(CS90) Savage Gors
Chaos, cost 2, loyalty 1, power 2, hit points 2
Warrior
Battlefield. This unit deals 2 additional damage while attacking if you have 2 or more
developments in your battlefield.

(CS82) Savage Marauders
Chaos, cost 3, loyalty1, power 2, hit points 1
Warrior

I don't have the cards yet, so bear with me if the stats above are wrong. Assuming that the stats are correct, it seems to me that Savage Gors are much better than Savage Marauders . They cost less, have a hit point more, and a cool card ability.

Also, I am bit disappointed in that Savarge Gors lack the Beastmen trait. Goblins can be recognised by the Goblins trait.

Any thoughs??

Allavandrel Fanmaris

Master-of-the-hunt

Hi!

Even if it's not a reasonable difference and you're still right, GORs has just 1 Power, MARAUDERS has 2.

It means that Gors deals 3 total damage with 2 dev for a 2 cost. Not so destructive, but it still has an ability for 1 less cost.

Additionally, both are 3x in the Core Set.

mmmh. Maybe in game terms the Power difference justifies the deal and I'm not able to notice it, yet. ;-)

Thanks for the correction!

In card design, power seems to be more expensive than hit points.

Allavandrel said:

Here we are...Thanks to you for this topic ;-)

I guess yes, that's a ratio they're considering in design.

Absolutely. Remember power is not just how much damage a card can do on attack/defense but how much it powers up your Kingdom and Quest Zones. I'll pay the extra resource to draw an extra card or gain additional resources each turn until it dies. Managing the power in those zones is very important. You don't want to have to stick extra characters in a zone if you don't have to just to gain the extra card/resource.

Bear in mind as well that the Gors only deal that extra damage if you have 2 developments in the battlefield, which makes them less useful in the early game and vulnerable to anything that can destroy developments (Demolition, Will of the Electors, Grimgor, Doom Divers, Smash Go Boom etc.).

Oh i LOVE savage marauders ALL OVER the place. first turn drop it in a zone for 2 more resource or card draw? All in one card (that's the clencher. it only cost me ONE card to drop him).

Yeah that's pretty fantastic. First turn getting a two power advantage is always what you're aiming for. 3 is even better.

DB_Cooper said:

The general pattern I'm seeng from Hastur's spoiler is: power equals to half resource cost (round down). Hit points are usually 1 to 1 ratio barring useful ability and/or high powers that may knock it down a notch.

Because the Kingdom zone produces a base of 3 resources every turn, the basic lower tier units seem to look like this:

1 resources, 1 loyalty, 1 power, 1 hit points.
2 resources, 1 loyalty, 1 power, 2 hit points.
3 resources, 1 loyalty, 1 power, 3 hit points.
4 resources, 2 loyalty, 2 power, 4 hit points.

Higher tier units and heroes have more variable hit points and power. Faction defining units and cards with powerful abilities are also heavy loyalty cost as expected. Self-granting low power Keyworded (toughness 1, counterstrike 1, scout) units does not seem to break this formula until other factors weigh in to give it more oomph.

Heroes also seem to follow that pattern except they have higher loyalty cost (usually equalling their resource cost) and the severe restriction of hero placement (unique and 1 per zone). Dwarven Durgnar with -1 hit point and +1 power, the dying high powered Thyrus, and mobile but low powered Johannes are slightly oddball but well within accepable limits. Chaos heroes have lower loyalty cost than other heroes due to limitation of their ablities being dependent on corruption.