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

Shadow Walkers

BastileanBastilean Registered Users Posts: 735
Increase their model count to 60. Decrease their ammo count to 12.

20 * 45 = 900 ammo

12 * 60 = 720 ammo (drop of 180 shots)

Justification is that they cost 1100g and are supposed to be strong melee combatants, they have less ammo and range than WW, they have low armor and they are not AP. Poison is only valued at 100g as shown by other poison archer picks.

They are never going to impress in melee at 45 models, which is the unit size of elite cavalry skirmishers that cost far less. Also, at 900g Shadow Warriors out shoot and out melee the higher price tag Shadow Walkers.

Lothern Sea Guard are 68 models for example and cost much less.

Alternatively Shadow Walkers could stay at 45 models and reduce their price tag from 1100 to 900 which is 225g more than what a 45 model unit of Shadow Warriors would cost. This price might still be over priced.

900 (SWarriors) * 45/60 = 675g

«1

Comments

  • littlenukelittlenuke Registered Users Posts: 406
    edited October 17
    They are actually really good units, especially against skaven XD

    The only problem is they are subfaction only.
    Karaz-A-Karak discord: https://discord.gg/UZV6F5N
  • hanenhanen Registered Users Posts: 436
    Are you only looking at pure stats or have you actually tried them out in a skirmish duel vs shadow warriors?
  • Loupi_Loupi_ Registered Users Posts: 2,071
    All they need is +2AP on their missiles and to be added to main faction. Its a strong unit but needs a little more versatility vs armour to be worth the price.
  • Green0Green0 Registered Users Posts: 7,095
    slap them with a -50g and keep them in subfaction.
  • ShiroAmakusa75ShiroAmakusa75 Senior Member Registered Users Posts: 26,370
    I see no reason to give any ranged units any buffs, especially not elven ones. Ranged gameplay is already way too oppressive in the current meta.

  • Loupi_Loupi_ Registered Users Posts: 2,071

    I see no reason to give any ranged units any buffs, especially not elven ones. Ranged gameplay is already way too oppressive in the current meta.

    why especially not elven ones?
  • ShiroAmakusa75ShiroAmakusa75 Senior Member Registered Users Posts: 26,370
    Loupi_ said:

    I see no reason to give any ranged units any buffs, especially not elven ones. Ranged gameplay is already way too oppressive in the current meta.

    why especially not elven ones?
    Elves can already lay down an endless stream of projectiles on their opponents. I don't see why a hail of poison-AP should be added to the package.

    Are there even other poison projectiles with increased AP ratios?

    And I'm in general for toning down all ranged units in this game, not just Elves, but Elves are one of the worst offenders in this regard, together with VCoast and Skaven.

  • Green0Green0 Registered Users Posts: 7,095
    Loupi_ said:

    I see no reason to give any ranged units any buffs, especially not elven ones. Ranged gameplay is already way too oppressive in the current meta.

    why especially not elven ones?
    he watches Legend of Total War campaign playthroughs, I recently watched a few videos by him too, fairly sure he gets all of his info there. In campaign HE are the strongest race in the game because there is no money limit so you can spam stacks of like 15 sisters of Avelorn and block with 5 characters and dumb AI dies to that cuz they blob around the characters. Understandably after witnessing that one could conclude HE are OP.

    (you can do analogous with Waywatchers by WE and Darkshards/Shades from DE I imagine).
  • Lotus_MoonLotus_Moon Registered Users Posts: 9,708
    Add to main faction as an ROR and leave it be.
  • Odysseus95Odysseus95 Registered Users Posts: 179
    edited October 18
    There need to be more sub-faction unique units, not fewer. Gives people a reason to actually pick sub-factions.
  • Lotus_MoonLotus_Moon Registered Users Posts: 9,708
    edited October 18

    There need to be more sub-faction unique units, not fewer. Gives people a reason to actually pick sub-factions.

    why? subfactions should be removed form MP and instead add army painter and banner design, they are a total waste of space and only good thing about them is colour schemes.

