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

The Green Knight !

13

Comments

  • ystyst Posts: 6,192Registered Users

    I vote:
    - Mass to 1100 in line with other heavy cav.
    - -50 gold.
    - Trade the 'regen in the woods' ability, which is often useless and sometimes extremely OP, for a free passive Forest Strider ability like WE.

    Ohhh thats very good idea.

    He needs more umphhh to it really, frikking 1.9k base 3 yrs late on immune to vig, better now than never. He IS bretonnia, how could the faction identity not get on him. Then uve the ladys champion leon, again frikking getting exhausted yet having regen. And paladins, all these greater grails getting exhausted just a joke. Most specifically one of the most expensive character model in game
    https://imgur.com/a/Cj4b9
    Top #3 Leaderboard on Warhammer Totalwar.
    Unit stats compare courtesy of Seal62 https://total-war-unit-compare.herokuapp.com/
  • mightygloinmightygloin Posts: 1,449Registered Users
    Vistahm said:


    Tyrion sucks so saying that he is more or less like Tyrion actually means he also sucks.

    Just out of curiosity, how does Tyrion suck though? Because he doesn't have a flying mount? Or there are more impactful caster lords than him in the faction?

    As a melee character; he got a speedy horse, one of the highest melee stats, worthy items like self-heal and aoe attack, high armor etc. What else would he need to not suck?

    To me he seems like one of the best implemented lords. Not weak or overpowered, while being faithful to TT and lore in its implementation.
  • another505another505 Posts: 1,084Registered Users
    tyrion is definitely a decent lord.
  • Green0Green0 Posts: 5,256Registered Users
    edited June 16

    Vistahm said:


    Tyrion sucks so saying that he is more or less like Tyrion actually means he also sucks.

    Just out of curiosity, how does Tyrion suck though? Because he doesn't have a flying mount? Or there are more impactful caster lords than him in the faction?

    As a melee character; he got a speedy horse, one of the highest melee stats, worthy items like self-heal and aoe attack, high armor etc. What else would he need to not suck?

    To me he seems like one of the best implemented lords. Not weak or overpowered, while being faithful to TT and lore in its implementation.
    he has no mass so vs a smart opponent he will be fighting Skavenslaves for the whole battle. Or get surrounded by Chaos Knights + terror routed (no ItP). He’s also super expensive for a lord who brings just good stats and no AoE buffs to the table (compare to KF, say). His AP ratio is also lower than most other AP lords. At ~2.2k gold, he’s internally competing with stuff like Moon Dragons as a brawler. Moon Dragon can cycle charge, has breath attacks on shorter cooldown (no requirement of recharging in melee), immune to terror, can actually pull out of undesirable engagements and pick its engagements.

    Green Knights in all fairness probably shares the same weaknesses, but at least he is Unbreakable and if there are no magical attacks he is very resilient to damage (especially if you cast Shield of Thorns on him).
  • ystyst Posts: 6,192Registered Users
    What a horrific assessment that’s literally wrong in every single aspect. I suggest actually using tyrion first and make some actual tests
    https://imgur.com/a/Cj4b9
    Top #3 Leaderboard on Warhammer Totalwar.
    Unit stats compare courtesy of Seal62 https://total-war-unit-compare.herokuapp.com/
  • Green0Green0 Posts: 5,256Registered Users
    yst said:

    What a horrific assessment that’s literally wrong in every single aspect. I suggest actually using tyrion first and make some actual tests

    so let me get this straight: Tyrion is a top lord for you, but Green Knight needs buffs? Either both are fine, or neither. They are basically the same concept of duelist lord with slightly different abilities.

    It's so wonderful how you can rationalize one choice being strong and ask buffs for the other one unironically.
  • ystyst Posts: 6,192Registered Users
    Pretty much that. Its pretty amazing how tyrion can be downplayed to uselessness. Should actually try him sometime tbh, otherwise ppl thought ure describing like a $1500 marauder chieftain on horse or something lol
    https://imgur.com/a/Cj4b9
    Top #3 Leaderboard on Warhammer Totalwar.
    Unit stats compare courtesy of Seal62 https://total-war-unit-compare.herokuapp.com/
  • AWizard_LizardAWizard_Lizard Posts: 931Registered Users
    Green0 said:

    Vistahm said:


    Tyrion sucks so saying that he is more or less like Tyrion actually means he also sucks.

    Just out of curiosity, how does Tyrion suck though? Because he doesn't have a flying mount? Or there are more impactful caster lords than him in the faction?

    As a melee character; he got a speedy horse, one of the highest melee stats, worthy items like self-heal and aoe attack, high armor etc. What else would he need to not suck?

