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

Let's Talk About Rampage

PippingtonPippington Posts: 1,581Registered Users
edited October 2 in Balancing Discussions
Indypride recently did a video on Rampage, and how inappropriate and downright un-fun it is on non-feral units like Horned Ones, Kroxigor and Saurus:



I super agree with what he says in the video and I'm interested to see how widely that opinion is shared. It seems to me like maybe CA just aren't aware of how little people enjoy the presence of Rampage on these units. I've created a straw poll to try to find out - if you have thoughts on Rampage, please vote!

http://www.strawpoll.me/16570729/r

I'd recommend you watch the video first as Indypride goes into the arguments for why it's a problem in excellent detail.


Get on, Kroq-Gar, we're going shopping

«1

Comments

  • Green0Green0 Posts: 833Registered Users
    10+ minute video made to maximize youtube profit; tl;dw. My attention span isn't that long.

    I do think Lizardmen infantry is a bit on the weaker side, not because of Rampage only, but because of low stats AND Rampage that largely offset whatever advantage their high WS and HP might grant. Low tier infantry should get a cost reduction imo. Kroxigors need minor buffs, Horned Ones are fine.
  • JDog91JDog91 Junior Member Posts: 421Registered Users
    Rampage is a horrible mechanic to plague such a large section of an army roster. Losing control of infantry makes campaign battles so much less interesting, and it just devolves into a total mess half way through a battle unless you're winning significantly.

    I agree with the video entirely. If you're gonna make a unit kamikaze itself, give it a big stat boost or make it harder to actually make them rampage, or just get rid of it all together. I get that they wanted to give a trade-off to the okay stats of the Saurus, but every tournament I watch I never see lizardmen infantry do much at all. In campaign, blessed saurus are insane, but I think it's more important to look at MP balance for this.

    Losing control of your army is not good for gameplay. It's an unstoppable and inevitable crowd control that you consciously have to pick and there's no real trade off, you just end up losing units from it.
  • ystyst Posts: 3,136Registered Users
    Hate rampage as hell, but I think unfortunately CA likes it. So not going anywhere or even getting any change. I believe they want it to stay that way.

    Superbad mechanic, should just stay true to totalwar series and make it charge without orders.

    Totally losing control is a huge no no, units like feral manticore r 100% unusable because of it
    https://imgur.com/a/Cj4b9
    Top #3 Leaderboard on Warhammer Totalwar.
    Unit stats compare courtesy of Seal62 https://total-war-unit-compare.herokuapp.com/
  • AerocrasticAerocrastic Posts: 156Registered Users
    yst said:



    Totally losing control is a huge no no, units like feral manticore r 100% unusable because of it

    Also makes transformation of kadon a terrible spell
  • XxXScorpionXxXXxXScorpionXxX Posts: 114Registered Users
    If they're going to keep rampage what they should do is give a huge state buff to units once they go into rampage, more MA more AP, maybe even a bonus vs infantry
  • SarmatiansSarmatians Posts: 1,972Registered Users
    I agree that rampage on a lot of units doesn't make sense. Personally, I'd like to see it removed from the units like Saurus, Kroxigors and Horned Ones.

    Leave it on everything feral.

    But, I'm afraid for any meaningful changes for Lizardmen, we will have to wait for dlc
  • Disposable HeroDisposable Hero Posts: 1,406Registered Users
    Agreed, get rid of it on mainline troops, it can remain on "animals". Mostly because it's boring when you can't micro large parts of your army. Cost-adjustments where appropriate.
  • Green0Green0 Posts: 833Registered Users
    edited October 3
    I can get it when we're talking about Kroxigors, but who the hell micros Saurus?? Makes 0 difference if Saurus rampage or no, they are an exclusively frontline unit with a very boring role. I haven't seen someone disengage a frontline in ages so I highly doubt it's necessary to do so in the case of Saurus.