    They also telegraph what you might want to do with your faciton and which lords you will not use.

    Im ok with specific lords allowing use of special units but that should be unlocked via main faciton, say you pick AA as your lord pick you get to use Shadow Walkers
  • Xerxes52Xerxes52 Registered Users Posts: 369
    I'd just shift two points of damage from their base missile damage to AP missile damage. Other than that their stats are quite good imo.

    Also, their unit name should be changed from "Shadow-walkers" to "Shadow Walkers".
  • BjornNorlinderBjornNorlinder Registered Users Posts: 370
    they got 43 more accuracy + a whole lot of better stats / utility like poison than shadow warriors. They also got +12 bvi which makes a big difference in late game scenarios vs races like skaven.
  • ystyst Registered Users Posts: 7,869
    edited October 18
    Pointless, faction without op teclics and allarial, lol why bother

    Thats not even the worst aspect, choosing this sub alone ia s hugee imma gonna pick shadow walker or distracting so i can pick weak lords
    https://imgur.com/a/Cj4b9
    Top #3 Leaderboard on Warhammer Totalwar.
  • ShiroAmakusa75ShiroAmakusa75 Senior Member Registered Users Posts: 26,370
    I actually have LegendofTotalWar's channel blocked on YT because I can't stand him. Saying I take my info from there is just another lame attempt to poison the well.

    Ranged troops in WH2 right now are overpowered, they're one of the unholy triad of monsters, magic and missiles.


    They need all to be nerfed and Elves are on top of the pile.

  • Loupi_Loupi_ Registered Users Posts: 2,071

    I actually have LegendofTotalWar's channel blocked on YT because I can't stand him. Saying I take my info from there is just another lame attempt to poison the well.

    Ranged troops in WH2 right now are overpowered, they're one of the unholy triad of monsters, magic and missiles.


    They need all to be nerfed and Elves are on top of the pile.

    Top of the pile right under coast, dwarfs and skaven.
  • Loupi_Loupi_ Registered Users Posts: 2,071

    Loupi_ said:

    I see no reason to give any ranged units any buffs, especially not elven ones. Ranged gameplay is already way too oppressive in the current meta.

    why especially not elven ones?
    Are there even other poison projectiles with increased AP ratios?

    Well gutter runners do more poison AP per volley than SW, not to mention any skaven missile unit can have poison whenever they want.
  • PocmanPocman Registered Users Posts: 3,153
    hanen said:

    Are you only looking at pure stats or have you actually tried them out in a skirmish duel vs shadow warriors?

    I have tried them in melee Vs wardancers. Shadow warriors rank 9 are substantially better
  • ystyst Registered Users Posts: 7,869
    They r far more accurate than waywatchers. Thereby shadow warriors r not even qualify to compete with them in range, its a completely dif league.

    Purely on a range viewpoint, if shadow wars is $850 on range, these guys r bare min $925 or even more just on that alone, thats without linking poison. Say u add in poison, u get a bundle of $1000. Gutters poison r +$100 variant. If u wanna go that route assuming their range is equal ure already talking $950.

    So thats the $1000. Now, the other $100



    Once again u see them outperforming shadow warriors.
    They r infact a full upgrade of shadow warriors in both missile and melee.

    Nowthats not saying they r perfect, u did pay $250 more for these premiums and by right should get them, still as the costs goes up, the risks become higher.

    Its still pretty reasonable to call for a -$50 cut

    But really, end of the day this is a serious waste of balance resources as their
    MAIN PROBLEM IS BEING A SUBFACTION ONLY.

    Till thats fix, these guys will remain at 0 pick rate, 3 years on, i only seen them like twice in the game
    https://imgur.com/a/Cj4b9
    Top #3 Leaderboard on Warhammer Totalwar.
  • Loupi_Loupi_ Registered Users Posts: 2,071
    yst said:

    They r far more accurate than waywatchers. Thereby shadow warriors r not even qualify to compete with them in range, its a completely dif league.

