|
rockopete posted:Ugh they've confirmed they're putting in naval combat? I wish they'd have someone who actually knows about to implement naval battles do it, like Tindalos (made Battlefleet Gothic Armada which is pretty drat fun and is essentially a tall ship fleet game). They haven't but placeholder units are already present in the files.
|
#
?
Jun 7, 2016 16:38
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 7, 2024 07:45 |
|
|
Yvonmukluk posted:Also that Brettonia is coming as FreeLC (as well as playable in skirmish).  genericnick posted:Same question but for steamtanks. Steamtanks don't count, one of my mates was lamenting his 19 panzer army being required to build a ram and/or siege towers before being allowed to assault
|
|
#
?
Jun 7, 2016 16:41
|
|
|
drat. Oh one more thing for the OP: mention overcasting, I had no idea it existed till I read this thread.
|
|
#
?
Jun 7, 2016 16:42
|
|
|
Korgan posted:Steamtanks don't count, one of my mates was lamenting his 19 panzer army being required to build a ram and/or siege towers before being allowed to assault I don't even know why you need to build equipment at all to assault. Every infantry unit can deploy ladders. Yeah, you'll probably get loving slaughtered if you attack into a defended castle with only ladders, but that's your decision to make. At the very least monstrous units should count as artillery/siege equipment, since Kholek/Varghulfs/etc are far better at smashing gates to splinters than stupid rams.
|
|
#
?
Jun 7, 2016 16:49
|
|
|
Most legendary lords can knock down a gate just fine anyways. Thor grim or karl franz can just walk up and bash it down in a minute or so
|
|
#
?
Jun 7, 2016 16:51
|
|
|
rockopete posted:You should put in a note describing where to find the stance button, I can see people having trouble with that or forgetting it quickly if the game mentions it briefly. Also put in a note about unique and resource-tied buildings. Not necessarily a list but just a note that they exist and an example, Marienburg's a good one. You guys all seem to forget napoleon naval combat, which was good and cool.
|
|
#
?
Jun 7, 2016 16:52
|
|
|
Arglebargle III posted:You guys all seem to forget napoleon naval combat, which was good and cool. That and Fall Of The Samurai were great fun, basically only when the ships have cannons is it good. Also having naval artillery support in land battles in FotS was the best thing.
|
|
#
?
Jun 7, 2016 16:56
|
|
|
Yvonmukluk posted:Also that Brettonia is coming as FreeLC (as well as playable in skirmish). Free Loadable Content? You mean its Free DLC. Free Downloadable Content.
|
|
#
?
Jun 7, 2016 16:59
|
|
|
I personally thought base Shogun 2 had the best naval combat. And by best I mean least terrible. Cannon ships are micromanagement hell once you have more than a few of them. Rome 2 ramming is even worse and also terrible even without the micro aspect. Shogun 2 ships you could just move around and they'd automatically shoot things from any angle, or you can tell them to board a target and then forget them for a while. They were the only ships that would take care of themselves to some degree without constant babysitting.
|
|
#
?
Jun 7, 2016 17:01
|
|
|
GuardianOfAsgaard posted:That and Fall Of The Samurai were great fun, basically only when the ships have cannons is it good. Also having naval artillery support in land battles in FotS was the best thing. FotS was so good, but offshore naval support might have been my favorite part of all, just raining down hell from miles away with nothing the enemy could do except try to disperse. But oh, you dispersed your lines? Well gee that sure makes it easier for me to charge them, so get owned fucko!
|
|
#
?
Jun 7, 2016 17:03
|
|
|
Anyone get a weird bug where enemy lords will appear to be 100 feet tall on the strategic map? Kholek was towering over my cities one second and next turn he was back to normal size.
|
|
#
?
Jun 7, 2016 17:12
|
|
|
Deified Data posted:Anyone get a weird bug where enemy lords will appear to be 100 feet tall on the strategic map? Kholek was towering over my cities one second and next turn he was back to normal size. I've also seen that, only with Kholek
|
|
#
?
