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.
Yeah Ogre Bulls are weak against armor in the same way Flesh Hounds are. They have huge WS meaning they hit pretty solidly against any targets.
CA likely realized that when every unit in a roster has armor piercing it makes it very difficult to differentiate elite and non-elite units. Well that and there seems to have been a re-balancing of armor piercing damage in the game, with a lot of units losing AP damage but gaining base damage which makes armor a more valuable stat.
Considering people were complaining about the prevalence of ap damage and the uselessness of armor for years this shouldn't come as a surprise.
I don't see why that's an issue. All dwarfen units barring slayers are slow, heavily armored and have high morale. Nearly all Slaaneshi units are squishy and nearly armorless but hit like a truck with high charge bonus and AP. A faction like the OK being almost all AP is not out of the norm. It's a useless distinction. The eliteness of a unit throughout TW titles is demonstrated through higher morale and greater skill in combat so we'd expect Ironguts and Man eaters to have greater MA and MD since they're more competent in battle than the simple brutish bulls. It's just poor game design.
Dwarfs have rangers who are as fast as Slayers. Slaanesh mortals are all not AP even when they have mutations and mounts that could reasonably be interpreted as AP. Slaanesh mortals also have pretty meh CB and lack devastating flanker. Those are both in line with making Ogre Bulls non-ap units while leaving AP to the higher tier man-eaters (which CA did).
CA goes out of their way to provide variety and limit redundancy in all rosters, so every OK unit having AP would undercut that effort. It would also be very much out of the norm and would result in either high costs for the Ogre units or lower WS, both of which are problems in certain match ups. If this is poor game design then I guess you've had the same problem through the entire trilogy and beyond the total war warhammer series.
Yes, slayers AND rangers, I deserve a place in the book for the grave sin of forgeting the stealthy stunties. Relatively few of the Slaaneshi units are mortals, which means that, as I previously stated: nearly all Slaaneshi units are squishy and nearly armorless but hit like a truck with high charge bonus and AP. Nothing has been contradicted here. The Ogre Kingdoms already has non-ap units aplenty in their low tiers, they're called gnoblars. Now personally I think that the way AP damage is calculated in Warhammer is borked, so ultimately I don't care whether ogre bulls get 7:3 ratio AP or 4:6 AP or whatever; the point is that it's just a completely arbitrary distinction in the first place.
As for providing variety and limiting redundancy, I'd say it's a mixed bag with far more stinkers than actual zingers. Variation upon variation of unit, unit+shield, unit, unit+minor buff exist in most rosters but they tend to come straight from TT rules so I won't fault them for such roster bloat. What I can say is that in order to limit redundancy we've seen units nerfed from their TT role into lower tier units in order to fill a niche that wasn't needed. I'm talking about dwarf miners and White Lions of Chrace specifically.
Everytime you remind me of the White Lions...I go red like beet
The biggest insult is this was asked for by literally NO ONE. Campaign players don't give a **** about mid tier trash. You mass cheap early infantry...you magically skip the nonexistent midgame, and then you start rolling out late game elite infantries.
MP players spend points on chevrons to beef up lower tier infantry.
Yeah... Basically you play with your initial Spearmen till they aren't cutting it anymore. There's just no way to get your troops reasonably to the front lines.
Campaign just has really bad game progression. I don't have 5 turns to run back to my main settlement to recruit some mid tier chaff and then run back after loosing all my territorial gains.
I can't afford the double gold and double recruitment time either and it really wouldn't save me much if any time because 2 turn recruits turn into 4 turns.
Yeah Ogre Bulls are weak against armor in the same way Flesh Hounds are. They have huge WS meaning they hit pretty solidly against any targets.
CA likely realized that when every unit in a roster has armor piercing it makes it very difficult to differentiate elite and non-elite units. Well that and there seems to have been a re-balancing of armor piercing damage in the game, with a lot of units losing AP damage but gaining base damage which makes armor a more valuable stat.
Considering people were complaining about the prevalence of ap damage and the uselessness of armor for years this shouldn't come as a surprise.
I don't see why that's an issue. All dwarfen units barring slayers are slow, heavily armored and have high morale. Nearly all Slaaneshi units are squishy and nearly armorless but hit like a truck with high charge bonus and AP. A faction like the OK being almost all AP is not out of the norm. It's a useless distinction. The eliteness of a unit throughout TW titles is demonstrated through higher morale and greater skill in combat so we'd expect Ironguts and Man eaters to have greater MA and MD since they're more competent in battle than the simple brutish bulls. It's just poor game design.
