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 underperforming WoC units

Asamu#6386Asamu#6386 Registered Users Posts: 1,548
edited September 10 in Warhammer Battle Feedback
  • Daemon Princes* Aside from Be'lakor, they all cost ~600 more than they should. The Tzeentch DP, for example, costs 550 more than an exalted lord of change, but has weaker stats.
  • Aspiring Champions - They're awful in MP. The RoR has a bit of a niche vs Ogres and maybe a couple of other factions where you want anti-large that isn't vulnerable to typical anti-infantry spells, but that's about it. The regular Aspiring champions are worse than they were in WH2, and they weren't a good unit then either.
  • Warshrines - The Tzeentch, Khorne, and Undivided Warshrines are all terrible. Their bonuses should probably be doubled. The Tzeentch Warshrine probably needs an additional effect, like barrier recharge or something, because spell mastery and WoM recharge is not going to cut it unless the values are ridiculous. The Nurgle warshrine is probably fine. The Slaanesh Warshrine, like most Mortis engine effects, is probably too strong currently.
  • Dragon Ogres - They're significantly worse than the Khorne GW minotaurs, which still cost 100 less. If they cost 1450-1500, they'd probably be alright, but as is, they're pretty terrible for the cost.
  • Chaos Knights - The new, larger models result in less getting in combat, their mass is less effective due to the larger models each coming into contact with more entities, they're easier to hit with projectiles due to larger entities, and they're turning to the side a lot in melee due to the new animations. Their performance has taken a ~8-10% hit compared to before the new models. Something along the lines of +100 mass and + ~5-10% weapon strength or hp could offset their reduced performance.
  • Swords of Chaos - Regular chaos knights that cost 400 less will perform better against most units in the game.
  • Hellcannon - Even using their full ammunition, they're unlikely to pay off unless there are particularly good targets. Even the RoR with +15 ammunition can have trouble paying off when left alone if the opponent doesn't have expensive targets. They're likely one of the worst artillery pieces in the game right now, considering they cost 1200.
Edit: Also, the Paragon of Ruin ability. 5% charge bonus might as well not exist, and it giving ITP is redundant with Archaon's Crown of Domination.
Post edited by Asamu#6386 on

Comments

  • The_real_FAUST#6885The_real_FAUST#6885 Registered Users Posts: 2,068
    edited September 10
    Some overly strong suggestions as buffs but broadly the identification of weak units I agree with.


    I'd rather warshrines had buffs that affected their area of effect, blobbing should not be encouraged so map wide buffs rather than AoE should be prioritised.

    However their should be a counter if a warshrines is destroyed, it should have a small limited effect on the WOC army as a morale damager
  • yst#1879yst#1879 Registered Users Posts: 9,975
    Dragon orge and minos a tricky one, once u get pass $1500 it becomes a high risk unit to bring.

    Both have their uses in the sense drag orge is more def oriented and minos r pure glass cannon baring that armor.

    They need to be tested against each other for a conclusion
    https://imgur.com/a/Cj4b9
    Top #3 Leaderboard on Warhammer Totalwar.
  • yst#1879yst#1879 Registered Users Posts: 9,975
    Also minos have splash 3, orge 4. So thats pretty huge difference
    https://imgur.com/a/Cj4b9
    Top #3 Leaderboard on Warhammer Totalwar.
  • griffithx#1314griffithx#1314 Registered Users Posts: 1,514
    I definitely agree on Khorne, Tzeentch and regular warshrines. I was trying to see how they hold up in combat to get a sense for if they are useful without good buffs but at least against infantry they lose to empire swordsmen....I got the sense they might be able to sometimes handle 300 cost skink cohort.

  • Asamu#6386Asamu#6386 Registered Users Posts: 1,548
    edited September 10
    yst said:

    Dragon orge and minos a tricky one, once u get pass $1500 it becomes a high risk unit to bring.

    Both have their uses in the sense drag orge is more def oriented and minos r pure glass cannon baring that armor.

    They need to be tested against each other for a conclusion

    Khorne minos have 70 armour. Head-to-head, Khorne minos win more often with 1.5-3k hp left (The fight is super close/practically even; It largely depends on if/how many Minotaurs get punted on contact due to their leaping charge animation being particularly vulnerable to that).