    To me he seems like one of the best implemented lords. Not weak or overpowered, while being faithful to TT and lore in its implementation.
    he has no mass so vs a smart opponent he will be fighting Skavenslaves for the whole battle. Or get surrounded by Chaos Knights + terror routed (no ItP). He’s also super expensive for a lord who brings just good stats and no AoE buffs to the table (compare to KF, say). His AP ratio is also lower than most other AP lords. At ~2.2k gold, he’s internally competing with stuff like Moon Dragons as a brawler. Moon Dragon can cycle charge, has breath attacks on shorter cooldown (no requirement of recharging in melee), immune to terror, can actually pull out of undesirable engagements and pick its engagements.

    Green Knights in all fairness probably shares the same weaknesses, but at least he is Unbreakable and if there are no magical attacks he is very resilient to damage (especially if you cast Shield of Thorns on him).
    You don't say... He has no mass and he can be bogged down easily... He can't fight anything but chaff... Hmm
  • hanenhanen Posts: 357Registered Users
    Tyrion is not bad but costs too much to be worth it.

    For the price you are better off with the princess on a moon dragon.

    The Green Knight does actually bring something else than pure killing power - terror.

    I wouldn't mind a cost decrease of 100-200 gold on both.
  • keroro7keroro7 Posts: 220Registered Users
    edited June 16
    Green Knight is already strong in certain situations and has already been discussed in other comments.
    And it has already been discussed that it is not powerful in some situations.
    also Tyrion is not so bad by itself, Another faction with a poor Lords will appreciate receiving Tyrion.

    just Tyrion does not fit well with high elves. He already has his own recovery item to regain his strength.
    However, for high elves, the healing spell is a compulsion state(almost).
    most problem is, It is because the high mobility units(with number) that support him are not compatible with Tyrion.

    However, Green Knight is different. If he can be used in a wider situation, he can make up for the weakness of Bretonnia.
    You can also play games safely with the help of a powerful CAV, with terror options.
    I do not have to say it, but write it down to avoid misunderstanding. It get the means to easily handle SE,SEM - the weakness of Bretonnia.

    so tyrion/Green knight - It is the same in view. But it can be different results.

    So it is better to watching for a while(if he get change more widely) than to give a hasty buff.
    And I think Tyrion's problem is better to think new in other threads. ;)
  • AIMA_DracklorAIMA_Dracklor Posts: 4,402Registered Users
    edited June 16
    hanen said:

    Tyrion is not bad but costs too much to be worth it.

    For the price you are better off with the princess on a moon dragon.

    The Green Knight does actually bring something else than pure killing power - terror.

    I wouldn't mind a cost decrease of 100-200 gold on both.

    Hummm the Green knight is a more expensive unit with less speed wesker stats, no aoe buffs and no abilities ither than combat contrary to Tyrion who has Sunfang which can clear out chaff letting him get on the good targets. The Greenknight is weak, a lord on a Hippogryph or HK arw much much better at applying terror

    His only advantage is physical resist which as we know is a double edge sword making any magic extremely cost effective against him. DD spells are really popular atm and while Magic damage was rare in warhammer 1 its getting more and more widespread. Also the fact that top tier LM cav and lord like Louen have phys resistance makes it so that magic damage is almost always worth bringing


  • another505another505 Posts: 1,084Registered Users
    Green0 said:

    Vistahm said:


    Tyrion sucks so saying that he is more or less like Tyrion actually means he also sucks.

    Just out of curiosity, how does Tyrion suck though? Because he doesn't have a flying mount? Or there are more impactful caster lords than him in the faction?

    As a melee character; he got a speedy horse, one of the highest melee stats, worthy items like self-heal and aoe attack, high armor etc. What else would he need to not suck?

    To me he seems like one of the best implemented lords. Not weak or overpowered, while being faithful to TT and lore in its implementation.
    he has no mass so vs a smart opponent he will be fighting Skavenslaves for the whole battle. Or get surrounded by Chaos Knights + terror routed (no ItP). He’s also super expensive for a lord who brings just good stats and no AoE buffs to the table (compare to KF, say). His AP ratio is also lower than most other AP lords. At ~2.2k gold, he’s internally competing with stuff like Moon Dragons as a brawler. Moon Dragon can cycle charge, has breath attacks on shorter cooldown (no requirement of recharging in melee), immune to terror, can actually pull out of undesirable engagements and pick its engagements.

    Green Knights in all fairness probably shares the same weaknesses, but at least he is Unbreakable and if there are no magical attacks he is very resilient to damage (especially if you cast Shield of Thorns on him).
    You can sunfang out the slaves
    He does has a bit of buff like stand your ground.
    He has self-heal that other lords dont have so you can use other
    Green0 said:

    yst said:

    What a horrific assessment that’s literally wrong in every single aspect. I suggest actually using tyrion first and make some actual tests

    so let me get this straight: Tyrion is a top lord for you, but Green Knight needs buffs? Either both are fine, or neither. They are basically the same concept of duelist lord with slightly different abilities.