    Purely on a range viewpoint, if shadow wars is $850 on range, these guys r bare min $925 or even more just on that alone, thats without linking poison. Say u add in poison, u get a bundle of $1000. Gutters poison r +$100 variant. If u wanna go that route assuming their range is equal ure already talking $950.

    So thats the $1000. Now, the other $100



    Once again u see them outperforming shadow warriors.
    They r infact a full upgrade of shadow warriors in both missile and melee.

    Nowthats not saying they r perfect, u did pay $250 more for these premiums and by right should get them, still as the costs goes up, the risks become higher.

    Its still pretty reasonable to call for a -$50 cut

    But really, end of the day this is a serious waste of balance resources as their
    MAIN PROBLEM IS BEING A SUBFACTION ONLY.

    Till thats fix, these guys will remain at 0 pick rate, 3 years on, i only seen them like twice in the game

    yeah they are much better than shadow warriors, but shadow warriors themselves pay for melee stats, so I would warriors are basically deepwood scouts+150g worth of melee (including prowess). So shadowalkers are more like 800g if you consider only range, then +300-350 in melee.

    I wouldnt make them better in melee, just a little more AP on missiles, and either add them to main faction or make the Grey a shadow walker ROR.
  • PocmanPocman Registered Users Posts: 3,153
    Loupi_ said:

    yst said:

    They r far more accurate than waywatchers. Thereby shadow warriors r not even qualify to compete with them in range, its a completely dif league.

    Purely on a range viewpoint, if shadow wars is $850 on range, these guys r bare min $925 or even more just on that alone, thats without linking poison. Say u add in poison, u get a bundle of $1000. Gutters poison r +$100 variant. If u wanna go that route assuming their range is equal ure already talking $950.

    So thats the $1000. Now, the other $100



    Once again u see them outperforming shadow warriors.
    They r infact a full upgrade of shadow warriors in both missile and melee.

    Nowthats not saying they r perfect, u did pay $250 more for these premiums and by right should get them, still as the costs goes up, the risks become higher.

    Its still pretty reasonable to call for a -$50 cut

    But really, end of the day this is a serious waste of balance resources as their
    MAIN PROBLEM IS BEING A SUBFACTION ONLY.

    Till thats fix, these guys will remain at 0 pick rate, 3 years on, i only seen them like twice in the game

    yeah they are much better than shadow warriors, but shadow warriors themselves pay for melee stats, so I would warriors are basically deepwood scouts+150g worth of melee (including prowess). So shadowalkers are more like 800g if you consider only range, then +300-350 in melee.

    I wouldnt make them better in melee, just a little more AP on missiles, and either add them to main faction or make the Grey a shadow walker ROR.
    yst said:

    They r far more accurate than waywatchers. Thereby shadow warriors r not even qualify to compete with them in range, its a completely dif league.

    Purely on a range viewpoint, if shadow wars is $850 on range, these guys r bare min $925 or even more just on that alone, thats without linking poison. Say u add in poison, u get a bundle of $1000. Gutters poison r +$100 variant. If u wanna go that route assuming their range is equal ure already talking $950.

    So thats the $1000. Now, the other $100



    Once again u see them outperforming shadow warriors.
    They r infact a full upgrade of shadow warriors in both missile and melee.

    Nowthats not saying they r perfect, u did pay $250 more for these premiums and by right should get them, still as the costs goes up, the risks become higher.

    Its still pretty reasonable to call for a -$50 cut

    But really, end of the day this is a serious waste of balance resources as their
    MAIN PROBLEM IS BEING A SUBFACTION ONLY.

    Till thats fix, these guys will remain at 0 pick rate, 3 years on, i only seen them like twice in the game

    100 (which in fact are 150 extra gold) to get a super minor performance increase only against infantry (so minor that they still aren't able to win against Bretonnian infantry) while also being less durable against range, and against anything large...

    What were you testing them against?
  • DaBoyzAreBackInTownDaBoyzAreBackInTown Registered Users Posts: 198
    Subfactions are good for the game and they should remain subfaction only. It allows devs to give different unique tools to different factions at the cost of certain legendary lord choices without every faction becoming copies of one another with different skins.

