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

Unit caps

2»

Comments

  • Michael4537Michael4537 Registered Users Posts: 2,241
    I like units caps, but it should be an option that you can tick before you start your campaign. Some people want caps, but other people want to keep the full sandbox experience. Why not both?
  • TennisgolfbollTennisgolfboll Registered Users Posts: 8,720
    edited January 2019

    I like units caps, but it should be an option that you can tick before you start your campaign. Some people want caps, but other people want to keep the full sandbox experience. Why not both?

    Agreed.

    You want AI doomstacking? Only black orc armies for the AI greenskin faction? Then dont tick the box.

    If you want loreful armies full of boyz and state troops for both AI and player? Tick the box.
    It needs to be pointed out that what people call "cheese" is just playing the game the way it actually exists not in some fictional way they think it is supposed to work.
  • Ephraim_DaltonEphraim_Dalton Senior Member Registered Users Posts: 23,908
    That "box" should be the mod button. The basegame should always offer an actually challenging experience.

    Doomstacks are not challenging, since they are all the same you also only ever need the one counter build. And some Doomstacks are just pitifully weak, like the DEs and their Black Guard and Hydra combo which is pathetically easy to counter.

  • CarognaCarogna Registered Users Posts: 314
    Mods that add caps have drastically improved my enjoyment of the game. I think CA should implement it as an optional feature. The more they make the campaign customizable the better.
    Team Skaven
    Team Dark Elves
  • SagrandaSagranda Registered Users Posts: 1,659
    The basegame should offer a challenge that's adequate for the target audience and hardcore players are seldom part of it.
    Sucks a bit for me, too, but that's what mods are for in my eyes.

    I also only ever needed 1 army comp in games with AI recruitment or unit cap mods.
    Both variants are easy when it comes to battles, but a weaker balanced army (balanced as in unit usage throughout all tiers and kinds) vs. a balanced AI army gives me an easier time than a weaker balanced army against a good AI doomstack. Balanced army vs balanced AI army? Easier than most vanilla battles.
    The times I may have actually used counter builds? (AI buff mods excluded) Wood Elves. Though not because of unit caps, doomstacks or stuff like that, but because their army consists of a felt 90% ranged skirmishers which are a pain for a lot of units.

    So again, from my experience, AI recruiting more balanced armies or unit caps won't make the game any harder, unless they ramp up the battle AI buy a huge margin, while also improving its decision making which units are actually the best in slot for a situation/in general.


    Are unit caps more immersive? Yes, on that I agree.
    That AI army comps are more diverse than without? Slightly, but the base build is also often the same. It's also something that can be addressed without unit caps.


    There are a lot of things that would need to happen to actually increase the difficulty, but solely adding unit caps won't solve anything in that regard. At least not for the hardcore audience.
    Disclaimer: What I say is my opinion and not necessarily stated as fact.
  • Ephraim_DaltonEphraim_Dalton Senior Member Registered Users Posts: 23,908
    The playerbase dropped significantly from WH1 to WH2. Sorry, but the Candy Crush crowd are not who will keep this series afloat.

  • TennisgolfbollTennisgolfboll Registered Users Posts: 8,720
    edited January 2019
    Sagranda said:

    The basegame should offer a challenge that's adequate for the target audience and hardcore players are seldom part of it.
    Sucks a bit for me, too, but that's what mods are for in my eyes.

    I also only ever needed 1 army comp in games with AI recruitment or unit cap mods.
    Both variants are easy when it comes to battles, but a weaker balanced army (balanced as in unit usage throughout all tiers and kinds) vs. a balanced AI army gives me an easier time than a weaker balanced army against a good AI doomstack. Balanced army vs balanced AI army? Easier than most vanilla battles.
    The times I may have actually used counter builds? (AI buff mods excluded) Wood Elves. Though not because of unit caps, doomstacks or stuff like that, but because their army consists of a felt 90% ranged skirmishers which are a pain for a lot of units.

