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

Rare Single Entity Cap is DESTROYING Lizardmen competitive play...

GreyKnightDantesGreyKnightDantes Posts: 216Registered Users
Look, this army relies on large monsters. When you limit monsters to ONLY 3, they lose their power.


Bastiladons should NOT count towards the cap. They are your cheapest monster unit. They are not OP, they are not even that strong. They shoudln't count towards this cap, otherwise NO ONE will pick them.


Lords/heroes on Monster Mounts should NOT count towards cap as well. It's like their ONE RACIAL strength. Heroes/Lord mounts are what makes Lizardmen characters so powerful. WIthout them, they are trash. Kroq-Gar, TRASH on foot. Tehenuain? Trash on foot. Nakai? He counts towards the cap...Lord Kroak? Counts towards Cap. All Slann characters? Counts TOWARDS CAP! Scar-Veteran? Trash without mount.


Lizardmen cannot, I reapeat CANNOT rely on their infantry and cavalry. Infantry is solid but that is it. Cavalry overall is trash. Their monsters is what makes them what they are.

PLEASE FIX THIS! This cap is destroying their competitive play....

==========================================================================================
When you are trying hard not to burn people but you smell heresy in the air...


«1

Comments

  • ystyst Posts: 6,507Registered Users
    edited December 2019
    Raised this point repeatedly, liz is the only faction in game that actually got weaker on a dlc lol

    A monster faction that cant monster, not a single ferals r being taken now, u cant use regular stegs, etc etc. Also rubbish of sotek is about the worst of the worst monster in game, after dread saurian ror if u wanna count rors in

    Even stupid slann count as 1 slot. Get rekt liz.
    https://imgur.com/a/Cj4b9
    Top #3 Leaderboard on Warhammer Totalwar.
  • Green0Green0 Posts: 5,518Registered Users
    edited December 2019
    I mean, a Bastiladon still rocks a massive 140 armor so it requires ALWAYS a more expensive (read: with AP) unit to get rid of it). It kills chaff, though not exactly quickly, but it does so efficiently. It also causes terror which is the main reason you want to take it, cheap terror source.

    Nah, the caps definitely improved the game, don't like Bastiladons you can bring 3 Carnosaurs if you think that's the best way for you to win.

    I see Bastiladons from time to time, and I think they can make sense vs:

    - Wood Elves (you can rush the WE and 2-3 cheap Bastiladons are not exactly what the WE want to focus their Waywatchers/Glade Guard on)
    - High Elves (they tend to struggle vs armor so again, a 650g beast that will typically require a 2400g Star Dragon to spend some time dealing with them and land can be good)
    - Skaven (again, Skaven weapon teams don't wanna shoot such a cheap unit and yet terror is very useful vs a Skaven frontline)
    - Greenskins (again, GS tend to struggle vs armor and terror a bit)
    - Beastmen (though you don't really need help in this matchup, and there's no reason not to pick a Stegadon instead, Bastiladons are nevertheless very good vs Beastmen also)

    And honestly, if you think Lizardmen are weak, it's a learn to play issue. LZ are top 3 at the moment, having following advantages:

