Upgrading to a monstrous mount typically brings an increase in WS and a change of the AP/non-AP ratio in favor of the AP as well as huge splash damage upon landing. I would say this is one of the few options where you do have a big disadvantage: land in a big number of troops and you will risk getting stuck and because of low mass escaping won't be easy. and you can land straight onto the walls in siege battles which is HUGE. Upgrading to flying cavalry has the biggest benefit of easier flanking in field battles as well as easier sniping of archers/warmachines etc. Upgrading to a horse typically gives an HP buff, if it's barded an armor buff and mobility (and you ALWAYS want mobility on your Lord)
LORDS MOBILE HEROES TOO PUT ON YOUR WALL UPGRADE
Mounts provide a plethora of advantages and the case is rare when you don't want to upgrade to the next available mount. What cases do you guys use mount (I'm especially curious about Louen as I feel like his basic horse beats both next mounts) Originally posted by Kayami Kira:So I usually don't use most mounts as it lowers stats a lot and/or removes buffs that the lord has when on foot. He'll generally be a bit less tough, but deal notably more damage to more enemies in exchange. Louen on a Hippogryph may look less good, but he can fly over enemy units to go straight after vulnerable enemy casters, lords, artillery or archers, and when he gets in, his attacks will hit quite a few enemies with every swing. The part you don't see is that their attacks also have notably larger area of effect. Most 'monstrous' mounts (Griffons, hippogryphs, dragons, bonecrushers, etc) have notably larger health pools, deal primarily armor piercing damage, and often have increased armor as well, at the cost of base attack/defense.
Other mounts may require more consideration: most flying mounts generally have higher charge bonus, at the cost of general defense. Horses are almost always worth taking because they simply give your Lord (or Hero) more Health and Speed and sometimes Armor, while granting them enough Mass to withstand most knockbacks, and changing them from being vulnerable to Anti-Infantry to being vulnerable to Anti-Large. The preview shows how the mount will change from the lords *base* stats, not showing after-effects provided by skills, weapons, armor, etc. Originally posted by Kayami Kira:oh so the buffs icons where the spells are as well are not really lost that's a kinda bug from the preview of mount stats ?Įxactly, Kira. Now, in truth, monstrous mounts like gryphons and hippogryphs do lower your stats a bit, even if comparing foot/horse/pegasus lord vs monstrous lord, but the extra hp, mobility, mass(to push in and out of trouble), AP, fear/terror, charge bonus and splash more than makes up for that. oh so the buffs icons where the spells are as well are not really lost that's a kinda bug from the preview of mount stats ? Yeah, the stats it shows for the next mount are stats if your hero was completely stock with that mount. Only for large monstrous mounts do you tend to lose some stats, you lose some attack, defence, and armour, but you gain a huge aoe, damage, health, mass, and usually things like fear/terror.įlying mounts are generally more fragile, but the mobility gain more than makes up for it. You typically lose a bit of shield defence, but gain speed, health, and armour for a horse. When hovering over a mount to see what it does, it will display base stats only, it doesn't include any of the bonuses or upgrades you've taken for that lord/hero. Originally posted by DarkFenix:Mounts generally don't remove buffs or much in the way of stats, what you're seeing is a quirk of the interface.
0 kommentar(er)
