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

Factionwide Caps vs Army Caps

Bereaver#4201Bereaver#4201 Registered Users Posts: 967
edited April 2 in General Discussion
This is always a hot topic across Total War: Warhammer boards, and I want to discuss it again with my own bias of course =)

Having played a lot of Tomb Kings campaigns and SFO campaigns I've grown warm to the idea of factionwide caps, and I think that it is a nice mechanic to be implemented in some way across the whole game.

Many people argue for implementation of Army Caps, because that's how it was in Tabletop Warhammer Fantasy, and these people feel that there should never be conditions for something like 19 Steam Tanks/Dragon Ogre Shaggoths/Star Dragons/etc in one army.

Most suggested idea is that army should be capped by some arbitrary points and a system where you always have to take LL+ some heroes+core+special units.

I do understand why it was great for TT, why it is partially used in Multiplayer already with its heavy restrictions on SEM and other unit types. It provides balance for each player in the individual competitive battle.

But I certainly do not agree that is even remotely good idea to implement it for every race in the game on campaign map, where you intentionally make your positions stronger in one place, while leaving one place less defended, you know, doing strategical decisions.

I mean, for example I'm playing Imrik and have 20 Dragons available through buildings increasing unit caps, why on Earth Imrik would forbid himself to use them all in one glorious Dragon Host (it is even described to be purpose of Imrik in lore)?

Why would not Throt's army really use a terrifying all Moulder-monster stack? Why would not Ikit use his usual Ratling Guns+Jezzail sheningans? Same with other races spamming their elites, really, there is no reason they should not be able to use them all in one army.

I'm all for making some units more rare to acquire, but I'm a firm believer that the Player (or AI for that matter) should be the one to decide how to use these rare units - spread them across all of his armies to make all of his armies stronger, or use them in one mighty fist to crush the opposition and leaving other of it's armies less than ideal in return.

I like Troy's idea of resources making higher tier units harder to acquire with different resources needed to recruit them. I'd also like to see more local recruited units. For example, I find it is too easy right now that you can increase amounts of elite units you can have with each tier 5 province for TK, it quickly leads to switching your skeletons out with tons of constructs.

Maybe factionwide unit caps should be bound on some other factors, like for example Casket of Souls for Tomb Kings or Queen Bess for Vampire Coast. I generally like to see different methods of recruiting new units.

I'd love to hear your opinions and suggestions!
Post edited by Grom_the_Paunch#8146 on
«13

Comments

  • Steph_F_DavidSteph_F_David Junior Member Registered Users Posts: 3,425
    In my mod, SWO-RD, I have both.

    - Army caps based on TTC, with a twist: the limit of special/rare units is based on the rank of the lord. Lord rank 1 cannot get a Star Dragon, only Moon, and a Lord Rank 40 could have 3 Star Dragons.

    - Factionwide cap for every unit, based on the settlements and building you have. Combined with a regional recruitment for provincial units. If you have the 4 regions in Reikland maxed, and only one region in Middenland, you can recruit much more Empire troops with Reikland heraldry than troops with Middenland heraldry.

    This also applies to some "unique" unit, mostly for HE. Each hunter building give a small contribution to the White Lions cap. But the landmark in Chrace gives a much larger bonus: so you can recruit White Lions, but with a small cap, unless you control Chrace, the cap is significantly higher then.
  • Bereaver#4201Bereaver#4201 Registered Users Posts: 967

    In my mod, SWO-RD, I have both.

    - Army caps based on TTC, with a twist: the limit of special/rare units is based on the rank of the lord. Lord rank 1 cannot get a Star Dragon, only Moon, and a Lord Rank 40 could have 3 Star Dragons.

    - Factionwide cap for every unit, based on the settlements and building you have. Combined with a regional recruitment for provincial units. If you have the 4 regions in Reikland maxed, and only one region in Middenland, you can recruit much more Empire troops with Reikland heraldry than troops with Middenland heraldry.

    This also applies to some "unique" unit, mostly for HE. Each hunter building give a small contribution to the White Lions cap. But the landmark in Chrace gives a much larger bonus: so you can recruit White Lions, but with a small cap, unless you control Chrace, the cap is significantly higher then.

    Well, as per example in my main post, why would Imrik have only 3 Star Dragons in his glorious Dragon Host in the late campaign? Seems too arbitrary, no?

