A Reminder on Mechanics that need Adjustment

2twoto#4000

With talk of new DLC being relatively close, I figure now would be the best time of any to return and throw out a reminder about some previously discussed mechanics that need adjustment, either for the sake of balance, ease of use, and/or clarity:

1) Crumbling: Longer story short, undead units don't take enough damage from crumbling in exchange for their psuedo-unbreakability (only 11 dmg/second), specifically in the case of the Vampire Coast and Tomb Kings, but their greatly decrease leadership can also lead to situations where a unit with decent health that should rally will continue to crumble because the crumble damage keeps their morale from recovering. A suggested solution would be to increase the damage crumbling deals (i.e. double the damage), but increase the leadership on most undead units by 5-10 (with perhaps additional buffs for the Vampire Counts undead if this change proves crippling to them).

2) Stealth and detection: This mechanic is in desperate need of clarity. Specifically, it would help significantly if there was the ability to see a unit's detection ranges (like there currently is with firing arcs), one indicating the detection range against stalk/hidden units and a second one doing the same against unpotable units. Just give the option to toggle it on and off like with most of the in-battle information.

3) Forest Stalker/Aquatics: Long-story short, Forest Stalker encourages tree blobs due to the MD buff it provides. As many people have advocated, this bonus should be changed to literally anything that doesn't make fighting in trees massively advantageous for those with this bonus: a speed buff or something similar would do well. Likewise, aquatics should be changed similarly for both consistency and balance (aquatics gives a unit a 40% MA and MD stat swing against opponents in swampland).

4) Unit Formations: Were in previous total war games, surprising that it's absent from this one. The result is that loose formation is somehow superior to tight formation in all circumstances (something that defies IRL and previous TW logic) and units can't change formation. It would be nice to instead have the option on most units toggle between loose and tight formations, while reinstituting drawbacks to each like in the previous games.

5) Vortexes: A little indicator for where the vortex will go first would be nice, as well as being able to control the initial direction (just the initial direction) would go a long way to make these spells better.

6) Trait Limit: This one is mostly focused on single player, but still relevant to game balance. Basically, there is a limit to how many traits a Lord can have, and once hit a Lord can gain no more traits. There is literally no reason for this to be the case: from a balance perspective, acquiring the traits requires time investment insofar as by the time the Lord would start exceeding the trait limit, they're most likely lvl 40 and the small power boost each trait would give would be negligible at that point (as the Lord is probably already optimized and winning most battles at that point). Likewise, the whole point of the system is to add something fun to hunting down legendary lords: a trait limit undermines that purpose, especially when traits cannot be removed and you can't easily see how many traits a lord has. Unless there is a coding limitation or something similar, there isn't a good reason to limit the number of traits a lord can have.

7) Spell/ability Adjustments: Basically, there are certain spells that are OP if brought on multiple casters (specifically nets, constant AoE drain effects, summons, and healing). These classes of abilities/spells should either be nerfed insofar as to make brining 3 casters/units with said spells/abilities not OP or else such abilities/spells should be specifically limited insofar as to prevent 3 casters from using them at the same time (something like all spells/abilities of a type share a global cooldown). The first would be preferable, as it would truly balance the spells in question, but the second might be easier to implement overall.

These suggestions are pretty abbreviated due to previous discussions on them, but these are the biggest mechanics in need of adjustments for both SP and MP (at least that I've noticed: let me know if I missed something).

saweendra#3399

There is trait limit its 40 traits. If remember correctly

DwarfSizedBeard

kasunrathnatunga said:

There is trait limit its 40 traits. If remember correctly

he doesn't want trait limit

WojmirVonCarstein

This is a great list.
I would just like to add a few things to your points

2) In addition, there should not be a pop-up saying that a previously hidden enemy unit has been spotted. It kind of makes stealh pointless or at least very weak.

5) Please let Vortices do (way) more damage to large and especially SEM. It is so dumb that a Treeman can bathe in a flamestorm and not take any damage. This would discourage blobs.

I would also like to add a point:

8) Make shielded vs unshielded versions of the same units be same cost but be slighthly different. Like maybe Saurus without shields gain +2 WS, +1 AP and +6 MA while shielded ones get +6 MD and 35 missile resist. This is just an example and may be unbalanced. But would noticeably increase roster variety.

9) Mounts need to have their costs increased or base choice has to be cheaper for some characters. For example, most people will never bring certain casters on foot. This to me means that a caster on foot is worse value for the cost than a mounted one. This should not be so. Both should be about equal in value.

