Units that make Zatikon not Fun

[mongolian]

I love Zatikon, but over the course of my life with it, I've come into some very heated debates and some very hated opponents all over the way a unit acted or just plainly because they didn't like the unit.  So some of the units hear fall into the category they are too strong/too weak, but I'm really mainly interested to hear which units people don't like seeing when on the battlefield.  Before I get to my list, I've said this before, but I'm a big fan of simplicity.  When Zatikon adds more units, all I hope is that units don't change the game balance aka just simple units.

UNITS I DON"T LIKE:
------------------------------------------
(1) Arch-Angel. It costs $550, so it's supposed to be a huge game changer.  I loathe when I play a random or consturcted game and this is totally a I win or lose type unit.  Why can't the angel by cheaper to cost like 300-400 and be weaker by either it's stats or a weaker special ability?  Again, it's too big a win/loser.

(2) Armory. In all theory, I should love this card's simpicity, but too often not it's too much a game breaker for random games.

(3) Conjurer.  Ok, it's just too powerful currently. If all it's deploy and range for things was 3 (meaning 6 range for all it's targeting), I'm not too sure I can appreciate him.  BUt anyhow 4+4=8 Range in the game, nothing in this game should be further then 6 range.

(4) Changeling. Ok, changeling would NOT be making this list at all if swap only occured on 5 spaces vs 6.  But with 6, it's so impossable to stop the swap.  I also loahte changeling in how powerful it is against the AI.

(5) Wizard. Again, just not a fan of things that influence the range aspect of the game.  I'm exicited to see units manipulate and give more ways to move around the battlefield, but not add MORE range to other units.  I guess the only part of wizard that really bothers me is just that fact it can swap positions with an ally, giving him HUGE range.  If when he swaps positions it was only valid for enemy units...

[Jezebeau]

I can agree on the changeling.  A unit as powerful as the changeling should require support or a good set-up play, as would be required if it were range 5.  As it is, it's completely self-sufficient at maximum range.

[Norsker]

I'm inclined to agree.

The Archangel would probably be better suited as a 350 piece, with its abilities 'severely' diminished(weakened aegis, doesn't return to castle, etc)

While we're reducing the changling's range, I'd like to see the same happen to the mimic.

I like the idea of the conjurer, but he tends to be very, very difficult to beat if you don't have quite a few inorganics.  A reduction of its deploy and summon range to 3 and the elimination of the portals' ability to suck in and stun its killer should balance the unit.

[JoeMaster]

same thing to mimic?  mimic is worthless next to changling as the enemy loses a unit as well as you gaining 1 (twice the unit difference) 
I personally like the wizard's flight, and don't see the unit swap happening very much.  It would be nice to see the wizard get a different ability altogether

[Norsker]

same thing to mimic?  mimic is worthless next to changling as the enemy loses a unit as well as you gaining 1 (twice the unit difference) 

It's not like the other player is forced to take and keep the changling- he can take his opponent's unit the very next turn.

The changling is a double edged sword in player vs. player games.  I've lost games because I swapped overzealously, and I've won games because my opponent made similar mistakes. 

The 150 point mimic, on the other hand, can become that 550 point dragon-and it's very hard to stop it from doing so.  And, unlike with the changling, you haven't just given your opponent the unit that may be your undoing.

[Tek777]

what do You thing about huge change in range damage?
for example damage lower with range
for example range 5 damage 5 means that in range 1 (near) unit will do 5 damage, in range 2 - 4 damage, in range 3 = 3 damage, in range 4 =2 damage, in range 5 = 1 damage?
or weaker change - damage lower every 2 squares of range => in range 1 and 2 = 5 damage, in range 3 or 4 = 4 damage, in range 5 = 3 damage ??

this will make this game less range... but will do every range unit weaker

[Chronic Logic - Josiah]

what do You thing about huge change in range damage?
for example damage lower with range
for example range 5 damage 5 means that in range 1 (near) unit will do 5 damage, in range 2 - 4 damage, in range 3 = 3 damage, in range 4 =2 damage, in range 5 = 1 damage?
or weaker change - damage lower every 2 squares of range => in range 1 and 2 = 5 damage, in range 3 or 4 = 4 damage, in range 5 = 3 damage ??

this will make this game less range... but will do every range unit weaker

That is an interesting idea but would require overhauling all the ranged units as they normally have less power then melee units already and this would weaken all of them.  It would also make the game more complicated for players to figure out what is going to happen when they act.

[Tek777]

to make game less complicated You can add 'hints' - for example if unit A is targetting unit B - it could display damage that will be dealt (3 or 1 etc, so players will not have to count all thos armors, effects etc)

[Lunaraia]

great ida but.. that kinda removes the chanse of an unit being saved in pvp due to people counting wrong ^^

[Kran]

What should be avoided is the empty lines on the battlefield that usually appear beetwen 2 top players armyes =D...

[Lunaraia]

Kran not all of us charges in head first and thinks later ^^ (this IS a joke btw)

[Norsker]

I'd like to add in assassin and confessor to this list.

My problem with these two units is that there is no real way to 'counter' them, and a well-dropped assassin can quickly turn the game against a player who had otherwise been playing better than his opponent.  Sure, you can maintain constant assassin paranoia and ensure that every unit has support that can knock off one, but I'm not sure this is reasonable to ask.  Even if I do maintain perfect spacing, there's nothing I can really do to stop an opponent from dropping an assassin to protect his army at it moves into 'kill position'.  In my opinion, this unit needs to be removed or redesigned.

The confessor would be fine, if it didn't register murders that occur before it's even on the field.   Sure, you can try to avoid ever using a low armor/HP unit to land a kill, but this imposes unreasonable strategic limitations.

[Lunaraia]

There is a direct counter to the confessor namely shieldbearer, but i get your point, take a look at some of my unit ideas and you will find that I ave acually made 2 units that focuses on countering abilities like that of the assassin and the confessor, the Soul Forger (I think that was the name I ended up with) and the Demonologist, 1 is in my main unit thread the other is in the black mage/cultist thread, check em out and tell me what ya think ^^

[Kran]

Agreed the confessor is a bit unbalanced, but the assasin is perfect. Some of the most balanced units in the game. About the Shield bearer, i dont think it can be cosidered a GREAT counter vs a confessor. A good counter is a druid! =0
About changeling i think its almost All-agreed that it needs 5 range.
The mimic is ok.
Confessor would be nice if it's attacks could make the attacked unit looses the murderer status. Then it could be cheaper.
@Lunaraia: I will ignore this =)
@Norsker: I can understand your point of view, but the assassin paranoia isn't needed, if you can count the price. If you think enemy hava an assassin, do not maintein any space that can be used by one. A small amout of range can change assassin's plans. =)
Kran

[Norsker]

@Norsker: I can understand your point of view, but the assassin paranoia isn't needed, if you can count the price. If you think enemy hava an assassin, do not maintein any space that can be used by one. A small amout of range can change assassin's plans. =)
Kran

Here's the problem, though-this doesn't help when the assassin is simply being used to cover, say, a channeler moving into position to kill everything in your army the next turn.  I used one yesterday to return a magus who I had used to hop forward and kill my opponent's most important unit-there was absolutely no way for my opponent to have blocked the move.  "Bunching" is frequently 'required' when you have to do a lot of blocking, or are yourself trying to charge a unit that just needs to die.  Even if you can kill the assassin, it typically gives your opponent the necessary window to put units in position to kill the units that were stunned.