    I like your ideas for regional recruitment and having unique provinces increasing unit caps more than usual though, great one!
  • Steph_F_DavidSteph_F_David Junior Member Registered Users Posts: 3,425
    In the case you said, it could make sense for Imrik to have more dragons, but maybe not with every random lord, even HE.

    I'm still busy extended the system to every race (doing the Skaven at the moment, still Vampire Coast, Norsca and Beastmen to do), and then, probably with Warhammer III, I'll probably do a tweaking pass on every race, check it stills works with Game 3, see what new possibilities come from the changes CA will (hopefully) introduce, and increase the specificies:
    - More bonuses for region specific troops to differentiate them from other
    - Some Lords having a bonus to their army cap to allow recruiting more of their iconic units.

  • Iron_Crown#5779Iron_Crown#5779 Registered Users Posts: 1,764
    Bereaver said:

    In my mod, SWO-RD, I have both.

    - Army caps based on TTC, with a twist: the limit of special/rare units is based on the rank of the lord. Lord rank 1 cannot get a Star Dragon, only Moon, and a Lord Rank 40 could have 3 Star Dragons.

    - Factionwide cap for every unit, based on the settlements and building you have. Combined with a regional recruitment for provincial units. If you have the 4 regions in Reikland maxed, and only one region in Middenland, you can recruit much more Empire troops with Reikland heraldry than troops with Middenland heraldry.

    This also applies to some "unique" unit, mostly for HE. Each hunter building give a small contribution to the White Lions cap. But the landmark in Chrace gives a much larger bonus: so you can recruit White Lions, but with a small cap, unless you control Chrace, the cap is significantly higher then.

    Well, as per example in my main post, why would Imrik have only 3 Star Dragons in his glorious Dragon Host in the late campaign? Seems too arbitrary, no?
    Maybe because the dragons get grumpy and refuse to fight if there are 19 of them so their deeds in battle are not properly fawned over by the smallfolk. Like a soccer star who does not get recognition because everyone else in his team is an even bigger superstar.

    Or maybe concentrating 19 dragons in one place is unsustainable because they eat the countryside clean.

    Or their magic aura all in one place tears apart the fabric of reality and causes Armageddon.

    Whatever silly excuse you make up for why it's not possible, it's always better than allowing it to happen, because a stack of Imrik with a bunch of dragons is unbeatable and that's boring and lame.

  • Steph_F_DavidSteph_F_David Junior Member Registered Users Posts: 3,425
    I agree that for gameplay reason, and balance, it maybe better to avoid Imrik with 19 dragons.
    But maybe he could have 4 instead of 3 for other LL for example
  • DraxynnicDraxynnic Registered Users Posts: 11,364
    Factionwide. For two reasons:

    First, some of the "doomstacks" are things that have actually happened in the fluff. The whole 'stack of dragons' thing that has already been settled on as the topic of discussion? Actually happened. Even the Dark Elves pulled off having a squadron of dragons in one place a couple of times - for the High Elves, it's actually fairly common, particularly in those "the situation was desperate so they woke as many dragons as they could at once" circumstances.

    Second, faction-based caps are caps that, like the Tomb Kings, could be lifted through having the right infrastructure. This would provide encouragement to make multiple recruiting provinces rather than just one or two while the rest focus entirely on economy.

    The tabletop rules are intended in the context of single battles, so they represent a "typical" force that has a mix of standard units and a few exotic units. In the TWW context, however, the game goes well beyond a single battle, so the balance can come in the form that if one of your armies has all of a particular rare type of unit, then the others are going to have to make do with something else.

    At the moment, the problem is 1) the only limit for most races is gold cost and upkeep; 2) supply lines, particularly at high difficulties, make it so that multiple cheap units end up being a less efficient means of converting gold to military power than elite units and 3) even if you eliminated the first two, the limit to the number of units you can have in a battle limits the value of quantity over quality approaches. #3 is a bit difficult to get around, but if #1 and #2 can be addressed, then doomstacks might become something you use strategically as a breakthrough instrument rather than something that you want ALL of your armies to be if reasonably practical.
  • Steph_F_DavidSteph_F_David Junior Member Registered Users Posts: 3,425
    Although Doomstacks may have existed in the lore, using only factionwide cap, and so the possility to make even ONE doomstack army is bad I think.
    Because this army could destroy all the other "regular" army it could meet. It could actually unbalance things more than just leaving Doomstack for all.

