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 elephant in the room - Impossible matchups

FerrousTarkusFerrousTarkus Posts: 525Registered Users
Hay guys!

Lets talk about the elephant in the room of balance; Impossible match-ups. What I mean by that is faction that really struggle against other factions in multiplayer. So of you may already know that factions have advantageous, balanced and disadvantageous match-ups with different factions. Some factions are top tier because they have very few disadvantageous match-ups. Others are bottom tier because they have too many disadvantageous match-ups. So, in a tournament normally players first pick faction that have few disadvantageous match-ups while the counter picking player can choose a faction without making it an uphill battle.

Yes, its important to focus on balance at a micro level by buffing such and such units, but the real imbalance come from match up that are uphill battles from the get go.

So, in my opinion, and please tell me what you think about that we have two options;
  1. Provide tools/buffs for factions to be able to deal with their disadvantageous match-ups.
  2. Give players a pick and ban mechanics at the army screen
Personally, I would rather have the former, since that way every faction is viable versus any other faction. Anyways, what do you think? What factions do you think are fighting an uphill battle against particular faction? What would need to be buffed/given in order for them to have more balanced match-up without disrupting the balance against other faction?
«1

Comments

  • Green0Green0 Posts: 5,180Registered Users
    edited October 5


    Provide tools/buffs for factions to be able to deal with their disadvantageous match-ups.
    the problem with this is that it would break the factions.

    Small example: Beastmen are bad into VC and Coast, but also have even/slightly favorable matchups into HE and Empire.

    In order to buff BM enough to compete with Coast or VC, you would need to break them vs HE or Empire.

    Pick & ban system would just lead to some factions never getting picked and some becoming even more dominant.
  • SeldkamSeldkam Senior Member Posts: 4,113Registered Users
    Fixing this doesn't really work. Asymmetrical games will always, always have counters and recounters, it's just how these games are designed to be. It's literally the point.

    The reason matchups that are truly difficult exist isn't because of a number issue, but rather design, which is to say, the theme of factions countering the playstyle of others. Think Greek city States and nomadic tribes from Rome 2.
    The inferior races of this world will be crushed one by one, as our armies move from shore to shore, and hill to hill, and city to city-- and each of their cries will be as music to our ears, for we are the Druchii.
  • FerrousTarkusFerrousTarkus Posts: 525Registered Users
    Seldkam said:

    Fixing this doesn't really work. Asymmetrical games will always, always have counters and recounters, it's just how these games are designed to be. It's literally the point.

    The reason matchups that are truly difficult exist isn't because of a number issue, but rather design, which is to say, the theme of factions countering the playstyle of others. Think Greek city States and nomadic tribes from Rome 2.

    What about the factions that have MANY disadvantageous match-ups? Are those balanced? Then how come lizard-men have barely any disadvantageous match-ups? Following your logic shouldn't they struggle too versus some of them?
  • another505another505 Posts: 1,007Registered Users


    Seldkam said:

    Fixing this doesn't really work. Asymmetrical games will always, always have counters and recounters, it's just how these games are designed to be. It's literally the point.

    The reason matchups that are truly difficult exist isn't because of a number issue, but rather design, which is to say, the theme of factions countering the playstyle of others. Think Greek city States and nomadic tribes from Rome 2.

    What about the factions that have MANY disadvantageous match-ups? Are those balanced? Then how come lizard-men have barely any disadvantageous match-ups? Following your logic shouldn't they struggle too versus some of them?
    Cause they have huge rosters....
    With big rosters you are bound to be more varied and able to deal with different MU
    its not hard to see the biggest roster factions, lzm, skaven and empire and now top
  • SeldkamSeldkam Senior Member Posts: 4,113Registered Users


    Seldkam said:

    Fixing this doesn't really work. Asymmetrical games will always, always have counters and recounters, it's just how these games are designed to be. It's literally the point.

    The reason matchups that are truly difficult exist isn't because of a number issue, but rather design, which is to say, the theme of factions countering the playstyle of others. Think Greek city States and nomadic tribes from Rome 2.

