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

Some Dev Interview Highlights from 6/6

124»

Comments

  • Commissar_GCommissar_G Senior Member Registered Users Posts: 15,697

    16K viewers? No wonder it was a crappy interview. Why don't they do a Q and A with someone like Indy.

    Because Indy is significantly worse.
    I wasn't going to say anything but since you brought it up.

    The host was an atrocious interviewer. Barely communicated for the first 10-15 minutes. Interrupted Andy to talk about the game he was playing. Had no questions prepared or even an introduction.


    Legend has the social skills of an amoeba and would've done a better job because you know he would've had a list of questions and topics to cover prepared in advance.
    MarcusLivius: You are indeed a lord of entitlement.
  • LeonArddoggLeonArddogg Registered Users Posts: 69

    16K viewers? No wonder it was a crappy interview. Why don't they do a Q and A with someone like Indy.

    Because Indy is significantly worse.
    I wasn't going to say anything but since you brought it up.

    The host was an atrocious interviewer. Barely communicated for the first 10-15 minutes. Interrupted Andy to talk about the game he was playing. Had no questions prepared or even an introduction.


    Legend has the social skills of an amoeba and would've done a better job because you know he would've had a list of questions and topics to cover prepared in advance.
    The man, the Legend yeah he would be best. Although there is a risk he would break the interview and try to cheese poor Andy 😜
  • T_MACCABBEET_MACCABBEE Registered Users Posts: 700

    Draxynnic said:

    Crane gunners are fine right now. They deserve to be the strongest ranged infantry unit Cathay has. They are using goddamn anti tank rifles for pete's sake.
    Before there was no point in using them since cannons do a better job at killing high value targets while crossbows are simply better at ranged dps. You also have to factor in that crane gunners are also slow to reposition and require LoS.
    Anyone who has used skaven jezzails would know how underwhelming they are by comparison especially when they have roughly similar stats.

    Shouldn't Crane and Iron Hail Gunners have rather narrow niches? They certainly strike me as that sort of special rather than general purpose weapons. So imho crossbows and artillery should certainly outperform them against more general targets, whereas they should perform better under more specific conditions appropriate to their role.
    What do you mean by "narrow niche"? You haven't even tried to define a specialty for the units, nor acknowledged that they deal the same damage per shot to all targets in game currently so I'm not sure where this point even comes from?

    They're wall guns (which are light artillery) and blunderbusses respectively, they fire balls of lead at high speed with an explosive force strong enough to pierce metal armor. If you shoot something with either of them that thing is going to hurt.

    The difference between a cannon, a wall gun, and a blunderbuss if you really want to simplify is size. They're all smooth bore firearms that fire a number of balls of lead at varying distances, but as you go up in size you can accuracy, range and power from the increased explosive force in the longer barrel. You could load shot into a Crane Gun and a Cannon without a problem actually, it's just not a great use of the range.

    These are all pretty generalist as far as tools go, used to shoot targets directly, so I'm not sure why they'd have a limited use case in terms of targeting. Currently you bring them if they align with your armies needs, just like any other missile unit in the game.
    The distinction here, I think, is that... yeah, sure, they do the same damage to everything. But does everything take the same damage to knock down, or are there things where a crossbow bolt will do the job and a crane gun is overkill?

    I think that's the distinction - crossbow units should be more efficient firing into masses of lightly or medium armoured infantry, particularly since Cathayan crossbows are supposed to be second only to Druchii crossbows. Crane guns should be oriented more towards sniping out high-value, well armoured targets, while being a bit of a waste if they're shooting at, say, Marauders.
    That's the problem, this hypothetical niche doesn't really exist right now or at least work in favor of either iron hail gunners or crane gunners before this patch.
    At first glance you'd think crossbows and bows should be better against soft targets, while the blunderbusses should be for stopping advancing heavily armored units while crane gunners should be for sniping key targets like heroes or lords, but that doesn't work because even peasant archers can do the job of both just as well in most scenarios, sometimes even better because peasant archers/jade crossbows can fire over your troops and obstacles on top having faster fire rates and numbers.

    At least now with this patch, sky lanterns have also gotten a much needed buff because before that they were utterly useless.
    I have a forum post in limbo that would provide some useful context but the hypothetical niches your describing can't really exist based on the way AP damage works. AP damage is just not reduced, meaning it's consistent damage. Since health in this game is pretty standardized (Chaos Warriors have about the same health as marauders on a per unit basis) AP units that deal enough damage to be good against armored targets will therefore be good against unarmored targets. Likewise, since all units have some AP volume is always going to be effective because the range on health is pretty limited, again by design.

    Archers and Crossbows are better for firing into unarmored units because they're more efficient cost wise, but if Crane Gunners deal enough damage to be relevant against Chaos Warriors they'll deal solid damage to marauders and that's okay.

    Prior to this patch Crane Gunners damage output was atrocious. Against infantry they dealt so little damage as to be inconsequential, against monstrous infantry they still do mediocre damage on this patch which tells you how rough they were on the last patch. Even against the targets they ideally would be sniping they were (and honestly still are) pretty uninspiring. The biggest strength they have is zoning lords out but the AI really doesn't respect that and as such you might as well just go cheaper and with greater volume if killing lords is your thing. Since buffing Crane Gunner damage to the point of relevance against SEs would probably need it to be around 75% of handgunners (around 1500) and that would be pretty toxic as a lord sniping too while still making the unit questionable as a choice, just letting them effectively double their volley against infantry seems like a safer and substantially less toxic approach. I think the niche of "anti-armored infantry" feels reasonable and it creates greater artillery variety between the Empire, Dwarfs, and Cathay which is a worthy goal in and of itself.

    Iron Hails on the other hand, just sucked because they were wasting their time with an animation before firing. You can kite with those ladies now that they turn and fire immediately. It's great. Most improved unit in the game this patch and people still pass over them. Seriously you need a unit dead, bring two of these ladies, who are cheaper than a CG I might add. In this case the niche is less anti-armor and more high risk high reward, which is fine in comparison to the rest of Cathay's lower risk, lower reward missile units.
    Imo, since CDC have repeating crossbows, they should not be competing with crane gunners for damage output but rather, they should instead have suppressive fire that slows enemy units. At least in 3K that was the niche of repeating crossbows. I really hate this meme that due to darkshards, repeating crossbows are now a high AP missile weapon.