    It's so wonderful how you can rationalize one choice being strong and ask buffs for the other one unironically.
    Yes cause you intentionally missed out
    Stand your ground a support buff
    Sunfang to remove chaffs
    A better speed horse with foe seeker
    A way better self heal that makes him need less support
    None of these are present in green knight

    Tyrion is a different tier than green knight, and i do think tyrion is decent but slightly overpriced so its even worse than the green knight
    And yes compared to sem they both suck
  • Green0Green0 Posts: 5,256Registered Users
    edited June 16

    hanen said:

    Tyrion is not bad but costs too much to be worth it.

    For the price you are better off with the princess on a moon dragon.

    The Green Knight does actually bring something else than pure killing power - terror.

    I wouldn't mind a cost decrease of 100-200 gold on both.

    Hummm the Green knight is a more expensive unit with less speed wesker stats, no aoe buffs and no abilities ither than combat contrary to Tyrion who has Sunfang which can clear out chaff letting him get on the good targets. The Greenknight is weak, a lord on a Hippogryph or HK arw much much better at applying terror

    His only advantage is physical resist which as we know is a double edge sword making any magic extremely cost effective against him. DD spells are really popular atm and while Magic damage was rare in warhammer 1 its getting more and more widespread. Also the fact that top tier LM cav and lord like Louen have phys resistance makes it so that magic damage is almost always worth bringing
    since you want to list only the advantages of Tyrion while failing to list his disadvantages, let me give you a list of where GK is better:

    - costs less (~500 less give or take if Tyrion comes with all items)
    - has more burst damage, more AP ratio also. His item brings him to have same MA as Tyrion
    - is way more tanky vs AP stuff (Kholexes etc.) which is what matters in the end. The situation where he will be fighting magical units is very niche (e.g. Norsca) and in those matchups you can always not take him
    - is Unbreakable (will fight to the last HP, can't be terror-routed like Tyrion)
    - doesn't have to be your general (useful to play him more aggro)

    Also, I would hardly argue that Tyrion has "AoE buffs". By this definition, the General of the Empire is also a strong pick since he too has Stand Your Ground. Sunfang has a lengthy cooldown, is useful ONLY vs lowly-armored units and can be dodged.

    Green0 said:

    Vistahm said:


    Tyrion sucks so saying that he is more or less like Tyrion actually means he also sucks.

    Just out of curiosity, how does Tyrion suck though? Because he doesn't have a flying mount? Or there are more impactful caster lords than him in the faction?

    As a melee character; he got a speedy horse, one of the highest melee stats, worthy items like self-heal and aoe attack, high armor etc. What else would he need to not suck?

    To me he seems like one of the best implemented lords. Not weak or overpowered, while being faithful to TT and lore in its implementation.
    he has no mass so vs a smart opponent he will be fighting Skavenslaves for the whole battle. Or get surrounded by Chaos Knights + terror routed (no ItP). He’s also super expensive for a lord who brings just good stats and no AoE buffs to the table (compare to KF, say). His AP ratio is also lower than most other AP lords. At ~2.2k gold, he’s internally competing with stuff like Moon Dragons as a brawler. Moon Dragon can cycle charge, has breath attacks on shorter cooldown (no requirement of recharging in melee), immune to terror, can actually pull out of undesirable engagements and pick its engagements.

    Green Knights in all fairness probably shares the same weaknesses, but at least he is Unbreakable and if there are no magical attacks he is very resilient to damage (especially if you cast Shield of Thorns on him).
    You can sunfang out the slaves
    He does has a bit of buff like stand your ground.
    He has self-heal that other lords dont have so you can use other
    Green0 said:

    yst said:

    What a horrific assessment that’s literally wrong in every single aspect. I suggest actually using tyrion first and make some actual tests

    so let me get this straight: Tyrion is a top lord for you, but Green Knight needs buffs? Either both are fine, or neither. They are basically the same concept of duelist lord with slightly different abilities.

