High charge bonus infantry

saweendra#3399

I do not think any of the high charge bonus infantry apart from daemonettes whose high speed and pretty high stat line

And death runners with their weeping blades perform well.

Even the units mentioned work due to their superior stat lines and gimmicks


Not necessarily due their cb

I think units like bestigors , plague monks..etc

Who have very high cb

Need to be reclassified as shock infantry

Given moderate speed boost of +5 base line


And more importantly a new rule which allows all the rank of the infantry to benifit from cb allowing them to actually function as their intended role instead of generlizing them with

Normal gw wepaon infantry and making them more grindy.

Loupi#8512

something is not working quite right with charges hitting (especially noticeable on infantry v infantry) you can see a lot of the time charges will fall short or get stuck, similar to the old great stag charge problems.

Spellbound1875#4610

I agree with your premise that "shock infantry" as a unit class need some help but I'm not sure your suggestions would address their issues.

And more importantly a new rule which allows all the rank of the infantry to benifit from cb allowing them to actually function as their intended role instead of generlizing them with

When you say this are you suggesting that every infantry unit that's charging should get it's CB individually or are you suggesting that more units need to be able to apply their CB on the charge?

If it's the former, that's how the game works currently, CB is entity based and starts with each entities charge animation.

If it's the latter, that's basically what happened after the charge bugfix and the result was making changes to reduce the number of infantry who could attack on the charge as well as systemically buffing all cavalry units to counter balance the effect. It seems like a bad idea to roll back some of those changes because their results are hard to predict and negatively impact units other than infantry at a greater rate.

I think the actual issue is that shock infantry by and large have pretty bad stats. You yourself note this when you say Exalted Daemonettes and Death Runners (though I don't know if these are really a shock infantry given their low CB of 22) are solid because of their stats and abilities, which is entirely correct.

Good shock infantry for the price like Marauder Berserkers, Bladesingers, and Exalted Daemonettes have WS values around 50-60 against infantry and CB values around 30 with the more expensive of the bunch having extremely high AP ratios (Bladesingers jump between 48 majority AP and 63 majority base with BvI). Bad shock infantry for the price like Wardancers and Plague monks have WS values in the 30-40s and CB values in the 20s. That's not end all be all of balancing obviously (Berserkers also distinguish themselves with high health and Berserk at the same price) but it's the most apparent difference between units of this class that function well and units of this class that do not.

Exalted Daemonettes are a solid case study of this since they went from a mediocre at best unit in patch 1.2 to the solid shock infantry they are in 1.3 when they received +7 CB, +7 AP, and +5 base damage taking them from 38 WS and 28 CB to 50 WS and 35 CB. Daemonettes on the other hand received much less (just CB from 20 to 30) and are still quite mediocre since their damage output isn't much better than most 800 cost Greatweapon units.

Considering that many GW units have CB values around the low 20s and AP WS's in the mid 30s the fact that shock infantry who have identical combat stats, worse AP values and lower health struggle seems to follow naturally. Boosting WS and CB for some of these weaker units seems like a simpler solution if you want them to be glass cannons. In the case of Dryads, Witch Elfs, Black Ark Corsairs and Nehekhara warriors it's seemed broadly effective. Obviously don't put every unit in the class to 50 WS no questions asked but it's clear that these glass cannons are missing the cannon.

The_real_FAUST#6885

Yes it seems there is something going on with how they interact it's seems weak for some reason

Jman5#8318

Loupi#8512 said:

something is not working quite right with charges hitting (especially noticeable on infantry v infantry) you can see a lot of the time charges will fall short or get stuck, similar to the old great stag charge problems.

In Warhammer 2, if part of the formation hit first, the rest of the formation would quickly follow through at a sprint. In Warhammer 3, the part of the formation that doesn't connect with the enemy immediately will suddenly stop, and then slowly walk in.

It's less noticeable on larger units like Cavalry because their mass and speed usually brings everything forward quick enough to avoid it.

saweendra#3399

Spellbound1875#4610 said:

I agree with your premise that "shock infantry" as a unit class need some help but I'm not sure your suggestions would address their issues.

