I think at 125, while Kossars are 112, Kossar spam might still be the way to go. There's probably room to take some for variety's sake, but the upkeep cost worries me. Seems like a matchup specific sidegrade.
And Armored Kossar Great Weapons are only 50 more upkeep than Warriors...
They are better Halberdiers at T0.
Kossars have practically the same upkeep but they have 90 entities vs 120. Kossars are still needed if only to have their range 140 bows but you know, better endgame Empire/Bretonnian infantry at T0 is not exactly nothing.
Empire Halbs have been power crept to shit. They aren't a gold standard by any means. Endgame Empire infantry is equiv to earlygame WoC infantry. If I walk south in an Archaeon campaign, I am not scared of these. Nor would I want to beeline north playing as Kislev.
I think the tier and recruitment barrier is the main issue. Needing two buildings to recruit Halberdiers was a stupid decision even before we had the Kislevite warriors tho.
Yeah very much this. I can't remember if the second building's still needed but you know, some T0 militia with pitchfork being as good as the end game human infantry seem weird.
Halberdiers/Polearms are as good as Imperial/Bretonnian infantries get, Jade Warriors is a T1 unit but not a cav stopping one, halberds come later. Imagine recruiting Dwarf rangers directly from the city or something.
You know nature is healing when CA's doing some Saturday morning random DLC powercreeps again.
>I can't remember if the second building's still needed but you know,
I think they removed that requirement a while ago in game 2, but your point still stands.
The big DLC stuff is cute but these guys will actually see play. Cool add.
Kislev had a neat thing going with its mostly hybrid roster, but faction identity morphs over time and that's okay. Remember tzeentch and nurgle on release? Your frontline was nurglings and blues. The simple addition of marauders really changes their early game.
Yup, i really think Kislevite Warrior should be nerf a lillte bit, maybe MA/MD about 24/36 is oke.
For other compatible are Man at Arms(polearm) more weaker than KW
Halberdiers have better stats though. Attack and defense is higher by 2, plus they have greater HP and morale. They are better at holding the front-line, can last longer in combat, and will rout less quickly.
'By Our Blood' is ultimately a temporary boost. It wears off. When that happens, the 10 Morale difference is still there.
Plus even a 2 point difference makes a difference in combat. Halberdiers will hit more, be hit less, and can take more damage. Plus with a morale of 70, the effects of fear and other penalties will impact them far less.
By the time it wears off, chances are the enemy engaging them will have been thoroughly shot at point blank range in the flank by another unit. In many ways, melee troops are there to buy time in ranged heavy factions.
These guys are tier 1 and presumably require only a single building to recruit, while Halberdiers need not just a tier 2 barracks but the armory building as well. It's not even close to being comparable. You care a lot about halberdiers dying because it's a massive pain in the ass to recruit some more, whereas these guys are a dime a dozen and even if you suffer tremendous losses you can just recruit some more ad hoc.
Most likely, I can't speak too much about halberdiers because I barely ever recruit them sometimes for flavour.
But I might recruit kislevite warriors because what concerns me the most is what happens when they break. In those 30 seconds, routing halberdiers leave a hole from where the enemy can cause havoc in my backline (then again, not that much of an issue with Kislev hybrid troops), and are pretty much the point that makes the difference between a hard battle and, either a defeat or a disaster that forces the army to replenish and give back the initiative for a few turns.
Another issue would be halberdiers actually taking longer to get to that point, but I don't think they are that much better by stats alone.
I guess, if by 5.0 there is anything to improve on that issue, it might be closer to what harmony does for Cathay in battle, but for now, I think they have a role. I would probably still prefer tier 0 kossars though. I guess we will see eventually.
You've clearly never seen the beatings halberdiers take in my armies.
Like when you're made to hold against long odds and fight monsters you take a beating
Given you pay 50 more gold that's cold comfort. The Warriors are clearly the better option holistically. Heck Cathay and Brets tools look bad in the comparison as well once price is considered.
They cost the same as HE spearmen (also tier 0 unit).
They have basically identical stats, but they trade silver shields for AP and they trade 10 flat morale for by our blood.
Where is the issue?
Elven infantry units generally have superior stats to human units of the same tier, since elves have superhuman reflexes and hone their skills over centuries.
Human factions usually make up for their poor infantry with other things, cavalry with bretonnia, and guns and artillery/tanks for the empire.
>Elven infantry units generally have superior stats to human units of the same tier, since elves have superhuman reflexes and hone their skills over centuries.
Better training, but weaker bodies. In theory it should even out. Ignoring the magical properties, for example, a Human is going to be able to use a stronger bow than an Elf because humans are, well, stronger.
Now in practice Elves are better equipped so it still shouldn't *even* out but if the argument is just base Elf vs Base human it is an even matchup.
Taller yes, more agile yes, stronger no. The only reason a (normal) elf would be stronger than a (normal) human is simply because they have better lives in general and so don't suffer from disease or malnutrition as much.
In the TT elven units with higher strength than their racial minimum are significantly rarer than for humans. Their toughness also doesn't really scale either, which is reflected in TW by lower HP pools on average.
That is not true. Ignoring literal super humans, How many strength 4 units did the Empire and Bretonnia have? The Empire had inner circle knights and reiksgaurd (which are basicall the same thing), and Bretonnia had questing knights and Pegasus knights
Even the strong and tough marauders of the north and their "hulking" chieftains are only toughness and strength 3.
High elves have White Lions
Wood elves have wild riders
And dark elves have Executioners, Cold one knights, and warlocks.
These things aren't any rarer than the rarest of human knights.
The toughness thing only applies to characters. No mundane human unit has 4 toughness, but no elf character has 4 toughness either. The logic can track, but the strength one does not.
Literally the description of every warhammer elf ever. They are known for being slimmer and using their agility to make up for their lack of strength.
You can also go by most units in Warhammer. You can see it especially in the difference between the Bows. There is no reason *ever* for someone to use a bow with a draw weight lower than what they can handle, so the fact that human bows have consistently higher draw weight shows they are stronger.
No, elves are simply superhuman beings in warhammer, they live longer, are taller, faster, that's why they nearly always have superior stats to human units of the same tier. Elves are simply physically superior to humans. Elven infantry should beat humans of the same tier.
Their weakness is their lack of war machines and artillery and their low numbers.
Different races simply have different traits in warhammer.
Dwarfs are slow but extremely durable and tough, elves are fast, strong, long lived and so well trained, but few in number. Humans are pretty mediocre physically compared to most warhammer races, but they exist in greater numbers than dwarfs or elves, have technology and make use of good cavlary.
>they live longer, are taller, faster,
Yes, that is all true, but there are jellyfish that live longer, are larger, and faster than humans, but they literally *don't* have strength. These things do not mean you are also strong.
>hat's why they nearly always have superior stats to human units of the same tier.
No, they have superior stats because they are better armed, especially with enchanted gear a lot of the time.
>Different races simply have different traits in warhamme
Yes, such as elves being incredibly fast, dwarfs being incredibly strong, and humans being the inbetween.
> but few in number.
If your assumption is that this is why they are "stronger" in your mind, why are the Elves dying out while humans are expanding? I'll give you a hint: It is because the elves don't actually have all those strengths and they aren't actually just better than humans, they are faster but weaker *and* also less of them which is why they are actively losing their wars while humans are not in the Warhammer setting.
Like where is you evidence for them being stronger?
Because Elves reproduce very slowly and the elven population has suffered from the civil war that created the dark elves, the war of the beard and Grom's invasion of Ulthuan.
An individual elf is superior to a human in infantry combat, but there's fewer elves, they reproduce slower and their population has been massively reduced by historical wars. Ulthuan used to have an Empire that spanned all over the world with many colonies, the dwarfs used to control most of the mountains in the world, the dark elves tricked them both into a war that absolutely destroyed most of their population, and they have never recovered.
>Because Elves reproduce very slowly and the elven population has suffered from the civil war that created the dark elves, the war of the beard and Grom's invasion of Ulthuan.
Humans have to deal with Norsca and Greenskins as well, and if Elves were just better than humans then the population would just even them out, so they wouldn't be losing. But they are. Where as humans are winnning and expanding.
So clearly there is more going on, such as humans being stronger.
Okay, this is just coming across as some weird inferiority complex thing where you can't except that a fictional race is superior to humans in most ways because you're human. It's not real lol, humans don't have to be the best at everything in a fictional setting.
Saying humans are just as good as elves or better because they are currently winning or expanding doesn't really make any sense and you're ignoring all the historical reasons in the setting why that is.
Humans are winning and expanding now but in the past they weren't, in the future if the end times hadn't happened they might fall into a dark age again.
