|
The negative reviews are people blasting the game for the Beastmen DLC price. Warhammer is the fastest selling TW game to date for good reason - it's a great game. If you enjoy the TW series and find this setting interesting you should pick it up. Performance wise the general consensus is that it is similar to Rome 2. Generally Atilla performed worse than Rome 2. I have the same card and a worse processor and I run at high settings at 50 fps. Steam refunds give you a great option to test out performance. Captain Beans fucked around with this message at 04:27 on Sep 25, 2016 |
#
?
Sep 25, 2016 04:23
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 8, 2024 07:04 |
|
|
SkySteak posted:Hello there. I deeply apologise if this has been asked a million times before but I admit I have not been keeping track of this thread since the game came out. Basically my simple question is, is the game worth playing? I look on the Steam page and it is getting mixed reviews yet I am hearing good things about it? Has it been like Rome 2 again where it's been a broken mess on launch and has had to be slowly fixed? It has been the habit of TW games as of late I have noticed. On top of that how well does this game run? I was running a Core i5 4690k and a GTX 970 with 4GB RAM and Attila absolutely choked on my machine. Rome 2 was generally OK but is Warhammer going to be even more demanding? Attila is unoptimized as all poo poo and CA have basically abandoned trying to patch it. Warhammer has been their most stable launch since Shogun 2 and they've been really drat good at patching it and keeping things up to date. Makes sense considering they've been working on this game for years while Attila was to Rome 2 what Napoleon was to Empire, functionally superior but rushed out quickly.
|
|
#
?
Sep 25, 2016 04:24
|
|
|
SkySteak posted:Hello there. I deeply apologise if this has been asked a million times before but I admit I have not been keeping track of this thread since the game came out. Basically my simple question is, is the game worth playing? I look on the Steam page and it is getting mixed reviews yet I am hearing good things about it? Has it been like Rome 2 again where it's been a broken mess on launch and has had to be slowly fixed? It has been the habit of TW games as of late I have noticed. On top of that how well does this game run? I was running a Core i5 4690k and a GTX 970 with 4GB RAM and Attila absolutely choked on my machine. Rome 2 was generally OK but is Warhammer going to be even more demanding? Game's real good. The base game is perfectly deep and satisfactory, and IMO each piece of DLC was worth what I paid for it. They've basically guaranteed they'll be supporting it for YEARS. It runs pretty well, though to be fair Attila never did. The multiplayer is kind of crap, but you can get good matches if you set up house rules beforehand, like they do ITT. I strongly recommend you play with the No Aggressive Agents mod, because the agent game still sucks, and the More Skill Points mod is great too. There's a bunch of other fun mods.
|
|
#
?
Sep 25, 2016 04:41
|
|
|
So far the DLC added has well exceeded half the price of the base game, while most certainly not adding half again as much content. It has been 2 additional races compared to the original 4 (and given a bunch of people got Chaos Warriors for free, it's really about 1/3 the price of the base game for just a single extra race compared to the original 5), a mini-campaign far smaller than the original one, a few new units, and some reskinned ones with changed stats. Oh, and a feature that may have very well already been in the code (the blood splatter one) already. So we're already above the price of what many full expansions to games cost back in the day, and they usually added decently more than that. I'm hardly going to write a negative review of the game for that reason since there's clearly a market willing to buy it - hell, I'll almost certainly end up buying it at some point myself - and that's the way the entire gaming industry has been trending for a while now, but I also fully understand why so many gamers are relatively annoyed about this.
|
|
#
?
Sep 25, 2016 04:52
|
|
|
SkySteak posted:Hello there. I deeply apologise if this has been asked a million times before but I admit I have not been keeping track of this thread since the game came out. Basically my simple question is, is the game worth playing? I look on the Steam page and it is getting mixed reviews yet I am hearing good things about it? Has it been like Rome 2 again where it's been a broken mess on launch and has had to be slowly fixed? It has been the habit of TW games as of late I have noticed. On top of that how well does this game run? I was running a Core i5 4690k and a GTX 970 with 4GB RAM and Attila absolutely choked on my machine. Rome 2 was generally OK but is Warhammer going to be even more demanding? It has been a incredibly smooth release and a top tier Total War title, multiplayer balance is a mess but that is to be expected given the variety of units/spells in the game. A large part of negative reviews are due to DLC policies, it has been receiving monthly updates - including free and paid content -, but felt and feels like a complete game without the DLC, which has been great so far. It runs way better than Attila. Cheers.
|
|
#
?
