Welcome

Please register for Total War Access to use the forums. If you're an existing user, your forum details will be merged with Total War Access if you register with the same email or username. For more information please read our FAQ’s here.

Categories

Vampire Counts and balance (Anti Large)

2»

Comments

  • MadDemiurgMadDemiurg Posts: 2,386Registered Users
    edited November 2017
    If VC can rout supporting infantry isolated monsters would usually die to VC blob, especially if you have mortis and corpse cart to support. Skeleton spearmen and crypt horrors both are pretty effective in this scenario and even grave guard can do some damage vs something that's not an ultimate anti infantry monster. Ethereal units can do ok vs armored monsters too, especially with regen aura, but they're still a coinflip unit vs most factions due to how hard they are countered by magic attacks. Exhausted units lose armor and AP damage so non AP damage becomes more effective lategame. VS Lizardmen it's basically a question of whether you can outblob and outlast them.

    Tbh HE air superiority and lord sniping is a much bigger problem for VC imo, since VC are nothing without their lords.

    Team Skaven

    Team O&G

  • InfletoInfleto Member Posts: 300Registered Users
    edited November 2017
    eumaies said:

    TeNoSkill said:

    There are no gg halberd in tt for many editions, there were on 3rd but got removed, so forget it.

    Does sound like an legit addition tho co sidering CW's have also 3 variants
    Yeah but that's part of chaos strength - versatility in lots of infantry variants. It's a better game when not everyone has every useful variant.
    intresting
  • TeNoSkillTeNoSkill Posts: 2,827Registered Users
    Considering the vast difference
    eumaies said:

    TeNoSkill said:

    There are no gg halberd in tt for many editions, there were on 3rd but got removed, so forget it.

    Does sound like an legit addition tho co sidering CW's have also 3 variants
    Yeah but that's part of chaos strength - versatility in lots of infantry variants. It's a better game when not everyone has every useful variant.
    Considering VC have an exceptional problem against single large entities and the unit wouldn t break any basic rules of the faction, why not?

    I have seen this argument many times in DoW III forums used and it lead to things like not having rhinos for SM, Fire dragons for eldar and flash gitz for orks
  • eumaieseumaies Senior Member Posts: 4,527Registered Users
    TeNoSkill said:

    Considering the vast difference

    eumaies said:

    TeNoSkill said:

    There are no gg halberd in tt for many editions, there were on 3rd but got removed, so forget it.

    Does sound like an legit addition tho co sidering CW's have also 3 variants
    Yeah but that's part of chaos strength - versatility in lots of infantry variants. It's a better game when not everyone has every useful variant.
    Considering VC have an exceptional problem against single large entities and the unit wouldn t break any basic rules of the faction, why not?

    I have seen this argument many times in DoW III forums used and it lead to things like not having rhinos for SM, Fire dragons for eldar and flash gitz for orks
    Well I think the exceptional problem with large is disputed somewhat by ca-ato. But also, countering via improved terrorgheists and the combined arms needed to make them work is more interesting than everybody getting the same cav counters.
  • TeNoSkillTeNoSkill Posts: 2,827Registered Users
    eumaies said:

    TeNoSkill said:

    Considering the vast difference

    eumaies said:

    TeNoSkill said:

    There are no gg halberd in tt for many editions, there were on 3rd but got removed, so forget it.

    Does sound like an legit addition tho co sidering CW's have also 3 variants
    Yeah but that's part of chaos strength - versatility in lots of infantry variants. It's a better game when not everyone has every useful variant.
    Considering VC have an exceptional problem against single large entities and the unit wouldn t break any basic rules of the faction, why not?

    I have seen this argument many times in DoW III forums used and it lead to things like not having rhinos for SM, Fire dragons for eldar and flash gitz for orks
    Well I think the exceptional problem with large is disputed somewhat by ca-ato. But also, countering via improved terrorgheists and the combined arms needed to make them work is more interesting than everybody getting the same cav counters.
    I think hardly anyone would have an problem with different factions having halberd units at their disposal. Each army works unique in it´s own way and that alone lets similar units work vastly different.

