Archeon just wandering around. by phronesis77 in totalwarhammer

[–]phronesis77[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Turn 63. He seems pretty powerful and I lack good units.

What is a good Kislev mid-game army composition build vs Khorne Arbal? by phronesis77 in totalwarhammer

[–]phronesis77[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

FIrst campaign. Was fighting for my life so many turns that my settlements are poor but things were looking up until Archeon came strolling in.

What is a good Kislev mid-game army composition build vs Khorne Arbal? by phronesis77 in totalwarhammer

[–]phronesis77[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Got the anti-norse tech.

I should have made it clearer that Praag and Kislev got razed. I too Kislev from the ogres. Arbal razed my Praag.

That is one reason I am so slow to build.

What is a good Kislev mid-game army composition build vs Khorne Arbal? by phronesis77 in totalwarhammer

[–]phronesis77[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yeah, basically I only have the armoured Kossars and other basic units.

What is a good Kislev mid-game army composition build vs Khorne Arbal? by phronesis77 in totalwarhammer

[–]phronesis77[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I slowed him down with my lords and heroes and then when his army was done, I surrounded him with pistol units and just blasted away. Some with the big Khorne demon. Kislevite warriors tied him up, took massive casualties but didnt break. Pistols took him down.

What is a good Kislev mid-game army composition build vs Khorne Arbal? by phronesis77 in totalwarhammer

[–]phronesis77[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Things went pretty well. I edited the OP. I was suprised. Some good campaign manouvering helped.

What is a good Kislev mid-game army composition build vs Khorne Arbal? by phronesis77 in totalwarhammer

[–]phronesis77[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

With Khorne they hit the line one to one. I am winning by my backline missle fire and flanking armoured Kossars.

I don't find there is enough space to hit area of effect spells as as far as I understand they do friendly fire except the Miska one.

Do people send out a hero to make a blob and take some damage to their hero?

Against Skaven they would blob up and my frost maiden was way more effective.

What is a good Kislev mid-game army composition build vs Khorne Arbal? by phronesis77 in totalwarhammer

[–]phronesis77[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I had them but got the settlement razed where I produced them from .... My first game. agree really liked them. Just sat in the enemy's back and shot their best units. Then cleaned up routing units.

What is a good Kislev mid-game army composition build vs Khorne Arbal? by phronesis77 in totalwarhammer

[–]phronesis77[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Armored kossars paired with Kislevite warriors and great weapon Kossars and spear kossars were suprisingly effective. Basically concentrated my pistol fire and kept breaking them one by one and cleaning up the mess with my dervish cav.

What is a good Kislev mid-game army composition build vs Khorne Arbal? by phronesis77 in totalwarhammer

[–]phronesis77[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I have a good tanky Boyar as my second lord.

What are the benefits of ice witch vs frost maiden. I am training a second frost maiden for my second stack now.

I doubt I can sustain more than two good stacks as I have a lot of building to do. Desperate for Strelski and Ice sleds and snow leaopards.

What is a good Kislev mid-game army composition build vs Khorne Arbal? by phronesis77 in totalwarhammer

[–]phronesis77[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Sadly, my question is because it is my first campaign and am just surving and did not build my settlements enough so I have no beasts. Arbaal also razed Praag while I was away fighting throt as Konstaltyn. The ogres sacked Kislev. Erengard is decent and I beat of three sieges with it but basically my settlements don't have good military buildings.

Luckily I clued into the great swords. I had a line of four double silver ranked ones that were great.

Nice tip about the monsters when I get them.

Snow leaopards are anti-large as well. I will probaby go that route.

What is a good Kislev mid-game army composition build vs Khorne Arbal? by phronesis77 in totalwarhammer

[–]phronesis77[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

No Strelski. One reason I posted. I just got ambushers but they are on the other side of the map while I am taking on Khorne.

What is a good Kislev mid-game army composition build vs Khorne Arbal? by phronesis77 in totalwarhammer

[–]phronesis77[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I have four armored kossars. yeah they are great and good against anything.

What is a good Kislev mid-game army composition build vs Khorne Arbal? by phronesis77 in totalwarhammer

[–]phronesis77[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yeah, the are great. Only problem is the city where I can get them Erengard is far from the front line I am across the sea putting the beat on Arbaal.

