Quote:
Originally Posted by Raider30
Personally I think you have to evaluate a unit, generally speaking, on its own. I mean what good does it do to evaluate a unit based on +1 defense that it *might* have during a battle? What about Raelin with +2 defense? Are you now going do more ranks based on that?
Suffice to say that adding defense to pretty much most units makes them more effective than they were but what does that really prove?
|
It lets you know how good it is in its best builds. This matters because Raelin is good for everything (even 4th Mass) but much more important for some builds than others. This is what OEA1 was talking about in his brief voice-over that replaced the discussion in the podcast.
For something like Knights of Weston, Raelin doesn't really help much - they work much better relying on their high base defense, and being able to swarm the map without being tethered to Raelin. In some extremely defensive matchups Raelin will help, but in most matchups it's not as significant. If given the choice between 4 squads and Raelin, or 5 squads, 5 squads is usually better. Of course, they're "A" already, but that's really not at all because of the presence of Raelin.
By contrast, Elf Wizards get an enormous benefit from having Raelin, to the point that the army would have to be at least one and maybe two ranks lower if you're not willing to consider how strong the Raelin-inclusive army is.
Again, it's just a question of the approach. I think it's more useful to ask "how valuable is the unit in its best army" than "how valuable is the unit on its own", because it tells people more about how competitive that unit truly is in tournament play.