    - strong infantry (Saurus beat any other 800g infantry in the game, Temple Guard are a good generalist unit, 300g Cohorts are an excellent chaff/archer killer and 600g Red Crested Skinks are a good melee rush unit. The 400g Cohort has insane missile damage per volley though they only shoot 3 times).
    - strong monstrous infantry (Kroxigors are basically the Swordmasters of monster infantry)
    - strong magic (Slanns + budget Skink Priest. I think you heavily underestimate how game-changing it is to have access to 6 lores of magic)
    - strong monsters including monster mounts. This is the biggest selling point of Lizardmen, you can have so much versatility in how you play, for example you can pick a Dread Saurian which is a good generalist monster, or a more specialized anti-blob one in the form of the RoR Stegadon... or you can have a fast anti-large force with like an Oldblood on Carnosaur, a Feral Carnosaur and a unit of Horned Ones... or you can kite and kill all of the enemy infantry with an Ancient Salamander... the choice is yours really but this is the biggest reason to play Lizardmen, monster selection and versatility.
    - OK skirmishing (notably Chameleons and Terradons are hidden gems)
    - OK missile cav (Salamanders + Razordons are hard to use but have a very high damage output)
    - below average artillery (though still sometimes seen, for example ballista Stegadons beat Bolt Throwers in a ranged duel while losing almost no HP). Don't understand "below average" as "underpowered", Solar Engines and ballista Stegadons are most certainly cost-effective, only not as versatile as the artillery other factions have which is why I classify them as below average.
    - OK air units
    - good Regiments of Renown (for example, Starchamber Guardians beat any infantry in the game except RoR Phoenix Guard and RoR Black Orcs. The Umbral Tide is a good AL unit that doesn't need to be protected against artillery, as such it tends to shine vs for example Skaven or High Elves where it can target their monsters fairly efficiently. The Cohort of Sotek is a good unbreakable, high DPS unit for a relatively low price. The Paxuax Sentinels are a good harassment unit with a VERY strong rock drop that can delete a lot of HP from even the most elite units in 1 drop, again for a relatively cheap 800g)
    - strong cavalry (if you think otherwise you're likely using it wrong, Spear Riders are slightly better Cold One Knights, which is a very good cav unit, and Horned Ones are just a good general-purpose killing unit, only lacking slightly in the armor department for the cost).


    If you wanna spam single entities and cheese your opponent go and open a Multiplayer Lobby. Only to have fair play make sure that your opponent can also bring 4 Luminarks, 2 Star Dragons, etc.

    I'm glad the monster spam phase of Quick Battles is gone, if you think otherwise you most likely wanted to cheese wins.

    Or you can always play campaign I think there you can spam 20 stacks of Stegadons.
    Post edited by Green0 on
  • BovineKingBovineKing Posts: 172Registered Users
    Yeah I forgot slan counts they shouldn’t count towards it personally removing it would be fine. I can’t remember if the skink flying mounts count but if it does that one too as it already counts towards flying limit.
  • Green0Green0 Posts: 5,518Registered Users

    Yeah I forgot slan counts they shouldn’t count towards it personally removing it would be fine. I can’t remember if the skink flying mounts count but if it does that one too as it already counts towards flying limit.

    Slanns probably should count toward the cap as long as Life Slann (which is getting a -150g to bring it in line with other Slanns next patch) is in the LZ roster. Not only are they relatively cheap, but they carry a bunch of hidden perks such as an AoE ward save, 2 free Banishments, Greater Arcane Conduit and the Statuette item is like 4 casts of Melkoth's Miasma damage-wise.

    I can see something like a Slann, 2 Temple Guards and 3 other monsters being a bit too strong.
  • BovineKingBovineKing Posts: 172Registered Users
    How is Slann different from any other named caster though? slann also are prone to lord sniping depending on circumstance. Idk they don’t really fall in category of sem for me and I don’t even play lizardmen much
  • eumaieseumaies Senior Member Posts: 4,870Registered Users
    edited December 2019
    So... lizardmen are highly competitive that's not the issue. Also, big picture the cap is good and necessary for balance.

    But it's a fair point about build options and usability of some of the lesser/cheaper dinos. A solution could be either hybrid caps that incorporate point cost in some way or perhaps putting cheaper ferals in a separate bucket along with a more expansive (e.g. 4) "total monsters" bucket.
  • Green0Green0 Posts: 5,518Registered Users
    eumaies said:

    So... lizardmen are highly competitive that's not the issue. Also, big picture the cap is good and necessary for balance.

    But it's a fair point about build options and usability of some of the lesser/cheaper dinos. A solution could be either hybrid caps that incorporate point cost in some way or perhaps putting cheaper ferals in a separate bucket along with a more expansive (e.g. 4) "total monsters" bucket.

    go down this rabbit hole and a number of exceptions need to be made:

    - VC will start saying Bats shouldn’t count for 1 full flyer slot
    - HE and WE Eagles, DE Manticores should count 1/2 (analogously to proposed Bastiladon change)
    - Weapon Teams new cap is unjust toward Skaven now that LZ can spam 4 Bastiladons.