Jun 7, 2016 17:19
|
|
|
My greenskin armies make heavy use of (mostly) goblin/night goblin archers. What people forget is there are more archers per unit with the goblins. Your boyz are the meat and potatoes but some ranged capability is useful. Having around four goblin archers to fight off skirmish cav or run around and shoot into the flanks of infantry is pretty nice. Night goblin archers are the same except much better with poison attacks. As for other gobbos. Night goblin melee units are surprisingly effective. Make sure they don't get charged, but have them get stuck in and they will punch above their weight. Wolf cavalry is roughly equivalent to the wardrogs of other factions. You use them to chase down like cavalry, artillery, and non-dwarven skirmisheds. Archer gobbo cav you use to fire into the enemy's back. Another thing about goblins is almost all of their units take one turn to build. Recruiting from the global pool is 2 turns for goblins, but 4 turns or greater for most orc units. But maybe I'm biased because I like the goblins. They're adorable homicidal gremlins.
|
|
#
?
Jun 7, 2016 17:20
|
|
|
In the tabletop game is there a leadership penalty for a lord being killed? Or is the real "penalty" that units can no longer use the dead lords leadership?
|
|
#
?
Jun 7, 2016 18:25
|
|
|
Kanos posted:I guess this is just a point of variance in army composition, come to think of it. You seem to prefer Hammerers/Miners with Grenades to deal with the armored threats and Quarellers to deal with everything else, which I can understand. I just prefer fielding the totally invincible high tier shield units and letting the lighter enemies break themselves upon me while my guns take out the armored threats that IBs/Longbeards have trouble with. Overall I prefer to field both quarrellers and thunderers as I don't see one as just an upgrade of the other.
|
|
#
?
Jun 7, 2016 18:27
|
|
|
Captain Beans posted:In the tabletop game is there a leadership penalty for a lord being killed? It's the latter. This can be a big deal when a unit's unled leadership is low, though.
|
|
#
?
Jun 7, 2016 18:27
|
|
|
An explanation of the relative value of combat stats for heroes/lords would be great. Ungrim, for instance, has three 3 point special picks re: Melee Attack, but he seems to smash things just fine without them? Likewise, Melee Defense and Armour. I get that Armour is just damage reduction against non-AP, so more is generally better, but what about Melee Defense? Working through the combat trees you have to make choices between these constantly and I have a hard time figuring which is a Good Pick. Obviously at high level you just take everything, but at level 5 or whatever you're making a choice between health, defense, charge bonus and damage most of the time and it's all very opaque.
|
|
#
?
Jun 7, 2016 18:32
|
|
|
I think melee attack rolls against melee defense to see if you connect at all.
|
|
#
?
Jun 7, 2016 18:40
|
|
|
Captain Beans posted:In the tabletop game is there a leadership penalty for a lord being killed? It's just the latter except for the Vampire Counts, who have to immediately pass a leadership check with all non-vampire units or suffer crumbling. If there's another wizard to take over as the general, then they can stop further crumbling, but if not they have to check every turn. VC leader sniping is WAY worse on the tabletop as a result (also because one cannonball to the face can kill them rather than Mannfred the Unkillable)
|
|
#
?
Jun 7, 2016 18:41
|
|
|
Melee attack and defence are used in some complicated formula no one really knows. It's understood that if you have really high melee attack, further points have diminishing returns - unless you are attacking something with high defence anyway.
|
|
#
?
Jun 7, 2016 18:42
|
|
|
Fangz posted:Melee attack and defence are used in some complicated formula no one really knows. It's understood that if you have really high melee attack, further points have diminishing returns - unless you are attacking something with high defence anyway. Basically this. If you already have very high melee attack then stacking on more usually isn't very effective unless the target has very high melee defense. This is usually a hero vs hero consideration. Like if you take a hero who is already really good at melee like Grimgor or Franz or and stack more melee attack on them it won't make much difference fighting mobs but it will improve their effectiveness against other heroes.
|
|
#
?