And more importantly a new rule which allows all the rank of the infantry to benifit from cb allowing them to actually function as their intended role instead of generlizing them with

When you say this are you suggesting that every infantry unit that's charging should get it's CB individually or are you suggesting that more units need to be able to apply their CB on the charge?

If it's the former, that's how the game works currently, CB is entity based and starts with each entities charge animation.

If it's the latter, that's basically what happened after the charge bugfix and the result was making changes to reduce the number of infantry who could attack on the charge as well as systemically buffing all cavalry units to counter balance the effect. It seems like a bad idea to roll back some of those changes because their results are hard to predict and negatively impact units other than infantry at a greater rate.

I think the actual issue is that shock infantry by and large have pretty bad stats. You yourself note this when you say Exalted Daemonettes and Death Runners (though I don't know if these are really a shock infantry given their low CB of 22) are solid because of their stats and abilities, which is entirely correct.

Good shock infantry for the price like Marauder Berserkers, Bladesingers, and Exalted Daemonettes have WS values around 50-60 against infantry and CB values around 30 with the more expensive of the bunch having extremely high AP ratios (Bladesingers jump between 48 majority AP and 63 majority base with BvI). Bad shock infantry for the price like Wardancers and Plague monks have WS values in the 30-40s and CB values in the 20s. That's not end all be all of balancing obviously (Berserkers also distinguish themselves with high health and Berserk at the same price) but it's the most apparent difference between units of this class that function well and units of this class that do not.

Exalted Daemonettes are a solid case study of this since they went from a mediocre at best unit in patch 1.2 to the solid shock infantry they are in 1.3 when they received +7 CB, +7 AP, and +5 base damage taking them from 38 WS and 28 CB to 50 WS and 35 CB. Daemonettes on the other hand received much less (just CB from 20 to 30) and are still quite mediocre since their damage output isn't much better than most 800 cost Greatweapon units.

Considering that many GW units have CB values around the low 20s and AP WS's in the mid 30s the fact that shock infantry who have identical combat stats, worse AP values and lower health struggle seems to follow naturally. Boosting WS and CB for some of these weaker units seems like a simpler solution if you want them to be glass cannons. In the case of Dryads, Witch Elfs, Black Ark Corsairs and Nehekhara warriors it's seemed broadly effective. Obviously don't put every unit in the class to 50 WS no questions asked but it's clear that these glass cannons are missing the cannon.

the latter


i just don't care for their extended combat ability currently their charges are pretty weak,
all three of the unit you mention shine in the grind not so on the charge

Spellbound1875#4610

Thanks for the clarification. To be clear I think it's a bad idea to move back to that direction as it through off balance between unit classes quite a bit as lower health units like cav, monstrous cav, and SE's are more negatively impacted by extra attacks.

I'm struggling somewhat to understand what your balance goal is. It seems to me that having units be strong on the charge and only on the charge would be best met by boosting CB massively and lowering MA/MD/WS, which I'm not sure would be desirable for infantry.

It both steps on the toes of cavalry and relies on infantry being able to cycle charge which is difficult for anything under monstrous infantry speed. I also worry that to have damage numbers which make the units cost effective we'd be making the game rocket tag, i.e. getting a charge off devastates the target to the point where combat is massively sped up and the game becomes overly focused on the charge.

I flatly disagree that the units I highlighted don't shine on the charge. Exalted Daemonettes for example do more than 1000 damage above Swordmasters on the charge against Chaos Warriors. You see similar results with Bladesingers. Berserkers out damage units like Wardancers on the charge again suggesting exceptional performance for these units. They aren't slouches in a grind sure but they're doing a much larger proportion of their damage on the charge than most GW units and most Shock infantry (bloodletters are pretty comparable but they have CBs of 30 and 36)

The glass cannon unit design CA uses aims for massive damage being traded off with large vulnerability to damage, usually through low armor, low health, or both. In theory the front loading of damage provides benefits in leadership shocks and reduces damage taken by ending combat quickly. Quickly is relative though. Even exceptional units like Exalted Daemonettes are still fighting for 30+ seconds most of the time, and there statline is way above the average for the class. I think infantry fights getting much shorter would be detrimental to the games health.