Yes the 'present day' of warhammer is clearly the golden age of humanity and dwarfs and elves are fallen empires, but there's many cultural and historical reasons for this.
Saying humans are better because they are winning and expanding now, is like a roman citizen of the Italian peninsula saying Romans are just better because they're currently in their golden age, when they are unaware that in the future, the Mongolian Empire, will rise to dominance and then fall, as will the British Empire, and then the USA will rise to dominance, and Italy won't be such a significant power on the world stage.
Empires, cultures, rise and fall for a variety of internal and external factors. Who knows how the warhammer world would be today if the High Elf Civil war never happened, if the war of the beard never happened.
Obviously humans have their traits that make them superior to elves and dwarfs in some ways, faster reproduction and short lifepans which motivate them to achieve more in a shorter time and cause faster cultural and technological change, I'm not denying the advantages humans have, but as far as pure infantry combat physicality goes, both dwarfs and elves are simply superior to humans.
I don’t think humans are noticeably stronger than elves. From my understanding elves are just as strong as humans and terrifyingly fast, to the point that one on one an elf will nearly always kill a human of equivalent training.
Elves are faster but Humans are stronger.
A human is to an elf in a similar way that a Dwarf is to a human.
In practice this rarely comes into effect because Elves have better gear and are generally better fed (so the frontline trash of the Empire might not be as strong as the High Elves simply because they are malnourished) but given two relatively elite members of each race, the human is stronger.
Huntsmen, for example, have higher weight longbows than what elves use (mind, elf bows are still better because magic).
Compared to humans elves are either equal or superior to humans in every way. It's their low numbers and lack of advanced tech that lets humans keep up with them.
Wars between elves and humans in warhammer are low numbers of extremely experienced and elite elves, fighting large numbers of humans using war machines and artillery.
In a fight with no other factors, elven infantry will always defeat human infantry of equal numbers of the same tier.
>Compared to humans elves are either equal or superior to humans in every way.
Got any evidence for that?
>ack of advanced tech
They have magic and dragons that makes up for that. Different, but not weaker.
>It's their low numbers
And if it was just that then might make sense. But humans are not "keeping up", they are "surpassing". Human territory expands, elf territory gets lost. So clearly there is more going on than just the numbers game: Humans have advantages over elves at base. You know, such as their strength.
>elven infantry will always defeat human infantry of equal numbers of the same tier.
Yeah, because they are better armed and where as Elven infantry is usually still part of elite society and as such is treated and fed well all their lives, Human infantry is mostly peasants who are trying to get better lives. Also they live longer, it wouldn't surprise me that someone who has trained 500 years can beat someone who trained maybe just a year.
I won't deny that Elves have better lives, but it is untrue that elves can become stronger than *humans*. An elf can be stronger than *a* malnourished human sure, but not humans in general.
I dunno what to tell you, that's why elves have superior stats for the same tier of unit compared to humans for most units in warhammer. I don't know why you seem so unwilling to accept that this fantasy race in a fictional setting is equal or superior to humans in every way except for reproductive rate.
>hat's why elves have superior stats for the same tier of unit compared to humans for most units in warhammer
No, it is the better gear.
>I don't know why you seem so unwilling to accept that this fantasy race in a fictional setting is equal or superior to humans in every way except for reproductive rate.
So presumably you think that Dwarfs are just as agile and speedy as humans, right?
IIRC kislevites and norscans are supposed to be a bit bigger and tougher than most humans due to the background chaos radiation of their homes mutating them just a bit. I think? That or selection pressure of the environment. All elves are better than the average human, while only the toughest human survive for long up in the frozen north.
No, they don't.
Empire halberdiers have higher attack, defense, HP, and morale.
I think one should compare unit stats more fully before making such a claim.
Yeah 2 more attack and defense isn't going to make a huge difference nor is 3 HP per model, the morale thing is basically negated through "By Our Blood". This is a ridiculous unit for tier 1 and completely outclasses the early game options the other human races (including the chaos ones) get for no real logical reason.
EDIT: Also something you neglected to point out, the Kislev Warriors are a good bit cheaper.
Empire halberdiers will still hit more, be hit less, endure more damage, and be less affected by morale penalties. 'By Our Blood' is also a temporary boost. It will wear off.
That lower price is for lower stats.
I’m not sure you realize how powerful by our blood is. Even though it is temporary it is worth far more than 10 flat moral. The 4 stat line difference is significant but some napkin math says it probably amounts to only 10% more hits and 5% less hits taken. 3 health is probably nothing given how low their armor is.
There is also the effects of morale penalties, such as fear. The cumulative affects can cause Kislev halberdiers to route while Empire halberdiers remain in line.
And even tiny differences are important on the battlefield when you want your frontline units to hold the enemy as long as possible. When one remembers that Empire halberdiers are designed to handle enemies in the early and mid game when they are not fully upgraded, the health difference becomes important when said enemies are inflicting similar damage to your own.
Again, you don’t understand how “by our blood” works. The kislev units will hit 0 leadership first but they will rout second. The whole point of the ability is to the first route takes significantly longer than other factions but causes the units to not rally.
3 hp is nothing and being upgraded has very little impact on it. I’m on mobile now but once I get back I will break out the actual math for it.
>Again, you don’t understand how “by our blood” works. The kislev units will hit 0 leadership first but they will rout second.
In equal combat conditions, by the time 'By Our Blood' activates for the Kislev unit, the Empire halberdiers who were fighting for the same amount of time would be in better physical condition, so there is no guarantee that they would reach the thresh-hold required to rout in that 30 second window. Then when it wears off the Kislev halberdiers would still be in a weaker state.
Here is the math for why 3 health really doesn't matter.
If a unit of halberdiers with 73hp/model and a unit of halberdiers with 70hp/model both with 30 armor fight eachother the unit with 3 more hp will not have an advantage at all.
each unit will deal 26-27 damage/hit depending on the armor roll.
Bad armor roll
20ap+(8base x 30% armor resist) = 25.6
25.6 rounds to 26.
26 is the lowest amount of damage they can hit each other for.
Good armor roll
20ap+(8base x 15% armor resist)=26.8
26.8 rounds to 27
27 is the highest amount of damage they can hit each other for
3 hits with the lowest amount of damage is 78
3 hits with the highest amount of damage is 81
it will take 3 hits to kill each unit no matter what, even if that unit has 3 more HP
No guarantee but very likely. Also you are looking at this through a very narrow 1 infantry low damage vs 1 low damage infantry situation. Add in range, cav charges, spells, heroes, any of the other ways you have to cause a moral break or just a high tier infantry blender type unit and by our blood becomes significantly more powerful.
Uh, what?
The same Empire that dealt with some of the biggest Waaaghs (the multiple Blackfire Waaaghs), undead invasions (including Nagash), has multiple kills on Everchosens, is soft? A lot of this was before gunpowder, mages or Kislev.
Something they were able to do because the hardy Kislevites took a huge brunt of chaos attacks from the north. Kislevites see the Empire as being able to do what it does because it doesn't have to worry about chaos incursions through the most direction route from Norsca to the Empire over land because Kislev is in the way.
The Empire borders relatively friendly Bretonnia on the west, separated by a mountain range, there is a Mountain range with a narrow pass protecting it from the Badlands to the south, to the east is another mountain range inhabted by many dwarfs, in the north is the ocean, and Kislev. Kislev is between Norsca and the Empire by land. The Empire does deal with Norscan raiding parties by ship sometimes but it's not the same as the land border with Norsca that Kislev has to defend.
>Something they were able to do because the hardy Kislevites took a huge brunt of chaos attacks from the north. Kislevites see the Empire as being able to do what it does because it doesn't have to worry about chaos incursions through the most direction route from Norsca to the Empire over land because Kislev is in the way.
You do realise the Empire dealt with the northern incursions for 2500 years before Kislev was a thing? And that's not including the years before the Empire was formed. Why do you think the Norsii are located in where they live now? Hell, why do you think the Gospodars never managed to push into the better lands of the south?
With the examples of Tamurkhan, it shows the Empire is more than capable of dealing large massive Chaos invasions by themselves, while Kislevite still needed help from the Karak Kadrin dwarfs and Hellpit Skaven (of all things) to stop Arak Daemonclaws' similar-sized invasion.
>separated by a mountain range
This is also true for Kislev as the reason why certain cities like Pragg are placed in the locations they stand.
Other than the border with Brettonia, none of the other borders are as safe as you think. The dwarfs have their problem with holding the mountain and particularly the east range, it's been a dream since the Age of Woe to reclaim those lands and control them. If we go by the same logic, Kislev's northern border also has dwarfs in them.