    This way, CDC would be enabling crane gunners instead of competing with them for a spot in your army.
  • Spellbound1875Spellbound1875 Registered Users Posts: 1,722

    Draxynnic said:

    Crane gunners are fine right now. They deserve to be the strongest ranged infantry unit Cathay has. They are using goddamn anti tank rifles for pete's sake.
    Before there was no point in using them since cannons do a better job at killing high value targets while crossbows are simply better at ranged dps. You also have to factor in that crane gunners are also slow to reposition and require LoS.
    Anyone who has used skaven jezzails would know how underwhelming they are by comparison especially when they have roughly similar stats.

    Shouldn't Crane and Iron Hail Gunners have rather narrow niches? They certainly strike me as that sort of special rather than general purpose weapons. So imho crossbows and artillery should certainly outperform them against more general targets, whereas they should perform better under more specific conditions appropriate to their role.
    What do you mean by "narrow niche"? You haven't even tried to define a specialty for the units, nor acknowledged that they deal the same damage per shot to all targets in game currently so I'm not sure where this point even comes from?

    They're wall guns (which are light artillery) and blunderbusses respectively, they fire balls of lead at high speed with an explosive force strong enough to pierce metal armor. If you shoot something with either of them that thing is going to hurt.

    The difference between a cannon, a wall gun, and a blunderbuss if you really want to simplify is size. They're all smooth bore firearms that fire a number of balls of lead at varying distances, but as you go up in size you can accuracy, range and power from the increased explosive force in the longer barrel. You could load shot into a Crane Gun and a Cannon without a problem actually, it's just not a great use of the range.

    These are all pretty generalist as far as tools go, used to shoot targets directly, so I'm not sure why they'd have a limited use case in terms of targeting. Currently you bring them if they align with your armies needs, just like any other missile unit in the game.
    The distinction here, I think, is that... yeah, sure, they do the same damage to everything. But does everything take the same damage to knock down, or are there things where a crossbow bolt will do the job and a crane gun is overkill?

    I think that's the distinction - crossbow units should be more efficient firing into masses of lightly or medium armoured infantry, particularly since Cathayan crossbows are supposed to be second only to Druchii crossbows. Crane guns should be oriented more towards sniping out high-value, well armoured targets, while being a bit of a waste if they're shooting at, say, Marauders.
    That's the problem, this hypothetical niche doesn't really exist right now or at least work in favor of either iron hail gunners or crane gunners before this patch.
    At first glance you'd think crossbows and bows should be better against soft targets, while the blunderbusses should be for stopping advancing heavily armored units while crane gunners should be for sniping key targets like heroes or lords, but that doesn't work because even peasant archers can do the job of both just as well in most scenarios, sometimes even better because peasant archers/jade crossbows can fire over your troops and obstacles on top having faster fire rates and numbers.

    At least now with this patch, sky lanterns have also gotten a much needed buff because before that they were utterly useless.
    I have a forum post in limbo that would provide some useful context but the hypothetical niches your describing can't really exist based on the way AP damage works. AP damage is just not reduced, meaning it's consistent damage. Since health in this game is pretty standardized (Chaos Warriors have about the same health as marauders on a per unit basis) AP units that deal enough damage to be good against armored targets will therefore be good against unarmored targets. Likewise, since all units have some AP volume is always going to be effective because the range on health is pretty limited, again by design.

    Archers and Crossbows are better for firing into unarmored units because they're more efficient cost wise, but if Crane Gunners deal enough damage to be relevant against Chaos Warriors they'll deal solid damage to marauders and that's okay.

    Prior to this patch Crane Gunners damage output was atrocious. Against infantry they dealt so little damage as to be inconsequential, against monstrous infantry they still do mediocre damage on this patch which tells you how rough they were on the last patch. Even against the targets they ideally would be sniping they were (and honestly still are) pretty uninspiring. The biggest strength they have is zoning lords out but the AI really doesn't respect that and as such you might as well just go cheaper and with greater volume if killing lords is your thing. Since buffing Crane Gunner damage to the point of relevance against SEs would probably need it to be around 75% of handgunners (around 1500) and that would be pretty toxic as a lord sniping too while still making the unit questionable as a choice, just letting them effectively double their volley against infantry seems like a safer and substantially less toxic approach. I think the niche of "anti-armored infantry" feels reasonable and it creates greater artillery variety between the Empire, Dwarfs, and Cathay which is a worthy goal in and of itself.

    Iron Hails on the other hand, just sucked because they were wasting their time with an animation before firing. You can kite with those ladies now that they turn and fire immediately. It's great. Most improved unit in the game this patch and people still pass over them. Seriously you need a unit dead, bring two of these ladies, who are cheaper than a CG I might add. In this case the niche is less anti-armor and more high risk high reward, which is fine in comparison to the rest of Cathay's lower risk, lower reward missile units.
    Imo, since CDC have repeating crossbows, they should not be competing with crane gunners for damage output but rather, they should instead have suppressive fire that slows enemy units. At least in 3K that was the niche of repeating crossbows. I really hate this meme that due to darkshards, repeating crossbows are now a high AP missile weapon.

    This way, CDC would be enabling crane gunners instead of competing with them for a spot in your army.
    That's not an unreasonable argument, but it's against GW's conventions. Though to be fair repeating crossbows in warhammer have the same fire rate as regular crossbows, they just fire multiple bolts per volley. No idea why that would make them armor piercing but they're a complete fantasy unit without any apparent similarity to real world weapons, in spite of the naming convention.

    Either way CDC and CG aren't really in direct competition on this patch. CDC have a higher potential damage output against a lot of targets which makes them separate tools in a tool box, not directly competing options.
  • Surge_2Surge_2 Registered Users Posts: 10,457

    16K viewers? No wonder it was a crappy interview. Why don't they do a Q and A with someone like Indy.

    Whats wrong with 16K viewers? Thats more than double the games current peaks.
    Glory matters not.

