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

Welcome to total war chaffhammer!

ThePhoenixKingThePhoenixKing Registered Users Posts: 31
Why should you take elite inf units?
Artillery gets value on them fast and they can be attacked in the back because you don't have enough money left to protect it.
Just an example: is it better to have 2 Har Ganeth executioners that can fight at two places at the same time or 3 Witchelves that can fight at 3 places? Same price btw.
I have no idea how to change that but it has to be changed! Maybe a MA Debuff if units fight units that cost more
«1

Comments

  • TheKrakenmeisterTheKrakenmeister Registered Users Posts: 51

    Why should you take elite inf units?
    Artillery gets value on them fast and they can be attacked in the back because you don't have enough money left to protect it.
    Just an example: is it better to have 2 Har Ganeth executioners that can fight at two places at the same time or 3 Witchelves that can fight at 3 places? Same price btw.
    I have no idea how to change that but it has to be changed! Maybe a MA Debuff if units fight units that cost more

    Not just artillery, literally everything kills elite infantry. Item abilities, spells, monsters charging, etc. This is a problem inherent in the "rock-paper-scissors" that wasn't properly thought out and the solution would require much deeper changes than some stat changes.
  • ThePhoenixKingThePhoenixKing Registered Users Posts: 31
    edited June 21

    Why should you take elite inf units?
    Artillery gets value on them fast and they can be attacked in the back because you don't have enough money left to protect it.
    Just an example: is it better to have 2 Har Ganeth executioners that can fight at two places at the same time or 3 Witchelves that can fight at 3 places? Same price btw.
    I have no idea how to change that but it has to be changed! Maybe a MA Debuff if units fight units that cost more

    Not just artillery, literally everything kills elite infantry. Item abilities, spells, monsters charging, etc. This is a problem inherent in the "rock-paper-scissors" that wasn't properly thought out and the solution would require much deeper changes than some stat changes.
    That's exactly what i think.^^ But total war is not rock-paper-scissors. The Problem is that a unit is not dead instantly if it fights a stroner one. It's like a human and an ant:
    A single ant can hurt the human a bit; 20000 can kill him.
  • eumaieseumaies Senior Member Registered Users Posts: 6,130
    You make a fair point. It's definitely not terminal yet but it's getting there.

    And I don't begrudge the fun of units like poison wind mortars or summons that create pocket armies out of thin air or magic that just seems especially good at nuking infantry and not so much other things.

    But perhaps as a start infantry priced over 1000 in this game, for every faction, could be nudged down slightly in price if that''s the way the game is going to be.
  • Loupi_Loupi_ Registered Users Posts: 1,722
    replace the word "infantry" with 'cavalry', or 'archers' and you get the same argument
  • kasunrathnatungakasunrathnatunga Registered Users Posts: 4,031
    It is rather realistic though. In a world where magic, atilary , tanks , monsters and nukes exisist if you want to use elite stuff one must be rather skillful.


    And like wise one shouldn't fill your armies with lot of elites elite should be taken with great consideration on what and where they would fight.

    But then again i doubt i would be a good general so who knows.
    #givemoreunitsforbrettonia
  • Green0Green0 Registered Users Posts: 6,370
    edited June 21
    the problem for elite infantry is actually not competition by chaff infantry but wind/explosion spells that delete infantry. E.g. Wulfrik's longboat. Even artillery you can deal with and altogether artillery is not terribly effective vs elite infantry though it is effective.

    Test Chaos Warriors Great Weapons and test Chosen GW into Ironbreakers and you will see why you pick elite infantry.

    Also, elite infantry is in a good spot, it's a "sometimes pick" but not a "spam frontlines of them" which would make for a very boring game.
  • Ephraim_DaltonEphraim_Dalton Senior Member Registered Users Posts: 24,667
    Loupi_ said:

    replace the word "infantry" with 'cavalry', or 'archers' and you get the same argument

    Nope, you won't. Cavalry has its speed and skirmishers don't need to slog all the way to the enemy to do damage. They simply have better chances of making their cost back than melee infantry.

  • Loupi_Loupi_ Registered Users Posts: 1,722
    If you take elite units of any kind you better have a plan to avoid/beat their counters, simple as that.
  • TheKrakenmeisterTheKrakenmeister Registered Users Posts: 51
    Green0 said:

    the problem for elite infantry is actually not competition by chaff infantry but wind/explosion spells that delete infantry. E.g. Wulfrik's longboat. Even artillery you can deal with and altogether artillery is not terribly effective vs elite infantry though it is effective.

    Test Chaos Warriors Great Weapons and test Chosen GW into Ironbreakers and you will see why you pick elite infantry.