10) Certain units are never chosen. Has anyone EVER seen a Skaven warlord on foot in an MP game? Even pre all DLC's, I haven't. This essentially means that the choice doesn't exist as it is so bad. Why not change something to make that choice viable. Here is an idea as an example: A Skaven Warlord comes with a free unit of Skaven Clanrats with shields. There! 350g value unit for free. That would make the Skaven Warldord an interesting choice (maybe). I think all units options that are never chosen should be revisited and improved. I know that technically nothing HAS to be done as something being terrible doesn't impact balance in any way, it just makes the amount of options seem higher than it really is. Another example would the the Ghoul King. He is way worse on every way than the Strigoi vampire. Why not make the Ghoul King useable? Make him a large monster like a Kroxigor Ancient and boom! You got something unique.

11) Make it so that you can see the deployment zones on MP map in the army build screen. Also, it would be nice to know if a map will allow you to deploy vanguard units around your opponents deployment zone.

Pocman#6295

2twoto said:

With talk of new DLC being relatively close, I figure now would be the best time of any to return and throw out a reminder about some previously discussed mechanics that need adjustment, either for the sake of balance, ease of use, and/or clarity:

1) Crumbling: Longer story short, undead units don't take enough damage from crumbling in exchange for their psuedo-unbreakability (only 11 dmg/second), specifically in the case of the Vampire Coast and Tomb Kings, but their greatly decrease leadership can also lead to situations where a unit with decent health that should rally will continue to crumble because the crumble damage keeps their morale from recovering. A suggested solution would be to increase the damage crumbling deals (i.e. double the damage), but increase the leadership on most undead units by 5-10 (with perhaps additional buffs for the Vampire Counts undead if this change proves crippling to them).

2) Stealth and detection: This mechanic is in desperate need of clarity. Specifically, it would help significantly if there was the ability to see a unit's detection ranges (like there currently is with firing arcs), one indicating the detection range against stalk/hidden units and a second one doing the same against unpotable units. Just give the option to toggle it on and off like with most of the in-battle information.

3) Forest Stalker/Aquatics: Long-story short, Forest Stalker encourages tree blobs due to the MD buff it provides. As many people have advocated, this bonus should be changed to literally anything that doesn't make fighting in trees massively advantageous for those with this bonus: a speed buff or something similar would do well. Likewise, aquatics should be changed similarly for both consistency and balance (aquatics gives a unit a 40% MA and MD stat swing against opponents in swampland).

4) Unit Formations: Were in previous total war games, surprising that it's absent from this one. The result is that loose formation is somehow superior to tight formation in all circumstances (something that defies IRL and previous TW logic) and units can't change formation. It would be nice to instead have the option on most units toggle between loose and tight formations, while reinstituting drawbacks to each like in the previous games.

5) Vortexes: A little indicator for where the vortex will go first would be nice, as well as being able to control the initial direction (just the initial direction) would go a long way to make these spells better.

6) Trait Limit: This one is mostly focused on single player, but still relevant to game balance. Basically, there is a limit to how many traits a Lord can have, and once hit a Lord can gain no more traits. There is literally no reason for this to be the case: from a balance perspective, acquiring the traits requires time investment insofar as by the time the Lord would start exceeding the trait limit, they're most likely lvl 40 and the small power boost each trait would give would be negligible at that point (as the Lord is probably already optimized and winning most battles at that point). Likewise, the whole point of the system is to add something fun to hunting down legendary lords: a trait limit undermines that purpose, especially when traits cannot be removed and you can't easily see how many traits a lord has. Unless there is a coding limitation or something similar, there isn't a good reason to limit the number of traits a lord can have.

7) Spell/ability Adjustments: Basically, there are certain spells that are OP if brought on multiple casters (specifically nets, constant AoE drain effects, summons, and healing). These classes of abilities/spells should either be nerfed insofar as to make brining 3 casters/units with said spells/abilities not OP or else such abilities/spells should be specifically limited insofar as to prevent 3 casters from using them at the same time (something like all spells/abilities of a type share a global cooldown). The first would be preferable, as it would truly balance the spells in question, but the second might be easier to implement overall.

These suggestions are pretty abbreviated due to previous discussions on them, but these are the biggest mechanics in need of adjustments for both SP and MP (at least that I've noticed: let me know if I missed something).

Agree with all of them.


