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.
It seems almost everyone agrees that the newest version of Rune of Wrath and Ruin is not only worse (regardless of being stronger or not), but also more unloreful. Which begs the question again: why change it instead of focusing on potential adjustments to other highly lacklustre and unused lords and heroes of this faction?
Complaints about Master Wrath and Ruin are silly at this point, how can a 30 second slow come close to the power level of other faction "caster" lords? Even if Runelord other runes were buffed to be less average, he still can't come close.
Not even getting into when the casters have monstrous mounts, how is a 30 second slow ON A LORD CHOICE more oppressive than:
- Wurrzag (net, strong lore of magic, constant MA buffs, Waagh) - Fae (Mortis, healing, bound AOE damage) - Vampire Counts Lord (healing, summons, AOE debuff, regen, all sort of damage and slows) - Mazdamundi (AOE damage, nets, healing, buffs) - Skrolk (summons, AOE damage, single target DD) - Arkhan (summons, DD in low and high model count, AOE phys resist) - Noctilus (summons with fat range, bombardments, healing) - plenty of others, can't be bothered listing them all
Even if we just want to look at generic lords exclusively:
- Gladey (arti snipe, instant net with reduced missile resist) - Great Gobbo Shaman (great lore of magic, make unit unbreakable, Waaagh) - Night Gobbo Warboss (tormentor sword,. Waaagh) - Bloodline Lords (see LL above) - High Beastmaster (Great buffs and tormentor sword) - Various caster lords for each faction
These complaints seen unwilling to acknowledge that magic is by far the most powerful and cost effective tool in this game. Easily the biggest bang for your buck of anything you can bring to the field, utterly indispensable even against Dwarfs, even if taking damage spells and not buffs/debuff/summons/healing. Runelord costs 1012 with just slow and is extremely mediocre in melee and takes up your lord choice. Every other faction can bring a great non-caster lord and then a hero level caster for a pittance. Or just choose to combine both in a lord level combat caster.
As for not having access to 80% of your roster, that is just bs. Which factions don't have access to 80% of roster? The 3 that struggle the most are Wood Elves, Chaos, Coast, the first 2 of which are way out of date and just need more stuff (and in Chaos case can just be abused by certain builds), the last of which do struggle but are going through their own rebalance from their jank release. Maybe Bret too but they also are one of the more limited rosters.
So if we generously say 4 factions, how is this any worse than the roster restrictions placed on Greenskins when facing Lizards, Tomb Kings, Counts, Coast? Or High Elves when facing Dark Elves, Chaos, Lizards, Bretonnia? Or Coast when facing High Elves, Empire, Tomb Kings, Skaven? Or Chaos and Brettonia against plenty of factions? There are massive roster restrictions you have to deal with for these factions too due to how the others plays. Playing against Dwarfs as Coast is rough and tough, but no more so than against Bretonnia as High Elves, or against Lizards as Beastmen, or any other number of matchups.
This isn't to say it isn't worthwhile to make some changes to Dwarfs, there have been recent threads about changes to various units and the heroes and some lords could still use work. But the alleged OPness of a strong slow on a lord that has 40/40 statline with 32 speed is myopic.
It seems almost everyone agrees that the newest version of Rune of Wrath and Ruin is not only worse (regardless of being stronger or not), but also more unloreful. Which begs the question again: why change it instead of focusing on potential adjustments to other highly lacklustre and unused lords and heroes of this faction?
I think the new runes are much more interesting than the old and more challenging to use well and at the right time. That aside yeah they’re nothing special and much better to talk about other interesting abilities that would be fun options.
If I try to be more clear what I mean, what I mean by click-delete abilities is just one skill that immobilizes a target to the point that they are dead from ranged. The prime example is prey+ww but things like kindlenet, warpgale, net+bowshapti etc can do the same. It's of course not entirely without counterplay but it's not very interesting way to "solve" problems killing a unit type, in any roster.
I think the idea of fortifying a unit is really interesting. That's exactly the kind of creative ideas that add depth to gameplay. The other option I have brought up many times now is to create a good "blocking unit". Large models with mass and a unit size of 9-24 models depending on what it is. We mentioned golems before but it might not be entirely true to TT so I don't know... but something alone these lines would be so much more interesting than additional slows or a new net or whatever.
The same goes for high elves, I wouldn't want say a bound net on Loremasters or whatever you could imagine to help against heavy cav spam/armored monsters. It's not an interesting way to solve such problems. I'd much prefer more available and effective treekin for example to help infantry fight these SEMs than more ways to gank them.
Absolutely. Troll mass giant slayers problem solved.
That said, They’ve toned down nets overall to be short and mostly that keeps them interesting and fun in my book. Then slows come in a wide variety and don’t really negate opponent’s ability to react. A large chunk of Skaven slows slow enemy cav to basically be Skaven speed, temporarily (or permanently) leveling the playing field. Similarly dwarfs 72% slow let’s them temporarily be in the same speed zone as fast enemies. For all of these abilities the timing and coordination challenge ofnusing them is reasonably interesting, but like you I prefer unit tactics to castable magic solving problems in a war game.
How about we change the Master Rune of Wrath to inflict Rampage? I think then it will serve its purpose in terms of anti-chariot play and it'll be even better at drawing large units into slayers without the boring 'net and trollhammer' killbutton effect (which isn't OP IMO, just distasteful and boring). Seems more thematic too than a slow, which to me really doesn't make any sense mechanistically. It should be short duration though to avoid it forcing a caster lord or missile unit into instant death in melee.
Then make a separate Rune of Ruin: functions like one of Mazdamundi's Ruination of Cities beams emanating straight out from the rune caster in a chosen direction.
Rune of Fortification: gives a unit charge defence vs. all and 100% knockback resistance.
Rune of Wind: functions like a larger windblast emanating from the caster that deals no damage but knocks over all infantry and staggers all larger units.
I think these are much more fun and dynamic ways to address the dwarf mobility/chariot issue than nets and slows.
