What Makes a Unit "Bad"

[Tai-Pan]

There's no such thing as a bad unit, only bad players.



That being said, I'm a really bad player everytime I play Kiova, Spartacus, Hatamoto Taro, and/or Dünd.

[Revdyer]

Originally Posted by Mr Migraine

Overpriced

Weakling

Lame Duck

Thanks, Mr Migraine. You've given us a nifty way to think about why units are considered "bad." This will give the community another fun mental tool to use when pondering the game.

In the Weakling category I would also add units that are slow in movement or difficult (e.g., non-flying double-based units) to move or place on maps. The rapid filling of starting spaces also tends to weaken double hex units. Thus, Marrden Hounds can be considered "bad."

<RR>

Originally Posted by Sarpedon

I don't want to demolish a lop-sided opponent's army in 15 minutes and then have to spend the rest of the time twiddling my thumbs unitil the next round.

If you would play the way I do, this will never be a problem for you, Sarpedon. <grin>

Originally Posted by greenless

before you say they are so bad try playing 2-3 squads of einar imperium, kiova and raelin in a 600 point game.

The problem I've almost always found with the EI is that they simply die much too quickly. Using Raelin helps with that, of course, until she is dead, at which point the EIs weak defense is again the central issue of their worth.

[Elf_Archer]

I have had really good experiences with Deadeye. I wouldn't consider him a lame duck.

[Utgarsrage]

Originally Posted by Mr Migraine

I guess it is all up to one's opinion.If you know how to use them well, great. In all kindness, though, I never see them winning any tourneys. I think their 1 life, high defense isn't as reliable as most heroes'. One whiffed roll, and that's 140 points down the toilet.
</p>EDIT: I guess they weren't the best examples, though.</p>

I just won the Dayton Ohio tourney this Saturady. I went undefeated, with DW7K being my team MVP. In 5 games he did nearly 800 points in damage and allowed me to get 10 bonus pionts per game for being the first in an enemy start zone. I actually had a couple people complain about my stratagy with him. As I had him in the enemy start zone at turn 3 of round 1 in all my games, save one.

[rym]

[quote=greenless;688866]

Originally Posted by rym

before you say they are so bad try playing 2-3 squads of einar imperium, kiova and raelin in a 600 point game. the imperium are 140 points because they are one of the highest attack dice per order marker cards out there. 18 attack dice(without height which is easy to get with stealth flying) on one order marker! well worth the 140 points and one of my favorite units.

I'm not saying the Einar Imperium are bad.

In the context of what this thread is about, then yes, the EI are "bad". In a tournament setting, you would need to field at least 2 squads to be effective, (maybe even 3). That's 280 points right there. Then let's throw Raelin in so they last a little longer. You are now at 360 points of a typically 500 point army, with no range yet. In a range-heavy tournament (as most oftentimes, the tournaments are), they get toasted.

I agree with you in that they are a fantastically fun unit to play. And I have fielded 2-3 squads of them, with Kiova. And the high amount of attack dice? Awesome! But that's just the casual game amongst my friends. In that context, they're fun, and good, to play. In the context of this thread, they fall into Overpriced.

[Mr Migraine]

Updated

[Kroc]

You know, Mr. Migraine, your problem here is that there is always SOMEONE who loves every lame unit. I appreciate your goal and think this is a really good idea, help us understand what a lame unit really is.

But are the categories you propose really that different? Isn't it true that there is a price for every unit? If Kyntella Gwyn cost 5 points I bet she'd see a lot more love.

I mean consider Vipers, many people love them but they have zero defense. Doesn't that make them weaklings? But they are loved because they are so low cost. Same is true for blade/arrow gruts.

But I'd encourage you to keep on thinking this through. Understanding suckiness is as important as understanding greatness.

[Mr Migraine]

Originally Posted by Elf_Archer

I have had really good experiences with Deadeye. I wouldn't consider him a lame duck.

No doubt he can be powerful, but we are talking tournament worthiness here. If you bring him to a tournament, he just doesn't do enough. Heck, you may even roll a few 20s that day, but every turn your opponents' Q9s and 4th Mass are going to get 3 or 4 attacks of 3+, while Deadeye attacks once with his mega-range.

Originally Posted by Kroc

You know, Mr. Migraine, your problem here is that there is always SOMEONE who loves every lame unit. I appreciate your goal and think this is a really good idea, help us understand what a lame unit really is.

I'm using the sense here.

Originally Posted by Elf_Archer

But are the categories you propose really that different? Isn't it true that there is a price for every unit? If Kyntella Gwyn cost 5 points I bet she'd see a lot more love.

