I don't have enough uninterrupted time to sit down and play multiplayer, but I've been experimenting with Drakken and am a little disturbed by their potential for rushing. I'm curious about how this plays out in multiplayer.



The strategy goes like this:

• Settle near some ruins
• Give talismans to your starting units and your hero
• Equip your starting drakkenlings with as much armor as you can afford
• March to the nearest capital, engaging any villages you come across for experience

On single-player games, this is leading to victories (in 2 player games) at turn 10. The influence cost of starting a war isn't very high, especially with the temple bonus. It's mostly about travel time. Fast learner and a healing hero means that your army can sometimes reach your destination already level 2. The other player can't counterattack-- they probably don't even know where you are. The economic cost of this is pretty low: a few ruins, countered by reduced army upkeep.



I'm wondering how this plays out in multiplayer.

• Have any of you ever been on the giving or receiving end of this? How did it turn out?
• Do you alter your starting strategy when there's a Drakken player in the game? What do you do to defend against this possibility?
• What can be done to defend against this? Is it just broken?
  
  

I can say that rushing is strong in Multiplayer with any faction that has good early game units and/or strong early game. The Wild Walkers used to be VERY strong (IMHO the best) before Industry Efficient heroes (which they got one at start) and Rangers got a nerf a while ago.



In multiplayer 3+ player FFAs, rushing is a bigger risk as the other players can exploit the rusher, provided they see it coming (usually easy to do watching the Status Screen).



I'm not so sure that rushing is something that the Drakken are the best at. They do have good starting units though.

I'm not talking about waiting for a full army, or even a third unit, so industry doesn't play a role. The reason Drakken are uniquely suited to this is

• Strongest starting army
• Healer general
• Influence bonus permits declaring war prior to turn 10
• Know starting positions

I think Cultists are a bit of a pain (too much fortification) but in a 1v1, the Cultists still lose, because you deny exploitation tiles during the siege. WW might be troublesome as they're the least bothered by queuing a military unit rather then their Memorial as their first build-- but even with three Rangers and a hero, I'm not sure they can defend against iron-talismanned Drakken.



Meanwhile, I can't imagine any other faction defending successfully against this. Does even the threat of it force non-Drakken into queuing military units as their first and second builds?

That's true. I can say that from my experience in 3+ FFA MP, nobody is preparing for early aggression (vs. Drakken or not). 1v1 is probably the exception (I've played only a couple 1v1 games)



The victim could buy out a couple units since you are in their home turf. So while you have 2 T1 Iron Drakkenlings + Hero (probably leveled up a bit), they'd potentially have 3-5 units and a hero.

Propbuddha wrote:
The victim could buy out a couple units since you are in their home turf. So while you have 2 T1 Iron Drakkenlings + Hero (probably leveled up a bit), they'd potentially have 3-5 units and a hero.

A naked Stalwart costs 170 dust (on normal speed). If you sit near your capital and keep your units from getting spread, 170 dust is about what you can afford by turn 10 (unless you're really lucky with ruins or starting spot). And you can have another Stalwart by the time Drakken arrive, if you queue it on turn 1, on spread starting placement. 4 naked Stalwarts + Hero + 2 militia, that would probably beat 2 half-armored drakkenlings and their general. (If it were only 3 stalwarts, I'm not sure who I'd put my money on, probably depends on how much armor you get on the drakkenlings.)



But there's the opportunity cost-- keeping your units within movement reach of your capital means no significant exploration, while the Drakken pick up ruins along the way. And it means no spending on a 2nd pop, no building buyouts to speed production, no economic production.



I've been trying it against various AI-- so far, batting 1000 against up to Serious (which has some significant production bonuses, if I'm not mistaken). Cultists took me almost 30 turns of tedious battles though.



Meanwhile the only setback the Drakken player suffers is slightly reduced exploration (I've since realized you can explore with your hero while your drakkenlings march, then teleport the hero in). The Drakken can develop their capital economically as normal. More, the Drakken player doesn't need to actually rush, they just need to threaten a rush. There's no way for the other player to know if they're coming or not. Flip a coin to determine if you should produce military or economically at turn 1; if you get it wrong, you lose.

- Good players can push back a drakken rush, but some others not. Drakken rush is lame and a kind of exploit. Moreoever, it does not feet with the Drakkens pacifist background (now they are warmonger which can protect themself from fightback with "force truce"...).



- A good player may resist to a drakken rush, but some players will just die. It is not fair and interesting.



- As a simple idea, I think Devs could do this : the "Reveal" spell act at turn 10 and not turn 0. It would be more interesting fot the drakken to know where the seconds city are planted (if there are), and not possible to rush into the darkness as drakkens can do now.

I think the "fix" is simpler than that, just reduce Drakkenling health so they aren't so strong. Not sure why they are so strong in the first place. I don't think Amplitude factored in the fast level up and the Drakken hero healers one these stats. I've suggested as much in VIP forums and in the last live stream but I don't think the designers see it as an issue.



I agree rushing can be lame, but early aggression needs to be a part of the game, else turtling and economic expansion strategies (which are already strong) will dominate the game.



Another (semi-unrelated) idea I'm kicking around for Battle for Auriga is making the ability to Siege unlocked by a Era 2 tech. This would reduce the options available to an earlier game rusher.

Making siege a tech is an interesting idea, but I don't think it would fix this particular issue (except maybe against Cultists). In my tests, I was usually taking the city in 1-3 assaults. (Tried it with impossible difficulty, btw-- almost doable, but not quite. 4 rangers = maybe, 5 rangers = definitely not )

The thought was to force the rusher to attack defenders with full fortification (+100 HP) without the ability to cripple the economy while trapping the defender. You are correct that it does not help the defenders win the fight if the rusher was going to attack immediately without siege anyway.

I think that kind of early rush leaves the drakken open to having their city taken by anyone else who comes along though. I guess the fact that they know the starting positions, but if someone said "Hey the drakken are here at my capital" in chat, I can't imagine whoever their neighbor is is going to forgo the opportunity to take an early game capital.



That scenario sees the drakken with one capital and whoever their neighbor is with two, in my opinion (they'd have to have one, and I'd venture a two-militia city with any of the starting units, but especially with a 4 unit cultist army which is pretty trivial by turn 10)





I think in general rushing isn't a bad idea because it's unfair, or because it's an advantage, but because it's basically a suicide attack that knocks two players out of the game early.

Some of the answers here are kind of what makes me a bit wary about participating in an actual multiplayer game. The biggest factor that would protect you when you're defending against a rush is the hope that the maneuver will leave the assaulters cities undefended from roaming armies or other players. If that's the case then distance is probably the biggest factor in this kind of strategy succeeding.

The point is that rushing is a bad tactic, it's bad because it isn't smart. Even the person that you're rushing can just walk right around you and head back to your capital to take it from you. I mean occasionally it'll all work out, but only if other people don't capitalize on your rashness. If you end up seeing that kind of strategy a lot it's just because the people you're playing with are bad at the game.

Even the person that you're rushing can just walk right around you and head back to your capital to take it from you.

Well, not unless they're Drakken and they're pursuing the exact same strategy and just accidentally happen to pick your capital they won't.



If Drakken are headed straight to a capital on turn 1, nobody is going to get to the Drakken capital before the Drakken get to their target capital.