Mind you upon reflection I think for Plague Monks and Wardancers you could balance them by just cutting 100 gold from each unit. They'd be comparable to the current Black Ark Corsairs and Battle Pilgrims which feels broadly appropriate (wardancers being so close to dryad price isn't ideal however, I might prefer buffing them). I think a similar approach of price cuts works for the Khorne Dual axe units (Dual Axe marauders at 500 feels reasonable, Warriors 900 is probably fine). Rangers could probably benefit from 25ish gold cut.

Only units in the class that needs exceptional balance changes imo are Gor Herd and Daemonettes. For Gor herd slapping a BvI value of around 7 would work decently. For Daemonettes just giving them all the buffs listed in the 1.3 patch would probably be sufficient. Weird note, Savage Orcs (basic) should probably be in this category. Some BvI would help give them a real niche in the roster and justify their price.

saweendra#3399

not for every unit just for this specific class as additional new rule similar to orger charge.


yes we can balance them by cost or improving their stats but that only means there is no true shock infantry in game

edit massively boosting CB is pointless since only the two ranks of the infantry benfit from it the goal of the balance change is to make them actually viable on the charge and play into infantry strength numbers

now as for the speed comment thats why i also suggest a + 5 speed boost for the slower ones that are below 45 base line with out such things as primal furry


so they can cycle but it will take heavy casulties but if the player can pull it off than its devastating

Bastilean#7242

Isn't high CB infantry what caused the great infantry out trading charging cavalry debacle in Warhammer 2 two years ago?

Spellbound1875#4610

Point 1.
More that two rows benefit from CB on average in the current build, that's the only way charges are seeing the damage numbers we currently have. CB activates per entity and decays on a per entity basis. As long as there is sufficient distance to start a charge animation and the cool down is not active an entity will charge and get the boni.

As an example we can compare Exalted Daemonette damage and Swordmaster damage at the 4 second mark. 4 seconds means the entities which landed their attacks at the beginning of the charge can't have attacked a second time, the damage can only be explained by first time attackers. The TLDR is the number of attacks after accounting for armor and accuracy is somewhere between 50 and 60 based on RNG rolls, which requires some number of the 3rd line to engage in combat. Beyond that on the low end half of the infantry models are getting to swing on the charge which is a substantially proportion.

Both units were used at default stretch which puts about 20 entities in each line.

Daemonettes dealt 2838 damage at 4 seconds (attack interval 4). 66 damage per hit into 100 armor. Land 74% of attacks on chaos warriors. 43 attacks need to land. Devastating flanker maybe active for some of these entites on the edge which would potentially lower the number of attacks needed slightly but based on the stretch used this seems unlikely. About 60 attacks needed to hit this number on average assuming no devastating flanker.

Swordmasters dealt 2299 damage at 4 seconds (attack interval 4.3). 54 damage per hit into 100 armor. Land 88% of attacks on chaos warriors. 43 attacks need to land. About 50 attacks needed to hit this number on average. The lower number of attacks suggested here may be simple RNG or it may be the result of devastating flanker boost Daemonette damage slightly. However on the low end we're seeing about half of the 3rd line engaging in combat.

Mind you I think we can even ignore all this testing and simply note that the two front rows in their entirety are making up 40% of the above units without me going full spaghetti lines. Even at only two rows that's CB x40 on the low end which would make CB quite powerful.

Given the above just leaning extremely hard into CB should be effective if you wanted to create a "true shock infantry" without the need to change how charges work on an individual unit level (which may or may not be feasible). For the record I still wouldn't advise this as I think the gameplay pattern would be toxic but the idea that CB isn't impactful for infantry doesn't seem well supported by observations of the live game, or reflecting on the dev history of TWW games.

