Why can only High Elf Fire Mages Ride Dragons?

[enricofermi2]

In the new patch high elf hero mages can now use a sun dragon mount. I'm not sure if this is intentional since fire mage, fire mount. But having a dragon mount is way better than having the chariot, and only the fire mage gets a special mount.

[A.Pot]

Its probably a reference to the Dragon Mage hero from the tabletop. Basically they are pure Lore of Fire wizards who ride dragons and they wear the same armor as Dragon Princes.

[enricofermi2]

Originally posted by al_potenciano:

Its probably a reference to the Dragon Mage hero from the tabletop. Basically they are pure Lore of Fire wizards who ride dragons and they can wear the same armor as Dragon Princes.

Ah I see, it does seem to make picking a fire mage a no brainer in single player though.

Dragon > chariot.

[Guts]

Originally posted by enricofermi2:

Originally posted by al_potenciano:

Its probably a reference to the Dragon Mage hero from the tabletop. Basically they are pure Lore of Fire wizards who ride dragons and they can wear the same armor as Dragon Princes.

Ah I see, it does seem to make picking a fire mage a no brainer in single player though.

Dragon > chariot.

Considering you can recruit dragons, and all of your lords get dragon mounts, that's a pretty silly statement. I'm not going to take a fire mage when I need lore of life just because one gets a dragon mount.

[Barser]

Originally posted by Twitch Staff:

Originally posted by enricofermi2:

Ah I see, it does seem to make picking a fire mage a no brainer in single player though.

Dragon > chariot.

Considering you can recruit dragons, and all of your lords get dragon mounts, that's a pretty silly statement. I'm not going to take a fire mage when I need lore of life just because one gets a dragon mount.

I will have to agree with OP. Why not choose a fire mage for campaign?

[Garatgh Deloi]

There are more heroes like that, for example out of the wizards in the empire only the amber wizard can ride a griffon.

Btw, its also a thing for arch mages, while the other arch mage types can use a moon dragon the fire arch mage is the only one with a sun dragon.

[Fendelphi]

Originally posted by Twitch Staff:

Originally posted by enricofermi2:

Ah I see, it does seem to make picking a fire mage a no brainer in single player though.

Dragon > chariot.

Considering you can recruit dragons, and all of your lords get dragon mounts, that's a pretty silly statement. I'm not going to take a fire mage when I need lore of life just because one gets a dragon mount.

However, it does make a Incendiary fire mage very potent. ;)

[Guts]

Originally posted by Barser:

Originally posted by Twitch Staff:

Considering you can recruit dragons, and all of your lords get dragon mounts, that's a pretty silly statement. I'm not going to take a fire mage when I need lore of life just because one gets a dragon mount.

I will have to agree with OP. Why not choose a fire mage for campaign?

Because a fire mage only gets access to lore of fire. A sun dragon mount is not the end all be all, there's 19 other units in your army.

Originally posted by Fendelphi:

Originally posted by Twitch Staff:

Considering you can recruit dragons, and all of your lords get dragon mounts, that's a pretty silly statement. I'm not going to take a fire mage when I need lore of life just because one gets a dragon mount.

However, it does make a Incendiary fire mage very potent. ;)

Very true :)

[enricofermi2]

Originally posted by Garatgh Deloi:

There are more heroes like that, for example out of the wizards in the empire only the amber wizard can ride a griffon.

Btw, its also a thing for arch mages, while the other arch mage types can use a moon dragon the fire arch mage is the only one with a sun dragon.

I think the difference is that dragon mounts are on a different tier than most other mounts, especially for mages.

Mages have terrible base stats, so getting a dragon mount massivly increases attack, defense and damage, where a normal lord or hero, might actually lose some state.

As well, breath attacks are one of the few abilties that are almost always worth using, since they do so much damage.

Normal mounts like gryphons or Horses, give utility but don't really make the mage stronger.

[Garatgh Deloi]

Originally posted by enricofermi2:

Normal mounts like gryphons or Horses, give utility but don't really make the mage stronger.

Well the griffon mounted amber mage is quite tanky/powerful in melee combat (for a mage). However i do agree that dragons are on another level entirely.

[Fendelphi]

Originally posted by enricofermi2:

Originally posted by Garatgh Deloi:

There are more heroes like that, for example out of the wizards in the empire only the amber wizard can ride a griffon.

Btw, its also a thing for arch mages, while the other arch mage types can use a moon dragon the fire arch mage is the only one with a sun dragon.

I think the difference is that dragon mounts are on a different tier than most other mounts, especially for mages.

Mages have terrible base stats, so getting a dragon mount massivly increases attack, defense and damage, where a normal lord or hero, might actually lose some state.

As well, breath attacks are one of the few abilties that are almost always worth using, since they do so much damage.

Normal mounts like gryphons or Horses, give utility but don't really make the mage stronger.

The sun dragon is slower than an eagle though. Also more expensive in terms of upkeep compared to other mage mounts.

[Barser]

Yes the upkeep will be higher, but it will totally be worth it. We will see, but I cant really see myself getting other mages for my army.

[Garatgh Deloi]

Originally posted by Barser:

Yes the upkeep will be higher, but it will totally be worth it. We will see, but I cant really see myself getting other mages for my army.

Depends on the reason for getting the mage.

If i'm going for damage dealing then yea the fire mages having sun dragons, together with decent damage spells, will likely make me pick them (Especially with Imrik since his army becomes extra effective with fire).

But if i want to be able to heal my dragons then a fire mage would simply not be able to serve that purpose.

Or net my enemies, etc.

[Barser]

Yes I understand that. But from a campaign perspective it just seems much superior. Fire mages are really good in campaign already, but with kindleflame and dragon breath and dragon attacks, the other mages cant rival that on there horse/chariots.

[Flesh wound]

Originally posted by Barser:

Originally posted by Twitch Staff:

Considering you can recruit dragons, and all of your lords get dragon mounts, that's a pretty silly statement. I'm not going to take a fire mage when I need lore of life just because one gets a dragon mount.

I will have to agree with OP. Why not choose a fire mage for campaign?

Because lore of life is OP when we are talking about single entity units.

What do you think its stronger 20 dragons that have no way to heal, or 19 dragons that can regenerate up to 80% of lost HP? who can replenish in the middle of foreign territory?

There is a reason why Life Slann is the most powerful lizard lord by a lot, even though he sucks at melee and its not a LL.

Single entity doomstacks with lore of life are OP in the game they can take several armies on their own.

[Dagy47]

its kinda the same thing as the beast wizard for empire being able to ride a griffon, and others cant...