Dwarfs have rangers who are as fast as Slayers. Slaanesh mortals are all not AP even when they have mutations and mounts that could reasonably be interpreted as AP. Slaanesh mortals also have pretty meh CB and lack devastating flanker. Those are both in line with making Ogre Bulls non-ap units while leaving AP to the higher tier man-eaters (which CA did).
CA goes out of their way to provide variety and limit redundancy in all rosters, so every OK unit having AP would undercut that effort. It would also be very much out of the norm and would result in either high costs for the Ogre units or lower WS, both of which are problems in certain match ups. If this is poor game design then I guess you've had the same problem through the entire trilogy and beyond the total war warhammer series.
Yes, slayers AND rangers, I deserve a place in the book for the grave sin of forgeting the stealthy stunties. Relatively few of the Slaaneshi units are mortals, which means that, as I previously stated: nearly all Slaaneshi units are squishy and nearly armorless but hit like a truck with high charge bonus and AP. Nothing has been contradicted here. The Ogre Kingdoms already has non-ap units aplenty in their low tiers, they're called gnoblars. Now personally I think that the way AP damage is calculated in Warhammer is borked, so ultimately I don't care whether ogre bulls get 7:3 ratio AP or 4:6 AP or whatever; the point is that it's just a completely arbitrary distinction in the first place.
As for providing variety and limiting redundancy, I'd say it's a mixed bag with far more stinkers than actual zingers. Variation upon variation of unit, unit+shield, unit, unit+minor buff exist in most rosters but they tend to come straight from TT rules so I won't fault them for such roster bloat. What I can say is that in order to limit redundancy we've seen units nerfed from their TT role into lower tier units in order to fill a niche that wasn't needed. I'm talking about dwarf miners and White Lions of Chrace specifically.
Everytime you remind me of the White Lions...I go red like beet
The biggest insult is this was asked for by literally NO ONE. Campaign players don't give a **** about mid tier trash. You mass cheap early infantry...you magically skip the nonexistent midgame, and then you start rolling out late game elite infantries.
MP players spend points on chevrons to beef up lower tier infantry.
Yeah... Basically you play with your initial Spearmen till they aren't cutting it anymore. There's just no way to get your troops reasonably to the front lines.
Campaign just has really bad game progression. I don't have 5 turns to run back to my main settlement to recruit some mid tier chaff and then run back after loosing all my territorial gains.
I can't afford the double gold and double recruitment time either and it really wouldn't save me much if any time because 2 turn recruits turn into 4 turns.
This is why I miss the no-general mini stacks from Shogun 2 and previous games. They were perfectly designed for reinforcing your main armies in the field plus proved useful for public order and dissuading raiders. I know they got rid of them because the AI kept spamming ministacks nonstop, but there had to have been a better way than to completely cut the ability to do so. Complete removal of player freedom when that was cut. Global recruitment so artificial in comparison.
No Ogres should be able to knock down walls with melee weapons, it's dumb. Stone walls built to resist siege engines are not that weak, ogres are not that big.
Yeah Ogre Bulls are weak against armor in the same way Flesh Hounds are. They have huge WS meaning they hit pretty solidly against any targets.
CA likely realized that when every unit in a roster has armor piercing it makes it very difficult to differentiate elite and non-elite units. Well that and there seems to have been a re-balancing of armor piercing damage in the game, with a lot of units losing AP damage but gaining base damage which makes armor a more valuable stat.
Considering people were complaining about the prevalence of ap damage and the uselessness of armor for years this shouldn't come as a surprise.
I don't see why that's an issue. All dwarfen units barring slayers are slow, heavily armored and have high morale. Nearly all Slaaneshi units are squishy and nearly armorless but hit like a truck with high charge bonus and AP. A faction like the OK being almost all AP is not out of the norm. It's a useless distinction. The eliteness of a unit throughout TW titles is demonstrated through higher morale and greater skill in combat so we'd expect Ironguts and Man eaters to have greater MA and MD since they're more competent in battle than the simple brutish bulls. It's just poor game design.
Dwarfs have rangers who are as fast as Slayers. Slaanesh mortals are all not AP even when they have mutations and mounts that could reasonably be interpreted as AP. Slaanesh mortals also have pretty meh CB and lack devastating flanker. Those are both in line with making Ogre Bulls non-ap units while leaving AP to the higher tier man-eaters (which CA did).