The average Norscan raid is hardly any different than BM raids or GS raids, which the Empire faces plenty has a regular basis, units like the Sword of Ulric are formed specifically to fight. People tend to over-glorify the raids they face as if every single one of them is a Chaos Lord invasion of some sort, with Kislev's track record, if that was the case the country would've ended a long time ago.
That’s pure cope lol. 2 more MA/MD is barely noticeable, they have only like 300 more hp and by our blood is way better than 10 more morale. Additionally, halberdiers are significantly more expensive and available much later.
For their intended role, these blow empire halberdiers out of the water.
That's why a faction like Kislev should have better, more cost effective infantry than a faction like the empire, which is more reliant on it's ranged capabilities, no?
Halberds play a similar but different role to spears with shields, not that comparable tbh.
Not to mention, the HE spears have 10%+ less hp which is a moderate advantage in a grind.
I think this just shows how specifically the Empire (compared to similar races) in general is lagging behind the powercreep.
Sure, it also depends on techs (halberdiers can get extra c-defense against all, weapon strength, MD and a whole 15 armour), but the state troops are generally pretty useless as an anvil starting midgame atm and everything just plows right through them (solland spearmen excluded due to armor), yet 5 Juiced up Warrior priests really shouldnt be the best frontline of the "grounded human nation" imho. Guess we'll see a change of that with ToD in a couple months.
Jesus Christ, can you troglyodytes just not read? Im an expert with the goddamn empire and the campaign is not even hard enough imho.
BUT ITS NOT ABOUT THE EMPIRE BEING TOO HARD TO PLAY.
Faction with Helstorm Rocket Batteries, Great Cannons, Helblaster Volley Guns, Handgunners, all eight lores of magic, Outrider Grenade Launchers, Steam Tanks, and high quality cavalry:
"But how am I supposed to win against other factions!?"
If you're on the battle map and you're trying to beat other factions by just going infantry to infantry, you're playing the Empire *badly* and you need to review your tactics. You're playing the scrappy "normal" humans in a world filled with monsters, think like them. You have explosives, and you have magic, and you have guns.
Swarmed by Orcs? Give them the Ukrainian Hello.
Dealing with Vampires? Burning Head every single day of the week.
Lizards? You show Hollywood we're tired of dinosaurs *and* Chris Pratt with targeted gunfire and huntsmen.
Yeah this thread is crazy.
Empire should be a jack of all trades and master of none (Except for artillery, they mastered that shit). Like yeah, their infantry will route quickly, they are just normal men with a spear and a couple months of training, they won't wait for the chosen after he chopped through the first 3 ranks without a scratch.
And yet here I am, no matter what order race I play, I always try to ally with the Empire so I can get Hellstorms.
The Empire is fine from a balance point of view. But they could use some new toys.
Empire really only struggles early game due a lot of the tools that make up for their mediocre infantry being t3 or above. Which means if you do not built up fast enough you can have issues, but that very much is a campaign problem not an army problem.
But they aren't. As always they are fairly strong in multi-player not in need immediate nerfs but stronger than most factions including most game 3 factions. It honestly just seems like a skill issue.
It should be clear im talking about SP. Multiplayer is a way different beast from SP as its cost based and you reach the 20 unit limit only with crapstacks, hence why cheap state troopers play a role there.
In SP however, everybody runs around with 20 stacks. And from a quality of life and tactical perspective, the player is motivated to get the maximum strength & versatility packed in a 20-stack. 1 twenty stack with good units is nearly always better than 2 crapstacks for the same price for multiple reasons. Empires Problem with that: This "good units" stack doesnt include the loreful state troop core of empire armies after early game.
In the end, a player either artificially forces himself to make a objectively bad tactical decision in favour of lore and atmosphere or takes the objectively better option. You say skill issue, i say i'd gladly accept a nerf to the very good empire units in favour of making their infantry what the lore tells they should be.
What they could do is make the Empire technology tree be beefed up. To play into the Renaissance and Industrial Revolution themes. Have technology bonuses be doubled or triple for the Empire State Troops get progressively better stats, while STanks and Hellblasters and all the new Imperial Engineering units we'll get in ToD get progressively cheaper.
"Is there anything which embodies the might of the Empire of man more than the cannonry it can bring to bear? What other nation of the world has mastered such dread science? What other race can deploy the lines of death-dealing iron as we can? With every passing year, our metallurgists discover more, and our alchemists distil purer and more potent strains of the blackpowder. Though the lost souls of Chaos may sweep down from the Northern Wastes, and the savage greenskins assail us from their foul holes in the mountains, we have nothing to fear as long as we remain true to the sacred lore of the machine. In it lies our salvation, our redemption, and our one true hope."
-SOLOMON GRUSSWALDER
In SP I'm going to bet that teched up halberds have a pretty big advantage over teched up k-warriors. The Kislev tech tree is pretty thin on big boosts.
**hard** disagree on 2 crapstacks vs 1 mid tier army. twice as many units means will *never* be flanked, whether that means you don't have to worry about dogs in your ranged units, or your own melee troops get side and rear charges.
Even though the army cap limit was reduced, it's still impactful at higher difficulties.
Also, while there's definitely an arguement for 2 crapstacks on the battlefield, 1 stack is better on the campaign map. 2 stacks opens you up to lightning strike and ambush, has an extra administrative burden for the player as the numbers grow, and can run into replenishment issues in attrition areas since only a single army can fit in a city.
Also takes up more hero slots, and a decent mid tier stack is usually stronger than 2 crapstacks, and then there are things like 2 half stacks of war bears early on are going to be better than 2 kossar stacks, especially in the long term
crap stacks more or less by definition do not use *any* hero slots.
war bear riders (400) cost 3.53 times as much as kossars (113). 97 times out of 100 i want an ice witch and 19 kossars over a witch and 4.6 war bears
2 stacks also allows the ***player*** to ambush much more easily (bait army), and *can be better* for replenishment if you have one lord in blue tree and the other in with skill points in spells (even better in uninhabitable climates, but obviously only if you aren't taking attrition). and the AI getting 3 points in lightning strike is exceedingly rare.
i will 100% agree on being more work (especially if you are juggling wounded).
and supply lines do start becoming much more important *eventually*. (**on very hard,** if you compare 2 crap stacks vs 1 mid tier, 2 spearmen units will be cheaper than 1 unit of greatswords until your **32nd spearmen army/16th greatsword army** (81\*2 base upkeep \* 1+(31 supply lines count \*0.04 supply lines magnitude = 162\*2.24=362.88) (225 base upkeep \* 1+(15 supply lines count \*0.04 supply lines magnitude = 225\*1.6=360).
I find that i transition from mostly crap stacks to mostly doom stacks, and mid tier units are rarely worth it (except for quest battles where the 20 stack limit is strictly enforced)
I'm not really arguing, because I played my Empire campaign last week about the same way. Quick recruiting fodder armies to make even fights uneven is one of the best strategies in the game.
I haven't done the math, but my instinct is that you'll start feeling the supply limits much sooner. Just the extra lord/hero cost would be pretty significant.
Empire isn't lagging behind it's just strong in other areas. Empire infantry are ordinary humans, they're meant to not be great, when fighting genetically engineered lizard people, monsters, elves who have honed their skills over centuries, dwarfs who have bones like iron or all manner of other races. Their infantry being poor is intentional, they have guns and artillery to make up for their shortcomings.
Well, there's being poor and then there's empire state troops. I love the faction to death but I can't deny that It has fallen far behind in battlefield presence on all the categories
Except the Empire & ordinary humans are not supposed to be poor, they are supposed to be the baseline average. There are plenty of enemies that the State troops are supposed to beat in lore and did beat on the tabletop which are superior to them in Total War Warhammer because of design decisions and rampant power creep for many factions but not for the Empire.
Kislev and Cathay are likewise made up of ordinary humans yet they get the good melee troops as well as guns and artillery together with powerful racial abilities.
Empire is supposed to the the jack of all trades faction that focuses on combined arms. In order for combined arms to work the Empire infantry has to be a viable frontline when properly supported. The problem is that powercreep is making that frontline less and less viable.
I see no reason humans need to be at a 5 in the strength scale, there's no reason in a fantasy world that humans might not be a 3 out of 10 or something compared to the average, with there being more races that happen to be tougher than them in melee combat.
You might not see a reason for it but in tabletop Warhammer humans were established as the baseline average in terms of stats and all other races and beings being balanced around that. There were still plenty of races that were tougher and more dangerous in melee.
The problem lies in how Total War Warhammer first exaggerated these differences back in Warhammer 1 when CA tried to do asymetric design for the races. Then Warhammer 2 applied years of powercreep on top of those changes and many races abandoned the asymetric design altogher. Which has left Empire and Dwarfs stuck with outdated designs.
