As a red-green colorblind person, I'd like to ask if you could use a deeper green next time for the chart? I'm having a really hard time making out anything of it.
My hypothesis on why marauders lose to swordsmen, despite higher stats: Swordsmen have a SMALLER unit model than marauders, thus there are more of them squeezed into the front rank and actively contributing to the unit's DPS
Glad he mentioned the campaign differences like if you were playing as Sigvald your marauders get rage too and even berserk after a certain rank would make a massive difference in multi
Spearmen: The problem with Martial Prowess, is that the ability will stop as they hit 50% HP. It helps them stay aboe half health a bit longer, but after that they loose performance. So unless they could deal a lot of damage above 50% HP, they will invariably looses once they drop below. It is a bit better with buffs of course - Martila Prowess is all about incentivising buff and healing spells. Frenzy: Murderouds Prowess, Waagh, Frenzy. Those are all about staying in the fight for long. The plan is to have enough models left, that the boost can be translated into outkilling the enemy while it lasts. Vanguard Deployment: While all those units are melee so they will end up in melee combat, it does sometimes mater how long it takes them to get there. Waaagh has a plain old cooldown. While Murderous Prowess will also be build by Ranged attacks. So for those abilities, being in the melee quicker does mater to some degree. It gives you more time before the enemy buff kicks in. I have no idea how to model that in those scenarios, but they would be helpfull in practice.
Good video, particularly because I love my low tier infantry when buffed in campaign. I do have a question though. Was it an unfair advantage for the Green Skins to use Waaagh? Just curious what everyone else thinks.
I had kind of an idea for units with shields: the problem with them is that they do don't hold the line as much as we would expect them to do so. Their melee defence isn't that great. It would be quite cool if CA changed their stats in function of the quality if the shield: - bronze: +5 melee defence - silver: +8 md - good: +10 md IF they are fighting on the front. Wouldn't apply if they best rear-charged. Or sth like that. It would make them maybe more useful? Idk. Just an idea. The shield for now only increases their missile resistance.
It would be neat to have the stat cards up in the corner while they fight so I, the casual viewer, have a reference of weapon skill and such. Good job on this!
IMO it’s Saurus Warriors. I know the LM have skinks which are cheaper but still, it’s the main unit you’ll use for most LM factions and they’re so good. Massive weapon damage and solid melee attack, solid armor and melee defense…literal monsters in the early game.
At 300 points cost and 160 skinks per unit, I definitely consider them meat shields. It's stupid that they don't say that on their card as they actually are decent meat shields since they have shields and, again, 160 members per unit. For less than nearly every leader and hero, you can get the maximum of 5 units of 160 troops with shields. Sometimes, I take the max of them for just 1500 and have a wall of junk units with shields in front of my real army just to soak up stuff.
The Whaaggh mechanic is a huge factor. I knew the winner before you even started. Even Goblins can trash low tier units (i.e., clanrats, skeletons, etc.) because of it. The testing scenario is kind of stilted, though, as greenskins, with their low armor (in most cases), are usually whittled down by missiles before closing to melee. But it's a nice "lab test", as it shows you that you should never go "melee only" against the orcs.
I still can't get over how tired the empire soldiers look. Look at those dark circles. Those guys haven't slept for days, and they have to fight undead, rats, sentient bushes, and every other creature under the sun. Get them some sleep.
I wonder how Glade Guard would do in these match-ups. Their melee dmg is -10 on empire swordsmen, and melee def is -4 on empire swordsmen, charge is half of empire swordsmen, otherwise the stats are the same BUT the Glade Guard would get several volleys of arrers off beforehand (which is a free attack) - reducing model count is a good way to win these matchups and range is a good way to do it. Could Glade Guard work as an infantry frontline? I wonder... Zerk?
