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

Just a few simple reasons why TROGLODON should be in the LP...

13»

Comments

  • DraxynnicDraxynnic Posts: 6,616Registered Users

    Goatforce said:

    But it not need into LM roster, weaker version of Carnosaur.

    It's already been said, but it isn't a weaker carnosaur, it is a powerful supporting unit (so no it isn't as worse Stegodon either).

    It shouldn't be a feral unit, it should be mounted by Skink Oracle. If it is a Lord/Hero (which I personally favour) it could be a runesmith/warrior priest style buff platform that also hits hard and is extremely fast (but has weaker buffs to compensate), if it is just a unit it can get some passive abilities and perhaps a bound spell too.

    It would be an interesting and unique unit, would be good to see it in action.
    Support unit gonna be engine of the gods, not a Troglodon.
    Different kinds of support, really. Trogs and Engine of the Gods Stegadons would have different abilities.
    Goatforce said:

    psychoak said:

    Why no skink lord would be because there isn't one.

    You've got the slann lord, saurus lord and hero, and skink chief and priest hero. We have the full roster of character types in here already, and everyone is in their proper place.

    Could we have one? Sure, but why an oracle instead of an invented extra tier of the chief or priest? Oracles are lesser characters than priests.

    Goblins have a warboss on TT, orc, savage orc, black orc, goblin, and night goblin warboss , then everything in great shaman flavor except for black orcs. Same deal on the hero tier as big boss and shaman, then unit champions are regular ol' boss. Terribly imaginative faction naming.

    You have a point there, there isn't one on TT, but tbh I think this would be something CA could bend the lore on for the sake of gameplay. It wouldn't break their aesthetic or playstyle and would offer viability to Skink based armies, which to me justifies them. But why Oracles? Yes it would be another bending of the lore (however skink Oracles are highly revered so if any unit could become a character in the roster it would be them) but to put it bluntly an Oracle could be made to be far more interesting than just a Chief or Priest, an upgrade would mean more flexibility in how it is implemented and perhaps a more bold (though not mold breaking) direction by CA - chief and priest are safe picks but with little room for innovation.
    Honestly, I don't see the Oracle doing anything that a Skink Priest couldn't apart from having a different mount. Trog-mounted Oracles are pretty much presented as being the Lizardmen equivalent to Light College Apprentices - lacking the ability to cast spells themselves, but able to support other spellcasters.

    In terms of combat capabilities and inspirational ability, Chieftains are better - the inspirational effect of the Trog unit comes from the Trog itself, not the Oracle.

    If they do give a hypothetical Skink lord a new suite of abilities, than I'd rather see it be presented as something new rather than co-opting the name of something that already exists.
  • DraculasaurusDraculasaurus Posts: 3,251Registered Users
    Draxynnic said:

    Goatforce said:

    But it not need into LM roster, weaker version of Carnosaur.

    It's already been said, but it isn't a weaker carnosaur, it is a powerful supporting unit (so no it isn't as worse Stegodon either).

    It shouldn't be a feral unit, it should be mounted by Skink Oracle. If it is a Lord/Hero (which I personally favour) it could be a runesmith/warrior priest style buff platform that also hits hard and is extremely fast (but has weaker buffs to compensate), if it is just a unit it can get some passive abilities and perhaps a bound spell too.

    It would be an interesting and unique unit, would be good to see it in action.
    Support unit gonna be engine of the gods, not a Troglodon.
    Different kinds of support, really. Trogs and Engine of the Gods Stegadons would have different abilities.
    Goatforce said:

    psychoak said:

    Why no skink lord would be because there isn't one.

    You've got the slann lord, saurus lord and hero, and skink chief and priest hero. We have the full roster of character types in here already, and everyone is in their proper place.

    Could we have one? Sure, but why an oracle instead of an invented extra tier of the chief or priest? Oracles are lesser characters than priests.

    Goblins have a warboss on TT, orc, savage orc, black orc, goblin, and night goblin warboss , then everything in great shaman flavor except for black orcs. Same deal on the hero tier as big boss and shaman, then unit champions are regular ol' boss. Terribly imaginative faction naming.

    You have a point there, there isn't one on TT, but tbh I think this would be something CA could bend the lore on for the sake of gameplay. It wouldn't break their aesthetic or playstyle and would offer viability to Skink based armies, which to me justifies them. But why Oracles? Yes it would be another bending of the lore (however skink Oracles are highly revered so if any unit could become a character in the roster it would be them) but to put it bluntly an Oracle could be made to be far more interesting than just a Chief or Priest, an upgrade would mean more flexibility in how it is implemented and perhaps a more bold (though not mold breaking) direction by CA - chief and priest are safe picks but with little room for innovation.
    Honestly, I don't see the Oracle doing anything that a Skink Priest couldn't apart from having a different mount. Trog-mounted Oracles are pretty much presented as being the Lizardmen equivalent to Light College Apprentices - lacking the ability to cast spells themselves, but able to support other spellcasters.

