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

Orc Warbosses are too squishy, and not orcy enuf

2»

Comments

  • mightygloinmightygloin Registered Users Posts: 2,575
    Wow it's incredible almost nobody disagrees. I guess some things are really obvious eh? At least to players :|

    I agree 100%. All orc warbosses need a large hp buff, and possible stats buffs as well. They should not be losing to the likes of Allarielle in a duel, that’s just a joke.

    Do they really lose to allarielle? if so thats messed up.
    Well at least it's true that Alarielle has unusually high melee stats for a caster but she also had relatively high Weapon Skill for a caster on TT as i remember, so her stats - on foot - are justified (dat 67 MD though :D ). The real issue is other lords in my view. Why does Azhag on Skullmuncha has "half" the MD of Alarielle on eagle? And why only 400 HP difference? Why does Grimgor, Ungrim, Grombrindal etc. have significantly less MD than her especially as footlords? All of these are vastly superior melee combatants with nothing else. This and that such and such blah blah. There's so many whys and riddles in the dark, but one thing seems clear that more patches are needed.

  • LamentationsLamentations Registered Users Posts: 168
    Having tough stompy Lords was a big part of the Orcs identity on tabletop, in general besides Wurzag and the generic goblin lords (still want an araknorok spider mount of the shaman.) the green skin leaders need a touch up especially the warboss more health at least seems a reasonable path to take since they lack healing as a faction and better item choices would also be a nice change. I like greens suggestion of a magic resistance item. If we want to look to another faction that I personally feel has no bad lord choices the dark elves would be a good reference point. Even their generic lords would look good in other factions rosters.
  • Green0Green0 Registered Users Posts: 6,378
    edited June 2019


    Well at least it's true that Alarielle has unusually high melee stats for a caster but she also had relatively high Weapon Skill for a caster on TT as i remember, so her stats - on foot - are justified (dat 67 MD though :D ). The real issue is other lords in my view. Why does Azhag on Skullmuncha has "half" the MD of Alarielle on eagle?

    because he has already 110 speed, poison attacks, decent offensive stats and can kite with SL, something that can be really obnoxious to deal with. Give him 1 weakness. Already in his current form, if you don't abide by tournament rules, he can be a very scummy and toxic pick on ladder.

    Let's not use Alarielle as the gold standard of balancing also. Not like these comparisons matter much anyway, you have to consider how the whole faction plays as a whole. I feel that whenever HE are brought up, the discussion often degenerates about some principle of who deserves to be the best faction so let's just agree that a unit is "meh", "good", or "very good" in a vacuum.

    "It was like this in TT" also doesn't matter in general. Some tabletop-friendly ideas, while apparently innocuous, have potential to break balancing. I would follow Soothsayer's guidelines in making this lord more playable by giving him either a cost niche or unique items that would make him a good pick in some matchups.
  • Theo91Theo91 Registered Users Posts: 1,701
    I don’t think a small buff to the orc warboss will break any of the balance.

    Let’s say +3 md and +300 hp

    See what happens and go from there
  • EnergyzedEnergyzed Registered Users Posts: 357
    Theo91 said:

    I don’t think a small buff to the orc warboss will break any of the balance.

    Let’s say +3 md and +300 hp

    See what happens and go from there

    The thing is that he is priced correctly for his stats. But give him access to an interesting item or ability like stand your ground and he would probably see more play.
  • Ares354Ares354 Registered Users Posts: 3,170
    Theo91 said:

    I don’t think a small buff to the orc warboss will break any of the balance.

    Let’s say +3 md and +300 hp

    See what happens and go from there

    Maybe MA, defence for Orc, he dont need it :pensive: HP fine as long as it like in TT.
  • keroro7keroro7 Registered Users Posts: 222
    edited June 2019
    To be honestly, I'm not sure.
    GS is a good balanced faction.

    camp, kiting, rush who can win around any build.
    There is a lot of factions that are not easy with simple troop exchange.

    But I think that low leadership and lack of lords do not make them op.