Sep 25, 2016 04:53
|
|
|
Lord Koth posted:So far the DLC added has well exceeded half the price of the base game, while most certainly not adding half again as much content. It has been 2 additional races compared to the original 4 (and given a bunch of people got Chaos Warriors for free, it's really about 1/3 the price of the base game for just a single extra race compared to the original 5), a mini-campaign far smaller than the original one, a few new units, and some reskinned ones with changed stats. Oh, and a feature that may have very well already been in the code (the blood splatter one) already. So we're already above the price of what many full expansions to games cost back in the day, and they usually added decently more than that. If they made the base game more expensive, or had less playability, would you be happy? If they handed out fewer free DLC with the DLC releases and instead made you have to spend money to get them would things be great? Inherently DLC has to be a worse value proposition than the base game, because not everyone is gonna buy them. So they will be earning less for the devs at a given fixed price. The game's fun, buy the DLC if it makes sense for you. I don't see how this is remotely like Deus Ex's pay-to-break-the-game model. Also the blood stuff isn't just adding a spatter code, it adds new animations for each model in terms of decapitations etc. Fangz fucked around with this message at 05:03 on Sep 25, 2016 |
|
#
?
Sep 25, 2016 05:01
|
|
|
Fangz posted:If they made the base game more expensive, or had less playability, would you be happy? If they handed out fewer free DLC with the DLC releases and instead made you have to spend money to get them would things be great? Yeah, not that I'm complaining, but videogames should probably be a lot more expensive than they are, considering how much they've increased in fidelity and production costs without increasing in price. A continuous DLC model is pretty much the company trying to recoup that difference.
|
|
#
?
Sep 25, 2016 07:35
|
|
|
Matches Vs. Beans. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QUf8J7oLtME When I was practicing up I was pretty specifically going for tactics that I knew work. Don't kill the guy with 2 health bars (3 in ladder) and kill everything else instead. Doesn't matter if you have a healing potion, potion of toughness and are full health, if you're the last man standing and have a huge wave of troops coming down on you, you just break and are down and out. Even if those troops are low tier and the heroes are gorebulls. The first game is the inverse. If I have 3 really tough things that can kill a load of enemy troops as well as all their characters, if he doesn't have enough army left to auto break them, I win as killing them is extremely inefficient. My goal in that one was to just rough up enough of his troops that my gorebulls and cygore could wreck the remaining heroes, few infantry and cavalry. Once both of us were missing most of our armies, my gorebulls can finish off everything else. The last game was what I was talking about more directly. I still had a huge number of zombies left, a few cairn wraiths and a few other units kicking around but I didn't have anything that could have actually killed an orc warboss that still had his potions (though I think he'd used his in that case) and a giant in combination. Despite that, his giant autobroke along with his shaman and general even though they still had pretty good health and could have killed an awful lot more had they fought it out against me. In this particular case I could probably have afforded to lose a little more before getting to that state, the boar boys got sort of hard countered by this composition and ended up being dead points but this strategy works even in matches where I end up in a similar state sans my banshees and mortis engine, you simply surround one of them, have Vlad do a little damage and you end up breaking enemies that would have won if morale wasn't a part of the game.
|
|
#
?
Sep 25, 2016 08:55
|
|
|
Giving a negative review because of DLC pricing when the base game has easily 100 hours of non-repetitive gameplay in it is dumb as poo poo. If anything DLC should have their own separate review scores. e: I guess they do, but that doesn't stop people from bashing the base game because of them Double Bill fucked around with this message at 10:46 on Sep 25, 2016 |
|
#
?