    It would be an good addition to finally have some decent lineholders in the VC roster against large
  • DandalusXVIIDandalusXVII Posts: 4,171Registered Users
    Infleto said:

    CA_Ato said:

    Terrorgheist scream attack will become a bit more potent against large targets.
    Vargheists are candidates for a buff, possibly AP, but not to the point that they become an armour piercing unit.

    That said, the theory that VC struggle against factions with a lot of strong single monsters does not appear to be true for all players. In terms of QB results, they struggle most against Dwarfs, while being fairly even against Lizardmen for example. Monsters will exhaust quicker than chaff and will then be vulnerable to a number of VC units. I agree that it's more difficult than having a cheap AP anti-L unit in the army, but players are finding other tools against monsters.

    As always, I'm not saying VC don't need more tweaks, but you might want to investigate this faction from different angles.

    KR, A

    "theory that VC struggle against factions with a lot of strong single monsters "
    That is not the theory we are talking about. We are talking about VC struggling against strong Single monsters.
    A QB player of a faction who has single unit monsters that elects not to take them.... Is not what we are talking about.


    So please tell use what are the units you are talking about that the VC have which larger monsters are oh so vulnerable too? What do the VC's have that is actually cost effective when not looked at in just a vacuum?
    Just try to kill large units and with the battle.
  • MadDemiurgMadDemiurg Posts: 2,386Registered Users
    edited November 2017


    Just try to kill large units and with the battle.

    lol, this is what it sounds like:


    Team Skaven

    Team O&G

  • DavielebbDavielebb Posts: 792Registered Users
    Really lol?A faction that dominated a large portion of game 1, and still stayeda top tier faction for the rest now has a weakness that TBH is onyl really brought to light by lizardmens armored dinos?
    So what loleven if thats the case let them be a lower tier faction for a while its only fair. Only dinos give a huge problem to VC and theres an answer for that.. dont fight lizardmen with VC, just as you shouldnt fight dwarfs as wood elves and expect it to be fair.
    For other large monsters its not impossible, try taking your lord on a dragon now that they are much better, try combining magic with units, okkams mind razor from lore of shadows on a unit of blood knights will wreck dinos,
    Use spirit leech, heroes, etc to deal with monsters as well, focus on killing their army and ignore monsters for the most part, your army is immune to terror anyway and if the enemy has an army entirely of monsters well then thats just cheese and you cant expect armies to be balance for dealing with cheese builds.
  • eumaieseumaies Senior Member Posts: 4,527Registered Users
    TeNoSkill said:

    eumaies said:

    TeNoSkill said:

    Considering the vast difference

    eumaies said:

    TeNoSkill said:

    There are no gg halberd in tt for many editions, there were on 3rd but got removed, so forget it.

    Does sound like an legit addition tho co sidering CW's have also 3 variants
    Yeah but that's part of chaos strength - versatility in lots of infantry variants. It's a better game when not everyone has every useful variant.
    Considering VC have an exceptional problem against single large entities and the unit wouldn t break any basic rules of the faction, why not?

    I have seen this argument many times in DoW III forums used and it lead to things like not having rhinos for SM, Fire dragons for eldar and flash gitz for orks
    Well I think the exceptional problem with large is disputed somewhat by ca-ato. But also, countering via improved terrorgheists and the combined arms needed to make them work is more interesting than everybody getting the same cav counters.
    I think hardly anyone would have an problem with different factions having halberd units at their disposal. Each army works unique in it´s own way and that alone lets similar units work vastly different.

    It would be an good addition to finally have some decent lineholders in the VC roster against large
    I don't feel that strongly about this issue for VC but note that dwarfs have no regular infAntry with anti large and the game is better for it. Slayers are more interesting.
  • OdTengriOdTengri Posts: 3,531Registered Users
    Grave Guard w/Halberds seem like a reasonable add if its necessary, but only as a last resort.
    Give us Doombull, Great Bray-Shaman, Wargor, and Tuskgor Chariot.

  • saellsaell Posts: 471Registered Users
    Well i'm glad i can expect tomb guard with halberds
  • patlau2001patlau2001 Posts: 213Registered Users
    Well.... giants are pretty powerful single entity monsters... VC never had trouble in game 1 with them. I haven't really played VC since game 2, but terrogehiest was really solid against large units. And of course blood knights. These are some of the most powerful anti large options in the game, giving them halbert seems too much, in my view.