Point 2. I don't think it's reasonable to say that units like Berserkers, Exalted Daemonettes, or Bladesingers aren't impressive on the charge. At the 4 second margin Daemonettes have a bit more than 500 damage on the Swordmasters (similar priced AP unit specialized in killing infantry) and that lead grows until about halfway through the CB decay at which point it mostly sustains, though the swordmasters trade more effectively. Not to mention against the targeted unit of chaos warriors that's about 1/3rd of the units health gone before the Daemonettes make a second attack which is a huge amount of damage.

The fact that Exalted Daemonettes don't immediately start losing combat after the charge is more a reflection on their extremely good combat stats/the charmged effect but it doesn't undercut the point that a glass cannon statline in the current system can produce impressive damage results. Swordmasters, a unit which is much better in sustained combat do notably worse on the charge.

To reiterate, you can explain the poor performance of units like Plague Monks and Wardancers (and many other glass cannon units) simply by noting their damage isn't particularly impressive. On the charge 61 damage max with 25% AP and 72 damage max with ~27% AP just aren't good for the price or the defenses. Berserkers are at 98 (25% AP) with much better defenses, Khorne Dual Axes Marauders are at 82 damage (25% AP) and are a unit I'd argue need a price cut. As another point of comparison a unit which is only tangentially related to this unit class, Black Ark Corsairs, deal 63 (29% AP) for 100 gold less with 80 armor and more health than wardancers.

If we compare these values to GW units around the 800 price point the low damage becomes fairly apparent. Marauder GWs hit for 52 max, Foot Squires 65, Longbeards for 52, White Lions for 52, Bloodletters for 73!, Armored Kossars for 56, etc. We see our weak glass cannons are either at parity or only 10-20 damage up, despite the worse AP ratio resulting in greater damage loss. Berserkers on the other hand in the absolute worst case scenario are still up by 15 and more often are up by 30 to 40 damage. They also have the highest accuracy out of the units presented by a huge margin.

There isn't a need to look for bugs or to make mechanics changes here, the problem is just that glass cannon units are systemically underpowered with CA needing to given them higher WS/CB/BvI/mix of the former numbers or ridiculously powerful effects such as weeping blades for them to see use.

saweendra#3399

unless @CA_Duck was lieing isn't the whole purpose of charge changes were only two rows gets CB ?


plus i think E. demonnets over all stat line mean i rarely of ever seen them as shock infantry but more like secondary sweeper units

Spellbound1875#4610

I don't think Duck ever made the claim that the cav beta meant only two rows would get CB.

Checking the cav beta post from CA it just indicated that infantry entities were no longer able to charge if blocked by an entity in front of them and that they predicted this change would lower total attacks on the charge by around 35% (and this had some caveats I noted below). Infantry were needing to attack with around 60% of their entities to hit the damage numbers seen post bug fix. Since infantry move around each other to pile in as long as a space can be found and there is sufficient distance new entities will charge into combat as spaces open up. The key bit of text I think is this

This reduces the damage dealt by infantry when counter-charging as fewer entities get an immediate charge attack. This helps cavalry trade more favourably with infantry.   

Emphasize mine. The 35% reduction wasn't a count of the total number of charge attacks reduced but of the number removed from the countercharge itself.

This comment further corroborates the point that while attacks were more delayed than reduced.

Most likely that spike comes from the rear ranks that remain standing after the initial contact getting their attacks in. Even though they might not get charge attacks on the charge, they are essentially loaded and ready to attack once the path is clear for them to strike.

Quote from this thread https://forums.totalwar.com/discussion/comment/3162210#Comment_3162210
Which was in response to testing by various folks, though Disposable Hero presented it most clearly, showing the damage loss for infantry was much lower than the 35% reduction in attacks would imply.

Chart attached here

Again the language choice of "might not get charge attacks on the charge" reflects the fact that CB is applied per entity and that delayed attacks can still have full CB. You can actually see the gentle curve upwards of tests post charge bugfix and cav beta which suggests gentle spikes as late charging infantry are piling in.