    In terms of combat capabilities and inspirational ability, Chieftains are better - the inspirational effect of the Trog unit comes from the Trog itself, not the Oracle.

    If they do give a hypothetical Skink lord a new suite of abilities, than I'd rather see it be presented as something new rather than co-opting the name of something that already exists.
    I think an all new "Priest of Sotek" or "Skink High Priest" generic lord is a very real possibility.
  • mightygloinmightygloin Posts: 1,624Registered Users
    xXF1aKOXx said:

    Kranox said:

    Enforest said:

    Let me also remind that neither Troglodon or Carnosaur existed by themselves in the TT: they were either a mount for Saurus in case of Carnosaur, or for magical Skinks.

    Carnosaur is a pure killing machine, while Troglodon is support with poison spit, AoE melee attack/damage buff, aquatic, scaly skin and channeling ability (not sure how this would get implemented in game, probably free spells or shared spells with Slanns).

    Apples to oranges.

    Honestly they are not what I want the most, as long as we get salamanders and ripperdactyl I dont give a **** honestly, as long as its cool and gives new gameplay option im down
    No Razordon😦
    I was wanting to ask, how would Razordons be implemented really? Would they be ranged or artillery beasts with melee capability? How would their back spikes work as a deterrent?

    Reptile breeders to the rescue.
  • BoombastekBoombastek Posts: 2,047Registered Users

    xXF1aKOXx said:

    Kranox said:

    Enforest said:

    Let me also remind that neither Troglodon or Carnosaur existed by themselves in the TT: they were either a mount for Saurus in case of Carnosaur, or for magical Skinks.

    Carnosaur is a pure killing machine, while Troglodon is support with poison spit, AoE melee attack/damage buff, aquatic, scaly skin and channeling ability (not sure how this would get implemented in game, probably free spells or shared spells with Slanns).

    Apples to oranges.

    Honestly they are not what I want the most, as long as we get salamanders and ripperdactyl I dont give a **** honestly, as long as its cool and gives new gameplay option im down
    No Razordon😦
    I was wanting to ask, how would Razordons be implemented really? Would they be ranged or artillery beasts with melee capability? How would their back spikes work as a deterrent?

    Reptile breeders to the rescue.
    Mid range AOE arty, with some ability to fight in melee, like Cygor 40 attack and 15 def.
  • DraculasaurusDraculasaurus Posts: 3,251Registered Users

    xXF1aKOXx said:

    Kranox said:

    Enforest said:

    Let me also remind that neither Troglodon or Carnosaur existed by themselves in the TT: they were either a mount for Saurus in case of Carnosaur, or for magical Skinks.

    Carnosaur is a pure killing machine, while Troglodon is support with poison spit, AoE melee attack/damage buff, aquatic, scaly skin and channeling ability (not sure how this would get implemented in game, probably free spells or shared spells with Slanns).

    Apples to oranges.

    Honestly they are not what I want the most, as long as we get salamanders and ripperdactyl I dont give a **** honestly, as long as its cool and gives new gameplay option im down
    No Razordon😦
    I was wanting to ask, how would Razordons be implemented really? Would they be ranged or artillery beasts with melee capability? How would their back spikes work as a deterrent?

    Reptile breeders to the rescue.
    Mid range AOE arty, with some ability to fight in melee, like Cygor 40 attack and 15 def.
    And maybe some sort of charge defense.
  • xXF1aKOXxxXF1aKOXx Posts: 849Registered Users

    xXF1aKOXx said:

    Kranox said:

    Enforest said:

    Let me also remind that neither Troglodon or Carnosaur existed by themselves in the TT: they were either a mount for Saurus in case of Carnosaur, or for magical Skinks.

    Carnosaur is a pure killing machine, while Troglodon is support with poison spit, AoE melee attack/damage buff, aquatic, scaly skin and channeling ability (not sure how this would get implemented in game, probably free spells or shared spells with Slanns).

    Apples to oranges.

    Honestly they are not what I want the most, as long as we get salamanders and ripperdactyl I dont give a **** honestly, as long as its cool and gives new gameplay option im down
    No Razordon😦
    I was wanting to ask, how would Razordons be implemented really? Would they be ranged or artillery beasts with melee capability? How would their back spikes work as a deterrent?