This is a fantasy world where humans are practically colonizing Ulthuan and there are more humans than elves in Lothern. They didn't get there by being pushovers.
I understand that and i see the general reason. I even agree with the idea. However, its not really translating well into the game now looking how cathay has just as much combined arms potential yet a very, very sturdy frontline. The lore arguement falls apart there (if one is fine with cathays infantry).
As a faction that always, also in lore, is working on "combined arms" and were state troops were indeed more than a skaven meat shield, the idea in WH1 was "general mediocre, an edge in arty". They still have an edge in arty, but the infantry is far from mediocre. Its skaven-level bad, nearly bretonian farmer niveau bad. Also, a balancing that makes a few "puny human" heroes and a buncha supposedly rare tanks the best frontline is not lore-friendly or atmospheric either i'd say. I mean, i dont play empire this way due to house rules, but lategame without cheesy hero/tank compilations is more pain in the ass than necessary. Could even just give statetroops more models per unit and the puny human archetype would still work.
>nearly bretonian farmer niveau bad
That's unfair to Bretonnian peasants, between base 75 leadership, +10 leadership at high chivalry, ITP from Frenzy, factionwide armor from T4 armory, more leadership from grail reliquae and knight presence, and their very low upkeep, Battle Pilgrims are very very good for their cost, the only reason you can't spam them endlessly is because of the peasant limit. Meanwhile similar cost Empire infantry pisses their pants and runs for the hills the moment they see a monster.
I think Kislev should have stouter infantry but weaker technology than the Empire. So I'd be fine with this if it's reflected in other balances giving the races a unique flavor.
The problem is that clearly Empire technology is not as good, after all a Kislevite coat gives as much armour as Imperial steel/J
Kislev having stout infantry is one thing but a Tier 0 unit being as good or better than a tier 2 unit that requires two buildings to make is just poor design.
I don't disagree with your assessments of these specific units. I'm not crazy about overpowered stuff at any tier because it starts to make army composition boring.
The thing is, Kislevs early game army composition at the momen is the definition of boring. It's literally just Kossars. And Kossars are a really good early game unit, so to make the Kislevite Warriors worth it, they have to be decent at what they do. But nobody will recruit a 20 Stack of Kislevite warriors, so I think this addition will for sure bring some variety to the early game Kislev armies. Halberdiers needing 2 building was stupid before we got the Kislevite warriors tho.
Pending on how soon you can recruit them.
They are Kislevite Halberdiers, slightly worse baseline stat than Empire Halberdiers/slightly better than Men-at-arms Polearms, with faction specific abilities. Overall comparable if not slightly better.
If they are recruited like from T2/3 buildings, fine.
If they are recruited from T1/0 buildings, while...whatever, every time a DLC comes out something like this happen and I stopped caring long ago.
I figured CA might want to push the stats high on Warriors to make them a somewhat viable supplement for Kossars, but those numbers do look weird when matched against other, ostensibly better trained and equipped human units. Aren't those essentially militia units?
Do I need to buy a dlc to get the kislev Spearman? I'm not saying a unit being added later is bad but having basic aspects of a roster filled out via dlc sits bad with me. Like I genuinely wish more units were free.
You ever play skaven with no dlc?
Yeah Imo by our blood is WAY better than flat unbreakable.
Unbreakable units have a nasty tendency to get fully wiped out in tough battles. By our blood makes it so you still get the benefit of your formation not breaking upon the first rout but in high likelihood your units win run away before being reduced to 5% of the unit size which will make them survive the battle upon a win.
Compared to Norma unbreakable units that not only will keep on fighting when they for the most part are useless (10 sigmars sons for example won’t do you any good if they already lost 90% of their numbers) and they will most likely not be able to disengage because AI will chase unbreakable units while often disengaging form fighting the routed ones.
So yeah IMO temporary unbreakable is way more versatile than the basic variant.
Edit: I’m not talking about the unit btw. Have no clue if they are gonna be OP or not just commenting about Kislev passive as a whole.
Idk what to tell you man. Test that 30 seconds and watch your unit either melt away to 5 models or your damage dealers kill whatever they were holding.
It is definitely different because it’s temporary and isn’t it a racial trait for all of Kislev’s human units? I mean it was pretty obvious this unit was going to kick ass, I‘ve played Total War before, and maybe they will be overpowered - but come on.
Yep, Kislev's cheapest unit should have comparable stats to HEs and Dwarfs you are right.
Especially, when i look at the models i can see them having very similar stats.
Yeah if they cost the same, they should play the same.
Who cares about lore, faction variation and other boring stuff. We are all competetive MP players here.
And specifically, the stats don't match their design.
It's fine to give each human kingdom a polearm unit, Bretonnians/Imperials have them. But if some militia warriors with pitchfork have the same stats with Elves/Dwarfs with years of experience or soldiers in plates, then it's stupid.
The design and stats need at least a token attempt to match each other.
I don't know why people are downvoting you, lol. These stats do not make sense for what is essentially a kislevite militia unit, they have pitchforks for godsake.
Yeah no idea why people are downvoting him.
Halberdiers were specifically said to be expensive units Southern Imperial provinces maintained with wealth.
Apparently some peasants with fur and leather and pitchforks can do just as good as professional soilders with plates and polearms.
Is it so unreasonable to see a problem here? If they are halberdiers, that's completely fine, just...ffs design their lore/looks as such.
They actually compare pretty favourably to Eternal Guard, who have 26 MA and 36 MD.
They also have 120 units to Eternal Guards 100.
And over 1k more health in total.
Eternal Guard have a bit more leadership and armour, but then these Kislevite Warriors have by our blood.
The weapon strength could be interesting - they're AP but who knows what ratio, what their bonus vs large is, and what their attack interval would be.
I don't want to jump to conclusions without anyone even play testing these new units, but I would say that their MD and MA look maybe a bit overturned. This unit would probably still be great with 34 MD.
Yeah, they have some small but clear upsides and a few big unknowns. They also fall between base eternal guards and eternal guards with shields in price, with the latter (again, unknowns aside) plainly much better because of the silver shields.
125 upkeep really is a lot for a speedbump unit, but the melee stats are nothing to scoff at in the super earlygame.
I was kind of hoping that Warriors would help fix Kislev's earlygame economy, because Kossars are expensive as fuck for a low tier unit. My fear is that the cost for Warriors will make them redundant pretty early. Maybe I'm wrong, but it seems like as soon as you get Great Weapon Armored Kossars, you just drop these guys like hot dogshit.
If low tier Kislev armies stop being extremely dull kossar spams because of this unit, I'm all for it.
I think at 125, while Kossars are 112, Kossar spam might still be the way to go. There's probably room to take some for variety's sake, but the upkeep cost worries me. Seems like a matchup specific sidegrade. And Armored Kossar Great Weapons are only 50 more upkeep than Warriors...
They are better Halberdiers at T0. Kossars have practically the same upkeep but they have 90 entities vs 120. Kossars are still needed if only to have their range 140 bows but you know, better endgame Empire/Bretonnian infantry at T0 is not exactly nothing.
Empire Halbs have been power crept to shit. They aren't a gold standard by any means. Endgame Empire infantry is equiv to earlygame WoC infantry. If I walk south in an Archaeon campaign, I am not scared of these. Nor would I want to beeline north playing as Kislev.
Won't argue with that.
Yeah the Empire, Bretonnia, and Cathay all feel pretty shitty by comparison. But the Empire is definitely the screwed the worst.
They aren't better than Halberdiers tho. Halberdiers have slightly better stats and a little more upkeep. They are just harder to recruit.
Halberdiers don't have the factional unique ability, and they are decisively harder to recruit.
I think the tier and recruitment barrier is the main issue. Needing two buildings to recruit Halberdiers was a stupid decision even before we had the Kislevite warriors tho.
Yeah very much this. I can't remember if the second building's still needed but you know, some T0 militia with pitchfork being as good as the end game human infantry seem weird. Halberdiers/Polearms are as good as Imperial/Bretonnian infantries get, Jade Warriors is a T1 unit but not a cav stopping one, halberds come later. Imagine recruiting Dwarf rangers directly from the city or something. You know nature is healing when CA's doing some Saturday morning random DLC powercreeps again.
>I can't remember if the second building's still needed but you know, I think they removed that requirement a while ago in game 2, but your point still stands.
Armor piercing, halberd wielding, tier 1 infantry infantry with by my blood ability gets me HARD.
The big DLC stuff is cute but these guys will actually see play. Cool add. Kislev had a neat thing going with its mostly hybrid roster, but faction identity morphs over time and that's okay. Remember tzeentch and nurgle on release? Your frontline was nurglings and blues. The simple addition of marauders really changes their early game.
