Addressing buffstacking issues in SP... and mount issues in MP....

Mythicveil1415

Note: this is a relatively long post, some people might just want to skim through this


I think we can all agree that buffstacking is a problem, and one that will only get worse with time. So I was thinking that there could be a buffstacking decay modifier. Basically there will be a modifier at the end that is multiplied into the buffstack. Now there are many ways to do this, but the modifier could start only after a couple of buffs have applied, and the exact number could depend on the number of buffs, the effectiveness of each buff, and maybe even the section that the buff is applied to (factionwide, armywide, specific unit) could be taken into consideration

In regard to mounts like Peclis, I personally like them in SP, but some (and in some peoples opinion, all) mounts are definitely unhealthy. So I think that Peclis and Wulfriks Mammoth and other engregious examples should be removed/banned in MP and kept in SP. Some mounts just cant be balanced that well IMO.

What do you guys think about these two issues? Feedback appreciated!

Neodeinos#5871

Nah, those mounts should be removed in the campaign as well since it's not only a balance issue but also something that ruins the uniqueness and identity of a LL.

Mythicveil1415

I would agree with that, but not for Teclis. The problem is that everyone likes (or doesnt like) different mounts, so it will already be hard to draw the line at one thing or another for sp. I dont think that avoiding a mount that you dont want to use is an ideal solution, but a compromise for some mounts has to be reached

Neodeinos#5871

Teclis is one of the worst actually, his whole thing is that Teclis is weak because of his curse and that mount is literally removing his weakness and a part of his identity. He's even a better fighter than Tyrion with that mount, it's bloody absurd.

Nitros14#7973

Buffs just need to not stack. Take the highest of each kind of buff.

Mythicveil1415

Nitros14 said:

Buffs just need to not stack. Take the highest of each kind of buff.

that will render many technologies useless, among other things. Fine in the early game, not so much later on.

UberReptilian#8431

Literally no one has said all mounts are bad, the argument is giving every single LL a mount is bad and also forcing characters to have a mount when it contradicts both lore/TT and their playstyle is bad.

No one has a problem with Kroq-gar having a Carnosaur mount as not only does that make him unique, but it gives him a niche as an LL. What CA are doing wrong is they know melee footlords are terrible atm and so to compensate they give characters mounts. Giving Gor-rok a carnosaur would not only violate his characters lore and playstyle, it would also make him the same as Kroq-gar. Obviously that one hasn’t happened (yet), but the easy example is Lokhir. Originally he was a melee footlord, now he is Malekith without Magic cause of the stupid Dragon. He isn’t unique anymore and removing his mount would force CA to cater his playstyle towards what he should’ve been to begin with.

Giving players more options is great in theory but what this has resulted in is making LLs feel the same. Why bother playing Tyrion when I have a caster LL whose mount makes him stronger than his brother? If the reason is you don’t want to play as a caster just don’t use Teclis’ spells. Limitations are what help define LLs.

Point is removing unloreful character ruining mounts from campaign benefits all players as now they have more variety in LL playstyles. This same principle would apply if we gave Queek Headtaker lore of Plague just because. It’s stupid and unloreful but also makes him the same as Skrolk and more importantly, would mean CA doesn’t have to bother trying to fix terrible footlords like him.

Beast_of_Guanyin#8747

Characters should have the mounts they had on the TT and nothing else. CA needs to fix footlords.

Buff stacking I somewhat agree with, though I'd prefer simple caps.

Nitros14#7973

Mythicveil1415 said:

Nitros14 said:

Buffs just need to not stack. Take the highest of each kind of buff.

that will render many technologies useless, among other things. Fine in the early game, not so much later on.

No, it'll mean you can spec your lords into something other than red line skills, which are frankly overpowered right now.

GloatingSwine#8098

I'm not sure what problem you're trying to solve here?

Why are unit buffs a problem in singleplayer? Identifying and selecting options that will reinforce the unit choices you have made is part of the gameplay, no?

