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

Why are Dragon Princes so underrated? Playing as Imrik, of course

2»

Comments

  • saweendrasaweendra Registered Users Posts: 17,625
    Valkaar said:

    saweendra said:

    Valkaar said:

    saweendra said:

    Valkaar said:

    saweendra said:

    Valkaar said:

    saweendra said:

    Valkaar said:

    Yeah for their cost, they don’t compete with their counterparts in their weight class.

    Nor do they have any strong unique traits such as Blood Knight’s self-healing in melee or Demigryph’s low model count that makes Earth Blood/Regrowth viable for them. I know they get some unique traits but they’re situational and feel more thematic than useful.

    Additionally, ALL Melee cavalry, regardless of stats, is incredibly squishy and doesn’t apply cost-effective damage after their charge wears off. I’m not quite sure why this is. Like, I don’t know what mechanically causes this to be the case. But I do know it’s a deliberate design decision as it applies to almost ALL heavy cav. If you don’t constantly baby sit them, 9 times out of 10, they die. Even to units less than 1/5 their cost.

    ^^And this didn’t used to be true in past Total War games. Previous Total Wars there were true ‘Shock’ cavalry and Heavy Lancers, that were meant to charge and then gtfo. But there was ALSO heavy MELEE cavalry, that functioned like true cataphracts and knights where they charged, embedded themselves in melee, and could hold their own there in a protracted grind if necessary.

    ^This is not really possible in Warhammer. CA changed something about how Heavy Cavalry works in Warhammer specifically, that has drawn criticism for many units across the board, Dragon Princes included.

    Well they are heavy shock cav , there is literally few melee cav in this game rest are supposed to cycle charge. You answer your own question
    It’s not a question. It’s an explanation for why people are critical of Dragon Princes.

    It’s not a mystery to me that there’s only shock cav/no true melee cav in this game. It’s a critique.

    Many people miss having true melee cav. Especially at the top of the tech tree/price points (which is where melee cav used to reside...while shock cav was mid-tier to upper-mid tier).

    So having an upper tier unit in terms of cost/tech play like an old mid tier unit feels bad out of place to a lot of people.

    ^^Again, this is not a question. It’s an explanation for why people don’t like the unit. They don’t like the role that it, and other elite melee cav, have been relegated to.
    I mean there are true melee cav . Just not with High elf.

    Aka grail gurdians
    Eh not really. Grail Guardians among the closest to what people are actually thinking of. By Warhammer standards they’re supposed to be.

    But they’re still a far cry from what the old knights and cataphracts from older games used to feel like.
    Sorry mate but that isn't how this game is balanced.

    No cav in this game are that tanky and the reason every unit in this game also pay for speed , mass and CB.

    This is the price you have to pay for those.

    And the reason why they are not more tanky is very very simple there are ton of players who have the skill to micro them and cycle charge units , so such tankyness would make the unit class op.

    That said i did use dragon prince as front line troops in my imrik campaign so in campaign with enough buffs, and with bit of skill this more than possible .
    Nah. It’s just that the game balance in Warhammer is less nuanced when it comes to same unit categories.

    Like in older games, heavy cavalry that wasn’t lancers would come with less stamina overall (so you literally couldn’t cycle charge them without exhausting them ... but had to make sure you chose 1 good for them... preferably not against chaff or archers.... but deliberately picked a fight against elite infantry)

    OR the unit gave up a lot of charge bonus compared to lancers so you didn’t pay for the unit right away in 10 seconds.... but over time.

    Then lancers played like shock cav do now.

    It wasn’t balance vs non balance. It was flavor and play style and intricacies that are just missing.

    Grail Guardians for example... without cycle charging.... despite being ‘anti-infantry’ ... can only beat infantry half their cost or less. Infantry at 75% their cost.... not even anti-large units .... just regular units... like standard Chosen, beat them. Which feels weird.

    It’s the same thing in infantry fights too. In older titles.... you could line up a Legion vs a Phalanx of similar cost in dozen different pairs.... change the formation and line depth in each pair.... and have a different victor in each pairing.

    That nuance is entirely gone in Warhammer. You line up two different infantry types a dozen times.... and one is just going to win... each time... or if one doesn’t win it’s due to RNG of the hits.... not tactical deployment of the formation.

    People miss that old tactical variety within same unit types. It IS objectively missing.