Sep 25, 2016 10:31
|
|
|
SkySteak posted:Hello there. I deeply apologise if this has been asked a million times before but I admit I have not been keeping track of this thread since the game came out. Basically my simple question is, is the game worth playing? I look on the Steam page and it is getting mixed reviews yet I am hearing good things about it? Has it been like Rome 2 again where it's been a broken mess on launch and has had to be slowly fixed? It has been the habit of TW games as of late I have noticed. On top of that how well does this game run? I was running a Core i5 4690k and a GTX 970 with 4GB RAM and Attila absolutely choked on my machine. Rome 2 was generally OK but is Warhammer going to be even more demanding? I haven't been this gripped by a Total War game since Shogun 2, or maybe even the original Medieval: Total War. It feels like the series was just waiting for this setting to let the mechanics work at their best. And yeah it runs a lot better than Rome 2/Attila but is still probably pretty demanding. I think RAM might be where you're lacking, and also an SSD for the loading times helps a lot.
|
|
#
?
Sep 25, 2016 10:50
|
|
|
Holy poo poo, Helstorm rockets are loving terrifying. They rack up Mortar-level kill counts, except much faster since they shoot so quickly and so far that they frequently run out of ammo by the time the melee lines clash. In turn, they're completely useless once said melee begins, but now I'm wondering if losing that flexibility is worth just savaging the poo poo out of the enemy blob way before your swords and halberds get to work...
|
|
#
?
Sep 25, 2016 11:13
|
|
|
Mordja posted:Yeah, not that I'm complaining, but videogames should probably be a lot more expensive than they are, considering how much they've increased in fidelity and production costs without increasing in price. A continuous DLC model is pretty much the company trying to recoup that difference. Hasn't the price of video games gone down in the last 20 years or so? I remember Nintendo 64 games costing 700 NOK (which would be about $90) back in the late 90s/early 2000s.
|
|
#
?
Sep 25, 2016 11:28
|
|
|
Lord Koth posted:So far the DLC added has well exceeded half the price of the base game, while most certainly not adding half again as much content. It has been 2 additional races compared to the original 4 (and given a bunch of people got Chaos Warriors for free, it's really about 1/3 the price of the base game for just a single extra race compared to the original 5), a mini-campaign far smaller than the original one, a few new units, and some reskinned ones with changed stats. Oh, and a feature that may have very well already been in the code (the blood splatter one) already. So we're already above the price of what many full expansions to games cost back in the day, and they usually added decently more than that. One of the Developers (Wiz?) from Paradox explained that the reason why DLCs was pricey compared to the base game, was because DLCs did not sell as many units, so they needed to offset the price due to the manpower used. That said, having blood as a DLC is just plain greed. 
Rincewinds fucked around with this message at 11:33 on Sep 25, 2016 |
|
#
?
Sep 25, 2016 11:31
|
|
|
SkySteak posted:Hello there. I deeply apologise if this has been asked a million times before but I admit I have not been keeping track of this thread since the game came out. Basically my simple question is, is the game worth playing? I look on the Steam page and it is getting mixed reviews yet I am hearing good things about it? Has it been like Rome 2 again where it's been a broken mess on launch and has had to be slowly fixed? It has been the habit of TW games as of late I have noticed. On top of that how well does this game run? I was running a Core i5 4690k and a GTX 970 with 4GB RAM and Attila absolutely choked on my machine. Rome 2 was generally OK but is Warhammer going to be even more demanding? Easily the best TW game so far. If you're unsure, the base game is complete without buying any of the DLC, so there's no need to get it straight off. The mixed reviews are just the gamer hivemind being bitches about having to pay for DLC. Until recently I was running the game on a Core i5 3570K with a GTX 660 Ti with 2GB of RAM with no issues, so your setup should do just fine.
|
|
#
?
