I hate it, when strategy games do this.>unit is one of the most effective units in the game for it's intended role>nothing in it's stats indicate that it should be as effective as it is>look_inside.mp4>the entire balance of the game is built on the never actually communicated mechanic that knocked down units are invincible>that is to prevent monster and cavalry focused armies to just completely demolish other factions and why battles, when you zoom out, feel like punching water - single entities, chariots, cavalry are just crashing into blobs of infantry over and over again, sweeping hundreds of entities on the ground, only for them to reform into a blob>so the reason why dogs are so effective is that they have so low mass, that they never knock down enemy units, when they attack>they also attack like at least two to three times as fast as any other unit in the game with no stat explaining or indicating their fast attack animations>if they had actually good stats, they would completely dominate the game and be by far the best unit and just melt any other unit
I must be retarded because I just use dogs to bait and harass ranged before I upgrade to cavalry. Are they really that good?
it's genuinely insane that the missile strength stat in WH3 is a normalized DPS stat but weapon strength is literally just how hard the weapon hits and its literally impossible to know how fast a unit attacks in melee other than timing it yourself
>>2506110Nope. OP is a dumb cocksucker, like usual.
>>2506110If they had better stats, they'd be the best unit in the game.But since they have shit stats, their greatest strength is making routed units melt in seconds with dog bites.
>>2506110They're good at chasing down routing infantry. That's about it. They die like flies against anything that can fight back and even as flankers they tend to not be great since they can't cycle charge as well as cav.
>>2506109These units are only good at killing fleeing enemies. Also>not playing SFO