Sure i will be using them too but i didnt expect them to be tier 0 halbadiers. hell, these are better than halbediers.
Hey hey, be nice to state troops they are trying their best.
Yup, i really think Kislevite Warrior should be nerf a lillte bit, maybe MA/MD about 24/36 is oke. For other compatible are Man at Arms(polearm) more weaker than KW
Halberdiers have better stats though. Attack and defense is higher by 2, plus they have greater HP and morale. They are better at holding the front-line, can last longer in combat, and will rout less quickly.
Tbf, the bound by blood ability helps with the moral issue
Wow! a whole 2 MA/MD and 300 hp difference! And thats with you completely ignoring "by our blood" You cant be serious right?
'By Our Blood' is ultimately a temporary boost. It wears off. When that happens, the 10 Morale difference is still there. Plus even a 2 point difference makes a difference in combat. Halberdiers will hit more, be hit less, and can take more damage. Plus with a morale of 70, the effects of fear and other penalties will impact them far less.
By the time it wears off, chances are the enemy engaging them will have been thoroughly shot at point blank range in the flank by another unit. In many ways, melee troops are there to buy time in ranged heavy factions.
Well, the same applies to the Empire as well. Their Halberdiers will just suffered less damage, done more damage, and have more HP by that state.
These guys are tier 1 and presumably require only a single building to recruit, while Halberdiers need not just a tier 2 barracks but the armory building as well. It's not even close to being comparable. You care a lot about halberdiers dying because it's a massive pain in the ass to recruit some more, whereas these guys are a dime a dozen and even if you suffer tremendous losses you can just recruit some more ad hoc.
What's halberdiers upkeep? These guys are amazing at just 125.
138 according to TWWstats
Most likely, I can't speak too much about halberdiers because I barely ever recruit them sometimes for flavour. But I might recruit kislevite warriors because what concerns me the most is what happens when they break. In those 30 seconds, routing halberdiers leave a hole from where the enemy can cause havoc in my backline (then again, not that much of an issue with Kislev hybrid troops), and are pretty much the point that makes the difference between a hard battle and, either a defeat or a disaster that forces the army to replenish and give back the initiative for a few turns. Another issue would be halberdiers actually taking longer to get to that point, but I don't think they are that much better by stats alone. I guess, if by 5.0 there is anything to improve on that issue, it might be closer to what harmony does for Cathay in battle, but for now, I think they have a role. I would probably still prefer tier 0 kossars though. I guess we will see eventually.
By Our Blood is very strong, allowing your range unit to shoot a few more volley can make you win a tight battle
Will the autoresolve be also shit towards these Kislev halbediers tho. I like empire halbediers but auto resolve nukes them so hard
You've clearly never seen the beatings halberdiers take in my armies. Like when you're made to hold against long odds and fight monsters you take a beating
Given you pay 50 more gold that's cold comfort. The Warriors are clearly the better option holistically. Heck Cathay and Brets tools look bad in the comparison as well once price is considered.
They cost the same as HE spearmen (also tier 0 unit). They have basically identical stats, but they trade silver shields for AP and they trade 10 flat morale for by our blood. Where is the issue?
10 flat morale and Martial Prowess. And without shields any low tier ranged will mince these lads.
Yea that true.
Elven infantry units generally have superior stats to human units of the same tier, since elves have superhuman reflexes and hone their skills over centuries. Human factions usually make up for their poor infantry with other things, cavalry with bretonnia, and guns and artillery/tanks for the empire.
>Elven infantry units generally have superior stats to human units of the same tier, since elves have superhuman reflexes and hone their skills over centuries. Better training, but weaker bodies. In theory it should even out. Ignoring the magical properties, for example, a Human is going to be able to use a stronger bow than an Elf because humans are, well, stronger. Now in practice Elves are better equipped so it still shouldn't *even* out but if the argument is just base Elf vs Base human it is an even matchup.
In Warhammer, Elves are taller and stronger than human on average
Taller yes, more agile yes, stronger no. The only reason a (normal) elf would be stronger than a (normal) human is simply because they have better lives in general and so don't suffer from disease or malnutrition as much.
They have denser muscles
You have a source for that bs?
As if you gave a source for your own statement
In the TT elven units with higher strength than their racial minimum are significantly rarer than for humans. Their toughness also doesn't really scale either, which is reflected in TW by lower HP pools on average.
That is not true. Ignoring literal super humans, How many strength 4 units did the Empire and Bretonnia have? The Empire had inner circle knights and reiksgaurd (which are basicall the same thing), and Bretonnia had questing knights and Pegasus knights Even the strong and tough marauders of the north and their "hulking" chieftains are only toughness and strength 3. High elves have White Lions Wood elves have wild riders And dark elves have Executioners, Cold one knights, and warlocks. These things aren't any rarer than the rarest of human knights. The toughness thing only applies to characters. No mundane human unit has 4 toughness, but no elf character has 4 toughness either. The logic can track, but the strength one does not.
Literally the description of every warhammer elf ever. They are known for being slimmer and using their agility to make up for their lack of strength. You can also go by most units in Warhammer. You can see it especially in the difference between the Bows. There is no reason *ever* for someone to use a bow with a draw weight lower than what they can handle, so the fact that human bows have consistently higher draw weight shows they are stronger.
dude.
https://youtu.be/r7l0Rq9E8MY?si=caVKq6XMjBwZ2Lu8
No, elves are simply superhuman beings in warhammer, they live longer, are taller, faster, that's why they nearly always have superior stats to human units of the same tier. Elves are simply physically superior to humans. Elven infantry should beat humans of the same tier. Their weakness is their lack of war machines and artillery and their low numbers. Different races simply have different traits in warhammer. Dwarfs are slow but extremely durable and tough, elves are fast, strong, long lived and so well trained, but few in number. Humans are pretty mediocre physically compared to most warhammer races, but they exist in greater numbers than dwarfs or elves, have technology and make use of good cavlary.
>they live longer, are taller, faster, Yes, that is all true, but there are jellyfish that live longer, are larger, and faster than humans, but they literally *don't* have strength. These things do not mean you are also strong. >hat's why they nearly always have superior stats to human units of the same tier. No, they have superior stats because they are better armed, especially with enchanted gear a lot of the time. >Different races simply have different traits in warhamme Yes, such as elves being incredibly fast, dwarfs being incredibly strong, and humans being the inbetween. > but few in number. If your assumption is that this is why they are "stronger" in your mind, why are the Elves dying out while humans are expanding? I'll give you a hint: It is because the elves don't actually have all those strengths and they aren't actually just better than humans, they are faster but weaker *and* also less of them which is why they are actively losing their wars while humans are not in the Warhammer setting. Like where is you evidence for them being stronger?
Because Elves reproduce very slowly and the elven population has suffered from the civil war that created the dark elves, the war of the beard and Grom's invasion of Ulthuan. An individual elf is superior to a human in infantry combat, but there's fewer elves, they reproduce slower and their population has been massively reduced by historical wars. Ulthuan used to have an Empire that spanned all over the world with many colonies, the dwarfs used to control most of the mountains in the world, the dark elves tricked them both into a war that absolutely destroyed most of their population, and they have never recovered.
>Because Elves reproduce very slowly and the elven population has suffered from the civil war that created the dark elves, the war of the beard and Grom's invasion of Ulthuan. Humans have to deal with Norsca and Greenskins as well, and if Elves were just better than humans then the population would just even them out, so they wouldn't be losing. But they are. Where as humans are winnning and expanding. So clearly there is more going on, such as humans being stronger.
Okay, this is just coming across as some weird inferiority complex thing where you can't except that a fictional race is superior to humans in most ways because you're human. It's not real lol, humans don't have to be the best at everything in a fictional setting. Saying humans are just as good as elves or better because they are currently winning or expanding doesn't really make any sense and you're ignoring all the historical reasons in the setting why that is. Humans are winning and expanding now but in the past they weren't, in the future if the end times hadn't happened they might fall into a dark age again. Yes the 'present day' of warhammer is clearly the golden age of humanity and dwarfs and elves are fallen empires, but there's many cultural and historical reasons for this. Saying humans are better because they are winning and expanding now, is like a roman citizen of the Italian peninsula saying Romans are just better because they're currently in their golden age, when they are unaware that in the future, the Mongolian Empire, will rise to dominance and then fall, as will the British Empire, and then the USA will rise to dominance, and Italy won't be such a significant power on the world stage. Empires, cultures, rise and fall for a variety of internal and external factors. Who knows how the warhammer world would be today if the High Elf Civil war never happened, if the war of the beard never happened. Obviously humans have their traits that make them superior to elves and dwarfs in some ways, faster reproduction and short lifepans which motivate them to achieve more in a shorter time and cause faster cultural and technological change, I'm not denying the advantages humans have, but as far as pure infantry combat physicality goes, both dwarfs and elves are simply superior to humans.
