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

Do Greenskins have worse supply lines now?

2»

Comments

  • TayvarTayvar Registered Users Posts: 12,081
    Yea loyalty system would be better than "supply lines", in fact everything is better than "supply lines".
  • CaesarSahlertzCaesarSahlertz Registered Users Posts: 3,025



    Lol. Ok then I'm never going to be able to get past that level of arrogance so I might as well just do a little sweep before I leave you to seethe in the corner...

    Oh boy.. Lets start to pick apart your asinine "arguments shall we?


    "nothing to the east of black Crag"

    What? Crookback mountain? Kroq Gar, Malus, Snikch, Imrik? nothing to the east huh?

    Those are practically worthless and compared to the amount of loot to the West: Yes, nothing. With that being said, if you want to, sure you can go East, that is part of the point with the Greenskin roaming armies...



    It's not stupid for someone to have a different preference for how to play the game. You realise you're exploiting a bunch of different things at once, treating it like a spreadsheet and trying to min-max everything.

    It is stupid when they think their preference can apply to all factions. It is stupid when they demand that preference apply to all factions. It is stupid when they think that by using actual mechanics (such as the confederation mechanic) as intended is exploitation, becuase it makes their prefered stupid playstyle look even more stupid in the context of the faction in question...


    If players have to follow your path to actually succeed then the campaign is poorly designed or an element of it certainly is (supply lines) Mortal Empires is meant to be a sandbox.

    Players don't ahve to follow my path. They can play Greenskins as slow and tall as they want to. However, by doing so they are not playing into the Greenskins' strengths and they are severely limiting themselves by playing it dumb..


    And Again, your min-max strategy for Grimgor does not reflect the faction as a whole or what you should and should not be able to do in a GS campaign. the whole point is diversity of start positions, playstyles, strategy's etc.

    What I was doing was hardly min-maxing... Min-maxing would ahve me eradicate all the other factions after having sacked them. I generally left them alive, so that they could grow back and attempt to challenge me, so that I could keep beating them down... And since I have just tried it, you can in fact do the EXACT same on all other Greenskin lords.. So your point is as flacid as the other arguments...


    In the example I laid out to you I did not wait for my settlements to grow tall. I was on my feet the entire time, sacking, raiding looting and conquering. The only thing I didn't do was focus in on every single goldmine within a 200 mile radius and try to own them all by turn 10.

    Why not? If you want to field armies, and yet not go into negative, then you NEED those Gold Mines... seems like you set yourself up for failure from the start...


    You realise also that when you're having to prop up your economy with Black Crag, Mount Gunbad, Oathgold, K8P and Ekrund...that's not indicative of the factions economy and what they can do without that kind of cash right?

    You don't ahve to do it.. As I have now told you numerous times, ALL Greenskin lords can achieve this strategy rather easily.. Those particular landmarks help (of course they do, it is extra money), but they are not in any way required..


    You literally are exploiting the whole game. saying 'I'm just using the mechanics as intended' has nothing to do with whether or not those mechanics are balanced and good. Legendoftotalwar says the same kind of sh*t when he spends half an hour running his heroes in zigzags to expend all the enemies ammo, which is a crucial tactic on Legendary difficulty, yet that's complete bs and if you have to do stuff like that to win then that difficulty isn't balanced (which it isn't).

    I have not yet exploited a single thing... The fact that the strategy is vastly superior to your passive playstyle does not make it an "exploit".. It makes it superior..


    I really hate it when people like you attack everyone who questions the balance of the game to defend your pride even if the mechanic is broken or terrible. You're the kind of person that would rage against putting a lower difficulty into Dark Souls or abuse people into the ground for daring to say something is unbalanced and broken (even though half the community cheats out the Wazoo to win and then pretends they did it legit and attacks any 'weakling' who cant handle it :D )

    I have not yet attacked your playstyle a single time. I have said taht it is subpar and doesn't play into the strengths that the Greenskins offer. On the other hand, you ahve claimed that by not playing liek you, we are basically exploiting the game and not playing it as it was intended (using implemented mechanics exactly as intended is exploitation, lol okay...)..