    So I prefer an per army cap for all to avoid this.

    But since there are a lot of different personnal tastes for this, I don't think it's really CA role to find a "perfect" solution, it's better IMO to use mods for that, with different approaches so you install the mod, or combination of mods, that works best for you.

  • obippoobippo Member Registered Users Posts: 2,686
    edited March 2021
    I love doing weird and silly army comps just for the lols, no army caps is the way. allows everyone to play the way they want and AI using broken comps is not a problem either because even on legendary theyre complete ****.
    Always be aware when a Content Refusing Troll Brigade (CRTB) representative is near. Contact your local Witch Hunter for further info.


  • Bereaver#4201Bereaver#4201 Registered Users Posts: 967

    Although Doomstacks may have existed in the lore, using only factionwide cap, and so the possility to make even ONE doomstack army is bad I think.
    Because this army could destroy all the other "regular" army it could meet. It could actually unbalance things more than just leaving Doomstack for all.

    So I prefer an per army cap for all to avoid this.

    But since there are a lot of different personnal tastes for this, I don't think it's really CA role to find a "perfect" solution, it's better IMO to use mods for that, with different approaches so you install the mod, or combination of mods, that works best for you.

    It can destroy one army, or may be even two, but there are not a lot of doomstacks in game that can defeat every possible enemy composition 1v4.

    Enemy still has ability to recruit elite units, so several usual armies pose a threat to doomstacks.
    You mean to just rip out player's arms instead of creating a way to make an intelligent choice.

    I think that powerful rare units should be very hard to acquire, cost a lot of different resources , but player should be able to fit them however he wants in his armies.

    It is really unfathomable why would ever ruler not use his mightiest troops in his personal army if he has resources to do so.

    So, I think that army caps are wrong premise. Resources and Logistics should prevent spamming of t4/t5 units, not arbitrary caps.
  • HarconnHarconn Registered Users Posts: 943
    edited March 2021
    I am also very interested in army caps. The total war warhammer doomstack armies are just annoying imo, there was a reason for caps in TT. After 40 turns campaign gets ridiculous, armies aren't loreful anymore and the AI compositions are often annoying (for someone who wants to play loreful with a lot of standard core units).

    I guess best CA can do is an option for players to use army caps. So players can choose to make weird armies full of sisters of averlorn and fighting against 6 steam tanks. But other players can also toggle caps and fight against balanced "realistic" armies. My opinion.
    _______________________________________________________________________________________________________

    My German Youtube-Channel - Let's Plays (Strategy, RPG, Indie,...): https://www.youtube.com/channel/UChwblqvwr8XxKP0GzCcUb8Q
  • Bereaver#4201Bereaver#4201 Registered Users Posts: 967
    Harconn said:

    I am also very interested in army caps. The total war warhammer doomstack armies are just annoying imo, there was a reason for caps in TT. After 40 turns campaign gets ridiculous, armies aren't loreful anymore and the AI compositions are often annoying (for someone who wants to play loreful with a lot of standard core units).

    I guess best CA can do is an option for players to use army caps. So players can choose to make weird armies full of sisters of averlorn and fighting against 6 steam tanks. But other players can also toggle caps and fight against balanced "realistic" armies. My opinion.

    What is loreful about Archaon being forced to not use a lot of Chosen in his armies? What is loreful about Thorgrim Grudgbearer using Dwarf Warriors instead of his Royal Guard, the Hammerers?

    It is loreful that there can be one one elite army and several weak ones running around, as it is loreful that all elite units can be spread around to make every army stronger. But it should be in the hands of the player, not a game system.

    Factionwide caps are a good instrument to prevent some of more obnoxious stuff, like having to fight against every army of HE having combo of Phoenixes+Phoenix Guard+Sisters of Avelorn, but per army caps are wrong in their principle.
  • Xenos777Xenos777 Registered Users Posts: 8,038


    Or maybe concentrating 19 dragons in one place is unsustainable because they eat the countryside clean.

    This is the only one that makes sense, and it is how it works in serious wargames. Like, in HoI4 it's very difficult to use tank divisions in central Africa because they run out of supply too quickly. Each army here could have a supply limit, maybe modified by skills and terrain, and get penalties if it goes above it, like restricted mobility. For the undead you can tie it to the control capacity of the lord, factually the same just like dark magic and gold.