Especially since as the player it's one of your primary tools to counter the economic bonuses the AI gets.

Vanilla_Gorilla said:

Characters should have the mounts they had on the TT and nothing else. CA needs to fix footlords.

Buff stacking I somewhat agree with, though I'd prefer simple caps.

Lords on tabletop are generally expected to be deployed within regiments, since that doesn't happen in TWW there's no argument that they should automatically have the same mount choices. The concept of a lord is actually different in this game.

Theo91#7431

Mythicveil1415 said:

I think we can all agree that buffstacking is a problem, and one that will only get worse with time. So I was thinking that there could be a buffstacking decay modifier. Basically there will be a modifier at the end that is multiplied into the buffstack.

Lol. I think we ALL AGREE that my opinion covers everyone who’s ever played this game (except for the devs of course). Now that we’ve established my opinion is fact, let’s discuss how to change the game to suit my needs.

Theo91#7431

So hopefully people can help me on an issue whilst playing my Grom campaign. I recruited an army but there were some trolls, some orcs and some doom diver artillery in my Grom army.

The game didn’t seem to implode when I didn’t buff stack... should I report it as a bug?

I mean, buff stacking is designed to be a compulsory mechanic? My wurzag army was full of savage orcs but my Grom army didn’t have any goblins in it??

And the most crazy part is I was still enjoying the game?! Please help!

Slayer_Yannir#8069

As for Teclis, I think he was fine before without a bird. So getting rid of that wouldn't be a problem IMO. His new sword can stay though. I think it fits him. Just give Mazda and the other Slann a regular Arcane Conduit in addition to the GAC.

Buffstacking is fine IMO. It's not mandatory on any difficulty and those that get a kick out of it can have a little fun. I can't think of any buffs that really get OP in the long run. I mean if you can put 19 Gunnery Wights or Master Engineers into an army, you're already really far into the campaign and it doesn't really matter if you stack their buffs.

GloatingSwine#8098

Yannir said:

Buffstacking is fine IMO. It's not mandatory on any difficulty and those that get a kick out of it can have a little fun. I can't think of any buffs that really get OP in the long run. I mean if you can put 19 Gunnery Wights or Master Engineers into an army, you're already really far into the campaign and it doesn't really matter if you stack their buffs.

It's also a trap for people who are bad at math.

Each additional engineer you put in has diminishing returns on the additional strength you add to a ranged unit, and at some point (depending on which type of engineer it is) you will get less extra damage from adding a new engineer than you would get from adding another unit to be buffed by your existing engineers.

(NB it is not necessarily easy to math out exactly what that breakpoint is because the reload speed buffs are animation limited, a unit cannot refire faster than its animation speed allows, but the unit statcard will still calculate as if it was, so those comedy 18 engineer ratling guns are not actually doing as much dps as you think. If that were not the case the peak engineer DPS would come at 9 engineers & 10 ranged units)

Rheingold#6691

GloatingSwine said:

Yannir said:

Buffstacking is fine IMO. It's not mandatory on any difficulty and those that get a kick out of it can have a little fun. I can't think of any buffs that really get OP in the long run. I mean if you can put 19 Gunnery Wights or Master Engineers into an army, you're already really far into the campaign and it doesn't really matter if you stack their buffs.

It's also a trap for people who are bad at math.

Each additional engineer you put in has diminishing returns on the additional strength you add to a ranged unit, and at some point (depending on which type of engineer it is) you will get less extra damage from adding a new engineer than you would get from adding another unit to be buffed by your existing engineers.