    VC has strong magic options too, which increases combat performances of melee duel, lords have super strong abilities for dueling too. I can't see that to be a genuine issue for VC.
  • KayosivKayosiv Senior Member Posts: 2,623Registered Users
    Vampires had huge problems with giant spam in game 1. It was the most effective way to beat them for several patches.
    Space Frontier is a sci-fi themed board game I've designed for 2-4 players. Please take a look and enjoy our free Print-and-Play at FreezeDriedGames.com

    If you have any questions about tactics or mechanics in Total War Warhammer multiplayer, feel free to PM me.
  • RandomTagRandomTag Posts: 1,479Registered Users
    CA_Ato said:

    Terrorgheist scream attack will become a bit more potent against large targets.
    Vargheists are candidates for a buff, possibly AP, but not to the point that they become an armour piercing unit.

    That said, the theory that VC struggle against factions with a lot of strong single monsters does not appear to be true for all players. In terms of QB results, they struggle most against Dwarfs, while being fairly even against Lizardmen for example. Monsters will exhaust quicker than chaff and will then be vulnerable to a number of VC units. I agree that it's more difficult than having a cheap AP anti-L unit in the army, but players are finding other tools against monsters.

    As always, I'm not saying VC don't need more tweaks, but you might want to investigate this faction from different angles.

    KR, A

    First, mass collected QB data contains a majority of amateur players who don't know what they're doing, as I explained before. The only reliable source of info is high level play among experienced players who know game mechanics and unit characteristics. Only when a skilled opponent deliberately fielding hard counter units backed by proper support could expose the IMBA and design flaws in full.

    Second, Both Vargulf and Vargheist have Strength 5 on TT. I don't know why Vargulf has AP while Vargheist don't.





  • CA_AtoCA_Ato The Creative Assembly Posts: 700Registered Users, Moderators, CA Staff Mods, CA Staff
    Here we go
    RandomTag said:


    First, mass collected QB data contains a majority of amateur players who don't know what they're doing, as I explained before.

    Here we go again... as I also explained before, if anything the data would be skewed by the distribution of activity of players, not by the distribution of their skill. How else do you explain that the data does confirm other weaknesses in balancing mainly abused by top players? Diss data as much as you like, but be aware that you are discrediting yourself by deliberately not making full use of all information available.

    Secondly, because we interpret TT stats as we see fit.

    KR, Ato
  • RandomTagRandomTag Posts: 1,479Registered Users
    Deliberately not making full use of all information available, or screening out the noise, is a common practice among game designers for titles with big MP scene. Dayvie only pays full attention to data collected from Gold League and above, and I don't consider such method as discrediting himself. Well of course CA designers are not Dayvie or IceFrog, nor TW titles comparable with SC2/Dota2 on MP scene and budget dedicated to balance. Under such constrains a different approach may be necessary, this I understand.
  • patlau2001patlau2001 Posts: 213Registered Users
    Now that I'm thinking straight, I would disagree giving grave guard with halberts.

    Vamp wins the cav fight, with mortis engine the infantry fight favours VC too, missile with short range is ineffective against vamp due to summoning, and vamp monsters are viable (terrorgheist can goon single big monsters), give them halbert and I'm afraid they will be op...

    I never thought VC have a problem against monsters, in my view its missile that can wreck VC.
  • KhorneFlakesKhorneFlakes Posts: 3,373Registered Users
    As far s tourney goes,besdies kroq-gar ,none of the single model monster created problems for vampires let alone any other race,
    just look at this a kholek + shaggoth couldn't even do anything here let alone ,dinos

    https://twitch.tv/videos/200426525?t=06h52m55s

    All single entity monsters are are performing worse from wh1 and hp buff from 5-10% only,halberds buff,vigor changes,make this guys worse and so do in testing,again other than kroq-gar with swiftness of itzl and net + breath in tournies, i haven't seen a single issue with any other single entity monster in the mathces i watched ,most likely
    in a week we will see monsters undepowered thread.

    now truth be told the main problem are just healing on dinos (which can be easily fixed if cold blooded was only self )and net + breath which is justdown to net or breath

    Balance Is A Lie

  • patlau2001patlau2001 Posts: 213Registered Users
    Khorne flakes I agree with u. Just self healing seems fine for cold blooded. At least there is one shot of healing.