    Also, Horned Ones without rampage would need a big price increase, $100 for sure, perhaps even $150. In my opinion it's better to keep HO this way, it makes them cheaper, gives them some flavor and their rampage doesn't really matter as long as you pick the right engagement.

    Now about Kroxigors I'm not sure. They aren't in the best spot but other monstrous infantry also has disadvantages (Trolls - weak LD, Crypt Horrors, weak stats and crumbling, Minotaurs - weak armor and weak stats for the cost).
  • SarmatiansSarmatians Posts: 1,972Registered Users
    Saurus rampage is least problematic of those mentioned, indeed.

    It can be a pain if it comes to close late game, when opponents have few tattered units. Losing the ability to maneuver can really hurt your chances.
  • ThibixMagnusThibixMagnus Posts: 263Registered Users
    an important point is how unfitting it is to the lore, it doesn't do justice to the lizardmen.

    (Though losing control shouldn't be always bad if done right, I do hope to see orc animosity one day, in a way that can be fun, possible to avoid, and with positive trade-offs)
  • HorseWithNoNameHorseWithNoName Posts: 923Registered Users
    I think there are two things that need to be addressed when it comes to this mechanic (two fail-cases that should not happen):
    1. It makes certain units uncontrollable for too much of their lifespan. On units that have to generate their value by intensive micro, this is most apparent.
    2. It can make it so that too many units are uncontrollable at a time, so there is too little input possible from the player who is doing nothing at that time.

    To better avoid both cases, I think it is best to just cut down on the time a unit can rampage. Lowering the threshold will improve 1, but 2 will mostly remain in the late stages of a battle.

    As for changing it to an active ability, I think that would go against what I perceive to be the reason such a mechanic even exists. That reason I think is to have players play differently/adapt their strategy without having to use active abilities. This game is very difficult to follow as is with so many units to micro in real time. I even see really good players forget to micro units in some micro intensive matchups (e.g. Bret vs WE), so the amount of active abilities that lead to players adapting their play (which is the only reason they exist as if people play as though those actives did not exist, they are superfluous, apart from flavor reasons imo) is very limited and should be restricted to a few select units.
  • TennisgolfbollTennisgolfboll Posts: 4,974Registered Users
    I voted to change it because i dont think CA will remove it (best thing would have been to never add it in at all). Now that we hsve it make it trigger at 25% hp and last 30 seconds.

    The old rampage can be given to feral dinos or even keep their current. But all troops must see massive fixes to rampage.
    Read all my replies as if we are having a pint and a good old time. I will always read your reply like that.
  • Green0Green0 Posts: 833Registered Users
    edited October 3

    Now that we hsve it make it trigger at 25% hp and last 30 seconds.

    so essentially make it a non-issue in practice while claiming that it wasn’t removed by mentioning this meager effect?

    Let’s give LZM Empire Swordsmen and Cannons while we’re at it. Reskin simulatorrr :p

    Raise stats if you think Saurus are weak. ut please don’t remove rampage. If you don’t like rampage you should be playing Empire, not advocating for standardization of all factions.
  • ZeblaskyZeblasky Posts: 364Registered Users
    While certain units are indeed hampered by Rampage too much, Saurus Warriors are perhaps the only unit that is completely fine with it. Sure you can speak about removing it, but then please add at least +75 cost to them, as they have great stats as it is. But of course, being pretty much the only main line infantry for Lizards, they are always expected and thus always properly countered. Give them any other decent option, and Saurus would become much more dangerous.


    Saurus Spears though... are a pretty bad unit. Low AP and kinda meh stats. Dunno what to do with them.
  • PippingtonPippington Posts: 1,581Registered Users
    edited October 3
    Zeblasky said:

    Sure you can speak about removing it, but then please add at least +75 cost to them, as they have great stats as it is.

    You can't really have it both ways - either they are "fine with Rampage" and it's not something that should have a big impact on their cost, or it is being factored into their cost because it's a downside that actually causes them to suffer.