    Vs infantry, Khornotaurs are drastically better than Dragon Ogres, likely due to animations. With no cycle-charging, a unit of Khorne GW minos can kill a unit of Khorne warriors with very little damage taken, but Dragon Ogres get stuck in a grind and only barely win the fight due to their weak charge.
    Dragon Ogre charge animations don't let them get impact damage because they stop right in front of the target and wind up an attack instead of attacking while moving/charging, which effectively cripples them vs infantry compared to other large units. Shaggoths use the same animations, and it's why they struggled to hit a mortis engine in WH1/2 if it was moving away. The main charge attack animation stops them right in front of the target and then winds up a slow attack animation, which doesn't hit a large enough area to actually hit a target moving away at moderate speed.
    Minotaurs are the opposite, since their leaping charge animation can take them all the way through an infantry unit at high speed, which causes a ton of impact damage.
    yst said:

    Also minos have splash 3, orge 4. So thats pretty huge difference

    Actually, it doesn't really matter. There's nothing in the game with low enough HP for that to make a difference. If anything, killing each entity slower is probably a disadvantage (as it was for hammerers). Minotaurs actually perform drastically better than Dragon Ogres vs infantry.
  • #210289#210289 Registered Users Posts: 167
    Agree on overall identification of issues, but disagree on specifics.



    Adressing them:

    1. Several of the warshrines are just terrible. They need to suck less. Meanwhile Slaanesh has a mortis engine and nurgle one heals. Agree


    2. Elite cavalry without armor piercing is pretty terrible in general in the current multiplayer metas. Chaos knight arguement also applies to Dragon Princes, Grail Knights, Grail Guardians, Wild Riders, Gryphon Legion, Reiksguard, and any other 'high tier no ap shock cavalry.'

    So yeah, chaos knights aren't great but in terms of their archetype they are among the best of the worst. So I agree but only to a point. All of those cavalrry tend to suck and be overpriced.

    3. Dragon Ogres won't see play until slaanesh hellstriders are nerfed which do their job better. I find them useful and a reasonable price. Case of being outshone by a better unit. Disagree


    4. Swords of Chaos do suck. Buff them. Agreed

    5. Hellcannon is just fine, if your opponent brought no expensive targets to play around the hell cannon, that's good strategy, not because the hell cannon is bad. Hell cannon is not bad when it's shooting into expensive elite infantry people -really- want to take vs Chaos but don't due to said hellcannon and magic. Disagree entirely.


    6. Aspiring Champions actually seem better then you'd think. They bust ethereal units, and are very difficult to kill with magic and artillery and shooting. (Silver shields, low model count that is spread out, high high hp each) Good to mix in with normal marauders. Could maybe use more armor penetration values so they smash a little harder, or be given a combination of the various marks watered down like in campaign. Partially agree.

    I really ilke using them against Vampire Coast where they bust the sirens down to size, and can't be shot to pieces. Also good vs The Empire or other artillery heavy factions.
  • Spellbound1875#4610Spellbound1875#4610 Registered Users Posts: 1,997
    Daemon Princes: Largely agree, though the Khorne one is slightly less overpriced (closer to 300).

    Aspiring Champions: I wouldn't say they're worse than prior to the update but they are at least 300 gold overpriced for their current stats. As effectively a monstrous infantry unit they compare poorly to spawn and armored chaos trolls. WS is quite low with the AP ratio, and the combat stats are no longer quite so ridiculous at base. If CA wants them to be more elite a MD buff (+5) and a WS buff (+24) would be reasonable to start though I still suspect they'd be a poor choice at the current price.

    Warshrines: Agreed though I might suggest adjusting some of the effects rather than doubling them. Khorne really doesn't need more melee attack for instance and we've seen conditional WS buffs are much less impactful than CA thinks (soulscent anyone?). Changing it to a +15% WS buff (or a +20% AP) might open up some use cases.

    Dragon Ogres: These guys pay for missile resist and better health, and have a more consistent combat statline. It's a trade off but I don't think it's fair to highlight these guys as significantly worse. Having said that you could argue for a price reduction pretty easily as they're a bit expensive despite being about as good as cheap units (see bear riders for kislev). Not super pressing certainly

    Chaos Knights: Interesting results you're identifying. That big of a performance drop certainly isn't worth the 4 speed gain. I had previously though the issue was the marked units being overpriced (haven't really used the base ones). Might be a situation where buffs are more appropriate than price cuts.

    Swords of Chaos: These guys need to be treated like monstrous cavarly and have 8 more entities. A health reduction would be needed (-50 health from 24 is 1200, +~260 for the 8 extra models adds ~2000 for a net gain of ~800) but in terms of combat stats these guys are very comparable to monstrous cav like skullcrushers which makes them pretty terrible in combat. Other solution would be to buff stats but there aren't many 24 entity units to compare to.