I like all your creative ideas.
but do you really really think the ranged killer units of dwarfs and Skaven are so different in power that one faction is fine with tons of nets and slows and the other somehow merits this constant withering complaining about one 30s slow? Honestly a unit of miners is also a 30s slow and often a more useful one.
The double standards just blow my mind. Constantly.
If you check my posts, you'll see I'm against any and all nets and many slows, not just the Dwarf one. They're lazy gameplay design. I also consider Skaven top tier and was against their extra slows and nets from this patch and the one before it. However, none of that has any bearing on the discussion for Dwarfs, so accusing me of double standards is just a personal attack that avoids the arguments.
How about we change the Master Rune of Wrath to inflict Rampage? I think then it will serve its purpose in terms of anti-chariot play and it'll be even better at drawing large units into slayers without the boring 'net and trollhammer' killbutton effect (which isn't OP IMO, just distasteful and boring). Seems more thematic too than a slow, which to me really doesn't make any sense mechanistically. It should be short duration though to avoid it forcing a caster lord or missile unit into instant death in melee.
Then make a separate Rune of Ruin: functions like one of Mazdamundi's Ruination of Cities beams emanating straight out from the rune caster in a chosen direction.
Rune of Fortification: gives a unit charge defence vs. all and 100% knockback resistance.
Rune of Wind: functions like a larger windblast emanating from the caster that deals no damage but knocks over all infantry and staggers all larger units.
I think these are much more fun and dynamic ways to address the dwarf mobility/chariot issue than nets and slows.
I like all your creative ideas.
but do you really really think the ranged killer units of dwarfs and Skaven are so different in power that one faction is fine with tons of nets and slows and the other somehow merits this constant withering complaining about one 30s slow? Honestly a unit of miners is also a 30s slow and often a more useful one.
The double standards just blow my mind. Constantly.
If you check my posts, you'll see I'm against any and all nets and many slows, not just the Dwarf one. They're lazy gameplay design. I also consider Skaven top tier and was against their extra slows and nets from this patch and the one before it. However, none of that has any bearing on the discussion for Dwarfs, so accusing me of double standards is just a personal attack that avoids the arguments.
Aye, I am in the same boat. Nets are kind of lazy fixes, at least the long duration ones, in all factions.
It should also be said that comparing runelords utility to other lords that cost 1000-2000 gold more and are in completely different rosters is not quite right. There are quite a few dwarven units, like blasting charges, warriors, longbeards, thunderers, rangers and cannons that would enter any other roster as top tier units, so there is much more to it than saying that runelords are instead of magic. The whole roster is different. IMHO runelords/priests are more the equivalent of warrior priest/lector than compensation for magic, and that the compensation for magic rather lies in the very good durability/leadership of all dwarven units plus the magic resist.
Don't fear the knockdown. Control it. Embrace it. Love it!
1. It would be cool to a rune guardian unit in the form of a summon, coming from the master rune of waking, which could be tied exclusively to the anvil of doom mount. When used it should do a little bit of damage to the runelord and root him in place for a time; from a lore perspective waking a rune guardian could turn you to stone so there be some risk to the caster involved.
It would certainly help dwarfs to have a high mass unit without resorting to nets.
2. Another rune I'd like to see is a simple rune that grants magic attacks, maybe in exchange it could remove magic resistance for the active time.
3. Some sort of urannon thunderbolt master rune would be nice. Maybe this will happen if Thorek ironbrow is added.
How about we change the Master Rune of Wrath to inflict Rampage? I think then it will serve its purpose in terms of anti-chariot play and it'll be even better at drawing large units into slayers without the boring 'net and trollhammer' killbutton effect (which isn't OP IMO, just distasteful and boring). Seems more thematic too than a slow, which to me really doesn't make any sense mechanistically. It should be short duration though to avoid it forcing a caster lord or missile unit into instant death in melee.
Then make a separate Rune of Ruin: functions like one of Mazdamundi's Ruination of Cities beams emanating straight out from the rune caster in a chosen direction.
Rune of Fortification: gives a unit charge defence vs. all and 100% knockback resistance.
Rune of Wind: functions like a larger windblast emanating from the caster that deals no damage but knocks over all infantry and staggers all larger units.
I think these are much more fun and dynamic ways to address the dwarf mobility/chariot issue than nets and slows.
I like all your creative ideas.
but do you really really think the ranged killer units of dwarfs and Skaven are so different in power that one faction is fine with tons of nets and slows and the other somehow merits this constant withering complaining about one 30s slow? Honestly a unit of miners is also a 30s slow and often a more useful one.
The double standards just blow my mind. Constantly.
If you check my posts, you'll see I'm against any and all nets and many slows, not just the Dwarf one. They're lazy gameplay design. I also consider Skaven top tier and was against their extra slows and nets from this patch and the one before it. However, none of that has any bearing on the discussion for Dwarfs, so accusing me of double standards is just a personal attack that avoids the arguments.
Aye, I am in the same boat. Nets are kind of lazy fixes, at least the long duration ones, in all factions.
It should also be said that comparing runelords utility to other lords that cost 1000-2000 gold more and are in completely different rosters is not quite right. There are quite a few dwarven units, like blasting charges, warriors, longbeards, thunderers, rangers and cannons that would enter any other roster as top tier units, so there is much more to it than saying that runelords are instead of magic. The whole roster is different. IMHO runelords/priests are more the equivalent of warrior priest/lector than compensation for magic, and that the compensation for magic rather lies in the very good durability/leadership of all dwarven units plus the magic resist.
Again with those easy to fact check lies.
Allariele all items/spells equiped = 2800 Runelord all items/"spells" equiped = 2400
No not a single other support lord costs 1000-2000 gold more.... seriously thats why discussing any change for Dwarfs is unbearabyl hard on this forum.
And if they really end up costing more its because of the myriad of usefull abilitys/mounts they are able to take while every addition/change to a Dwarf char ends in endless discussions and cries about the certain doom about to come down on us all.