    It's so wonderful how you can rationalize one choice being strong and ask buffs for the other one unironically.
    Yes cause you intentionally missed out
    Stand your ground a support buff
    Sunfang to remove chaffs
    A better speed horse with foe seeker
    A way better self heal that makes him need less support
    None of these are present in green knight

    Tyrion is a different tier than green knight, and i do think tyrion is decent but slightly overpriced so its even worse than the green knight
    And yes compared to sem they both suck
    I agree with all you say but you miss out on the fact that:

    - Tyrion has no unbreakable (terror-routing him before Star of Avelorn procs IS a strategy)
    - he is ~500g more expensive
    - worse AP ratio (one of the lowest AP ratios in the game for an AP lord)
    - worse vs pure AP/AL lords (e.g. Kholek)
    - Sunfang has a lengthy cooldown


    Look, I don't need to get sold on the fact that Green Knight is fairly bad. If he dropped Unbreakable somehow and traded some of his resist for armor, I think he would be in a better spot. That being said this is not a confrontation and we don't need to establish who is 5% better between the 2 choices, both are below average.
  • UagrimUagrim Posts: 698Registered Users
    edited June 16
    GK might be more tanky vs AP damage, but if you're opponent brings DD spells. Which honestly makes sense with Grails being standard in most matchups he has the tools to deal with the GK. Which is why reducing GKs physical resistance in favor of more HP makes sense.

    If your opponent doges the Sunfang he moved away from Tyrion allowing you to get away from the chaff.
    Which is something the GK can't do, hell on Tyrion you can drop an AOE spell to help him while GK is much less resilient to such things.

    I don't see what the comparison between GK and tyrion has to do with empire general.
  • Green0Green0 Posts: 5,256Registered Users
    edited June 16
    Sunfang will do nothing vs a surround by something like Dragon Ogres, Chaos Warriors, Grave Guard, Chaos Knights basically any armored or low model unit. Once you dodge it or tank it, you can also comfortably surround him for 120s without worrying about him pulling out.

    SLing the GK, while good isn’t gonna kill him, unless your opponent invests his whole mana pool and a good amount of time doing so. If you get SLd, you can always camp a forest for passive regen (assuming your opponent wants to SL kite, which is against tournament rules) or Regrowth him.

    I would also argue that SLing the GK is a medium priority type of deal. This is not a GS general you are SLing that once dead makes the rest of the army rout. While the gold value of SLing him is relatively high, in the grand scheme of the battle killing him early often means little.

    Again, GK is not amazing but he has so many advantages over Tyrion (just like Tyrion has statline + Sunfang advantage over GK), vs a good opponent Tyrion is a very bad pick because he costs A LOT and you can’t reliably land him on good targets to get your investment back fast. By the time you get to fight the targets he wants to be fighting, the engagement might no longer be on terms favorable to you (eg you ran out of infantry and opponent didn’t).
  • another505another505 Posts: 1,084Registered Users
    Tyrion could definitely get a price buff since horse melee lords are bad compare to SEM of equal price. That includes the green knight

    Anyways lets stop getting derailed by the comparison. I could see it going nowhere

    Green knight
    Definitely Immune to vigour
    Somrthing like verminous valor or kroq gar swiftness of something
    Or short range teleportation!
  • keroro7keroro7 Posts: 220Registered Users
    Simple Unit VS Unit This can be used as a basic indicator but can not be evaluated as an absolute value.
    It's just a trap.
    We need to look at other resources available and judge them in a broader perspective.

    Also balancing is not making my good matchup more comfortable with my favorite faction, and not making it easier to make bad matchups.

    BALACING = To create a more equitable state. (While maintaining the individuality of the faction each.)

    Having a stable tools vs SEM for Bretonnia can be a burden for other faction.
    Greed is not good, Step by step. (I'm sorry for my serious, if it was a joke :D )

    and as I said, We can talking about Tyrion, Anyone can create a new thread.
    then maybe we can find a great and fair idea for Tyrion. at least, We can find motivation to pick Tyrion.
  • AIMA_DracklorAIMA_Dracklor Posts: 4,402Registered Users
    Green0 said:

    hanen said:

    Tyrion is not bad but costs too much to be worth it.

    For the price you are better off with the princess on a moon dragon.

    The Green Knight does actually bring something else than pure killing power - terror.

    I wouldn't mind a cost decrease of 100-200 gold on both.

    Hummm the Green knight is a more expensive unit with less speed wesker stats, no aoe buffs and no abilities ither than combat contrary to Tyrion who has Sunfang which can clear out chaff letting him get on the good targets. The Greenknight is weak, a lord on a Hippogryph or HK arw much much better at applying terror

    His only advantage is physical resist which as we know is a double edge sword making any magic extremely cost effective against him. DD spells are really popular atm and while Magic damage was rare in warhammer 1 its getting more and more widespread. Also the fact that top tier LM cav and lord like Louen have phys resistance makes it so that magic damage is almost always worth bringing
    since you want to list only the advantages of Tyrion while failing to list his disadvantages, let me give you a list of where GK is better:

    - costs less (~500 less give or take if Tyrion comes with all items)
    - has more burst damage, more AP ratio also. His item brings him to have same MA as Tyrion
    - is way more tanky vs AP stuff (Kholexes etc.) which is what matters in the end. The situation where he will be fighting magical units is very niche (e.g. Norsca) and in those matchups you can always not take him
    - is Unbreakable (will fight to the last HP, can't be terror-routed like Tyrion)
    - doesn't have to be your general (useful to play him more aggro)

    Also, I would hardly argue that Tyrion has "AoE buffs". By this definition, the General of the Empire is also a strong pick since he too has Stand Your Ground. Sunfang has a lengthy cooldown, is useful ONLY vs lowly-armored units and can be dodged.