    Also, elite infantry is in a good spot, it's a "sometimes pick" but not a "spam frontlines of them" which would make for a very boring game.

    I'd put them in a category below "sometimes pick" and into "very niche" except for black orks and temple guard, which are still "sometimes pick". I don't like the idea of just making them cheaper because it doesn't solve the fundamental problem of unit interactions. Just having another unit that dies to everything but you don't care all that much if it dies doesn't increase the richness and depth in strategy -- it's just a chaff unit with teeth.
  • AnalogAnalog Registered Users Posts: 158
    Elite Melee Infantry are easily the worst unit category/type in the game. As a rule if your infantry unit price is moving above 1000 you are trending into uncompedative waters.

    Infantry of high price are not only vulnerable to just about everything such as Kraken pointed out above, but also are liable to take damage from their very own ideal matchups. No Melee infantry unit can fight anything without taking some losses and on multi-model units these losses have impact this is unlike archers/ranged units, who can generate value quite safely and without any inherent risk from their own action or Calavary/SEM who either have the mobility or mass to be quite selective in their engagements and better insure value whitest also being more efficient and valuable to heal and thus more forgiving of misplays and mistakes.

    Elite Infantry have no shortage of downsides and few upsides, they stand as a niche pick in certain match ups whitest units from other categories are seen across a variety of match ups.
  • TheKrakenmeisterTheKrakenmeister Registered Users Posts: 51
    Analog said:

    No Melee infantry unit can fight anything without taking some losses and on multi-model units these losses have impact this is unlike archers/ranged units, who can generate value quite safely and without any inherent risk from their own action or Calavary/SEM who either have the mobility or mass to be quite selective in their engagements and better insure value whitest also being more efficient and valuable to heal and thus more forgiving of misplays and mistakes.

    Thus rip all singleplayer balance.
  • Elder_BasiliskElder_Basilisk Registered Users Posts: 382
    Curiously, the limitation on elite infantry viability is more the inability to choose your engagements than the presence of artillery or even cavalry.

    For example, elite infantry such as swordmasters, sisters of slaughter and executioners and executioners are viable and even meta in HE or DE vs dwarf matchup despite dwarves having lots of artillery and gun lines. The reason is that they are sure to have targets and they are guaranteed to be able to catch those targets if they don't get shot to pieces on the way in--and they won't all get shot to pieces on the way in. Also, cav and things like dragons tend to be even more vulnerable than elite infantry in the dawi matchup. Likewise they were viable vs greenskins pre-warden and paunch (at least if you brought arcane unforging or destroyer (DE) to shut down waagh) because greenskins always brought infantry and usually couldn't control the mobility game.

    In most other matchups, elite infantry generally faces more resource competition from cavalry and cheaper infantry can often get the job done. Two rangers/corsairs chop through skavenslaves faster than 1 swordmaster/executioner.
  • kasunrathnatungakasunrathnatunga Registered Users Posts: 4,031
    Sword masters and white lions with time warp. I wanna see what happens :) vs skaven. Will they cut through the chaff or will they get shot to high heavens.
    #givemoreunitsforbrettonia
  • Lotus_MoonLotus_Moon Registered Users Posts: 8,905
    Just an example: is it better to have 2 Har Ganeth executioners that can fight at two places at the same time or 3 Witchelves that can fight at 3 places? Same price btw.


    Take that vs dwarfs and let me know how that went
  • AnalogAnalog Registered Users Posts: 158

    Curiously, the limitation on elite infantry viability is more the inability to choose your engagements than the presence of artillery or even cavalry.

    For example, elite infantry such as swordmasters, sisters of slaughter and executioners and executioners are viable and even meta in HE or DE vs dwarf matchup despite dwarves having lots of artillery and gun lines. The reason is that they are sure to have targets and they are guaranteed to be able to catch those targets if they don't get shot to pieces on the way in--and they won't all get shot to pieces on the way in. Also, cav and things like dragons tend to be even more vulnerable than elite infantry in the dawi matchup. Likewise they were viable vs greenskins pre-warden and paunch (at least if you brought arcane unforging or destroyer (DE) to shut down waagh) because greenskins always brought infantry and usually couldn't control the mobility game.

    In most other matchups, elite infantry generally faces more resource competition from cavalry and cheaper infantry can often get the job done. Two rangers/corsairs chop through skavenslaves faster than 1 swordmaster/executioner.

    This is true, But a weakness to Artillery and Spells does compound the issue further again. I agree that a lack of mobility is the main disadvantage, but its made worse by the other supporting disadvantages.
  • The_real_FAUSTThe_real_FAUST Registered Users Posts: 770
    edited June 21
    Because ultimately the game comes down to fast high mass or fast mobility.