    Also let's have the dragons brush their teeth, so their bad breathe would hurt so much? Net + breath seems a bit too much? I'm aware that someone said terrogheist will get stronger breathe, that's also an option too?
  • eumaieseumaies Senior Member Posts: 4,527Registered Users
    RandomTag said:

    CA_Ato said:

    Terrorgheist scream attack will become a bit more potent against large targets.
    Vargheists are candidates for a buff, possibly AP, but not to the point that they become an armour piercing unit.

    That said, the theory that VC struggle against factions with a lot of strong single monsters does not appear to be true for all players. In terms of QB results, they struggle most against Dwarfs, while being fairly even against Lizardmen for example. Monsters will exhaust quicker than chaff and will then be vulnerable to a number of VC units. I agree that it's more difficult than having a cheap AP anti-L unit in the army, but players are finding other tools against monsters.

    As always, I'm not saying VC don't need more tweaks, but you might want to investigate this faction from different angles.

    KR, A

    First, mass collected QB data contains a majority of amateur players who don't know what they're doing, as I explained before. The only reliable source of info is high level play among experienced players who know game mechanics and unit characteristics. Only when a skilled opponent deliberately fielding hard counter units backed by proper support could expose the IMBA and design flaws in full.

    Second, Both Vargulf and Vargheist have Strength 5 on TT. I don't know why Vargulf has AP while Vargheist don't.





    Even if we accept your premise you would still need to clearly explain the build that VC are hugely weak against to make the logic check out. There's been some discussion of lizard men healing large units. Anything else?

    The fact that gobbos and others frequently take Giants vs VC doesn't necessarily means it's op. That's just what people felt they needed to even have a shot - which makes some sense they are immune to psychology via terror. But that doesn't clarify that they are OP.

    I really like the terrorgheists breath tweak ato suggested he's doing.
  • kaneofbloodkaneofblood Posts: 9Registered Users
    GG with halberds does not fix the issue. Stat-wise GG are not all that good, giving them halberds would lower their m.att and increase m.def a bit compared to GG-GW, and that does nothing in making them trade efficiently with enemy halberd infantry, which is more than half of the issue. Not even wraiths with anti-large would help.

    If a giant is in a blob of friendly units the point of contact a halberd infantry would have is so minimal that it makes no difference if it has anti large or not. In fact, it would make things worse, because they'll just lose to halberd infantry of monster faction even harder due to stat shift compared to great weapon unit. That or people would just start to grab great weapon infantry instead or mix them up. And that would shred vamp roster even harder.

    I dont think giving terrorgheist a better tool for that (breath) or buffing vargheist does anything either, at least not in QB, as there are no silly rules to limit rosters. Monster factions would contest the skies more with flying monsters or lords on flying monsters, and that pretty much is the same as them taking giants, just trading a bit of staying power for mobility. Vampires are just **** against some factions, just like some factions are **** against some other factions. Deal with it.
  • eumaieseumaies Senior Member Posts: 4,527Registered Users

    GG with halberds does not fix the issue. Stat-wise GG are not all that good, giving them halberds would lower their m.att and increase m.def a bit compared to GG-GW, and that does nothing in making them trade efficiently with enemy halberd infantry, which is more than half of the issue. Not even wraiths with anti-large would help.

    If a giant is in a blob of friendly units the point of contact a halberd infantry would have is so minimal that it makes no difference if it has anti large or not. In fact, it would make things worse, because they'll just lose to halberd infantry of monster faction even harder due to stat shift compared to great weapon unit. That or people would just start to grab great weapon infantry instead or mix them up. And that would shred vamp roster even harder.

    I dont think giving terrorgheist a better tool for that (breath) or buffing vargheist does anything either, at least not in QB, as there are no silly rules to limit rosters. Monster factions would contest the skies more with flying monsters or lords on flying monsters, and that pretty much is the same as them taking giants, just trading a bit of staying power for mobility. Vampires are just **** against some factions, just like some factions are **** against some other factions. Deal with it.