Runelords/smiths should not just be more expensive versions of the Warriorpriest/Archlektor and Runes which are the way Dwarfs use magic should not just be limited to them alone.
You have those saying that magic resist already is enough for having no magic at all or even trying to bring other things into it despite it beeing completley irrelevant.
Or even totally wrong: HE-Spearmen have the same LD as Dwarf warriors, Swordmasters have the same as Hammerers and their durability comes with decreased Offense and Numbers of models.
25% Magic resist really is not a compensation for having no acces to magic.
Everything comes at a price, nothing is granted for free.
Except for WoM which every faction gets to use besides 1 guess which 1. Hint: Its the one people complain the most about any change without added nerf while complaining about the faction boring to play against and not getting changed at all.
Do you want examples? Just search for the first thread about Giant slayers (which ruined many MUs) after that go search for the first change to Wrath and Ruin (which added the first slow) if you still haven't had enough search for the last change for W&R and i almost forgot about the Tormentor Sword.
How about we change the Master Rune of Wrath to inflict Rampage? I think then it will serve its purpose in terms of anti-chariot play and it'll be even better at drawing large units into slayers without the boring 'net and trollhammer' killbutton effect (which isn't OP IMO, just distasteful and boring). Seems more thematic too than a slow, which to me really doesn't make any sense mechanistically. It should be short duration though to avoid it forcing a caster lord or missile unit into instant death in melee.
Then make a separate Rune of Ruin: functions like one of Mazdamundi's Ruination of Cities beams emanating straight out from the rune caster in a chosen direction.
Rune of Fortification: gives a unit charge defence vs. all and 100% knockback resistance.
Rune of Wind: functions like a larger windblast emanating from the caster that deals no damage but knocks over all infantry and staggers all larger units.
I think these are much more fun and dynamic ways to address the dwarf mobility/chariot issue than nets and slows.
I like all your creative ideas.
but do you really really think the ranged killer units of dwarfs and Skaven are so different in power that one faction is fine with tons of nets and slows and the other somehow merits this constant withering complaining about one 30s slow? Honestly a unit of miners is also a 30s slow and often a more useful one.
The double standards just blow my mind. Constantly.
If you check my posts, you'll see I'm against any and all nets and many slows, not just the Dwarf one. They're lazy gameplay design. I also consider Skaven top tier and was against their extra slows and nets from this patch and the one before it. However, none of that has any bearing on the discussion for Dwarfs, so accusing me of double standards is just a personal attack that avoids the arguments.
Whether any of us likes it or not, nets and slows are a big part of the game (and I think overall the game is better for it). As is mass and its interactions with combat. And considering a faction that already had both mass, summons, and plenty of slows was given MORE in the latest DLC shows that CA clearly have no intention of reducing the amount available.
So even if your view is consistent, the practical effect of arguing along these lines is to deny slows to some factions and not others, because those factions already have powerful slows or nets. So even though I agree it is not a double standard, it is definitely (unintentionally) biased even if meant in good faith. If Dwarf players were coming here and consistently asking that the WoM base pool be cut in half for all factions because magic was having a big negative impact on the ability of lots of factions to field their elite cav/infantry, it might be a consistent view but because the impact of this change would be nothing but a net positive for Dwarfs it would not be surprising if it was perceived as Dwarf bias because of the practical impact it would have on the balance of factions.
How about we change the Master Rune of Wrath to inflict Rampage? I think then it will serve its purpose in terms of anti-chariot play and it'll be even better at drawing large units into slayers without the boring 'net and trollhammer' killbutton effect (which isn't OP IMO, just distasteful and boring). Seems more thematic too than a slow, which to me really doesn't make any sense mechanistically. It should be short duration though to avoid it forcing a caster lord or missile unit into instant death in melee.
Then make a separate Rune of Ruin: functions like one of Mazdamundi's Ruination of Cities beams emanating straight out from the rune caster in a chosen direction.
Rune of Fortification: gives a unit charge defence vs. all and 100% knockback resistance.
Rune of Wind: functions like a larger windblast emanating from the caster that deals no damage but knocks over all infantry and staggers all larger units.
I think these are much more fun and dynamic ways to address the dwarf mobility/chariot issue than nets and slows.
I like all your creative ideas.
but do you really really think the ranged killer units of dwarfs and Skaven are so different in power that one faction is fine with tons of nets and slows and the other somehow merits this constant withering complaining about one 30s slow? Honestly a unit of miners is also a 30s slow and often a more useful one.
The double standards just blow my mind. Constantly.
If you check my posts, you'll see I'm against any and all nets and many slows, not just the Dwarf one. They're lazy gameplay design. I also consider Skaven top tier and was against their extra slows and nets from this patch and the one before it. However, none of that has any bearing on the discussion for Dwarfs, so accusing me of double standards is just a personal attack that avoids the arguments.
Aye, I am in the same boat. Nets are kind of lazy fixes, at least the long duration ones, in all factions.
It should also be said that comparing runelords utility to other lords that cost 1000-2000 gold more and are in completely different rosters is not quite right. There are quite a few dwarven units, like blasting charges, warriors, longbeards, thunderers, rangers and cannons that would enter any other roster as top tier units, so there is much more to it than saying that runelords are instead of magic. The whole roster is different. IMHO runelords/priests are more the equivalent of warrior priest/lector than compensation for magic, and that the compensation for magic rather lies in the very good durability/leadership of all dwarven units plus the magic resist.