Jun 7, 2016 18:53
|
|
|
Does that mean, conversely, that stacking melee defense on someone like Franz means that they're even more untouchable than normal by chaff?
|
|
#
?
Jun 7, 2016 18:57
|
|
|
Kaza42 posted:It's just the latter except for the Vampire Counts, who have to immediately pass a leadership check with all non-vampire units or suffer crumbling. If there's another wizard to take over as the general, then they can stop further crumbling, but if not they have to check every turn. VC leader sniping is WAY worse on the tabletop as a result (also because one cannonball to the face can kill them rather than Mannfred the Unkillable) Interesting, I wonder if the answer to hero sniping in multiplayer is to both decrease the cost of lords, limit them to 1 and remove the moral penalty from their death. Right now you can see some strange mini hero battles that determine the match early on, kind of making most other units irrelevant. It's like some WWI battleship dilemma where your lords are required to kill the enemy lords but at the same time you can't afford to risk yours so they spend less time in action and more just time posturing. Captain Beans fucked around with this message at 19:03 on Jun 7, 2016 |
|
#
?
Jun 7, 2016 18:58
|
|
|
shalcar posted:That's a really good point. Post updated. It's probably a good idea to include a link to the online copy of the in-game encyclopedia. Apologies if it was in there and I just somehow missed it.
|
|
#
?
Jun 7, 2016 19:01
|
|
|
Wallet posted:It's probably a good idea to include a link to the online copy of the in-game encyclopedia. Apologies if it was in there and I just somehow missed it. Let's make a important resource with no ability to search. gently caress me. Unbelievable. That team seriously need an instructional designer. I've gone over the idea of making proper tutorial videos a few times, but  I don't have enough knowledge to want to take a serious stab at it, but with enough material I could put together six 10 minute long videos covering the basics in a proper, structured fashion. I've watched a few videos and they all love to go off into tangents or unrelated, secondary knowledge. It's easy to forgive, given the nature of the game, but as many others have mentioned the learning curve for this game is pretty steep if you want to feel confident when playing. midge fucked around with this message at 19:10 on Jun 7, 2016 |
|
#
?
Jun 7, 2016 19:02
|
|
|
Coolguye posted:Does that mean, conversely, that stacking melee defense on someone like Franz means that they're even more untouchable than normal by chaff? Yeah. IIRC testing and (limited) documentation suggests it caps out at like 10%/90% either way so units always have a real chance to hit/miss regardless of the disparity. You can't make yourself totally unkillable, but you can get a pretty huge survivablity boost and if you can add damage reduction from ward saves and self-healing on top you'll be pretty ridiculous. Generally speaking, knowledge from previous Total War games suggests you should favor attack over melee defense at reasonable values (and assuming it's a 1:1 tradeoff), but melee defense is still really good and something you want to be boosting as much as possible. e: Previous Total War games also didn't have the afforementioned ward saves and in-battle healing though, so in fairness I should point out that it's quite possible the situation may be different for some builds of hero units now as well (since the general bias towards offense might be outweighed if you can create a unit with a "good enough" offense that can tank an army). LGD fucked around with this message at 19:17 on Jun 7, 2016 |
|
#
?
Jun 7, 2016 19:09
|
|
|
Beat a Chaos long campaign, Started with Kholek and recruited a second lord as soon as I could and split the army between them and filled them mostly with marauders with hounds, Sigvald came a little later and a 4th wasn't necessary but I had archeon roaming around draining my money for not much gain. Awakened the first tribe at the landing but besides being useful for early healing while breaking a way through kislev they were fairly useless and died early, awakened one other in the far north that actually took over ruins quickly. Had Kholek destroying the north and adding Sigvald halfway while the other lord kept pushing south for money, I was usually within 5 turns of bankruptcy at any point until I could afford the discount buildings for the army I gave to Sigvald, then it was a managable -6000 per turn with three armies then back to -11000 per turn with a useless archaeon. Some things that worked for me.