    So again, from my experience, AI recruiting more balanced armies or unit caps won't make the game any harder, unless they ramp up the battle AI buy a huge margin, while also improving its decision making which units are actually the best in slot for a situation/in general.


    Are unit caps more immersive? Yes, on that I agree.
    That AI army comps are more diverse than without? Slightly, but the base build is also often the same. It's also something that can be addressed without unit caps.


    There are a lot of things that would need to happen to actually increase the difficulty, but solely adding unit caps won't solve anything in that regard. At least not for the hardcore audience.

    Since there is a cap on deployed units i can with a doomstack massacre the AI. They can just have 40vs20 in first wave. Then they got 40 units as reinforcements but they will trickle in vs my absolute elite faraway on the map. Once i control the battles first wave i massacre reinforcements. My elites has so high MD etc

    If the armies were balanced facing 4 other balanced armies i would probably lose most of the times with 1 stack.

    But with a doomstack i can take out 4 enemy doomstack armies like 100% of the time.

    Also it feels very unloreful to see full dragon armies and swordmasters, nothing but black orcs and giants etc
    It needs to be pointed out that what people call "cheese" is just playing the game the way it actually exists not in some fictional way they think it is supposed to work.
  • SagrandaSagranda Registered Users Posts: 1,659

    The playerbase dropped significantly from WH1 to WH2. Sorry, but the Candy Crush crowd are not who will keep this series afloat.

    And that's solely because of the difficulty and there can't possibly be any other factors.

    Sagranda said:

    The basegame should offer a challenge that's adequate for the target audience and hardcore players are seldom part of it.
    Sucks a bit for me, too, but that's what mods are for in my eyes.

    I also only ever needed 1 army comp in games with AI recruitment or unit cap mods.
    Both variants are easy when it comes to battles, but a weaker balanced army (balanced as in unit usage throughout all tiers and kinds) vs. a balanced AI army gives me an easier time than a weaker balanced army against a good AI doomstack. Balanced army vs balanced AI army? Easier than most vanilla battles.
    The times I may have actually used counter builds? (AI buff mods excluded) Wood Elves. Though not because of unit caps, doomstacks or stuff like that, but because their army consists of a felt 90% ranged skirmishers which are a pain for a lot of units.

    So again, from my experience, AI recruiting more balanced armies or unit caps won't make the game any harder, unless they ramp up the battle AI buy a huge margin, while also improving its decision making which units are actually the best in slot for a situation/in general.


    Are unit caps more immersive? Yes, on that I agree.
    That AI army comps are more diverse than without? Slightly, but the base build is also often the same. It's also something that can be addressed without unit caps.


    There are a lot of things that would need to happen to actually increase the difficulty, but solely adding unit caps won't solve anything in that regard. At least not for the hardcore audience.

    Since there is a cap on deployed units i can with a doomstack massacre the AI. They can just have 40vs20 in first wave. Then they got 40 units as reinforcements but they will trickle in vs my absolute elite faraway on the map. Once i control the battles first wave i massacre reinforcements. My elites has so high MD etc

    If the armies were balanced facing 4 other balanced armies i would probably lose most of the times with 1 stack.

    But with a doomstack i can take out 4 enemy doomstack armies like 100% of the time.

    Also it feels very unloreful to see full dragon armies and swordmasters, nothing but black orcs and giants etc
    I had those situations with the unit cap and recruitment mods and I found taking on 4 Doomstacks harder than the balanced armies.
    Partly because the higher stats compensate, even if only just a little bit, the horrendous battle AI to some degree.