CA goes out of their way to provide variety and limit redundancy in all rosters, so every OK unit having AP would undercut that effort. It would also be very much out of the norm and would result in either high costs for the Ogre units or lower WS, both of which are problems in certain match ups. If this is poor game design then I guess you've had the same problem through the entire trilogy and beyond the total war warhammer series.
Yes, slayers AND rangers, I deserve a place in the book for the grave sin of forgeting the stealthy stunties. Relatively few of the Slaaneshi units are mortals, which means that, as I previously stated: nearly all Slaaneshi units are squishy and nearly armorless but hit like a truck with high charge bonus and AP. Nothing has been contradicted here. The Ogre Kingdoms already has non-ap units aplenty in their low tiers, they're called gnoblars. Now personally I think that the way AP damage is calculated in Warhammer is borked, so ultimately I don't care whether ogre bulls get 7:3 ratio AP or 4:6 AP or whatever; the point is that it's just a completely arbitrary distinction in the first place.
As for providing variety and limiting redundancy, I'd say it's a mixed bag with far more stinkers than actual zingers. Variation upon variation of unit, unit+shield, unit, unit+minor buff exist in most rosters but they tend to come straight from TT rules so I won't fault them for such roster bloat. What I can say is that in order to limit redundancy we've seen units nerfed from their TT role into lower tier units in order to fill a niche that wasn't needed. I'm talking about dwarf miners and White Lions of Chrace specifically.
Relatively few of the Slaanesh roster is mortal? Marauders, Spawn, Hellstriders and the cultist make up 7 units on a roster of 21. That's a third of the roster there. In comparison the Ogres would have exactly 2 units that weren't AP across their roster following your logic (3 if sabretooths were for some reason excluded from your AP logic here). Out of a roster with 28ish units that's not even a blip.
As for the stats being arbitrary, well yeah it's a video game. None of this is real, everything is arbitrary. I see no reason to get hung up on this particular bit of data when it both fits CA's design philosophy and results in a greater range of unit costs and use cases. Adjusting a tabletop format into a video game is always going to have some shuffling of unit roles and stats. The fact that White Lions are just an incredibly efficient mid tier infantry rather than another competing directly with sword masters and phoenix guard (a situation which would create the same result of one unit being better and therefore seeing more use in optimized stacks) isn't a meaningful loss. Ditto for miners in comparison to dwarf warriors.
The initial question in this thread was why this is the case. I think the answer is fairly clear. Whether you find it satisfying or not is up to you.
And if you turn them into Zombies they gain armor Piercing again (animated hulks).
Or is that because they get new fancy gun- and crab hands?
Edit: Yeah actually in terms of game design it makes sense that they gain armor piercing because of the guns, crab claws and anchor. Slaanesh claws by comparision are all armor percing I believe?
I think there is one thing from the tabletop that can justify it:
It probably won't be shown this way ingame, but one thing that distinguished ogres from other monstrous infantry on the tabletop was that while the generally had lower Strength (and thus weren't as effective at smashing armour) with their regular attacks, they used their mass as a weapon a lot more than other monstrous infantry, to the point of having impact hits. It's possible that this is what they're actually doing to the walls - they're not bashing at them with their piddly little clubs, they're all forming up as a unit and charging at the wall and slamming their entire collective weight against the wall at once. This is something that less intelligent monstrous infantry like kroxigors, rat ogres, and trolls likely wouldn't have the coordination to do (they didn't do it on tabletop, after all), but if done enough times it might well cause a stone wall to start to shake apart.
Alternatively, if every infantry unit in a siege carries ladders, it would make sense for ogres to carry battering rams. An entire unit of ogres slamming logs into a wall probably wouldn't be a whole lot less destructive than a battery of stone throwers bombarding the wall. Again, this is something that most monstrous infantry probably wouldn't think of to do. Ogres aren't the sharpest tools in the shed, after all, but they're still quite a bit smarter than feral Rat Ogres, Kroxigor that sometimes need to have their weapons tied onto them so they don't forget to use them, and trolls that actually had the Stupidity rule. While there are monstrous infantry units in the game that would be smart enough to do so, the fact that they don't could be explained by them feeling that they don't need to because they're parts of factions that have plenty of infantry to attack the walls, so for them it's more efficient to just carry their regular weapons and to go for the more vulnerable gates while their allies occupy the defenders on the walls. Ogres, however, don't have this option, since nobody sensible is going to expect gnoblars to successfully carry out a wall assault against any opposition of note. Necessity is the mother of invention, even if you're an ogre.