- Prophetess (Horse) with Awakening of the Wood, Earth Blood, Assualt of Stone, Arcane Conduit = 1054 - Supreme Sorceress (Horse) with Fireball, Cascading Fire Cloak, Burning Head, Arcane Conduit = 1106 - Night Gobbo Shaman (Wolf) with Sneaky Stabbing, Vindictive Glare, Gork'll Fix It, Arcane Conduit, Waaagh! = 1087 - High Slann (no mount) with Apotheosis, Tempest, Blood Statuette of Spite, Greater Arcane Conduit = 1186 - Grey Seer (no mount) with Pestilent Breath, Bless with Filth, Vermintide, Warpstorm Scroll, Arcane Conduit = 874 - Vampire Fleet Admiral (Pistol) (no mount) with Drowned Dead, Invocation of Nehek = 1190 - Master Necromancer (Horse) with Curse of Undeath, Master of the Dead, Invocation, Raise Dead = 972 - Chaos Sorcerer Lord (Horse) with Final Transmutation, Arcane Conduit = 1282
All of these choices are close to the price range of a Runelord with his most common kits of either just MRoW&R (1012) or MRoW&R + Rune of Negation (1238). There is a lot of variation in how good they are in combat, how survivable they are, where they are good picks, etc but let's not pretend that the comparison here is a Runelord with MRoW&R against a fully kitted Mannfred on a Dragon.
Yes, rosters are different and the Dwarfs are given advantages that other factions are not. But that is true with all factions. And that doesn't change the fact that MRoW&R is in not even close to an outlier in power level in it's price range compared to the tools given to other factions. Dwarfs as a faction are still comfortably in a position where the only talk that should be happening about most of their lords and heroes is straight buffs, predominantly in their itemisation and the versatility of that itemisation.
How about we change the Master Rune of Wrath to inflict Rampage? I think then it will serve its purpose in terms of anti-chariot play and it'll be even better at drawing large units into slayers without the boring 'net and trollhammer' killbutton effect (which isn't OP IMO, just distasteful and boring). Seems more thematic too than a slow, which to me really doesn't make any sense mechanistically. It should be short duration though to avoid it forcing a caster lord or missile unit into instant death in melee.
Then make a separate Rune of Ruin: functions like one of Mazdamundi's Ruination of Cities beams emanating straight out from the rune caster in a chosen direction.
Rune of Fortification: gives a unit charge defence vs. all and 100% knockback resistance.
Rune of Wind: functions like a larger windblast emanating from the caster that deals no damage but knocks over all infantry and staggers all larger units.
I think these are much more fun and dynamic ways to address the dwarf mobility/chariot issue than nets and slows.
I like all your creative ideas.
but do you really really think the ranged killer units of dwarfs and Skaven are so different in power that one faction is fine with tons of nets and slows and the other somehow merits this constant withering complaining about one 30s slow? Honestly a unit of miners is also a 30s slow and often a more useful one.
The double standards just blow my mind. Constantly.
If you check my posts, you'll see I'm against any and all nets and many slows, not just the Dwarf one. They're lazy gameplay design. I also consider Skaven top tier and was against their extra slows and nets from this patch and the one before it. However, none of that has any bearing on the discussion for Dwarfs, so accusing me of double standards is just a personal attack that avoids the arguments.
It was a good initial post with fun ideas. That said rampage on wrath and rune would be way stronger! But possibly more fun and a better synergy with melee units so that could be nice. People would hate it even more though.
yeah can't w8 for dwarves to have 70% slow and foot of Gork, lol enough said about quality of those ideas
You do realize orcs have foot of gork, effigy of the git, and smoke bombs right?
This is the madness. I don’t honestly care exactly what fun tools dwarfs get my spare me this bs!!!!!!!
First of all it is different roster with less potent shooting, effigy of the git is tied to one LL not like rune of slowness. I don't see why dwarfs need yet anther gimmick to destroy cav, which is crap vs them anyway.
yeah can't w8 for dwarves to have 70% slow and foot of Gork, lol enough said about quality of those ideas
You do realize orcs have foot of gork, effigy of the git, and smoke bombs right?
This is the madness. I don’t honestly care exactly what fun tools dwarfs get my spare me this bs!!!!!!!
First of all it is different roster with less potent shooting, effigy of the git is tied to one LL not like rune of slowness. I don't see why dwarfs need yet anther gimmick to destroy cav, which is crap vs them anyway.
Inappropriate Comment removed.
And now it’s the shooting and not the foot of gork.
Nasty skulkers are faction wide. I wouldn’t even waste a previous master slow that wouldn’t even stop a cav from disengaging from a foot of gork type spell.
Nobody cares if a damage rune does as much as a 26 wom spell. Nobody’s asking for op. But the idea that all area damage abilities are off the table for a faction because they also possess a slowing item is nonsense.
Why do you compare a lot of casters to rune lords? I am all for new exciting runes or preferably a new rune system all together but I don't think the expectation that rune lords should alone compensate for lack of magic holds any merit. I think the lack of magic is compensated for by units having armour, shields, ld, itp, mass, magic resist etc abundantly. Some units are very very cost efficient if you compare, at least I attribute this to compensation.
Creative runes = fun. More snares = no fun, that's my opinion on this. Fortification rune was a cool idea, more of these. I liked loupis suggestions too.
Don't fear the knockdown. Control it. Embrace it. Love it!
Why do you compare a lot of casters to rune lords? I am all for new exciting runes or preferably a new rune system all together but I don't think the expectation that rune lords should alone compensate for lack of magic holds any merit. I think the lack of magic is compensated for by units having armour, shields, ld, itp, mass, magic resist etc abundantly. Some units are very very cost efficient if you compare, at least I attribute this to compensation.
Creative runes = fun. More snares = no fun, that's my opinion on this. Fortification rune was a cool idea, more of these. I liked loupis suggestions too.
I'm not suggesting more snares. People are suggesting no dwarf character should have an ability that does damage to enemy units because a slow currently exists on the runelord. That's what I think is silly. Synergies that exist in any other roster are somehow terrifying on a dwarf roster.
And I'm not comparing casters to rune lords. I'm explicitly saying that runes, which are one-off item abilities in this game, shouldn't be as powerful as 26 WoM spells and no on is seriously considering to make them that powerful, particularly if they are multi-cast. I'm sure there's a reasonable level of damage that can be worked out if CA was to add an item to a dwarf character that did some template of damage to enemy units, either as a one time ability or a multi-use ability.