    Nagarythe is a very strong subfaction pick, you can take 9 different horse/eagle/dragon caster lords, 2 different ranged lords (one who functions as skirmishing artillery), a melee monster lord. Don't see any plausible argument that their lord restrictions at all impact the ability to use that subfaction.

    Clan Angrund is the same, only issue is 3 lord choices, two of which are basically the same (lord/Belegar), and the Runelord is overpriced at base. Once Belegar gets a better kit and the Runelord gets either a cost decrease or rework, they will be solid.

    Ditto for all the others, if the issue is the subfaction isn't getting enough play then just buff whatever their unique units are in order to make them a better pick. Or nerf overperforming lords in the main faction that make them a must pick .

  • SarmatiannsSarmatianns Registered Users Posts: 4,141
    I think I remembered testing them vs Empire Halberds in melee. Walkers barely dropped a model before routing halberdiers (I think it was 0-3 models dropped).

    But, again, the problem is that infantry (especially unarmoured infantry) is usually least concern. You have breaths, magic, cav, chariots, archers, seaguard... all of which deal with unarmoured infantry much more effectively, usually without suffering much in return.

    So, while Shadow Walkers are actually VERY good vs unarmoured infantry, both in ranged and in melee, that's usually irrelevant in a battle.
  • ystyst Registered Users Posts: 7,869
    Pocman said:

    What were you testing them against?

    Pilgrims.

    Thats a very solid performance vs a frenzy $600s
    https://imgur.com/a/Cj4b9
    Top #3 Leaderboard on Warhammer Totalwar.
  • PocmanPocman Registered Users Posts: 3,153
    Okay, i decided to test the Grey (left/near) shadow warriors (middle) and shadow walkers (right/far) for the fun of it.

    Against VC Wolves:

    image

    Norscan Wolves

    image

    Savage Orcs
    image

    Bretonnian Pilgrims
    image

    Empire spearmen (shields)

    image

    Rank 9 Empire spearmen (shields)

    image


    Silverin Guards

    image

    The only fights were Shadow Walkers did better than the Gray were those they received no charge damage, like against spears. The moment they fight something with a little bit of CB that charges back they are useless. They do have the advantage of killing more models, though.

    As a general rule, even with poison (i took precautions ot ensure that the poison didn't affect any unit but the one the shadow walkers were fighting) they don't really perform much better in melee than the Grey. Who, I have just realized, perform worse than Rank 9 shadow warriors (will make a post about this).


    Then i tested them for their ranged capabilities:

    I did various tests:

    - How fast they could, while controlled by the AI, beat a unit of basic HE archers that do not fire back, with the ranking being Rank 9 shadow warriors > shadow walkers > standard shadow warriors (with basically shadow warriors and shadow walkers dealing hte same damage per volley, but shadow warriors rank 9 firing slightly faster) while standard shadow warriors sometimes needing an extra volley).

    - Automatized duel vs the RoR HE light armour archers (Tor Kaleda).

    The result was Rank 9 shadow warriors>> Shadow walkers> shadow warriors

    - Firing at Gors at long range and short range

    In the first case, there was a significant advantage for Shadow Walkers (550 to 700 damage per volley), while shadow warrirors R9 did a bit better than shadow warriors. In the second case, the difference was smaller, with shadow walkers still dealing about 700 per volley, but the warriors got to the 600s.

    - Firing at a Giant at long range

    Shadow walkers did about 770, shadow warriors rank 9 about 720, shadow warriors about 600 (per volley).

    So, after testing them, I still think they are not worth it. The extra accuracy is nice at long range, but not that relevant. The extra melee stats are at best situational.

    They barely justify ringing them over shadow warriors rank 9, if at all.
  • SarmatiannsSarmatianns Registered Users Posts: 4,141
    Well, even if they're just as good in 1v1 as rank 9 Warriors, poison gives them a huge advantage, because of possibility of shooting on engaged units, and being involved in more than just 1v1 melee engagements.