    In the end, these caps are for the best really. The reason why a Bastiladon counts for 1 full SEM slot is because it’s still a Terror source with 140 armor. If you look at it that way, 650g is very cheap for this type of battlefield influence.

    If you think a Bastiladon is an issue, nobody is forcing you to pick it either, you can spam 3 Stegadons.

    People who are unhappy with these caps just wanna abuse the system and go back to spamming SEs. As if this was a true problem and LZ SEs were even bad.

    Slanns like said carry a bunch of free baggage, to my list above I forgot to add like 5500 HP and 40% missile resist. They are most definitely not your average caster lord.
  • KayosivKayosiv Senior Member Posts: 2,631Registered Users
    edited December 2019
    Slann counting towards single entity monsters is rubbish.

    They are not fast, they are not armor piercing, they do not have armor. They share nothing in common with any monster in role or ability.

    They are just a foot wizard that has more HP and happen to be way easier to hit due to a much larger hitbox than a normal foot lord.
    Space Frontier is a sci-fi themed board game I've designed for 2-4 players. Please take a look and enjoy our free Print-and-Play at FreezeDriedGames.com

    If you have any questions about tactics or mechanics in Total War Warhammer multiplayer, feel free to PM me.
  • AerocrasticAerocrastic Posts: 416Registered Users
    Green more or less already summarized the main points. Bastiladons are a source of cheap terror and any monster in large enough numbers can be a problem. Slann counting as monsters is an argument of contention, and people have brought up the issue that tournament rules don't restrict them but that's only applicable to English speaking tournaments, and depends on the rulesets. I personally don't feel strongly about Slann one way or another, but I think that tournament rules and quick battle rules should always be different from each other. If people want a complete competitive experience, then you know where to find tournament signups.
  • ValkaarValkaar Junior Member Posts: 1,929Registered Users
    The ONE point that I can agree with is the Slaan not counting. Their role is not the same as an SEM on the battlefield. They are often kept in the back and guarded by other units. They aren't pushing into the fray.

    Many of their abilities cost gold, and none of their abilities are any more 'game-changing' than any other hybrid caster lord. Like Malekith's buffs to Melee Defense and Leadership in an AoE is just as impactful as a Shield of the Old Ones. His Gaze of Malice can actually cause MORE damage over the course of a battle than any Banishment. And he's not counted an SEM until he's mounted on a dragon (which makes sense). And that's just a single example. Ikit, Khatep, and many other caster lords that come with bound vortexes and utility abilities are not treated as SEM's. It's kinda weird that Slaan's were singled out for this classification.

    Everything else though....makes sense honestly. Bastilidon Spam was part of the pre-cap problem, as their cost allowed you to bring several of them and still have enough gold left over to bring a respectable army. Whereas other races attempting to spam monsters, if they brought 3 of anything, it was 40% or more of their gold.

    Hero/Lord mounts OF COURSE should count. I feel like that's a no brainer. It would be a pretty cheap work around to bring Kroq-Gar, and 2 Scar Vets, all on carnosaurs....and STILL bring another 3 SEM's on top of that! That would allow for some of those 6 model army cheeses to resume.

    So yeah, TL;DR...I'll concede the OP's point on the Slaan. Everything else though, is fair as is imo. My only wish was that mobile skirmishers and/or ranged units in general were capped more stringently...rather than relaxing the cap on monsters. It seems weird that only healing monster cheeses seem to be addressed in recent patches...while draw and/or kiting based cheeses remain perfectly viable.
  • glosskilosglosskilos Posts: 1,176Registered Users
    edited December 2019
    Slann should not count as rare single entities, that’s just ridiculous and unecessarily restrictive for a faction that depends on monsters more than probably any other in the game except maybe norsca.

    Other than that though I think LM are fine. Bastiladons are fine as rare single entities and lords and heroes on monsters should absolutely remain rare single entities.

    Also, LM cav is very strong what are you talking about? LM are very much capable of winning without monsters they have solid infantry and cavalry and are one of the best factions at kiting and skirmish.
  • Lotus_MoonLotus_Moon Posts: 8,141Registered Users
    edited December 2019

    Slann should not count as rare single entities, that’s just ridiculous and unecessarily restrictive for a faction that depends on monsters more than probably any other in the game except maybe norsca.

