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

Should the AP on elven archers be reduced?

1235»

Comments

  • cool_ladcool_lad Senior Member IndiaRegistered Users Posts: 2,278
    Pocman said:

    cool_lad said:

    It's less of HE archers are too good in isolation and more that they're far better than their counterparts. If their range is not to be nerfed, then I think that we should at lease establish how the other units (Crossbows and Glade Guard) should perform in relation to each other.

    IMO, the differences between them should be:-
    1. Glade Guard: most versatile and best archer unit of the lot; perhaps give them 360 degree shooting to allow them to really be used as a fast mobile force instead of being shoehorned into a mainline archer role. They could also perhaps have their price reduced a notch to the same level as the armoured HE archers (525).
    2. Crossbowmen: most damage per shot; these guys should do appreciably more damage than their counterparts, in order to represent the fact that crossbows had strength 4 attacks instead of strength 3 attacks; give them say 23 or 26 ranged damage as opposed to the 20 that others have.
    3. HE Archers: best mainline archer; these guys could remain as is, but they should at least go up in cost. They cost 10 points as opposed to 9 for crossbows, so a price point of 500 seems more appropriate (which still keeps them cheaper than Glade Guard).

    IMO this at least differentiates these units from each other and creates some appreciable differences between them.

    Completely disagree:

    Glade guards with 360 fire would be OP as hell. Crossbowmen do not need more damage per shot: they already have the best damage of the 3 units you are comparing. And HE archers do have less ap than the other ones:

    I don't think any changes are needed.
    I think that claims regarding the OP nature of the suggested buffs seem rather inflated when one looks at the units in question.

    A. Crossbowmen have 20 damage, which is 2 less than Glade Guard and 1 more than HE archers. They're very much middle of the pack, while having significantly lower range, which serves as a pretty massive disadvantage. Higher damage would merely offset, but not eliminate this disadvantage; giving crossbows a separate identity instead of just making them into a worse version of HE archers.
    B. Glade Guard actually do more damage than HE archers, a grand total of 50 more damage for the entire unit, while suffering from the significantly higher cost and lower range. For what should be the best archer unit of the group, they are decidedly unimpressive while being substantially more vulnerable. Their very slightly increased damage doesn't compensate for these substantial drawbacks, especially in light of their cost.

    Overall, the differences in damage aren't sufficient to give each unit an intelligible identity; to the extent that the range advantage of the HE archers completely eclipses any supposed advantages the other units have. And that's before one looks at the cost of HE archers, which is far too low for what they bring to the table, or indeed, reflective of the cost differences from the TT.
  • Cukie251Cukie251 Registered Users Posts: 1,213
    cool_lad said:

    Pocman said:

    cool_lad said:

    It's less of HE archers are too good in isolation and more that they're far better than their counterparts. If their range is not to be nerfed, then I think that we should at lease establish how the other units (Crossbows and Glade Guard) should perform in relation to each other.

    IMO, the differences between them should be:-
    1. Glade Guard: most versatile and best archer unit of the lot; perhaps give them 360 degree shooting to allow them to really be used as a fast mobile force instead of being shoehorned into a mainline archer role. They could also perhaps have their price reduced a notch to the same level as the armoured HE archers (525).
    2. Crossbowmen: most damage per shot; these guys should do appreciably more damage than their counterparts, in order to represent the fact that crossbows had strength 4 attacks instead of strength 3 attacks; give them say 23 or 26 ranged damage as opposed to the 20 that others have.
    3. HE Archers: best mainline archer; these guys could remain as is, but they should at least go up in cost. They cost 10 points as opposed to 9 for crossbows, so a price point of 500 seems more appropriate (which still keeps them cheaper than Glade Guard).

    IMO this at least differentiates these units from each other and creates some appreciable differences between them.

    Completely disagree:

    Glade guards with 360 fire would be OP as hell. Crossbowmen do not need more damage per shot: they already have the best damage of the 3 units you are comparing. And HE archers do have less ap than the other ones:

    I don't think any changes are needed.
    I think that claims regarding the OP nature of the suggested buffs seem rather inflated when one looks at the units in question.

    A. Crossbowmen have 20 damage, which is 2 less than Glade Guard and 1 more than HE archers. They're very much middle of the pack, while having significantly lower range, which serves as a pretty massive disadvantage. Higher damage would merely offset, but not eliminate this disadvantage; giving crossbows a separate identity instead of just making them into a worse version of HE archers.
    B. Glade Guard actually do more damage than HE archers, a grand total of 50 more damage for the entire unit, while suffering from the significantly higher cost and lower range. For what should be the best archer unit of the group, they are decidedly unimpressive while being substantially more vulnerable. Their very slightly increased damage doesn't compensate for these substantial drawbacks, especially in light of their cost.