Besides some early tough fights of silver/gold ranked Skaeling armies and the empire deciding to send Karl and Balt's twin armies to fight my sacking lord, the campaign was 90% just auto resolving garrison fights, sacking and razing everything I came across. On another note, is the Advisor the guy from the intro cinematic but in rags instead of a fancy empire wizard robe? would seem to fit things.
|
|
#
?
Jun 7, 2016 19:14
|
|
|
LGD posted:Yeah. IIRC testing and (limited) documentation suggests it caps out at like 10%/90% either way so units always have a real chance to hit/miss regardless of the disparity. You can't make yourself totally unkillable, but you can get a pretty huge survivablity boost and if you can add damage reduction from ward saves and self-healing on top you'll be pretty ridiculous. Generally speaking, knowledge from previous Total War games suggests you should favor attack over melee defense at reasonable values (and assuming it's a 1:1 tradeoff), but melee defense is still really good and something you want to be boosting as much as possible. Interesting Really I just want to see Karl stomp up on about 500 nerds and kill every last one of them
|
|
#
?
Jun 7, 2016 19:18
|
|
|
Here's a Reddit thread you can link in the "How does Melee Attack and Defense work" https://www.reddit.com/r/totalwar/comments/4m9sdw/how_melee_attack_and_defense_armor_and_damage/ the short version: quote:THERE IS NO RANDOM DAMAGE ROLLING And here's the math using 100 melee attack Melee Defense Chance to hit 25 90% 50 87% 100 45% 150 15% 200 12% 250 10% (I actually got 7% but that is due to RNG as 10% is the minimum chance to hit)their base stats to determine actual DPS.
|
|
#
?
Jun 7, 2016 19:27
|
|
|
LGD posted:Yeah. IIRC testing and (limited) documentation suggests it caps out at like 10%/90% either way so units always have a real chance to hit/miss regardless of the disparity. You can't make yourself totally unkillable, but you can get a pretty huge survivablity boost and if you can add damage reduction from ward saves and self-healing on top you'll be pretty ridiculous. Generally speaking, knowledge from previous Total War games suggests you should favor attack over melee defense at reasonable values (and assuming it's a 1:1 tradeoff), but melee defense is still really good and something you want to be boosting as much as possible. Can confirm your numbers since they're in the database. Also, ward saves max at 90% too which still seems ridiculous to me. From what I can tell the threshold for attack/defense differences maxing or min-ing is 39 points. Base Hit Chance is 40% and then I guess each tier of difference (1, 4, 9, 19, 39) modifies it up or down. I don't actually know how it's using those tiers of difference but those are clearly the numbers--it could be that each tier is a cap on effectiveness or each tier could alter just one part of the formula with the space between still providing some benefit. edit: guess that testing shows that it's likely the latter and 39 isn't enough to min it and now I'm thinking those numbers aren't so much actual tiers but rather the points in the formula that CA considered significant enough to warrant ramps up in cost to increase the stat if they were to ever flesh out their multiplayer. Decus fucked around with this message at 19:42 on Jun 7, 2016 |
|
#
?
Jun 7, 2016 19:28
|
|
|
I got the item that gives you regeneration while in combat, a potion of Toughness and all of the combat skills for Ungrim and he took on Grimgor's entire army by himself and never dropped below 1/2 life (I did pop the potion when he got close, but that was only while fighting Grimgor and a couple units of Mork and Gork's chosen. I eventually brought in all of my quarrelers to help finish off the enemy archers/fast cav, but I'm pretty sure Ungrim could have just won it completely solo. I don't even have any of his unique items (quests are overrated... I had to destroy the greenskins first!)
|
|
#
?
