I understand what you say but just leave them how they are.
I understand what you say but just leave them how they are.
How about this, reduce some of the stats, wholesale. Reduce damage, reduce health, reduce housing space, and reduce the cost. This will change the dynamics of dragons to where they are more viable for more situations, and allow other air attacking defences to do some good verses dragons.
I mean other people spam units. I just had some person spam 20 level 5 Giants on my base (with two Healers and 3 heal spells), but wasn't totaly over powered. People do mass minion attacks and there is the costly, but selectively effective, mass hog riders. So more weaker (smaller?) dragons maybe a better way to go. Would reduce the "Destroy Air Defence buildings to press Win Button with Mass Dragons" issue people are so ticked off about.
Idk.. not too serious an idea. Just throwing it out there, seeing someone likes it or shoots it down.
Ok please ignore the speculations of the AI buff, because they are what it is, just a speculation of you. Beside that, i think that this wont be a buff, it would be a nerv, look at loons, 12 loons slowly fly to an tower while 3-4 would be enough to destroy it. and now think about 8-10 dragons stacked together and moving from 1 building to another, 2- dragons are enough to 1 shot most buildings so clumbed dragons are a big waste of dps, while spreaded dragons would result in taking more damage from more towers shooting the dragons.
Talk about how it affects the possible unit compositions.
I am not crying that dragons are too weak nor that they are too strong.
They just dont fit in any army and that is what i would like to change.
I just don't see the point.
I use dragons enough to know that what others are saying is most likely true: the AI will become more predictable. No, I can't "prove" it, but it's just logically obvious:
Currently, dragons approach their targets from random directions. This happens with all units. I can spam 20 archers in one spot, but they will fan out when attacking a building. Barbs, on the other hand, tend to clump up in one spot. Dragons do the same thing, but on a much larger scale. I've seen someone drop 10 dragons in one spot, and they targetted 3 different buildings and spread out over a an area about 10 tiles across. Never seen archers do that, let alone barbarians.
So here's the thing: even if the choice of the next target is somewhat random, regardless of range, what will be far less random is where dragons are when they choose their next target. Right now, if I drop 3 dragons next to a building, the dragons will spread out about 3-4 tiles and attack it from multiple directions. Now, when that building is destroyed, those dragons are 3-4 tiles away from each other when choosing their next targets. That alone adds a lot of randomness, which makes predicting the next targets very hard.
However, if they were melee targets, the 3 dragons would be sitting 1-2 tiles away from each other, instead of 3-4. When the building is destroyed, there will be a certain amount of randomness in the selection of the next target. But by virtue of the fact that the dragons are so much closer together, they are much more likely to select the same target. That will make predicting the AI of a swarm of dragons more predictable, even if the behavior of individual dragons is still fairly unpredictable.
Anyway, the AI is a small issue overall. I still consider this a buff to dragons, but I don't like it. I like dragons the way they are now. I think level 1 dragons need less DPS, level 4 dragons need more health and need to be given to TH9, and we need a level 5 dragon for TH10. That would make dragons more fair at TH7, and less than useless at TH9-TH10. That's all they need. We don't need to drastically alter dragons into some brand new unit that barely resembles the current dragons. Might as well just suggest a new unit if you're going to change them that much.
Ok one more time:Quote:
Originally Posted by Xitra
1. You cannot proofe it, correct
2. Would it realy be a buff if dragons are staying clustered? (Waste of DPS and take more damage of Wizzard tower and Air bombs)
3. You like dragons the way they are? So you like to use them on townhall 7+8 all Drag attack and than ignore them because there is not vital way to mix them with other units?
2. Would it be a buff if dragons stay clustered? The way I use them, yes. The way other people use them, maybe not. I don't know how other people use them. The way I've seen them used against me in wars (never been 3-starred btw), it would probably be a nerf. But that's their problem for not trying to use any skill. This would nerf dragon attacks by people who don't have any skill, but definitely buff attacks for those who do.Quote:
Originally Posted by WingChris
3. I've been using a TH7 and a TH8 account in war for the last couple months. I fully expect to have to switch to lavaloonion when I get to TH9. I don't think your proposed changes would change my mind. If you want dragons to be more effective at max-TH8 or higher, then level 4 needs to go to TH9, and the stats need a boost. I'm on the fence about buffing level 4's health or DPS. Health would make them more tanky, but that's what lava hounds do. DPS would make them better at cleanup, but that's what minions are for. Since I've never used lavaloonion (still TH8 after all), I don't think I'm the best person to make that call, lol!
Balloons are an extreme example of clumping behavior, since they have to be right on top of thier target, and their target is selective, meaning thier AI path will easily wind up meeting back together again. Which is why the best tactic is to deploy them spread out to reduce the chance of that. Dragons are done this way to prevent the opposite, so they destroy the other's likely target, and keep moving in one general direction.
I agree with Xitra's explanation, since I see the same thing with my regular use of dragons. Remember, I love working out systems, and played AI/bot programing games for hours on end (wished Mindrover had more stuff). One Reason why it can't be proven, is because we lack the ability to test it. Only Supercell can do that. But given what we know of stats and unit behavior, if the attack range is reduced, logic does dictate that it will reduce the spreading effect of dragons. Another reason why it is 'unprovable' is that no set range has been given. The idea of a 'reduced range' has been said, but by how much of a reduction has not been said.
Assumed deployment methods and undefined stat changes are no reason to say it is unprovable and should be wholy ignored. Based on the given info, our experience, and our observation with dragons, a reduction in attack range will likely help with making AI pathing more predicable. Likey, likely Not will. Just stressing that since that is a common thing I've seen people assume, taking 'likely' as more definite than intended. It depends on what the range reduction is for us to be more sure about our predictions.
2. One more time, u have no proof in your post. Maybe it will buff them, the way you use them, maybe not. only time and testing would show it. And one more time: debating about Dragon AI is not the only part here.Quote:
Originally Posted by Xitra
3. I talk about usabiltity in general, not about buffing them. I want addiontional strategies where you can mix dragons with other units to benefit from each other. Right now: Dragons CAN tank a bit, but the loons will move further in the base and get destroyed. Dragons and minions can fly together, but the dragons dont protect the minons from the wizard tower nor from air bombs.
And: MAYBE the attack pathing becomes a bit more predictable, it is still like chess, you can only think about the first 3-5 buildings that they attack, than it starts to become to complex.
Still no post about unit mixing, all you talk about is AI theories, which is just speculating, unless you know the AI programm Code. And i doubt SC will post it :rolleyes:
Quote:
Originally Posted by WarrenJames
Really... Granted it was implied, rather than directly stated, but unit mixing would be easier with the 'throwaway' idea I posted.Quote:
Originally Posted by WingChris
Also note: Continuing to argue against the AI theory (or any idea someone is stressing as obvously valid) as if it has no significant merit will cause people to argue 'harder' to get the point across. Just saying. So best to try to move on from there, but without dismissing the point.
I dont argue against the AI theory, i just say what it is: a Theory. So there is no need to talk about that further unless someone has a proof.Quote:
Originally Posted by WarrenJames
Lets face it, Dragons are broken in many terms:
Overpowered at Townhall 7 till mid townhall 8
Useless afterwards
not compatibel to any other unit, except maybe hogs/loons if air defense is placed far outside.
With the suggestion i made, the mixing problem would be solved, and if a unit can be mixed better, it might be more usefull in later townhall levels again.