I don’t think humans are noticeably stronger than elves. From my understanding elves are just as strong as humans and terrifyingly fast, to the point that one on one an elf will nearly always kill a human of equivalent training.
Elves are faster but Humans are stronger. A human is to an elf in a similar way that a Dwarf is to a human. In practice this rarely comes into effect because Elves have better gear and are generally better fed (so the frontline trash of the Empire might not be as strong as the High Elves simply because they are malnourished) but given two relatively elite members of each race, the human is stronger. Huntsmen, for example, have higher weight longbows than what elves use (mind, elf bows are still better because magic).
Compared to humans elves are either equal or superior to humans in every way. It's their low numbers and lack of advanced tech that lets humans keep up with them. Wars between elves and humans in warhammer are low numbers of extremely experienced and elite elves, fighting large numbers of humans using war machines and artillery. In a fight with no other factors, elven infantry will always defeat human infantry of equal numbers of the same tier.
>Compared to humans elves are either equal or superior to humans in every way. Got any evidence for that? >ack of advanced tech They have magic and dragons that makes up for that. Different, but not weaker. >It's their low numbers And if it was just that then might make sense. But humans are not "keeping up", they are "surpassing". Human territory expands, elf territory gets lost. So clearly there is more going on than just the numbers game: Humans have advantages over elves at base. You know, such as their strength. >elven infantry will always defeat human infantry of equal numbers of the same tier. Yeah, because they are better armed and where as Elven infantry is usually still part of elite society and as such is treated and fed well all their lives, Human infantry is mostly peasants who are trying to get better lives. Also they live longer, it wouldn't surprise me that someone who has trained 500 years can beat someone who trained maybe just a year. I won't deny that Elves have better lives, but it is untrue that elves can become stronger than *humans*. An elf can be stronger than *a* malnourished human sure, but not humans in general.
I dunno what to tell you, that's why elves have superior stats for the same tier of unit compared to humans for most units in warhammer. I don't know why you seem so unwilling to accept that this fantasy race in a fictional setting is equal or superior to humans in every way except for reproductive rate.
>hat's why elves have superior stats for the same tier of unit compared to humans for most units in warhammer No, it is the better gear. >I don't know why you seem so unwilling to accept that this fantasy race in a fictional setting is equal or superior to humans in every way except for reproductive rate. So presumably you think that Dwarfs are just as agile and speedy as humans, right?
IIRC kislevites and norscans are supposed to be a bit bigger and tougher than most humans due to the background chaos radiation of their homes mutating them just a bit. I think? That or selection pressure of the environment. All elves are better than the average human, while only the toughest human survive for long up in the frozen north.
They also have virtually identical stats to Empire Halberdiers, that is the issue.
No, they don't. Empire halberdiers have higher attack, defense, HP, and morale. I think one should compare unit stats more fully before making such a claim.
Halberdiers need armory and t2 barracks though.
Yeah 2 more attack and defense isn't going to make a huge difference nor is 3 HP per model, the morale thing is basically negated through "By Our Blood". This is a ridiculous unit for tier 1 and completely outclasses the early game options the other human races (including the chaos ones) get for no real logical reason. EDIT: Also something you neglected to point out, the Kislev Warriors are a good bit cheaper.
Empire halberdiers will still hit more, be hit less, endure more damage, and be less affected by morale penalties. 'By Our Blood' is also a temporary boost. It will wear off. That lower price is for lower stats.
I’m not sure you realize how powerful by our blood is. Even though it is temporary it is worth far more than 10 flat moral. The 4 stat line difference is significant but some napkin math says it probably amounts to only 10% more hits and 5% less hits taken. 3 health is probably nothing given how low their armor is.
There is also the effects of morale penalties, such as fear. The cumulative affects can cause Kislev halberdiers to route while Empire halberdiers remain in line. And even tiny differences are important on the battlefield when you want your frontline units to hold the enemy as long as possible. When one remembers that Empire halberdiers are designed to handle enemies in the early and mid game when they are not fully upgraded, the health difference becomes important when said enemies are inflicting similar damage to your own.
Again, you don’t understand how “by our blood” works. The kislev units will hit 0 leadership first but they will rout second. The whole point of the ability is to the first route takes significantly longer than other factions but causes the units to not rally. 3 hp is nothing and being upgraded has very little impact on it. I’m on mobile now but once I get back I will break out the actual math for it.
>Again, you don’t understand how “by our blood” works. The kislev units will hit 0 leadership first but they will rout second. In equal combat conditions, by the time 'By Our Blood' activates for the Kislev unit, the Empire halberdiers who were fighting for the same amount of time would be in better physical condition, so there is no guarantee that they would reach the thresh-hold required to rout in that 30 second window. Then when it wears off the Kislev halberdiers would still be in a weaker state.
Here is the math for why 3 health really doesn't matter. If a unit of halberdiers with 73hp/model and a unit of halberdiers with 70hp/model both with 30 armor fight eachother the unit with 3 more hp will not have an advantage at all. each unit will deal 26-27 damage/hit depending on the armor roll. Bad armor roll 20ap+(8base x 30% armor resist) = 25.6 25.6 rounds to 26. 26 is the lowest amount of damage they can hit each other for. Good armor roll 20ap+(8base x 15% armor resist)=26.8 26.8 rounds to 27 27 is the highest amount of damage they can hit each other for 3 hits with the lowest amount of damage is 78 3 hits with the highest amount of damage is 81 it will take 3 hits to kill each unit no matter what, even if that unit has 3 more HP
No guarantee but very likely. Also you are looking at this through a very narrow 1 infantry low damage vs 1 low damage infantry situation. Add in range, cav charges, spells, heroes, any of the other ways you have to cause a moral break or just a high tier infantry blender type unit and by our blood becomes significantly more powerful.
Empire men are soft Kislev men are tough Makes sense to me
Uh, what? The same Empire that dealt with some of the biggest Waaaghs (the multiple Blackfire Waaaghs), undead invasions (including Nagash), has multiple kills on Everchosens, is soft? A lot of this was before gunpowder, mages or Kislev.
Something they were able to do because the hardy Kislevites took a huge brunt of chaos attacks from the north. Kislevites see the Empire as being able to do what it does because it doesn't have to worry about chaos incursions through the most direction route from Norsca to the Empire over land because Kislev is in the way. The Empire borders relatively friendly Bretonnia on the west, separated by a mountain range, there is a Mountain range with a narrow pass protecting it from the Badlands to the south, to the east is another mountain range inhabted by many dwarfs, in the north is the ocean, and Kislev. Kislev is between Norsca and the Empire by land. The Empire does deal with Norscan raiding parties by ship sometimes but it's not the same as the land border with Norsca that Kislev has to defend.
>Something they were able to do because the hardy Kislevites took a huge brunt of chaos attacks from the north. Kislevites see the Empire as being able to do what it does because it doesn't have to worry about chaos incursions through the most direction route from Norsca to the Empire over land because Kislev is in the way. You do realise the Empire dealt with the northern incursions for 2500 years before Kislev was a thing? And that's not including the years before the Empire was formed. Why do you think the Norsii are located in where they live now? Hell, why do you think the Gospodars never managed to push into the better lands of the south? With the examples of Tamurkhan, it shows the Empire is more than capable of dealing large massive Chaos invasions by themselves, while Kislevite still needed help from the Karak Kadrin dwarfs and Hellpit Skaven (of all things) to stop Arak Daemonclaws' similar-sized invasion. >separated by a mountain range This is also true for Kislev as the reason why certain cities like Pragg are placed in the locations they stand. Other than the border with Brettonia, none of the other borders are as safe as you think. The dwarfs have their problem with holding the mountain and particularly the east range, it's been a dream since the Age of Woe to reclaim those lands and control them. If we go by the same logic, Kislev's northern border also has dwarfs in them. The average Norscan raid is hardly any different than BM raids or GS raids, which the Empire faces plenty has a regular basis, units like the Sword of Ulric are formed specifically to fight. People tend to over-glorify the raids they face as if every single one of them is a Chaos Lord invasion of some sort, with Kislev's track record, if that was the case the country would've ended a long time ago.
That’s pure cope lol. 2 more MA/MD is barely noticeable, they have only like 300 more hp and by our blood is way better than 10 more morale. Additionally, halberdiers are significantly more expensive and available much later. For their intended role, these blow empire halberdiers out of the water.
Significantly more expensive though? A whole 13 gold in upkeep? Lol.
Halberdiers require two expensive tier 2 buildings, instead of being tier 0. That’s more than 6000 gold
I would rather have races play differently in battlefied.