    To Warhammer’s defense.... a ton more different unit types exist overall. Monsters, flyers, wizards, etc. but that didn’t have to be mutually exclusive with intricate infantry on infantry or cavalry on cavalry interplay. But it unfortunately was :(

    The example I’ve seen/used before.... is the older games, their rock/paper/scissors was just superior. More depth/nuance/variety to the rock/paper/scissors.

    Warhammer’s rock/paper/scissors is way more simple/sharp/concrete/less nuanced. But Warhammer added a lot more weapon types. So the game isn’t just rock/paper/scissors anymore. It’s rock/paper/scissors/grenade/shotgun/flamethrower. Which is its own form of enjoyable complexity to be sure! I’m glad new unit categories were added beyond just cavalry/infantry/missiles.

    ^^Yet, I can still enjoy the new unit categories while still missing the old unit balancing nuance. It would be cool to have both, they don’t have to be mutually exclusive. But CA currently treats them like they are.

    TL;DR: I like monsters and magic just fine. But I still miss formations/melee cav/etc. They don’t have to get rid of monsters to give us Phalanxes or Porcupines or true Knights back.
    As for ap damage , no comment right now because i am still looking up how it worked in the past. But if it was similar to how non ap damage worked in this game or was acting like pseduo HP than . Than this sytem is superior.

    Any way i like the current meta for better or worst in MP. Its not just stratagey and tactics. But its statagey and tactics and the skill to excute them which i like.
    Old AP systems worked similar to how Anti-large and anti-infantry work now. Not IDENTICAL ofc. I won’t pretend I know how the old math worked in terms of exact numbers. But overall, ‘bonuses’ like that were way less sharp in older games than they are now. Numbers aside, it functioned like a ‘bonus vs armor’.

    If an AP it attacked an armored target specifically, it was able to do more damage/punch above its pay grade. So you’d want to stick your halberd or axe units against Knights specifically. But they wouldn’t have the same level of cost effective performance against unarmored troops.

    Side note: skill to apply tactics was omnipresent in all Total Wars. There wasn’t a ‘skill less’ one and a ‘skilled one’. The main differences over time have been balance (Atilla and 3k being horribly balanced compared to Warhammer or Rome 2 for example)....and tactical VARIETY. This is different from ‘skill’. Just the number of different types of strategies that could be attempted.

    Empire or Thrones of Britannia being the pinnacle of ‘very little variety’. Warhammer has some of the best variety. HOWEVER, Warhammer was kind of a ‘2 steps forward, one step back’ in terms of variety...... by eliminating things like formations! and melee cavalry!

    While adding a ton of of other things like magic and heroes and such.
    sorry that ap system sounds bad , like bad in game like this too many units have lot more ap due to various reasons like being a giant monsters to using enchated swords

    some formations are specific for some races and i disagree on no melee cav there are melee cav but what changed was the rest for example chosen who are super natural warriors on par with grail knight so you simply can not leave them in their and expect the fight to go well , when the chosen out number grail guardians

    #givemoreunitsforbrettonia, my bret dlc


  • CvejoCvejo Registered Users Posts: 114
    edited April 2021
    Yannir said:

    Cvejo said:

    Yannir said:

    You're getting this wrong, dude.
    Dragon Princes are as viable as any other cavalry at its pricepoint.
    Which is the problem. Cavalry sucks in this game.

    But for Imrik specifically, who gets access to them at t3 because of the unique building in Darkhold, Dragon Princes are a good tool for the early game if you can afford them. For the late game, they have an issue of being as expensive as a dragon or a phoenix without providing the same amount of performance. Why would you get Dragon Princes when you can get a Star Dragon for the same price?

    Imrik's Dragonkin trait gives a -25% Upkeep reduction for Dragon Princes likewise. The Purified Graves of the Dragons from Darkhold grants another -15%. The Friends in High Places tech grants another -5% for the DP, and then another -5% from Imrik's unique Dedicated to Vaul skill. That's a whopping 50% Upkeep cost reduction, meaning they go down to just 175 per turn. That is most definitely not "at the cost of a Star Dragon".