    If you want the game easier then play on the easier difficulties.. The issue you rant about in this thread is only present on higher difficulties (and even then, as I have presented it isn't really an issue).. Do not try to get the VH/VH or Legendary campaigns to be easier jus so that you can pretend you were capable of completing them..
  • JastalllJastalll Junior Member Registered Users Posts: 1,156
    Supply lines are a bane on every faction (well save for Bretonnia/TKs who make do with caps instead). Greenskins aren't special in this regard, and their economy is actually not too bad; hardly DEs/Dwarfs levels of course, but raiding and sacking can supplement that quite well, and WAAAGH exists to bolster your numbers into the stratosphere in dire situations. They're hardly as bad as, say, Norsca whose basic economy completely sucks and are overly reliant on raiding and sacking to have more than two armies going. As Grom in Vortex I can maintain 4 fairly good armies with a decent portion of the Southlands conquered. The -10% upkeep tech is a lifesaver.
  • Jman5Jman5 Registered Users Posts: 745



    You literally are exploiting the whole game. saying 'I'm just using the mechanics as intended' has nothing to do with whether or not those mechanics are balanced and good. Legendoftotalwar says the same kind of sh*t when he spends half an hour running his heroes in zigzags to expend all the enemies ammo, which is a crucial tactic on Legendary difficulty, yet that's complete bs and if you have to do stuff like that to win then that difficulty isn't balanced (which it isn't).

    I have nothing against legendoftotalwar playing how he wants. However, it pains me to see how his popularity seems to have created this idea that you have to play like him in order to beat the AI on Legendary difficulty. You don't. It's just not quite as efficient to play without abusing the game. Like the example you gave where people zigzag around with a lord wasting the AI's arrows. The AI is terrible at protecting their ranged units which means you can almost always fly over or execute a standard flank and kill them. Hell, just pressuring them with a cheap infantry unit will essentially neutralize them. It may not be quite as efficient as arrow dodging, but it's a perfectly good tactic on legendary. And you don't feel nearly as slimy afterward.
  • korradokortokorradokorto Registered Users Posts: 161

    @CaesarSahlertz

    You realise this cannot be done with Skarsnik, Azhag or Wurrzag, all of whom are out in the open and start completely surrounded by enemies.

    nah skarsnik its the perfect LL to play a looting style campaign, at least on hard ,sure everyone hate you and quickly declare war but your only serious threat is belegar,and when you get rid of him youve plenty of juicy humans settlement to harvest.
  • TayvarTayvar Registered Users Posts: 12,081

    Supply lines are largely irrelevant to Greenskins since you can practically sack a new city times however many armies you got every turn. So as long as your armies sack a city that yields more than their upkeep per turn, then the upkeep is irrelevant.

    Ultimately supply lines will force you to have fewer, more elite armies than you otherwise would. That you can make a lot of money elsewhere doesn't change how Supply Lines works, which is to penalize you for having more armies.
    Yes the "supply lines" mechanic encourage elite units spam gameplay.
  • NazjaxNazjax Registered Users Posts: 796
    I remember the first game i played on vortex Campaign in 2017 ? I was with lizardmen in VH. And.. It was like 300 for just 3 armies.

    In my opinion this 5k isnt that much if we compare to before. 5 armies 5k more is kind of okiii. After all, with playing well the raidstance and the bonuses that focus the Economy on GS it's pretty decent.

    Only one thing that could be cool is giving more gold to the raze option because now it's very interesting to raze it.
  • JastalllJastalll Junior Member Registered Users Posts: 1,156
    Jman5 said:



    You literally are exploiting the whole game. saying 'I'm just using the mechanics as intended' has nothing to do with whether or not those mechanics are balanced and good. Legendoftotalwar says the same kind of sh*t when he spends half an hour running his heroes in zigzags to expend all the enemies ammo, which is a crucial tactic on Legendary difficulty, yet that's complete bs and if you have to do stuff like that to win then that difficulty isn't balanced (which it isn't).

    I have nothing against legendoftotalwar playing how he wants. However, it pains me to see how his popularity seems to have created this idea that you have to play like him in order to beat the AI on Legendary difficulty. You don't. It's just not quite as efficient to play without abusing the game. Like the example you gave where people zigzag around with a lord wasting the AI's arrows. The AI is terrible at protecting their ranged units which means you can almost always fly over or execute a standard flank and kill them. Hell, just pressuring them with a cheap infantry unit will essentially neutralize them. It may not be quite as efficient as arrow dodging, but it's a perfectly good tactic on legendary. And you don't feel nearly as slimy afterward.
    I do feel like the people claiming you "have" do doomstack and hardcore AI abuse in VH/Legendary are really exaggerating, and/or trying to find a playstyle that allows them to beat these difficulties with minimal effort. Sure, massing Stegagons, Sisters of Avelorn or Ratling Guns might be the most efficient way to play their respective races and allows you to destroy the AI without microing much if at all, but I play on VH/VH most of the time and make do with fairly balanced armies and win my campaigns. It might take me longer and be harder, but it's also a lot more satisfying to have my line of Swordmasters and Silverin Guard clash and hold on against the enemy while Dragon Princes flank and a well placed Banishment destroys a ranged blob than it is to just recruit 19 Sisters and click on one unit after another to delete it. Or using a ninja rat build with Snikch instead of moonlighting as a budget Ikit Klaw.