  • TheShiroOfDaltonTheShiroOfDalton Senior Member Registered Users Posts: 34,001
    Bereaver said:

    Harconn said:

    I am also very interested in army caps. The total war warhammer doomstack armies are just annoying imo, there was a reason for caps in TT. After 40 turns campaign gets ridiculous, armies aren't loreful anymore and the AI compositions are often annoying (for someone who wants to play loreful with a lot of standard core units).

    I guess best CA can do is an option for players to use army caps. So players can choose to make weird armies full of sisters of averlorn and fighting against 6 steam tanks. But other players can also toggle caps and fight against balanced "realistic" armies. My opinion.

    What is loreful about Archaon being forced to not use a lot of Chosen in his armies? What is loreful about Thorgrim Grudgbearer using Dwarf Warriors instead of his Royal Guard, the Hammerers?


    What is loreful about such armies replenishing at the same speed as lower tier units and there being infinite replacements for every unit lost?

  • Bereaver#4201Bereaver#4201 Registered Users Posts: 967

    Bereaver said:

    Harconn said:

    I am also very interested in army caps. The total war warhammer doomstack armies are just annoying imo, there was a reason for caps in TT. After 40 turns campaign gets ridiculous, armies aren't loreful anymore and the AI compositions are often annoying (for someone who wants to play loreful with a lot of standard core units).

    I guess best CA can do is an option for players to use army caps. So players can choose to make weird armies full of sisters of averlorn and fighting against 6 steam tanks. But other players can also toggle caps and fight against balanced "realistic" armies. My opinion.

    What is loreful about Archaon being forced to not use a lot of Chosen in his armies? What is loreful about Thorgrim Grudgbearer using Dwarf Warriors instead of his Royal Guard, the Hammerers?


    What is loreful about such armies replenishing at the same speed as lower tier units and there being infinite replacements for every unit lost?

    Yeah, that's the better way to approach it! Elite units indeed should be slower to replenish and harder to sustain, I'm all for that. It encourages player to make meaningful choices instead of hamfisted "you can't have more than this amount of that in your army".
  • WarriorofahuraWarriorofahura Registered Users Posts: 144
    I personally use both in my campaigns
  • DraxynnicDraxynnic Registered Users Posts: 11,364
    Regarding AI doomstacking:

    I think it's worth noting that factionwide caps would also be likely to impact the AI, since it would remove things like the AI being able to pump out stacks of mammoths out of a single settlement and so on. It'd mean that while AI doomstacks are still possible, taking one out would be more of an accomplishment than a "one down, a dozen to go" type situation.

    Force concentration is a valid military strategy. It was pretty much the concept behind blitzkrieg, and that wasn't the first instance of the general principle.
  • mightygloinmightygloin Karaz-a-KarakRegistered Users Posts: 6,084
    Mix of both.
  • TheShiroOfDaltonTheShiroOfDalton Senior Member Registered Users Posts: 34,001
    Draxynnic said:

    Regarding AI doomstacking:

    I think it's worth noting that factionwide caps would also be likely to impact the AI, since it would remove things like the AI being able to pump out stacks of mammoths out of a single settlement and so on. It'd mean that while AI doomstacks are still possible, taking one out would be more of an accomplishment than a "one down, a dozen to go" type situation.

    Force concentration is a valid military strategy. It was pretty much the concept behind blitzkrieg, and that wasn't the first instance of the general principle.

    Force concentration means that you are concentrating large parts of your military on narrow points in the enemy line for a breakthrough, it doesn't mean building tank divisions that are exclusively Tiger IIs.
  • DraxynnicDraxynnic Registered Users Posts: 11,364

    Draxynnic said:

    Regarding AI doomstacking:

    I think it's worth noting that factionwide caps would also be likely to impact the AI, since it would remove things like the AI being able to pump out stacks of mammoths out of a single settlement and so on. It'd mean that while AI doomstacks are still possible, taking one out would be more of an accomplishment than a "one down, a dozen to go" type situation.

    Force concentration is a valid military strategy. It was pretty much the concept behind blitzkrieg, and that wasn't the first instance of the general principle.