    Green0 said:

    Vistahm said:


    Tyrion sucks so saying that he is more or less like Tyrion actually means he also sucks.

    Just out of curiosity, how does Tyrion suck though? Because he doesn't have a flying mount? Or there are more impactful caster lords than him in the faction?

    As a melee character; he got a speedy horse, one of the highest melee stats, worthy items like self-heal and aoe attack, high armor etc. What else would he need to not suck?

    To me he seems like one of the best implemented lords. Not weak or overpowered, while being faithful to TT and lore in its implementation.
    he has no mass so vs a smart opponent he will be fighting Skavenslaves for the whole battle. Or get surrounded by Chaos Knights + terror routed (no ItP). He’s also super expensive for a lord who brings just good stats and no AoE buffs to the table (compare to KF, say). His AP ratio is also lower than most other AP lords. At ~2.2k gold, he’s internally competing with stuff like Moon Dragons as a brawler. Moon Dragon can cycle charge, has breath attacks on shorter cooldown (no requirement of recharging in melee), immune to terror, can actually pull out of undesirable engagements and pick its engagements.

    Green Knights in all fairness probably shares the same weaknesses, but at least he is Unbreakable and if there are no magical attacks he is very resilient to damage (especially if you cast Shield of Thorns on him).
    You can sunfang out the slaves
    He does has a bit of buff like stand your ground.
    He has self-heal that other lords dont have so you can use other
    Green0 said:

    yst said:

    What a horrific assessment that’s literally wrong in every single aspect. I suggest actually using tyrion first and make some actual tests

    so let me get this straight: Tyrion is a top lord for you, but Green Knight needs buffs? Either both are fine, or neither. They are basically the same concept of duelist lord with slightly different abilities.

    It's so wonderful how you can rationalize one choice being strong and ask buffs for the other one unironically.
    Yes cause you intentionally missed out
    Stand your ground a support buff
    Sunfang to remove chaffs
    A better speed horse with foe seeker
    A way better self heal that makes him need less support
    None of these are present in green knight

    Tyrion is a different tier than green knight, and i do think tyrion is decent but slightly overpriced so its even worse than the green knight
    And yes compared to sem they both suck
    I agree with all you say but you miss out on the fact that:

    - Tyrion has no unbreakable (terror-routing him before Star of Avelorn procs IS a strategy)
    - he is ~500g more expensive
    - worse AP ratio (one of the lowest AP ratios in the game for an AP lord)
    - worse vs pure AP/AL lords (e.g. Kholek)
    - Sunfang has a lengthy cooldown


    Look, I don't need to get sold on the fact that Green Knight is fairly bad. If he dropped Unbreakable somehow and traded some of his resist for armor, I think he would be in a better spot. That being said this is not a confrontation and we don't need to establish who is 5% better between the 2 choices, both are below average.
    If you bring Tyrion with all Item you need to take GK with all item for fair comparison, which equates to a similar cost. GK has 430 WS while tyrion got what 475 ? Tyrion has better speed, Melee attack, Melee defense, armor ( 125), more HP, Aoe buffs, An item who can wipe out chaff.

    GK will take much more damage against lower AP units, he takes similar damage against all units.

    I never said Tyrion has strong aoe buffs, I just said he had some.

    Imo Tyrion is decent, not good, but decent, his high melee defense and armor makes him really suprisingly tanky. His Item can protect him on the charge against big monsters and you can easily evade them with 95 speed. Tyrion vs Green knight is an extremely close fight even if tyrion doesnt have magic damage.
    Imo what makes tyrion decent is sunfang, if he gets cought in chaff you can burn them and go back to a good target while racking up a lot of kills, you can burn down a unit of archers too, I honestly really like this item.

    The GK I think is bad because he cost an arm and a leg, bretonnia has better terror platforms, he is really vulnerable to magic, his combat stats are meh for the price, but the worst thing is how easily he can shut down with chaff and how much he struggles to get to his optimal targets. I honestly think just giving him a verminous valour type of ability with a decently long in combat cooldown would be great, that would let you once or maybe twice get out of chaff to go back to the targets he needs to get to, since ot recharges in melee you can still temporarily shut him down that way.