Jun 7, 2016 19:37
|
|
|
Captain Beans posted:Interesting, I wonder if the answer to hero sniping in multiplayer is to both decrease the cost of lords, limit them to 1 and remove the moral penalty from their death. I don't know, I think this would taking the wrong approach. If Lord sniping is a really a problem then I think a better solution would just be to give lords a certain amount of magic resistance or reduce the effectiveness of hero sniping spells. Beyond that I think if you find that in MP you're just getting your lord killed all the time leading to army routs then the problem is with your play. Heroes exist for a reason. Each hero projects a command aura just like a general and can do wonders to keep your army in good leadership. Lords can be protected. Heroes can supplement morale in the event of a leaders death. Removing the penalty for their death would be way, way overboard in my opinion and just catering to the wrong crowed/type of play.
|
|
#
?
Jun 7, 2016 19:57
|
|
|
I haven't touched multiplayer yet, but can you not set equips on your legendary lords? Easy solution would be a gold cost to every equip and letting you really play around with it so you could stack magic resistance or whatever you wanted, preferably with no ward save items allowed. Just looking at database stuff multiplayer seems really barebones at the moment but they've left in some stuff to flesh it out later. I know you can't touch anything on custom battles which made testing new effects/items really, really obnoxious since had to set them as quest rewards, play until the quest, beat the quest and then fight another battle to test them out and make sure I added them right.
|
|
#
?
Jun 7, 2016 20:03
|
|
|
Mugsbaloney posted:????????????? Its a very classic song! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V92OBNsQgxU
|
|
#
?
Jun 7, 2016 20:05
|
|
|
Decus posted:I haven't touched multiplayer yet, but can you not set equips on your legendary lords? Easy solution would be a gold cost to every equip and letting you really play around with it so you could stack magic resistance or whatever you wanted, preferably with no ward save items allowed. Just looking at database stuff multiplayer seems really barebones at the moment but they've left in some stuff to flesh it out later. Well yeah but he was talking about multiplayer for the lord sniping thing. It's not really an issue in the campaign as far I know. The AI doesn't seem to go out of it way to kill your heroes (well, in battle) unless you leave them pretty exposed. e: I misread your post a bit. Yeah there is no equipment customization or anything in multiplayer. What you see in the "custom battle" setup are all the same options as online play.
|
|
#
?
Jun 7, 2016 20:06
|
|
|
Tenzarin posted:I hope you put on the ride of the valkyries. 
|
|
#
?
Jun 7, 2016 20:08
|
|
|
Whats up with poison attacks? Specifically against high armor dudes/all Dwarves? Night gobs seem cool and stuff but they don't seem particularly effective. Are they for killing other green skins and chaff humans? I imagine they're outright useless against VCs.
|
|
#
?
Jun 7, 2016 20:09
|
|
|
Chomp8645 posted:I don't know, I think this would taking the wrong approach. Have you seen the videos where two casts of spirit leech basically wreck any single model unit? I'm not disagreeing that there's counters to everything, but if it's some poo poo like "Bring your Lord anywhere close to the battle and RIP" then that seems kinda dumb. Incidentally if you aren't using spirit leech on enemy heroes / Lords in the campaign, you should be. Because lmao.
|
|
#
?
Jun 7, 2016 20:10
|
|
|
Tenzarin posted:Its a very classic song! Man I just don't even know who's trolling who anymore
|
|
#
?
Jun 7, 2016 20:14
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 7, 2024 07:45 |
|
|
Chomp8645 posted:I don't know, I think this would taking the wrong approach. Ironically I'm actually looking at this the other way around - as a VC player who is doing the hero killing. It's basically impossible to stop me from killing enemy lords/heroes because with micro Mannfred on a flying nightmare can dodge everything, zigzagging dodges all projectiles. I've lost like 7 games out of 70+. What's really crazy is that I just found out empire light wizards can hero snipe even better because their overcast magic missile has 250 range which is bananas.
|
|
#
?
Jun 7, 2016 20:32
|
|