  • XxXScorpionXxXXxXScorpionXxX Registered Users Posts: 5,493
    Surge_2 said:

    16K viewers? No wonder it was a crappy interview. Why don't they do a Q and A with someone like Indy.

    Whats wrong with 16K viewers? Thats more than double the games current peaks.
    there are creators with hundreds of thousand. Legend almost has half a million.
    Request scorched body textures, poisoned dying animations for infantry's skeletons, a blood slider that allows us to control how much blood appears in battle and make proper death animations for all ethereal units so they vanish for Blood for the Blood God 3.
  • Surge_2Surge_2 Registered Users Posts: 10,457

    Surge_2 said:

    16K viewers? No wonder it was a crappy interview. Why don't they do a Q and A with someone like Indy.

    Whats wrong with 16K viewers? Thats more than double the games current peaks.
    there are creators with hundreds of thousand. Legend almost has half a million.
    Concurrent views?!

    Thats quite impressive.
    Glory matters not.

  • SchubSchub Registered Users Posts: 1,401
    Surge_2 said:

    Surge_2 said:

    16K viewers? No wonder it was a crappy interview. Why don't they do a Q and A with someone like Indy.

    Whats wrong with 16K viewers? Thats more than double the games current peaks.
    there are creators with hundreds of thousand. Legend almost has half a million.
    Concurrent views?!

    Thats quite impressive.
    No he mixes things up. Legend has almost half a million subscribers. Concurrent views? Hm I think the peak was about over 8k but that is an old information
    Sigmar protect us all...


  • DraxynnicDraxynnic Registered Users Posts: 11,165

    Draxynnic said:

    Crane gunners are fine right now. They deserve to be the strongest ranged infantry unit Cathay has. They are using goddamn anti tank rifles for pete's sake.
    Before there was no point in using them since cannons do a better job at killing high value targets while crossbows are simply better at ranged dps. You also have to factor in that crane gunners are also slow to reposition and require LoS.
    Anyone who has used skaven jezzails would know how underwhelming they are by comparison especially when they have roughly similar stats.

    Shouldn't Crane and Iron Hail Gunners have rather narrow niches? They certainly strike me as that sort of special rather than general purpose weapons. So imho crossbows and artillery should certainly outperform them against more general targets, whereas they should perform better under more specific conditions appropriate to their role.
    What do you mean by "narrow niche"? You haven't even tried to define a specialty for the units, nor acknowledged that they deal the same damage per shot to all targets in game currently so I'm not sure where this point even comes from?

    They're wall guns (which are light artillery) and blunderbusses respectively, they fire balls of lead at high speed with an explosive force strong enough to pierce metal armor. If you shoot something with either of them that thing is going to hurt.

    The difference between a cannon, a wall gun, and a blunderbuss if you really want to simplify is size. They're all smooth bore firearms that fire a number of balls of lead at varying distances, but as you go up in size you can accuracy, range and power from the increased explosive force in the longer barrel. You could load shot into a Crane Gun and a Cannon without a problem actually, it's just not a great use of the range.

    These are all pretty generalist as far as tools go, used to shoot targets directly, so I'm not sure why they'd have a limited use case in terms of targeting. Currently you bring them if they align with your armies needs, just like any other missile unit in the game.
    The distinction here, I think, is that... yeah, sure, they do the same damage to everything. But does everything take the same damage to knock down, or are there things where a crossbow bolt will do the job and a crane gun is overkill?

    I think that's the distinction - crossbow units should be more efficient firing into masses of lightly or medium armoured infantry, particularly since Cathayan crossbows are supposed to be second only to Druchii crossbows. Crane guns should be oriented more towards sniping out high-value, well armoured targets, while being a bit of a waste if they're shooting at, say, Marauders.
    That's the problem, this hypothetical niche doesn't really exist right now or at least work in favor of either iron hail gunners or crane gunners before this patch.
    At first glance you'd think crossbows and bows should be better against soft targets, while the blunderbusses should be for stopping advancing heavily armored units while crane gunners should be for sniping key targets like heroes or lords, but that doesn't work because even peasant archers can do the job of both just as well in most scenarios, sometimes even better because peasant archers/jade crossbows can fire over your troops and obstacles on top having faster fire rates and numbers.

    At least now with this patch, sky lanterns have also gotten a much needed buff because before that they were utterly useless.
    I have a forum post in limbo that would provide some useful context but the hypothetical niches your describing can't really exist based on the way AP damage works. AP damage is just not reduced, meaning it's consistent damage. Since health in this game is pretty standardized (Chaos Warriors have about the same health as marauders on a per unit basis) AP units that deal enough damage to be good against armored targets will therefore be good against unarmored targets. Likewise, since all units have some AP volume is always going to be effective because the range on health is pretty limited, again by design.

    Archers and Crossbows are better for firing into unarmored units because they're more efficient cost wise, but if Crane Gunners deal enough damage to be relevant against Chaos Warriors they'll deal solid damage to marauders and that's okay.

    Prior to this patch Crane Gunners damage output was atrocious. Against infantry they dealt so little damage as to be inconsequential, against monstrous infantry they still do mediocre damage on this patch which tells you how rough they were on the last patch. Even against the targets they ideally would be sniping they were (and honestly still are) pretty uninspiring. The biggest strength they have is zoning lords out but the AI really doesn't respect that and as such you might as well just go cheaper and with greater volume if killing lords is your thing. Since buffing Crane Gunner damage to the point of relevance against SEs would probably need it to be around 75% of handgunners (around 1500) and that would be pretty toxic as a lord sniping too while still making the unit questionable as a choice, just letting them effectively double their volley against infantry seems like a safer and substantially less toxic approach. I think the niche of "anti-armored infantry" feels reasonable and it creates greater artillery variety between the Empire, Dwarfs, and Cathay which is a worthy goal in and of itself.

    Iron Hails on the other hand, just sucked because they were wasting their time with an animation before firing. You can kite with those ladies now that they turn and fire immediately. It's great. Most improved unit in the game this patch and people still pass over them. Seriously you need a unit dead, bring two of these ladies, who are cheaper than a CG I might add. In this case the niche is less anti-armor and more high risk high reward, which is fine in comparison to the rest of Cathay's lower risk, lower reward missile units.
    Imo, since CDC have repeating crossbows, they should not be competing with crane gunners for damage output but rather, they should instead have suppressive fire that slows enemy units. At least in 3K that was the niche of repeating crossbows. I really hate this meme that due to darkshards, repeating crossbows are now a high AP missile weapon.