    And then there's also Lightning Strike and the Ambush Attack stances for some factions, which trivialize such situations anyway,

    As I said, unit caps improve immersion, on that I agree, but those kind of examples (full Dragon, full Black Orc, etc.) are far from the sole reason for people who are against unit caps, while AI recruitment of those kind of armies can be fixed without caps, which has been stated often enough by now.
    Disclaimer: What I say is my opinion and not necessarily stated as fact.
  • MonochromaticSpiderMonochromaticSpider Registered Users Posts: 923
    I can sort of see the issue for those who want to do more with tier 1-2 units. You can manage with tier 2-3 armies as Dwarfs but tier 1 Empire? Tier 1 Greenies? Tier 1 TK? That gets ridiculous pretty fast, as higher tier units start being recruited.

    The playerbase dropped significantly from WH1 to WH2. Sorry, but the Candy Crush crowd are not who will keep this series afloat.

    How many people are playing your beloved ToB, though?
  • CanuoveaCanuovea Registered Users, Moderators Posts: 13,871
    Can we please avoid any escalation of sniping? That would be nice.

    I personally do not enjoy being called part of the "Candy Crush Crowd" myself. Certainly that is the implication I've been seeing.
    -Forum Terms and Conditions: https://forums.totalwar.com/discussion/172193/forum-terms-and-conditions#latest
    -Using all caps is the equivalent of shouting. Please don't.
    -The "Spam" flag is not a "disagree" flag. Have a care.
    -...No, no the "Abuse" flag isn't a "disagree" flag either!
    -5.7 Summon a moderator if someone seems to be out of line, or use the report button. Do NOT become another party to misbehaviour
  • Ephraim_DaltonEphraim_Dalton Senior Member Registered Users Posts: 23,908
    Sagranda said:

    The playerbase dropped significantly from WH1 to WH2. Sorry, but the Candy Crush crowd are not who will keep this series afloat.

    And that's solely because of the difficulty and there can't possibly be any other factors.

    Sagranda said:

    The basegame should offer a challenge that's adequate for the target audience and hardcore players are seldom part of it.
    Sucks a bit for me, too, but that's what mods are for in my eyes.

    I also only ever needed 1 army comp in games with AI recruitment or unit cap mods.
    Both variants are easy when it comes to battles, but a weaker balanced army (balanced as in unit usage throughout all tiers and kinds) vs. a balanced AI army gives me an easier time than a weaker balanced army against a good AI doomstack. Balanced army vs balanced AI army? Easier than most vanilla battles.
    The times I may have actually used counter builds? (AI buff mods excluded) Wood Elves. Though not because of unit caps, doomstacks or stuff like that, but because their army consists of a felt 90% ranged skirmishers which are a pain for a lot of units.

    So again, from my experience, AI recruiting more balanced armies or unit caps won't make the game any harder, unless they ramp up the battle AI buy a huge margin, while also improving its decision making which units are actually the best in slot for a situation/in general.


    Are unit caps more immersive? Yes, on that I agree.
    That AI army comps are more diverse than without? Slightly, but the base build is also often the same. It's also something that can be addressed without unit caps.


    There are a lot of things that would need to happen to actually increase the difficulty, but solely adding unit caps won't solve anything in that regard. At least not for the hardcore audience.

    Since there is a cap on deployed units i can with a doomstack massacre the AI. They can just have 40vs20 in first wave. Then they got 40 units as reinforcements but they will trickle in vs my absolute elite faraway on the map. Once i control the battles first wave i massacre reinforcements. My elites has so high MD etc

    If the armies were balanced facing 4 other balanced armies i would probably lose most of the times with 1 stack.

    But with a doomstack i can take out 4 enemy doomstack armies like 100% of the time.

    Also it feels very unloreful to see full dragon armies and swordmasters, nothing but black orcs and giants etc
    I had those situations with the unit cap and recruitment mods and I found taking on 4 Doomstacks harder than the balanced armies.
    Partly because the higher stats compensate, even if only just a little bit, the horrendous battle AI to some degree.

