Jump to content

what do you guys think about these unit classes


Recommended Posts

I have listed most of the current classes, i left out marauders because i dont see much use for an additional designation based on the units i saw which already had it and instead would make more sense classified as soldiers, feel free to explain why you disagree. Please let me know if there are any i'm missing.

Rank 1: soldier, archer

Rank 2: wizard, supporter, corruptor

Rank 3: dominator, destroyer

Rank 4: crusader

I've listed them in this order due to what i think is the approximate general power level of each. For example rank 2 classes are usually slightly to moderately more expensive per unit than soldiers or archers (rank 1 classes). Think 60-80 power at t1 for a wizard vs 50 for an archer. Similarly rank 3 are oftentimes double that of rank 1 for example sunderer or mountaineer. Granted such costs are also determined by other factors but such factors are often interrelated with the target class. Rank 4 units tend to cost double a rank 2 or rank 3 unit. 

Another aspect to differentiate the classes on a similar scale is spammability. Lower ranks tend to be used in higher quantities than higher ranks. For example dreadnought vs tempest, grinder vs batariel. 

 

Now for general class definitions:, i started with the old definitions from the original bf wiki then modified them after looking through all the units and then changed crusader to be a bit more intuitive. 

Soldier: basic melee combatant
Archer: Basic ranged combatant

Wizard: usually ranged combatant that uses magic, primarily used for additional ability/utility
Supporter: below average to very below average combat power but provides bonuses to allies
Corruptor: average to below average combat power but provides detriments to enemies

Dominator: Above average combat power
Destroyer: average or above average combat power and excels against structures; oftentimes has siege

Crusader: Significantly above average effect on force strength. Often similar to adding support/corruptor/wizard to another class,


Some notable comments:

1: marauder has very little purpose and should probably be removed if not repurposed

2: skyelves should be changed to wizard or possibly support to better define crusader

3: more units should be placed in crusader. for example batariel and harvester

4: the distinction between dominator and destroyer isnt always clear. It is obvious that for the most part units with siege were often destroyers but for ease of balancing and intuitiveness of the classes i dont think siege should be 100% required, just as not having it shouldnt prevent being a destroyer if the unit's use case is often buildings. Stuff like ashbone are right on the line, i would say most people dont use them to specifically counter structures but since they have siege they are classed as destroyers. Others are a bit farther over the line such as juggernaut who is significantly better at fighting structures instead of units when compared to alternative strategy for his color and tier. Even farther over the line are units like abyssal warder who is classified as a destroyer despite having no siege and no structure related ability, when you realize that avatar of frost and grinder are both classified as soldiers abyssal warders destroyer class seems obviously in error. 

5: magic is usually the determining factor in close cases between wizard and archer

6: satanael is a destroyer for no apparent reason and should instead be classed as a wizard

7: overlord should definitely be a dominator rather than a crusader, 

8: forest elder should be classified as supporter/corruptor

9: misclassification tends to be more common at higher tiers when units have more effects and the rank 1 classes arent used as much, a lot of misclassifications like 6, 7, and 8 can be found in the higher tiers
 

Edited by JarodDempsey
Dallarian likes this
Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree that the unit classifications aren't always justified.

 

I guess the Maurauder class is due to Thugs and Strikers having the Looter passive ability as the only cards in the game, but that alone shouln't justify a separate class. Same with Gladiator which would only be justified by the model of Amii Phantom, but even Gladiatrix is a Soldier...

Maurauder and Gladiator are ones I would just change into Soldier, since I don't believe there is any benefit in having them in a separate class.

 

The classification is better for buildings, but there are still Statue, Barrier and Hut which could be argued to also fit into other classes (at least Statue, Barrier on the other hand doesn't really fit anywhere else)

For spells it's even better and the classifications are justified.

 

Going back to unit classifications, while I am not entirely sure if ranking them in regards to their powerlevel is a good idea, I support the concept of clearifying what each class should symbolize and adjusting the existing cards accordingly. Here is just a general idea that came to mind, similar to yours.

 

- Soldier: gerneral melee focused unit

- Archer: general ranged focused unit

- Wizard: ability focused which can benefit own or disadvantage enemy entities

- Supporter: aids/gives benefits to friendly entities

- Corruptor: handicaps/gives disadvantages to enemy entities

- Dominator: excels at overpowering another (single) enemy entity

- Destroyer: excels at larger scale desctruction of enemy entities

- Crusader: able to influence the outcome of a large scale battle in a significant way with low numbers

 

Though the issue with this is that there are units that fit into multiple classifications, which makes a clear cut not always possible. On the other hand it could also be argued that the roles of Wizard and Crusader are already covered by other classes, so I am not sure if it wouldn't be better to assimilate the units into the other classes. Nonetheless there are some Units that don't really fit into their current class, so some changes might still be a good way in the right direction.

Classifying units correctly sure isn't always easy, but there might be others with better ideas. 🙂

JarodDempsey likes this
Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue. Terms of Use