Vamp route

[CLem]

So.. this is supposed to be the anti-SO route right? Can someone tell me how this is the case with the recent drop of the bonus to SO?

With SA firing first and dealing health hit on health based Vamps and then assassins firing before gargoyles...

Also Vamp used to be able to munch SO, Sorcs, etc...now it seems that it is pretty rubbish against them all.

Can someone tell me something what I failed to see in the vamp route!

 

[TaO]

They are vampires!
You have to kill them by smashing a stake into the heart!

And as SA's don't have one on them, they are unable to kill vamps..

 

[Turnip2k]

I'm not quite sure what the logic was behind this change to be honest, but its pretty obvious what it will do. SO now dominate the route, unless you go crazy on warewolf flak (which wont be overly effective due to high price).

Vamps as a unit are much more powerful when they get to fire, and will now obliterate TL's, RPG's and Rangers far more easily than before (due to costing far far less) - at the cost of dieing to SO very quickly. Sorcs have been a less tasty target since they were changed to mainly armour.

This change was a pretty poor one IMO - SO needed more enemies in this game, not TL's, RPG's and Rangers. Now SO only have PA and rangers to really fear, and rangers are going to have a crap time with so many routes pounding them before they can even fire, with the recent changes to TL's and vamps.

I suggest going PA to stem the horde of SO and vamp players this round!

 

[Cheese]

I'm not quite sure what the logic was behind this change to be honest, but its pretty obvious what it will do. SO now dominate the route, unless you go crazy on warewolf flak (which wont be overly effective due to high price).

Vamps as a unit are much more powerful when they get to fire, and will now obliterate TL's, RPG's and Rangers far more easily than before (due to costing far far less) - at the cost of dieing to SO very quickly. Sorcs have been a less tasty target since they were changed to mainly armour.

This change was a pretty poor one IMO - SO needed more enemies in this game, not TL's, RPG's and Rangers. Now SO only have PA and rangers to really fear, and rangers are going to have a crap time with so many routes pounding them before they can even fire, with the recent changes to TL's and vamps.

I suggest going PA to stem the horde of SO and vamp players this round!

WW cost 25k and are a very good flak unit.

 

[Ezekiel]

I'm not quite sure what the logic was behind this change to be honest, but its pretty obvious what it will do. SO now dominate the route, unless you go crazy on warewolf flak (which wont be overly effective due to high price).

Vamps as a unit are much more powerful when they get to fire, and will now obliterate TL's, RPG's and Rangers far more easily than before (due to costing far far less) - at the cost of dieing to SO very quickly. Sorcs have been a less tasty target since they were changed to mainly armour.

This change was a pretty poor one IMO - SO needed more enemies in this game, not TL's, RPG's and Rangers. Now SO only have PA and rangers to really fear, and rangers are going to have a crap time with so many routes pounding them before they can even fire, with the recent changes to TL's and vamps.

I suggest going PA to stem the horde of SO and vamp players this round!

WW cost 25k and are a very good flak unit.

I think he's referring to them before the switch with mummies.

 

[Turnip2k]

They would be if Vamps were more expensive and more powerful - right now, you will need too many of them to save your vamps, meanining the number of vamps you will actually have to fire will not do enough damage to the enemy. You will still get ploughed through by SA massers, but lets see for the BR's before jumping to any conclusions.

At any rate, TL's just got a serious headache, and the vamp route will not be attacking anyone with SA unless they have a terrible setup - one less route to bother SO, which isn't what was needed.

 

[Cheese]

They would be if Vamps were more expensive and more powerful - right now, you will need too many of them to save your vamps, meanining the number of vamps you will actually have to fire will not do enough damage to the enemy. You will still get ploughed through by SA massers, but lets see for the BR's before jumping to any conclusions.

At any rate, TL's just got a serious headache, and the vamp route will not be attacking anyone with SA unless they have a terrible setup - one less route to bother SO, which isn't what was needed.

I'll be honest with you, last round before the change on vamps vamps sucked against SA. The route works best if you don't just mass 1 type of unit... although having alot of WW is advantageous as they work well as a flak unit, and make more of themselves

Takes 2 pom to block 1 WW for example... so don't underestimate the unit

 

[tobapopalos]

I suggest changing the vamp to an armour-based (maybe *** or **** armour) health-killer firing the same init they do now.

That way the SAs won't kill many of them, so you have a chance to kill the SAs and assassins before the assassins fire and kill the vamps. So SA players have a chance of countering vamps by massing on 'sins, but the vamps can waste the SAs.

Not sure what effect this would have in the wider scheme of things, but it would at least give vamps a purpose.

 

[Cheese]

I suggest changing the vamp to an armour-based (maybe *** or **** armour) health-killer firing the same init they do now.

That way the SAs won't kill many of them, so you have a chance to kill the SAs and assassins before the assassins fire and kill the vamps. So SA players have a chance of countering vamps by massing on 'sins, but the vamps can waste the SAs.

Not sure what effect this would have in the wider scheme of things, but it would at least give vamps a purpose.

It really is just a support route like the other fantasy route. So I like the idea of actually giving the route the ability to kill things... But if vamps were armour based would you not be quite hard to attack if you had vamp:mummy ratio of 1?