In short, ogres might not be using the same techniques against walls that they use against enemy combatants that move and fight back.
The fact that White Lions are just an incredibly efficient mid tier infantry rather than another competing directly with sword masters and phoenix guard (a situation which would create the same result of one unit being better and therefore seeing more use in optimized stacks) isn't a meaningful loss.
They could have been an offensive anti-large, to complement PG (defensive anti-large) and SM (offensive anti-infantry). While the mid-tier versions could have been Chracian Hunters, ie, the cultural group from whom the White Lions are recruited from.
I think there is one thing from the tabletop that can justify it:
It probably won't be shown this way ingame, but one thing that distinguished ogres from other monstrous infantry on the tabletop was that while the generally had lower Strength (and thus weren't as effective at smashing armour) with their regular attacks, they used their mass as a weapon a lot more than other monstrous infantry, to the point of having impact hits. It's possible that this is what they're actually doing to the walls - they're not bashing at them with their piddly little clubs, they're all forming up as a unit and charging at the wall and slamming their entire collective weight against the wall at once. This is something that less intelligent monstrous infantry like kroxigors, rat ogres, and trolls likely wouldn't have the coordination to do (they didn't do it on tabletop, after all), but if done enough times it might well cause a stone wall to start to shake apart.
Alternatively, if every infantry unit in a siege carries ladders, it would make sense for ogres to carry battering rams. An entire unit of ogres slamming logs into a wall probably wouldn't be a whole lot less destructive than a battery of stone throwers bombarding the wall. Again, this is something that most monstrous infantry probably wouldn't think of to do. Ogres aren't the sharpest tools in the shed, after all, but they're still quite a bit smarter than feral Rat Ogres, Kroxigor that sometimes need to have their weapons tied onto them so they don't forget to use them, and trolls that actually had the Stupidity rule. While there are monstrous infantry units in the game that would be smart enough to do so, the fact that they don't could be explained by them feeling that they don't need to because they're parts of factions that have plenty of infantry to attack the walls, so for them it's more efficient to just carry their regular weapons and to go for the more vulnerable gates while their allies occupy the defenders on the walls. Ogres, however, don't have this option, since nobody sensible is going to expect gnoblars to successfully carry out a wall assault against any opposition of note. Necessity is the mother of invention, even if you're an ogre.
In short, ogres might not be using the same techniques against walls that they use against enemy combatants that move and fight back.
The fact that White Lions are just an incredibly efficient mid tier infantry rather than another competing directly with sword masters and phoenix guard (a situation which would create the same result of one unit being better and therefore seeing more use in optimized stacks) isn't a meaningful loss.
They could have been an offensive anti-large, to complement PG (defensive anti-large) and SM (offensive anti-infantry). While the mid-tier versions could have been Chracian Hunters, ie, the cultural group from whom the White Lions are recruited from.
This a pretty reasonable head cannon and I can see the logic behind it. Still don't like it but at least it's an accurate explanation for ogre siege mentality: don't go over, go through.
Yeah Ogre Bulls are weak against armor in the same way Flesh Hounds are. They have huge WS meaning they hit pretty solidly against any targets.
CA likely realized that when every unit in a roster has armor piercing it makes it very difficult to differentiate elite and non-elite units. Well that and there seems to have been a re-balancing of armor piercing damage in the game, with a lot of units losing AP damage but gaining base damage which makes armor a more valuable stat.
Considering people were complaining about the prevalence of ap damage and the uselessness of armor for years this shouldn't come as a surprise.
I don't see why that's an issue. All dwarfen units barring slayers are slow, heavily armored and have high morale. Nearly all Slaaneshi units are squishy and nearly armorless but hit like a truck with high charge bonus and AP. A faction like the OK being almost all AP is not out of the norm. It's a useless distinction. The eliteness of a unit throughout TW titles is demonstrated through higher morale and greater skill in combat so we'd expect Ironguts and Man eaters to have greater MA and MD since they're more competent in battle than the simple brutish bulls. It's just poor game design.
You must not have much IQ's or had any physics at school. Anyway not everything which can destroy walls is considered 'armour piercing'. For example high explosives can break walls but don't pierce a tank armor. Armour piercing stuff generally puts a lot off mass and speed behind a small tip.
A club isn't good at piercing armor, however if it is strong enough you can certainly use it as a sledge hammer and knock down walls.