    Both these things infantry can't deal with, and elite infantry are an even less cost efficient way to try and deal with the problem set.

    The majority of Magic is more effective vs infantry of all kinds than cavalry, monstrous inf or highly mobile armored SEM (HMASEM)

    The majority of missiles find it easier to hit inf than cav or HMASEM both of which can have sky high armour values.

    The majority of HMASEM even if AL can kill infantry well but are also good vs Large so it's more efficient to spend gold on one unit thay can do two things well than numerous units that are specific but not particularly effective at their specific tasks.

    Cav can be effective vs elite inf as they inflict high shock damage. But they will lose a few models to do so. It's less efficient for them to cycle charge 3 dread spears to death than 1 unit of black guard over the course of a long game. So you take lots of inf not elite inf.

    Elite infantry CAN eventually beat cav, as they tear down a few models every time so the cav gets weaker as infantry gets weaker.

    However HMASEM with high armour can run through inf without taking much damage. Unlike the inf. The inf then blob to deal with the HMASEM and then get smashed with magic or missiles.


    Ultimately if HMASEM are therefore a problem you are better taking 3x dreadspears than 1 black guard. Unless you have a way of blocking HMASEM in the black guard by other means other than just the black guards mass. I.e. Dark riders /cold ones on top of black guard trapping a HMASEM in the guard allowong the guard to actually fight back.


    Those are the long reasons.


    And note throughout the deliberate use of HMASEM, so there can be NO confusion with giants and bastilidons when clearly units like shaggoths and dragons are meant.
  • outrage4outrage4 Registered Users Posts: 54
    Can't agree with point OP made.

    There are elite infanrty units with spread formation that are in a great spot such as Black Orks, Chosen(shields),Temple guard.
    (Grave guard are also great but thats probably due to nehek and relatively low cost)

    The problem is mostly formation difference: unit with spread formation take sagnificantly less damage from AOE spells and abilities while tight formation has no advantages whatsoever.

    Whether they should make formation optional i don't know since everyone will only be using spread formation is so.
  • Ephraim_DaltonEphraim_Dalton Senior Member Registered Users Posts: 24,667
    Melee infantry is in a horrible state in this game and needs buffs.

    Ranged, monsters and magic need to be nerfed, they just hammer too much damage out too fast and are too safe.

    1.Monsters need to lose mass and charge bonus as they get damanged + they need to turn and accelerate slower, especially flying monsters. On top of that, artillery firing on monsters needs to lead its target so that dodging shots becomes a bigger micro burden and therefore less attractive

    2.Ranged units need to have their DPS curtailed. I would say shield parry should be buffed by one tier (bronze goes from 30 to 50 and silver from 50 to 70) and reload speed needs to be halved overall

    3.Magic is too safe and has basically no counterplay. A mage on a flying mount will basically never miss to spend his whole WoM until the end of the match. So I suggest implementing one or more of the following:

    -no casting while in combat, if he gets engaged while casting, the spell doesn't go off and it's disabled until he disengages
    -no casting while moving, casting stops any mage dead in his tracks until the casting is complete
    -lower casting ranges. They are too high for way too many spells, -25% to -35% shorter ranges are necessary so that mages can't cast from safe distances
    -make miscast more punishing. -35% of max health for every miscast. Overcasting should come with a risk assessment

    Magic also needs to be more effective against monsters as compensation. It can't be that whenever a spell is useful against SEMs, whining and BAWWing from the monster apologists immediately gets CA to nerf it (see Vindictive Glare and PBoB). AoE spells and vortices should damage monsters massively when they stand right in the middle of it, so this stupid blobbing tactics goes out of the window.

  • WitchbladeWitchblade Registered Users Posts: 594
    Elite infantry by its very nature is not a competitive concept. If elite infantry dominated the game, the game would be a point-and-click frontline mash fight with little skill other than army selection. Elite infantry simply doesn't reward skill much, so it's good they're not OP.

    Executioners are highly viable against dwarfs and VC by the way, so they're far from a useless unit.
  • Green0Green0 Registered Users Posts: 6,370

    Elite infantry by its very nature is not a competitive concept. If elite infantry dominated the game, the game would be a point-and-click frontline mash fight with little skill other than army selection. Elite infantry simply doesn't reward skill much, so it's good they're not OP.

    Executioners are highly viable against dwarfs and VC by the way, so they're far from a useless unit.

    yep I agree with this statement.
  • AnalogAnalog Registered Users Posts: 158

    Melee infantry is in a horrible state in this game and needs buffs.

