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

All Men-At-Arms Need To Be Expendable

Ephraim_DaltonEphraim_Dalton Senior MemberRegistered Users Posts: 26,039
All ungor variations are expendable.
All goblins on foot are expendable.
Only the peasant mob is expendable.

Notice something? I don't see anything that justifies this imbalance. Not even peasant archers are expendable fer crissakes!

The TT rule for Bretonnian Knights was that they ignore the morale checks from all fleeing infantry units, so all infantry, except for maybe Battle Pilgrims and Foot Squires should get the expendable trait.

Comments

  • BugmansxxxBugmansxxx Registered Users Posts: 288
    edited February 2018
    Problem is that battlepilgrims and footsquires should get morale hit from fleeing men-at-arms.

    I agree with you for the knights but making men-at-arms fodder would infact buff battlepilgims and footsquires indirectly.
  • Nitros14Nitros14 Junior Member Registered Users Posts: 1,873
    Unintended consequence: Now Men-at-Arms suffer a leadership hit from fleeing peasants.
  • MrMecHMrMecH Registered Users Posts: 2,291
    Agree. However they need to nerf Pole-arms version. Expandable in 500+ price unit seem weird.
    SHUT UP GIVE US GHORGON!!!!!

  • Ephraim_DaltonEphraim_Dalton Senior Member Registered Users Posts: 26,039
    Battle Pilgrims and Foot Squires need a boost anyway, so I see that as a plus. Men-At-Arms being affected by fleeing peasents...well, they're all peasents, so it fits and I'd say it's less of a downside than the routinely mass-routing men-at-arms making knights skittish.

  • SephlockSephlock Registered Users Posts: 2,394

    #JusticeForUshoran #RuneGolems #RuneGuardians #ShardDragons #Thunderbarges #Stormfiends #BigMonsters #MoreDakka
  • TempestWolfTempestWolf Senior Member Registered Users Posts: 963
    edited February 2018
    sice it's bretonia... maybe a special flag: serfs... where they are not affected by fleeing expendables... but neither are knights affected by fleeing serfs

    EDIT: or maybe expendable for men at arms and "lesser than insects" for peasants :lol:
  • SerkeletSerkelet Member Registered Users Posts: 364
    In canpaign my men at arms only rout when under 20 men left. Is this a MP thread?
  • coffeecake13coffeecake13 Junior Member Registered Users Posts: 475
    Nitros14 said:

    Unintended consequence: Now Men-at-Arms suffer a leadership hit from fleeing peasants.

    ^This. There is a reason why they aren't expendable. This game isn't a tabletop simulator.
  • ZerglesZergles Member Registered Users Posts: 3,014
    That's a bad idea. Men at arms have low leadership compared to other troops, sure. But for what you pay for them? It's pretty high. If you keep Lords, Heroes, or a Relic near they end up holding fairly well. Very well with a Grail Relic near.

    You would make chain routing worse, in my opinion. If you gave them all expendable. Obviously because they would no longer ignore peasants like others pointed out. And in SP that would actually be an issue. It wouldn't have much effect on Knights either. Bret cav all has such high leadership that it makes very little difference as to whether men at arms, are or are not expendable.Foot Squires and Battle Pilgrims would also barely see any effects off of the proposed change. But you do take something away from all men at arms. Their ability to ignore peasants and keep up with higher tier infantry or knights.

    What do you plan to do about Yeomen? Should they be expendable despite being almost the same stats and function as Warhounds?

    What about artillary crews?

  • boyfightsboyfights Junior Member Registered Users Posts: 4,023

    sice it's bretonia... maybe a special flag: serfs... where they are not affected by fleeing expendables... but neither are knights affected by fleeing serfs

    EDIT: or maybe expendable for men at arms and "lesser than insects" for peasants :lol:

    a tier system seems a decent solution, and other factions could probably make use of one as well. Chaos dwarfs could have dwarf/hobgoblin/greenskin tiers or greenskins could use black orcs/other orcs/goblins
    boyfights you are always here to confirmate every spark of originality
    or reason burns or acid bruises anyone,
    stop your gladiator love for agressions.
  • Ephraim_DaltonEphraim_Dalton Senior Member Registered Users Posts: 26,039
    I disagree that making MAA expendable would hurt Bretonnia. BM and GS have this system where practically all their chaff is expendable and I don't see it hurting them. BM even used to be the most competitive race until this patch.

  • GallowmereWarlockGallowmereWarlock Registered Users Posts: 281

    I disagree that making MAA expendable would hurt Bretonnia. BM and GS have this system where practically all their chaff is expendable and I don't see it hurting them. BM even used to be the most competitive race until this patch.

    Because you don't use many ungors or goblins* on those armies anyway.

    * Skarsnik is another story because he buffs the goblins to not be just chaff
    <3
  • Ephraim_DaltonEphraim_Dalton Senior Member Registered Users Posts: 26,039

    I disagree that making MAA expendable would hurt Bretonnia. BM and GS have this system where practically all their chaff is expendable and I don't see it hurting them. BM even used to be the most competitive race until this patch.

    Because you don't use many ungors or goblins* on those armies anyway.

    * Skarsnik is another story because he buffs the goblins to not be just chaff
    You are not going to use many MAA in Bretonnian armies either eventually.

  • JastalllJastalll Junior Member Registered Users Posts: 1,156
    No, because then peasants become even more useless, and Men-at-Arms aren't expendable fodder, they actually receive some amount of training and are soldiers. Both gameplay and fluff wise they shouldn't be expendable.

    Yes, in lore Knights don't care too much about the lowborn, but even then seeing all their infantry support get demolished is bound to rattle them some.
  • TolgharTolghar Registered Users Posts: 97
    Rather than nerfing already weak troop choice why not give knights special ability that allows them to ignore?
  • Total War ftwTotal War ftw Member Registered Users Posts: 1,272
    What does the expendable trait do again? I've seen it on Ai stacks but didn't look at what it gives.
  • Vanilla_GorillaVanilla_Gorilla Registered Users Posts: 20,719
    edited February 2018
    Nah, they're people.

    Making all low tier units the same is boring anyway.
    Malakai is the best choice for a Dwarf LP. Give us Slayer lords so we may form a Slayer host and revel in our destruction!
  • BaronKlatzBaronKlatz Registered Users Posts: 1,037
    Tolghar said:

    Rather than nerfing already weak troop choice why not give knights special ability that allows them to ignore?

    I like this idea.

    (Boyfights idea is also interesting but I don't know how that'll make things different. )
  • Ephraim_DaltonEphraim_Dalton Senior Member Registered Users Posts: 26,039

    What does the expendable trait do again? I've seen it on Ai stacks but didn't look at what it gives.

    Expendable units fleeing only affects units that also have the expandable trait. So goblins running away doesn't give Ork Boyz the "friendly units are routing" debuff.

  • Total War ftwTotal War ftw Member Registered Users Posts: 1,272
    What does the expendable trait do again? I've seen it on Ai stacks but didn't look at what it gives.

    What does the expendable trait do again? I've seen it on Ai stacks but didn't look at what it gives.

    Expendable units fleeing only affects units that also have the expandable trait. So goblins running away doesn't give Ork Boyz the "friendly units are routing" debuff.


    Oh righto thanks
Sign In or Register to comment.