Most testing I've done in game 3 suggests CB is active on some level for infantry upwards of 30 seconds (comparison of Bloodletter performance in game versus the math on their sustained combat damage showed greater in game values at 30 seconds, which is best explained by some late charges still having active CB) as new models push forward but that the rate of new charging infantry drops precipitously after the first 5ish seconds. As long as an infantry entity can make the charge animation they get the charge bonus whether at second 1 or second 45.

As for Exalted Daemonettes being able to fulfill other roles sure, but if we're not classifying them as shock infantry I don't think the classification makes sense. They're basically the highest damage infantry on the charge in the game currently, only competition would realistically be Exalted Bloodletters. The fact that they are elite enough to kill basically anything on the charge and can also hold their own in sustained combat against most units just reflects their elite status.

Asamu#6386

Loupi#8512 said:

something is not working quite right with charges hitting (especially noticeable on infantry v infantry) you can see a lot of the time charges will fall short or get stuck, similar to the old great stag charge problems.

It's a completely different problem than the problem stag knights had. What happens now (and it happens to cav and monstrous units as well) is that units sometimes kill all of their momentum when the first entity makes contact with an enemy, stopping completely when the unit enters combat, and then even entities well away from the enemy will only walk, as if they were in close quarters with the target (except from 10-20m away instead of 1-3). The charge is cut off early, so, especially if the charge was messy, a lot of the entities, even ones that make it to combat, won't even get their charge bonus (charge bonus is, unless I'm mistaken, determined on a per entity basis).

When you get clean charges from units that were entirely unengaged previously, it's almost never an issue, but it's a real problem when charges are at all messy or a unit is already engaged with something else and is attempting to charge a new target.

It's been happening since launch of WH3. I don't think this ever happened in WH1/2.


The move to ultra was particularly noticeable for infantry though, since they don't penetrate the enemy unit like cav/monstrous units to get more entities fighting. Infantry vs Infantry fights have the same amount of entities fighting on ultra as they did on large, which makes charge bonus a lot less valuable than before, as combat damage is 25% lower relative to total unit HP until around 2-3-75% of the unit is dead (eg: if the charge did ~1/3 of enemy unit HP on the charge before on large, it'd do ~25% now on ultra).

Loupi#8512

Asamu#6386 said:

Loupi#8512 said:

something is not working quite right with charges hitting (especially noticeable on infantry v infantry) you can see a lot of the time charges will fall short or get stuck, similar to the old great stag charge problems.

It's a completely different problem than the problem stag knights had. What happens now (and it happens to cav and monstrous units as well) is that units sometimes kill all of their momentum when the first entity makes contact with an enemy, stopping completely when the unit enters combat, and then even entities well away from the enemy will only walk, as if they were in close quarters with the target (except from 10-20m away instead of 1-3). The charge is cut off early, so, especially if the charge was messy, a lot of the entities, even ones that make it to combat, won't even get their charge bonus (charge bonus is, unless I'm mistaken, determined on a per entity basis).

When you get clean charges from units that were entirely unengaged previously, it's almost never an issue, but it's a real problem when charges are at all messy or a unit is already engaged with something else and is attempting to charge a new target.

It's been happening since launch of WH3. I don't think this ever happened in WH1/2.


The move to ultra was particularly noticeable for infantry though, since they don't penetrate the enemy unit like cav/monstrous units to get more entities fighting. Infantry vs Infantry fights have the same amount of entities fighting on ultra as they did on large, which makes charge bonus a lot less valuable than before, as combat damage is 25% lower relative to total unit HP until around 2-3-75% of the unit is dead (eg: if the charge did ~1/3 of enemy unit HP on the charge before on large, it'd do ~25% now on ultra).

nah stag knights have always done that too, you can still see them doing it now

saweendra#3399

Spellbound1875#4610 said:

I don't think Duck ever made the claim that the cav beta meant only two rows would get CB.