Why do you compare a lot of casters to rune lords? I am all for new exciting runes or preferably a new rune system all together but I don't think the expectation that rune lords should alone compensate for lack of magic holds any merit. I think the lack of magic is compensated for by units having armour, shields, ld, itp, mass, magic resist etc abundantly. Some units are very very cost efficient if you compare, at least I attribute this to compensation.
Creative runes = fun. More snares = no fun, that's my opinion on this. Fortification rune was a cool idea, more of these. I liked loupis suggestions too.
I'm not suggesting more snares. People are suggesting no dwarf character should have an ability that does damage to enemy units because a slow currently exists on the runelord. That's what I think is silly. Synergies that exist in any other roster are somehow terrifying on a dwarf roster.
And I'm not comparing casters to rune lords. I'm explicitly saying that runes, which are one-off item abilities in this game, shouldn't be as powerful as 26 WoM spells and no on is seriously considering to make them that powerful, particularly if they are multi-cast. I'm sure there's a reasonable level of damage that can be worked out if CA was to add an item to a dwarf character that did some template of damage to enemy units, either as a one time ability or a multi-use ability.
Tbh I could accept the Runelord's current rune system as it currently is (with some duration buffs to Master Rune of Negation and the Master Rune of Oath & Steel, or make them castable at range) if the Anvil of Doom wasn't such utter trash.
Imho the kit a Runelord brings on the Anvil of Doom should be an entirely different set of Runes related to offense, just priced and powered correctly. In TT it was explicitly able to do stuff like this, shoot lightning bolts and fireballs etc. You could even make them exclusive maybe, so if you had 6 runes available you would only be able to take 1 or 2 per match. As long as the Anvil of Doom was priced appropriately (currently 1250 which may need to be reviewed) it would be a great change to the Dwarf playstyle. You would of course want to select the runes it got carefully, no one is saying Anvil of Doom should be given Winds of Death.
And the reason I am comparing casters to the runelord is that at the end of the day the difference between a spell and a rune is a distinction without a difference. Net of Amyntok is limited by WoM, RoW&R is limited by 4 usages. Potion of Charoi is limited by 4 usages, Earthblood is limited by WoM.
But the big difference is that even if we look at a faction with relatively poor magic selection like Bretonnia, they have access to 18 spells (i.e. ranged abilities that either inflict damage, buff/debuff, heal units, summon, slow/snare) at the hero level they can bring while the Dwarfs have......2. Rune of Wrath and Ruin and Fiery Ring of Thori. Dwarfs do have some other actives that can fill the roll somewhat like Bombs on Gyros, Ulthar's Raiders thing, but the gap is still quite glaring. And that is for one of the factions with relatively limited options, if you start comparing it to factions like Empire, High Elves, Dark Elves, Skaven, Lizardmen, the gap becomes laughable and imo completely unjustifiable.
yeah can't w8 for dwarves to have 70% slow and foot of Gork, lol enough said about quality of those ideas
You do realize orcs have foot of gork, effigy of the git, and smoke bombs right?
This is the madness. I don’t honestly care exactly what fun tools dwarfs get my spare me this bs!!!!!!!
First of all it is different roster with less potent shooting, effigy of the git is tied to one LL not like rune of slowness. I don't see why dwarfs need yet anther gimmick to destroy cav, which is crap vs them anyway.
You spare me your freaking ****.
And now it’s the shooting and not the foot of gork.
Nasty skulkers are faction wide. I wouldn’t even waste a previous master slow that wouldn’t even stop a cav from disengaging from a foot of gork type spell.
Nobody cares if a damage rune does as much as a 26 wom spell. Nobody’s asking for op. But the idea that all area damage abilities are off the table for a faction because they also possess a slowing item is nonsense.
The difference between wom limited spells a 4 charges is that triple mage is still limited by wom while triple char with 4 charges get 12 charges. No diminishing returns. That's why runes are simply items and are best compared with warrior priests imo, they also have a large number of them (though more powerful than current runes so I think they slacked up on balancing here).
Don't fear the knockdown. Control it. Embrace it. Love it!
Like already suggested a number of times now, some runes could just be included on the anvil of doom. And since it's all a question of balancing and a Runesmith comes at a price higher then some caster lords already, price is also a quite important difference to WoM users.
Like already suggested a number of times now, some runes could just be included on the anvil of doom. And since it's all a question of balancing and a Runesmith comes at a price higher then some caster lords already, price is also a quite important difference to WoM users.
I don't think it would be unreasonable for the Anvil of Doom + Runes to be quite expensive though relative to other factions casters. Dwarfs should have to pay a premium for magic, Anvil's of Doom are supposed to be excpetionally rare and powerful after all. They just need to be given the option.
Runelord is already 200-400 gold more then some other naked caster lords, the premium price is already included its just the options that are still very limited. 2 new skills just for the Anvil would increase variety and would bring the Runelords full price closer to other caster lords with full kit.
They really should just remove runelord and runepriest from mp, the obsession over these 2 stupid characters has done nothing but impact the whole faction negatively. 2 years of +50 or +100 and tweaks on runelord, seriously what the heck Thane itemization remains the #1 greatest mystery on warhammer, charge and flame item, if thats not bad enough they also gave him the most pathetic slow item in game. Ungrim still a mega meme pick, thorgrim hardly ever recoup the costs and be useful, belegars dull albiet somewhat usable. Grom still prettymuch suffering same fate as the others, simply average
They really should just remove runelord and runepriest from mp, the obsession over these 2 stupid characters has done nothing but impact the whole faction negatively. 2 years of +50 or +100 and tweaks on runelord, seriously what the heck Thane itemization remains the #1 greatest mystery on warhammer, charge and flame item, if thats not bad enough they also gave him the most pathetic slow item in game. Ungrim still a mega meme pick, thorgrim hardly ever recoup the costs and be useful, belegars dull albiet somewhat usable. Grom still prettymuch suffering same fate as the others, simply average
I feel obliged to admit that grom and thorgrim are far better than they used to be, and downright usable in some builds and matchups.
