Min-maxing is an important part of any testing, especially in the face of a game that is fun and thematic. You have to step back from what is cool and fun and how it is "supposed" to be played and see how far the game bends. There is no personal attack made against the developers, there is only the project, and code has no ego. I believe that three warriors are simply the best party. (You can see high level cards in the MP starter pack store in addition to your campaign experiences to follow along.) The Cleric's problem is that heals are smaller than attacks. In DnD 4e, if you had 32 hp, you'd be getting hit for 10 and healed for 15. And the cleric would still get to attack. Here, it's hit for 6 and heal for 4, and it cost you a card (half or all of your cleric's turn). Every heal card drawn is just a bad idea. The Wizard's problem is they have half the hitpoints of a warrior, and attacks can't miss. (I had thought originally that it was spells being range 2 and allies not blocking LOS, but it looks like higher level spells get rid of the range 2 limitation.) It's the can't miss that is the important part. Consider the raw hitpoints on the table. (Sure, the wizard is shooting from 6, but that just means he'll be picked last. Someone has to be.) As each fighter falls in 6-8 hits (average damage with blocks and armor added), it becomes the wizard's turn and he lasts for 2. The wizard doesn't do more damage per round to make up for his shortfall; he just gets an extra turn or three where the baddies are out of range. If there are neat things that clerics and wizards can do, then yay (Mass Frenzy!). But consider: couldn't a fighter have done everything else better?
Not in beta, but I think already I can see multiple things to consider beyond min/maxing health and damage. Just as something to consider... Perhaps you run 3 wizards and you find a way to maximize their push spells. You may do minimal damage, but the fighters may never make it to range. If they only get 1 move card per turn and the wizard gets at least two push spells and 1 move, you may never catch them. Depending on terrain and luck of the draw this may hold far from true and I could be totally off mark, but i think much more things, such as terrain and positioning have to be considered besides pure damage. Another possibility is placing your characters in single file position down a hallway with a priest/priest/figher party. You block with a fighter in front and give him constant heals from the back. If you yourself have 3 fighters, eventually the single fighter with double untouchable support will wear you down. The fighter in front will only have 4 cards max to attack with, one of them being a move. That assumes you didn't draw extra move cards or pure armor draw and can do nothing offensive that turn without spending two rounds to switch out the characters position. Not to mention once those cards have expired, the priests may have many ways to draw extra cards, making the amount of heal they can pull off more than 1 heal per 1 attack. Like I said, I am not in the beta yet and these ideas are based on pure assumption and basic strategies commonly used in other RPG's. I think in a purely open table where the two teams run straight at each other the fighters would win out, but add in terrain damage spells, draw card spells, and spells that push move others about the table, pure damage spells will be hard pressed.
Well, as for wizards, it's not uncommon for them to go the entire encounter without ever being hit. The simple fact that they can routinely attack from afar means that they can stay out of melee range. Warriors and priests can both act as walls and keep any enemies far away from your relatively squishy wizard while he bombards them with attacks that outright avoid some rather nasty anti-melee defenses. They also get access to many more status-effect type cards and devastating terrain-altering cards than do their melee-centric counterparts. So far, each of my wizards have been responsible for snatching victory from the jaws of defeat many times more than all of my warriors and priests combined. Priests gain access to significantly more card draw more easily than other character types, which they can apply to themselves or their allies. They have ways of stripping cards from their enemies and also ways of denying their enemies from taking action at all. Early on healing is... a bit pathetic, granted, but there are very potent healing cards later on that can keep up with many attacks. All-warrior is certainly a legitimate way to fight, but I'm not convinced that it is always the superior option.
This thread is great. We're really hoping to put this sort of thing to the test in beta, so please bring your warrior party into multiplayer so we can see how it plays out.
The problem here is that you assume more damage and hp > better if that was the truth you would never win a single map as mobs generally have more hp and damage then you do. Also warriors taking 6-8 hits is living in dream land as early as lvl 4 there are mobs that can do more then 1 attack per turn and still two shot a warrior through some armor. Then again don't think I'm saying warriors are useless i think i have one of if not the highest damage card in the beta on my warrior x 4 and i can actually 1 hit a lot of the later mobs with a single 34 damage attack. To sum up, i would never consider a warrior over my wizard but i might consider one over my cleric possibly.
And Wizard has alot of Utility too. Like Maze , Acid , Lava and many other different spells which control the flow of battle more than a Warrior does with hit it until it dies.
Isn't a kiting strategy pretty draw-dependent, though? It's not like in other games where you can reliably move or slow. I haven't played yet, so I'm curious if players who have think kiting is a legitimate strategy.