(NB it is not necessarily easy to math out exactly what that breakpoint is because the reload speed buffs are animation limited, a unit cannot refire faster than its animation speed allows, but the unit statcard will still calculate as if it was, so those comedy 18 engineer ratling guns are not actually doing as much dps as you think. If that were not the case the peak engineer DPS would come at 9 engineers & 10 ranged units)

Yup, definitely there are caps on damage modifiers. Particularly reload speed. Not an issue with one dwarf/Skaven engineer but I've seen armies on YouTube with 6 engineers
And while the unit card numbers are really impressive from movement speed to damage, it doesn't seem to play out in game. Obviously there is serious damage and speed buffs but not what you would expect looking at the info. Definitely something going on under the hood. Personally 1 engineer (2 late, late game) in an army seems about right.

Mythicveil1415

I would say that some buff stacking is a problem, but I do have fun making doom stacks and stuff. Like for example HE economy cheese which makes the hero produce way more income than its upkeep which doesn't seem right. Maybe I was exaggerating when I said everyone agrees buffstacking is a problem but some instances still stand out to me.

Theo91#7431

Mythicveil1415 said:

but I do have fun making doom stacks and stuff

This for me is the issue. Fun is subjective, and in this case you admit that you enjoy (at least on occasions) buff stacking. Now it’s not for me to tell you how to play the game and what to enjoy but likewise it’s not for you to tell others how to play.

Some people enjoy buff stacking and others don’t. But for those who don’t, just don’t buff stack your lord. It’s really that simple

mightygloin#2446

Theo91 said:

Mythicveil1415 said:

but I do have fun making doom stacks and stuff

Some people enjoy buff stacking and others don’t. But for those who don’t, just don’t buff stack your lord. It’s really that simple

Sure then get wrecked by heavily buffstacked enemy armies. Totally simple.

RomeoReject#1666

Buff-stacking:


If you choose to buff stack, you've made a tacit agreement to break the game. I've never "accidentally" found myself doubling unit stats or anything, just leave it as it is.

Mounts: I don't think anyone minds the loreful mounts. It's the unloreful ones that are painful to look at, and everyone is familiar with the big three: Wulfrik, Lokhir and Teclis. It's not just a multiplayer concern (I've quite literally never played a multiplayer match, and I still want those mounts eliminated), it's innately stupid when you fight those Lords in campaign and see Wulfrik - a man charged by the gods to challenge every worthy opponent to a duel - hanging out on the back of a mammoth while the wooly boy does all his fighting for him.

Theo91#7431

mightygloin said:

Theo91 said:

Mythicveil1415 said:

but I do have fun making doom stacks and stuff

Some people enjoy buff stacking and others don’t. But for those who don’t, just don’t buff stack your lord. It’s really that simple

Sure then get wrecked by heavily buffstacked enemy armies. Totally simple.

Haha are we really gonna use the argument that the enemy efficiently points their armies??

Have you never confederated a lord where the points are seemingly totally random. Or when you confed a lord who’s buffing goblins but doesn’t have a single goblin in their army

Theo91#7431

mightygloin said:

Theo91 said:

Mythicveil1415 said:

but I do have fun making doom stacks and stuff

Some people enjoy buff stacking and others don’t. But for those who don’t, just don’t buff stack your lord. It’s really that simple

Sure then get wrecked by heavily buffstacked enemy armies. Totally simple.

Also are you really getting wrecked by the ai? I mean seriously, I don’t think anyone who plays the game enough to post on these forums is getting wrecked by the ai... and if they are, then they have bigger issues than buffstacking

Rheingold#6691

Theo91 said:

mightygloin said:

Theo91 said:

Mythicveil1415 said:

but I do have fun making doom stacks and stuff

Some people enjoy buff stacking and others don’t. But for those who don’t, just don’t buff stack your lord. It’s really that simple

Sure then get wrecked by heavily buffstacked enemy armies. Totally simple.

