What do do about the Ulfserker?

[Elvish_Pillager]

Working himself into rage is kind of strange...

It's what real berserkers do. You can't have a war-rage without working it up first. If you're ambushed, you're desperate, but not enraged. If you're attacked, you don't really have a chance to work yourself up first. It actually takes a while.

Berserkers did sometimes use drugs, but most of the effect is just the body drugging itself.

[Cod]

I didn't lose with Bats then, I don't lose with Ulfserkers now.

And I do lose with Rebels, Loyalists, and even Northerners.

Pff, you lost against me using ulfzerkers. Of course, as soon as things started to go my way, you started to screw around, killing the rest of your units by attacking stupidly. Nice to have that as an escape, yeah?

EDIT: I'd like to add:

[turin]

If It isn't broke, don't fix it

It was broken. Not in MP but in SP. Because the ulfserker was easily killed by any decent melee unit it was useless in later campaigns were the enemy recuited L2 Units against which the ulfserker stood no chance. And you had nearly no chance to advance him.

It seems fairly obvious, then, that the ulfserker is not intended as a campaign unit! Just as some units are not appropriate for multiplayer use, some are not appropriate for campaigns. This is one of them.

However, it wasn't broken, exactly, but it just wasn't interesting. The change IMHO made it more interesting, but also unbalanced it. I think that by reducing stats, but leaving berserker as it is, we can make it both interesting and balanced.

[Elvish_Pillager]

I didn't lose with Bats then, I don't lose with Ulfserkers now.

And I do lose with Rebels, Loyalists, and even Northerners.

Pff, you lost against me using ulfzerkers. Of course, as soon as things started to go my way, you started to screw around, killing the rest of your units by attacking stupidly. Nice to have that as an escape, yeah?

EDIT: I'd like to add:

*tries to remember incident*

*fails*

I just play MP too much and can't remember it all!

[Cod]

*tries to remember incident*

*fails*

I just play MP too much and can't remember it all!

It's all good, laddy. Just KEEPING IT REAL, you know?

[Jetrel]

The only terrain that the ulfserker has good defense(<50%) is in hills mountains and castles. Everywhere else, units have at least a 50-50 chance to hit. Their defense in grassland and forest is 70%! I don't think you can say they have really that great of a defense. It sounds to me like you use the ulfserker the same way one uses a mage, to finish off already weakened units, but ultimately as a unit that needs protection from other types of units (at which the dwarvish guardsmen conveniently excell). In fact the comparision is quite good, in my opinion. In both cases, however, it requires that you surround the ulf/mage after its attack to prevent the retaliatory strike. The difference beyond the superficial (what range each dominates in) is that you know when you attack with the ulf that either it will be killed, or the hex of the unit it attacked will be open so that you can move a unit into that hex to defend the ulf. This is an advantage to be sure, but I don't think that it is an overpowering advantage. It does imply that the ulf should cost at least as much as the mage, however.

I think I would reject (although I should note, it is not up to me ) any change to the ulf which did not leave it so it would almost always kill ranged only units.

I agree with Darth Fool completely.

The thing that you have to understand with the ulfzerker is that unlike most other specialty units that have a significant vulnerability, like mages, the ulfzerker has two.

The ulfzerker has a "normal" vulnerability - he is helpless against ranged attacks.

But unlike almost every other unit except perhaps the horseman, the ulfzerker has one really bad special vulnerability - his special attack is a severe vulnerability.

There are many units that an ulfzerker simply cannot attack, even at full health: Skeletons, Heavy infantry, Cavalry, horsemen, any decent melee unit above his level, practically any dwarf, most of the drakes.

Not to mention that given his low defense, many evasive units can ruin an ulfzerker's day as well. A saurian on sand can win against an ulf with full health.


The ulfzerker should be balanced to be like the unit he most resembles - the horseman. It would be reasonable to make him cost >20 gold. But don't do anything else, because right now, he's not actually very powerful.

Personally, I'd bump his cost to something like 23-25 gold.

[Chris Byler]

Note that if he costs that much, takes out a shaman and dies, it's a net *loss* for the dwarf player (not counting any exp that the shaman may have had). So they have to get him back alive to make him cost-effective, which puts much more restriction on when you can actually take a shot with him (ie if he's going to get counter-surrounded, you are probably operating at a loss). Unless the level 1 ulfzerker can take out level 2 druid, white mage, etc. in which case you just have to be really careful with those units. Ulfzerkers don't have skirmish (thank god) so don't get your lines broken.

[turin]

Note that if he costs that much, takes out a shaman and dies, it's a net *loss* for the dwarf player (not counting any exp that the shaman may have had). So they have to get him back alive to make him cost-effective, which puts much more restriction on when you can actually take a shot with him (ie if he's going to get counter-surrounded, you are probably operating at a loss). Unless the level 1 ulfzerker can take out level 2 druid, white mage, etc. in which case you just have to be really careful with those units. Ulfzerkers don't have skirmish (thank god) so don't get your lines broken.

