They need to make the second smaller square related to holding the other minor points and supplies, so that if you fall back to the final one, you don't instantly lose to ticket decay
Isn't the consensus that TWW3 is too easy? So isn't this added challenge a good thing? To me it makes sense that you need to defend more more than just 1 square.
No, battles aren't too easy, it's the campaigns. If you are sieged by four armies, you cannot hold both squares at once with one army. A retreat mechanic from point 1 to 2 could be a good way to deal with it, rather than just having one capture point, so it still has relevance.
@@crispyquesadilla adding on to what sea turtles said, the AI is overly cautious in WH3. That can make the campaign boringly easy, because you can get away with too much. It can also make the battles frustratingly difficult, though, because the AI is a lot more likely to send overwhelming force when they do attack you. Especially when they attack your settlements.
Honestly they should just remove tickets. The way it works in unwalled settlements is fine: lose all the points for ~5 seconds = lose the battle, but as long as you hold one you can keep fighting.
Not sure if anybody else noticed this but there are many towers on multiple maps that are obstructed from the choke points you want them firing into. For example on this map it's the 2 towers between the primary and centre defence point, the ones where legend kept asking himself "Why don't these feel like they're firing". They're firing, they're just firing straight into the big obelisks that are placed right in front of them obstructing them from firing into the centre capture point.
It’a honestly really awful how in a lot of sieges the major point is pretty well defendable, but the second most important one is usually completely open and not well defendable at all. This is even worse in minor sieges because the major point is the same as the previously mentioned second most important and you just can’t defend something that’s accessible from 4+ sides
@@AArmstrongDotOrg That is true, I meant more in terms of defendability. Since it does provide a pretty good buff it should be worth defending, but many times it's pretty much impossible
God, one of my favorite things to do after a big battle like this is to just take stock of the battlefield and look at the corpses. I just love the story it tells as where the biggest battles were and where lords and large monsters died.
I hate that a bunch of settlements have impossible to defend designs too. At the very least, any major settlements should have a clear defensive position with a chokepoint that defends the primary victory point.
Yeah, i just wish it had a clear defense path. As well its near unfun playing against the ai when the main defensive point has 4 entrances, as they have incredible micro, and can seep through all the entrances. I just don't understand why you would design a base where you can't funnel them into a central point to then spam magic, or use archers to they're best effect.
Ancient Sal's are fantastic when used properly but a doomstack of them is just problems. They're incredible at arcing shots over troops and they're pretty fast for their damage, so getting them into a good position is usually pretty simple. I find I use them similar to Poison Wind Globadiers because of how well they will arc their shots and how fast they thin out groups of enemies.
Legend made this battle harder on himself by not using more of the salamander ammo and just melee charging them even when he had a ranged window. I don't think he's very used to using ancient sals, lol. They're basically just mobile flame cannons. A couple shots to chunk off a huge part of the unit's health, *then* run into melee to cleanup. They're a lot more effective against infantry, it's the hunting packs that are meant for single entities.
Dude it's called Lumpia and they are little fried egg rolls, the national food of the Philippines hahaha that's funny though that you call em that in the Netherlands, I love you silly Dutch and your funny sounding language
@@toasteddingus6925 yeah it's originally a Vietnamese snack, but it's been widely consumed here nowadays. The reason I 'claimed' this lizardmen translation is because friq'andel, croq'et and some other snacks are all in the game. Frikandel is a uniquely dutch snack, but they are all common snacks over here, and loempia is not very common/known in most countries.
Salamanders really don’t like siege defense. Speed is one of their greatest strength and they can’t use it. If this is field battle they can just shoot at stuff that are faster than them then run away and divide their army.
i stopped getting ancient salamanders unless they're with a fire slann, with a skink oracle for the earthbloods so that his lore passive reduce fire resistance ontop of their flammable, it helps
The kindleflame passive from the Lore of Fire Slann makes the enemy weak to fire, not reduce their fire resistance. That’s better as it works on all units, not just those that have fire resistance.