Also are you really getting wrecked by the ai? I mean seriously, I don’t think anyone who plays the game enough to post on these forums is getting wrecked by the ai... and if they are, then they have bigger issues than buffstacking

Some ai factions are tough. Skaven take a while to get decent stacks but once they do... Wood elves are always a pain. And late high elf doomstacks can be a problem. Empire armies with 6 hellstorm rockets and 5 tanks are also a pain.
Believe it or not there are some units that are so powerful they don't need the ai to have any micro skills. Sisters, waywatchers, death globadiers, hellstorm rockets can be a pain. In particular if you try have balanced armies.

Theo91#7431

Rheingold said:

Theo91 said:

mightygloin said:

Theo91 said:

Mythicveil1415 said:

but I do have fun making doom stacks and stuff

Some people enjoy buff stacking and others don’t. But for those who don’t, just don’t buff stack your lord. It’s really that simple

Sure then get wrecked by heavily buffstacked enemy armies. Totally simple.

Also are you really getting wrecked by the ai? I mean seriously, I don’t think anyone who plays the game enough to post on these forums is getting wrecked by the ai... and if they are, then they have bigger issues than buffstacking

Some ai factions are tough. Skaven take a while to get decent stacks but once they do... Wood elves are always a pain. And late high elf doomstacks can be a problem. Empire armies with 6 hellstorm rockets and 5 tanks are also a pain.
Believe it or not there are some units that are so powerful they don't need the ai to have any micro skills. Sisters, waywatchers, death globadiers, hellstorm rockets can be a pain. In particular if you try have balanced armies.

Balanced armies are usually fine to take these out. But that’s a separate issue anyway, you’re saying elite units are tough to beat. The ai is hardly abusing buffstacking mid tier units elite.

A star dragon is a strong unit either way, the ai definitely isn’t buffstacking those

mightygloin#2446

Theo91 said:

mightygloin said:

Theo91 said:

Mythicveil1415 said:

but I do have fun making doom stacks and stuff

Some people enjoy buff stacking and others don’t. But for those who don’t, just don’t buff stack your lord. It’s really that simple

Sure then get wrecked by heavily buffstacked enemy armies. Totally simple.

Also are you really getting wrecked by the ai? I mean seriously, I don’t think anyone who plays the game enough to post on these forums is getting wrecked by the ai... and if they are, then they have bigger issues than buffstacking

No but melee troops are already having a hard time with buffs unless you have insane replenishment like WH2 elves. Without buffs to them you just gotta go LoTW style and spam ranged or SEM.

And then there's lords issue who also become literally army soloing immortals in battles after a while after accumulating tons of stuff even if you don't skill them into combat.

Theo91#7431

mightygloin said:

Theo91 said:

mightygloin said:

Theo91 said:

Mythicveil1415 said:

but I do have fun making doom stacks and stuff

Some people enjoy buff stacking and others don’t. But for those who don’t, just don’t buff stack your lord. It’s really that simple

Sure then get wrecked by heavily buffstacked enemy armies. Totally simple.

Also are you really getting wrecked by the ai? I mean seriously, I don’t think anyone who plays the game enough to post on these forums is getting wrecked by the ai... and if they are, then they have bigger issues than buffstacking

No but melee troops are already having a hard time with buffs unless you have insane replenishment like WH2 elves. Without buffs to them you just gotta go LoTW style and spam ranged or SEM.

And then there's lords issue who also become literally army soloing immortals in battles after a while after accumulating tons of stuff even if you don't skill them into combat.

So im confused, are you saying the buffstacking is helpful to defeat the enemy because of the buffs the ai gets or are you saying buffstacking is a terrible cheat and needs to be removed from the game?

I'm saying this thread is stupid and buffstacking is a complete non-issue.

Likewise, uber lords having tons of traits has nothing to do with buffstacking so isn't relevant to this but my opinion on that too is that it's fine as is. i've never found my lords to be OP unless i've gone out of my way to make them that way which is a process i often enjoy

TheShiroOfDalton

As always, the argument of "don't like it don't use it" is toted around and also as always, it's 100% invalid and self-defeating.

One, if you can't find reasons for how anything actually enhances gameplay, don't bother defending it. If the best you can say about anything is that you can ignore it, it's not worth keeping it around.