    I think we fairly agree that GK is subpar, I just personally think he is in a worst spot than Tyrion. Remeber the guy had such ridiculous MA and MD because he had no AP, so a low AP ratio with 470 WS is still really good on him because he constantly lands it. But I think Tyrion could use a bit of help too.


  • eumaieseumaies Senior Member Posts: 4,489Registered Users
    All this talk about Tyrion being bad... sometimes you want a more durable and sustained tool than a dragon that is just waiting to get focused down. You play the long game and he pays off. Dragons play a more heavy handed game. This diversity is a good thing and in my experience Tyrion is quite good if you use him right.
  • DandalusXVIIDandalusXVII Posts: 4,171Registered Users
    Canuovea said:

    Could he get some kind of formation disruption spell like Kroq-Gar gets? So he can disengage? It could represent his mobility.

    Yes plz.
  • Green0Green0 Posts: 5,256Registered Users
    edited June 17
    eumaies said:

    All this talk about Tyrion being bad... sometimes you want a more durable and sustained tool than a dragon that is just waiting to get focused down. You play the long game and he pays off. Dragons play a more heavy handed game. This diversity is a good thing and in my experience Tyrion is quite good if you use him right.

    bruh he has 3k HP. Star Dragon sitting comfy at 6K, also 80 armor and since it flyes and has mass it can actually dodge damage better than Tyrion ever will.

    All horse lords are in general fairly mediocre, unless they bring crazy, crazy buffs like Karl Franz and his Demi blob.

    It’s not even close, 2.5k for Tyrion with full kit or 2.4k for Stardragon.
  • Wyvern2Wyvern2 Posts: 1,363Registered Users
    Green0 said:

    eumaies said:

    All this talk about Tyrion being bad... sometimes you want a more durable and sustained tool than a dragon that is just waiting to get focused down. You play the long game and he pays off. Dragons play a more heavy handed game. This diversity is a good thing and in my experience Tyrion is quite good if you use him right.

    bruh he has 3k HP. Star Dragon sitting comfy at 6K, also 80 armor and since it flyes and has mass it can actually dodge damage better than Tyrion ever will.

    All horse lords are in general fairly mediocre, unless they bring crazy, crazy buffs like Karl Franz and his Demi blob.

    It’s not even close, 2.5k for Tyrion with full kit or 2.4k for Stardragon.
    Tyrion with heart has what? 4.5k? He's a tiny target, has 125 armor, top of the line melee stats, and he also has 94 speed, so saying he cant dodge is bullocks.

    I also don't think it's fair to say horse/equivalent lords/heroes are anywhere near bad as a general rule. Franz is one great example, sure, but Wulfrik, Nobles, Blood Dragon, Settra, Tomb Princes, Kroq, Old Blood, Vet etc are all incredibly popular on horseback for their combat prowess as much as their utility. Honestly, if more lords retained AP on horseback, I wouldn't really be surprised if they were even more popular. The price cut you take compared to flying mounts is really quite huge and while flying is nice, it's nowhere near necessary for good performance as long as pricing is decent.

    The problem is that in the case of Green Knight especially, pricing is not decent, and it's an ancillary hero, competing for a slot with other 2k elites like hippogryph knights for practically the same function, and doing far far worse. In comparison, High Elf nobles, tomb princes etc all cost ~1k apiece, meaning you get 2, with not hugely worse stats, for the price of one GK. The worst part is that their real combat stats are often no worse(if not better, especially vs large). GK pays a massive premium for stats/"perks" that often dont come into play or are entirely irrelevant as he gets spirit leeched into oblivion.
    Regularly publish Total War: Warhammer 2 content on my YT channel

    https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCPI93p-X2T4YKD18O16bhPw
  • another505another505 Posts: 1,084Registered Users
    edited June 17
    yup... i wonder why ever take green knight when i can take two paladin on pegasus or a RHK

    being a hero spot, you compete with your roster more than the lord spot. And he requires way too much support to worth it.
  • hanenhanen Posts: 357Registered Users
    Wyvern2 said:

    Green0 said:

    eumaies said:

    All this talk about Tyrion being bad... sometimes you want a more durable and sustained tool than a dragon that is just waiting to get focused down. You play the long game and he pays off. Dragons play a more heavy handed game. This diversity is a good thing and in my experience Tyrion is quite good if you use him right.

    bruh he has 3k HP. Star Dragon sitting comfy at 6K, also 80 armor and since it flyes and has mass it can actually dodge damage better than Tyrion ever will.

    All horse lords are in general fairly mediocre, unless they bring crazy, crazy buffs like Karl Franz and his Demi blob.

    It’s not even close, 2.5k for Tyrion with full kit or 2.4k for Stardragon.
    Tyrion with heart has what? 4.5k? He's a tiny target, has 125 armor, top of the line melee stats, and he also has 94 speed, so saying he cant dodge is bullocks.
    Doesn't matter. Being on a horse is completely different than being a monster or, even better, a flying monster.