I would mention:
For undeads, maybe instead of extra LD, make Nehek stop crumbling (nerf the healing )


Regarding OP spells, I would say those are simply OP. Not a problem regarding the number of casters.

WojmirVonCarstein said:

This is a great list.
I would just like to add a few things to your points

2) In addition, there should not be a pop-up saying that a previously hidden enemy unit has been spotted. It kind of makes stealh pointless or at least very weak.

5) Please let Vortices do (way) more damage to large and especially SEM. It is so dumb that a Treeman can bathe in a flamestorm and not take any damage. This would discourage blobs.

I would also like to add a point:

8) Make shielded vs unshielded versions of the same units be same cost but be slighthly different. Like maybe Saurus without shields gain +2 WS, +1 AP and +6 MA while shielded ones get +6 MD and 35 missile resist. This is just an example and may be unbalanced. But would noticeably increase roster variety.

9) Mounts need to have their costs increased or base choice has to be cheaper for some characters. For example, most people will never bring certain casters on foot. This to me means that a caster on foot is worse value for the cost than a mounted one. This should not be so. Both should be about equal in value.

10) Certain units are never chosen. Has anyone EVER seen a Skaven warlord on foot in an MP game? Even pre all DLC's, I haven't. This essentially means that the choice doesn't exist as it is so bad. Why not change something to make that choice viable. Here is an idea as an example: A Skaven Warlord comes with a free unit of Skaven Clanrats with shields. There! 350g value unit for free. That would make the Skaven Warldord an interesting choice (maybe). I think all units options that are never chosen should be revisited and improved. I know that technically nothing HAS to be done as something being terrible doesn't impact balance in any way, it just makes the amount of options seem higher than it really is. Another example would the the Ghoul King. He is way worse on every way than the Strigoi vampire. Why not make the Ghoul King useable? Make him a large monster like a Kroxigor Ancient and boom! You got something unique.

11) Make it so that you can see the deployment zones on MP map in the army build screen. Also, it would be nice to know if a map will allow you to deploy vanguard units around your opponents deployment zone.

This is no longer about necessary adjustments but more about personal opinions.

Vortex, as a general rule, doing more damage to SEMs would make slow SEMs even less viable.

saweendra#3399

DwarfSizedBeard said:

kasunrathnatunga said:

There is trait limit its 40 traits. If remember correctly

he doesn't want trait limit

oh well i think it needs to equipable than the current system , and limit should be way less

tank3487

2twoto said:

(with perhaps additional buffs for the Vampire Counts undead if this change proves crippling to them).

Maybe buff Vampire counts before another nerf in the row. Why melee only faction get nerfs due to problems with range factions. Thing is crumbling are slow only for very high hp units like zombies. Vs Ethereals crumbling right now are too strong with how low LD are on them, cavalry do feel it well enough.

And Vampire counts can field only 5 zombie units for 500 gold.
Try to play vs competent HE or LZD that use abusive builds with VC, feel the power of 5 zombies crumbling before such suggestions.

tank3487

Pocman said:

I would mention:
For undeads, maybe instead of extra LD, make Nehek stop crumbling (nerf the healing )

WTF. Nehek can target only 4 units. It cost 12 WOM on overcast. VC DO NOT have good WOM regen on most Lords. Vampire casters DO NOT have WOM regen. Necro battery are easy to snipe and would cost you 400 gold to field minimum. You already never cast nehek on any infantry except cairns, Crypt horrors and anything less expensive than 800-900 gold.

ThibixMagnus#8300

good list, indeed crumbling should be reworked (along VC buffs) but it depends on what is to be achieved. Personally I'd like disintegration to happen faster on low tier units, as to make undead battles more dynamic and varied through breaking points. That's how routing works: a sudden change in map control that opens a new phase of the battle. Now crumbling is just linear attrition, a continuous change in the state of battle. That should remain an undead feature, but having more breaking points makes battles more fun for everyone IMO. We could see something like disintegration happening at -30 leadership instead of -50, but increase leadership of mid and high tier units. I think zombies should hold longer than skaven slaves, but quickly evaporate if enough shock resources are focused on them. At the same time I would make nehek much stronger for chaff, and remove unit caps on VC zombies.

As a related matter, I think unit caps need a review. The equipment variants create artificial differences (I don't see any reason you could take 10 spearmen with or without shields, but only 5 zombies), and I feel it harms more factions with smaller rosters like VC, while up to date factions have so much to pick from. Or it constrains exploring units that are not (afaik) abusive, like pegasus knights or TK light chariot units.