Kiting can be an efficient strategy, but only really against specific opponents. There have been some that were just too strong to face head to head, and you have to kinda play keep away from, but there are also some that can keep up with you no problem. The problem comes when they have people that are making them draw more cards, or blocking you in with acid.. etc.. there are lots of ways to prevent it. My Fav strategy right now is the burn and run. Set em on fire with all different types of burn damage, and just stay way from them if ya can. I use push backs, and terrain (Like Acid/Lava/Smoke/Walls) to keep them at bay while my burning just kills em. Though it doesn't "Always" work, as I said above sometimes it can be tough to keep away, but having Elf characters helps. Though I do have an all Warrior party.. And it is really fun. I would say they are the easiest of the "All the same type" parties, but if you really want to do the best you can ya have to mix it up with different types. But this is just IMO I am sure everyone has a different play style. Edit: I was curious, but is there anyone that has luck with Bashing (Or other melee attacks that push back an enemy)? Since the same type move at the same time, I have had problems with it. They all move at once so they don't really leave a spot open behind the guy, so the bash is pretty much useless. I am not saying all maps are like this (there are some with just a few people in them, and it seems alright there most the time), but if there are 3-4 of the same people then it just doesn't seem to be a decent card.
Bashing really comes into its own in multi-player. In general, we have to grade cards for multi-player and that means that there are some cards that are over or under graded for single-player.
Don't take this the wrong way, I know why its there, but I think the thing I dislike the most in single player is that they all move at once. If they all moved like the players did (one at a time per turn) then not only would something like this be useful, but it would even things out so the computer doesn't get such a huge move bonus. Imagine in multiplayer if one of the players could move all their units whenever they played a move card, and the other couldn't? Now I know the computer isn't as smart as a person, but the point is still true.. Like the game, and everything =) Just saying out of all the things in it, this is just one of the things I do dislike.
Actually since that would mean he got a move card for every unit that would make it almost impossible to pin anything ranged down.
Easiest all-same party: priests. Can be set up as melee monsters similar to warriors, card draw machines, healers, or cursers/buffers. Easily the most versatile class. If you don't like using your priest to heal, experiment with setting it up to maximize inspiration, and favor altruism for the skill... Like this: Azgotkazak Level 19 Dwarf Priest Aureate MaceBlessed ClubInspiring Chain ShirtParrying BucklerSoft BootsAmulet Of InspirationAmulet Of InspirationAmulet Of InspirationCharging BattlerAltruismTotals 13 inspiration cards, 2 heals(blessed club, because ran out of talents), and a dwarven battle cry(all dwarves draw a card), and 3 altruisms, to get the card draws really going.
The reason we added this group move feature was that otherwise groups of monsters aren't very scary and don't behave in a very monster-like fashion. If you have 5 Kobolds in a group, the most efficient strategy for the AI is to push one forward and have the others hang back. It just looks weird and doesn't feel right. Also, you have to put crazy numbers of Move cards in their decks.
The only problem with all priest is if the other people have armor, or block. Those two things will stop ya more often then not. But a Priest made for drawing cards is awesome. I especially like to put my move team X spaces on them. But right now I am trying Fighter and 2 Mages.. It seems to be going well when I have one mage for traps, and the other one stealing cards from them. Of course the fighter is set up to do what a fighter does heh (Horned Plates + All Out Attack = dead lol) Note magic blocking or reflecting hurts.. Hate those guys lol I figured it had to do with the Teams and all.. I guess it is just something you have to get use to, just makes it tough to hit with Bash/Traps/etc. You have to wait till all of them have used all the moves they have other then just worrying about the one your trying to trap. But I guess in a way.. that is the point =)
I... I didn't get flamed. I stayed off the forum since I posted this because I thought, well... you know how forums can get when people disagree. I am counting the days until I can give this game all my money. Anyway, the biggest point I was totally missing was what Jon the Mushroom Man said about MP. I have only, and only ever intend to, play the single player. The AI doesn't kite perfectly like a real person would. I can herd those sprites in to a corner and reap them, but an MP elf party would never get hit. So thanks for that perspective. My CCG history makes me completely disregard Inspiration. It is costing you a card to draw a card. That's not even breaking even since you are losing a turn. But Altruism makes it interesting. All the defense of clerics I've seen mentions that card. (50% to draw when casting a spell on a friend, Trait.) Imma make a post about that separately, so thanks for the extra data point. But the warrior-wall argument still feels like defending the way it is "supposed" to be played. That setup is traditional. In DnD, my fighter can punch one guy and keep a bunch from moving while the wizard incinerates everybody. I control movement and have more health, he is vulnerable and does more damage. But here, the wizards don't do more damage. They're just more vulnerable, and do different damage. Fighters even get multiple-target powers way before wizards. Chop and Slicer is 6 & 6. For high damage, Fiery Stab is 6+3+3. The wizard can do his fancy tricks in safety, but when the lower party dps means the fighters are eventually eaten he'll just be a refreshing dessert. I totally switched to fighter-fighter-wizard to actually play though because wizards are totally fun. Just needed to remake him as a dwarf. I have 6 more hitpoints and am way more handsome.