    So to complement the stat and make the lords more stronger,
    It can be too strong faction without any disadvantages. (even more pay cost, speaking of possibilities, So I want to leave this part to the devs.)

    The subject started in War-boss, but I found a commonality among the lords that was not well chosen, and I just talked about it.

    This is the list.

    HE - prince (1time consume), tyrion
    LZ - red-skink, Kroq-gar
    DE - None, but dread-lord (sword & shield) slight worse.
    SV - None
    VP - None
    TK - None
    EM - general
    DW - ungrim
    GS - war-boss, skarsnik(has it but too tricky), grimgore
    VC - None (all caster)
    NC - chief, wulfrik (but champ killer)
    BR - lord
    WE - None
    BM - khazrak...
    CS - lord, kholek

    Surprisingly most of the lords has useful area-buffs/de-buffs. and now I see friends who are not popular in this list.

    without regen, spell, area de-buff, area buff. in this case, without special advantages, it is hard to survive.
    of course, still there is a lords who survives this list, they have special advantages or high stats.

    personally, I would like devs to pay attention to item balance. At least the legendary lords needs cure. khaxx, tyxx ...
  • LamentationsLamentations Registered Users Posts: 168
    I feel like that list has some flaws such as kholek, and the red-crested skink being on it.
  • keroro7keroro7 Registered Users Posts: 222
    edited June 2019

    I feel like that list has some flaws such as kholek, and the red-crested skink being on it.

    yes-yes, I already talked too. and there is another reason for the unloved lords who is out of the list.

    I made a little time!, so supplement the explanation.
    If I choose a kholek, it will save a cost to pick a monster. and the purpose is to check the other's monsters.
    so I think this is a choice to use the resources of chaos effectively. it is not mean better pick than sarsorael or archaon in my mind. and red-skink I honestly did not see him much. so I can't say anything.

    As a result, the basic idea remains unchanged. I think that it is true that a hero who only fights well alone is less than any other hero. If you not allow engage it.
    Post edited by keroro7 on
  • WojmirVonCarsteinWojmirVonCarstein Registered Users Posts: 1,008
    Energyzed said:

    Theo91 said:

    I don’t think a small buff to the orc warboss will break any of the balance.

    Let’s say +3 md and +300 hp

    See what happens and go from there

    The thing is that he is priced correctly for his stats. But give him access to an interesting item or ability like stand your ground and he would probably see more play.
    If this is true, then that means that most GS lords are too cheap
  • Odysseus95Odysseus95 Registered Users Posts: 139
    I agree with OP. If anything, the key features of Greenskins should be highest HP pools or high HP pools for cost-effective units, and then highest or very high weapon strength for cost-effective units.
  • mightygloinmightygloin Registered Users Posts: 2,575
    edited June 2019
    Theo91 said:

    I don’t think a small buff to the orc warboss will break any of the balance.

    Let’s say +3 md and +300 hp

    See what happens and go from there

    It's not like we haven't seen this mild approach before, and it literally changes nothing for obviously underpowered units.
    Green0 said:


    Well at least it's true that Alarielle has unusually high melee stats for a caster but she also had relatively high Weapon Skill for a caster on TT as i remember, so her stats - on foot - are justified (dat 67 MD though :D ). The real issue is other lords in my view. Why does Azhag on Skullmuncha has "half" the MD of Alarielle on eagle?

    because he has already 110 speed, poison attacks, decent offensive stats and can kite with SL, something that can be really obnoxious to deal with. Give him 1 weakness. Already in his current form, if you don't abide by tournament rules, he can be a very scummy and toxic pick on ladder.