    Other than that though I think LM are fine. Bastiladons are fine as rare single entities and lords and heroes on monsters should absolutely remain rare single entities.

    Also, LM cav is very strong what are you talking about? LM are very much capable of winning without monsters they have solid infantry and cavalry and are one of the best factions at kiting and skirmish.

    Why shouldnt it? They very strong and life slann + 3 monsters would be nuts for some factions to deal with, you can see how strong slann + 3 mosnters is by seeing how LZM dominate tournaments.
  • doktarrdoktarr Posts: 219Registered Users
    edited December 2019

    I think that tournament rules and quick battle rules should always be different from each other. If people want a complete competitive experience, then you know where to find tournament signups.

    I think there's value in implementing rules that align quick battles (and even campaign battles) more closely with tournament rules. The reason tournament rules are the way they are is because it's a better experience overall; more balanced and more decisive and less cheesy. These are things people complain about in quick battles - that games are cheesy or unbalanced or indecisive. Moreover, the closer campaign battles or quick battles are to tournaments, the more it feels like one game, and the lower the barrier of entry is. My campaign battles will better prepare me for quick battles, and quick battles will better prepare me for tournaments.

    Unit caps was a good example of aligning QB with tournaments, and complaints like the OP's aside, I think most people like them. I've suggested adding rules to the game to discourage corner-camping and draw-kiting, which would be further steps toward making quick battles more like tournaments.
  • rymeintrinsecarymeintrinseca Posts: 696Registered Users
    edited December 2019
    What's the point of having completely separate tourney selection rules? Once upon a time the anti-cheese/SEM spam argument worked, but since army caps were introduced the rules actually allow more cheese than QB in some respects (life slann+three dinos etc). And on the other side, a lot of extra stuff that's banned is not worth using anyway and never seen in QB.

    At the moment it's an intricate parallel system whose main effect is gatekeeping. QB players would be more willing to throw their names into open tournaments if the selection rules were basically the QB rules+a few really necesary add ons, as entry costs would then be much lower. And aligning the rules in this way would also make QB more useful for experienced players as a build testing ground.
  • Green0Green0 Posts: 5,518Registered Users
    doktarr said:

    I think that tournament rules and quick battle rules should always be different from each other. If people want a complete competitive experience, then you know where to find tournament signups.

    I think there's value in implementing rules that align quick battles (and even campaign battles) more closely with tournament rules. The reason tournament rules are the way they are is because it's a better experience overall; more balanced and more decisive and less cheesy. These are things people complain about in quick battles - that games are cheesy or unbalanced or indecisive. Moreover, the closer campaign battles or quick battles are to tournaments, the more it feels like one game, and the lower the barrier of entry is. My campaign battles will better prepare me for quick battles, and quick battles will better prepare me for tournaments.

    Unit caps was a good example of aligning QB with tournaments, and complaints like the OP's aside, I think most people like them. I've suggested adding rules to the game to discourage corner-camping and draw-kiting, which would be further steps toward making quick battles more like tournaments.
    people disagree on the extent to which some units should be limited, hence why there is not only tournament rules as opposed to QB caps, but also there are several tournament rulesets.
  • rymeintrinsecarymeintrinseca Posts: 696Registered Users
    ^ Which just goes to show that the tourney selection rules are more personal preference and historical accident than objective requirements for competitive play.
  • VikingCatVikingCat Posts: 256Registered Users
    Lizardmen are literally strong enough to be played even without monsters. They have pretty much any type of unit. This really shouldn't be such a problem. The same or similar limits exist in tournaments and Lizardmen are still a dominant faction there.