    What about the factions that have MANY disadvantageous match-ups? Are those balanced? Then how come lizard-men have barely any disadvantageous match-ups? Following your logic shouldn't they struggle too versus some of them?
    Ok first off lizards just now got a dlc, as did empire. We haven't had a balance pass on them so let's wait and see how the matchups are when appropriate changes come along to balance out the new tools lizards have.

    But perhaps more importantly, no. Because my logic isn't "if an army has a theme they automatically will be countered". Look at the empire. Technically they are supposed to be able to deal with everything as that's their theme, but because of that they're also hard to pilot against simpler factions. This statement may sound bizarre, but look at dwarf vs empire for example. Or beastmen into empire. Dwarf and beastmens theme are simple, if not easy. Beastmen rush hard and fast, dwarfs hold.

    Therefore you can look at empire for example and what is there to do which will help them? They already are supposed to be good at everything but not great right? Ok well what do you do? Buff empire infantry so it's somehow better than dwarf infantry? But that shatters the whole point of asymmetry.
    The inferior races of this world will be crushed one by one, as our armies move from shore to shore, and hill to hill, and city to city-- and each of their cries will be as music to our ears, for we are the Druchii.
  • Modern_ErasmusModern_Erasmus Posts: 132Registered Users
    edited October 6


    Seldkam said:

    Fixing this doesn't really work. Asymmetrical games will always, always have counters and recounters, it's just how these games are designed to be. It's literally the point.

    The reason matchups that are truly difficult exist isn't because of a number issue, but rather design, which is to say, the theme of factions countering the playstyle of others. Think Greek city States and nomadic tribes from Rome 2.

    What about the factions that have MANY disadvantageous match-ups? Are those balanced? Then how come lizard-men have barely any disadvantageous match-ups? Following your logic shouldn't they struggle too versus some of them?
    There are no factions with zero bad matchups. Lizards definitely have among the fewest rn, which is why they're generally considered one of the better factions, but even they do struggle with Dwarfs, Empire, Skaven, Vcoast, and to a much lesser extent Tomb Kings and Wood elves.

    Ultimately the existence of extremely hard matchups is unfortunate, but there's no such thing as a completely unwinnable one in the current meta. Tournaments also generally use pick ban format which allows niche factions like beast men (which have a lot of bad matchups but good ones against some of the top tier factions) to have a viable place in the metagame.
    Post edited by Modern_Erasmus on
  • Lotus_MoonLotus_Moon Posts: 7,781Registered Users


    Seldkam said:

    Fixing this doesn't really work. Asymmetrical games will always, always have counters and recounters, it's just how these games are designed to be. It's literally the point.

    The reason matchups that are truly difficult exist isn't because of a number issue, but rather design, which is to say, the theme of factions countering the playstyle of others. Think Greek city States and nomadic tribes from Rome 2.

    What about the factions that have MANY disadvantageous match-ups? Are those balanced? Then how come lizard-men have barely any disadvantageous match-ups? Following your logic shouldn't they struggle too versus some of them?
    There are no factions with zero bad matchups. Lizards definitely have among the fewest rn, which is why they're generally considered a top tier faction, but even they do struggle with Dwarfs, Empire, Skaven, and to a much lesser extent Vcoast and Wood elves.

    Ultimately the existence of extremely hard matchups is unfortunate, but there's no such thing as a completely unwinnable one in the current meta. Tournaments also generally use pick ban format which allows niche factions like beast men (which have a lot of bad matchups but good ones against some of the top tier factions) to have a viable place in the metagame.
    Can't say i agree, i think SKV still got no bad match-ups, while new empire doesn't seem to be at a disadvantage vs anyone either, i mean sure those factions have quite a few even ones currently, but still SKV and EMP could use some match-ups that they struggle in.
  • Disposable HeroDisposable Hero Posts: 3,726Registered Users
    You can do things but have to be extremely careful. It's hard to selectively touch only one or a few mu.