Same with the horseman, though. That's still a useful unit.

Still, I think having the cost about 19-20 would be good. Over 21 is IMHO excessive.

[Noy]

As I said earlier, increasing the Ulfs cost will certainly not help the situation. The dwarves already have some of the most expensive units in the game (And the most expensive lvl1 for that matter), and making another one (albriy quite a powerful one) just further skews the balance.

They do it way too much. Way too much now, way to much before. They tend to kill one enemy a turn, and they can do this for many turns. If you're using them right, the 'berserk-on-counterattack' issue makes no difference whatsoever --- You don't let them get attacked! They almost always have equal defense to and greater resistance than their victims, better attacks, and more HP.

Untrue. against most cheaper fighters, Ulfs get killed pretty quickly, even on advantageous terrain. Its quite difficult at times to zoc all axis, and a skilled counterattack will kill a zocing unit, opening a ulf to attack. Furthermore after a initial bezerk attack, an ulf is likely to be damaged.

Now however without bezerk on defence, a single fighter to attack a Ulf will likely not result in a kill, allowing it to get away scot free, heal and kill another unit. So it really does matter.

Ulfs forced an opposing player to change his game plan, but thats normal for playing against any other race with their specialized units. A player had to be careful to zoc his secondaries, and not to give terrain advantage to the knalgans, and you would be fine.

It was broken. Not in MP but in SP. Because the ulfserker was easily killed by any decent melee unit it was useless in later campaigns were the enemy recuited L2 Units against which the ulfserker stood no chance. And you had nearly no chance to advance him.

Look at the title of this board. It says multiplayer not single player. I'm not interested in singleplayer, and the ulf is the perfect example why.
The only reason why Ulfs were weak in single player is that the computer's behavior goes after weak units first, and kills them. In the same vein I can send a spread of cheap lvl1 units at the comp, while my lvl 2 and 3s can operated with imputnity. I'd rather play against a intelligent human any day. That way I won't have to give the computer 2X the money I have to make it a reasonably fair game.

So in conclusion, The reason why the Ulf dies quickly in singleplayer is not the ulfs faul, it is the AI's fault.

I'm curious about the developers who thought this change to the bezerker was necessary, when there was significant warning that this would occur.

Can anybody give a good reason why changing it back is not a good solution?

[AT]

Can anybody give a good reason why changing it back is not a good solution?

Partly because we think they should work this way and it just feels 'right'. It makes them much more interesting and scary. You should be uneasy when you see an Ulf coming your way.

Unfortunatly, it does have balance problems currently, that we are trying to fix.

Look, maybe it is a horrible idea. But we think that if we get it rebalanced with the change, people will be much happier.

[turin]

As I said earlier, increasing the Ulfs cost will certainly not help the situation. The dwarves already have some of the most expensive units in the game (And the most expensive lvl1 for that matter), and making another one (albriy quite a powerful one) just further skews the balance.

They also have some of the cheapest, though, in the outlaws. I don't see how this argument works.

[Noy]

The thing that you have to understand with the ulfzerker is that unlike most other specialty units that have a significant vulnerability, like mages, the ulfzerker has two.

The ulfzerker has a "normal" vulnerability - he is helpless against ranged attacks.

This is the third time I've said this. Given that this unit has the most awesome ability in the game Bezerk, it must be balanced out by just as significant vulnerability, which was the bezerk on defence. With its slightly lower cost, a second vulnerability of no ranged was just fine.

But unlike almost every other unit except perhaps the horseman, the ulfzerker has one really bad special vulnerability - his special attack is a severe vulnerability.

There are many units that an ulfzerker simply cannot attack, even at full health: Skeletons, Heavy infantry, Cavalry, horsemen, any decent melee unit above his level, practically any dwarf, most of the drakes.

Wow, so it can't be used against certain units, should we redress all units so that they can attack each other? by that logic we should rebalance spearmen to make sure they can attack woses right?

This was what the ulf 8.11 was, it was really the Dwarven mage. Since Dwarves don't have a mage, you sent the ulf in to kill an opponent's secondaries. Its perfect for that role. this has been repeated over and over again by MP players on this board. You don't use the an Ulf as a regular fighter. Treat it as a mage and its perfect.

Not to mention that given his low defense, many evasive units can ruin an ulfzerker's day as well. A saurian on sand can win against an ulf with full health.

Not to mention that given his low defense, many evasive units can ruin an ulfzerker's day as well. A saurian on sand can win against an ulf with full health.

Yes, so don't put your ulf beside sand. pretty simple solution

The ulfzerker should be balanced to be like the unit he most resembles - the horseman. It would be reasonable to make him cost >20 gold. But don't do anything else, because right now, he's not actually very powerful.