    This way, CDC would be enabling crane gunners instead of competing with them for a spot in your army.
    That's not an unreasonable argument, but it's against GW's conventions. Though to be fair repeating crossbows in warhammer have the same fire rate as regular crossbows, they just fire multiple bolts per volley. No idea why that would make them armor piercing but they're a complete fantasy unit without any apparent similarity to real world weapons, in spite of the naming convention.

    Either way CDC and CG aren't really in direct competition on this patch. CDC have a higher potential damage output against a lot of targets which makes them separate tools in a tool box, not directly competing options.
    Somebody in GW decided - in 7E, I think - that crossbows meant that they had to be armour piercing, despite repeating crossbows historically being pretty poor at that. (Worth noting here that the basic crossbows used by Empire and Dwarfs had the same capability to punch through armour on tabletop as repeating crossbows did, it just came from having a higher base Strength rather than formally having the armour piercing rule. So CA has actually compounded GW's original error by making repeater crossbows primarily armour-piercing damage while regular crossbows aren't).
  • Vanilla_GorillaVanilla_Gorilla Registered Users Posts: 37,351
    Surge_2 said:

    Surge_2 said:

    16K viewers? No wonder it was a crappy interview. Why don't they do a Q and A with someone like Indy.

    Whats wrong with 16K viewers? Thats more than double the games current peaks.
    there are creators with hundreds of thousand. Legend almost has half a million.
    Concurrent views?!

    Thats quite impressive.
    Yeah, 16k concurrents is enormous on Twitch. If that creator gets that consistently they're one of the biggest streamers on the platform.

    Even 16k views on a stream is very impressive.
    "It's no fun fighting people weaker than you." - The Beast

    "There are only two people better than me, and I'm both of them" - The descendant of Guanyin

    Forum Terms & Conditions

    I am The Beast, Descendant of Guanyin, The one who beasts 25 hours a day, 8 days a week, The Vanilla Gorilla, The great bright delight, Conqueror of Mountains, Purveyor of wisdom, Official forum historian, Master Tamer of energy, the one they fear to name, Beastradamus, The Teacher, Master Unbiased Pollster, The Avatar of Tuesday, Chief hype Train Conductor, Uwu Usurper, Pog Wog Warrior, Poggers Patroller, Alpha of the species, Apex protector,

  • LennoxPoodleLennoxPoodle Registered Users Posts: 1,666

    Draxynnic said:

    Crane gunners are fine right now. They deserve to be the strongest ranged infantry unit Cathay has. They are using goddamn anti tank rifles for pete's sake.
    Before there was no point in using them since cannons do a better job at killing high value targets while crossbows are simply better at ranged dps. You also have to factor in that crane gunners are also slow to reposition and require LoS.
    Anyone who has used skaven jezzails would know how underwhelming they are by comparison especially when they have roughly similar stats.

    Shouldn't Crane and Iron Hail Gunners have rather narrow niches? They certainly strike me as that sort of special rather than general purpose weapons. So imho crossbows and artillery should certainly outperform them against more general targets, whereas they should perform better under more specific conditions appropriate to their role.
    What do you mean by "narrow niche"? You haven't even tried to define a specialty for the units, nor acknowledged that they deal the same damage per shot to all targets in game currently so I'm not sure where this point even comes from?

    They're wall guns (which are light artillery) and blunderbusses respectively, they fire balls of lead at high speed with an explosive force strong enough to pierce metal armor. If you shoot something with either of them that thing is going to hurt.

    The difference between a cannon, a wall gun, and a blunderbuss if you really want to simplify is size. They're all smooth bore firearms that fire a number of balls of lead at varying distances, but as you go up in size you can accuracy, range and power from the increased explosive force in the longer barrel. You could load shot into a Crane Gun and a Cannon without a problem actually, it's just not a great use of the range.

    These are all pretty generalist as far as tools go, used to shoot targets directly, so I'm not sure why they'd have a limited use case in terms of targeting. Currently you bring them if they align with your armies needs, just like any other missile unit in the game.
    The distinction here, I think, is that... yeah, sure, they do the same damage to everything. But does everything take the same damage to knock down, or are there things where a crossbow bolt will do the job and a crane gun is overkill?

    I think that's the distinction - crossbow units should be more efficient firing into masses of lightly or medium armoured infantry, particularly since Cathayan crossbows are supposed to be second only to Druchii crossbows. Crane guns should be oriented more towards sniping out high-value, well armoured targets, while being a bit of a waste if they're shooting at, say, Marauders.
    That's the problem, this hypothetical niche doesn't really exist right now or at least work in favor of either iron hail gunners or crane gunners before this patch.
    At first glance you'd think crossbows and bows should be better against soft targets, while the blunderbusses should be for stopping advancing heavily armored units while crane gunners should be for sniping key targets like heroes or lords, but that doesn't work because even peasant archers can do the job of both just as well in most scenarios, sometimes even better because peasant archers/jade crossbows can fire over your troops and obstacles on top having faster fire rates and numbers.

    At least now with this patch, sky lanterns have also gotten a much needed buff because before that they were utterly useless.
    I have a forum post in limbo that would provide some useful context but the hypothetical niches your describing can't really exist based on the way AP damage works. AP damage is just not reduced, meaning it's consistent damage. Since health in this game is pretty standardized (Chaos Warriors have about the same health as marauders on a per unit basis) AP units that deal enough damage to be good against armored targets will therefore be good against unarmored targets. Likewise, since all units have some AP volume is always going to be effective because the range on health is pretty limited, again by design.

    Archers and Crossbows are better for firing into unarmored units because they're more efficient cost wise, but if Crane Gunners deal enough damage to be relevant against Chaos Warriors they'll deal solid damage to marauders and that's okay.