    This is a well made argument. Can you flesh it out a bit with an example or two of an army you feel dominates VC?
  • DandalusXVIIDandalusXVII Posts: 4,171Registered Users
    Kayosiv said:

    Vampires had huge problems with giant spam in game 1. It was the most effective way to beat them for several patches.

    It was also a noobish way and only noobs and fools who underestimated the opponent fell for it. Giants have practically no armor and are vulnerable to vargheists+spearmen+bats+lords+heroes+w9lves etc.
  • Elder_MolochElder_Moloch Posts: 1,793Registered Users

    Yes i do, they would become very good vs factions like greenskins and beastman, they could suddenly deal with all threats and not be infantry centered.

    Fair point, but if to cut terror/increase cost +exchange some AP to Anti-large it could work. I mean, GS don't have problems with killing Cairn Wraiths with their infantry+now they have access to magic attack with Fist of Gork spell, but in current state it's less cost-effective.
    But I would agree with "not infantry centered". It could become another wierd unit between Banshee or Chillgheists with diverse functionality but in strange position due to nerfs/exchanges.


    TeNoSkill said:

    Dwarves are the best faction to counter the VC's best tool : fear and terror.

    Plus they are highly armored (while Horros nerfed/Grave Guard with GW still don't seem viable) and have magic resistance (so Wraiths ain't that good, especially if there is W&R). And Longbeards+Slayers+all this slowing down stuff could reap apart their monsters which one according to Ato gets exhausted faster. WoD is more expensive and formation dependent. So eh. But, I still think that armored infantry not such a big deal compared to armored large.

    I wouldn't also say that VC are fully melee only. If Terrogheist breath would improve and Dragon breath won't be nerfed too much + Gaze of Nagash would work well it could do some job. Same improvements to common Xereus/Pit of Shades could help to deal with not very expensive infantry.


    CA_Ato said:

    Terrorgheist scream attack will become a bit more potent against large targets.
    Vargheists are candidates for a buff, possibly AP, but not to the point that they become an armour piercing unit.

    That said, the theory that VC struggle against factions with a lot of strong single monsters does not appear to be true for all players. In terms of QB results, they struggle most against Dwarfs, while being fairly even against Lizardmen for example. Monsters will exhaust quicker than chaff and will then be vulnerable to a number of VC units. I agree that it's more difficult than having a cheap AP anti-L unit in the army, but players are finding other tools against monsters.

    As always, I'm not saying VC don't need more tweaks, but you might want to investigate this faction from different angles.

    KR, A

    Thanks for info, Ato.
    Buff to Terrorgheist attack would be nice, but I hope that it won't be as strong as current breath attacks and Terrogheist as a unit would be also adressed.
    >I agree that it's more difficult than having a cheap AP anti-L unit in the army, but players are finding other tools against monsters.
    Problem with tools is that there are not much tools to deal with them for VC and such engagement could take too much and too long to be considered as balanced counter but with other options. And VC don't have even expensive units to counter effectively a lot of armored targets especially strong as Mammoths/Arachanrok/Shagoths etc.
    It doesn't mean that's impossible - it just mean it favors other factions with such stuff if they pull it against VC.
    >but you might want to investigate this faction from different angles.
    Could you give any tips which way we should investegate?
    Also, what about current VC productivity in current state? Are they in high-tier/mid-tier/low-tier league according to QB statistics?
    And speaking about statistic: argument about Large (mainly armored single model Large units) not a problem for VC based on how VC fits with Lizardmen is a little bit strange even if exclude:
    Not every Lizardmen army heavily oriented on Large
    Not every Lizardmen player spams Large.
    Not every Lizardmen player know how to use and abuse weakness properly
    Not enough statistic info on this match because it's not being so long/VC players are rare/VC players avoid this match.
    Not only Lizardmen have access to problematic for VC Large units. Its not Chariots against Dwarfs, but one of the tools that tip the scales in other factions favor. Same Dragon spam is not only about breath attacks.
    >How else do you explain that the data does confirm other weaknesses in balancing mainly abused by top players?
    Maybe not enough data on VC or something mentioned above? How many people play them now?