A thought; if you wanted to avoid using high elf spearmen for their anti-large rather than infantry focus, could've used rangers. Also, dryads might've been given a shot at gor herds as dwarves very specifically resist dryads very well where gor might not; dryads having low ap and magic attacks, which dwarves thrive against. That particular matchup doesn't seem too fair for determining their ranking
might be that i missed something, but wouldnt this setup be more fair, if you used the remaining gold to upgrade/give chevrons to the lower cost infantry so it cost as much as the most expensive ones ?
Spears just suck as a weapon in total war warhammer, unless you get that anti large bonus...which is bs. The spear should give them like 10 anti large and should cost them 3 to 5 melee def. For some reason CA decided that spears are garbage at fighting infantry because they are addicted to rock, paper, scissors.
Well the bigger the shield doesn't mean better blocking, bigger shields are heavier and more cumbersome, a smaller shield has less surface but is more mobile. So in a melee fight they sort of equal out.
Question: What prompted you to use Orc Boyz instead of Goblin spearmen for Greenskins here? And alternatively, why did you use Skinks to represent the Lizardmen as opposed to the Suraus Warriors?
As soon as I saw you'd picked the skinks to embarrass the Lizardmen, I knew they were the very bottom of the barrel. They should have been considered the same tier as the expendable, near-worthless units. I've never used any skink infantry units, they just aren't worth it.
I figure it would take a long time and extend the video slot but do all the armies fight each other or is it just like well they lost to these units but beat these so automatically they win against a whole list of units?
A bit surprised about the inclusion of Gor Herds, shouldn't that have been Ungors? That's like taking Saurus warriors for the Lizardmen instead of Skinks.
Would've made more sense to put the bottom tier Saurus with clubs in this, given that you pretty much used the baseline infantry for all other factions?
Hey Zerkovich is there a way you could use green/blue or red/blue in your charts? I'm red/green colorblind and it's nearly impossible for me to read the chart! Thanks
No surprises here. In the first game, club/mace/axe infantry would beat sword infantry in a lot of cases, not in all, but the first game was actually a bit more balanced. In this game, we just have DLCs buffing races based on sales and stats on who plays what and marketing, so no surprise that Orks won, I fully expected them to. It was impossible for Ork Boyz to beat Dwarf Warriors in the first game and that's what some people (I have no idea why) were bitching about for some time indeed. And GW, being smarter than not too smart, buffed the Orks like 10 times (I have no idea why) and everyone was happy... I have no idea why. To be honest, what these tests also show is that there is some back-end play happening in this game that does not correspond to the stats. I have heard ppl that really believe in this game tell me that there is a random, dice-rolling factor to it, with respect to the universe and whatever... I call those people slaves to substance. There is fuckery on the back-end and it keeps getting worse with every patch. And the TW:W3 browser game might just prove it outright.
Saurus cost at least 200 more than everybody else in this. I don't need to make a video to know they'll beat everyone in this competition. They're mid tier.
New Zealand Deckhands, very proficient in polishing and caulking decks. Skeleton Ribadism. Dwarfs whacking wood. And burly goat on orc action. Too much innuendo >.>
I'd say I'd want to see the battle of the "true" chaff, but that'd be dominated by anyone in it that doesn't have real chaff, like possibly the dwarves.
I bet the elven Rangers would do very well. They are tier 1, but they have ridiculous anti infantry, which makes them much better than Spearman in these kinds of early game fights. I mean, you chose orc boys over goblins. Not apples the apples, but still...
Which faction has the best RoR stack (an army consisting of only RoR units)? A bit different to a single unit match up, but I'm sure you can find a way for it to work.
Eternal Guard was a more apt choice for WE. Even if they would be outside the price range they are inarguably basic infantry. Dryads just don’t work the way regular infantry do and so don’t really benefit the comparisons at all.
