Smoother normal game play - warrior, paladin, or mage

[Zechnophobe]

Originally Posted by ckdamascus

I've been trying to find a reason to try out the warrior or paladin class, as I have only played on impossible mage.

One thing that has really bugged me about the mage is the mana regeneration after a battle. Sure sure, when I can easily wreck the enemy team to transmute, wait for concentration, and drop the mana accelerator.

But, it just seems really tedious to extend battles JUST to regenerate another round of points, especially if the enemy is weak enough not to generate a lot of rage.

Maybe I am overreacting since I've just finished undoing that pain of skull... twice in too short a time frame.

I've wondered, if I go with a warrior class, can I literally just do battle after battle? Yeah, there might be some of that boring resurrection crap (gosh, I really hate doing that and I wonder if anyone has a balanced team that doesn't rely on phantom paladins and inquisitors).

I'm just sort of sick of fighting, extending, waiting for mana to regen.

I am also sick of over-micro management of spells. There seems like so many powerful items for damage (yet, everyone says defense is key, bleh), yet how come there isn't really a lot of pure damage armies besides black knights?

And, I'm not too keen on the "let's go super buff royal griffin" team. I feel like inquisitors and archmages are like dead weight liabilities after they have used their buffs. Just more units to resurrect and/or protect.

The quick math says that having a really high attack rating might not buff as much as say buffing criticals, in which case, the warrior's advantage is only more leadership.

Anyone have a saved game of an impossible warrior that has smoothly crushed everything? I say smoothly as in, NO extending battles significantly (wasting 5 rounds just to rebuild mana/regen/resurrect is NOT smooth).

Boss battles must be smoothly done. I mean, 20-30 turns max. None of this 64 turns of very tedious stuff, like calm rage, phantom, resurrect. Or 10 rounds of eviln.

No waiting for rage to dissipate or mana to regen. I figured a warrior could just end with max rage, mana accelerate first thing next battle, and continue his rampage.

Any thoughts?

Dragons + Pet Dragon = Awesome sauce. This is how I play Warrior (and Paladin to a lesser extent). Did a no loss warrior run with this, and did not spend wasted extra time rezzing units at end of combat. Target + time back + army that absolutely dishes out the damage was more than enough in almost every encounter. Get lots of crit gear, focus on rage and pet dragon building skills.

I did end up having to use a solo bone dragon stack to kill Ktahu and Baal however. If you want No Loss against those two it requires some pretty specific combat choices.

[N3MES1S]

U can do more "battle after battle" with warrior thatn with mage. Instead of mana, with warrior u can raise the rage, and the bloodthirst skill, i finished the game on impossible with warrior 3 or 4 times, and it is eeeasier than with mage. And if u play with all level 4-5 units (like i did) u can just kill em all without being touch. Just cast fear, and see how they die one after another xD. (logically fear only is not enough, but playing with level 4-5 units its more easy).

[loreangelicus]

Originally Posted by N3MES1S

U can do more "battle after battle" with warrior thatn with mage. Instead of mana, with warrior u can raise the rage, and the bloodthirst skill, i finished the game on impossible with warrior 3 or 4 times, and it is eeeasier than with mage. And if u play with all level 4-5 units (like i did) u can just kill em all without being touch. Just cast fear, and see how they die one after another xD. (logically fear only is not enough, but playing with level 4-5 units its more easy).

Hi N3MES1S, I have always wondered how a level 4-5 only army fares against mass-attacking bosses, namely Zilgadis/K'Tahu/Baal. Could you tell me your experience with regards to these bosses (ie. level you fought them, how many turns to end the battle, any losses, what units you used)?

I'm asking this because against other enemies, be they regular enemies or hero-enhanced ones, I think one is spoiled with a bunch of tactics that work towards no-loss; it seems it is only the boss fights against the top 3 bosses that require superior tactics.

[ckdamascus]

It is funny you should mention that, lore. My previous impossible mage tries consisted of the Unholy Rainbow Dragon Force (red, black, green, bone) and demonologists.

With the proper tactics, can beat the normal stuff, but the bosses, eek, forget about it.

Well, maybe if I had the right resist gear...

[Zechnophobe]

Originally Posted by loreangelicus

Hi N3MES1S, I have always wondered how a level 4-5 only army fares against mass-attacking bosses, namely Zilgadis/K'Tahu/Baal. Could you tell me your experience with regards to these bosses (ie. level you fought them, how many turns to end the battle, any losses, what units you used)?

I'm asking this because against other enemies, be they regular enemies or hero-enhanced ones, I think one is spoiled with a bunch of tactics that work towards no-loss; it seems it is only the boss fights against the top 3 bosses that require superior tactics.

Well, I don't really agree there. Pretty much each boss is defeated by stoneskin + Eviln. Or RepairDroid-RepairDroid.

The real difference between bosses and non bosses, is that your strategies for bosses MUST revolve around resurrecting your troops (especially the final three) because you simply can't keep them completely intact otherwise.

My experience is that Zilgadis can be beaten without massive army change (just need high resist magic gear). Ktahu and Baal though, require a different formation for zero loss, or slight modification for minor losses.

[loreangelicus]

Originally Posted by Zechnophobe

Well, I don't really agree there. Pretty much each boss is defeated by stoneskin + Eviln. Or RepairDroid-RepairDroid.

The real difference between bosses and non bosses, is that your strategies for bosses MUST revolve around resurrecting your troops (especially the final three) because you simply can't keep them completely intact otherwise.

My experience is that Zilgadis can be beaten without massive army change (just need high resist magic gear). Ktahu and Baal though, require a different formation for zero loss, or slight modification for minor losses.

Hmmm... a matter of terminology then? I consider a tactic superior if it flexible enough to work against most if not all of the enemies in the game to hand you either a quick or no-loss victory, moreso if it gives you both. And I would rank these criteria in this order:

1) flexibilty (it is of prime importance that it works against all enemy encounters)
2) no-loss (keeping your army intact without re-supplying)
3) speed (battles should be decisive and quick)

What do you consider as a superior tactic?

[Zechnophobe]

I would consider a superior tactic the average of those things across all battles you fight.

Black-knight armies take a long time to finish off an opponent, so do repair-droids. They are flexible (due to being a resurrection strategy) but not horribly fast. Yes, in the three hardest battles, they remain effective. But I don't really consider it superior when it is so slow every other fight.

[ckdamascus]

Please don't remind me of the horror of dual droid stacks with cross healing against physical resistant enemies....

But, thanks for pointing it out, since I am not quite sure what is "fast" and what is not. Everyone has different standards.

I thought black knights were fast in killing (I mean, if you teleport them to the target) due to their Rising Fury super critical hits?