    If go Quartermaster and Renowned&Feared that's another 23% Upkeep reduction, bringing them down to just a meager 95 gold per turn. I believe there's a hero trait that grants an even further upkeep cost reduction.
    How do you think that matters?
    Dragonkin applies to Dragons as well. YES THAT ALSO MEANS STAR DRAGONS. So does everything you just mentioned. AND then on top of that, the Dragon Keep unique building Vaul's Anvil, Caledor, gives -25% upkeep reduction for dragons. So yes, Star Dragons are actually cheaper for Imrik than Dragon Princes are.
    No, not all I've mentioned grands Dragon Upkeep reductons for Dragons too. A -10% is DP exclusive.

    You also seem to forget that upkeep costs for DPs and Star Dragons are 360 and 600, respectively, so no, they are not cheaper (despite being able to knock off an additional -15%).
  • CvejoCvejo Registered Users Posts: 114
    Yannir said:

    Cvejo said:

    Yannir said:

    You're getting this wrong, dude.
    Dragon Princes are as viable as any other cavalry at its pricepoint.
    Which is the problem. Cavalry sucks in this game.

    But for Imrik specifically, who gets access to them at t3 because of the unique building in Darkhold, Dragon Princes are a good tool for the early game if you can afford them. For the late game, they have an issue of being as expensive as a dragon or a phoenix without providing the same amount of performance. Why would you get Dragon Princes when you can get a Star Dragon for the same price?

    Imrik's Dragonkin trait gives a -25% Upkeep reduction for Dragon Princes likewise. The Purified Graves of the Dragons from Darkhold grants another -15%. The Friends in High Places tech grants another -5% for the DP, and then another -5% from Imrik's unique Dedicated to Vaul skill. That's a whopping 50% Upkeep cost reduction, meaning they go down to just 175 per turn. That is most definitely not "at the cost of a Star Dragon".

    If go Quartermaster and Renowned&Feared that's another 23% Upkeep reduction, bringing them down to just a meager 95 gold per turn. I believe there's a hero trait that grants an even further upkeep cost reduction.
    How do you think that matters?
    Dragonkin applies to Dragons as well. YES THAT ALSO MEANS STAR DRAGONS. So does everything you just mentioned. AND then on top of that, the Dragon Keep unique building Vaul's Anvil, Caledor, gives -25% upkeep reduction for dragons. So yes, Star Dragons are actually cheaper for Imrik than Dragon Princes are.

    You seem to keep forgetting that Star Dragons are 600 upkeep and Dragon Princes only 360.
  • GreenColouredGreenColoured Registered Users Posts: 5,981
    Cvejo said:

    Yannir said:

    Cvejo said:

    Yannir said:

    You're getting this wrong, dude.
    Dragon Princes are as viable as any other cavalry at its pricepoint.
    Which is the problem. Cavalry sucks in this game.

    But for Imrik specifically, who gets access to them at t3 because of the unique building in Darkhold, Dragon Princes are a good tool for the early game if you can afford them. For the late game, they have an issue of being as expensive as a dragon or a phoenix without providing the same amount of performance. Why would you get Dragon Princes when you can get a Star Dragon for the same price?

    Imrik's Dragonkin trait gives a -25% Upkeep reduction for Dragon Princes likewise. The Purified Graves of the Dragons from Darkhold grants another -15%. The Friends in High Places tech grants another -5% for the DP, and then another -5% from Imrik's unique Dedicated to Vaul skill. That's a whopping 50% Upkeep cost reduction, meaning they go down to just 175 per turn. That is most definitely not "at the cost of a Star Dragon".

    If go Quartermaster and Renowned&Feared that's another 23% Upkeep reduction, bringing them down to just a meager 95 gold per turn. I believe there's a hero trait that grants an even further upkeep cost reduction.
    How do you think that matters?
    Dragonkin applies to Dragons as well. YES THAT ALSO MEANS STAR DRAGONS. So does everything you just mentioned. AND then on top of that, the Dragon Keep unique building Vaul's Anvil, Caledor, gives -25% upkeep reduction for dragons. So yes, Star Dragons are actually cheaper for Imrik than Dragon Princes are.

    You seem to keep forgetting that Star Dragons are 600 upkeep and Dragon Princes only 360.
    They might as well not exist what with how stupid OP High Elf economy is.


    This is why people can make 20 dragon doomstacks.
  • User_ClueUser_Clue Registered Users Posts: 1,569
    upkeep is somewhat relevant in the early game when you have less to work with, but you can easily cheese the high elf economy to get free armies, free buildings, and millions of income a turn, so upkeep is irrelevant.