    Ranged, monsters and magic need to be nerfed, they just hammer too much damage out too fast and are too safe.

    1.Monsters need to lose mass and charge bonus as they get damanged + they need to turn and accelerate slower, especially flying monsters. On top of that, artillery firing on monsters needs to lead its target so that dodging shots becomes a bigger micro burden and therefore less attractive

    2.Ranged units need to have their DPS curtailed. I would say shield parry should be buffed by one tier (bronze goes from 30 to 50 and silver from 50 to 70) and reload speed needs to be halved overall

    3.Magic is too safe and has basically no counterplay. A mage on a flying mount will basically never miss to spend his whole WoM until the end of the match. So I suggest implementing one or more of the following:

    -no casting while in combat, if he gets engaged while casting, the spell doesn't go off and it's disabled until he disengages
    -no casting while moving, casting stops any mage dead in his tracks until the casting is complete
    -lower casting ranges. They are too high for way too many spells, -25% to -35% shorter ranges are necessary so that mages can't cast from safe distances
    -make miscast more punishing. -35% of max health for every miscast. Overcasting should come with a risk assessment

    Magic also needs to be more effective against monsters as compensation. It can't be that whenever a spell is useful against SEMs, whining and BAWWing from the monster apologists immediately gets CA to nerf it (see Vindictive Glare and PBoB). AoE spells and vortices should damage monsters massively when they stand right in the middle of it, so this stupid blobbing tactics goes out of the window.

    Mostly agree

    Ive always liked the idea of SEM's going through stages of 'Bloodied' suffering CB, Speed and LD penalties as they take damage. Might acually add some skill and thought to what they can or should be fighting. especially if the debuff cant be removed by healing.

    I like the shield idea. No idea if its too radical or not but i do like the idea of them being more impactful and significant and its a change that dosent immediately make Shielded infantry super powered.

    Agree with magic to the extent that it should be just as effective for monster killing as infantry killing. If its good enough to be a counter for infantry almost across the board monsters should feel some heat from it too.

  • AnalogAnalog Registered Users Posts: 158

    Elite infantry by its very nature is not a competitive concept. If elite infantry dominated the game, the game would be a point-and-click frontline mash fight with little skill other than army selection. Elite infantry simply doesn't reward skill much, so it's good they're not OP.

    Executioners are highly viable against dwarfs and VC by the way, so they're far from a useless unit.

    This is true, but i dont think the ask is Infantry domination. Just that Elite infantry have a place like very other unit type.

    Theres something to be said for the price to product comparison for SEM and elite infantry in particular too.

    Compare in the Lizardmen Roster ( A faction with a strong monster identity.)
    the 650g Feral bastiladon
    and
    the 1100 Feral stegadon.

    The feral Steg is almost a complete and perfect step up from the feral, losing only armour and not having its own armour drop below 100 anyway.

    Compare that price step in an infantry faction like the Dwarves in,
    the 700 Longbeards
    and
    the 1100 Hammers
    The Hammers are not a perfect step up, they gain armour pierce but lose a ton of the goodies Longbeards bring to the table.

    The comparison is not perfect but you see examples of this in the infantry of every roster. Price jumps in Infantry are rarely as rewarding as they are in SEM's. Infantry can pay similar amounts for price bump much less rewarding.

    Infantry becoming viable dosent guarantee the stale infantry blob meta per se. But could help insure against the monster mash one that can be just as dull and low skill.
  • tank3487tank3487 Member Registered Users Posts: 1,668
    edited June 21
    outrage4 said:


    (Grave guard are also great but thats probably due to nehek and relatively low cost)

    First of all. Had you played vamps? No one use nehek on grave guard. You do not have WOM for this. And it is not cost effective. Grave guard are not elite infantry. It is mid tier. Plus other VC infantry do almost zero damage to any target with armor. You do see Chaos Warriors, White Lions, witch elves, longbeards often.

    Thing is missiles are just too good vs elites. And unlike SEMs or cav you do not have enough mobility to mitigate missile damage as elite infantry. Vs dawi you take elite infantry cause dawi has armor and insane MD on all units except slayers.
    Vs VC players spam elite infantry cause VC has no missiles and main counter are Mortis that you can try to counter.
  • TheKrakenmeisterTheKrakenmeister Registered Users Posts: 51
    tank3487 said:

    Vs dawi you take elite infantry cause dawi has armor and insane MD on all units except slayers.
    Vs VC players spam elite infantry cause VC has no missiles and main counter are Mortis that you can try to counter.

    Yes. All other factions make elite infantry look silly. I even think that VC pendulum is way underused.

    Melee infantry is in a horrible state in this game and needs buffs.