    In a similar fashion, when playing RPGs like Dragon Age Origins, Fallout New Vegas or Divinity OS II there are well known god builds that allow you to sleepwalk through the game. I tend to avoid them, a game's far more fun with a challenge. I'm not saying the game should be blatantly unbalanced, the AI's buffs should be reviewed and be more agnostic in a patch/WHIII, but unless you're playing Empire or Skaven and avoiding unit buffs you can very well have melee heavy armies in Very Hard battles. For some races such as Greenskins (barring Grom's absurd goblin archer buffs), it's sometimes the best way to play the race even.
  • Jman5Jman5 Registered Users Posts: 745
    Jastall said:

    Jman5 said:



    You literally are exploiting the whole game. saying 'I'm just using the mechanics as intended' has nothing to do with whether or not those mechanics are balanced and good. Legendoftotalwar says the same kind of sh*t when he spends half an hour running his heroes in zigzags to expend all the enemies ammo, which is a crucial tactic on Legendary difficulty, yet that's complete bs and if you have to do stuff like that to win then that difficulty isn't balanced (which it isn't).

    I have nothing against legendoftotalwar playing how he wants. However, it pains me to see how his popularity seems to have created this idea that you have to play like him in order to beat the AI on Legendary difficulty. You don't. It's just not quite as efficient to play without abusing the game. Like the example you gave where people zigzag around with a lord wasting the AI's arrows. The AI is terrible at protecting their ranged units which means you can almost always fly over or execute a standard flank and kill them. Hell, just pressuring them with a cheap infantry unit will essentially neutralize them. It may not be quite as efficient as arrow dodging, but it's a perfectly good tactic on legendary. And you don't feel nearly as slimy afterward.
    but unless you're playing Empire or Skaven and avoiding unit buffs you can very well have melee heavy armies in Very Hard battles. For some races such as Greenskins (barring Grom's absurd goblin archer buffs), it's sometimes the best way to play the race even.
    Even Skaven and Empire can do it on higher difficulties. Pre-Plague buff, I beat Vortex with Skrolk using mostly Plaguemonk Censor Bearers and just a couple plagueclaw catapults. On Mortal Empires, the hardest part of that campaign is beating Itza in the first 20 turns or so. It's just a matter of enveloping and using your spells.
  • TayvarTayvar Registered Users Posts: 12,081

    supply lines overstayed their welcome, no one likes them, they are restrictive and unthematic.

    how is ca gonna balance the game and not make it too easy for player is another question. it seems they have no idea.

    Bretonnia don't have "supply lines" issue, so it's sure possible to replace that poor mechanic.
  • whatever140596whatever140596 Registered Users Posts: 34
    Tayvar said:

    supply lines overstayed their welcome, no one likes them, they are restrictive and unthematic.

    how is ca gonna balance the game and not make it too easy for player is another question. it seems they have no idea.

    Bretonnia don't have "supply lines" issue, so it's sure possible to replace that poor mechanic.
    haven't played bret in long time but i'm sure they have something else to keep them in check.
  • TayvarTayvar Registered Users Posts: 12,081

    Tayvar said:

    supply lines overstayed their welcome, no one likes them, they are restrictive and unthematic.

    how is ca gonna balance the game and not make it too easy for player is another question. it seems they have no idea.

    Bretonnia don't have "supply lines" issue, so it's sure possible to replace that poor mechanic.
    haven't played bret in long time but I'm sure they have something else to keep them in check.
    That something else needed for other factions, the "supply lines" mechanic needs to go.
  • CaesarSahlertzCaesarSahlertz Registered Users Posts: 3,025

    Tayvar said:

    supply lines overstayed their welcome, no one likes them, they are restrictive and unthematic.

    how is ca gonna balance the game and not make it too easy for player is another question. it seems they have no idea.