I mean consider Vipers, many people love them but they have zero defense. Doesn't that make them weaklings? But they are loved because they are so low cost. Same is true for blade/arrow gruts.

I look at it this way: First, regardless of point cost, does it have the vital stats to survive, mobilize and do damage? Most do. If it fails it is a Weakling. If it passes, I investigate whether it does enough on a turn, so it is not a waste of an order marker, or if it has redeeming synergies and bonding. If it fails, it is a Lame Duck. If it passes, now I'll look at the price. If it costs too much for its stats and usefulness established above, I would deem it Overpriced. If it passes, it resides in of Jexik's "non-niche" categories from his Order Marker usage thread.

Maybe I should put this on the first post....

[Majai of Dreams]

I will always stand up and defend any Heroscape figure. It is the skill of the player that brings to life the full potential of what each unit has to offer. I was shocked to see so many units on that list, specifically, Moresbane, Sudema, the Hounds...
It pains me every time I see a thread or comment that downplays the value of any unit.

I would only concede that some units are more niche units, in that they are only meant to play with specific other units, like Hatomoto Taro, or the Hive.

When a fellow player decides to tell me that ANY figure or squad is "bad" or "not worth the cost", I proceed to draft them in a match and most often succeed in winning with them. All it takes is some skill and determination and Dund and the Obsidian guards with their friends the deathstalkers, with some coverfire from the Gorrilinators can clean up.

I wish there were more draft tournaments, where you take turns drafting with your opponents, so you can see the army grow and you can try and adapt to it. I think people mostly try and pick the "best units" because thats what everyone else is drafting. I try to throw in a less popular unit in each army I make just to let them shine. And when opponents arent used to playing against these units, they are less equipped to deal with them. It is like underestimating the perceived weaker opponent.

I think many units found in tournament armies are just easier to use. Someone on his first match after learning the game can take Q9 and decimate the field, I have seen this. But it takes skill to know when to use Dead Eye Dan and Sudema to their upmost potential.

I would encourage all tournament minded players to start drafting these less popular units and give them the credit they deserve. All it takes is some skill and many of these over priced weakling lame duck units will prove themselves time and time again.

[Jexik]

Originally Posted by Majai of Dreams

I think many units found in tournament armies are just easier to use. Someone on his first match after learning the game can take Q9 and decimate the field, I have seen this. But it takes skill to know when to use Dead Eye Dan and Sudema to their upmost potential.

I would encourage all tournament minded players to start drafting these less popular units and give them the credit they deserve. All it takes is some skill and many of these over priced weakling lame duck units will prove themselves time and time again.

I completely disagree with this belief. Sure, some units that are commonly found in tournaments (like Q9) are easier to use, but I'd contend that it takes a decent amount of skill to play Gladiatrons and Blastatrons well. To think that Deadeye Dan or Sudema can be much improved through smart play is hard for me to believe. They are patently luck-based units with very few options when you activate them. Even at their best, other units are simply better or more reliable.

This is especially true of Deadeye Dan.

[spidysox]

This is an interesting thread.
However I have a problem with it as I do with other threads that try and put units into categories, for the most part, it is subjective. What unit works for one person does not work for others, you know "one man's trash is another man's treasure."
Also, many units effectiveness is greatly changed by the units around them. The DW's may be lousy on their own, but pair them with enough Deathreavers to keep the enemy away from the fragile borgs and their value greatly increases (I love playing the DW's, so from my perspective, they are not lousy...See, subjective ).

[The Silver Surfer]

Originally Posted by spidysox

This is an interesting thread.
However I have a problem with it as I do with other threads that try and put units into categories, for the most part, it is subjective. What unit works for one person does not work for others, you know "one man's trash is another man's treasure."
Also, many units effectiveness is greatly changed by the units around them. The DW's may be lousy on their own, but pair them with enough Deathreavers to keep the enemy away from the fragile borgs and their value greatly increases (I love playing the DW's, so from my perspective, they are not lousy...See, subjective ).

Thank you, spidysox! +rep. I agree with this, and most of what Majai of Dreams said. At least with the characters I own on the list, I almost completely disagree that they are bad. For example, Agent Carr is one of my favorite characters, and he works well, and I think the Marrden Hounds are a great squad and pretty consistant, as well. Also, for everyone who doesn't have an Isamu, Otanashi is an excellent figure for her cost. As already stated by a few people, whether or not a character is bad really is dependant on how it is used, and what other figures are with it.