Rules Questions | Help | RSS