    If you test Saurus vs other line infantry in the same price range (Chaos Warriors, Plague Monks, White Lions) they don't overperform.
    Green0 said:

    Raise stats if you think Saurus are weak. ut please don’t remove rampage. If you don’t like rampage you should be playing Empire, not advocating for standardization of all factions.

    Yeah, let's make all factions more 'unique' by giving them abilities that are completely unfitting to their lore. How about a diplomat unit for Greenskins that convinces enemy units not to fight with the power of reasoned dialogue? Or a "deafening drinking song" ability for Phoenix Guard?


    Get on, Kroq-Gar, we're going shopping

  • TennisgolfbollTennisgolfboll Posts: 4,974Registered Users
    Green0 said:

    Now that we hsve it make it trigger at 25% hp and last 30 seconds.

    so essentially make it a non-issue in practice while claiming that it wasn’t removed by mentioning this meager effect?

    Let’s give LZM Empire Swordsmen and Cannons while we’re at it. Reskin simulatorrr :p

    Raise stats if you think Saurus are weak. ut please don’t remove rampage. If you don’t like rampage you should be playing Empire, not advocating for standardization of all factions.
    Nonsense.

    LZ without rampage is no more an empire clone than skaven.
    Read all my replies as if we are having a pint and a good old time. I will always read your reply like that.
  • PokemonsdudePokemonsdude Posts: 36Registered Users
    I agree that a lot of lizard units like saurus, kroxigors and horned ones shouldn't have rampage, but I think cold one knights and cold one dread knights should keep rampage honestly. Dark elves shouldn't be able to control cold ones like lizardmen and Cold one knights are so cost efficient anyway they don't need that buff. And for the dread knights, they should just get buffs I think, like price reductions or better melee stats.
  • Green0Green0 Posts: 833Registered Users
    edited October 3
    @Tennisgolfboll I don’t know I enjoy rampage as a mechanic as long as it’s balanced by lower cost. Adds a layer of complexity to the game. Perhaps you don’t enjoy this layer of complexity which is why I suggested playing Empire which doesn’t have these issues. If your argument is that they didn’t have it in TT, well, many things aren’t like TT now are they? Units don’t get run down if they rout, there isn’t the possibility to dispel magic, and many more. I play LZM now and again and while I do agree they are a bit unidimensional in my opinion this is not due to rampage. I enjoy the idea of having strong units but having to think about rampage as an additional complexity layer. That being said it is vastly negligible when it comes to infantry, relevant for monsters and sort of relevant for Kroxigors. Saurus Spears specifically, yea they’re weak. Suffer from what I call Phoenix Guard syndrome: inflated stats that are useless due to some limitation. In the case of PG it’s cost and speed, in the case of Saurus spears it’s the fact that you want spear infantry to hold the line only most of the time and support cav. No point in having 50 WS for $700 (correct me if I’m wrong on cost) you still can’t pierce through Reiksguard in a reasonable amount of time. TG outperform them in practice.

    Current LZM certainly do have their problems, but in my opinion rampage isn’t one of them. Possibility to exploit their short-ranged skirmishers, over-reliance on monsters and no good answers to AP halberds as well as some Lords not being playable are all problems in my opinion.
  • TennisgolfbollTennisgolfboll Posts: 4,974Registered Users
    Rampage is bad for both LZ and DEs. It should be changed or removed. Feral dinos can keep it.
    Read all my replies as if we are having a pint and a good old time. I will always read your reply like that.
  • Green0Green0 Posts: 833Registered Users
    reason being that you don’t like it. I get it.

    Grail Knights are bad for Bretonnia. They should be removed. Bretonnia players can keep Knights Errant though.
  • ZeblaskyZeblasky Posts: 364Registered Users

    Zeblasky said:

    Sure you can speak about removing it, but then please add at least +75 cost to them, as they have great stats as it is.

    You can't really have it both ways - either they are "fine with Rampage" and it's not something that should have a big impact on their cost, or it is being factored into their cost because it's a downside that actually causes them to suffer.