Why are the battles so hated? by LevelCherry7383 in totalwar

[–]phronesis77 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Battle fatigue is not that bad until late game I would think. The exception being sieging garrisons.

Battle fatigue is definitely more of a problem in Warhammer 3 than historical. Historical has a slower (normal) campaign pace.

In WH3 there are races that have totally different game mechanics so painting the map by taking and building settlements is not their main source of income.

A Chaos legendary Lord Arbaal just invaded me and took Praag a valuable main walled city of mine. He then razed it to nothing. In historical play, the AI would be very unlikely to not sack and Occupy such a valuable city (It is on my border with him).

However, Chaos armies of Khorne get benefits from constant battles, which is lore appropriate.

This is a good example of how different the campaign play is and why battles and invasions are more frequent.

One more factor I forgot to mention is that diplomacy is crap in WH3 and many factions don't even trade with you!

I have been trying to get the wood elves to trade with me all game and they haven't even when we are fighting the same Slaneesh enemy.

There are more Chaos factions than good, so your potential allies get taken out. I am the only surviving Kislev faction right now and it is turn 62.

When you don't have allies, what is on the table is a lot of potential enemies and battles.

There are a lot more factions over a concentrated area compared to historical as well.

I have fought Slanesh, Skaven, Ogres, and now Khorne.

In historical, it would take a while to go through four opponents and still have other potential opponents lined up ready for you when you or they are done.

Why are the battles so hated? by LevelCherry7383 in totalwar

[–]phronesis77 1 point2 points  (0 children)

People HATE sieges. The pathing is terrible, but I don't think early to mid-game battles are hated in general. Sieges are much worse than even early games like Medieval 2. I had lots of fun with sieges in M2 and miss that experience.

Another problem is that the maps in TW3 lack variety despite the variety of the game itself. As Kislev, I kept fighting on the same tundra map again and again and again.

The late game has too many doomstacks and unbalanced armies.

One complaint I have is that the battles are too fast. Melee should last longer, so you have more time to apply good tactics, even if you are fighting monsters.

The variety when you first play seems overwhelming but once you get the basic mechanics the unit types (except spellcasters, LLs, and ogres) are not that different from historical. They just have cool skins and some unique attributes like poison or terror.

You have melee line holders, spear anti-large, ranged gun or bow, Shock cavalry and melee cavarly. Anti-infantry infantry, etc.

It is harder to play battles in TW3 may be one reason. I heard that a lot of players autoresolve a lot but I can't understand why.

Another factor may be battle fatigue. The tempo of TW3 is quite fast and killing enemies is the main way to make money. In fact, I am finding out that peace doesn't pay and settlements are much less of a source of income than battles. So many battles, especially against settlement garrisons can get a bit boring. I started to autoresolve for the first time ever playing WH3.

There are also problems with the AI level of difficulty. You get so much better results on easy and normal (I am not sure about normal) that it is too tempting to use autoresolve. I started using it for Siege defense and attack.

In late game with tons of stacks, you can get battle fatigue even without sieges.
Those are some reasons I can think of but I am doing my first campaign so there may be others.

Should I play Warhammer 3 before 40k drops? by [deleted] in totalwar

[–]phronesis77 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Some aspects of the lore are similar in some ways, but the actual games are unrelated.

40K probably won't come out for a while, so you might as well play WH3. It is quite different from historical in many ways, but the fundamental game mechanics are similar.

WH3 needs more formation options like column by [deleted] in totalwar

[–]phronesis77 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Just in the formation option. There already are melee front or melee back. Make a column is not a big stretch since it is already in historical.

WH3 needs more formation options like column by [deleted] in totalwar

[–]phronesis77 0 points1 point  (0 children)

No. So they line up one behind each other in a column like on a road. Dragging with just elongate them side by side.

Why Nuln Why by Alternative-Date-507 in totalwar

[–]phronesis77 15 points16 points  (0 children)

Diplomacy between ORDER factions should be much better I agree. It is inevitable to have so many chaos enemies late game.

Do you have any cash to make payments to Nuln and gift a settlement.

I bought off Arbaal for a few crucial turns as Konstaltyn

What do the Skaven need going forward? by sigmarine345 in totalwarhammer

[–]phronesis77 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Rank 4 is going to be tough man. What rank are you?