    Force concentration means that you are concentrating large parts of your military on narrow points in the enemy line for a breakthrough, it doesn't mean building tank divisions that are exclusively Tiger IIs.
    It usually does mean sending your best units to do the job, though. In fact, that's what the Tigers were originally designed for - being the front of the blitzkreig, the part that actually smashes through while lighter units cover the flanks. Earlier in the war, though, just being units that concentrated tanks at all were the doomstacks that brushed aside Allied formations where the tanks were spread around in support of infantry.

    And in those later years, you had units that were exclusively Tigers, and the more elite divisions could be all 'big cats' (what tiers do you think Panthers and Tigers would be in a hypothetical Total War World War 2?). And if Germany had had a chance for a peacetime reorganisation of its military circa 1944, they'd have probably retired everything except Panthers, Tigers (2s once they had them), useful variants, and whatever reconnaissance vehicles they settled on. It's just that under wartime pressures they didn't have the opportunity to disband everything and replace it with the good stuff, because they weren't able to make the good stuff fast enough. That, and the Germans didn't have the problem of every additional division meaning that the upkeep for their entire army goes up by another 15%.

    Granted, it would be nice to be able to achieve a bit more of a focus on combined arms so that doomstacks are a mix of high-tier units rather than almost exclusively composed of one unit that is regarded as the best that race has to offer, but that doesn't change the general point: using elite units as a means of force concentration, including concentration of a specific unit type, is a valid military strategy. Both in real life and in Warhammer fluff.
  • Lampros73Lampros73 Registered Users Posts: 281

    Bereaver said:

    In my mod, SWO-RD, I have both.

    - Army caps based on TTC, with a twist: the limit of special/rare units is based on the rank of the lord. Lord rank 1 cannot get a Star Dragon, only Moon, and a Lord Rank 40 could have 3 Star Dragons.

    - Factionwide cap for every unit, based on the settlements and building you have. Combined with a regional recruitment for provincial units. If you have the 4 regions in Reikland maxed, and only one region in Middenland, you can recruit much more Empire troops with Reikland heraldry than troops with Middenland heraldry.

    This also applies to some "unique" unit, mostly for HE. Each hunter building give a small contribution to the White Lions cap. But the landmark in Chrace gives a much larger bonus: so you can recruit White Lions, but with a small cap, unless you control Chrace, the cap is significantly higher then.

    Well, as per example in my main post, why would Imrik have only 3 Star Dragons in his glorious Dragon Host in the late campaign? Seems too arbitrary, no?
    Maybe because the dragons get grumpy and refuse to fight if there are 19 of them so their deeds in battle are not properly fawned over by the smallfolk. Like a soccer star who does not get recognition because everyone else in his team is an even bigger superstar.

    Or maybe concentrating 19 dragons in one place is unsustainable because they eat the countryside clean.

    Or their magic aura all in one place tears apart the fabric of reality and causes Armageddon.

    Whatever silly excuse you make up for why it's not possible, it's always better than allowing it to happen, because a stack of Imrik with a bunch of dragons is unbeatable and that's boring and lame.

    Besides, even Imrik takes spearmen and archers into battle, among other units. He does not lead an all-Dragon force.
  • Bereaver#4201Bereaver#4201 Registered Users Posts: 967
    Lampros73 said:

    Bereaver said:

    In my mod, SWO-RD, I have both.

    - Army caps based on TTC, with a twist: the limit of special/rare units is based on the rank of the lord. Lord rank 1 cannot get a Star Dragon, only Moon, and a Lord Rank 40 could have 3 Star Dragons.

    - Factionwide cap for every unit, based on the settlements and building you have. Combined with a regional recruitment for provincial units. If you have the 4 regions in Reikland maxed, and only one region in Middenland, you can recruit much more Empire troops with Reikland heraldry than troops with Middenland heraldry.

    This also applies to some "unique" unit, mostly for HE. Each hunter building give a small contribution to the White Lions cap. But the landmark in Chrace gives a much larger bonus: so you can recruit White Lions, but with a small cap, unless you control Chrace, the cap is significantly higher then.

    Well, as per example in my main post, why would Imrik have only 3 Star Dragons in his glorious Dragon Host in the late campaign? Seems too arbitrary, no?
    Maybe because the dragons get grumpy and refuse to fight if there are 19 of them so their deeds in battle are not properly fawned over by the smallfolk. Like a soccer star who does not get recognition because everyone else in his team is an even bigger superstar.