Sep 25, 2016 12:11
|
|
|
Rincewinds posted:One of the Developers (Wiz?) from Paradox explained that the reason why DLCs was pricey compared to the base game, was because DLCs did not sell as many units, so they needed to offset the price due to the manpower used. That said, having blood as a DLC is just plain greed. Greed with a fig-leaf: leaving the gore out of the base game lets them keep the rating down. I started playing these games when I was like 13; I assume that still happens.
|
|
#
?
Sep 25, 2016 13:13
|
|
|
Been playing total war games since I was a kid as well and yeah this one's great. Been buying the dlcs and havent looked back, they've been worth the price imo
|
|
#
?
Sep 25, 2016 13:31
|
|
|
Some quick DLC opinions for new buyers, I guess. Chaos. It's pretty cheap, but Chaos is definitely the least fun/interesting campaign to play. Mind you their roster and Legendary Lords are actually pretty cool and it adds stuff to AI controlled Chaos to make them slightly less boring to fight every campaign so it's probably worth it just for that. Worth the price but just barely, IMO. Also now that I think about it this is actually the pattern with all of CA's pre-order factions. (Sparta, the Vikings, ect). The freebie factions are never hot stuff. Blood It's blood, it's mostly cosmetic, it's super cheap, just buy it unless you don't care about blood and gore at all. It also adds a couple of campaign events designed to make units more likely to explode into bloody chunks, which amuses me. My only gripe with this dlc is that it's a noticeable performance hit with blood turned on so I'd skip it for now if you're already struggling to run the game. Beastmen The most expensive/biggest DLC so far. Beastmen in campaign mode are like Chaos but exponentially more fun to play, they have a cool roster in general too and look fantastic. Their lords and heroes also have noticeably more interesting skill trees than the base factions. The Mini-campaign is a one-and-done affair but it has a nice aesthetic at least and you get an unlockable for beating it. Worth the price but don't feel like you need to buy it before you're done playing the other races. Grim and the Grave For 7 bucks, it's a steal. I like it a ton in part just because Empire/Vampires are both stuck with a dud Lord (Gelt/Kemmler) and having a cool alternative for a change owns. All the new units/lords are really good and worth using, and the Regiments of Renown add an interesting mercenary like recruitment system to the two factions.
|
|
#
?
Sep 25, 2016 14:08
|
|
|
What do I need to recruit Knights of the Blazing Sun? I must be blind because I'm looking all over the building tree and not seeing them.
|
|
#
?
Sep 25, 2016 16:16
|
|
|
DO IT TO IT posted:What do I need to recruit Knights of the Blazing Sun? I must be blind because I'm looking all over the building tree and not seeing them. Their chapter house must be built in Talabecland.
|
|
#
?
Sep 25, 2016 16:25
|
|
|
Any hints on completing the Orc campaign on Hard? My first attempt ended on turn 31, as all of the Dwarf nations blobbed up incredibly quickly, culminating in my level 8 Grimgor getting his poo poo slapped around by a lvl 10 Thorgrim, complete with first quest item. This time around I've made sure to expand south instead of north, and I own that strip of land that the Broken Toof's used to occupy. Do I head east and take on Karak Azul (which already has about 8 provinces) or go west, continuing to beat up on the other Orc tribes? How do I get an economy up and running with Da Boyz? I've got about 15K stashed away from lootin' and sackin' but i'm only bringing in about 1.5K a turn from my income producing buildings.
|
|
#
?
Sep 25, 2016 17:02
|
|
|
Uh, I would have said that the trick to the Orc campaign is to form a Waaagh and expand north with it ASAP.
|
|
#
?
Sep 25, 2016 17:04
|
|
|
I'm pretty sure this match's conclusion was as close as can possible get: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-zDB7csnHFs
|
|
#
?
Sep 25, 2016 17:11
|
|
|
I personally find Chaos campaign the one I enjoy the most right up with Beastmen, I guess YMMV I may just be sucker for horde style factions lead by Saturday morning cartoon villains fielding armies based on death metal cover art. For greenskins campaign either go all in and try take out the karaz a karak dwarfs right away once you pop first waagh , or play it more orky and don't expand beyond death pass early on, instead sacking and pillaging anything in the badlands getting tons of loot and high level lords, expansions can come later.
|
|
#
?