About some spells, I'm not sure I see how some are abusive only when brought several times but are ok alone. Given the shared resource pool, investing in 2-3 casters should not be constrained, if the spells alone are ok.

Abilities can be opressive though, and for me the biggest problem remains the net into ability combo with no counterplay. Widespread access to quick targettable magic resistance, or quick mapwide cooldown resets, would make it at least more dynamic so you can either resist or interrupt a combo.

Cadia101

Forest Stalker/Aquatics : change it to speed buff, the units shouldn’t be in specific zones to be good but it would allow them to outmaneuver enemies on those grounds.

mightygloin#2446

Traits are already cheesy as it is. They should be temporary or something since you can farm a single LL every few turns.

Forest buff should stay, but trees should be burnable

Pocman#6295

tank3487 said:

2twoto said:

(with perhaps additional buffs for the Vampire Counts undead if this change proves crippling to them).

Maybe buff Vampire counts before another nerf in the row. Why melee only faction get nerfs due to problems with range factions. Thing is crumbling are slow only for very high hp units like zombies. Vs Ethereals crumbling right now are too strong with how low LD are on them, cavalry do feel it well enough.

And Vampire counts can field only 5 zombie units for 500 gold.
Try to play vs competent HE or LZD that use abusive builds with VC, feel the power of 5 zombies crumbling before such suggestions.

Do you realize we are proposing meta changes for WH3, and that have little or nothing to do with the current state of balance?

Pocman#6295

mightygloin said:

Traits are already cheesy as it is. They should be temporary or something since you can farm a single LL every few turns.

Forest buff should stay, but trees should be burnable

Nah, traits are fine, just remove the limit.

mightygloin#2446

Pocman said:

mightygloin said:

Traits are already cheesy as it is. They should be temporary or something since you can farm a single LL every few turns.

Forest buff should stay, but trees should be burnable

Nah, traits are fine, just remove the limit.

Sure so you can farm them even more and make a superman out of your lords even better. Then people talk about balance in campaign

TheShiroOfDalton

Traits are just more crap that adds to the rampant buffstacking in campaign. I'd not only limit them further, I'd also add more bad traits and make it way harder to pick up any in the first place.

sandercohen#2214

1. Agreed if VC get a ld buff. The LD om some of their monsters like varghulfs is already atrociously low, so at least for the counts such a change is justified if crumbling gets a berf.

2/4 agreed

3 I think instead that CA sgould create more mPs with comp in play while removing some maps fdom the QB pool altogether.

5I have already tested this and in general vortexes remove away from the caster.

6. Yes the fact that some traots are kinda worthless is infuritaing. However I would counteract that is should be easier to gai negative traits. Currently it is too easy to stay i n the posotove side, makinfg the whole train development seem redundant., as least as far as the penalties are corncerned

7 limiting the amount of nets would probably be tje best route as it is the easiest one! Just cap it to one, maybe twp at the max.

another505

Skv infantry are the hardest for me to identify at a glance....
In RTW1, you can see the chevron by how many flags in the infantry.

perhaps some stars on top of the banner for each tier. Tier 5 gets 5 stars, easy to see that this is a high tier unit.

sandercohen said:

1. Agreed if VC get a ld buff. The LD om some of their monsters like varghulfs is already atrociously low, so at least for the counts such a change is justified if crumbling gets a berf.

2/4 agreed

3 I think instead that CA sgould create more mPs with comp in play while removing some maps fdom the QB pool altogether.

5I have already tested this and in general vortexes remove away from the caster.

6. Yes the fact that some traots are kinda worthless is infuritaing. However I would counteract that is should be easier to gai negative traits. Currently it is too easy to stay i n the posotove side, makinfg the whole train development seem redundant., as least as far as the penalties are corncerned

7 limiting the amount of nets would probably be tje best route as it is the easiest one! Just cap it to one, maybe twp at the max.

WojmirVonCarstein

I just watched the latest ECL Tournament hosted by Turin and every single battle featured a manticore summon.

This spell is clearly OP.

There are other good spells, but they are never brought as often.

Djau#5149

ShiroAmakusa75 said:

Traits are just more crap that adds to the rampant buffstacking in campaign. I'd not only limit them further, I'd also add more bad traits and make it way harder to pick up any in the first place.

God forbid the single player side of the game gets content. Theres little reason to have LLs interact with LLs outside of it. Theres fun in trying to hunt down as many traits as possible (also, one of the few things that a Tomb King player can get to do; given the lack of confederations so just access to only 1 Legendary Lord...)