    Or maybe concentrating 19 dragons in one place is unsustainable because they eat the countryside clean.

    Or their magic aura all in one place tears apart the fabric of reality and causes Armageddon.

    Whatever silly excuse you make up for why it's not possible, it's always better than allowing it to happen, because a stack of Imrik with a bunch of dragons is unbeatable and that's boring and lame.

    Besides, even Imrik takes spearmen and archers into battle, among other units. He does not lead an all-Dragon force.
    He does not lead an all-Dragon force, because Dragons are slumbering. Imrik's goal is to awaken Dragons and lead a Dragon Host.

    It is totally fine to use Imrik with core troops, especially during early game, what is not fine is forcing him to stay with these troops at the point when he is rank 40, completed all his Dragon quests, united Ulthuan etc. At this point it is to be excpected that he is leading Dragon Host. That's why factionwide caps are good, and army caps are unreasonable. They really break immersion.
  • yolordmcswagyolordmcswag Registered Users Posts: 4,227
    Both. Hard caps factionwide and soft caps per army. The number of elite units factionwide should be somewhat limited, perhaps based on realm size, buildings, even diplomatic relations with certain factions(for example, a high elf faction with good relations with Saphery might be able to ask for some swordmasters to support them, while skaven clans could buy Skryre weapons, moulder monsters etc). With some races or units it could also be tied to a kind of manpower system, like in thrones of Britannia. You have a global pool of elites that increase slowly, but if you manage to keep your elites without much losses you could increase the numbers over time without new buildings or such.

    Then for every army, if the total number of elite or high tier units were proportionally too large compared to core troops, the army would become more expensive and maybe have other penalties based on the units. An army with more than 30%(for example) artillery might have a penalty to campaign map movement speed, while an army with too many single entities would have lower ambush chance etc. This would represent supply lines and such, elite troops do well in battle but might not be able to do all the logistic aspects alone. For monsters or war machines, having too few regulars would make those harder to control.

    Then certain lords and heroes would affect this "effective army composition. For example, beastmaster tye lords and heroes might increase the soft-cap on monsters, engineer hero for war machines etc, Malekith might have Black guard not count as "Elite" for the cap purpose. This would be good for army diversity IMO, as you would see a bunch of different armies around the map.

    And you ask, why would Throt or Ikit use skavenslaves when they have so many advanced weapons? The simple answer is because they have them. No matter how many weapons or monsters they make, they lead skaven clans and any skaven clan has huge numbers of slaves available. When going to war those slaves are not left at home, they go to battle alongside the elite troops. Same for Imrik, while he uses many dragons he still goes to war with his full glittering host.

  • TheShiroOfDaltonTheShiroOfDalton Senior Member Registered Users Posts: 34,001
    Draxynnic said:

    Draxynnic said:

    Regarding AI doomstacking:

    I think it's worth noting that factionwide caps would also be likely to impact the AI, since it would remove things like the AI being able to pump out stacks of mammoths out of a single settlement and so on. It'd mean that while AI doomstacks are still possible, taking one out would be more of an accomplishment than a "one down, a dozen to go" type situation.

    Force concentration is a valid military strategy. It was pretty much the concept behind blitzkrieg, and that wasn't the first instance of the general principle.

    Force concentration means that you are concentrating large parts of your military on narrow points in the enemy line for a breakthrough, it doesn't mean building tank divisions that are exclusively Tiger IIs.
    It usually does mean sending your best units to do the job, though. In fact, that's what the Tigers were originally designed for - being the front of the blitzkreig, the part that actually smashes through while lighter units cover the flanks. Earlier in the war, though, just being units that concentrated tanks at all were the doomstacks that brushed aside Allied formations where the tanks were spread around in support of infantry.

    And in those later years, you had units that were exclusively Tigers, and the more elite divisions could be all 'big cats' (what tiers do you think Panthers and Tigers would be in a hypothetical Total War World War 2?). And if Germany had had a chance for a peacetime reorganisation of its military circa 1944, they'd have probably retired everything except Panthers, Tigers (2s once they had them), useful variants, and whatever reconnaissance vehicles they settled on. It's just that under wartime pressures they didn't have the opportunity to disband everything and replace it with the good stuff, because they weren't able to make the good stuff fast enough. That, and the Germans didn't have the problem of every additional division meaning that the upkeep for their entire army goes up by another 15%.