@@maxpower3990 Weakness to fire and Fire resistance are the same stat, just worded differently. So something with 50% fire resistance will get their fire resistance reduced when they incur a fire weakness penalty. But yeah, weakness to fire also affects units with 0% fire resistance, giving them negative fire resistance making them take a significant amount more damage.
I suspect that they are meant to be raidy hybrid units like medusas. You move them around and shoot enemy infantry in the back. And if you get caught they are still kind of OK in melee. They also have anti-large on their ranged attacks for some reason.
Ancient Salamanders were one of those units which were really good at the release of the DLC and got nerfed into oblivion after the MP community has complained on them (I think even they would say that the AS was nerfed too much).
@@dostayer3369 This The unit was pretty good, but then MP complained and instead of just making the unit more expensive or something, they made the unit unusable garbage unless you're dedicated to it, performance be damned
as always, you make a broken game work. Thank you for sticking through the mud...this mud is sticky though, so I understand you leaving streaming for some time. I appreciate everything you've done till now, Legend! :)
It's kinda disappointing that the walled cities didn't see a change with the IE release. Any poll I've seen about walled sieges has been very negative to them, right from WH3 launch. I really hope CA will put aside some manpower and go through all of those maps and remove that victory point, or at least change how the tickets are generated so that just holding the minor point can't outright win while the defender is holding the major one.
I was actually excited when I first saw them with the quest battle demo, the big problem is that all the cool abilities like the ammo replenishment, the healing, and the unit upgrades/unit spawns are unavailable in the regular siege battles which means that every siege breaks down into a slow meat grinder in front of maxed out towers with both sides sitting on a huge cache of unused supplies. There's no reward for the attacker capping points and that means no incentive to recap or hold points for the defender either. The worst part is that the two point thing makes bigger settlements harder to defend than the small ones. In my opinion they need to add those quest battle things to the regular sieges, and they need to make the garrison more dependent on what buildings are built in the settlement so that it's not every settlement has 6 infantry, 4 archers, and 2 cavalry. just grinding those units out under tower fire everywhere you go. It needs to be like oh there's a tier 3 cavalry building here so you'll be fighting 4-6 good cavalry, there's a barracks here, so you'll be fighting 4-6 good infantry, there's economic buildings here so you're fighting 4-6 chaff units. That's been my biggest gripe is the monotony of the garrisons and that we haven't gotten the cool shit from the quest siege in normal sieges.
I mean I think it’s fine, just the ticket loss should be to a minimum. They are positioned that way (I guess) because they effectively represent the main square which does give a huge advantage in holding it. Forward base camp, space to gather forces etc etc. it’s just basically from there a battle of attrition and that’s what it should be. So the timer should be there( even though I personally don’t like it) it should just be slower because you could effectively keep fighting back for days if not weeks in a fortified keep. That’s what they were designed to do. So year I guesstimate a 20 min capture ticket loss after losing the main square should be best
Ya, either remove the secondary point like you suggested, or at least give some special tower types for the internal towers on city maps (especially T4 and T5 walled cities). I'd put up with having to hold a crappy point in the middle of a Tomb King city if it meant my towers were stationary Caskets of Souls.
Fire mage and an oracle so you have earth blood and kindle flame. Pretty sure salamanders do fire damage in melee yeah? I think the flaw in this army is not buffing the salamanders more with kindle flame.
I've only played Warhammer 2, and I basically only play HEs. I can tell you all variations of the Salamander units are OP AF against High Elves. their missiles do brutal damage, and seem to prevent the high elves from getting their arrows into the air as they keep stumbling from the impact. It honestly feels like there is no counter to them as HEs lol.
Flamespyre and Arcane Phoenixes and Dragon Princes all have 70% fire resistance in WH2, so those are the best units to use against Salamanders. Especially Phoenixes that are better in melee than Salamanders and can dodge their slow arcing shots to waste their ammo. Also, Nobles are anti-large and can get good fire resist items to deal with Salamanders.