How about we change the Master Rune of Wrath to inflict Rampage? I think then it will serve its purpose in terms of anti-chariot play and it'll be even better at drawing large units into slayers without the boring 'net and trollhammer' killbutton effect (which isn't OP IMO, just distasteful and boring). Seems more thematic too than a slow, which to me really doesn't make any sense mechanistically. It should be short duration though to avoid it forcing a caster lord or missile unit into instant death in melee.
Then make a separate Rune of Ruin: functions like one of Mazdamundi's Ruination of Cities beams emanating straight out from the rune caster in a chosen direction.
Rune of Fortification: gives a unit charge defence vs. all and 100% knockback resistance.
Rune of Wind: functions like a larger windblast emanating from the caster that deals no damage but knocks over all infantry and staggers all larger units.
I think these are much more fun and dynamic ways to address the dwarf mobility/chariot issue than nets and slows.
I like all your creative ideas.
but do you really really think the ranged killer units of dwarfs and Skaven are so different in power that one faction is fine with tons of nets and slows and the other somehow merits this constant withering complaining about one 30s slow? Honestly a unit of miners is also a 30s slow and often a more useful one.
The double standards just blow my mind. Constantly.
If you check my posts, you'll see I'm against any and all nets and many slows, not just the Dwarf one. They're lazy gameplay design. I also consider Skaven top tier and was against their extra slows and nets from this patch and the one before it. However, none of that has any bearing on the discussion for Dwarfs, so accusing me of double standards is just a personal attack that avoids the arguments.
It should also be said that comparing runelords utility to other lords that cost 1000-2000 gold more and are in completely different rosters is not quite right.
So base Runelords costs about 850 gold and fully kitted one costs about 2400 gold. Base Supreme Sorceress Lord costs 450. Base Goblin Great Shaman cost 300. Teclis with just Regrowth, Net, Potion and Arcane Conduit costs 1188.
So which Lords are you talking about that cost 1850-2850 base and 3400-4400 fully kitted are being compared to Runelord? Or just because Runelord is often taken naked with Rune of Wrath that costs about 1k in total - because other abilities are waste of gold - you thought he is cheap?
Likewise base Runesmith with just the Rune of Wrath costs 630 while for 492 gold you can grab a Life Wizard with Regrowth to heal your Karl Franz or another single entity to generate tremendous value.
I mean they r acceptable naked I suppose, once u start kitting them up which obviousy is the whole point to bring them otherwise uw ould just go generic dwf lord. Once u start buying stuffss to make thorgrim, thorgrim, and that bill comes. Ugh
How about we change the Master Rune of Wrath to inflict Rampage? I think then it will serve its purpose in terms of anti-chariot play and it'll be even better at drawing large units into slayers without the boring 'net and trollhammer' killbutton effect (which isn't OP IMO, just distasteful and boring). Seems more thematic too than a slow, which to me really doesn't make any sense mechanistically. It should be short duration though to avoid it forcing a caster lord or missile unit into instant death in melee.
Then make a separate Rune of Ruin: functions like one of Mazdamundi's Ruination of Cities beams emanating straight out from the rune caster in a chosen direction.
Rune of Fortification: gives a unit charge defence vs. all and 100% knockback resistance.
Rune of Wind: functions like a larger windblast emanating from the caster that deals no damage but knocks over all infantry and staggers all larger units.
I think these are much more fun and dynamic ways to address the dwarf mobility/chariot issue than nets and slows.
I like all your creative ideas.
but do you really really think the ranged killer units of dwarfs and Skaven are so different in power that one faction is fine with tons of nets and slows and the other somehow merits this constant withering complaining about one 30s slow? Honestly a unit of miners is also a 30s slow and often a more useful one.
The double standards just blow my mind. Constantly.
If you check my posts, you'll see I'm against any and all nets and many slows, not just the Dwarf one. They're lazy gameplay design. I also consider Skaven top tier and was against their extra slows and nets from this patch and the one before it. However, none of that has any bearing on the discussion for Dwarfs, so accusing me of double standards is just a personal attack that avoids the arguments.
It should also be said that comparing runelords utility to other lords that cost 1000-2000 gold more and are in completely different rosters is not quite right.
So base Runelords costs about 850 gold and fully kitted one costs about 2400 gold. Base Supreme Sorceress Lord costs 450. Base Goblin Great Shaman cost 300. Teclis with just Regrowth, Net, Potion and Arcane Conduit costs 1188.
So which Lords are you talking about that cost 1850-2850 base and 3400-4400 fully kitted are being compared to Runelord? Or just because Runelord is often taken naked with Rune of Wrath that costs about 1k in total - because other abilities are waste of gold - you thought he is cheap?
Likewise base Runesmith with just the Rune of Wrath costs 630 while for 492 gold you can grab a Life Wizard with Regrowth to heal your Karl Franz or another single entity to generate tremendous value.
Yup. No need to even compare him to mages. Just pick any basic or legendary lord from another faction that has more than 1 good ability and where at least 1 of their abilities is a ranged castable ability. That's the runelord.