    He can be zoned out by infantry, surrounded by cavalry and cycle charged to death by a flying monster.

    I cannot come up with a what situation he would be the optimal pick.
  • ystyst Posts: 6,192Registered Users
    Theres certain lies and bad info that needs to be cleared. Why that happens on purpose is a mystery so lets get some real facts

    1) Tyrion bad ap ratio and green knight is godlike ap.
    Lie. Tyrion has 66% ap ratio, green knight is 65% ap. Karl himself being potrayed as god duelist is just 70% ap.

    2) Tyrion has no mass.
    Lie. Tyrion has 1300 mass, green knight is 950.
    https://imgur.com/a/Cj4b9
    Top #3 Leaderboard on Warhammer Totalwar.
    Unit stats compare courtesy of Seal62 https://total-war-unit-compare.herokuapp.com/
  • Disposable HeroDisposable Hero Posts: 3,774Registered Users
    hanen said:


    Wyvern2 said:

    Green0 said:

    eumaies said:

    All this talk about Tyrion being bad... sometimes you want a more durable and sustained tool than a dragon that is just waiting to get focused down. You play the long game and he pays off. Dragons play a more heavy handed game. This diversity is a good thing and in my experience Tyrion is quite good if you use him right.

    bruh he has 3k HP. Star Dragon sitting comfy at 6K, also 80 armor and since it flyes and has mass it can actually dodge damage better than Tyrion ever will.

    All horse lords are in general fairly mediocre, unless they bring crazy, crazy buffs like Karl Franz and his Demi blob.

    It’s not even close, 2.5k for Tyrion with full kit or 2.4k for Stardragon.
    Tyrion with heart has what? 4.5k? He's a tiny target, has 125 armor, top of the line melee stats, and he also has 94 speed, so saying he cant dodge is bullocks.
    Doesn't matter. Being on a horse is completely different than being a monster or, even better, a flying monster.

    He can be zoned out by infantry, surrounded by cavalry and cycle charged to death by a flying monster.

    I cannot come up with a what situation he would be the optimal pick.
    Yeah I don't think Tyrion is my main choice in any matchup, and in most matchups he's not the second or third either. He's certainly not bad, but he is expensive for what he brings and he competes with Alarielle, Teclis and Princess on dragon, which I would all value higher than Tyrion over all.

    I guess he's the closest to being picked by me vs Coast, there he can do pretty good work. Also vs Dwarves on foot together with a lore master as a surprise pick to lay a beating on rune smiths. Before the fix to flayers I tried him a bit vs new skaven, but that requires some woods to hide in early game. Otherwise he get's very little mileage unfortunately.

    He could use 200 more mass (if I remember correctly, that would put him at the same as boris/karl/lector etc on a barded horse). I think he has 1300 now, the others have 1500 iirc. Still I think he would need cost reduction and probably another tweak to when and how the heart procs in order to really challenge the pick rates of the other options.
  • Green0Green0 Posts: 5,256Registered Users
    yst said:

    Theres certain lies and bad info that needs to be cleared. Why that happens on purpose is a mystery so lets get some real facts

    1) Tyrion bad ap ratio and green knight is godlike ap.
    Lie. Tyrion has 66% ap ratio, green knight is 65% ap. Karl himself being potrayed as god duelist is just 70% ap.

    2) Tyrion has no mass.
    Lie. Tyrion has 1300 mass, green knight is 950.

    my bad about GK AP ratio, I thought it would be 70-75% like most other AP lords, he like Tyrion is an exception then.

    About mass, I never explicitly said that GK has good mass and Tyrion doesn't. In my book they both have bad mass.
  • Wyvern2Wyvern2 Posts: 1,363Registered Users

    hanen said:


    Wyvern2 said:

    Green0 said:

    eumaies said:

    All this talk about Tyrion being bad... sometimes you want a more durable and sustained tool than a dragon that is just waiting to get focused down. You play the long game and he pays off. Dragons play a more heavy handed game. This diversity is a good thing and in my experience Tyrion is quite good if you use him right.

    bruh he has 3k HP. Star Dragon sitting comfy at 6K, also 80 armor and since it flyes and has mass it can actually dodge damage better than Tyrion ever will.

    All horse lords are in general fairly mediocre, unless they bring crazy, crazy buffs like Karl Franz and his Demi blob.

    It’s not even close, 2.5k for Tyrion with full kit or 2.4k for Stardragon.
    Tyrion with heart has what? 4.5k? He's a tiny target, has 125 armor, top of the line melee stats, and he also has 94 speed, so saying he cant dodge is bullocks.
    Doesn't matter. Being on a horse is completely different than being a monster or, even better, a flying monster.