Sallying out and using the speed for deafeat in dertail at the start might have been good By which I mean run outside the walls with big groups of lizards and kill one set of units after the next
Really this was a viable doomstack in warhammer 2 where you could shoot from afar, then ball these guys up & give them all 60% physical resistance with flesh to stone. Now that flesh to stone is single target it has really nerfed the lore of life's utility. That & shield of thorns being reduced to one unit really sapped the lore of some diversity, but at the same time they made awakening of the wood and the dwellers below way more powerful which is nuts, because those spells were both already good damage dealers for their costs.
The final point should be the ONLY ONE for ticket decay, the minor cap point should just be a buff like it is in non-walled settlements, idk why CA does this shit I hate doing siege battles as the defender unless I have a 20 stack army sitting in one lmao
Because the tomb king army and the vampire army are two separate factions, if I'm not mistaken ^^ I seem to recall that making it possible for them to show up despite that
@@Scarface39212 yes that's correct, if it's different factions, it's multiple 20 units armies. If it's the same faction, it's 1 big armie so only 20 can join. When outnumbered some times, a cool tip is to activate "pc control" on your own re-enforcement and this will allow you to have 40 units (half controlled by the pc) but 20 units for the enemi because the pc create a temporary faction during the fight
So in this scenario, if the vampire counts were to be all wiped out would the tomb kings be allowed to start bringing in more units (up to the max 40?) or since its a different factions units once they die off only more vampire count units would be allowed in, since there are none no new unit enters?
I think you put your unit on the ranged barricade and it replenishes ammo. I may be wrong, as I've never tested it, but have seen him talk about it on stream.
would you use the same strategy of defense if they had stegodons instead? I'm new and im trying to build stegodon stack (cuz i love stegodon) and I just want to know how to use them properly.
The same strat would have had a much better result with stegodons, especially with the engine of the god's ability. Keep them in a blob, use magic, and you can beat most armies you'll encounter in the campaign.
@@zulemaalderete5299 I had troubles winning battles when they had lots of archers. how should i deal with them? Like similar scenario but they had some melee to pin my stegadons and use archers from the back so I couldn't do much.
@@seungkim1170 Depends on what kind of stegodons you have. The engine of the gods varient is the best in my opinion and you can use their ability to get rid of the archers or infantry so you can get to the archers. The ancient stegadons have an artillery piece on their back so you can use that to deal damage to the archers while the enemy comes at you. Magics can work as well, archers have a tendency to stay still they're firing so that's when you should cast on them. The ability that spawns cold ones would also be very useful here, though you need to activate a rite for that
Tho i have told my co mate to recruit Ancient salamanders, that cuz of their range breathe attack, and that they do have infantry holding the line... i wouldnt imagine if someone thought it be viable doomstack xD
The Ancient Salamanders really suck now. I swear they were better in like every way when they first came out. I tried a Salamander stack as one of my first things in TWW3 to relive those memories and... oh no. What have they done to muh boys. I watched one actually lose to Dreadspears while in TWW2 I remember beating Blackguard with them. The suffering.
it would and it'd have been actually the better option but legend has always struggled with defensive siege garrisons fsr even back in wh2 if you actually look, kind of worst case scenario for salamanders right there having to sit on place and be in melee instead of hit and run or half of them sniping half meleeing single entities
You also have to take into account, that there were several strong lord in that battle necrophix after necrophix and a couple of zombie dragons, tho it might seem like priority should be to expend their ammo, it might also cause friendly fire tho i can see and i dont know why legend didnt target the Terrorgist and zombie dragons, as much as possible as early as possible, being that they do regen which is weaken with fire attacks I think main problem of a proper ancient salamander army is that, as oppose to stegadons or ancient stegadons ability to withstand several forms of attack, Salamanders are probobly also worse cuz their low health, smaller hit box, but still pretty large for melee units compare with health diffrence with stegadons I notable to add if the Sphinxes had been switch out with necrophix, i trully belive Legend would lost
That's just caching of assets into ram. Sure if you have a huge amount of ram you can cache the entire game but having a fast ssd you load in quickly at the start so you don't have to cache stuff. And it's not longer -> shorter load times. It's I have already loaded these assets in -> faster load times.
honestly, its these sieges that make me keep playing twwh2 i actually like sieges in 2, yea they are a bit samey, but at least they are predictable and pretty fun with the right kinds of armies, but in 3 they are just too much fiddling around with shit and worrying about supplies and towers etc. I wouldnt mind a bit of each type, and just less sieges overall but constant tower wars in twisty maps gets real old real fast.
