 |
SFR, Inc. Forums that relate to SFR products
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
AC common
Joined: 26 Feb 2012 Posts: 317 Location: DC GMA

|
Posted: Fri Feb 15, 2013 12:22 pm GMT Post subject: |
|
|
I understand that it's a popular sentiment -- that Firewalkers are fragile -- but unless it refers to a lack of defensive magic, I'm not sure if I see it. Every non-magic 6-sider has a save face and only the Adventurer (Light Uncommon) and Firestormer (Missile Rare) average fewer than 1 per unit health when they roll a save (man, how that Adventurer's lone shield face boldly mocks me from the squillions of them I own). In similar states are the Dwarves, Goblins, and Amazons. It wasn't until the later races that we started to see the exploration of extreme save faces and the 50% save rates. So Firewalkers are not nearly as tough as 5 of the latter 6 races, and lacking any defensive magic or terrain advantage that grants extra saves, they have no real ability to augment their natural saves, but in a neutral context, they can look out for themselves decently.
Coral Elves I'll grant, though I'd suggest that Watery Double and Wall of Ice help tremendously in that regard. I own very few Coral Elf mages, and I think that's why I disregarded them as too weak for so long. It wasn't until Swamp Stalkers that another Green magic race came out, so I really didn't have any avenue for appreciating it.
It's probably a matter of acclimation, too. By games played, a lot of my time in Dragon Dice was spent when there were only the original 4 races, or the first couple kickers. Then in my second stint it was all about the Undead (and Goblins; always Goblins), and I'd barely touch something so wimpy as a Firewalker. This time around, it's been a while, so I'm approaching everything with fresh senses. Maybe I'll sour on the fireballers before too long. We'll see.  |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
TheLazyhase common
Joined: 16 Jan 2013 Posts: 208

|
Posted: Fri Feb 15, 2013 12:44 pm GMT Post subject: |
|
|
| AC wrote: | | I understand that it's a popular sentiment -- that Firewalkers are fragile -- but unless it refers to a lack of defensive magic, I'm not sure if I see it. Every non-magic 6-sider has a save face and only the Adventurer (Light Uncommon) and Firestormer (Missile Rare) average fewer than 1 per unit health when they roll a save (man, how that Adventurer's lone shield face boldly mocks me from the squillions of them I own). In similar states are the Dwarves, Goblins, and Amazons. |
Well, people don't play evenly every unit of a race.
The better unit of the Firewalker are theirs mage, and their mage die if you look funny at them. So, people tend to play Firewalker with a lot of magic unit, and have consequently 50% of their force very fragile.
Their non-magic unit all have both melee and missile face, so they are unattractive. Your army which use Firewalker only for the mage follow this trend (as do mine in my only forum game).
Also, their melee light infantry only have the counter as save, unlike the goblin and amazon one, and have no racial to transform into an unkilleable tank like the elve light infantry rare.
Of course, psychological factor help too : their racial make it so people seek save face more than other army, and the phenix give credence to the idea that they are weak, since they have been awarded a super-resilient monster to compensate. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
AC common
Joined: 26 Feb 2012 Posts: 317 Location: DC GMA

|
Posted: Fri Feb 15, 2013 12:54 pm GMT Post subject: |
|
|
It is true that Firewalker mages are attractive and their relative softness may overshadow the race's overall survivability. Of note, in the original plan for my army, I was going to use all Coral Elf mages. I just don't own the dice, though, and prefer not to use a lot of proxies.
Prior to the advent of Flaming Shields, Firewalkers were kind of a mess if you were looking for reliability. However, since their Save icon is now dual-function, Firewalker Heavy, Light, and (dare I say it?) Cavalry are just as "focused" as their average contemporary. On the typical Heavy or Light, you will have 3 melee faces (plus ID) and two faces which, in melee, will be useless -- say, a save (usually) and a maneuver, or two maneuver faces. The Firewalker has this as well: his two melee faces, plus his save face and his ID give him the same 67% melee rate as any other. His two "useless" faces in a melee roll are his maneuver and his missile. The missile stands out, but the Firewalker is actually producing as well as, if not better than, most others. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
TheLazyhase common
Joined: 16 Jan 2013 Posts: 208

|
Posted: Fri Feb 15, 2013 1:11 pm GMT Post subject: |
|
|
| AC wrote: | | but the Firewalker is actually producing as well as, if not better than, most others. |
Well, the true problem of firewalker are that (one of) their racial don't give them an edge. You may believe that the flaming shield mean they are extra good in melee when it fact it just mean their unit are good at missile.
The Sentinel is actually one of the worst melee heavy, with 10 melee icon only (most have 11 ; the lava elf one have 10, and the frostwing one have 9) and "only" 67% melee chance. Ditto for the Daybringer.
Compare to dwarfs, who have two unit at 83% melee and 13 melee icon. It mean their unit are a lot more scary to melee attack than Firewalker, because they will not miss you in return.
It's not unlike the melee unit of the amazon which are scorned because of a lack of specific edge |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group
|