    Hellcannon: You're just describing issues with targeting, not with the unit. If the meta is chaffy then expensive units suck but that isn't strictly a balance issue but an issue with how damage value is distributed. While making expensive units cheaper appears to solve the problem it just pushes different units out of the meta.

    Paragon of Ruin is silly but it's the mark of undivided effect and on the Daemon Prince it has a purpose. Archaon seems to have picked it up largely because because CA's been really big on this symmetry with this update. Silly but harmless.
  • Asamu#6386Asamu#6386 Registered Users Posts: 1,548
    edited September 11


    So yeah, chaos knights aren't great but in terms of their archetype they are among the best of the worst. So I agree but only to a point. All of those cavalrry tend to suck and be overpriced.

    The point on Chaos knights is just the effect of the new models on their performance. They're weaker than they were with the old models/animations and perform worse in comparison to other heavy cavalry in the price range than before.

    Hellcannon: You're just describing issues with targeting, not with the unit. If the meta is chaffy then expensive units suck but that isn't strictly a balance issue but an issue with how damage value is distributed. While making expensive units cheaper appears to solve the problem it just pushes different units out of the meta.

    Thing is, other artillery is fine. Hellcannons require expensive targets to be worth anything, which is not the case for other artillery, which is generally going to do fine as long as it can use its ammunition, even if it doesn't have expensive targets. In practice, it's not much better than a 650 mortar, but costs 1200 and is even more vulnerable to cannons/bolt throwers/dragon breaths/etc... due to the single artillery model.

    Vs Chaos warriors (750) that simply stand still at ~2/3 range, a hellcannon will only get around 1000 value with its entire pool of ammunition. Empire Mortars (650) get around 1300 vs the same chaos warriors at the same range. (In some testing with an AI in control of the artillery)
    It's not a targeting issue. The unit is just bad right now, likely because it has the same performance it did in WH2, but the unit size has been increased to ultra, making it less effective in practice. Hellcannons were never particularly good, and they're currently the worst they have ever been.



    Dragon Ogres do seem to beat Bear riders consistently, so maybe I was premature in calling them out, though their performance vs infantry is terrible compared to other anti-large monstrous/cavalry units in the price range. They're far more dedicated to the anti-large role than comparable units, and don't perform it notably better for the cost, if at all for the price.
    Post edited by Asamu#6386 on
  • Spellbound1875#4610Spellbound1875#4610 Registered Users Posts: 1,997
    edited September 11
    Asamu said:


    So yeah, chaos knights aren't great but in terms of their archetype they are among the best of the worst. So I agree but only to a point. All of those cavalrry tend to suck and be overpriced.

    The point on Chaos knights is just the effect of the new models on their performance. They're weaker than they were with the old models/animations and perform worse in comparison to other heavy cavalry in the price range than before.

    Hellcannon: You're just describing issues with targeting, not with the unit. If the meta is chaffy then expensive units suck but that isn't strictly a balance issue but an issue with how damage value is distributed. While making expensive units cheaper appears to solve the problem it just pushes different units out of the meta.

    Thing is, other artillery is fine. Hellcannons require expensive targets to be worth anything, which is not the case for other artillery, which is generally going to do fine as long as it can use its ammunition, even if it doesn't have expensive targets. In practice, it's not much better than a 650 mortar, but costs 1200 and is even more vulnerable to cannons/bolt throwers/dragon breaths/etc... due to the single artillery model.

    Vs Chaos warriors (750) that simply stand still at ~2/3 range, a hellcannon will only get around 1000 value with its entire pool of ammunition. Empire Mortars (650) get around 1300 vs the same chaos warriors at the same range. (In some testing with an AI in control of the artillery)
    It's not a targeting issue. The unit is just bad right now, likely because it has the same performance it did in WH2, but the unit size has been increased to ultra, making it less effective in practice. Hellcannons were never particularly good, and they're currently the worst they have ever been.



    Dragon Ogres do seem to beat Bear riders consistently, so maybe I was premature in calling them out, though their performance vs infantry is terrible compared to other anti-large monstrous/cavalry units in the price range. They're far more dedicated to the anti-large role than comparable units, and don't perform it notably better for the cost, if at all for the price.
    Fair point on the Hellcannon switch to ultra. It probably got treated like SEM'S who didn't gain damage with the move. While that was an intentional nerf on CA's part of Hellcannons didn't get a damage increase they would be quite a bit worse regardless of targeting.
    Post edited by Spellbound1875#4610 on
  • Bastilean#7242Bastilean#7242 Registered Users Posts: 2,939
    Chaos Knights remind me how CA made Grimgor bigger and worse, and then this very community nerfed his green gluteus into the ground.
  • BovineKingBovineKing Registered Users Posts: 962
    Did Hellcannon projectile aoe not scale with change to ultra? Cause if not I have hard time believing it’s bad.
  • Bastilean#7242Bastilean#7242 Registered Users Posts: 2,939
    AOE size doesn't change due to unit size, but the damage does scale.
  • BovineKingBovineKing Registered Users Posts: 962
    edited September 13
    Bastilean said:

    AOE size doesn't change due to unit size, but the damage does scale.