Checking the cav beta post from CA it just indicated that infantry entities were no longer able to charge if blocked by an entity in front of them and that they predicted this change would lower total attacks on the charge by around 35% (and this had some caveats I noted below). Infantry were needing to attack with around 60% of their entities to hit the damage numbers seen post bug fix. Since infantry move around each other to pile in as long as a space can be found and there is sufficient distance new entities will charge into combat as spaces open up. The key bit of text I think is this

This reduces the damage dealt by infantry when counter-charging as fewer entities get an immediate charge attack. This helps cavalry trade more favourably with infantry.

Emphasize mine. The 35% reduction wasn't a count of the total number of charge attacks reduced but of the number removed from the countercharge itself.

This comment further corroborates the point that while attacks were more delayed than reduced.

Most likely that spike comes from the rear ranks that remain standing after the initial contact getting their attacks in. Even though they might not get charge attacks on the charge, they are essentially loaded and ready to attack once the path is clear for them to strike.

Quote from this thread https://forums.totalwar.com/discussion/comment/3162210#Comment_3162210
Which was in response to testing by various folks, though Disposable Hero presented it most clearly, showing the damage loss for infantry was much lower than the 35% reduction in attacks would imply.

Chart attached here

Again the language choice of "might not get charge attacks on the charge" reflects the fact that CB is applied per entity and that delayed attacks can still have full CB. You can actually see the gentle curve upwards of tests post charge bugfix and cav beta which suggests gentle spikes as late charging infantry are piling in.

Most testing I've done in game 3 suggests CB is active on some level for infantry upwards of 30 seconds (comparison of Bloodletter performance in game versus the math on their sustained combat damage showed greater in game values at 30 seconds, which is best explained by some late charges still having active CB) as new models push forward but that the rate of new charging infantry drops precipitously after the first 5ish seconds. As long as an infantry entity can make the charge animation they get the charge bonus whether at second 1 or second 45.

As for Exalted Daemonettes being able to fulfill other roles sure, but if we're not classifying them as shock infantry I don't think the classification makes sense. They're basically the highest damage infantry on the charge in the game currently, only competition would realistically be Exalted Bloodletters. The fact that they are elite enough to kill basically anything on the charge and can also hold their own in sustained combat against most units just reflects their elite status.

Fair enough on first point though its bit ambiguous and i am not searching trough all the places where duck spoke..


And i still do prefer adding new rule to allow very specific units to have the previous behaviour


Since that charge attack means lot more on contact damage which will go a long way and make them feel like shock infantry.

The units i have in mind are


Gors dual axe
Bestigors
Plague monks
Wardancers and spear dancers( excluding blade dancers since they have very high stats to begin with if they get this ability need rebalance and this appllies to daemonettes, exalted daemonettes , as well eshin triads and death runners though the latter two are mostly due to how strong weeping blade is)

Miners tentivaily hammers but again would prefer rebalance if they start over performing.

Rangers with great weapons

Depth guard both varients

And sisters of slaughter


Red crested skinks

Forsaken of all types.


Now i am also gonna admit this is lot of work on CA end but i think this something they should do to make for crisp game play.




Also another thing to note is i never said e. Damenottes are not shock infantry just said currently no one really use them as shock infantry




Now to answer final point before i end
Whats the final goal of i am trying to achive


Not grindy infantry with high charge

Not sweeper units like what currently witch elves and daemonettes are but infantry unit that can rapidly punch holes in opposing line while taking massive casualties and given the opportunity get a rear charge..

But unlike cavalry out maneuvering isn't the primary use.

Asamu#6386

Loupi#8512 said:

\nah stag knights have always done that too, you can still see them doing it now

Stag knights stopped because of their charge animation, not because of a universal problem like we're seeing in WH3 with units seemingly almost randomly killing their momentum upon contact with any enemy unit, even when charging (It could be a result of the game treating them as encountering a "new" enemy aside from the charge target and immediately cancelling orders, seeing as it usually happens with messy charges).