    On Wyvern he can be toxic indeed, but i thought his mediocre unhealable HP and armor was weakness enough. Such low MD seems very artificial to give him weakness especially when you consider generic Warboss having more in any form. Also Luthor on TG has very similar sniping potential, though lacks SL but has AP missiles. On top of this he's healable and doesn't have skeleton level MD.
  • sonofabhorashsonofabhorash Registered Users Posts: 194
    The generic lords should def. bring some unique flavor to the army when taken, except WE
    Not just i want to go cheap policy
    What about +7%whole army leadership for empire,weapon strength for greenskins,charge bonus for brets etc.
    I mean diversity and mindgames are huge part of this game so why not to go further?
  • WojmirVonCarsteinWojmirVonCarstein Registered Users Posts: 1,008
    The army wide buffs are good idea to help with the usefulness. But I do questions the lore aspect of it.

    ie: why would a greenskin army led by an Orc Warboss hit harder than one lead by Grimgor or Azhag?

    Or why would an Empire army lead by the Emperor himself be less brave than one led by a general?

    What I think would make sense is just to drop prices on many of the generic lords to make them cost efficient. So then the choice become to do you want a powerful lord with unique abilities or a generic weaker lord but for much cheaper?

    I think for GS, this is how it works for the night goblins big boss. That guy can cost as little as 800g, while still having some cool abilities like the tormentor sword. Add in a orc or goblins caster for about 700-900g and you are at 1500-1700g Or you can get Azhag who will run you 2200g - 2500g. I think that is a good balance (though admittedly Azhag still frequently is the better pick, thought the night gobbo on squiq can be a nice surprise)

    Certainly some generic lords do need buffs, but I think dropping prices would definitely help.

    In factions where there is a large choice of lords, some generic lords literally never get chosen.

    Like for example VC, no none will ever choose the generic Master Necro because for a slight price increase you get Kemmler who is so much better. And if you want a master necro on a corpse cart (God knows why), you would go with the man himself, Ghorst.

  • keroro7keroro7 Registered Users Posts: 222

    The army wide buffs are good idea to help with the usefulness. But I do questions the lore aspect of it.

    ie: why would a greenskin army led by an Orc Warboss hit harder than one lead by Grimgor or Azhag?

    Or why would an Empire army lead by the Emperor himself be less brave than one led by a general?

    What I think would make sense is just to drop prices on many of the generic lords to make them cost efficient. So then the choice become to do you want a powerful lord with unique abilities or a generic weaker lord but for much cheaper?

    I think for GS, this is how it works for the night goblins big boss. That guy can cost as little as 800g, while still having some cool abilities like the tormentor sword. Add in a orc or goblins caster for about 700-900g and you are at 1500-1700g Or you can get Azhag who will run you 2200g - 2500g. I think that is a good balance (though admittedly Azhag still frequently is the better pick, thought the night gobbo on squiq can be a nice surprise)

    Certainly some generic lords do need buffs, but I think dropping prices would definitely help.

    In factions where there is a large choice of lords, some generic lords literally never get chosen.

    Like for example VC, no none will ever choose the generic Master Necro because for a slight price increase you get Kemmler who is so much better. And if you want a master necro on a corpse cart (God knows why), you would go with the man himself, Ghorst.

    It is a really good point. Now I am sleepy(coz drink B) ) so I will answer simple.
    As you said, the goblin big-boss is a good example. The price is cheap and his power is not strong, but you also have items that help your team.

    But let's look at the war-boss. Look at the poor items he has.
    It is a one-time item, only for himself, and it disappears if it does not succeed in the time-attack.

    This is the point I want to say.

    The legendary lords are, of course, strong and expensive.
    The caster is very useful for saving the cost.
    A regen lords are easy to maintain the front and does not have to take care of much, and It survives well and keeps friend's morale.

    However, in the case of war-boss (only can frontline-fight types), if the price is simply reduced,
    only the cost savings will be increased.

    I don't think it is fun. maybe to think about the combination with the team is more fun.
    Also If you do not use all of the legendary lords spell/skills and you exclude some of them, then the legendary lords can lose cost because the cost of the general-lords will be too low.

    The example of a vampire is also very good.
    Yes, I agee in this case you are right.
    Who can not evaluate them with just the items they have. Price is also an important issue.

    But they are all casters, so I excluded this time.
    If someone later creates a thread with a new topic, it will be possible to discuss it in another time.

Sign In or Register to comment.