Two, since you apparently are not making use of it, it getting toned down won't affect you anyway, so you have no reasons to object to such measures in the first place.

Third, making the argument that people should force themselves to ignore part of the mechanics of a game so they can enjoy it is completely backwards. A videogame is not a souflee, so suggesting people carefully tiptoe around it lest it deflates is honestly one of the most tone-deaf things to do. Sorry, but it's on the devs to not design their game in a way that just going for the obviously best options renders the game trivial.

If I want to practice restraint, I join a monastic order, I for sure won't hold back when playing videogames so don't bother trying to make me feel bad about it.

GloatingSwine#8098

ShiroAmakusa75 said:

If I want to practice restraint, I join a monastic order, I for sure won't hold back when playing videogames so don't bother trying to make me feel bad about it.

Yeah, the AI doesn't have feelings.

Theo91#7431

ShiroAmakusa75 said:

As always, the argument of "don't like it don't use it" is toted around and also as always, it's 100% invalid and self-defeating.

One, if you can't find reasons for how anything actually enhances gameplay, don't bother defending it. If the best you can say about anything is that you can ignore it, it's not worth keeping it around.

Two, since you apparently are not making use of it, it getting toned down won't affect you anyway, so you have no reasons to object to such measures in the first place.

Third, making the argument that people should force themselves to ignore part of the mechanics of a game so they can enjoy it is completely backwards. A videogame is not a souflee, so suggesting people carefully tiptoe around it lest it deflates is honestly one of the most tone-deaf things to do. Sorry, but it's on the devs to not design their game in a way that just going for the obviously best options renders the game trivial.

If I want to practice restraint, I join a monastic order, I for sure won't hold back when playing videogames so don't bother trying to make me feel bad about it.

Some people like buffstacking and some people don’t.

Option 1: take it out the game - people who enjoy that part of the gameplay lose out

Option 2: leave it in the game - people who don’t like it show some self control

It seems like a no brainer to me - please don’t reply with the bs that not buffstacking is equivalent to living a celibate life as a monk in the mountains

XxXScorpionXxX#2310

Mythicveil1415 said:

Note: this is a relatively long post, some people might just want to skim through this


I think we can all agree that buffstacking is a problem, and one that will only get worse with time. So I was thinking that there could be a buffstacking decay modifier. Basically there will be a modifier at the end that is multiplied into the buffstack. Now there are many ways to do this, but the modifier could start only after a couple of buffs have applied, and the exact number could depend on the number of buffs, the effectiveness of each buff, and maybe even the section that the buff is applied to (factionwide, armywide, specific unit) could be taken into consideration

In regard to mounts like Peclis, I personally like them in SP, but some (and in some peoples opinion, all) mounts are definitely unhealthy. So I think that Peclis and Wulfriks Mammoth and other engregious examples should be removed/banned in MP and kept in SP. Some mounts just cant be balanced that well IMO.

What do you guys think about these two issues? Feedback appreciated!

Even in SP I don't like Peclis. I mean you're playing his faction and want to have a power fantasy trip fine enough. But most of the time you wont be playing the loremasters and he's really annoying to deal with in battle MP or not. That he outshines his brother in melee combat in both is also problematic. It ultimately just comes down to the fact that he was already really good and didn't need the parrot, his sword item doesn't even make sense anymore.

As for Wulfric on a Mammoth thats a little more tricky because Norsca is starved for Lord choices, on the one hand it makes the Chieftain lord more viable on the other taking that away from Wulfric would really hurts the faction competitively. We don't even have a Caster Lord and Throgg gets terror routed for some reason.

They need to fix foot lords over all and I liked the idea people had of combining them with an infantry unit like you would a mount. Give them the HP buffer they desperately need to compete with mount HP boost, and stops them from being surrounded in combat which tanks the leadership.