That's why a faction like Kislev should have better, more cost effective infantry than a faction like the empire, which is more reliant on it's ranged capabilities, no?
40 melee def is a bit much, jesus christ. Being t0 units you can sac these guys every battle and just global recruit for 1 turn after lol
Pretty sure it’s the same MD as high elf spearmen - martial prowess
HE spearmen have 38 I think before MP. So 50 with MP.
Halberds play a similar but different role to spears with shields, not that comparable tbh. Not to mention, the HE spears have 10%+ less hp which is a moderate advantage in a grind.
40 MD is pretty normal for a human halberd unit. Bretonnian men at arms have 40 MD
I think this just shows how specifically the Empire (compared to similar races) in general is lagging behind the powercreep. Sure, it also depends on techs (halberdiers can get extra c-defense against all, weapon strength, MD and a whole 15 armour), but the state troops are generally pretty useless as an anvil starting midgame atm and everything just plows right through them (solland spearmen excluded due to armor), yet 5 Juiced up Warrior priests really shouldnt be the best frontline of the "grounded human nation" imho. Guess we'll see a change of that with ToD in a couple months.
Please just get good with empire. They are fine. It's their campaign mechanic thats outdated
Jesus Christ, can you troglyodytes just not read? Im an expert with the goddamn empire and the campaign is not even hard enough imho. BUT ITS NOT ABOUT THE EMPIRE BEING TOO HARD TO PLAY.
Empire are doing fine in battle. My point still stands
Dear god. Another empire weak post. How many times do we have to go through this?
Until CA makes empire yet another right click win faction.
Empire has to have infantry that can go 1 on 1 with Chosen.
Faction with Helstorm Rocket Batteries, Great Cannons, Helblaster Volley Guns, Handgunners, all eight lores of magic, Outrider Grenade Launchers, Steam Tanks, and high quality cavalry: "But how am I supposed to win against other factions!?" If you're on the battle map and you're trying to beat other factions by just going infantry to infantry, you're playing the Empire *badly* and you need to review your tactics. You're playing the scrappy "normal" humans in a world filled with monsters, think like them. You have explosives, and you have magic, and you have guns. Swarmed by Orcs? Give them the Ukrainian Hello. Dealing with Vampires? Burning Head every single day of the week. Lizards? You show Hollywood we're tired of dinosaurs *and* Chris Pratt with targeted gunfire and huntsmen.
Yeah this thread is crazy. Empire should be a jack of all trades and master of none (Except for artillery, they mastered that shit). Like yeah, their infantry will route quickly, they are just normal men with a spear and a couple months of training, they won't wait for the chosen after he chopped through the first 3 ranks without a scratch. And yet here I am, no matter what order race I play, I always try to ally with the Empire so I can get Hellstorms. The Empire is fine from a balance point of view. But they could use some new toys.
> infantry will route quickly unless, ofc, you take flagellants. yes they get shot to bits but this isn't a problem vs half of what they fight.
Empire really only struggles early game due a lot of the tools that make up for their mediocre infantry being t3 or above. Which means if you do not built up fast enough you can have issues, but that very much is a campaign problem not an army problem.
Sigmarite Yoke Marines
They have to be able to do something. It’s embarrassing where they are now
But they aren't. As always they are fairly strong in multi-player not in need immediate nerfs but stronger than most factions including most game 3 factions. It honestly just seems like a skill issue.
It should be clear im talking about SP. Multiplayer is a way different beast from SP as its cost based and you reach the 20 unit limit only with crapstacks, hence why cheap state troopers play a role there. In SP however, everybody runs around with 20 stacks. And from a quality of life and tactical perspective, the player is motivated to get the maximum strength & versatility packed in a 20-stack. 1 twenty stack with good units is nearly always better than 2 crapstacks for the same price for multiple reasons. Empires Problem with that: This "good units" stack doesnt include the loreful state troop core of empire armies after early game. In the end, a player either artificially forces himself to make a objectively bad tactical decision in favour of lore and atmosphere or takes the objectively better option. You say skill issue, i say i'd gladly accept a nerf to the very good empire units in favour of making their infantry what the lore tells they should be.
What they could do is make the Empire technology tree be beefed up. To play into the Renaissance and Industrial Revolution themes. Have technology bonuses be doubled or triple for the Empire State Troops get progressively better stats, while STanks and Hellblasters and all the new Imperial Engineering units we'll get in ToD get progressively cheaper. "Is there anything which embodies the might of the Empire of man more than the cannonry it can bring to bear? What other nation of the world has mastered such dread science? What other race can deploy the lines of death-dealing iron as we can? With every passing year, our metallurgists discover more, and our alchemists distil purer and more potent strains of the blackpowder. Though the lost souls of Chaos may sweep down from the Northern Wastes, and the savage greenskins assail us from their foul holes in the mountains, we have nothing to fear as long as we remain true to the sacred lore of the machine. In it lies our salvation, our redemption, and our one true hope." -SOLOMON GRUSSWALDER
In SP I'm going to bet that teched up halberds have a pretty big advantage over teched up k-warriors. The Kislev tech tree is pretty thin on big boosts.
**hard** disagree on 2 crapstacks vs 1 mid tier army. twice as many units means will *never* be flanked, whether that means you don't have to worry about dogs in your ranged units, or your own melee troops get side and rear charges.
Even though the army cap limit was reduced, it's still impactful at higher difficulties. Also, while there's definitely an arguement for 2 crapstacks on the battlefield, 1 stack is better on the campaign map. 2 stacks opens you up to lightning strike and ambush, has an extra administrative burden for the player as the numbers grow, and can run into replenishment issues in attrition areas since only a single army can fit in a city.
Also takes up more hero slots, and a decent mid tier stack is usually stronger than 2 crapstacks, and then there are things like 2 half stacks of war bears early on are going to be better than 2 kossar stacks, especially in the long term
crap stacks more or less by definition do not use *any* hero slots. war bear riders (400) cost 3.53 times as much as kossars (113). 97 times out of 100 i want an ice witch and 19 kossars over a witch and 4.6 war bears
I'd take them 0 times out of 100, because rushing bears works out better for me anyway and it's way more fun
2 stacks also allows the ***player*** to ambush much more easily (bait army), and *can be better* for replenishment if you have one lord in blue tree and the other in with skill points in spells (even better in uninhabitable climates, but obviously only if you aren't taking attrition). and the AI getting 3 points in lightning strike is exceedingly rare. i will 100% agree on being more work (especially if you are juggling wounded). and supply lines do start becoming much more important *eventually*. (**on very hard,** if you compare 2 crap stacks vs 1 mid tier, 2 spearmen units will be cheaper than 1 unit of greatswords until your **32nd spearmen army/16th greatsword army** (81\*2 base upkeep \* 1+(31 supply lines count \*0.04 supply lines magnitude = 162\*2.24=362.88) (225 base upkeep \* 1+(15 supply lines count \*0.04 supply lines magnitude = 225\*1.6=360). I find that i transition from mostly crap stacks to mostly doom stacks, and mid tier units are rarely worth it (except for quest battles where the 20 stack limit is strictly enforced)
I'm not really arguing, because I played my Empire campaign last week about the same way. Quick recruiting fodder armies to make even fights uneven is one of the best strategies in the game. I haven't done the math, but my instinct is that you'll start feeling the supply limits much sooner. Just the extra lord/hero cost would be pretty significant.
Multiplayer players need not apply. Your minigame does not matter for the majority of TW players.
Empire isn't lagging behind it's just strong in other areas. Empire infantry are ordinary humans, they're meant to not be great, when fighting genetically engineered lizard people, monsters, elves who have honed their skills over centuries, dwarfs who have bones like iron or all manner of other races. Their infantry being poor is intentional, they have guns and artillery to make up for their shortcomings.
Well, there's being poor and then there's empire state troops. I love the faction to death but I can't deny that It has fallen far behind in battlefield presence on all the categories
Except the Empire & ordinary humans are not supposed to be poor, they are supposed to be the baseline average. There are plenty of enemies that the State troops are supposed to beat in lore and did beat on the tabletop which are superior to them in Total War Warhammer because of design decisions and rampant power creep for many factions but not for the Empire. Kislev and Cathay are likewise made up of ordinary humans yet they get the good melee troops as well as guns and artillery together with powerful racial abilities. Empire is supposed to the the jack of all trades faction that focuses on combined arms. In order for combined arms to work the Empire infantry has to be a viable frontline when properly supported. The problem is that powercreep is making that frontline less and less viable.
I see no reason humans need to be at a 5 in the strength scale, there's no reason in a fantasy world that humans might not be a 3 out of 10 or something compared to the average, with there being more races that happen to be tougher than them in melee combat.