    That’s probably the problem than cause Hellcannons performance was largely due to hitting high numbers of models not just damage as overkill was pretty common for it.

    Man being a single artillery piece must suck now.
  • yst#1879yst#1879 Registered Users Posts: 9,975
    Most single art r pretty weak now due to increased model size in ultra

    Basically their value gets a -25% cut as u now need to kill 33% more to get the same value from 90 model inf to 120

    A $1200 hell cannon is just a $900 piece now

    Its not like range units where their model gets increased due to scale
    https://imgur.com/a/Cj4b9
    Top #3 Leaderboard on Warhammer Totalwar.
  • Spellbound1875#4610Spellbound1875#4610 Registered Users Posts: 1,997
    Bastilean said:

    AOE size doesn't change due to unit size, but the damage does scale.

    Issue isn't whether the damage scales in game 3 (which it should) but whether or not CA increased it to match the new ultra unit size standard, something they did not do with SEM's in what was seemingly an intentional nerf.

    Given that I can't recall any nerfs to the Hellcannon specifically in TWW2 and old videos show a damage value of 415 on large unit size, it would appear that CA did not rebalance the Hell cannons damage per shot for the move to ultra. Combined with the nerf to reload rate and I could definitely see the unit struggling above and beyond other missile units. A damage increase of some kind would be warranted imo.
  • Bastilean#7242Bastilean#7242 Registered Users Posts: 2,939

    Bastilean said:

    AOE size doesn't change due to unit size, but the damage does scale.

    Issue isn't whether the damage scales in game 3 (which it should) but whether or not CA increased it to match the new ultra unit size standard, something they did not do with SEM's in what was seemingly an intentional nerf.


    The scaling goes from 25% to 100% damage scaling. Cannons go from 1 cannon to 4 cannons.

    We really didn't have good scaling in WH2.

    If you are saying CA should have increased the damage to 133% and 133% health too then you should just say that.

    ARE you saying that all SE should have 33% more health and damage?
  • yst#1879yst#1879 Registered Users Posts: 9,975
    Thats the thing, hell cannon is still 1 model and their blast radius arent expanding. Basically means they r weaker now
    https://imgur.com/a/Cj4b9
    Top #3 Leaderboard on Warhammer Totalwar.
  • Spellbound1875#4610Spellbound1875#4610 Registered Users Posts: 1,997
    Bastilean said:

    Bastilean said:

    AOE size doesn't change due to unit size, but the damage does scale.

    Issue isn't whether the damage scales in game 3 (which it should) but whether or not CA increased it to match the new ultra unit size standard, something they did not do with SEM's in what was seemingly an intentional nerf.


    The scaling goes from 25% to 100% damage scaling. Cannons go from 1 cannon to 4 cannons.

    We really didn't have good scaling in WH2.

    If you are saying CA should have increased the damage to 133% and 133% health too then you should just say that.

    ARE you saying that all SE should have 33% more health and damage?
    Damage scaling in game 3 just took the values from game 2 which were balanced for large and set them as 100% in ultra. For multi-entity units this didn't matter since they already scaled just fine by adding more entities. For SEMs this was probably an intentional nerf since they were usually seen as too strong and the new SEMs were balanced with similar stats and damage.

    The Hellcannon however was forgotten and is basically collateral damage. I don't know if 133% damage would be the exact number I'd recommend but when you compare the damage output to all of the single entity artillery units added in game 3 it's pretty apparent that they were balanced with higher damage outputs planned to compensate for the move to ultra. The Hellcannon basically got forgotten and then hit with the reload rate nerf resulting in the current dismal performance.
  • BovineKingBovineKing Registered Users Posts: 962
    yst#1879 said:

    Thats the thing, hell cannon is still 1 model and their blast radius arent expanding. Basically means they r weaker now

    Right this is what I was getting at it’s functionaly hitting the same number units on ultra that it hits on large scale meanwhile other artillery get another model.
  • GreenColouredGreenColoured Registered Users Posts: 6,927
    Only thing I kinda agree with is Tzeentch Warshrine needing an extra effect, preferably one that benefits the army
Sign In or Register to comment.