    Bretonnia don't have "supply lines" issue, so it's sure possible to replace that poor mechanic.
    haven't played bret in long time but i'm sure they have something else to keep them in check.
    They got a peasant economy. Their strongest economical building is dependant on you not exceeding a threshold of peasant units, or else it will start making less money. You can however circumvent this penalty by going with their secondary, less effective economy building, which is not affected by the peasant economy at all.
  • dreagondreagon Senior Member Registered Users Posts: 2,171
    What is the problem with those supply lines? They are the regular increases for hard difficulty. Unless I did my maths wrong that would mean each of the four armies is about 2500 gold base upkeep. Doesn't seem to be unreasonable.
    "The dog is a peasant and the cat is a gentleman." H.P. Lovecraft
  • TayvarTayvar Registered Users Posts: 12,081
    dreagon said:

    What is the problem with those supply lines? They are the regular increases for hard difficulty. Unless I did my maths wrong that would mean each of the four armies is about 2500 gold base upkeep. Doesn't seem to be unreasonable.

    It's encourage elite units spam, and in general it makes having multiple armies less efficient.
  • whatever140596whatever140596 Registered Users Posts: 34
    Tayvar said:

    Tayvar said:

    supply lines overstayed their welcome, no one likes them, they are restrictive and unthematic.

    how is ca gonna balance the game and not make it too easy for player is another question. it seems they have no idea.

    Bretonnia don't have "supply lines" issue, so it's sure possible to replace that poor mechanic.
    haven't played bret in long time but I'm sure they have something else to keep them in check.
    That something else needed for other factions, the "supply lines" mechanic needs to go.
    as i said, setting unit cap would restrict players from snowballing so hard. but they can't impose it now since many people would get mad.
  • TayvarTayvar Registered Users Posts: 12,081
    Jastall said:

    Jman5 said:



    You literally are exploiting the whole game. saying 'I'm just using the mechanics as intended' has nothing to do with whether or not those mechanics are balanced and good. Legendoftotalwar says the same kind of sh*t when he spends half an hour running his heroes in zigzags to expend all the enemies ammo, which is a crucial tactic on Legendary difficulty, yet that's complete bs and if you have to do stuff like that to win then that difficulty isn't balanced (which it isn't).

    I have nothing against legendoftotalwar playing how he wants. However, it pains me to see how his popularity seems to have created this idea that you have to play like him in order to beat the AI on Legendary difficulty. You don't. It's just not quite as efficient to play without abusing the game. Like the example you gave where people zigzag around with a lord wasting the AI's arrows. The AI is terrible at protecting their ranged units which means you can almost always fly over or execute a standard flank and kill them. Hell, just pressuring them with a cheap infantry unit will essentially neutralize them. It may not be quite as efficient as arrow dodging, but it's a perfectly good tactic on legendary. And you don't feel nearly as slimy afterward.
    I do feel like the people claiming you "have" do doomstack and hardcore AI abuse in VH/Legendary are really exaggerating, and/or trying to find a playstyle that allows them to beat these difficulties with minimal effort. Sure, massing Stegagons, Sisters of Avelorn or Ratling Guns might be the most efficient way to play their respective races and allows you to destroy the AI without microing much if at all, but I play on VH/VH most of the time and make do with fairly balanced armies and win my campaigns. It might take me longer and be harder, but it's also a lot more satisfying to have my line of Swordmasters and Silverin Guard clash and hold on against the enemy while Dragon Princes flank and a well placed Banishment destroys a ranged blob than it is to just recruit 19 Sisters and click on one unit after another to delete it. Or using a ninja rat build with Snikch instead of moonlighting as a budget Ikit Klaw.

    In a similar fashion, when playing RPGs like Dragon Age Origins, Fallout New Vegas or Divinity OS II there are well known god builds that allow you to sleepwalk through the game. I tend to avoid them, a game's far more fun with a challenge. I'm not saying the game should be blatantly unbalanced, the AI's buffs should be reviewed and be more agnostic in a patch/WHIII, but unless you're playing Empire or Skaven and avoiding unit buffs you can very well have melee heavy armies in Very Hard battles. For some races such as Greenskins (barring Grom's absurd goblin archer buffs), it's sometimes the best way to play the race even.
    Total War: Warhammer 2 encourage doomstacks in two main ways, AI cheats make most melee units almost useless, and with how lord's buffs work, it's better to focus on fewer types of units.
Sign In or Register to comment.