Just add a trait slider; from none to many.

WojmirVonCarstein said:

I just watched the latest ECL Tournament hosted by Turin and every single battle featured a manticore summon.

This spell is clearly OP.

There are other good spells, but they are never brought as often.

The rest of that lore is garbage apart from that spell.

mightygloin#2446

Theres fun in trying to hunt down as many traits as possible (

Subjective fun. "LL farming" how lame does that sound.

I personally don't like it when your every single lord has regeneration due to Isabella respawning in 3 turns and offering such a game changing trait to you on a silver platter. Most lords are already super strong as it is without traits.

Either LLs should stay dead way longer/permanent when killed by player, or these traits should be temporary or something. Could be adjusted per difficulty as well.

Djau#5149

mightygloin said:

Theres fun in trying to hunt down as many traits as possible (

Subjective fun. "LL farming" how lame does that sound.

I personally don't like it when your every single lord has regeneration due to Isabella respawning in 3 turns and offering such a game changing trait to you on a silver platter. Most lords are already super strong as it is without traits.

Either LLs should stay dead way longer/permanent when killed by player, or these traits should be temporary or something. Could be adjusted per difficulty as well.

Hey, Tomb Kings players have gotta have something to give their one LL variety.

2twoto#4000

Hello again: I was busy for a few days so I've not had a chance to hop on and respond until now.

First, in regards to crumbling and the comments made by @tank3487 and @ThibixMagnus, I will clarify that the changes are intended to make crumbling 1) an actual drawback to psuedo-unbreakability and 2) easier to recover from/prevent. Specifically, I think this change would more or less make undead chaff weaker but in exchange make the more elite units stronger: undead chaff/low tier units have abysmal leadership as is, and while the LD buff is significant, such units will still only have 35-40 LD, which is equivalent to a skaven slave (i.e. still abysmal). On the other hand, undead elites (i.e. ethereal units, blood knights, gg, ect.) already tend to have leadership of 40 or higher (with BK having ld of 65), and as such a buff of 5-10 LD will be significant in making them harder to crumble/disintegrate. I think that would be the healthiest change for the undead factions, as it is rarely their elites alone that cause problems but more their chaff. As for the VC specifically, the reason I don't advocate for a buff is because this leadership change would make their elite units more durable and I don't know if/how that will balance out with their chaff/low tier units being weaker, so I'd rather make the change then wait and see if further adjustments are needed.

Second, on traits: I agree with @sandercohen that the more useless traits should be changed and negative traits should be easier to acquire (not quite to game 1's ease of Volkmar, the Grand Theologian, spontaneously deciding he likes chaos after he fights them a couple of times, but some more ease in that department would be good). However, I do wish to also address @mightygloin , @ShiroAmakusa75 , and @kasunrathnatunga whom argue that traits should be more limited. While I can see the idea behind this, as buff-stacking in campaign can get to ludicrous levels (and with each update CA seems to make such buff-stacking even more prevalent), I'd argue that the trait system is not to blame for this: while some LL traits are fairly strong (i.e. Isabella's regeneration), many of them are anywhere from pretty good to severely underwhelming (i.e. Manfred's -50% Vampire attrition trait). These traits are rarely the problem: more often, it is certain units that are already very strong being supercharged by red line skills, LL personal skill lines, or faction bonuses that cause the buff stacking problem (stares and Skyre's workshop, Grom's pot, Wulfrik's +10 MA to mammoths, etc). As such, not only is limiting traits gimping a pretty fun system where defeating the heroes and villians of Warhammer grants a small title and boon, but it also doesn't really help the situation.

As for @mightygloin 's point for LL farming, making the traits temporary would suck: it would be better to just make AI LL's scale as though they and their army were 1 difficulty higher than what the player is playing on (specifically with the in-battle buffs, xp gain, army upkeep, etc) so that it feels like an accomplishment when you defeat them, and/or make it so that the AI won't recruit a LL if they are down to 1 province and being sacked every turn (i.e. the situation needed to farm an LL). That would fix this relatively small problem without detracting from (and perhaps, if the first solution is implemented, even enhancing) the fun of hunting down and defeating LL for traits and glory. These are just alternatives though: the point is that the trait limit should be removed if at all possible, as it's really not fun to be head-hunting and suddenly you can't get anymore traits because you sacked/razed too many cities, where in a province with a growth building for a turn, or some other random situation that gives a trait the LL isn't going to use.