I'm just curious why not rangers for the high elves instead of spearmen. I get that they don't have a shield and they have a bonus vs infantry, but they are fairly low tier and cheap
I think the orcs kind of overperform in these test a bit...getting 2 waaghs so quick...not sure about that Not saying u should´t use waaagh at all...just saying they might look a bit stronger in this test than they actually are out of the battlefield
no he shouldn't use Waagh. he refused to let the Ironbreakers throw their charges, a feature of the unit and accounted for in their stats and combat methods. actively popping WAAGGH is adding stats to a unit outside of the unit. if you dont allow built in stuff on the unit, dont use outside abilities (Tomb Kings is understandable because it is automatic)
If this is supposed to be a ranking of all the factions basic infantry, why arent the Saurus warriors here? I'd argue that the skinks are the cannon fodder, not their go to infantry.
saurus are a mid-tier 800 gold unit i can tell you for free saurus absolutely dunk on literally every single unit on this list but thats not surprising given that in some cases they cost almost 3x as much as clanrats
The difference of orc and dwarves are showing the bad balances. Dwarves are always backed up by superior range units.... And orcs? Well they should be succeed in any melee situation ... They do. But are then also nearly obliterated
Is it really fair to have gor herds in against empire infantry and clanrats? They really feel more mid tier to me. I would have said ungors with axes and shield would be more appropriate. Just my 2 cents.
Orc Boyz are probably the most cost-effective of these infantry units in melee, I won't deny that, but let's note that this test was quite generous to them because they got far more waaaghs than you would get in a normal game. Waaagh charges up when multiple entity units are in melee, but is effectively slowed by having low entity count units or archers. The waaagh is charging about twice as quick here I would guess, and especially against beastmen that can be huge because often your front line starts to route before you get the waaagh at all. You should run these tests with GS units getting one waaagh, that is the norm for the main frontline engagement.
The Elves have dexterity and perception but humans beat them out in strength and endurance. The only thing that really seperates them is the amount of time Elves have to train. Empire swordsmen need 70 leadership imo
I was wondering why Skinks were used instead of Saurus Sword and Board, and then I looked at the cost. At which point, I looked at the 800 cost and went "oh, oh no, that wouldn't have even been a competition."
Saurus are good mid-tier infantry that can comfortably tussle with everything short of elite anti-infantry, and with unexpectedly high AP can even do some damage before they go on Seordmasters and Executioners. They would have stomped even a mid-tier infantry contest, let alone this.
At least skinks have 46 speed and they can outrun most infantry. They can easily flank and will still beat many missile units so they are not bad units for their price. Also, they are AqUaTiC!!!
@@tunemaki_izlasitrlv6835 This is where the test falls apart. Different units serve a different purpose within their rosters: State Troops are the backbone of the frontline, while Skinks are a specialized supplement.
I’m absolutely surprised by the performance of Empire Swordsmen. I thought High Elf Spears and Marauders would just run them over but they beat all of them, and even one dryad unit somehow lost against them. Thats some Sigmar’s blessing
The state troops are absolutly fine. They lose against higher tier infantery, but in the beginning theyre very powerfull and you just need a lvl 5 general and few turns in campaign, to create very scary early game monsters.
They're good overall but more often than not the empire finds itself fighting against enemies with better basic infantry, with the only real exception being undead.
@@GaldirEonai if you play as Gelt they can be pretty cracked on the cost side, they get up to 55 armor guaranteed and with some items/perks up to 70, with their attack and defence being boostable, even the standard swordsman become pretty tough, and the greatswords can get over 130 armor.
Elves: "We're the Elves, Each individual Elf has been training in the art of warfare for 1000 years! No one can beat us!" Empire Rabble: "Hold my beer"
High Elves train their citizens for like 20-40 years at max. That's why on the tabletop basic bitch elves have the stats of human proffesional soldiers. But regular elves do not even live for a 1000 years (not anymore).
If i am not mistaken, the Empire fields professional armies while the lower ranked troops (spearmen and archers) of the high elves are levies and militia. Meanwhile Dwarfs are entirely militia.