They had their own problems when they first launched due to their animations being bad. IIRC, they were pushing enemies outside of their attack range before the damage was supposed to be dealt, but after the roll was made, resulting in no damage being dealt. CA then changed a bit of code behind the scenes to guarantee damage if an attack roll was made and scored a hit, which also resulted in infantry being able to deal damage back to cavalry in mutual charges, leading to adjustments to the conditions for infantry to begin their attacks while charging and the cavalry update and impact calculation changes later on.

Loupi#8512

Asamu#6386 said:

Loupi#8512 said:

\nah stag knights have always done that too, you can still see them doing it now

Stag knights stopped because of their charge animation, not because of a universal problem like we're seeing in WH3 with units seemingly almost randomly killing their momentum upon contact with any enemy unit, even when charging (It could be a result of the game treating them as encountering a "new" enemy aside from the charge target and immediately cancelling orders, seeing as it usually happens with messy charges).

They had their own problems when they first launched due to their animations being bad. IIRC, they were pushing enemies outside of their attack range before the damage was supposed to be dealt, but after the roll was made, resulting in no damage being dealt. CA then changed a bit of code behind the scenes to guarantee damage if an attack roll was made and scored a hit, which also resulted in infantry being able to deal damage back to cavalry in mutual charges, leading to adjustments to the conditions for infantry to begin their attacks while charging and the cavalry update and impact calculation changes later on.

yeah notice that I said "similar to the great stag problems" . cause might be different but the effect is the same.

Spellbound1875#4610

Bastilean#7242 said:

Isn't high CB infantry what caused the great infantry out trading charging cavalry debacle in Warhammer 2 two years ago?

So upon rereading it's not quite true. The issue was an increase in the number of attacks made by infantry. Halberds and spears who had minimal CB became must stronger on the charge into large targets because BvL was applying into cav and they saw a modest damage boost into infantry. It wasn't the CB but the number of attacks being made and later changes aimed to slow the rate of attacks not just nerf high CB units. High CB units just benefited more from the extra attacks so the effect was more pronounced but it was a systemic issue. CA's response of buffing cav defenses, tweaking charge behavior, and adding charge reflection is a theoretically sound way to rebalance the game (more work is needed imo).

Which I do think is worth keeping in mind when looking at game 3 charge weirdness. @Loupi#8512 @Asamu#6386 Correct me if I'm wrong but most of the units in the glass cannon category were pretty bad performers in game 2 for the price and had been for most of the games history yes?

Wardancers and Plaguemonks weren't common picks before the bugfix and didn't strike me as strong performers (Plaguemonks were basically just a summon). BM units at the end of game 2 were systemically over-performing since the BoP overvalued them and prior to that bug Ungors were commonly IDed as better than Gors from a cost efficiency standpoint. Bestigors sucking was one of the more common observations about the faction I recall. Units like Black Ark Corsairs and Nehekhara warriors were non-entities in the meta. Witch Elves existed to apply frenzy and were still quite rare.

Post Bugfix cheap and midtier GW's were the kings of the meta not high CB infantry in general (notably expensive GW's and Shock infantry received a disproportionate amount of buffs moving to game 2 none of which broke the game). Exceptions to this rule were basically Berserkers and maybe Forsaken after the Stag Knight fix (both have WS in the 60s, CBs in the high 40s, and exceptional defenses by glass cannon standards)? Stuff like Bladesingers, Battle Pilgrims, and HE Rangers saw play sometimes but I wouldn't say they were viewed as good (two out of three of those factions were in rough balance straits as I recall). When the bug holding them back got fixed they were immediately displaced by GWs which suggests they still weren't good for the cost.

I see little reason to expect that if charges were working with 100% effectiveness (I haven't had major charge issues consistently but I have seen the behavior described) that these units would suddenly be performing cost effectively. Stats seem like a more plausible explanation for the issues this thread aims to highlight. Obviously CA should address inconsistent unit behavior but I think that's missing the forest for the trees.