    Prior to this patch Crane Gunners damage output was atrocious. Against infantry they dealt so little damage as to be inconsequential, against monstrous infantry they still do mediocre damage on this patch which tells you how rough they were on the last patch. Even against the targets they ideally would be sniping they were (and honestly still are) pretty uninspiring. The biggest strength they have is zoning lords out but the AI really doesn't respect that and as such you might as well just go cheaper and with greater volume if killing lords is your thing. Since buffing Crane Gunner damage to the point of relevance against SEs would probably need it to be around 75% of handgunners (around 1500) and that would be pretty toxic as a lord sniping too while still making the unit questionable as a choice, just letting them effectively double their volley against infantry seems like a safer and substantially less toxic approach. I think the niche of "anti-armored infantry" feels reasonable and it creates greater artillery variety between the Empire, Dwarfs, and Cathay which is a worthy goal in and of itself.

    Iron Hails on the other hand, just sucked because they were wasting their time with an animation before firing. You can kite with those ladies now that they turn and fire immediately. It's great. Most improved unit in the game this patch and people still pass over them. Seriously you need a unit dead, bring two of these ladies, who are cheaper than a CG I might add. In this case the niche is less anti-armor and more high risk high reward, which is fine in comparison to the rest of Cathay's lower risk, lower reward missile units.
    Imo, since CDC have repeating crossbows, they should not be competing with crane gunners for damage output but rather, they should instead have suppressive fire that slows enemy units. At least in 3K that was the niche of repeating crossbows. I really hate this meme that due to darkshards, repeating crossbows are now a high AP missile weapon.

    This way, CDC would be enabling crane gunners instead of competing with them for a spot in your army.
    That's not an unreasonable argument, but it's against GW's conventions. Though to be fair repeating crossbows in warhammer have the same fire rate as regular crossbows, they just fire multiple bolts per volley. No idea why that would make them armor piercing but they're a complete fantasy unit without any apparent similarity to real world weapons, in spite of the naming convention.

    Either way CDC and CG aren't really in direct competition on this patch. CDC have a higher potential damage output against a lot of targets which makes them separate tools in a tool box, not directly competing options.
    I think the AP on Druchii repeating crossbows in WHFB is more down to them being elven crossbows (remember, Asrai bows have AP too) rather than anything else. Afaik the only repeating crossbows GW ever did where those Dark Elf ones, with the weapon type having no general profile in the rulebook.
    So we simply don't know how a "normal" (human) version from GW would look like. I suspect it wouldn't be AP.
  • Tzeentch711Tzeentch711 Registered Users Posts: 121
    Repeating crossbows in Vermintide 2 are also AP, maybe its just GW insisting that they have to be.
  • Lord_ZarkovLord_Zarkov Registered Users Posts: 1,701

    Draxynnic said:

    Crane gunners are fine right now. They deserve to be the strongest ranged infantry unit Cathay has. They are using goddamn anti tank rifles for pete's sake.
    Before there was no point in using them since cannons do a better job at killing high value targets while crossbows are simply better at ranged dps. You also have to factor in that crane gunners are also slow to reposition and require LoS.
    Anyone who has used skaven jezzails would know how underwhelming they are by comparison especially when they have roughly similar stats.

    Shouldn't Crane and Iron Hail Gunners have rather narrow niches? They certainly strike me as that sort of special rather than general purpose weapons. So imho crossbows and artillery should certainly outperform them against more general targets, whereas they should perform better under more specific conditions appropriate to their role.
    What do you mean by "narrow niche"? You haven't even tried to define a specialty for the units, nor acknowledged that they deal the same damage per shot to all targets in game currently so I'm not sure where this point even comes from?

    They're wall guns (which are light artillery) and blunderbusses respectively, they fire balls of lead at high speed with an explosive force strong enough to pierce metal armor. If you shoot something with either of them that thing is going to hurt.

    The difference between a cannon, a wall gun, and a blunderbuss if you really want to simplify is size. They're all smooth bore firearms that fire a number of balls of lead at varying distances, but as you go up in size you can accuracy, range and power from the increased explosive force in the longer barrel. You could load shot into a Crane Gun and a Cannon without a problem actually, it's just not a great use of the range.

    These are all pretty generalist as far as tools go, used to shoot targets directly, so I'm not sure why they'd have a limited use case in terms of targeting. Currently you bring them if they align with your armies needs, just like any other missile unit in the game.
    The distinction here, I think, is that... yeah, sure, they do the same damage to everything. But does everything take the same damage to knock down, or are there things where a crossbow bolt will do the job and a crane gun is overkill?

    I think that's the distinction - crossbow units should be more efficient firing into masses of lightly or medium armoured infantry, particularly since Cathayan crossbows are supposed to be second only to Druchii crossbows. Crane guns should be oriented more towards sniping out high-value, well armoured targets, while being a bit of a waste if they're shooting at, say, Marauders.
    That's the problem, this hypothetical niche doesn't really exist right now or at least work in favor of either iron hail gunners or crane gunners before this patch.
    At first glance you'd think crossbows and bows should be better against soft targets, while the blunderbusses should be for stopping advancing heavily armored units while crane gunners should be for sniping key targets like heroes or lords, but that doesn't work because even peasant archers can do the job of both just as well in most scenarios, sometimes even better because peasant archers/jade crossbows can fire over your troops and obstacles on top having faster fire rates and numbers.

    At least now with this patch, sky lanterns have also gotten a much needed buff because before that they were utterly useless.
    I have a forum post in limbo that would provide some useful context but the hypothetical niches your describing can't really exist based on the way AP damage works. AP damage is just not reduced, meaning it's consistent damage. Since health in this game is pretty standardized (Chaos Warriors have about the same health as marauders on a per unit basis) AP units that deal enough damage to be good against armored targets will therefore be good against unarmored targets. Likewise, since all units have some AP volume is always going to be effective because the range on health is pretty limited, again by design.

    Archers and Crossbows are better for firing into unarmored units because they're more efficient cost wise, but if Crane Gunners deal enough damage to be relevant against Chaos Warriors they'll deal solid damage to marauders and that's okay.