    Ranged, monsters and magic need to be nerfed, they just hammer too much damage out too fast and are too safe.

    1.Monsters need to lose mass and charge bonus as they get damanged + they need to turn and accelerate slower, especially flying monsters. On top of that, artillery firing on monsters needs to lead its target so that dodging shots becomes a bigger micro burden and therefore less attractive

    2.Ranged units need to have their DPS curtailed. I would say shield parry should be buffed by one tier (bronze goes from 30 to 50 and silver from 50 to 70) and reload speed needs to be halved overall

    3.Magic is too safe and has basically no counterplay. A mage on a flying mount will basically never miss to spend his whole WoM until the end of the match. So I suggest implementing one or more of the following:

    -no casting while in combat, if he gets engaged while casting, the spell doesn't go off and it's disabled until he disengages
    -no casting while moving, casting stops any mage dead in his tracks until the casting is complete
    -lower casting ranges. They are too high for way too many spells, -25% to -35% shorter ranges are necessary so that mages can't cast from safe distances
    -make miscast more punishing. -35% of max health for every miscast. Overcasting should come with a risk assessment

    Magic also needs to be more effective against monsters as compensation. It can't be that whenever a spell is useful against SEMs, whining and BAWWing from the monster apologists immediately gets CA to nerf it (see Vindictive Glare and PBoB). AoE spells and vortices should damage monsters massively when they stand right in the middle of it, so this stupid blobbing tactics goes out of the window.

    1. They already to lead targets, the problem is that all you have to do is change direction by the time if flies in your direction to dodge it.
    2. I think this is a little over the top -- you should have to compromise enemy ranged to get your infantry in and it's what's supposed to beat melee infantry in rock-paper-scissors.
    3. VERY INTERESTING!! I like it a lot. A trait to allow you to cast while fighting could be a rarity given to special hybrid lords e.g. Mannfred or Settra and it could be a temporary on items like old sword of Teclis. I think miscast should be reworked another way cause just taking more random damage just feels bad. The only problem I see is that the mages you want to jeopardize will remain fairly safe (i.e. imperial pegasus) while the ones that were already somewhat vulnerable will be dead fish in the water (i.e. skaven sorcerers). So it could use some extra thought, but I like where it's going!
  • tank3487tank3487 Member Registered Users Posts: 1,668
    edited June 21

    I even think that VC pendulum is way underused.

    To have pendulum you either need to take one specific Lord. Or bring vampire caster hero that has zero WOM generation(which is a huge issue cause most Vamp Lords are casters already and WOM generation for Vamp Lords are problematic(only Manfred, Necrarh and Ghorst has decent options to generate WOM, but Ghorst lose hp to do this, Necrarh require to cast spells himself and cannot generate for other caster and Manfred already pay for double lore and require being in melee for WOM generation)) plus Vamp heroes very expensive.

    So only viable pendulum source are Lahmia Lord.
  • Disposable HeroDisposable Hero Registered Users Posts: 4,767
    I think elite infantry can have a place in almost every matchup, you just need to like loupi said, have a plan how to protect them and use them.

    Thing is, if you fail to stop a unit like the ror executioners they will blend everything.
  • PussyslayerXDDPussyslayerXDD Registered Users Posts: 40
    Analog said:


    Agree with magic to the extent that it should be just as effective for monster killing as infantry killing. If its good enough to be a counter for infantry almost across the board monsters should feel some heat from it too.

    Remember in the empire trailer for wh1 when the heavens mage one shot a giant with cassandora comet?
    That would be dope. But its false advertisement to this day, just like artillery on the walls.
  • sonofabhorashsonofabhorash Registered Users Posts: 194
    elites are fine , they are not an autopick but they are fine
    just have them in reserve and push in once the enemy ranged has been tackled + have some your own defence against enemy skirmishers
    IF they got to frontline unscathed,its usually nice cost return for them
    so def. not a frontline unit unless going against VC
  • Ephraim_DaltonEphraim_Dalton Senior Member Registered Users Posts: 24,667
    edited June 21

    elites are fine , they are not an autopick but they are fine
    just have them in reserve and push in once the enemy ranged has been tackled + have some your own defence against enemy skirmishers
    IF they got to frontline unscathed,its usually nice cost return for them
    so def. not a frontline unit unless going against VC

    Being a frontline unit is their whole purpose. If their best use is to keep them far away from the fighting until their counters are gone, and melee infantry has the single biggest amount of possible counters BTW, then that's a major design failure.

  • Loupi_Loupi_ Registered Users Posts: 1,722



    Being a frontline unit is their whole purpose.

    well thats the issue, thats not their whole purpose.
Sign In or Register to comment.