I'm fine with taking the Mammoth away from Wulfric but he needs to keep his horse mount and needs options on foot to be in a unit of Champions or Berserkers. Also need more lord options like a Fimir Matriarch.

Rheingold#6691

Theo91 said:

Rheingold said:

Theo91 said:

mightygloin said:

Theo91 said:

Mythicveil1415 said:

but I do have fun making doom stacks and stuff

Some people enjoy buff stacking and others don’t. But for those who don’t, just don’t buff stack your lord. It’s really that simple

Sure then get wrecked by heavily buffstacked enemy armies. Totally simple.

Also are you really getting wrecked by the ai? I mean seriously, I don’t think anyone who plays the game enough to post on these forums is getting wrecked by the ai... and if they are, then they have bigger issues than buffstacking

Some ai factions are tough. Skaven take a while to get decent stacks but once they do... Wood elves are always a pain. And late high elf doomstacks can be a problem. Empire armies with 6 hellstorm rockets and 5 tanks are also a pain.
Believe it or not there are some units that are so powerful they don't need the ai to have any micro skills. Sisters, waywatchers, death globadiers, hellstorm rockets can be a pain. In particular if you try have balanced armies.

Balanced armies are usually fine to take these out. But that’s a separate issue anyway, you’re saying elite units are tough to beat. The ai is hardly abusing buffstacking mid tier units elite.

A star dragon is a strong unit either way, the ai definitely isn’t buffstacking those

Sure, the real problem is the ai doomstacking. And the crazy unloreful mounts.
Just saying that late game is a real grind and using buffstacking and doomstacking makes it bearable.
Though I will say, the game was more balanced when lords could only get to level 30. And had to use points to get all the mounts before getting the ultimate mount. Had to be more picky about which points to get.

I am trying a unit cap mod at the moment, haven't got far in Groms campaign - the chaos invasion has just arrived, but so far it's fantastic- it's literally a different game. Far more fun and varied armies.

Theo91#7431

Rheingold said:

Theo91 said:

Rheingold said:

Theo91 said:

mightygloin said:

Theo91 said:

Mythicveil1415 said:

but I do have fun making doom stacks and stuff

Some people enjoy buff stacking and others don’t. But for those who don’t, just don’t buff stack your lord. It’s really that simple

Sure then get wrecked by heavily buffstacked enemy armies. Totally simple.

Also are you really getting wrecked by the ai? I mean seriously, I don’t think anyone who plays the game enough to post on these forums is getting wrecked by the ai... and if they are, then they have bigger issues than buffstacking

Some ai factions are tough. Skaven take a while to get decent stacks but once they do... Wood elves are always a pain. And late high elf doomstacks can be a problem. Empire armies with 6 hellstorm rockets and 5 tanks are also a pain.
Believe it or not there are some units that are so powerful they don't need the ai to have any micro skills. Sisters, waywatchers, death globadiers, hellstorm rockets can be a pain. In particular if you try have balanced armies.

Balanced armies are usually fine to take these out. But that’s a separate issue anyway, you’re saying elite units are tough to beat. The ai is hardly abusing buffstacking mid tier units elite.

A star dragon is a strong unit either way, the ai definitely isn’t buffstacking those

Sure, the real problem is the ai doomstacking. And the crazy unloreful mounts.
Just saying that late game is a real grind and using buffstacking and doomstacking makes it bearable.
Though I will say, the game was more balanced when lords could only get to level 30. And had to use points to get all the mounts before getting the ultimate mount. Had to be more picky about which points to get.

I am trying a unit cap mod at the moment, haven't got far in Groms campaign - the chaos invasion has just arrived, but so far it's fantastic- it's literally a different game. Far more fun and varied armies.

Unit caps and more loreful builds is a different story altogether and I would prefer it as a tick box options.

Note how I say as a tick box option... because although I prefer unit caps, I’m aware some people don’t and it’s very easy to have the best of both worlds.