    @rymeintrinseca Depends which ruleset you're talking about. The one I use was based on the one used in the Pro League which combined the opinions of all the players in it across three leagues, and has since been updated based on player feedback. You are correct though that a lot of limits are made simply based on what a select few people have trouble playing against and deem 'op' and the most used ruleset is inherently flawed.
  • ystyst Posts: 6,507Registered Users
    Lets not kid yourself for those who thinks its ok. Liz got 14 monsters in their roster and thats bloody ignoring slann who already wouldve taken 1 slot. That numbers r higher than even majority of the infantries in the other 14 factions in game.



    https://imgur.com/a/Cj4b9
    Top #3 Leaderboard on Warhammer Totalwar.
  • VikingCatVikingCat Posts: 256Registered Users
    edited December 2019
    Slanns should not take monster slots, since they're not monsters. If that's a limit (and I know it is in 'certain') rulesets then it should be removed. People make the 'but but Slann + 3 monsters!' argument but it's just an unimaginative solution because really, it's limiting all the Slanns when it's a rule that exists just because of the life Slann who synergizes with the monsters too well.

    That's why you need a more subtle approach. 3 monsters, only one over 2100 cost, one has to cost 1400 or less, and no more than two of the same, obviously.

    Of course if they balanced monsters (most are too strong, especially the RoR) this discussion wouldn't be necessary.

    However the fact that they have a lot of monsters to pick from doesn't mean they're more reliant on them. They have a whole lot of other units as well, and said units are pretty much all good. Saurus, javelin skinks, chameleons, spear cav, even the flyers can be used to good effect.

    There was a tournament a while back where no one could take terror units, which you would think would affect Lizardmen the most, because it means no monsters at all, but what happened? Lizardmen were played and winning most battles... and the player using them the most ended up winning it.

    Saying it's fine is not kidding yourself, ignoring how dominant Lizardmen are, simply judging by results and their pick rate among competitive players is.
  • Lotus_MoonLotus_Moon Posts: 8,141Registered Users
    VikingCat said:

    Slanns should not take monster slots, since they're not monsters. If that's a limit (and I know it is in 'certain') rulesets then it should be removed. People make the 'but but Slann + 3 monsters!' argument but it's just an unimaginative solution because really, it's limiting all the Slanns when it's a rule that exists just because of the life Slann who synergizes with the monsters too well.

    That's why you need a more subtle approach. 3 monsters, only one over 2100 cost, one has to cost 1400 or less, and no more than two of the same, obviously.

    Of course if they balanced monsters (most are too strong, especially the RoR) this discussion wouldn't be necessary.

    However the fact that they have a lot of monsters to pick from doesn't mean they're more reliant on them. They have a whole lot of other units as well, and said units are pretty much all good. Saurus, javelin skinks, chameleons, spear cav, even the flyers can be used to good effect.

    There was a tournament a while back where no one could take terror units, which you would think would affect Lizardmen the most, because it means no monsters at all, but what happened? Lizardmen were played and winning most battles... and the player using them the most ended up winning it.

    Saying it's fine is not kidding yourself, ignoring how dominant Lizardmen are, simply judging by results and their pick rate among competitive players is.

    ITS not a monster cap ITS RARE SINGLE ENTITY and yes thats what they are.
  • hanenhanen Posts: 368Registered Users
    The only change I would like to see atm is for Kroxigor Ancients and Nakai not to be counted as rare single entities.
  • BjornNorlinderBjornNorlinder Posts: 71Registered Users
    Monsters dont win u battles. A balance army will perform better esp if the player knows how to play.
  • ValkaarValkaar Junior Member Posts: 1,929Registered Users
    edited December 2019

    Monsters dont win u battles. A balance army will perform better esp if the player knows how to play.

    “Balanced” armies these days = 4-5 missile cav. 2-3 shoot n scoot archers. 2-3 arty pieces. And as much chaff and light cavalry as you can afford after that.

    Maybe axe one of those cheeky ranged elements for 2-3 cycle charging flyers.

    So much more balanced. So much less cheesy. So much more fun..... *sarcasm*

    ^^and not punished by repeated balance patches at all.

    I swear it’s like CA has pre decided on the one formulaic style they want people to play and keep catering to it.