    If you test Saurus vs other line infantry in the same price range (Chaos Warriors, Plague Monks, White Lions) they don't overperform.
    Errr yes I can. They are fine and balanced with Rampage, and Rampage does has a big impact on their cost. And those statements do not contradict themselfs.

    If you take Saurus as a unit without rampage, then they their cost is too low for what can offer. But if you add rampage, they can be exploited in certain ways(not an easy way to do it properly btw, but it is possible). Thus their cost effectivenes becomes somewhat balanced out.

    And, well, testing Saurus versus Chaos Warriors - definetly not a good benchmark to set, as CW on their own is an OP unit(fine in Chaos roster though). White Lions are pretty much a counter unit to Saurus(Armor and AP attacks). The only one I am surprised about going even are Plague Monks, those on paper should lose decisively. I remember testing Wardancers vs Saurus, and Wardancers lost decisively without Shadow Coil on the charge and I think it was 50/50 with Shadow Coil? Or did they barely lost as well, I don't remember.

    Btw, Saurus are also characterized by relatively low MA and high WS. So in live battles spells that raize MA are especially effective if used on a Saurus frontline, which

    So the only problem I see with Saurus is that they are the only main line infantry for Lizardmen, thus making it relatively easy to counter them.
  • TennisgolfbollTennisgolfboll Posts: 4,974Registered Users
    Green0 said:

    reason being that you don’t like it. I get it.

    Grail Knights are bad for Bretonnia. They should be removed. Bretonnia players can keep Knights Errant though.

    Yeah it is bad. I hope it gets changed.
    Read all my replies as if we are having a pint and a good old time. I will always read your reply like that.
  • EnergyzedEnergyzed Posts: 101Registered Users
    I agree that rampage is not the most apealing or interesting mechanic but there is an expression from where i come from that goes something similar to " better bad known, than bad to know". What i try to say is that its better to leave it as it is than to completly rework rampage and possibly create other new problems.
    To justify changes to rampage indypride uses as a premise that rampage is Liz faction trait and how underwhelming it is compared to other TWW2 faction traits. And this is only half true, because Liz faction trait is rampage + cold blood. Also, i think he doesnt mention at any time that units with rampage got slightly better stats than similarly priced units without rampage. The clear example of this is cold one knights and cold one spear riders, with the DE counterpart having better stats but having rampage.

    I also dont agree with kroxigors and saurus needing to lose rampage or rampage having to be reworked due to this 2 units, kroxigors are on way better spot now than when the game released and if their performance isnt outstanding i think it has more to do with how predictable it is for your opponent to expect large armored monsters when facing liz. And in the case of saurus, even though i get that lore wise they shoudnt have rampage, i rather have them as they are currently on game than losing rampage from them and having their cost increased, lets say by 50.

    I share the same opinion as indypride that all feral units having rampage is a good inclusion for the game (except manticore) but some feral units could get some look at individually without the need of reworking rampage, im talking about feral cold ones, squigs and razorgors herd.

    At last, manticore, horned ones and dread knights. I agree with removing rampage from all this units and having their stats or price nerfed accordingly if needed. Unlike the other units, these units are suposed to be elite units which rely on their movibility and their ability to cycle charge to be able to get the most out of them. Rampage hinders this. From these 3 Manticore clearly needs rampage removed, but the other 2 im not complelty sure. I havent played enough with dread knights but i admit that i think horned ones are on a better spot that many may think and they are good on certain match ups.

    Overall, i doubt that CA agrees to remove/rework rampage, except maybe for manticore. They rather take the path of buffing these units if they feel they underperform, which im fine with. The best we can expect is that future units to come that rely on their movility not to have rampage.
  • SarmatiansSarmatians Posts: 1,972Registered Users
    edited October 3
    Zeblasky said:

    Zeblasky said:

    Sure you can speak about removing it, but then please add at least +75 cost to them, as they have great stats as it is.