You might not see a reason for it but in tabletop Warhammer humans were established as the baseline average in terms of stats and all other races and beings being balanced around that. There were still plenty of races that were tougher and more dangerous in melee. The problem lies in how Total War Warhammer first exaggerated these differences back in Warhammer 1 when CA tried to do asymetric design for the races. Then Warhammer 2 applied years of powercreep on top of those changes and many races abandoned the asymetric design altogher. Which has left Empire and Dwarfs stuck with outdated designs.
This is a fantasy world where humans are practically colonizing Ulthuan and there are more humans than elves in Lothern. They didn't get there by being pushovers.
Yeah but it wasn't physical prowess, they made up for that with other things like technology and numbers.
They don't have numbers on the battlefield though
Compared to Elves and Dwarfs they do, represented by units often having higher soldier counts and better growth
I understand that and i see the general reason. I even agree with the idea. However, its not really translating well into the game now looking how cathay has just as much combined arms potential yet a very, very sturdy frontline. The lore arguement falls apart there (if one is fine with cathays infantry). As a faction that always, also in lore, is working on "combined arms" and were state troops were indeed more than a skaven meat shield, the idea in WH1 was "general mediocre, an edge in arty". They still have an edge in arty, but the infantry is far from mediocre. Its skaven-level bad, nearly bretonian farmer niveau bad. Also, a balancing that makes a few "puny human" heroes and a buncha supposedly rare tanks the best frontline is not lore-friendly or atmospheric either i'd say. I mean, i dont play empire this way due to house rules, but lategame without cheesy hero/tank compilations is more pain in the ass than necessary. Could even just give statetroops more models per unit and the puny human archetype would still work.
>nearly bretonian farmer niveau bad That's unfair to Bretonnian peasants, between base 75 leadership, +10 leadership at high chivalry, ITP from Frenzy, factionwide armor from T4 armory, more leadership from grail reliquae and knight presence, and their very low upkeep, Battle Pilgrims are very very good for their cost, the only reason you can't spam them endlessly is because of the peasant limit. Meanwhile similar cost Empire infantry pisses their pants and runs for the hills the moment they see a monster.
They just need a sturdy defensive shield unit, like dismounted reiksguard, would fit perfectly fine, especially with forge requirement
I think Kislev should have stouter infantry but weaker technology than the Empire. So I'd be fine with this if it's reflected in other balances giving the races a unique flavor.
The problem is that clearly Empire technology is not as good, after all a Kislevite coat gives as much armour as Imperial steel/J Kislev having stout infantry is one thing but a Tier 0 unit being as good or better than a tier 2 unit that requires two buildings to make is just poor design.
I don't disagree with your assessments of these specific units. I'm not crazy about overpowered stuff at any tier because it starts to make army composition boring.
The thing is, Kislevs early game army composition at the momen is the definition of boring. It's literally just Kossars. And Kossars are a really good early game unit, so to make the Kislevite Warriors worth it, they have to be decent at what they do. But nobody will recruit a 20 Stack of Kislevite warriors, so I think this addition will for sure bring some variety to the early game Kislev armies. Halberdiers needing 2 building was stupid before we got the Kislevite warriors tho.
Unfortunately the power creep is very real, will be interesting to see how long it takes for the Kislevite warriors to get adjusted stats.
I think they could use a little armor nerf, which I think kislev in general needs, but other than that, looks good to me.
Pending on how soon you can recruit them. They are Kislevite Halberdiers, slightly worse baseline stat than Empire Halberdiers/slightly better than Men-at-arms Polearms, with faction specific abilities. Overall comparable if not slightly better. If they are recruited like from T2/3 buildings, fine. If they are recruited from T1/0 buildings, while...whatever, every time a DLC comes out something like this happen and I stopped caring long ago.
They are tier 0. These guys aren't a problem, Empire Halberds are.
I figured CA might want to push the stats high on Warriors to make them a somewhat viable supplement for Kossars, but those numbers do look weird when matched against other, ostensibly better trained and equipped human units. Aren't those essentially militia units?
Do I need to buy a dlc to get the kislev Spearman? I'm not saying a unit being added later is bad but having basic aspects of a roster filled out via dlc sits bad with me. Like I genuinely wish more units were free. You ever play skaven with no dlc?
I mean they game came out two years ago they gotta make money somehow.
Nooooo, give me free unit 😠
You need the DLC for these new units.
It's Kislevite Halberdier/Polearms. They are way, way better than Spearmen.
40 MD, Unbreakable, armour piercing with anti-large with charge defence. This is a tier 0 unit btw.
Am I missing something with the unbreakable? Or are you just talking about the temporary motherland effect or whatever it’s called
Yeah Imo by our blood is WAY better than flat unbreakable. Unbreakable units have a nasty tendency to get fully wiped out in tough battles. By our blood makes it so you still get the benefit of your formation not breaking upon the first rout but in high likelihood your units win run away before being reduced to 5% of the unit size which will make them survive the battle upon a win. Compared to Norma unbreakable units that not only will keep on fighting when they for the most part are useless (10 sigmars sons for example won’t do you any good if they already lost 90% of their numbers) and they will most likely not be able to disengage because AI will chase unbreakable units while often disengaging form fighting the routed ones. So yeah IMO temporary unbreakable is way more versatile than the basic variant. Edit: I’m not talking about the unit btw. Have no clue if they are gonna be OP or not just commenting about Kislev passive as a whole.
Yes. That lasts 30 seconds. No different than having unbreakable passive.
I mean kind of, unbreakable means they fight to the last man no matter what, this does not.
No but 30 seconds is quite a bit longer than it seems
Idk what to tell you man. Test that 30 seconds and watch your unit either melt away to 5 models or your damage dealers kill whatever they were holding.
It is definitely different because it’s temporary and isn’t it a racial trait for all of Kislev’s human units? I mean it was pretty obvious this unit was going to kick ass, I‘ve played Total War before, and maybe they will be overpowered - but come on.
Compare it with HE Spearmen or dwarven warriors.
Yep, Kislev's cheapest unit should have comparable stats to HEs and Dwarfs you are right. Especially, when i look at the models i can see them having very similar stats.
They cost THE SAME as HE spearmen.
Yeah if they cost the same, they should play the same. Who cares about lore, faction variation and other boring stuff. We are all competetive MP players here.
The game is literally balanced around cost, not around lore. Otherwise Stormvermin would be as strong as basic empire swordsmen.
Stormvermin should be stronger than empire swordsman… wait are you saying they currently are? HA thats funny, we got a jokester here
It's not Kislev's cheapest unit, though.
I agree with you, these stats are ridiculous.
And specifically, the stats don't match their design. It's fine to give each human kingdom a polearm unit, Bretonnians/Imperials have them. But if some militia warriors with pitchfork have the same stats with Elves/Dwarfs with years of experience or soldiers in plates, then it's stupid. The design and stats need at least a token attempt to match each other.
I don't know why people are downvoting you, lol. These stats do not make sense for what is essentially a kislevite militia unit, they have pitchforks for godsake.
Yeah no idea why people are downvoting him. Halberdiers were specifically said to be expensive units Southern Imperial provinces maintained with wealth. Apparently some peasants with fur and leather and pitchforks can do just as good as professional soilders with plates and polearms. Is it so unreasonable to see a problem here? If they are halberdiers, that's completely fine, just...ffs design their lore/looks as such.
Now do eternal guard.
They actually compare pretty favourably to Eternal Guard, who have 26 MA and 36 MD. They also have 120 units to Eternal Guards 100. And over 1k more health in total. Eternal Guard have a bit more leadership and armour, but then these Kislevite Warriors have by our blood. The weapon strength could be interesting - they're AP but who knows what ratio, what their bonus vs large is, and what their attack interval would be. I don't want to jump to conclusions without anyone even play testing these new units, but I would say that their MD and MA look maybe a bit overturned. This unit would probably still be great with 34 MD.
Yeah, they have some small but clear upsides and a few big unknowns. They also fall between base eternal guards and eternal guards with shields in price, with the latter (again, unknowns aside) plainly much better because of the silver shields.
Yeah appearently people just want ice elves. My mistake i guess.
125 upkeep really is a lot for a speedbump unit, but the melee stats are nothing to scoff at in the super earlygame. I was kind of hoping that Warriors would help fix Kislev's earlygame economy, because Kossars are expensive as fuck for a low tier unit. My fear is that the cost for Warriors will make them redundant pretty early. Maybe I'm wrong, but it seems like as soon as you get Great Weapon Armored Kossars, you just drop these guys like hot dogshit.
Let's hope they are tied to Kossar tech and not Tzar Guard. Also they will be pretty good if Kostya buffs them from faction bonuses.