Sep 25, 2016 17:19
|
|
|
i hated the chaos campaign until i got in the zone and created an army of Silgvald and friends and Kholek with his puppy Ogre horde. And then i burned the old world-
|
|
#
?
Sep 25, 2016 17:39
|
|
|
Thing with the DLC.. I mean, yes, investing into this game is probably going to be like investing into a full-blown warhammer army, when the two new expansions plus what.. Probably 12+ more DLC packs come out, you're going to have THE ENTIRE WARHAMMER FANTASY WORLD built up and playable in the next couple years. It's loving amazing. Will be well worth it whether you're buying just the base game for $79.99, or everything for.. Like, $300+
|
|
#
?
Sep 25, 2016 18:04
|
|
|
Choyi posted:I personally find Chaos campaign the one I enjoy the most right up with Beastmen, I guess YMMV I may just be sucker for horde style factions lead by Saturday morning cartoon villains fielding armies based on death metal cover art. I love the fantasy of Chaos, being the big bad thats destined to ruin the world, but their mechanics are just too distractingly clunky for me without mods. On the campaign map its the barely existant replenishment, leading to you slowly but surely have your leaders,heroes and elite units worn down until they just die. Usually when this happens you'll find yourself in deep poo poo as you've got a chump leader instead and you cannot go into ambush stance to hide from all the enemy factions that are now coming for you. In battle its the lack of any real ranged that makes it clunky. All those skirmisher type units just makes you lose your poo poo eventually and the tools for dealing with them are just not enough, even upgraded warhounds (poisoned or not) take ages to run down those goddamned horse skirmishers. Add to this the admitedly minor issue of not being able to clump your hordes together for added protection (something the computer utterly ignores) and Chaos doesn't feel right. What i usually do is:
*Use a mod ive personally changed, adding the Gor building chain as a buildable option (the original mod adds most of the beastmen building chains and i feel thats too much personally) so i can recruit Ungor Raiders. *Use a mod that disables the Chaos horde stacking attrition, if the computer can do it, why not me? With that in place Chaos feels a lot better for me personally.
|
|
#
?
Sep 25, 2016 18:10
|
|
|
There's a flaw in this game's guard mode implementation that's bumming me out: artillery units won't pursue targets when they leave their range, but they will pivot to shoot at them. This is a relic from Empire's days, because of line combat requiring units to face the enemy before shooting; you can still see it with Warhammer's ranged units and their arcs of fire. Unfortunately, while infantry shooters can manage decently enough since a square formation minimizes walking time, artillery units do not have this advantage, and will waste precious time moving their machines into position every time their target leaves their firing arc. This makes shooting enemy cavalry a chore to micromanage unless you position your artillery on the flanks, and even shooting enemy infantry can be really annoying if they're moving laterally. Another problem with this is that artillery units tend to move out of formation when they re-adjust, which is extremely annoying for Dwarfs since they're pressured enough as is to cover all their flanks. A cannon unit you're not actively babysitting will, even if they're in a 2x2 square, eventually swing around so much that a gun will often shove itself into a neighboring unit or out of the defensive line, possibly leading to disastrous results. The only workaround I use apart from micro-managing their shots constantly (which is very impractical) is leaving them on fire-at-will and pointing them at a likely direction (which is extremely inefficient). I wish CA would let guard mode for artillery work by preventing them from pivoting and just letting them shoot targets within their arc.
|
|
#
?
Sep 25, 2016 18:15
|
|
|
ZearothK posted:Their chapter house must be built in Talabecland. Oh drat, guess I need to do some confederating.
|
|
#
?
Sep 25, 2016 18:16
|
|
|
I do like how Knights of the Blazing Sun has suddenly made Talabecland relevant again, as opposed to those idiots I always ignored because the only thing they're good at is trying to pull me into war with every other Empire province. Playing with Volkmar especially I find myself going north more instead of leaving it all to get wrecked by Chaos and I'm having more fun that way so it's all good.
|
|
#
?