    You can't really have it both ways - either they are "fine with Rampage" and it's not something that should have a big impact on their cost, or it is being factored into their cost because it's a downside that actually causes them to suffer.

    If you test Saurus vs other line infantry in the same price range (Chaos Warriors, Plague Monks, White Lions) they don't overperform.
    Errr yes I can. They are fine and balanced with Rampage, and Rampage does has a big impact on their cost. And those statements do not contradict themselfs.

    If you take Saurus as a unit without rampage, then they their cost is too low for what can offer. But if you add rampage, they can be exploited in certain ways(not an easy way to do it properly btw, but it is possible). Thus their cost effectivenes becomes somewhat balanced out.

    And, well, testing Saurus versus Chaos Warriors - definetly not a good benchmark to set, as CW on their own is an OP unit(fine in Chaos roster though). White Lions are pretty much a counter unit to Saurus(Armor and AP attacks). The only one I am surprised about going even are Plague Monks, those on paper should lose decisively. I remember testing Wardancers vs Saurus, and Wardancers lost decisively without Shadow Coil on the charge and I think it was 50/50 with Shadow Coil? Or did they barely lost as well, I don't remember.

    Btw, Saurus are also characterized by relatively low MA and high WS. So in live battles spells that raize MA are especially effective if used on a Saurus frontline, which

    So the only problem I see with Saurus is that they are the only main line infantry for Lizardmen, thus making it relatively easy to counter them.
    I think you're misremembering. Wardancers lose slightly without Shadow Coil, but if activated to negate the charge, win comfortably.

    What can buff Saurus indirectly is more units/lord/lores added in the DLC... High HP, LD and WS units are prime targets for buff from spells and abilities, and synergize well with more specialized units in a roster, but that bridge can be crossed when/if we get to it.
    Energyzed said:



    At last, manticore, horned ones and dread knights. I agree with removing rampage from all this units and having their stats or price nerfed accordingly if needed. Unlike the other units, these units are suposed to be elite units which rely on their movibility and their ability to cycle charge to be able to get the most out of them. Rampage hinders this. From these 3 Manticore clearly needs rampage removed, but the other 2 im not complelty sure. I havent played enough with dread knights but i admit that i think horned ones are on a better spot that many may think and they are good on certain match ups.

    Well, from the Lizardmen roster, Horned One definitely deserve it removed completely. I'd argue that when they work, they work more because they're a surprise pick.
  • VistahmVistahm Posts: 155Registered Users
    Agree with Zeblaaky with regard to saurus.

    Saurus warriors trade very cost effectively with all the infantry units in their price range but grave guard, chaos warriors and longbeards.
    Which is something logical, cause saurus warriors have low ma and ap, and the above stated units have high md and armour.

    Right now they are pretty well balanced with rampage.

    Cause lizard players get a great unit for their cost, that is in fact undercosted in like 50 gold or so thanks to rampage.

    To me thats a fair trade off. If you remove rampage from saurus their cost should go up accordingly.

    Saurus spears is a decent unit, that in my view is simply pointless in the lizardmen roster.

    Btw lizardmen are still a good and pretty decent race. They still have some pretty stupid and cancerous builds.

    In fact @CA_Duck faced down one of those stupids builds not so long ago in Shetlands King cup (i think it was in August).
  • CA_DuckCA_Duck Posts: 1,200Registered Users, CA Staff
    Vistahm said:



    In fact @CA_Duck faced down one of those stupids builds not so long ago in Shetlands King cup (i think it was in August).

    The problem there wasn't the stupid build I faced, but the stupid build I used.
    Formal disclaimer: any views or opinions expressed here are those of the poster and do not necessarily represent the views or opinions of The Creative Assembly or SEGA.
  • VistahmVistahm Posts: 155Registered Users
    CA_Duck said:

    Vistahm said:



    In fact @CA_Duck faced down one of those stupids builds not so long ago in Shetlands King cup (i think it was in August).