    Prior to this patch Crane Gunners damage output was atrocious. Against infantry they dealt so little damage as to be inconsequential, against monstrous infantry they still do mediocre damage on this patch which tells you how rough they were on the last patch. Even against the targets they ideally would be sniping they were (and honestly still are) pretty uninspiring. The biggest strength they have is zoning lords out but the AI really doesn't respect that and as such you might as well just go cheaper and with greater volume if killing lords is your thing. Since buffing Crane Gunner damage to the point of relevance against SEs would probably need it to be around 75% of handgunners (around 1500) and that would be pretty toxic as a lord sniping too while still making the unit questionable as a choice, just letting them effectively double their volley against infantry seems like a safer and substantially less toxic approach. I think the niche of "anti-armored infantry" feels reasonable and it creates greater artillery variety between the Empire, Dwarfs, and Cathay which is a worthy goal in and of itself.

    Iron Hails on the other hand, just sucked because they were wasting their time with an animation before firing. You can kite with those ladies now that they turn and fire immediately. It's great. Most improved unit in the game this patch and people still pass over them. Seriously you need a unit dead, bring two of these ladies, who are cheaper than a CG I might add. In this case the niche is less anti-armor and more high risk high reward, which is fine in comparison to the rest of Cathay's lower risk, lower reward missile units.
    Imo, since CDC have repeating crossbows, they should not be competing with crane gunners for damage output but rather, they should instead have suppressive fire that slows enemy units. At least in 3K that was the niche of repeating crossbows. I really hate this meme that due to darkshards, repeating crossbows are now a high AP missile weapon.

    This way, CDC would be enabling crane gunners instead of competing with them for a spot in your army.
    That's not an unreasonable argument, but it's against GW's conventions. Though to be fair repeating crossbows in warhammer have the same fire rate as regular crossbows, they just fire multiple bolts per volley. No idea why that would make them armor piercing but they're a complete fantasy unit without any apparent similarity to real world weapons, in spite of the naming convention.

    Either way CDC and CG aren't really in direct competition on this patch. CDC have a higher potential damage output against a lot of targets which makes them separate tools in a tool box, not directly competing options.
    I think the AP on Druchii repeating crossbows in WHFB is more down to them being elven crossbows (remember, Asrai bows have AP too) rather than anything else. Afaik the only repeating crossbows GW ever did where those Dark Elf ones, with the weapon type having no general profile in the rulebook.
    So we simply don't know how a "normal" (human) version from GW would look like. I suspect it wouldn't be AP.
    In 6th/7th generic repeating crossbows were in the rule book but weren’t AP.

    In their 7th Ed AB, DE got special DE repeating x-bows with AP for game balance reasons, with their lore being they’re extra spikey elven ones.
  • LennoxPoodleLennoxPoodle Registered Users Posts: 1,666

    Draxynnic said:

    Crane gunners are fine right now. They deserve to be the strongest ranged infantry unit Cathay has. They are using goddamn anti tank rifles for pete's sake.
    Before there was no point in using them since cannons do a better job at killing high value targets while crossbows are simply better at ranged dps. You also have to factor in that crane gunners are also slow to reposition and require LoS.
    Anyone who has used skaven jezzails would know how underwhelming they are by comparison especially when they have roughly similar stats.

    Shouldn't Crane and Iron Hail Gunners have rather narrow niches? They certainly strike me as that sort of special rather than general purpose weapons. So imho crossbows and artillery should certainly outperform them against more general targets, whereas they should perform better under more specific conditions appropriate to their role.
    What do you mean by "narrow niche"? You haven't even tried to define a specialty for the units, nor acknowledged that they deal the same damage per shot to all targets in game currently so I'm not sure where this point even comes from?

    They're wall guns (which are light artillery) and blunderbusses respectively, they fire balls of lead at high speed with an explosive force strong enough to pierce metal armor. If you shoot something with either of them that thing is going to hurt.

    The difference between a cannon, a wall gun, and a blunderbuss if you really want to simplify is size. They're all smooth bore firearms that fire a number of balls of lead at varying distances, but as you go up in size you can accuracy, range and power from the increased explosive force in the longer barrel. You could load shot into a Crane Gun and a Cannon without a problem actually, it's just not a great use of the range.

    These are all pretty generalist as far as tools go, used to shoot targets directly, so I'm not sure why they'd have a limited use case in terms of targeting. Currently you bring them if they align with your armies needs, just like any other missile unit in the game.
    The distinction here, I think, is that... yeah, sure, they do the same damage to everything. But does everything take the same damage to knock down, or are there things where a crossbow bolt will do the job and a crane gun is overkill?

    I think that's the distinction - crossbow units should be more efficient firing into masses of lightly or medium armoured infantry, particularly since Cathayan crossbows are supposed to be second only to Druchii crossbows. Crane guns should be oriented more towards sniping out high-value, well armoured targets, while being a bit of a waste if they're shooting at, say, Marauders.
    That's the problem, this hypothetical niche doesn't really exist right now or at least work in favor of either iron hail gunners or crane gunners before this patch.
    At first glance you'd think crossbows and bows should be better against soft targets, while the blunderbusses should be for stopping advancing heavily armored units while crane gunners should be for sniping key targets like heroes or lords, but that doesn't work because even peasant archers can do the job of both just as well in most scenarios, sometimes even better because peasant archers/jade crossbows can fire over your troops and obstacles on top having faster fire rates and numbers.

    At least now with this patch, sky lanterns have also gotten a much needed buff because before that they were utterly useless.
    I have a forum post in limbo that would provide some useful context but the hypothetical niches your describing can't really exist based on the way AP damage works. AP damage is just not reduced, meaning it's consistent damage. Since health in this game is pretty standardized (Chaos Warriors have about the same health as marauders on a per unit basis) AP units that deal enough damage to be good against armored targets will therefore be good against unarmored targets. Likewise, since all units have some AP volume is always going to be effective because the range on health is pretty limited, again by design.

    Archers and Crossbows are better for firing into unarmored units because they're more efficient cost wise, but if Crane Gunners deal enough damage to be relevant against Chaos Warriors they'll deal solid damage to marauders and that's okay.