Whether your looking for the coveted 'salty post of the month' award or are having a significant emotional moment for unknown reasons, it is a poor effort of a post/thread.
Yeah Ogre Bulls are weak against armor in the same way Flesh Hounds are. They have huge WS meaning they hit pretty solidly against any targets.
CA likely realized that when every unit in a roster has armor piercing it makes it very difficult to differentiate elite and non-elite units. Well that and there seems to have been a re-balancing of armor piercing damage in the game, with a lot of units losing AP damage but gaining base damage which makes armor a more valuable stat.
Considering people were complaining about the prevalence of ap damage and the uselessness of armor for years this shouldn't come as a surprise.
I don't see why that's an issue. All dwarfen units barring slayers are slow, heavily armored and have high morale. Nearly all Slaaneshi units are squishy and nearly armorless but hit like a truck with high charge bonus and AP. A faction like the OK being almost all AP is not out of the norm. It's a useless distinction. The eliteness of a unit throughout TW titles is demonstrated through higher morale and greater skill in combat so we'd expect Ironguts and Man eaters to have greater MA and MD since they're more competent in battle than the simple brutish bulls. It's just poor game design.
You must not have much IQ's or had any physics at school. Anyway not everything which can destroy walls is considered 'armour piercing'. For example high explosives can break walls but don't pierce a tank armor. Armour piercing stuff generally puts a lot off mass and speed behind a small tip.
A club isn't good at piercing armor, however if it is strong enough you can certainly use it as a sledge hammer and knock down walls.
Whether your looking for the coveted 'salty post of the month' award or are having a significant emotional moment for unknown reasons, it is a poor effort of a post/thread.
Gee I was under the assumption that "armor-piercing" just meant "anti-armor". How could I ever have made such a critical mistake. Though we really should send CA this memo as they seem awfully confused on this issue as well. They've given units like Fimir, Giants, Marauder Champions and Sacred Kroxigors among others the AP signifier, when clearly they cannot be 'armor piercing' since they're all armed with blunt weapons like clubs and maces. Hopefully they'll get this memo and change it right away, so everyone knows that those units aren't really armor piercing!!
I think there is one thing from the tabletop that can justify it:
It probably won't be shown this way ingame, but one thing that distinguished ogres from other monstrous infantry on the tabletop was that while the generally had lower Strength (and thus weren't as effective at smashing armour) with their regular attacks, they used their mass as a weapon a lot more than other monstrous infantry, to the point of having impact hits. It's possible that this is what they're actually doing to the walls - they're not bashing at them with their piddly little clubs, they're all forming up as a unit and charging at the wall and slamming their entire collective weight against the wall at once. This is something that less intelligent monstrous infantry like kroxigors, rat ogres, and trolls likely wouldn't have the coordination to do (they didn't do it on tabletop, after all), but if done enough times it might well cause a stone wall to start to shake apart.
Alternatively, if every infantry unit in a siege carries ladders, it would make sense for ogres to carry battering rams. An entire unit of ogres slamming logs into a wall probably wouldn't be a whole lot less destructive than a battery of stone throwers bombarding the wall. Again, this is something that most monstrous infantry probably wouldn't think of to do. Ogres aren't the sharpest tools in the shed, after all, but they're still quite a bit smarter than feral Rat Ogres, Kroxigor that sometimes need to have their weapons tied onto them so they don't forget to use them, and trolls that actually had the Stupidity rule. While there are monstrous infantry units in the game that would be smart enough to do so, the fact that they don't could be explained by them feeling that they don't need to because they're parts of factions that have plenty of infantry to attack the walls, so for them it's more efficient to just carry their regular weapons and to go for the more vulnerable gates while their allies occupy the defenders on the walls. Ogres, however, don't have this option, since nobody sensible is going to expect gnoblars to successfully carry out a wall assault against any opposition of note. Necessity is the mother of invention, even if you're an ogre.
In short, ogres might not be using the same techniques against walls that they use against enemy combatants that move and fight back.
The fact that White Lions are just an incredibly efficient mid tier infantry rather than another competing directly with sword masters and phoenix guard (a situation which would create the same result of one unit being better and therefore seeing more use in optimized stacks) isn't a meaningful loss.
They could have been an offensive anti-large, to complement PG (defensive anti-large) and SM (offensive anti-infantry). While the mid-tier versions could have been Chracian Hunters, ie, the cultural group from whom the White Lions are recruited from.