Sep 25, 2016 18:47
|
|
|
Gejnor posted:I love the fantasy of Chaos, being the big bad thats destined to ruin the world, but their mechanics are just too distractingly clunky for me without mods. Doing my 5th or 6th play trough with Chaos and I don't really have issues with replenishment anymore(no gameplay mods that gives any bonuses to it), I do fight most my battles manually and make sure I tank most damage with easy to replace chaff units, but I still feel chaos corruption % in a region should matter more and increase replenishment substantially. Also if you get healing potions/items you can swap them around between turns for the heroes/lords which need it badly. Having armies together now and then for protection and taking infighting damage is rarely a huge issue for me either, the attrition losses are very minor and its mainly annoying since it stops replenishment, its bullshit that AI gets away without that penalty however. Not having normal skirmishers haven't bothered me either in campaign, Throwing axe Horsemen are real good and I feel they are vastly underrated, even with their limited range I find their insane mobility more then enough makes up for it, they do require a lot of micro but you can accomplish some real cool flanking stuff with them and I've often picked enemies apart using 3 horsemen and couple dogs to harass before the mainlines engages taking out many high threat targets. Then once I get hell cannons I find that is all the ranged firepower I need. My main issue with Chaos campaign right now is that it feel rather barebones compared to Beastmen, I'd love some cool event system like the moon phases the beasties got, and a "Fall of man" style final battle I something feel every faction should have cause that was cool as hell.
|
|
#
?
Sep 25, 2016 19:35
|
|
|
Choyi posted:Doing my 5th or 6th play trough with Chaos and I don't really have issues with replenishment anymore(no gameplay mods that gives any bonuses to it), I do fight most my battles manually and make sure I tank most damage with easy to replace chaff units, but I still feel chaos corruption % in a region should matter more and increase replenishment substantially. When the game is making you rotate health potions around and not using your lords/heroes in combat because you can't take the hit it sounds like a lot of busywork that you dont have to do with any of the other factions and thus its in my opinion poorly designed. I also agree with the chaos corruption should do something more for you, some benefit or there should be some other way to replace losses. Choyi posted:Having armies together now and then for protection and taking infighting damage is rarely a huge issue for me either, the attrition losses are very minor and its mainly annoying since it stops replenishment, its bullshit that AI gets away without that penalty however. As i said its relatively minor but if you can stack your stuff together and not have to worry about losses from attrition like all the other factions in the game it goes along way to make them feel better as a faction. Choyi posted:Not having normal skirmishers haven't bothered me either in campaign, Throwing axe Horsemen are real good and I feel they are vastly underrated, even with their limited range I find their insane mobility more then enough makes up for it, they do require a lot of micro but you can accomplish some real cool flanking stuff with them and I've often picked enemies apart using 3 horsemen and couple dogs to harass before the mainlines engages taking out many high threat targets. I think you missread me, its not that your skirmishers are bad, your horsemen are decent enough. Its that FACING enemy skirmisher units as Chaos is a goddamned chore, a simple ranged unit can take them out of the game within seconds while the dogs and your own skirmisher units can take the entire goddamned battle hunting those units down and it is just painful. Choyi posted:My main issue with Chaos campaign right now is that it feel rather barebones compared to Beastmen, I'd love some cool event system like the moon phases the beasties got, and a "Fall of man" style final battle I something feel every faction should have cause that was cool as hell. This is a thing too, Chaos felt a bit rushed out the door while Beastmen are basically Chaos but fun with their cooler special events etc, with Chaos being a DLC it makes me think they wont do anything to them either but i hope they will, adding in cool mechanics that make them more fun would just make them sell better anyways so why not?
|
|
#
?
Sep 25, 2016 20:05
|
|
|
On my first campaign I thought that the chaos portals that appear when Chaos razes a town were going to spawn demons or something. It's kind've strange that they do nothing. Standing near one should boost your replenishment maybe.
|
|
#
?