    Then there's the addition of dropping models slower, thus giving more time to save and also keeping their potential damage output for longer.
  • BastileanBastilean Registered Users Posts: 735
    edited October 20

    Well, even if they're just as good in 1v1 as rank 9 Warriors, poison gives them a huge advantage, because of possibility of shooting on engaged units, and being involved in more than just 1v1 melee engagements.

    Then there's the addition of dropping models slower, thus giving more time to save and also keeping their potential damage output for longer.

    I think he said they shoot about as good, but they don't trade as good. They have 45 models and the same health per model as a shadow warriors 60 models.

    I suppose your saying they can change targets just to bring about the debuff on multiple combatants. Their range certainly is premium for that.
    Post edited by Bastilean on
  • DaBoyzAreBackInTownDaBoyzAreBackInTown Registered Users Posts: 198
    Pocman said:

    Okay, i decided to test the Grey (left/near) shadow warriors (middle) and shadow walkers (right/far) for the fun of it.

    Against VC Wolves:

    image

    Norscan Wolves

    image

    Savage Orcs
    image

    Bretonnian Pilgrims
    image

    Empire spearmen (shields)

    image

    Rank 9 Empire spearmen (shields)

    image


    Silverin Guards

    image

    The only fights were Shadow Walkers did better than the Gray were those they received no charge damage, like against spears. The moment they fight something with a little bit of CB that charges back they are useless. They do have the advantage of killing more models, though.

    As a general rule, even with poison (i took precautions ot ensure that the poison didn't affect any unit but the one the shadow walkers were fighting) they don't really perform much better in melee than the Grey. Who, I have just realized, perform worse than Rank 9 shadow warriors (will make a post about this).


    Then i tested them for their ranged capabilities:

    I did various tests:

    - How fast they could, while controlled by the AI, beat a unit of basic HE archers that do not fire back, with the ranking being Rank 9 shadow warriors > shadow walkers > standard shadow warriors (with basically shadow warriors and shadow walkers dealing hte same damage per volley, but shadow warriors rank 9 firing slightly faster) while standard shadow warriors sometimes needing an extra volley).

    - Automatized duel vs the RoR HE light armour archers (Tor Kaleda).

    The result was Rank 9 shadow warriors>> Shadow walkers> shadow warriors

    - Firing at Gors at long range and short range

    In the first case, there was a significant advantage for Shadow Walkers (550 to 700 damage per volley), while shadow warrirors R9 did a bit better than shadow warriors. In the second case, the difference was smaller, with shadow walkers still dealing about 700 per volley, but the warriors got to the 600s.

    - Firing at a Giant at long range

    Shadow walkers did about 770, shadow warriors rank 9 about 720, shadow warriors about 600 (per volley).

    So, after testing them, I still think they are not worth it. The extra accuracy is nice at long range, but not that relevant. The extra melee stats are at best situational.

    They barely justify ringing them over shadow warriors rank 9, if at all.

    Only poison on High Elf roster, can be provided at 180 range, extremely accurate, only need 1 model alive to get this benefit. Poison in SEM/Cav/Infantry battles is a big deal, having access to it provides significant benefits beyond what is showing here from 1v1.

    Also try these tests:

    - Moon Dragon fighting a black dragon with a rank 9 Shadow Warrior shooting into the combat and a Shadow-Walker shooting into the combat
    - Dragon Princes charging a Chaos Knight (Lances) with a rank 9 shadow warrior shooting into the combat and a Shadow-Walker shooting into the combat
    - White Lions fighting a Black Orc with a rank 9 shadow warrior shooting into the combat and a Shadow-Walker shooting into the combat

    Etc. Poison is the whole point of the unit.

    At the absolute most they could use a small cost decrease (25-50).

  • Lotus_MoonLotus_Moon Registered Users Posts: 9,708
    If 1 could be taken as a ROR in main faction it would be very strong.
  • BastileanBastilean Registered Users Posts: 735
    edited October 21
    Why make it ROR? It wouldn't necessarily be better to have two. One is all you really need to debuff the main enemy targets.
Sign In or Register to comment.