 

[Turnip2k]

Vamps do have a purpose tobs - its to slaughter TL's, RPGs and rangers. It's just the wrong one IMO.

Problem is, there are plenty of other things that do that well, and not many that kill SO effectively, which is what vamps originally were meant to do.

We don't need another route that can butcher RPG's and rangers - there any plenty that can already do that perfectly well. We need a route that can attack SO effectively.

 

[tobapopalos]

I suggest changing the vamp to an armour-based (maybe *** or **** armour) health-killer firing the same init they do now.

That way the SAs won't kill many of them, so you have a chance to kill the SAs and assassins before the assassins fire and kill the vamps. So SA players have a chance of countering vamps by massing on 'sins, but the vamps can waste the SAs.

Not sure what effect this would have in the wider scheme of things, but it would at least give vamps a purpose.

It really is just a support route like the other fantasy route. So I like the idea of actually giving the route the ability to kill things... But if vamps were armour based would you not be quite hard to attack if you had vamp:mummy ratio of 1?

Well that is a choice the player can make. You could buy plenty of mummies to flak your vamps, but you would lose offensive capability. But that's no different from a thug player going 50/50 on TLs and jeeps, or an RPG buying lots of humvee flak. I don't see why making the route harder to kill is a bad thing

But as I said, this was just something which came to mind. I think it would solve the anti-SA issue, but might affect the way vamps interact with other routes as well.

 

[Iamsmart]

Vamps do have a purpose tobs - its to slaughter TL's, RPGs and rangers. It's just the wrong one IMO.

Problem is, there are plenty of other things that do that well, and not many that kill SO effectively, which is what vamps originally were meant to do.

We don't need another route that can butcher RPG's and rangers - there any plenty that can already do that perfectly well. We need a route that can attack SO effectively.

PoM,Strikers,rangers,robos,dragons can attack SO effectively

 

[CLem]

yeah, will see how the round develop for vamps, let's see if ww are that good of a flk to have!! Making vamps armour based is an interesting idea as well.

 

[Martin]

Vamps do have a purpose tobs - its to slaughter TL's, RPGs and rangers. It's just the wrong one IMO.

Problem is, there are plenty of other things that do that well, and not many that kill SO effectively, which is what vamps originally were meant to do.

We don't need another route that can butcher RPG's and rangers - there any plenty that can already do that perfectly well. We need a route that can attack SO effectively.

PoM,Strikers,rangers,robos,dragons can attack SO effectively

Strikers? Only if they are mass SAs...

The problem is with them routes that the SO player fires first, so all of them routes (bar PoM) have way more appealing targets.

I also don't really see the point in the Vamp change...

 

[Iamsmart]

Depends on your/there setup Martin, but yeah I guess I didn't really think when I said strikers.

I see the point - It made Vamps way better at everything else OTHER than killing SO, by making them like 30% cheaper.

 

[Turnip2k]

I see the point - It made Vamps way better at everything else OTHER than killing SO, by making them like 30% cheaper.

Exactly - SO got quite a large buff this round because of it mate. Anything that the vamp was good against before this change (bar SO) is going to get a complete pounding now - you have just as much damage, on all 3 ticks for 2/3 of the cost. With bugged insurance. This is going to be an annoying round for some!

As for SO killers - yeah, there are routes out there that will do it - but none that really specialise in it, aside from mass PA and mass rangers (and even rangers have better targets in some cases) [I don't count PoM since they kick ass quite universally for the price of no killing]. All the other routes will encounter quite serious losses in a fight with SO setups - compare that to rpgs / robo / rangers / sorcs / TL / vamps who will all die to several routes easily, barely scratching the attackers.

 

[Iamsmart]

Almost nobody goes vamp, its hardly a LARGE buff. SA already was quite good against vamp.

 

[Turnip2k]

Lets see how it turns out this round - now that it counters TL's brutally, should be much more popular.

 

[willymchilybily]

one related point didnt ww/mummies use to be undead?? now they say living, meaning pb's dont get thier bonus. so yeah seems like (with wws converting too) vamps is designed to really hurt tl. or so it seems

i wouldnt say a balanced vamp could easilly wipe a ranger though that armour base makes it hard for the vamps and gargoyles to easily kill a ranger. and rangers do shoot before ww's but now with two units converting (more if the zomb. are used and survive) you do have alot more conversions and far fewer straight kills. aka, only the mummies and gargs dont convert. looks like the route is to give minimal injuries to tl's and yeah does jack all against spec ops(sa/ass).

 

[Turnip2k]

WW difference betweeing fighting night and day is insane!!

[middle] 1,000,000 allied Werewolf attacked, killing 7,348,882 hostile staff.
[raised] 30,323 victims were infected, howling, as they became werewolves.

Note at the difference at day -

[range] 1,000,000 allied Werewolf attacked, killing 2,567,955 hostile staff.
[raised] 19,067 victims were infected, howling, as they became werewolves.

Shooting at the same stuff....

Weather or not you fight at night or day shouldnt make or break the unit - it should just give a little bit of a bonus. I would say improve conversion rate at night, and leave it at that - don't change the damage by a factor of 3! :/ Thats huge!