    Granted, it would be nice to be able to achieve a bit more of a focus on combined arms so that doomstacks are a mix of high-tier units rather than almost exclusively composed of one unit that is regarded as the best that race has to offer, but that doesn't change the general point: using elite units as a means of force concentration, including concentration of a specific unit type, is a valid military strategy. Both in real life and in Warhammer fluff.
    The funny thing is that for all the reputation both the Tiger I and Tiger II have, they actually didn't influence the war all that much because they were produced in awfully low numbers, something like one Tiger I+II for every 10 Panzer IVs. They also didn't actually help the German war effort all that much either because there only ever was a trickle of them and those that were deployed had the tendency to break down and then require pretty intensive maintenance. It has been said that Germany should have scrapped the whole thing and just concentrated on churning out the reliable and more than sufficient later versions of the Panzer IV because no matter how much better any Tiger was than any individual allied tank (and the Russian IS2s and the American Pershings were on par, so that wouldn't have lasted long anyway), it wasn't enough to make up for the utter mismatch in numbers.

    So if Imrik deploys his 19 Dragon stack, losing any of those dragons should be a near unrecoverable loss and healing those dragons slow.
  • VandicusVandicus Junior Member Registered Users Posts: 374
    The factions would need a serious rebalance to work with caps. Some factions have incredible low tier units as well as incredibly strong generic lords (dark elves, high elves). This is a serious overhaul that I don't think would be worth the effort up until the game is otherwise complete (all dlcs done in warhammer 3).

    Army-based caps would be easier to balance for 20 v 20 gameplay.
  • TheShiroOfDaltonTheShiroOfDalton Senior Member Registered Users Posts: 34,001
    Vandicus said:

    The factions would need a serious rebalance to work with caps. Some factions have incredible low tier units as well as incredibly strong generic lords (dark elves, high elves). This is a serious overhaul that I don't think would be worth the effort up until the game is otherwise complete (all dlcs done in warhammer 3).

    Army-based caps would be easier to balance for 20 v 20 gameplay.

    That implies how factions work right now is balanced...which it isn't. Adding caps is a measure to create balance where right now there's none.
  • DraxynnicDraxynnic Registered Users Posts: 11,364
    edited March 2021
    Lampros73 said:

    Bereaver said:

    In my mod, SWO-RD, I have both.

    - Army caps based on TTC, with a twist: the limit of special/rare units is based on the rank of the lord. Lord rank 1 cannot get a Star Dragon, only Moon, and a Lord Rank 40 could have 3 Star Dragons.

    - Factionwide cap for every unit, based on the settlements and building you have. Combined with a regional recruitment for provincial units. If you have the 4 regions in Reikland maxed, and only one region in Middenland, you can recruit much more Empire troops with Reikland heraldry than troops with Middenland heraldry.

    This also applies to some "unique" unit, mostly for HE. Each hunter building give a small contribution to the White Lions cap. But the landmark in Chrace gives a much larger bonus: so you can recruit White Lions, but with a small cap, unless you control Chrace, the cap is significantly higher then.

    Well, as per example in my main post, why would Imrik have only 3 Star Dragons in his glorious Dragon Host in the late campaign? Seems too arbitrary, no?
    Maybe because the dragons get grumpy and refuse to fight if there are 19 of them so their deeds in battle are not properly fawned over by the smallfolk. Like a soccer star who does not get recognition because everyone else in his team is an even bigger superstar.

    Or maybe concentrating 19 dragons in one place is unsustainable because they eat the countryside clean.

    Or their magic aura all in one place tears apart the fabric of reality and causes Armageddon.

    Whatever silly excuse you make up for why it's not possible, it's always better than allowing it to happen, because a stack of Imrik with a bunch of dragons is unbeatable and that's boring and lame.

    Besides, even Imrik takes spearmen and archers into battle, among other units. He does not lead an all-Dragon force.
    There are examples of Caledorian generals, including I think Imrik after the Finuval Plain, leading all-Dragon forces. In part because of something that isn't really represented in-game: all-dragon forces offer almost unparalleled strategic mobility combined with the striking power to make a difference when they arrive. Something that's commonly regarded as a "firefighting force" - a force that has both the strategic mobility to get to a crisis area quickly and the capability to deal with it when they get there.