@@Athalwolf13 The ENTIRE High Elf army is militia, the "Special units" are not really considered military (Swordmasters are monks, White Lion's are King's Guards, Phoenix Guards are Temple Guards etc.). The only part of the military that IS NOT militia are Sea Guards and their ships, bolt throwers etc. High elves just require EVERY citizen to undergo military training (Around 20 years if I am not mistaken - that's why basic bitch elven archers and spearmen in the tabletop have the same Weapon skill as Empire Greatswords and bretonnian knights - they just train for simmilar periods of time). Empire has a proffesional army, but that army is VERY often only the core of the army on the field, as it is usually supported by conscripted soldiers and militia. And Ogres. I do not know about Dwarves though.
@@kompatybilijny9348 If i am not mistaken, almost every dwarf upkeeps his own armour and weapons , often having a trade outside the militiary (besides most likely rangers and thanes) The basic Archers and Huntsmen of the Empire are technicially not professional soldiers. Sigmarite pilgrims ( i forgot what they are called. Frenzy and twin-hand maces) are also not professionally career soldiers. The Empire is more based on 1600~1806 Holy Roman Empire where being a soldier was a career thing with conscripts and militia being only used in times of invasion/war.
Yeah, I'm pretty sure to be fair he should have uses saurus instead of skinks. They are closer to orcs and Gor, where Skink are closer to ungor and goblins. High elves wise, I wonder if he shouldn't have been using the twin sword wielding ones. Spearmen are naturally disadvantaged vs sword type units.
@@Galatorm a bit late for the party, but saurus are closer to chaos warriors (obviously worse). They both were the kind of Basic yet Elite type of unit in TT, alongisde Longbeards and Big'Uns. After them, all elves (ethernal guard being the obvious winner) and gors were next in line for best basic infantry. Also, demons and ogres (but not really in the same category).
Maurauder would probably have the advantage if they actually wore functional armor, but they are one of the lowest armor unit, so they have a major weakness against everything cheap.
I would've guessed on the Dwarf Warriors to win because of the armor but didn't really think about the waaagh factor. Seeing the Beastmen do that well was surprising though
The thing I love most about the lizardmen is how different they are to every other faction in terms of unit parallels. The Saurus are ridiculously expensive, but they can stomp basically anything not specialised into anti infantry, whereas the skinks are utter crap, but excel at doing what the saurus can’t, chasing down routing units and flanking.
@@BH-ms2vw That 550 limit is just what he decided because it fit "what was already on the list". Rangers have less upkeep than any other HE unit(and lower than several of the other units on this list), is still very cheap for the HE lineup and is MADE for low-tier infantry grinds. He also said "low tier", but Gor Herds(tier 3), Man-at-arms with shields(tier 3) and Eternal Guards with shield(tier 2) are higher than tier 1. So why not Crypt Ghouls? They cost 500 and are tier 2, and vastly superior to Skeleton Warriors for the Vampire Counts. Or Nehekhara Warriors instead of Skeleton Warriors for the Tomb Kings(cost 525 and is tier 2)? If he had said the limit was 600, it would not change the lineup a whole lot. High Elves and Lizardmen(as LM would get Redcrested Skinks, which also is a low tier infantry grinder), and maybe Gor Herd(without shields) since they trade MD and shield block for more MA, AP and charge bonus. He is free to make his list as he wants, but the rules for choosing units is not very consistent, is all I am saying.
@@fendelphi because he has been doing this shit like this, his way, his liking, giving no shit for balancing and the sake of fairness. some first who's the best videos he let ror fight normal unit, ror already has 9 chevron, which normal units have to pay alot more gold to get, but he still think somehow that's fair? take these kind of videos from him with a grain of salt, it's just a content video, nothing from it have any value
@@fendelphi anyway his favorite faction is greenskins, that's probably why all of his whothebest videos are always bias and sometimes will yield most of the results to any orc's units