They don't need to be offensive anti-large
White Lions only needed to be Generalist AP that's decent vs. both infantry and large sized units (as opposed to SM and PG who overspecialized against infantry and large respectively) with Stubborn
Comments
Campaign just has really bad game progression. I don't have 5 turns to run back to my main settlement to recruit some mid tier chaff and then run back after loosing all my territorial gains.
I can't afford the double gold and double recruitment time either and it really wouldn't save me much if any time because 2 turn recruits turn into 4 turns.
- Report
0 · Disagree Agree- Report
5 · Disagree 5Agree- Report
4 · 1Disagree 4AgreeAs for the stats being arbitrary, well yeah it's a video game. None of this is real, everything is arbitrary. I see no reason to get hung up on this particular bit of data when it both fits CA's design philosophy and results in a greater range of unit costs and use cases. Adjusting a tabletop format into a video game is always going to have some shuffling of unit roles and stats. The fact that White Lions are just an incredibly efficient mid tier infantry rather than another competing directly with sword masters and phoenix guard (a situation which would create the same result of one unit being better and therefore seeing more use in optimized stacks) isn't a meaningful loss. Ditto for miners in comparison to dwarf warriors.
The initial question in this thread was why this is the case. I think the answer is fairly clear. Whether you find it satisfying or not is up to you.
- Report
2 · Disagree 2AgreeOr is that because they get new fancy gun- and crab hands?
Edit: Yeah actually in terms of game design it makes sense that they gain armor piercing because of the guns, crab claws and anchor. Slaanesh claws by comparision are all armor percing I believe?
- Report
0 · 1Disagree Agree- Report
1 · Disagree 1Agree- Report
1 · Disagree 1AgreeIt probably won't be shown this way ingame, but one thing that distinguished ogres from other monstrous infantry on the tabletop was that while the generally had lower Strength (and thus weren't as effective at smashing armour) with their regular attacks, they used their mass as a weapon a lot more than other monstrous infantry, to the point of having impact hits. It's possible that this is what they're actually doing to the walls - they're not bashing at them with their piddly little clubs, they're all forming up as a unit and charging at the wall and slamming their entire collective weight against the wall at once. This is something that less intelligent monstrous infantry like kroxigors, rat ogres, and trolls likely wouldn't have the coordination to do (they didn't do it on tabletop, after all), but if done enough times it might well cause a stone wall to start to shake apart.
Alternatively, if every infantry unit in a siege carries ladders, it would make sense for ogres to carry battering rams. An entire unit of ogres slamming logs into a wall probably wouldn't be a whole lot less destructive than a battery of stone throwers bombarding the wall. Again, this is something that most monstrous infantry probably wouldn't think of to do. Ogres aren't the sharpest tools in the shed, after all, but they're still quite a bit smarter than feral Rat Ogres, Kroxigor that sometimes need to have their weapons tied onto them so they don't forget to use them, and trolls that actually had the Stupidity rule. While there are monstrous infantry units in the game that would be smart enough to do so, the fact that they don't could be explained by them feeling that they don't need to because they're parts of factions that have plenty of infantry to attack the walls, so for them it's more efficient to just carry their regular weapons and to go for the more vulnerable gates while their allies occupy the defenders on the walls. Ogres, however, don't have this option, since nobody sensible is going to expect gnoblars to successfully carry out a wall assault against any opposition of note. Necessity is the mother of invention, even if you're an ogre.
In short, ogres might not be using the same techniques against walls that they use against enemy combatants that move and fight back. They could have been an offensive anti-large, to complement PG (defensive anti-large) and SM (offensive anti-infantry). While the mid-tier versions could have been Chracian Hunters, ie, the cultural group from whom the White Lions are recruited from.
- Report
2 · 1Disagree 2Agree- Report
2 · Disagree 2AgreeArmour piercing stuff generally puts a lot off mass and speed behind a small tip.
A club isn't good at piercing armor, however if it is strong enough you can certainly use it as a sledge hammer and knock down walls.
Whether your looking for the coveted 'salty post of the month' award or are having a significant emotional moment for unknown reasons, it is a poor effort of a post/thread.
- Report
0 · 3Disagree Agree- Report
0 · Disagree AgreeWhite Lions only needed to be Generalist AP that's decent vs. both infantry and large sized units (as opposed to SM and PG who overspecialized against infantry and large respectively) with Stubborn
- Report
1 · Disagree 1Agree