I downloaded a mod that only lets you/AI place towers/barricades before the battle starts, using only the supplies you or the AI start with. It has made it a decent feature now instead of tower defense
They are truly terrible units. They have too little health, too short range, not enough range damage, horrible in melee, and get shot to pieces by enemy archers. Probly the worst unit of lizardmen.
You saying its stupid for a defensive position to be that not defensive - well I'd argue. Its a Piramid, something important, big structure. In history there were also places, cities that were inhabited even though it wasn't safe or there were important cities, structures that were built even though it would be hard to defend if needed, also mostly in history not many of the "designers" even thought about that kind of scenarios - only castles, some cities (but they were mostly castles that got really developed) and forts, military camps were built with that aspect in mind.
WH2: almost endless magic reserves. Often no need for normal troops WH3: Only 100 magic, can't depend on forever healing magic and can't stomp slow armies with just a flying wizard anymore
They need to make the second smaller square related to holding the other minor points and supplies, so that if you fall back to the final one, you don't instantly lose to ticket decay
100% agree
Isn't the consensus that TWW3 is too easy? So isn't this added challenge a good thing? To me it makes sense that you need to defend more more than just 1 square.
No, battles aren't too easy, it's the campaigns. If you are sieged by four armies, you cannot hold both squares at once with one army. A retreat mechanic from point 1 to 2 could be a good way to deal with it, rather than just having one capture point, so it still has relevance.
@@crispyquesadilla adding on to what sea turtles said, the AI is overly cautious in WH3. That can make the campaign boringly easy, because you can get away with too much. It can also make the battles frustratingly difficult, though, because the AI is a lot more likely to send overwhelming force when they do attack you. Especially when they attack your settlements.
Honestly they should just remove tickets.
The way it works in unwalled settlements is fine: lose all the points for ~5 seconds = lose the battle, but as long as you hold one you can keep fighting.
Not sure if anybody else noticed this but there are many towers on multiple maps that are obstructed from the choke points you want them firing into. For example on this map it's the 2 towers between the primary and centre defence point, the ones where legend kept asking himself "Why don't these feel like they're firing". They're firing, they're just firing straight into the big obelisks that are placed right in front of them obstructing them from firing into the centre capture point.
It’a honestly really awful how in a lot of sieges the major point is pretty well defendable, but the second most important one is usually completely open and not well defendable at all. This is even worse in minor sieges because the major point is the same as the previously mentioned second most important and you just can’t defend something that’s accessible from 4+ sides
I don't think in minor sieges you can even lose by tickets. It's only major ones. So the minor ones just provide buffs if some points are held.
@@AArmstrongDotOrg That is true, I meant more in terms of defendability. Since it does provide a pretty good buff it should be worth defending, but many times it's pretty much impossible
you can if you mod in the old school Rome 1 Hoplites! lmao
God, one of my favorite things to do after a big battle like this is to just take stock of the battlefield and look at the corpses. I just love the story it tells as where the biggest battles were and where lords and large monsters died.
i don't know why it hurts so much when one of the salamanders die
Because they are majestic creatures.
I hate that a bunch of settlements have impossible to defend designs too. At the very least, any major settlements should have a clear defensive position with a chokepoint that defends the primary victory point.
Yeah, i just wish it had a clear defense path. As well its near unfun playing against the ai when the main defensive point has 4 entrances, as they have incredible micro, and can seep through all the entrances. I just don't understand why you would design a base where you can't funnel them into a central point to then spam magic, or use archers to they're best effect.