    Prior to this patch Crane Gunners damage output was atrocious. Against infantry they dealt so little damage as to be inconsequential, against monstrous infantry they still do mediocre damage on this patch which tells you how rough they were on the last patch. Even against the targets they ideally would be sniping they were (and honestly still are) pretty uninspiring. The biggest strength they have is zoning lords out but the AI really doesn't respect that and as such you might as well just go cheaper and with greater volume if killing lords is your thing. Since buffing Crane Gunner damage to the point of relevance against SEs would probably need it to be around 75% of handgunners (around 1500) and that would be pretty toxic as a lord sniping too while still making the unit questionable as a choice, just letting them effectively double their volley against infantry seems like a safer and substantially less toxic approach. I think the niche of "anti-armored infantry" feels reasonable and it creates greater artillery variety between the Empire, Dwarfs, and Cathay which is a worthy goal in and of itself.

    Iron Hails on the other hand, just sucked because they were wasting their time with an animation before firing. You can kite with those ladies now that they turn and fire immediately. It's great. Most improved unit in the game this patch and people still pass over them. Seriously you need a unit dead, bring two of these ladies, who are cheaper than a CG I might add. In this case the niche is less anti-armor and more high risk high reward, which is fine in comparison to the rest of Cathay's lower risk, lower reward missile units.
    Imo, since CDC have repeating crossbows, they should not be competing with crane gunners for damage output but rather, they should instead have suppressive fire that slows enemy units. At least in 3K that was the niche of repeating crossbows. I really hate this meme that due to darkshards, repeating crossbows are now a high AP missile weapon.

    This way, CDC would be enabling crane gunners instead of competing with them for a spot in your army.
    That's not an unreasonable argument, but it's against GW's conventions. Though to be fair repeating crossbows in warhammer have the same fire rate as regular crossbows, they just fire multiple bolts per volley. No idea why that would make them armor piercing but they're a complete fantasy unit without any apparent similarity to real world weapons, in spite of the naming convention.

    Either way CDC and CG aren't really in direct competition on this patch. CDC have a higher potential damage output against a lot of targets which makes them separate tools in a tool box, not directly competing options.
    I think the AP on Druchii repeating crossbows in WHFB is more down to them being elven crossbows (remember, Asrai bows have AP too) rather than anything else. Afaik the only repeating crossbows GW ever did where those Dark Elf ones, with the weapon type having no general profile in the rulebook.
    So we simply don't know how a "normal" (human) version from GW would look like. I suspect it wouldn't be AP.
    In 6th/7th generic repeating crossbows were in the rule book but weren’t AP.

    In their 7th Ed AB, DE got special DE repeating x-bows with AP for game balance reasons, with their lore being they’re extra spikey elven ones.
    Well, then my guess was right. Now I wonder how it is done in the secret Grand Cathay armybook. Reason says CDG crossbows fire at S4 BS 3, with -1 to hit thanks to multiple shots. TW's implementation hints at DE style AP though...
  • T_MACCABBEET_MACCABBEE Registered Users Posts: 700
    edited June 8
    Honestly, I would have preferred peasant archers to be renamed peasant sentries and are instead armed with mass produced repeater crossbows that do peashooter damage but are great for harassing the enemy from range, then give CDC actual heavy crossbows meant to punch through armor with each bolt/quarrel. Even better if they have a knock down effect.
  • capybarasiesta89capybarasiesta89 Senior Member Edinburgh, ScotlandRegistered Users Posts: 5,387
    8. They plan on doing a general repass on Lighting within the game. They said they might do more with Night Battles or moons in the skybox. They didn't promise the latter. The latter was a non-committal, 'maybe, we'll see if it fits in when we do the Lighting Pass'. But the Lighting repass itself is still good news!



    This is alright

    But..



    This exists in Troy files



    What we need plus twin moons
    #JusticeForTzeentch #JusticeForMonogods

    7bmg1fojzz69.jpg
  • XxXScorpionXxXXxXScorpionXxX Registered Users Posts: 5,493
    Surge_2 said:

    Surge_2 said:

    16K viewers? No wonder it was a crappy interview. Why don't they do a Q and A with someone like Indy.

    Whats wrong with 16K viewers? Thats more than double the games current peaks.
    there are creators with hundreds of thousand. Legend almost has half a million.
    Concurrent views?!

    Thats quite impressive.
    the guy with 16K didn't have concurrent views I'm talking about his equivalent of subscription. I don't know how twitch works nor am I interested in learning. I don't like the site.
    Request scorched body textures, poisoned dying animations for infantry's skeletons, a blood slider that allows us to control how much blood appears in battle and make proper death animations for all ethereal units so they vanish for Blood for the Blood God 3.
  • Spellbound1875Spellbound1875 Registered Users Posts: 1,722

    Draxynnic said:

    Crane gunners are fine right now. They deserve to be the strongest ranged infantry unit Cathay has. They are using goddamn anti tank rifles for pete's sake.
    Before there was no point in using them since cannons do a better job at killing high value targets while crossbows are simply better at ranged dps. You also have to factor in that crane gunners are also slow to reposition and require LoS.
    Anyone who has used skaven jezzails would know how underwhelming they are by comparison especially when they have roughly similar stats.

    Shouldn't Crane and Iron Hail Gunners have rather narrow niches? They certainly strike me as that sort of special rather than general purpose weapons. So imho crossbows and artillery should certainly outperform them against more general targets, whereas they should perform better under more specific conditions appropriate to their role.
    What do you mean by "narrow niche"? You haven't even tried to define a specialty for the units, nor acknowledged that they deal the same damage per shot to all targets in game currently so I'm not sure where this point even comes from?

    They're wall guns (which are light artillery) and blunderbusses respectively, they fire balls of lead at high speed with an explosive force strong enough to pierce metal armor. If you shoot something with either of them that thing is going to hurt.

    The difference between a cannon, a wall gun, and a blunderbuss if you really want to simplify is size. They're all smooth bore firearms that fire a number of balls of lead at varying distances, but as you go up in size you can accuracy, range and power from the increased explosive force in the longer barrel. You could load shot into a Crane Gun and a Cannon without a problem actually, it's just not a great use of the range.

    These are all pretty generalist as far as tools go, used to shoot targets directly, so I'm not sure why they'd have a limited use case in terms of targeting. Currently you bring them if they align with your armies needs, just like any other missile unit in the game.
    The distinction here, I think, is that... yeah, sure, they do the same damage to everything. But does everything take the same damage to knock down, or are there things where a crossbow bolt will do the job and a crane gun is overkill?