    The problem there wasn't the stupid build I faced, but the stupid build I used.
    To be honest my memory is a bit blurry, i think you were a bit to greedy with the bowshabti.....

    I dont remenber well your build......

    But of course you are the chief here and if you retrospectively say that it was bad, i will have to agree with you :) .

    btw i was saddened with your defeat. :'(

    I was rooting for you.
  • BlissBliss Posts: 443Registered Users
    What about a cooldown on rampage ? Like, when it triggers, it lasts 30 sec, and then you can't rampage again for like 1 min (random values).
  • PippingtonPippington Posts: 1,581Registered Users
    edited October 3
    Sorry Zeblasky, I think I misinterpreted you - when you said they are 'fine with Rampage' I thought you were saying Rampage is effectively 0 downside for infantry as others have said. The way you phrase it now makes more sense.
    Vistahm said:

    Saurus warriors trade very cost effectively with all the infantry units in their price range but grave guard, chaos warriors and longbeards.

    [...]

    Cause lizard players get a great unit for their cost, that is in fact undercosted in like 50 gold or so thanks to rampage.

    Can we actually go through this and list some of the units Saurus are confirmed to beat and not beat?

    My impressions and recollections are as follows:

    Personally tested in custom battle with another player:
    Chaos Warriors (750, paying for silver shields) - pretty much an even trade with a slight edge to the Chaos Warriors.
    Strong impressions from live battles:
    Grave Guard (750, paying for silver shields, fear and quasi-unbreakable) - Saurus lose pretty reliably
    Tomb Guard (750, paying for all the above but much less armour) - Saurus do well and usually win
    White Lions (800, paying for missile resist and heavy AP) - Saurus lose narrowly but reliably
    Longbeards (650! paying for immune to psychology) - Saurus can win 1v1 but lose badly $ for $.
    Savage Orc Big 'Uns (900, paying for anti-large) - smash Saurus with ease even before the Waaagh! changes
    Less confident impressions:
    Orc Big 'Uns (800, paying for anti-large) - Saurus win, not sure by how much. (I still think Big 'Uns are overpriced from the whopping +100 cost they got in WH2).

    This isn't a comprehensive list but this really doesn't strike me as the performance of a unit that is overperforming for its cost. There is plenty of evidence elsewhere (e.g. Squig Herds, Chaos Spawn) that discounts for Rampage are applied very patchily if at all.

    On the subject of being the only infantry - yes and that's not going to change, none of the missing Lizardmen units are infantry. On the subject of performing much better with MA buffs - maybe that might change but right now the only MA buffs Lizardmen have are seldom-used spells (Hand of Glory, Timewarp) on extremely seldom-used lords. You can't balance something by insisting the penalised player handicap themselves further by taking additional suboptimal choices.


    Get on, Kroq-Gar, we're going shopping

  • WakaWaka3000WakaWaka3000 Junior Member Posts: 356Registered Users
    I'm in the camp of people who would like to see it modified. I think its presence causes units like Horned ones, kroxigors, etc difficult to balance because rampage is a situational debuff that is difficult to assign a value to. However, I do feel that it is completely fine to have it on feral units.

    For example, if horned ones were buffed a bunch without touching rampage, then they could often trade above their weight class against factions that can't take advantage of rampage. But against, say, a heavy missile faction like the empire, you could net down a unit of horned ones and shoot them, causing them to rampage into a group of spears/demis and die. It's a fairly simple example, but I think it shows the point that rampage is hard to assign a value to because it depends situationally on what tools the enemy faction has to take advantage of it.

    I'll just throw up a list of things that might work. These are not meant to all be implemented at the same time.

    1. Reduce the HP threshold for rampage
    2. Rampage cannot occur if the unit in question is within the leadership aura of a lord or hero (This one could be interesting)
    3. Reduce the duration of rampage
    4. Using the cold-blooded ability ceases all rampaging
    5. If all else fails, remove rampage on the units in question
«1
Sign In or Register to comment.