    It’s not that it’s not beatable. It is. You can skirmish it back or double down on your own flyers, chaff, light cav. I just don’t enjoy the style at all. And just have been discouraged from playing as more and more playstyles and races I enjoy have been made increasingly obsolete (monsters or not). Like I didn’t/don’t enjoy playing Lizardmen cuz I’m fond of stealth Salamanders and Chameleon Skinks. If I liked that stuff I’d go play Wood Elves. So it is frustrating to feel pressured to either not play Lizardmen or play it in a way that’s not stylistically why I picked them as a main.
  • Cukie251Cukie251 Posts: 940Registered Users
    I think teclis should count towards the cavalry cap, seeing as he is clearly mounted on a horse and offers good support options.

    Yeah no. It makes absolutely 0 sense for a slann to be counted as a large monster. They have no combat capabilities, no mobility, and literally none of the qualities any of the other monsters in the lizard roster have.
  • Lotus_MoonLotus_Moon Posts: 8,141Registered Users
    Cukie251 said:

    I think teclis should count towards the cavalry cap, seeing as he is clearly mounted on a horse and offers good support options.

    Yeah no. It makes absolutely 0 sense for a slann to be counted as a large monster. They have no combat capabilities, no mobility, and literally none of the qualities any of the other monsters in the lizard roster have.

    They not counted as a large mosnter, you need to read what the actual caps are.
  • BovineKingBovineKing Posts: 172Registered Users
    I also have brought a literal single cannon in match ups knowing a Slann can’t do much against it. Also it does count towards your large units cause I can bring 3 monsters and a lord on cold one it through me off cause normally lords only count towards that cap if they’re mounted on a monster.
  • Green0Green0 Posts: 5,518Registered Users
    edited December 2019
    Cukie251 said:

    I think teclis should count towards the cavalry cap, seeing as he is clearly mounted on a horse and offers good support options.

    Yeah no. It makes absolutely 0 sense for a slann to be counted as a large monster. They have no combat capabilities, no mobility, and literally none of the qualities any of the other monsters in the lizard roster have.

    again, the reason why Slanns are capped and part of the Rare Single Entities is because they are

    a) rare in the lore.

    b) on top of generic Archmages who have Arcane Conduit, they come with a Ward save, extra missile resist, Greater Arcane Conduit and good items and increased HP.
  • Cukie251Cukie251 Posts: 940Registered Users
    But then literally every hero in the game should be counted as a rare single entity. Why isn't teclis a rare single entity? You can only take 1 and he is one of the best casters. Why isn't alarielle a rare single entitiy?

    It literally applies to almost no other factions. Its not really reasonable to apply it to lizards

    B. I mean teclis has a sword, greater arcane, self regen, and 40 passives. Literally every lord in the game has some situational aoe buffs to apply/

    Its not really fair for this to be a problem for lizards and no one else.
  • Lotus_MoonLotus_Moon Posts: 8,141Registered Users
    Cukie251 said:

    But then literally every hero in the game should be counted as a rare single entity. Why isn't teclis a rare single entity? You can only take 1 and he is one of the best casters. Why isn't alarielle a rare single entitiy?

    It literally applies to almost no other factions. Its not really reasonable to apply it to lizards

    B. I mean teclis has a sword, greater arcane, self regen, and 40 passives. Literally every lord in the game has some situational aoe buffs to apply/

    Its not really fair for this to be a problem for lizards and no one else.

    Perhaps they should but you need to suggest that i guess.

    Im 100% in support of a cap on slann currently therea no convincing argument of it being otherwise that i seen yet.
  • Green0Green0 Posts: 5,518Registered Users
    Cukie251 said:

    But then literally every hero in the game should be counted as a rare single entity. Why isn't teclis a rare single entity? You can only take 1 and he is one of the best casters. Why isn't alarielle a rare single entitiy?

    It literally applies to almost no other factions. Its not really reasonable to apply it to lizards

    B. I mean teclis has a sword, greater arcane, self regen, and 40 passives. Literally every lord in the game has some situational aoe buffs to apply/

    Its not really fair for this to be a problem for lizards and no one else.

    By this logic every LL should be a rare single entity and the SEM limit might as well be 2.

    In any case, Life Slann + 2-3 Temple Guard + 3 other SEMs is the main issue.

Leave a Comment

BoldItalicStrikethroughOrdered listUnordered list
Emoji
Image
Align leftAlign centerAlign rightToggle HTML viewToggle full pageToggle lights
Drop image/file