Comments
- Report
0 · Disagree AgreeNot even getting into when the casters have monstrous mounts, how is a 30 second slow ON A LORD CHOICE more oppressive than:
- Wurrzag (net, strong lore of magic, constant MA buffs, Waagh)
- Fae (Mortis, healing, bound AOE damage)
- Vampire Counts Lord (healing, summons, AOE debuff, regen, all sort of damage and slows)
- Mazdamundi (AOE damage, nets, healing, buffs)
- Skrolk (summons, AOE damage, single target DD)
- Arkhan (summons, DD in low and high model count, AOE phys resist)
- Noctilus (summons with fat range, bombardments, healing)
- plenty of others, can't be bothered listing them all
Even if we just want to look at generic lords exclusively:
- Gladey (arti snipe, instant net with reduced missile resist)
- Great Gobbo Shaman (great lore of magic, make unit unbreakable, Waaagh)
- Night Gobbo Warboss (tormentor sword,. Waaagh)
- Bloodline Lords (see LL above)
- High Beastmaster (Great buffs and tormentor sword)
- Various caster lords for each faction
These complaints seen unwilling to acknowledge that magic is by far the most powerful and cost effective tool in this game. Easily the biggest bang for your buck of anything you can bring to the field, utterly indispensable even against Dwarfs, even if taking damage spells and not buffs/debuff/summons/healing. Runelord costs 1012 with just slow and is extremely mediocre in melee and takes up your lord choice. Every other faction can bring a great non-caster lord and then a hero level caster for a pittance. Or just choose to combine both in a lord level combat caster.
As for not having access to 80% of your roster, that is just bs. Which factions don't have access to 80% of roster? The 3 that struggle the most are Wood Elves, Chaos, Coast, the first 2 of which are way out of date and just need more stuff (and in Chaos case can just be abused by certain builds), the last of which do struggle but are going through their own rebalance from their jank release. Maybe Bret too but they also are one of the more limited rosters.
So if we generously say 4 factions, how is this any worse than the roster restrictions placed on Greenskins when facing Lizards, Tomb Kings, Counts, Coast? Or High Elves when facing Dark Elves, Chaos, Lizards, Bretonnia? Or Coast when facing High Elves, Empire, Tomb Kings, Skaven? Or Chaos and Brettonia against plenty of factions? There are massive roster restrictions you have to deal with for these factions too due to how the others plays. Playing against Dwarfs as Coast is rough and tough, but no more so than against Bretonnia as High Elves, or against Lizards as Beastmen, or any other number of matchups.
This isn't to say it isn't worthwhile to make some changes to Dwarfs, there have been recent threads about changes to various units and the heroes and some lords could still use work. But the alleged OPness of a strong slow on a lord that has 40/40 statline with 32 speed is myopic.
- Report
6 · Disagree Agree- Report
1 · Disagree AgreeThat said, They’ve toned down nets overall to be short and mostly that keeps them interesting and fun in my book. Then slows come in a wide variety and don’t really negate opponent’s ability to react. A large chunk of Skaven slows slow enemy cav to basically be Skaven speed, temporarily (or permanently) leveling the playing field. Similarly dwarfs 72% slow let’s them temporarily be in the same speed zone as fast enemies. For all of these abilities the timing and coordination challenge ofnusing them is reasonably interesting, but like you I prefer unit tactics to castable magic solving problems in a war game.
- Report
2 · Disagree Agree- Report
2 · Disagree AgreeIt should also be said that comparing runelords utility to other lords that cost 1000-2000 gold more and are in completely different rosters is not quite right. There are quite a few dwarven units, like blasting charges, warriors, longbeards, thunderers, rangers and cannons that would enter any other roster as top tier units, so there is much more to it than saying that runelords are instead of magic. The whole roster is different. IMHO runelords/priests are more the equivalent of warrior priest/lector than compensation for magic, and that the compensation for magic rather lies in the very good durability/leadership of all dwarven units plus the magic resist.
- Report
0 · Disagree Agree- Report
0 · Disagree AgreeIt would certainly help dwarfs to have a high mass unit without resorting to nets.
2. Another rune I'd like to see is a simple rune that grants magic attacks, maybe in exchange it could remove magic resistance for the active time.
3. Some sort of urannon thunderbolt master rune would be nice. Maybe this will happen if Thorek ironbrow is added.
- Report
1 · Disagree AgreeAllariele all items/spells equiped = 2800
Runelord all items/"spells" equiped = 2400
No not a single other support lord costs 1000-2000 gold more.... seriously thats why discussing any change for Dwarfs is unbearabyl hard on this forum.
And if they really end up costing more its because of the myriad of usefull abilitys/mounts they are able to take while every addition/change to a Dwarf char ends in endless discussions and cries about the certain doom about to come down on us all.
Runelords/smiths should not just be more expensive versions of the Warriorpriest/Archlektor and Runes which are the way Dwarfs use magic should not just be limited to them alone.
You have those saying that magic resist already is enough for having no magic at all or even trying to bring other things into it despite it beeing completley irrelevant.
Or even totally wrong:
HE-Spearmen have the same LD as Dwarf warriors, Swordmasters have the same as Hammerers and their durability comes with decreased Offense and Numbers of models.
25% Magic resist really is not a compensation for having no acces to magic.
Everything comes at a price, nothing is granted for free.
Except for WoM which every faction gets to use besides 1 guess which 1.
Hint: Its the one people complain the most about any change without added nerf while complaining about the faction boring to play against and not getting changed at all.
Do you want examples?
Just search for the first thread about Giant slayers (which ruined many MUs) after that go search for the first change to Wrath and Ruin (which added the first slow) if you still haven't had enough search for the last change for W&R and i almost forgot about the Tormentor Sword.
- Report
2 · Disagree AgreeSo even if your view is consistent, the practical effect of arguing along these lines is to deny slows to some factions and not others, because those factions already have powerful slows or nets. So even though I agree it is not a double standard, it is definitely (unintentionally) biased even if meant in good faith. If Dwarf players were coming here and consistently asking that the WoM base pool be cut in half for all factions because magic was having a big negative impact on the ability of lots of factions to field their elite cav/infantry, it might be a consistent view but because the impact of this change would be nothing but a net positive for Dwarfs it would not be surprising if it was perceived as Dwarf bias because of the practical impact it would have on the balance of factions.