    Of course, the armies of Caledor taken as a whole include regular spearmen, archers, Silver Helms (not all Caledorian knights are Dragon Princes) and, of course, the aforementioned Dragon Princes. And when the dragons can't be roused, or those that can are needed elsewhere, that's what they rely on. But this could just as easily be represented by "you have one stack of all dragons, and you need the other stacks to protect the rest of your territory while the dragon stack is doing its thing" as it could by "all of your armies have a couple of dragons, like the Allies spread out their tanks in France and North Africa".

    (Honestly, in TWW mechanics, I find the latter does make for more interesting battles since I like combined-arms approaches, but the former is still a valid strategy.)

    The problem is that TWW allows, and at higher difficulties practically requires, every stack to be a doomstack.
  • VandicusVandicus Junior Member Registered Users Posts: 374

    Vandicus said:

    The factions would need a serious rebalance to work with caps. Some factions have incredible low tier units as well as incredibly strong generic lords (dark elves, high elves). This is a serious overhaul that I don't think would be worth the effort up until the game is otherwise complete (all dlcs done in warhammer 3).

    Army-based caps would be easier to balance for 20 v 20 gameplay.

    That implies how factions work right now is balanced...which it isn't. Adding caps is a measure to create balance where right now there's none.
    It would either immediately make things more unbalanced because many units are not competitive within the same tier or require a serious rework. Doesn't make sense to do it now when the game is going to continue to see lots of new stuff that will be unbalanced and probably power creep things.
  • TheShiroOfDaltonTheShiroOfDalton Senior Member Registered Users Posts: 34,001
    Vandicus said:

    Vandicus said:

    The factions would need a serious rebalance to work with caps. Some factions have incredible low tier units as well as incredibly strong generic lords (dark elves, high elves). This is a serious overhaul that I don't think would be worth the effort up until the game is otherwise complete (all dlcs done in warhammer 3).

    Army-based caps would be easier to balance for 20 v 20 gameplay.

    That implies how factions work right now is balanced...which it isn't. Adding caps is a measure to create balance where right now there's none.
    It would either immediately make things more unbalanced because many units are not competitive within the same tier or require a serious rework. Doesn't make sense to do it now when the game is going to continue to see lots of new stuff that will be unbalanced and probably power creep things.
    No, not at all.
  • JastalllJastalll Junior Member Registered Users Posts: 1,849
    If caps have to be there, definitely make them factionwide. That the Empire would needs loads of infrastucture even beyond their upkeep cost before it could field 19 Steam Tanks is fine. That Karl Franz could arbitrarily only field 2 in his army at a time because game mechanics isn't. Allowing players to make up crazy army builds is part of the fun of Total War, the issue is preventing the crazy builds from being the only way to play from a purely practical standpoint, and well implemented factionwide caps could help prevent that.
  • Jo_Proulx#5293Jo_Proulx#5293 Junior Member Registered Users Posts: 1,712
    I support all caps as campaign options.

    - Cost Based Army Cap
    - Tabletop Caps
    - Building Units Caps

    Those 3 should be toggle options IMO.

    Those 3 together make the game feel much better IMO. Only thing is AI should have a little ''boost'' depending on difficulty, especially on building unit caps and army cost cap, so that it is more competitive. Yet it should respect TT caps to stay loreful.

    I did a full Empire vanilla VH campaign recently and ended up with stacks of demis halberds+rocket batteries, because fighting stacks of black orcs + Arachnaroc spiders + waaaagh armies was just a PITA grind with balanced armies. Its not loreful and feel wrong to me.

    I hate I have to use mods to fix my experience, but I am very grateful they exist, so a big thx to you guys, Jadawin, Vacuity, Drunkflamingo etc..

    I agree that some lords should have unique caps that make sense like Imrik having a bit more dragons but at the same time with army cost cap he would at least have less units in his army due to dragons eating his funds limit so it would be fine.



    "Fear me mortals, for I am the Anointed, the favored Son of Chaos, the Scourge of the World. The armies of the gods rally behind me, and it is by my will and by my sword that your weakling nations shall fall."

    ~ Archaon, Lord of the End Times
This discussion has been closed.