    Tools that can work is resist items/auras, or abilities that partially offsets a weakness, like vulnerability to magic damage, terror or mass.
  • ystyst Posts: 6,073Registered Users
    Lulz no bad match up what epic fail nonsense. If thats true u be looking at nothing but skaven and emp on every single game or mirror match
    https://imgur.com/a/Cj4b9
    Top #3 Leaderboard on Warhammer Totalwar.
    Unit stats compare courtesy of Seal62 https://total-war-unit-compare.herokuapp.com/
  • DandalusXVIIDandalusXVII Posts: 4,167Registered Users
    Just wait for game 3 things will be fixed then.
  • ystyst Posts: 6,073Registered Users
    ^ chaos dwf, orge kingdoms and whoever the new faction is, should bring a huge balance of power to the game.

    Lets just hope chaos dwf r as godly as they are, armoured siege giants ohh and those hand cannons
    https://imgur.com/a/Cj4b9
    Top #3 Leaderboard on Warhammer Totalwar.
    Unit stats compare courtesy of Seal62 https://total-war-unit-compare.herokuapp.com/
  • WitchbladeWitchblade Posts: 330Registered Users
    This game is too well balanced to have impossible match-ups. The worst match-ups currently are 60-40 I'd say and the last win rate data support this, for what they're worth. That still amounts to a 50% higher winrate though, so it's very substantial.

    Very bad match-ups I'd say are:
    - Bretonnia, WE and Lizardmen vs Dwarfs (Empire struggles too without arguably cheesy armies)
    - Chaos and Beastmen vs VC (can't get through the blob)
    - Lizardmen vs Skaven (can't protect your lord)
    - TK vs Chaos (no cost-effective answers to halberds and shaggoths)
    - DE vs Vampirates (unless the opponent doesn't know about shades)
    - VC vs any Elves (strongly determined by army selection with unfavorable odds)
  • FerrousTarkusFerrousTarkus Posts: 525Registered Users

    This game is too well balanced to have impossible match-ups. The worst match-ups currently are 60-40 I'd say and the last win rate data support this, for what they're worth. That still amounts to a 50% higher winrate though, so it's very substantial.

    Very bad match-ups I'd say are:
    - Bretonnia, WE and Lizardmen vs Dwarfs (Empire struggles too without arguably cheesy armies)
    - Chaos and Beastmen vs VC (can't get through the blob)
    - Lizardmen vs Skaven (can't protect your lord)
    - TK vs Chaos (no cost-effective answers to halberds and shaggoths)
    - DE vs Vampirates (unless the opponent doesn't know about shades)
    - VC vs any Elves (strongly determined by army selection with unfavorable odds)

    Beastmen versus vampire is impossible for beastmen to win if both player are equally skilled and use competitive builds.

    Sons of ghorros are mandatory otherwise you dont have enough magic damage to deal with ethereals. Morghur is the only viable pick and the beastmen caster will probably be quickly gooned. Even then it will be very very hard and your stuff will be scared away very often.

    I would say its more like 80/20 in favor of vampires. Because of the predictable build and natural counters. Beastmen need more viable lords and more magic damage, spells or magical attack units. Also some way to boost their psychology/moral.

    Bretonnia versus lizardmen is also 80/20 because of their lack of AP and anti-large. Their archers need an armor piercing arrow variant in my opinion. The hunters would have been very handy for bretonnia unlike empire who already had gunpowder/canons to deal with dinos.

    Im sure there are other extreme case such as those two. I invite anyone to post their very hard match-ups.
  • RiggsenRiggsen Member Posts: 2,598Registered Users
    If a particular matchup is truly approaching impossible, then yes it needs to be actioned. But I don’t think there are any that are unwinnable, just advantaged or disadvantaged - and as others have said, that’s really just the nature of the beast with asymmetric balance and a very large number of factions.
    "CA WHY U NU UNPOOP GAME" (Dank TW meme of 2011)
  • WunderKatzeWunderKatze Posts: 219Registered Users
    How do you guys beat dwarves as empire. Basically impossible for me. That being requires dwarf player to mess up.
  • Green0Green0 Posts: 5,180Registered Users

    How do you guys beat dwarves as empire. Basically impossible for me. That being requires dwarf player to mess up.