    He can be zoned out by infantry, surrounded by cavalry and cycle charged to death by a flying monster.

    I cannot come up with a what situation he would be the optimal pick.
    Yeah I don't think Tyrion is my main choice in any matchup, and in most matchups he's not the second or third either. He's certainly not bad, but he is expensive for what he brings and he competes with Alarielle, Teclis and Princess on dragon, which I would all value higher than Tyrion over all.

    I guess he's the closest to being picked by me vs Coast, there he can do pretty good work. Also vs Dwarves on foot together with a lore master as a surprise pick to lay a beating on rune smiths. Before the fix to flayers I tried him a bit vs new skaven, but that requires some woods to hide in early game. Otherwise he get's very little mileage unfortunately.

    He could use 200 more mass (if I remember correctly, that would put him at the same as boris/karl/lector etc on a barded horse). I think he has 1300 now, the others have 1500 iirc. Still I think he would need cost reduction and probably another tweak to when and how the heart procs in order to really challenge the pick rates of the other options.
    I'm inclined to agree that a cost reduction would be the way to go(probably -100 or -200), but I think all this nonsense about his survivability not being as good(or quite frankly straight up better) than a dragons needs to stop.

    It's also a fact that horse lords/heroes are nowhere near unpopular if priced correctly.
    Regularly publish Total War: Warhammer 2 content on my YT channel

    https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCPI93p-X2T4YKD18O16bhPw
  • eumaieseumaies Senior Member Posts: 4,489Registered Users
    Tyrion is very good vs tomb kings as an example.

    It’s just a different tool for the right build - exactly what the game needs even if people insist on comparing units as brawlers and nothing else. You want survivable you pay for it.

    Agree the green knight is too gimmicky right now though, as discussed earlier.
  • Disposable HeroDisposable Hero Posts: 3,774Registered Users
    Wyvern2 said:

    hanen said:


    Wyvern2 said:

    Green0 said:

    eumaies said:

    All this talk about Tyrion being bad... sometimes you want a more durable and sustained tool than a dragon that is just waiting to get focused down. You play the long game and he pays off. Dragons play a more heavy handed game. This diversity is a good thing and in my experience Tyrion is quite good if you use him right.

    bruh he has 3k HP. Star Dragon sitting comfy at 6K, also 80 armor and since it flyes and has mass it can actually dodge damage better than Tyrion ever will.

    All horse lords are in general fairly mediocre, unless they bring crazy, crazy buffs like Karl Franz and his Demi blob.

    It’s not even close, 2.5k for Tyrion with full kit or 2.4k for Stardragon.
    Tyrion with heart has what? 4.5k? He's a tiny target, has 125 armor, top of the line melee stats, and he also has 94 speed, so saying he cant dodge is bullocks.
    Doesn't matter. Being on a horse is completely different than being a monster or, even better, a flying monster.

    He can be zoned out by infantry, surrounded by cavalry and cycle charged to death by a flying monster.

    I cannot come up with a what situation he would be the optimal pick.
    Yeah I don't think Tyrion is my main choice in any matchup, and in most matchups he's not the second or third either. He's certainly not bad, but he is expensive for what he brings and he competes with Alarielle, Teclis and Princess on dragon, which I would all value higher than Tyrion over all.

    I guess he's the closest to being picked by me vs Coast, there he can do pretty good work. Also vs Dwarves on foot together with a lore master as a surprise pick to lay a beating on rune smiths. Before the fix to flayers I tried him a bit vs new skaven, but that requires some woods to hide in early game. Otherwise he get's very little mileage unfortunately.

    He could use 200 more mass (if I remember correctly, that would put him at the same as boris/karl/lector etc on a barded horse). I think he has 1300 now, the others have 1500 iirc. Still I think he would need cost reduction and probably another tweak to when and how the heart procs in order to really challenge the pick rates of the other options.
    I'm inclined to agree that a cost reduction would be the way to go(probably -100 or -200), but I think all this nonsense about his survivability not being as good(or quite frankly straight up better) than a dragons needs to stop.

    It's also a fact that horse lords/heroes are nowhere near unpopular if priced correctly.
    Yeah, I agree.

    I can see the argument about Tyrion though even if I don't buy into it completely. He is not squishy. He is however a little bit like the GK but much less so. GK has very little HP balancing the huge PR of being etherial. Tyrion has elven HP, which is lowish, balancing very high stats. So, if the opponent didn't bring the tools to kill him he is a nightmare to kill, but if the opponent did bring the tools he is easier than average to kill because of his lowish HP pool. Taking a volley from the hammer of the witches to the face or a liber bubonicus or being massively debuffed quickly hurts him really badly.

    But anyways, that's just what he is.
Sign In or Register to comment.