- Prophetess (Horse) with Awakening of the Wood, Earth Blood, Assualt of Stone, Arcane Conduit = 1054
- Supreme Sorceress (Horse) with Fireball, Cascading Fire Cloak, Burning Head, Arcane Conduit = 1106
- Night Gobbo Shaman (Wolf) with Sneaky Stabbing, Vindictive Glare, Gork'll Fix It, Arcane Conduit, Waaagh! = 1087
- High Slann (no mount) with Apotheosis, Tempest, Blood Statuette of Spite, Greater Arcane Conduit = 1186
- Grey Seer (no mount) with Pestilent Breath, Bless with Filth, Vermintide, Warpstorm Scroll, Arcane Conduit = 874
- Vampire Fleet Admiral (Pistol) (no mount) with Drowned Dead, Invocation of Nehek = 1190
- Master Necromancer (Horse) with Curse of Undeath, Master of the Dead, Invocation, Raise Dead = 972
- Chaos Sorcerer Lord (Horse) with Final Transmutation, Arcane Conduit = 1282
All of these choices are close to the price range of a Runelord with his most common kits of either just MRoW&R (1012) or MRoW&R + Rune of Negation (1238). There is a lot of variation in how good they are in combat, how survivable they are, where they are good picks, etc but let's not pretend that the comparison here is a Runelord with MRoW&R against a fully kitted Mannfred on a Dragon.
Yes, rosters are different and the Dwarfs are given advantages that other factions are not. But that is true with all factions. And that doesn't change the fact that MRoW&R is in not even close to an outlier in power level in it's price range compared to the tools given to other factions. Dwarfs as a faction are still comfortably in a position where the only talk that should be happening about most of their lords and heroes is straight buffs, predominantly in their itemisation and the versatility of that itemisation.
- Report
4 · Disagree AgreeThis is the madness. I don’t honestly care exactly what fun tools dwarfs get my spare me this bs!!!!!!!
- Report
0 · Disagree Agree- Report
1 · Disagree AgreeInappropriate Comment removed.
- Report
-2 · Disagree AgreeNasty skulkers are faction wide. I wouldn’t even waste a previous master slow that wouldn’t even stop a cav from disengaging from a foot of gork type spell.
Nobody cares if a damage rune does as much as a 26 wom spell. Nobody’s asking for op. But the idea that all area damage abilities are off the table for a faction because they also possess a slowing item is nonsense.
- Report
2 · Disagree AgreeCreative runes = fun. More snares = no fun, that's my opinion on this. Fortification rune was a cool idea, more of these. I liked loupis suggestions too.
- Report
0 · Disagree AgreeAnd I'm not comparing casters to rune lords. I'm explicitly saying that runes, which are one-off item abilities in this game, shouldn't be as powerful as 26 WoM spells and no on is seriously considering to make them that powerful, particularly if they are multi-cast. I'm sure there's a reasonable level of damage that can be worked out if CA was to add an item to a dwarf character that did some template of damage to enemy units, either as a one time ability or a multi-use ability.
- Report
0 · Disagree AgreeImho the kit a Runelord brings on the Anvil of Doom should be an entirely different set of Runes related to offense, just priced and powered correctly. In TT it was explicitly able to do stuff like this, shoot lightning bolts and fireballs etc. You could even make them exclusive maybe, so if you had 6 runes available you would only be able to take 1 or 2 per match. As long as the Anvil of Doom was priced appropriately (currently 1250 which may need to be reviewed) it would be a great change to the Dwarf playstyle. You would of course want to select the runes it got carefully, no one is saying Anvil of Doom should be given Winds of Death.
And the reason I am comparing casters to the runelord is that at the end of the day the difference between a spell and a rune is a distinction without a difference. Net of Amyntok is limited by WoM, RoW&R is limited by 4 usages. Potion of Charoi is limited by 4 usages, Earthblood is limited by WoM.
But the big difference is that even if we look at a faction with relatively poor magic selection like Bretonnia, they have access to 18 spells (i.e. ranged abilities that either inflict damage, buff/debuff, heal units, summon, slow/snare) at the hero level they can bring while the Dwarfs have......2. Rune of Wrath and Ruin and Fiery Ring of Thori. Dwarfs do have some other actives that can fill the roll somewhat like Bombs on Gyros, Ulthar's Raiders thing, but the gap is still quite glaring. And that is for one of the factions with relatively limited options, if you start comparing it to factions like Empire, High Elves, Dark Elves, Skaven, Lizardmen, the gap becomes laughable and imo completely unjustifiable.
- Report
5 · Disagree Agree- Report
0 · Disagree Agree- Report
0 · Disagree Agree- Report
0 · Disagree AgreeAnd since it's all a question of balancing and a Runesmith comes at a price higher then some caster lords already, price is also a quite important difference to WoM users.
- Report
2 · Disagree Agree- Report
1 · Disagree Agree2 new skills just for the Anvil would increase variety and would bring the Runelords full price closer to other caster lords with full kit.
- Report
2 · Disagree AgreeTop #3 Leaderboard on Warhammer Totalwar.
- Report
4 · Disagree Agree- Report
1 · Disagree AgreeBase Supreme Sorceress Lord costs 450. Base Goblin Great Shaman cost 300.
Teclis with just Regrowth, Net, Potion and Arcane Conduit costs 1188.
So which Lords are you talking about that cost 1850-2850 base and 3400-4400 fully kitted are being compared to Runelord? Or just because Runelord is often taken naked with Rune of Wrath that costs about 1k in total - because other abilities are waste of gold - you thought he is cheap?
Likewise base Runesmith with just the Rune of Wrath costs 630 while for 492 gold you can grab a Life Wizard with Regrowth to heal your Karl Franz or another single entity to generate tremendous value.
- Report
0 · Disagree AgreeTop #3 Leaderboard on Warhammer Totalwar.
- Report
1 · Disagree Agree- Report
0 · Disagree AgreeGL ever doing 3x transmute worth of dmg or utility
Top #3 Leaderboard on Warhammer Totalwar.
- Report
3 · Disagree Agree- Report
0 · Disagree Agree