    And then there's also Lightning Strike and the Ambush Attack stances for some factions, which trivialize such situations anyway,

    As I said, unit caps improve immersion, on that I agree, but those kind of examples (full Dragon, full Black Orc, etc.) are far from the sole reason for people who are against unit caps, while AI recruitment of those kind of armies can be fixed without caps, which has been stated often enough by now.
    Doomstacks are pitfifully easy to counter since they will all spam the same 3-4 units and you will quickly learn the hard-counters to them. Those Dragon+Swordmaster HE builds? For Skaven take a bunch of Globadiers and Bombardiers and they get 'recked since unlike human players the AI doesn't abuse the OP agility and mobility of airborne units.

    Also, the AI does play better on the battlefield when it has a healthy mix of units instead of just the same 3-4 all the time, then it just bullrushes.

  • SagrandaSagranda Registered Users Posts: 1,659

    Sagranda said:

    The playerbase dropped significantly from WH1 to WH2. Sorry, but the Candy Crush crowd are not who will keep this series afloat.

    And that's solely because of the difficulty and there can't possibly be any other factors.

    Sagranda said:

    The basegame should offer a challenge that's adequate for the target audience and hardcore players are seldom part of it.
    Sucks a bit for me, too, but that's what mods are for in my eyes.

    I also only ever needed 1 army comp in games with AI recruitment or unit cap mods.
    Both variants are easy when it comes to battles, but a weaker balanced army (balanced as in unit usage throughout all tiers and kinds) vs. a balanced AI army gives me an easier time than a weaker balanced army against a good AI doomstack. Balanced army vs balanced AI army? Easier than most vanilla battles.
    The times I may have actually used counter builds? (AI buff mods excluded) Wood Elves. Though not because of unit caps, doomstacks or stuff like that, but because their army consists of a felt 90% ranged skirmishers which are a pain for a lot of units.

    So again, from my experience, AI recruiting more balanced armies or unit caps won't make the game any harder, unless they ramp up the battle AI buy a huge margin, while also improving its decision making which units are actually the best in slot for a situation/in general.


    Are unit caps more immersive? Yes, on that I agree.
    That AI army comps are more diverse than without? Slightly, but the base build is also often the same. It's also something that can be addressed without unit caps.


    There are a lot of things that would need to happen to actually increase the difficulty, but solely adding unit caps won't solve anything in that regard. At least not for the hardcore audience.

    Since there is a cap on deployed units i can with a doomstack massacre the AI. They can just have 40vs20 in first wave. Then they got 40 units as reinforcements but they will trickle in vs my absolute elite faraway on the map. Once i control the battles first wave i massacre reinforcements. My elites has so high MD etc

    If the armies were balanced facing 4 other balanced armies i would probably lose most of the times with 1 stack.

    But with a doomstack i can take out 4 enemy doomstack armies like 100% of the time.

    Also it feels very unloreful to see full dragon armies and swordmasters, nothing but black orcs and giants etc
    I had those situations with the unit cap and recruitment mods and I found taking on 4 Doomstacks harder than the balanced armies.
    Partly because the higher stats compensate, even if only just a little bit, the horrendous battle AI to some degree.

    And then there's also Lightning Strike and the Ambush Attack stances for some factions, which trivialize such situations anyway,

    As I said, unit caps improve immersion, on that I agree, but those kind of examples (full Dragon, full Black Orc, etc.) are far from the sole reason for people who are against unit caps, while AI recruitment of those kind of armies can be fixed without caps, which has been stated often enough by now.
    Doomstacks are pitfifully easy to counter since they will all spam the same 3-4 units and you will quickly learn the hard-counters to them. Those Dragon+Swordmaster HE builds? For Skaven take a bunch of Globadiers and Bombardiers and they get 'recked since unlike human players the AI doesn't abuse the OP agility and mobility of airborne units.