    Even if you don't cheese, you shouldn't have any issue affording whatever you want so most people just spam the strongest units they can.
    "Daemons are abroad again, and the servants of the foul gods march south with the storm at their backs. But as the winds of magic stir, other powers rise to contest it.
    I have seen the Lady, my brothers. She came to me from the waters and told me of the trials to come. This is why I call you here, so that Her summons may be answered. I call Errantry, a crusade to strike at the heart of the new darkness"


    -- The Lionhearted
  • NazjaxNazjax Registered Users Posts: 1,588
    edited April 2021
    They are mostly ''hated'' in MP battles than Campaign, cause as you said with all buffs and upkeep they can be nice. But they lack something, probably the anti large.


    In MP they are just OVERPRICED. Silver helms and ellyrions cav' are doing better for the price !
  • saweendrasaweendra Registered Users Posts: 17,625
    Nazjax said:

    They are mostly ''hated'' in MP battles than Campaign, cause as you said with all buffs and upkeep they can be nice. But they lack something, probably the anti large.


    In MP they are just OVERPRICED. Silver helms and ellyrions cav' are doing better for the price !

    MP they are not overpriced lol they are the most cost effective elite shock cav , you see them played in lot of MU silver helms are still not as played much

    #givemoreunitsforbrettonia, my bret dlc


  • VandicusVandicus Junior Member Registered Users Posts: 368
    Generally in order to limit casualties in campaign the ideal way to play HElfs in campaign is to do a bunch of damage with ranged and artillery before any melee combat. And melee (non-monster) units just don't put out very much damage.

    Phoenix guard has AP, a hefty anti-large bonus, expert charge defense and is quite durable. Even if you kill a bunch of units with dragon princes you're probably going to take significant casualties on them, and they aren't the best at killing monsters or enemy ranged(dragons are just a lot better at this in campaign, and phoenix guard are generally better for guarding your ranged). And lots of units are more useful in sieges than cavalry.

    It's not that they're particularly bad, they certainly aren't as in bad a spot as Throgg's troll buffs for instance. But they don't really fulfill a needed role in campaign, particularly for their price.

    Charge defense negates their charge bonus entirely fyi, from your post it seemed like you thought expert charge defense was needed, but the difference between expert charge defense and regular charge defense is that the latter negates charge bonuses of all enemy types while the former negates only large units(cavalry, monsters, monstrous infantry).
  • CvejoCvejo Registered Users Posts: 114

    Cvejo said:

    Yannir said:

    Cvejo said:

    Yannir said:

    You're getting this wrong, dude.
    Dragon Princes are as viable as any other cavalry at its pricepoint.
    Which is the problem. Cavalry sucks in this game.

    But for Imrik specifically, who gets access to them at t3 because of the unique building in Darkhold, Dragon Princes are a good tool for the early game if you can afford them. For the late game, they have an issue of being as expensive as a dragon or a phoenix without providing the same amount of performance. Why would you get Dragon Princes when you can get a Star Dragon for the same price?

    Imrik's Dragonkin trait gives a -25% Upkeep reduction for Dragon Princes likewise. The Purified Graves of the Dragons from Darkhold grants another -15%. The Friends in High Places tech grants another -5% for the DP, and then another -5% from Imrik's unique Dedicated to Vaul skill. That's a whopping 50% Upkeep cost reduction, meaning they go down to just 175 per turn. That is most definitely not "at the cost of a Star Dragon".

    If go Quartermaster and Renowned&Feared that's another 23% Upkeep reduction, bringing them down to just a meager 95 gold per turn. I believe there's a hero trait that grants an even further upkeep cost reduction.
    How do you think that matters?
    Dragonkin applies to Dragons as well. YES THAT ALSO MEANS STAR DRAGONS. So does everything you just mentioned. AND then on top of that, the Dragon Keep unique building Vaul's Anvil, Caledor, gives -25% upkeep reduction for dragons. So yes, Star Dragons are actually cheaper for Imrik than Dragon Princes are.

    You seem to keep forgetting that Star Dragons are 600 upkeep and Dragon Princes only 360.
    They might as well not exist what with how stupid OP High Elf economy is.


    This is why people can make 20 dragon doomstacks.

    Economy's not that great with Imrik. No trade, surrounded by hostiles everywhere.
Sign In or Register to comment.