    I agree.
  • eumaieseumaies Senior Member Posts: 4,442Registered Users

    How do you guys beat dwarves as empire. Basically impossible for me. That being requires dwarf player to mess up.

    There are definitely 80/20 matchups and that is one of them. Empire can do a reasonable mixed infantry swarm plus cheap skirmisher, among other build options, but it’s a combo of guess right and play at least as well too kind of situation.
  • SarmatiansSarmatians Posts: 3,248Registered Users

    This game is too well balanced to have impossible match-ups. The worst match-ups currently are 60-40 I'd say and the last win rate data support this, for what they're worth. That still amounts to a 50% higher winrate though, so it's very substantial.

    Very bad match-ups I'd say are:
    - Bretonnia, WE and Lizardmen vs Dwarfs (Empire struggles too without arguably cheesy armies)
    - Chaos and Beastmen vs VC (can't get through the blob)
    - Lizardmen vs Skaven (can't protect your lord)
    - TK vs Chaos (no cost-effective answers to halberds and shaggoths)
    - DE vs Vampirates (unless the opponent doesn't know about shades)
    - VC vs any Elves (strongly determined by army selection with unfavorable odds)

    TK vs Chaos?

    I would strongly argue that one is in TK favour, not the other way around.
  • Disposable HeroDisposable Hero Posts: 3,726Registered Users
    My list would be much shorter... And I wouldn't go as far as 80:20 except maybe the first row.

    Bm, woc vs vc
    We, he vs bret
    Vc vs he
    We, emp vs dwf

  • Wyvern2Wyvern2 Posts: 1,358Registered Users

    How do you guys beat dwarves as empire. Basically impossible for me. That being requires dwarf player to mess up.

    Mass dakka, basically gambling on the fact that the dwarf player cannot invest in enough shooting to outshoot you without compromising themselves against cav especially. Unless a dwarf player counter cheeses with an all slayer army(not just several slayers, practically all in on them, since you can still field a lot of frontline to stop a few) you can overwhelm them with mass crossbow, gun and huntsmen.
    Regularly publish Total War: Warhammer 2 content on my YT channel

    https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCPI93p-X2T4YKD18O16bhPw
  • eumaieseumaies Senior Member Posts: 4,442Registered Users

    This game is too well balanced to have impossible match-ups. The worst match-ups currently are 60-40 I'd say and the last win rate data support this, for what they're worth. That still amounts to a 50% higher winrate though, so it's very substantial.

    Very bad match-ups I'd say are:
    - Bretonnia, WE and Lizardmen vs Dwarfs (Empire struggles too without arguably cheesy armies)
    - Chaos and Beastmen vs VC (can't get through the blob)
    - Lizardmen vs Skaven (can't protect your lord)
    - TK vs Chaos (no cost-effective answers to halberds and shaggoths)
    - DE vs Vampirates (unless the opponent doesn't know about shades)
    - VC vs any Elves (strongly determined by army selection with unfavorable odds)

    TK vs Chaos?

    I would strongly argue that one is in TK favour, not the other way around.
    What's your secret? I would say that's one of the harder matchups for TK.
  • Green0Green0 Posts: 5,180Registered Users
    eumaies said:

    This game is too well balanced to have impossible match-ups. The worst match-ups currently are 60-40 I'd say and the last win rate data support this, for what they're worth. That still amounts to a 50% higher winrate though, so it's very substantial.