    Also, the AI does play better on the battlefield when it has a healthy mix of units instead of just the same 3-4 all the time, then it just bullrushes.
    I don't use hardcounters at all. There's no need to.
    Neither with or without unit caps or improved AI recruitment.
    I can use one comp throughout the whole game (depending on the comp, Wood Elves may be excluded) regardless of AI recruitment or caps.
    Though yes, they do make it even easier, but let's not pretend that more mixed armies are excluded from having counters thanks to faction specific strengths and weaknesses, as well as AI recruitment in general. This can not only be tested via cap/recruitment mods, but this has also be shown in pretty much every game with a kind of asymmetrical balance.

    And as said so often bevor, more mixed armies can be achieved without unit caps.

    The AI behaves better?
    It may not necessarily "bullrush", but it remains braindead, which makes the effect of "being better at battles" superficial at best.
    Disclaimer: What I say is my opinion and not necessarily stated as fact.
  • Ephraim_DaltonEphraim_Dalton Senior Member Registered Users Posts: 23,908
    Sagranda said:

    Sagranda said:

    The playerbase dropped significantly from WH1 to WH2. Sorry, but the Candy Crush crowd are not who will keep this series afloat.

    And that's solely because of the difficulty and there can't possibly be any other factors.

    Sagranda said:

    The basegame should offer a challenge that's adequate for the target audience and hardcore players are seldom part of it.
    Sucks a bit for me, too, but that's what mods are for in my eyes.

    I also only ever needed 1 army comp in games with AI recruitment or unit cap mods.
    Both variants are easy when it comes to battles, but a weaker balanced army (balanced as in unit usage throughout all tiers and kinds) vs. a balanced AI army gives me an easier time than a weaker balanced army against a good AI doomstack. Balanced army vs balanced AI army? Easier than most vanilla battles.
    The times I may have actually used counter builds? (AI buff mods excluded) Wood Elves. Though not because of unit caps, doomstacks or stuff like that, but because their army consists of a felt 90% ranged skirmishers which are a pain for a lot of units.

    So again, from my experience, AI recruiting more balanced armies or unit caps won't make the game any harder, unless they ramp up the battle AI buy a huge margin, while also improving its decision making which units are actually the best in slot for a situation/in general.


    Are unit caps more immersive? Yes, on that I agree.
    That AI army comps are more diverse than without? Slightly, but the base build is also often the same. It's also something that can be addressed without unit caps.


    There are a lot of things that would need to happen to actually increase the difficulty, but solely adding unit caps won't solve anything in that regard. At least not for the hardcore audience.

    Since there is a cap on deployed units i can with a doomstack massacre the AI. They can just have 40vs20 in first wave. Then they got 40 units as reinforcements but they will trickle in vs my absolute elite faraway on the map. Once i control the battles first wave i massacre reinforcements. My elites has so high MD etc

    If the armies were balanced facing 4 other balanced armies i would probably lose most of the times with 1 stack.

    But with a doomstack i can take out 4 enemy doomstack armies like 100% of the time.

    Also it feels very unloreful to see full dragon armies and swordmasters, nothing but black orcs and giants etc
    I had those situations with the unit cap and recruitment mods and I found taking on 4 Doomstacks harder than the balanced armies.
    Partly because the higher stats compensate, even if only just a little bit, the horrendous battle AI to some degree.

    And then there's also Lightning Strike and the Ambush Attack stances for some factions, which trivialize such situations anyway,

    As I said, unit caps improve immersion, on that I agree, but those kind of examples (full Dragon, full Black Orc, etc.) are far from the sole reason for people who are against unit caps, while AI recruitment of those kind of armies can be fixed without caps, which has been stated often enough by now.
    Doomstacks are pitfifully easy to counter since they will all spam the same 3-4 units and you will quickly learn the hard-counters to them. Those Dragon+Swordmaster HE builds? For Skaven take a bunch of Globadiers and Bombardiers and they get 'recked since unlike human players the AI doesn't abuse the OP agility and mobility of airborne units.