    Overall, the differences in damage aren't sufficient to give each unit an intelligible identity; to the extent that the range advantage of the HE archers completely eclipses any supposed advantages the other units have. And that's before one looks at the cost of HE archers, which is far too low for what they bring to the table, or indeed, reflective of the cost differences from the TT.
    Remember, crossbows already have more AP than either archer variant (pretty sure its +3 or +4 more than elven archers). Thats a pretty huge advantage if your enemy brings an armored monster or elite infantry. They arn't nearly as bad as you are making them out to be, and seem to be pretty decent after the patch.

    Glade guard with 360 degree fire is a disgusting joke. Not only would it totally remove their identity as the one stand and shoot archer in the WE roster but it would also make them absurd for their price point. All they need is a price and range buff.

    IMO you are exaggerating elven archers capabilities a bit
  • PocmanPocman Registered Users Posts: 5,302
    cool_lad said:

    Pocman said:

    cool_lad said:

    It's less of HE archers are too good in isolation and more that they're far better than their counterparts. If their range is not to be nerfed, then I think that we should at lease establish how the other units (Crossbows and Glade Guard) should perform in relation to each other.

    IMO, the differences between them should be:-
    1. Glade Guard: most versatile and best archer unit of the lot; perhaps give them 360 degree shooting to allow them to really be used as a fast mobile force instead of being shoehorned into a mainline archer role. They could also perhaps have their price reduced a notch to the same level as the armoured HE archers (525).
    2. Crossbowmen: most damage per shot; these guys should do appreciably more damage than their counterparts, in order to represent the fact that crossbows had strength 4 attacks instead of strength 3 attacks; give them say 23 or 26 ranged damage as opposed to the 20 that others have.
    3. HE Archers: best mainline archer; these guys could remain as is, but they should at least go up in cost. They cost 10 points as opposed to 9 for crossbows, so a price point of 500 seems more appropriate (which still keeps them cheaper than Glade Guard).

    IMO this at least differentiates these units from each other and creates some appreciable differences between them.

    Completely disagree:

    Glade guards with 360 fire would be OP as hell. Crossbowmen do not need more damage per shot: they already have the best damage of the 3 units you are comparing. And HE archers do have less ap than the other ones:

    I don't think any changes are needed.
    I think that claims regarding the OP nature of the suggested buffs seem rather inflated when one looks at the units in question.

    A. Crossbowmen have 20 damage, which is 2 less than Glade Guard and 1 more than HE archers. They're very much middle of the pack, while having significantly lower range, which serves as a pretty massive disadvantage. Higher damage would merely offset, but not eliminate this disadvantage; giving crossbows a separate identity instead of just making them into a worse version of HE archers.
    B. Glade Guard actually do more damage than HE archers, a grand total of 50 more damage for the entire unit, while suffering from the significantly higher cost and lower range. For what should be the best archer unit of the group, they are decidedly unimpressive while being substantially more vulnerable. Their very slightly increased damage doesn't compensate for these substantial drawbacks, especially in light of their cost.

    Overall, the differences in damage aren't sufficient to give each unit an intelligible identity; to the extent that the range advantage of the HE archers completely eclipses any supposed advantages the other units have. And that's before one looks at the cost of HE archers, which is far too low for what they bring to the table, or indeed, reflective of the cost differences from the TT.
    Crossbowmen still do more damage than GG due to 68 models. I could see them getting 1 extra normal damage. But that is about it.

    HE archers seem fine to me.

    Glade Guard are the middle point between them, plus have fire on the move as their unique ability.

    And the three units are mainine archers. They are not supposed to have "an intelligible identity". They are supposed to occupy a basic position in the different rosters, not be unique units that create unique playstyles.
  • cool_ladcool_lad Senior Member IndiaRegistered Users Posts: 2,278
    Pocman said:

    cool_lad said:

    Pocman said:

    cool_lad said:

    It's less of HE archers are too good in isolation and more that they're far better than their counterparts. If their range is not to be nerfed, then I think that we should at lease establish how the other units (Crossbows and Glade Guard) should perform in relation to each other.

    IMO, the differences between them should be:-
    1. Glade Guard: most versatile and best archer unit of the lot; perhaps give them 360 degree shooting to allow them to really be used as a fast mobile force instead of being shoehorned into a mainline archer role. They could also perhaps have their price reduced a notch to the same level as the armoured HE archers (525).
    2. Crossbowmen: most damage per shot; these guys should do appreciably more damage than their counterparts, in order to represent the fact that crossbows had strength 4 attacks instead of strength 3 attacks; give them say 23 or 26 ranged damage as opposed to the 20 that others have.
    3. HE Archers: best mainline archer; these guys could remain as is, but they should at least go up in cost. They cost 10 points as opposed to 9 for crossbows, so a price point of 500 seems more appropriate (which still keeps them cheaper than Glade Guard).