I'm sorry did I just hear that correctly? The Ulf is not too powerful? I'm sorry thats the most ridiculous statement I've ever heard. No other unit can ensure a kill in one attack. NONE. I've watched Mages miss all three of their strikes, with their opponent at one health or any number of other flukes. The ulf ensures kills against units, or severe damage. It is one of the most dangerous units against secondary units. I'm sure dark adepts have a reasonably good chance of killing an ulf on defence. And this is not powerful how?

It was perfectly costed and balanced with when viewed as part of its faction in 8.11.

[Noy]

Can anybody give a good reason why changing it back is not a good solution?

Partly because we think they should work this way and it just feels 'right'. It makes them much more interesting and scary. You should be uneasy when you see an Ulf coming your way.

Its felt "right" in 8.11. It was scary as hell as it was. People in MP didn't call it the most powerful unit in wesnoth because it was crap. In 8.11 leadership became useless against dwarves because nobody would risk their leader behind a skirmishing line. thats fear.

Unfortunatly, it does have balance problems currently, that we are trying to fix.

Look, maybe it is a horrible idea. But we think that if we get it rebalanced with the change, people will be much happier.

We had this discussion over a month ago and it was CLEARLY predicted that this would happen. It was also clearly stated that no such change was needed, and we got overruled. There was only one complaint about the Ulf from MP people, and that was by pillager and it was the exact opposite. It was TOO powerful.

I think most people just don't know how to use the ulf. And as I said earlier, its not a good unit against a computer because the computer's behaviour makes it a prime target to attack... Which as I said before is not the ulf's fault but the computer. If you want to design your units to attack the computer's behaviour, do so, but understand the sort of choices that you are making.

[Noy]

As I said earlier, increasing the Ulfs cost will certainly not help the situation. The dwarves already have some of the most expensive units in the game (And the most expensive lvl1 for that matter), and making another one (albriy quite a powerful one) just further skews the balance.

They also have some of the cheapest, though, in the outlaws. I don't see how this argument works.

Part of this has to do with the proposal for removing outlaws from dwarves, which seems to be in the cards.. The second is that there is no mid level fighter unit. The dwarvish fighter is 17 gold, compared to 14 for most others. I think thats a unit that needs rebalancing bad... why should the fighter be 17 gold? In a lot of ways I'd say the elvish fighter and spearman are more effective than the fighter, at a vastly cheaper cost. But thats another argument

That leaves the footpad, and the Theif. Now there is a bit of a corollory to to this. Instead of using the theif and the footpad as attackers, you use them as skirmishers, to harry forces until the slower more expensive units to catch up. Its a very dangerous strategy though because they are so weak that they quickly get chewed up (and dwarves are so slow). In the daylight, Theives get eaten alive by mages. You can't use them as your primary unit, and really only two or three are a really effective number.

[Elvish_Pillager]

Guaranteed kills. Sheesh.

Why the ability "Berserk" is bad:

1) Extremity. Anything excessively toward an extreme is bad. Berserk, for instance, has chances to kill far greater than 99.9999%, while its closest rival, a Paladin swinging at a Walking Corpse in Deep Water, has a measly 99.999% chance. It's as close to guaranteed as you'll ever get, and it's especially bad when it kills higher HP units. We shouldn't have Berserk, as it is now, for reasons similar to why we shouldn't have a faction that can recruit a level 10 unit for 1000 gold or have a unit with 50 moves and a 2-1 attack.

2) Strategies. You cannot use your leader in a fight, for instance, if your opponent controls Ulfserkers, because if you expose it at all, you will die instantly. If your opponent places an Elvish Fighter in a forest in a key defensive position, all you have to do is berserk it out of the way. If you ever need to kill something quickly -- and you ALWAYS need to get something quickly -- an Ulfserker can kill it; or open a path to it; or wound it, and leave an open hex for continued attack. Even a wounded Ulfserker has a good chance to take out a full HP enemy fighter, and such an action can often turn a battle.

3) Power. If a unit has Berserk, then either it is too weak to do anything usefully, or it is so strong that it can take out practiaclly any level 1 unit. In addition to being the absolute best killer of low HP units, it is also the absolute best killer of high HP units. Nothing is safe when two Ulfserkers are against them, and that's why the Tribalist was overpowered, too: Nothing was safe. That includes leaders.

Side note: Noy, if you think it's impossible to always defend a unit by ZoC, you're wrong. I know I can do it, for instance. It's possible in Heir to the Throne, and it's possible in MP too, and I can almost always have my other units attack as well as providing ZoC. While my enemies do sometimes break the ZoC, it is always at a loss.

Most of my Ulfserker testing has been in 0.8.11. Since then, its power has risen only slightly in my hands.

Can anybody give a good reason why changing it back is not a good solution?

Yes. Changing it back makes Berserk very little less powerful in the strategies I have outlined, and it makes it much less powerful in other ways. If it is balanced in such a way that there are no excessively overpowered strategies involving it, and also is switched back, then it will be amazingly weak when it is used for a different strategy.

In other words, it opens up a weakness that makes it no less overpowered. It's like weakening the weakest unit of a strong faction.