    Also, the AI does play better on the battlefield when it has a healthy mix of units instead of just the same 3-4 all the time, then it just bullrushes.
    I don't use hardcounters at all. There's no need to.
    Neither with or without unit caps or improved AI recruitment.
    I can use one comp throughout the whole game (depending on the comp, Wood Elves may be excluded) regardless of AI recruitment or caps.
    Though yes, they do make it even easier, but let's not pretend that more mixed armies are excluded from having counters thanks to faction specific strengths and weaknesses, as well as AI recruitment in general. This can not only be tested via cap/recruitment mods, but this has also be shown in pretty much every game with a kind of asymmetrical balance.

    And as said so often bevor, more mixed armies can be achieved without unit caps.

    The AI behaves better?
    It may not necessarily "bullrush", but it remains braindead, which makes the effect of "being better at battles" superficial at best.
    Disagree completely. Doomstacks are all the same so battles with them are also all the same. If the AI actually makes use of 100% of its roster instead of just 20%, you will immediately get more varied battles. Braindead bullrushes are always easily dealt with.

    Doomstacks suck, they make the game so much worse. They should really be restricted to those spawning Chaos stacks at best.

  • LennoxPoodleLennoxPoodle Registered Users Posts: 474
    Maybe some other method of encouraging more balanced armies than a hard cap would be desirable for the sandboxes sake. I can't think of any method though..
    Increasing the upkeep of elite units into the generally inefficient spectrum (forcing the player to properly leverage them for making them work) and decreasing their replenishment might be a step in the right direction. Another option would be increasing cost, upkeep and/or recruitment with already present numbers, pushing the notion that these guys are rare. In otherwise give certain units types a global availability stat, which makes it harder to acquire them the lower it gets.
  • Ephraim_DaltonEphraim_Dalton Senior Member Registered Users Posts: 23,908

    Maybe some other method of encouraging more balanced armies than a hard cap would be desirable for the sandboxes sake. I can't think of any method though..
    Increasing the upkeep of elite units into the generally inefficient spectrum (forcing the player to properly leverage them for making them work) and decreasing their replenishment might be a step in the right direction. Another option would be increasing cost, upkeep and/or recruitment with already present numbers, pushing the notion that these guys are rare. In otherwise give certain units types a global availability stat, which makes it harder to acquire them the lower it gets.

    Has already been suggested, the supply lines system should be changed to punish low tier troops less and high tier troops more. Something like 2% increase for militia 15% for large monsters, +2% per difficulty level.

  • LaindeshLaindesh Junior Member Registered Users Posts: 1,814
    edited January 2019
    Its nice reading people's oppinion. (sorry totally forgot i made this topic :P kinda busy RL)

    Reminder: Keep it civil and use common courtesy. People have different oppinions and enjoys different things. No need to get prickly about it.

    Personally i see why people like doomstacks, but i got tired of them after playing with doomstacks through WH1 and WH2 until tomb kings and the limit mods came out.

    Tabletop Based Unit Caps gotta be my favorite. Like Canuovea said: Factionwide caps is something specific to the tomb kings and TBUC (army based caps), as mentioned in opening post, forces me to think carefully what my army will be good at. Where the strength will be.

    For me that makes for a more engaging campaign. I can see that some races struggle more with such a system more than others (Vampire coast vs High Elves f.ex.) but it's part of the game and not really a hinder.
    Actually, combine Boyz will be Boyz and TBUC and you got tabletop more or less :)

    Of course, when the next DLC comes and mods needs patching, i'll play vanilla once more for 1 campaign. Then i play modded again ;)
  • cans4852cans4852 Registered Users Posts: 89
    I think unit caps is a must, specially for late games.

    Like now in my nakai campaign I have 3 dread saurians in my army, I can practilaty roflstomp 99% of the armies the AI makes.

    Also we don't need to lose the ability to make doomstacks:

    Create a toggle button for the campaign option - Enable unit cap

    There, if you want it you switch on, if not don't.
Sign In or Register to comment.