    Very bad match-ups I'd say are:
    - Bretonnia, WE and Lizardmen vs Dwarfs (Empire struggles too without arguably cheesy armies)
    - Chaos and Beastmen vs VC (can't get through the blob)
    - Lizardmen vs Skaven (can't protect your lord)
    - TK vs Chaos (no cost-effective answers to halberds and shaggoths)
    - DE vs Vampirates (unless the opponent doesn't know about shades)
    - VC vs any Elves (strongly determined by army selection with unfavorable odds)

    TK vs Chaos?

    I would strongly argue that one is in TK favour, not the other way around.
    What's your secret? I would say that's one of the harder matchups for TK.
    intuitively, and I'm by no means a TK expert, it seems though that something like Settra + 2x Necrotect with heals + RoR Necrosphinx will go a long way toward countering most Chaos armies. Marauder cav admittedly could be a problem, not exactly sure how TK counter that. Maybe 1x Bow Ushabti?

    But RoR Necrosphinx if you play it correctly is essentially a slower Kholek. But it can heal and it has Unbreakable.
  • eumaieseumaies Senior Member Posts: 4,442Registered Users
    Green0 said:

    eumaies said:

    This game is too well balanced to have impossible match-ups. The worst match-ups currently are 60-40 I'd say and the last win rate data support this, for what they're worth. That still amounts to a 50% higher winrate though, so it's very substantial.

    Very bad match-ups I'd say are:
    - Bretonnia, WE and Lizardmen vs Dwarfs (Empire struggles too without arguably cheesy armies)
    - Chaos and Beastmen vs VC (can't get through the blob)
    - Lizardmen vs Skaven (can't protect your lord)
    - TK vs Chaos (no cost-effective answers to halberds and shaggoths)
    - DE vs Vampirates (unless the opponent doesn't know about shades)
    - VC vs any Elves (strongly determined by army selection with unfavorable odds)

    TK vs Chaos?

    I would strongly argue that one is in TK favour, not the other way around.
    What's your secret? I would say that's one of the harder matchups for TK.
    intuitively, and I'm by no means a TK expert, it seems though that something like Settra + 2x Necrotect with heals + RoR Necrosphinx will go a long way toward countering most Chaos armies. Marauder cav admittedly could be a problem, not exactly sure how TK counter that. Maybe 1x Bow Ushabti?

    But RoR Necrosphinx if you play it correctly is essentially a slower Kholek. But it can heal and it has Unbreakable.
    So, TK have some solid units and abilities in general.

    But fundamentally you have chaos with good armored infantry you have to kill and then also AP anti large monsters that don’t pay for armour and therefore are more cost efficient than necrosphinxes or the anti large armoured TK cav when trading against large targets.

    It’s not like there’s no good options for TK but the fundamentals lean in favor of chaos in my experience.
  • Green0Green0 Posts: 5,180Registered Users
    eumaies said:

    Green0 said:

    eumaies said:

    This game is too well balanced to have impossible match-ups. The worst match-ups currently are 60-40 I'd say and the last win rate data support this, for what they're worth. That still amounts to a 50% higher winrate though, so it's very substantial.

    Very bad match-ups I'd say are:
    - Bretonnia, WE and Lizardmen vs Dwarfs (Empire struggles too without arguably cheesy armies)
    - Chaos and Beastmen vs VC (can't get through the blob)
    - Lizardmen vs Skaven (can't protect your lord)
    - TK vs Chaos (no cost-effective answers to halberds and shaggoths)
    - DE vs Vampirates (unless the opponent doesn't know about shades)
    - VC vs any Elves (strongly determined by army selection with unfavorable odds)

    TK vs Chaos?

    I would strongly argue that one is in TK favour, not the other way around.
    What's your secret? I would say that's one of the harder matchups for TK.
    intuitively, and I'm by no means a TK expert, it seems though that something like Settra + 2x Necrotect with heals + RoR Necrosphinx will go a long way toward countering most Chaos armies. Marauder cav admittedly could be a problem, not exactly sure how TK counter that. Maybe 1x Bow Ushabti?

    But RoR Necrosphinx if you play it correctly is essentially a slower Kholek. But it can heal and it has Unbreakable.
    So, TK have some solid units and abilities in general.