    Reptile breeders to the rescue.
    Mid range AOE arty, with some ability to fight in melee, like Cygor 40 attack and 15 def.
    They do armor piercing dont they?
  • DraxynnicDraxynnic Posts: 6,616Registered Users
    xXF1aKOXx said:

    xXF1aKOXx said:

    Kranox said:

    Enforest said:

    Let me also remind that neither Troglodon or Carnosaur existed by themselves in the TT: they were either a mount for Saurus in case of Carnosaur, or for magical Skinks.

    Carnosaur is a pure killing machine, while Troglodon is support with poison spit, AoE melee attack/damage buff, aquatic, scaly skin and channeling ability (not sure how this would get implemented in game, probably free spells or shared spells with Slanns).

    Apples to oranges.

    Honestly they are not what I want the most, as long as we get salamanders and ripperdactyl I dont give a **** honestly, as long as its cool and gives new gameplay option im down
    No Razordon😦
    I was wanting to ask, how would Razordons be implemented really? Would they be ranged or artillery beasts with melee capability? How would their back spikes work as a deterrent?

    Reptile breeders to the rescue.
    Mid range AOE arty, with some ability to fight in melee, like Cygor 40 attack and 15 def.
    They do armor piercing dont they?
    Given the way TWW has been treating flame weapons, Salamanders would probably be what you use for unarmoured troops, while Razordons would be what you use against armour.

    And yeah, Salamanders and Razordons would probably still be a bit hybrid-ish, but probably something you'd still want to keep out of melee on the whole due to the cost effectiveness balance: a single Salamander or Razordon is a formidable opponent for common infantry, but the units are probably still small enough and expensive enough that you wouldn't want to use them this way, except possibly if you get the opportunity to charge them into enemy archers or artillery. On the tabletop, they were weaker in melee than Kroxigors while being significantly more expensive.

    And like @Draculasaurus said, charge defence versus all. Razordons had a thing in the tabletop where they could shoot off a superpowered volley as a Stand and Shoot reaction if charged from the front - I suspect the TWW engine won't be able to reflect this behaviour, but Charge Defence Versus All will probably reflect that charging them in the front often doesn't work too well.
  • DraculasaurusDraculasaurus Posts: 3,251Registered Users
    Draxynnic said:

    xXF1aKOXx said:

    xXF1aKOXx said:

    Kranox said:

    Enforest said:

    Let me also remind that neither Troglodon or Carnosaur existed by themselves in the TT: they were either a mount for Saurus in case of Carnosaur, or for magical Skinks.

    Carnosaur is a pure killing machine, while Troglodon is support with poison spit, AoE melee attack/damage buff, aquatic, scaly skin and channeling ability (not sure how this would get implemented in game, probably free spells or shared spells with Slanns).

    Apples to oranges.

    Honestly they are not what I want the most, as long as we get salamanders and ripperdactyl I dont give a **** honestly, as long as its cool and gives new gameplay option im down
    No Razordon😦
    I was wanting to ask, how would Razordons be implemented really? Would they be ranged or artillery beasts with melee capability? How would their back spikes work as a deterrent?

    Reptile breeders to the rescue.
    Mid range AOE arty, with some ability to fight in melee, like Cygor 40 attack and 15 def.
    They do armor piercing dont they?
    Given the way TWW has been treating flame weapons, Salamanders would probably be what you use for unarmoured troops, while Razordons would be what you use against armour.

    And yeah, Salamanders and Razordons would probably still be a bit hybrid-ish, but probably something you'd still want to keep out of melee on the whole due to the cost effectiveness balance: a single Salamander or Razordon is a formidable opponent for common infantry, but the units are probably still small enough and expensive enough that you wouldn't want to use them this way, except possibly if you get the opportunity to charge them into enemy archers or artillery. On the tabletop, they were weaker in melee than Kroxigors while being significantly more expensive.

    And like @Draculasaurus said, charge defence versus all. Razordons had a thing in the tabletop where they could shoot off a superpowered volley as a Stand and Shoot reaction if charged from the front - I suspect the TWW engine won't be able to reflect this behaviour, but Charge Defence Versus All will probably reflect that charging them in the front often doesn't work too well.
    I'm betting on Charge Defense just because it's the easiest option to implement. Other things they could would be giving Razordons a sort of fire-shield effect, where enemies in melee with them take damage over time, or giving them some sort of bound spell that shoots off spines in a radius around them but has a cooldown.
Sign In or Register to comment.