    IMO this at least differentiates these units from each other and creates some appreciable differences between them.

    Completely disagree:

    Glade guards with 360 fire would be OP as hell. Crossbowmen do not need more damage per shot: they already have the best damage of the 3 units you are comparing. And HE archers do have less ap than the other ones:

    I don't think any changes are needed.
    I think that claims regarding the OP nature of the suggested buffs seem rather inflated when one looks at the units in question.

    A. Crossbowmen have 20 damage, which is 2 less than Glade Guard and 1 more than HE archers. They're very much middle of the pack, while having significantly lower range, which serves as a pretty massive disadvantage. Higher damage would merely offset, but not eliminate this disadvantage; giving crossbows a separate identity instead of just making them into a worse version of HE archers.
    B. Glade Guard actually do more damage than HE archers, a grand total of 50 more damage for the entire unit, while suffering from the significantly higher cost and lower range. For what should be the best archer unit of the group, they are decidedly unimpressive while being substantially more vulnerable. Their very slightly increased damage doesn't compensate for these substantial drawbacks, especially in light of their cost.

    Overall, the differences in damage aren't sufficient to give each unit an intelligible identity; to the extent that the range advantage of the HE archers completely eclipses any supposed advantages the other units have. And that's before one looks at the cost of HE archers, which is far too low for what they bring to the table, or indeed, reflective of the cost differences from the TT.
    Crossbowmen still do more damage than GG due to 68 models. I could see them getting 1 extra normal damage. But that is about it.

    HE archers seem fine to me.

    Glade Guard are the middle point between them, plus have fire on the move as their unique ability.

    And the three units are mainine archers. They are not supposed to have "an intelligible identity". They are supposed to occupy a basic position in the different rosters, not be unique units that create unique playstyles.
    Fire on the move isn't particularly useful if you can only really use it in one direction.

    The increased damage of crossbowmen is miniscule and easily overshadowed by the massively increased range of HE archers. The same holds true for Glade Guard.

    These are not the same units and really have no reason to be different versions of each other. A crossbow is not a longbow is not an Asrai longbow. Each of these units, while fulfilling a similar broad role, should (and indeed does, on the TT) have a unique identity of it's own which separates them from each other. Crossbows had Str 4 attacks and were the cheapest, Longbows (used by HE archers) had Str 3 attacks, while Asrai Longbows had Str 3 attacks and the AP rule. If anything, when one looks at their TT implementation, HE archers are very clearly shown to be, when compared to their counterparts, both OP and underpriced. If they are to not be changed then it follows that the other units need to be updated to bring out their own character and strengths.

    Keeping them the way they are is a disservice to both the WE and the Empire, reducing their flavour and giving them what are essentially worse versions of the HE archers for absolutely no reason whatsoever. These units were not the same on the TT, and there's no reason why they should be made worse versions of HE archers in this game.
  • ystyst Registered Users Posts: 9,517
    edited December 2018
    cool_lad said:

    Fire on the move isn't particularly useful if you can only really use it in one direction.

    That is incorrect, it makes them EXTREMELY responsive. When regular units r re-positioning, halt, then aim and finally firing, welf archers be already firing their second salvo, the whole process started the moment they got sight of the enemy in their los arc. U`ll not find archer in game with such short respond time.

    Crossbows dont fire immediately, theyve to load up the xbow for that. Wlef archers fires immediately, thats a mad advantage ull not find on paper stats.

    Anyway they r a completely dif league of archers, thats why was never really used as comparison benchmark. Something as godly as that has no equal.

    Really not much about this topic, absolutely nothing needs to change, they r about balance to perfection. It wasnt when xbow were $525, now that they r very viable at $475, the only archers that needs to be tweak r orkish and beastman ones.

    1 ap missile r way, wayyyy outdated. Its a format in war1 where dwf warriors have just 3 ap and swordsman with 4 with both having 7ap in war 2. Goblin, skeleton and raiders still using 1 ap missile. That needs to go, the bare min cannot be anywhere lower than 2 ap. That holds true for goblins and skeleton, i personally think raiders should be given 3 ap like the rest of the generic archers with slight ammo reduction as they r not the standing archers, more raiders
    https://imgur.com/a/Cj4b9
    Top #3 Leaderboard on Warhammer Totalwar.
  • AIMA_DracklorAIMA_Dracklor Registered Users Posts: 4,664

    Kranox said:

    I find it extremely **** funny 😂😂 When you attack the Elves on a pretty stupid point, but Elves fan respond srly for 100 comments 😂😂😂😂

    Nothing against HE fans tough, I just find it funny

    OP didn't seem that malicious to me
    Not malicious, but we all know its a no brainer to keep their already low AP where it is and not nerf it


Sign In or Register to comment.