    But fundamentally you have chaos with good armored infantry you have to kill and then also AP anti large monsters that don’t pay for armour and therefore are more cost efficient than necrosphinxes or the anti large armoured TK cav when trading against large targets.

    It’s not like there’s no good options for TK but the fundamentals lean in favor of chaos in my experience.
    Kholek and Necrosphinx RoR are equivalent though, in fact Necrosphinx is slightly more cost-efficient if anything. I don't know where you take that Chaos doesn't pay for armor on Shaggoths. It's not a false statement but TK don't either.
  • eumaieseumaies Senior Member Posts: 4,442Registered Users
    I’m saying chaos anti large AP units have lower armour, and are thus cheaper, and armour is not needed for their role in countering TK in this case.

    Meanwhile all of TK armour peircing units are armored large monsters (with the exception of halbards which will die to the first burning head).
  • FerrousTarkusFerrousTarkus Posts: 525Registered Users

    My list would be much shorter... And I wouldn't go as far as 80:20 except maybe the first row.

    Bm, woc vs vc
    We, he vs bret
    Vc vs he
    We, emp vs dwf

    Lets be honest here, when its hard enough to be over 65/35 for equally skilled player its mostly impossible to win. Unless the upper hand player really mess up and if thats the case they are not equally skilled player.

    Thus, these match-ups and others for that matter need some tools/buffs to specifically deal with these uphill battle while trying not to disturb the other match-ups. Most of them boil down to very specific thing that are not cost efficient, or doesn't have enough and can easily be fixed for instance;

    Psychology
    Armour piercing
    Anti-large
    magic-damage

    Im sure there are other simple statistics change on specific units that would go a long way giving vulnerable factions tools to deal with their "nemesis".
  • Lotus_MoonLotus_Moon Posts: 7,781Registered Users
    Emp vs dwarfs is Emp favoured after this patch due to black lions alone.
  • OrkLadsOrkLads Posts: 1,388Registered Users
    eumaies said:

    I’m saying chaos anti large AP units have lower armour, and are thus cheaper, and armour is not needed for their role in countering TK in this case.

    Meanwhile all of TK armour peircing units are armored large monsters (with the exception of halbards which will die to the first burning head).

    Check out the match between Aerocrastic and Soothsayer from 1 of the Everchosen's, the final is an amazing TK v Chaos match that might give some ideas.


    But I agree, TK struggles here because CW @ 750 beat all the infantry TK can throw at them very comfortably. And Chaos have no problem handling the large the Tomb kings can bring as their AP. Can't remember which build I have saved but will send it to you later on
  • eumaieseumaies Senior Member Posts: 4,442Registered Users
    edited October 8
    OrkLads said:

    eumaies said:

    I’m saying chaos anti large AP units have lower armour, and are thus cheaper, and armour is not needed for their role in countering TK in this case.

    Meanwhile all of TK armour peircing units are armored large monsters (with the exception of halbards which will die to the first burning head).

    Check out the match between Aerocrastic and Soothsayer from 1 of the Everchosen's, the final is an amazing TK v Chaos match that might give some ideas.


    But I agree, TK struggles here because CW @ 750 beat all the infantry TK can throw at them very comfortably. And Chaos have no problem handling the large the Tomb kings can bring as their AP. Can't remember which build I have saved but will send it to you later on
    Exactly. I'm not saying I don't have ideas or ways to win the matchup (though do send me ideas - more is good!). I just think it favors chaos and you have to be a bit creative and take some gambles with your build.
    Post edited by eumaies on
  • WunderKatzeWunderKatze Posts: 219Registered Users

    Emp vs dwarfs is Emp favoured after this patch due to black lions alone.

    I don't see that at all. It's out ranged by dwarf arty, which is also a good pick against emp calvary and greatswords.

    It may be useful but it is an exaggeration to say it will turn the match up around at all.
Sign In or Register to comment.