Sep 25, 2016 20:06
|
|
|
My big problem with chaos is that vampire counts do everything they do except better. Their characters are cooler, their magic is better and direwolves are even faster than chaos warhounds. I don't even think about range cavalry skirmishers, I just send one unit of direwolves after each and forget about it.
|
|
#
?
Sep 25, 2016 20:19
|
|
|
Trujillo posted:On my first campaign I thought that the chaos portals that appear when Chaos razes a town were going to spawn demons or something. It's kind've strange that they do nothing. Standing near one should boost your replenishment maybe. They're supposed to spread chaos corruption but I don't think they do, or at least not at any noticeable amount.
|
|
#
?
Sep 25, 2016 20:21
|
|
|
wiegieman posted:My big problem with chaos is that vampire counts do everything they do except better. Their characters are cooler, their magic is better and direwolves are even faster than chaos warhounds. I don't even think about range cavalry skirmishers, I just send one unit of direwolves after each and forget about it. Yeah see thats the thing, VC has no ranged at all but i dont feel weak vs skirmisher units because they have so many fast units to properly chase them down, flying or on ground.
|
|
#
?
Sep 25, 2016 20:21
|
|
|
I've come to the decision that VC flying units against anything but Chaos are a trap. Everybody takes some ranged if they have it available, and that unit of Vargheists is going to die or be rendered ineffective by one unit of crossbowmen, every time -- unless they immediately land in them, in which case they get swamped by a healthy army and die, or they take the long way around, in which case they are tired when they get to the fight late and still get swamped by the spears in back and die. I don't know, maybe I just don't use them right. They're great against Chaos though.
|
|
#
?
Sep 25, 2016 20:25
|
|
|
wiegieman posted:I've come to the decision that VC flying units against anything but Chaos are a trap. Everybody takes some ranged if they have it available, and that unit of Vargheists is going to die or be rendered ineffective by one unit of crossbowmen, every time -- unless they immediately land in them, in which case they get swamped by a healthy army and die, or they take the long way around, in which case they are tired when they get to the fight late and still get swamped by the spears in back and die. I don't know, maybe I just don't use them right. I'd argue that terrorgheists are still amazing, though you gotta be more careful now.
|
|
#
?
Sep 25, 2016 20:30
|
|
|
Gejnor posted:I'd argue that terrorgheists are still amazing, though you gotta be more careful now. Terrorgheists are amazing, they're just so drat expensive.
|
|
#
?
Sep 25, 2016 20:38
|
|
|
With the VC if you heavily invest in your air force and terror against any faction besides Bretonnia and the enemy brings their lord on a flying mount it's almost a guaranteed win. Kill their general with an overwhelming air force while keeping your ground force intact and after they lose their leader terrify them into mass routing with soulblight/doom and darkness after the ground fight starts. Was having a lot of success with that by bring Mannfred on the zombie dragon, 2 fell bats, 2-3 vargheist, the devils of schwartzhafen and a terrorgeihst, then mostly zombies in front of a few grave guard/cairn wraths. Against the empire usually works because they're bringing flying mounts more often than anyone else. Against Bretonnia though I'd advise against it because even against overwhelming numbers in the air, Louen and Pegasus knights still win.
|
|
#
?
Sep 25, 2016 20:45
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 8, 2024 07:04 |
|
|
wiegieman posted:I've come to the decision that VC flying units against anything but Chaos are a trap. Everybody takes some ranged if they have it available, and that unit of Vargheists is going to die or be rendered ineffective by one unit of crossbowmen, every time -- unless they immediately land in them, in which case they get swamped by a healthy army and die, or they take the long way around, in which case they are tired when they get to the fight late and still get swamped by the spears in back and die. I don't know, maybe I just don't use them right. Try taking raise undead with your armies. You can send in your lord to tango with the enemy front line and summon a unit of skeletons on top of their archers and then send in the air units while all of the ranged units are tied up. I don't use it often, but you could also go Vamp lord, 2 necromancers and raise up three zombie units into the enemy back line and have them basically bogged down for ages letting crypt horrors and air units do a lot more damage than they normally ever could.
|
|
#
?
Sep 25, 2016 21:45
|
|