    for now imo if overall balance goes its a matter if top factions are going down then no need to buff vamps,but changes to internal balnace roster is still ended(that includes buff to both terrorgheits,vargheists or nerf to mortis engine mostly engaged in melele condition )

    Would kinda agree, though still think that better balance for VC roster would make it more balanced inside the roster and towards other factions. But I'm not sure if it would make it on par with current high-tier/mid-tier factions.
    Same option with Halberds would give tool for VC, but how effective /accessible would be this tool in their roster depends from implementation. Anyway, VC do need 2 units to be on par with Empire/Chaos with their diversity.
    It could be Coven Throne/Grave Guard Halberds/Spirit Hosts/Swar of bats. Maybe even non-tt friendly undead Skin Wolves, lol.


    @Kayosiv
    Would completely agree with everything, maybe Black Coach is debatable though.
    It could get small cost reduction either small nerfs to current abilities, but more overall buffs through more abilities. Like give 5 abilities, where first would activate at 30 seconds, 2-d at 60 seconds, 3-d at 90, 4th at 135 seconds and 5th at 180 seconds. So it faster get buffs and would be stronger at the end, than in current state, but would be weaker until third ability would activated compared to current state.


    @eumaies
    >It's a better game when not everyone has every useful variant.
    Could agree if you meant that not every one should have same unit options, but in that case their should be other extra or stronger options to deal with something instead of having actual unit.
    >But also, countering via improved terrorgheists and the combined arms needed to make them work is more interesting than everybody getting the same cav counters.
    Interesting, but unit is simply easier. Especially when Mammoths would return. Also I don't get why people so against unit for VC. If it would be properly priced/have proper stats it won't be such a big deal for others, meanwhile VC would get actual option from abusing them, instead of combining all the forces and fight Large just to get overwhelmed in other parts of battlefield.
    But we'll see. Problem, is that VC need strong tool for that. But I don't think that making his breath as strong as current Dragon Breaths is good idea even if it would have smaller nishe.
    >I don't feel that strongly about this issue for VC but note that dwarfs have no regular infAntry with anti large and the game is better for it. Slayers are more interesting.
    Dwarfs have stronger infantry in general+stronger abilities and ranged to deal with Large. They could stop and debuff Large unit with Tormentor Sword and destroy it with Slayers (which are also more cost-effective in their role than Blood Knights which still lose to weakened Demis (Halberds) and cant' kill in 1v1 any large single model unit which is more expensive than they are). +in cases when Dwarf player expect lots of large it leads to Slayer spam.
    Also, don't forget in which situation were Dwarfs in last patch of WH1 because they lack of strong tools.


    @patlau2001
    >Well.... giants are pretty powerful single entity monsters... VC never had trouble in game 1 with them.
    They had troubles with them during few patches. I don't remeber were GIants nerfed or VC got some buffs but after that they stop to have serious troubles with Giants. Though, it doesn't matter that Giant become easy target for VC if he was protected with fodder.
    > I haven't really played VC since game 2,
    Why not to play and share you experience. Vampires in Game 1 and in Game 2 are 2 different factions if to count all the buffs for some other factions+WH2 factions.
    >terrogehiest was really solid against large units
    >terrorgheist can goon single big monsters

