Two or more beast units that all move in one turn

[jonathantu]

Has this been proposed? How about a beast unit like a wolf, or something else that moves in packs, that is relatively low on health, armor/blocking and power but, if there are multiples of its kind on the board they can all move in one turn? They'd have to be less powerful individually than an assassin, but I think a four square range would be fair.

I'd envision these things as quick strike units. If you had two using the stats below, you'd have an attack that did 24 points from two different directions, and if you had three then you'd have 36 from four directions and so on and so forth. There might have to be a cap like the knights with a max of three, seeing as how 36 damage plus possible rage (see below) is already pretty damn impressive. It would introduce a whole new dynamic into TAO: accounting for a simultaneous attack would make for different movements in blocking off, defending, etc. If the wolves ranged too far they'd be very, very vulnerable to LW or dragon attacks, which makes sense as they should be used as flanking units.

If playtesting shows they wouldn't be that useful, perhaps they could rage once they reached 50% health, adding to their power. Here's just a suggestion:

Dire wolf
Power: 12
Health: 34
Blocking: 40% front, 20% side
Armor: 10%
Recovery: 1
Movement: 4
Range: 1

If one thing needed to be lowered, I'd say the four sqaure range should be reduced to three squares first.

Thoughts?

[scb]

I believe I suggested that for a goblin unit, and did that myself with ants (although the more than one on the field bit was handled by a summoner).

The combination attack would make them useful - a three-wait unit could easily be taken down 72 HP (killing blow on a golem) by a trio of these. But it would still be underpowered for three units. Perhaps if they each counted as half a unit?

[jonathantu]

Zergling rush!

[Shadowkill]

How can it count as half a unit? What if you will place 3 of them? What then? Movement should be reduced. Yes it owns golems and units with low blocking, but a knight wall put them down. But yes it weak for 3 units so i dont know as how many units should it count.

[scb]

Ten of them would probably be worth ten units. It would take dual clerics to fight off ten of these guys.

Three of them would be worth 1.5 units and the other half a slot would have to be wasted, so three would effectively be two slots.

[jonathantu]

Exactly. A bunch of units that could hit simultaneously would be increasingly powerful with greater numbers. Theoretically you could deal a unit 48 damage in one turn, and pretty much only half of those could be blocked. If they were worth half a unit then they'd have to be scaled back, like maybe 10 power, and that movement would definitely have to be three squares.

I thought it'd be a great idea because it'd introduce an entirely new style of play to TAO.

[scb]

However, against ten of these guys, a wall of units with good blocking could take the hits (approximately 8 damage per turn, not including blocking) and wear them down.

Maybe put a limit on how many can move in a turn - perhaps 3. That wouldn't do anything to TAO, but it would balance them in a more generic game where you could have any number of any unit on the field as long as you had the same number as your opponent.

[this.bird.flys]

the one turn recovery is a bit overwhelming and the power should be about 10