    I think that's the distinction - crossbow units should be more efficient firing into masses of lightly or medium armoured infantry, particularly since Cathayan crossbows are supposed to be second only to Druchii crossbows. Crane guns should be oriented more towards sniping out high-value, well armoured targets, while being a bit of a waste if they're shooting at, say, Marauders.
    That's the problem, this hypothetical niche doesn't really exist right now or at least work in favor of either iron hail gunners or crane gunners before this patch.
    At first glance you'd think crossbows and bows should be better against soft targets, while the blunderbusses should be for stopping advancing heavily armored units while crane gunners should be for sniping key targets like heroes or lords, but that doesn't work because even peasant archers can do the job of both just as well in most scenarios, sometimes even better because peasant archers/jade crossbows can fire over your troops and obstacles on top having faster fire rates and numbers.

    At least now with this patch, sky lanterns have also gotten a much needed buff because before that they were utterly useless.
    I have a forum post in limbo that would provide some useful context but the hypothetical niches your describing can't really exist based on the way AP damage works. AP damage is just not reduced, meaning it's consistent damage. Since health in this game is pretty standardized (Chaos Warriors have about the same health as marauders on a per unit basis) AP units that deal enough damage to be good against armored targets will therefore be good against unarmored targets. Likewise, since all units have some AP volume is always going to be effective because the range on health is pretty limited, again by design.

    Archers and Crossbows are better for firing into unarmored units because they're more efficient cost wise, but if Crane Gunners deal enough damage to be relevant against Chaos Warriors they'll deal solid damage to marauders and that's okay.

    Prior to this patch Crane Gunners damage output was atrocious. Against infantry they dealt so little damage as to be inconsequential, against monstrous infantry they still do mediocre damage on this patch which tells you how rough they were on the last patch. Even against the targets they ideally would be sniping they were (and honestly still are) pretty uninspiring. The biggest strength they have is zoning lords out but the AI really doesn't respect that and as such you might as well just go cheaper and with greater volume if killing lords is your thing. Since buffing Crane Gunner damage to the point of relevance against SEs would probably need it to be around 75% of handgunners (around 1500) and that would be pretty toxic as a lord sniping too while still making the unit questionable as a choice, just letting them effectively double their volley against infantry seems like a safer and substantially less toxic approach. I think the niche of "anti-armored infantry" feels reasonable and it creates greater artillery variety between the Empire, Dwarfs, and Cathay which is a worthy goal in and of itself.

    Iron Hails on the other hand, just sucked because they were wasting their time with an animation before firing. You can kite with those ladies now that they turn and fire immediately. It's great. Most improved unit in the game this patch and people still pass over them. Seriously you need a unit dead, bring two of these ladies, who are cheaper than a CG I might add. In this case the niche is less anti-armor and more high risk high reward, which is fine in comparison to the rest of Cathay's lower risk, lower reward missile units.
    Imo, since CDC have repeating crossbows, they should not be competing with crane gunners for damage output but rather, they should instead have suppressive fire that slows enemy units. At least in 3K that was the niche of repeating crossbows. I really hate this meme that due to darkshards, repeating crossbows are now a high AP missile weapon.

    This way, CDC would be enabling crane gunners instead of competing with them for a spot in your army.
    That's not an unreasonable argument, but it's against GW's conventions. Though to be fair repeating crossbows in warhammer have the same fire rate as regular crossbows, they just fire multiple bolts per volley. No idea why that would make them armor piercing but they're a complete fantasy unit without any apparent similarity to real world weapons, in spite of the naming convention.

    Either way CDC and CG aren't really in direct competition on this patch. CDC have a higher potential damage output against a lot of targets which makes them separate tools in a tool box, not directly competing options.
    I think the AP on Druchii repeating crossbows in WHFB is more down to them being elven crossbows (remember, Asrai bows have AP too) rather than anything else. Afaik the only repeating crossbows GW ever did where those Dark Elf ones, with the weapon type having no general profile in the rulebook.
    So we simply don't know how a "normal" (human) version from GW would look like. I suspect it wouldn't be AP.
    GW made the Celestial Drgaon Crossbowmen and gave CA the descriptors. While AP is a total war thing more so than a tabletop thing the indication is that Celestial Dragon Crossbowmen use weapons which hit notably harder than normal crossbows.

    It seems that in GW's conventions a crossbow that fires multiple bolts at once is both a repeating crossbow and more damaging than a normal crossbow.

    This is just an area where GW and reality disagree which isn't all that uncommon. Though in this case I think someone was misinformed on what "repeating crossbows" were.
  • Vanilla_GorillaVanilla_Gorilla Registered Users Posts: 37,351
    edited June 8

    Surge_2 said:

    Surge_2 said:

    16K viewers? No wonder it was a crappy interview. Why don't they do a Q and A with someone like Indy.

    Whats wrong with 16K viewers? Thats more than double the games current peaks.
    there are creators with hundreds of thousand. Legend almost has half a million.
    Concurrent views?!

    Thats quite impressive.
    the guy with 16K didn't have concurrent views I'm talking about his equivalent of subscription. I don't know how twitch works nor am I interested in learning. I don't like the site.
    16k Subs would mean he's one of the most successful people on the platform and makes millions of dollars every year.

    If you don't know how the site works that's fine, but in that case you're criticizing him based from that lack of knowledge, which makes the criticism itself rather invalid.
    "It's no fun fighting people weaker than you." - The Beast

    "There are only two people better than me, and I'm both of them" - The descendant of Guanyin

    Forum Terms & Conditions

    I am The Beast, Descendant of Guanyin, The one who beasts 25 hours a day, 8 days a week, The Vanilla Gorilla, The great bright delight, Conqueror of Mountains, Purveyor of wisdom, Official forum historian, Master Tamer of energy, the one they fear to name, Beastradamus, The Teacher, Master Unbiased Pollster, The Avatar of Tuesday, Chief hype Train Conductor, Uwu Usurper, Pog Wog Warrior, Poggers Patroller, Alpha of the species, Apex protector,

Sign In or Register to comment.