    Only flying units with single model and only in Game 1. In game 2 Dragons beat them even in the air (even against cheaper Forest Dragon with better breath attacks he trade pretty even). And as a ground fighter Terrogheist was never good. He always lost to Giant, Shagoth and Arachnarok and other big single stuff.
    Blood Knights good against cav and even cav like monsters but not against armored large units with single model.
    > These are some of the most powerful anti large options in the game
    ...Even in Game 1 strongest option was always Demis (Halberds), yes BK were also bit OP against cav, but they never were that strong against Monsters (same as Hex Wraiths which supposed to deal well with armored targets but deal well only with few like same Demis). And I already replied about your misconceptions about Terrogheists.
    >lords have super strong abilities for dueling too
    ??? I know only 1 against common enemies: Master of Beguilement (Vlad/Isabella). El Syf is Lord/hero only. Everything else common for every faction.
    Also Lore of Vampires is strong for synergy with army and their weaknesses, not because it just strong to make them stronger for no reason. In current state it seems that it doesn't cover their weaknesses enough.
    Also all your stuff doesn't adress example with Large unit protected with anti-large infanty.
    >Vamp wins the cav fight when supported with summons - yes. when not 50/50. Also other factions could counter BK with magic and support attack with ranged.
    >with mortis engine the infantry fight favours VC too
    In any normal battle Mortis Engine is focused among first alongside with BK. But I would kinda agree that with support of Nehek+Engine+summons and without any counter from other side it would favor VC for sure.
    >missile with short range is ineffective against vamp due to summoning
    Do summons kill them? Can't other factions destroy summons? Do factions have only short range missile units as an option?
    You could just started with "No buffs for VC because they still OP/fine, maybe they need even nerfs, don't give VC anything"as well and this would look same.
    Halberds would just give versatility to VC (and actually won't even solve problem which described OP) - how they would be integrated (if they would be integrated) - it's the main question. Anyway, VC should get some units for army roster if CA would ever make some new units for old world factions (meanwhile, BM and WE could get Manticore even now while Chaos get some Chaos spawns and Manticore summons as an abilities for specific units).
    P.S. Missiles are problematic, but I thought it's more natural for VC to have disadvantage in such category. And people as far as I understand don't agree to give missile resistance to units like Ghouls/Fell Bats/Dire Wolves/Crypt Horrors/Vargheists/Varghulf/Black Coach/Terrogheist and Mortis Engine, so at least they would be able to have advantage in this area. So...

    If VC can rout supporting infantry isolated monsters would usually die to VC blob, especially if you have mortis and corpse cart to support. Skeleton spearmen and crypt horrors both are pretty effective in this scenario and even grave guard can do some damage vs something that's not an ultimate anti infantry monster. Ethereal units can do ok vs armored monsters too, especially with regen aura, but they're still a coinflip unit vs most factions due to how hard they are countered by magic attacks. Exhausted units lose armor and AP damage so non AP damage becomes more effective lategame. VS Lizardmen it's basically a question of whether you can outblob and outlast them.

    Tbh HE air superiority and lord sniping is a much bigger problem for VC imo, since VC are nothing without their lords.

    Yes, I would agree. But main problem with "If'. If your could rout infantry and cactch monster from running away and ME/Corpse Cart are still alive, you could technically win. And if Large units, instead of being protected by infantry, bunch together and focus your important units. Well, that's not nice too.
    >VS Lizardmen it's basically a question of whether you can outblob and outlast them.
    Yes. And it really seems that it favors LM where VC while VC were the one which were made to outlast opponent. But i could be wrong.
    >Tbh HE air superiority and lord sniping is a much bigger problem for VC imo, since VC are nothing without their lords.
    There a lot of other VC problems. Fighting for air superiority against fully flying factions and their control over ground as a result. Ranged stuff like Skirmish oriented builds. Lord sniping in general and focusing important units. Blobing, espeically healing blobs. No protection from missile fire on some units. Kinda weak low-tier cav option. Nets in general and no fully functioning alternative to Net - only Raise Dead as Net-like. Good Halberds could also favor other factions especially if they could destroy fodder+monster. Superior magic or magic tools or harassing VC magic tools. I also feel that AP segment isa bit weaker due to Crypt Horrors changes and not enough buffs for GG GW (but not sure about that). And hero segment weaker (not so drastical as for GS, but still ain't nice). And yeah. Same Large: would it be cav spam (light version) or Monster spam (harder version).
    As I said before it's not like Single Large units, cycle charging or chariots against Old Dwarfs. But amount of this stuff could be painful especially when something like breath attacks+net or Dwellers+Net happens and if faction already have good tools vs VC.
    +I really think that current system makes VC crumble more and Forbidden Rod for Necro Heroes as alternative to Arcanes for VC lords ain't that good especially with nerfs to recharge rates.
    So adressing it, not with big buffs, but with a little bit here, a little bit there could help them to become both strong and balanced.
    ____________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Sign In or Register to comment.