Ancient Sal's are fantastic when used properly but a doomstack of them is just problems. They're incredible at arcing shots over troops and they're pretty fast for their damage, so getting them into a good position is usually pretty simple. I find I use them similar to Poison Wind Globadiers because of how well they will arc their shots and how fast they thin out groups of enemies.
Legend made this battle harder on himself by not using more of the salamander ammo and just melee charging them even when he had a ranged window. I don't think he's very used to using ancient sals, lol. They're basically just mobile flame cannons. A couple shots to chunk off a huge part of the unit's health, *then* run into melee to cleanup. They're a lot more effective against infantry, it's the hunting packs that are meant for single entities.
@@quickdraw6893 "this is just a tiny stegadon right? Right?" - him, probably
Never forget the nerf they took. they were never quite the same after.
Lord name Loom'pia, obviously made up by a dutch guy at Ca.
A loempia is a fried snack in the netherlands.
There are so many dutch names in the Lizardmen and Skaven. I particularly like Tyfusrat.
Dude it's called Lumpia and they are little fried egg rolls, the national food of the Philippines hahaha that's funny though that you call em that in the Netherlands, I love you silly Dutch and your funny sounding language
@@toasteddingus6925 yeah it's originally a Vietnamese snack, but it's been widely consumed here nowadays.
The reason I 'claimed' this lizardmen translation is because friq'andel, croq'et and some other snacks are all in the game. Frikandel is a uniquely dutch snack, but they are all common snacks over here, and loempia is not very common/known in most countries.
@@Olav_Hansen there's also Ratte Plet'ten as a lizardmen lord / hero name
Salamanders really don’t like siege defense. Speed is one of their greatest strength and they can’t use it. If this is field battle they can just shoot at stuff that are faster than them then run away and divide their army.
i stopped getting ancient salamanders unless they're with a fire slann, with a skink oracle for the earthbloods
so that his lore passive reduce fire resistance ontop of their flammable, it helps
The kindleflame passive from the Lore of Fire Slann makes the enemy weak to fire, not reduce their fire resistance. That’s better as it works on all units, not just those that have fire resistance.
@@maxpower3990 Weakness to fire and Fire resistance are the same stat, just worded differently. So something with 50% fire resistance will get their fire resistance reduced when they incur a fire weakness penalty. But yeah, weakness to fire also affects units with 0% fire resistance, giving them negative fire resistance making them take a significant amount more damage.
"Never control large army"
-Sun Tzu (the art of war)
I like salamanders I hope they get a buf in the future
I think they kinda did with the not rampage primal instinct
Not only salamanders but razordons also.
@@victuz true but ancient salamanders is what would go for most with a skink orical and skink cheif lord
I adore the umbral tide in Multiplayer but I struggle to find real value in the Ancient Sallies
Theyre entirely meant to be anti elite infantry, and will outrange guns and crossbows
@@kvltofsobek90 But are they THAT useful when their missiles are slow? I'm not a Warhammer player, so I'm not able to judge shit
I suspect that they are meant to be raidy hybrid units like medusas. You move them around and shoot enemy infantry in the back. And if you get caught they are still kind of OK in melee. They also have anti-large on their ranged attacks for some reason.
Ancient Salamanders were one of those units which were really good at the release of the DLC and got nerfed into oblivion after the MP community has complained on them (I think even they would say that the AS was nerfed too much).
@@dostayer3369
This
The unit was pretty good, but then MP complained and instead of just making the unit more expensive or something, they made the unit unusable garbage unless you're dedicated to it, performance be damned
I love that the Slann is called Loom'pia (Dutch for eggroll)
as always, you make a broken game work. Thank you for sticking through the mud...this mud is sticky though, so I understand you leaving streaming for some time. I appreciate everything you've done till now, Legend! :)
@LegendofTotalWar I would like to try this disaster battle. Can you please post a link to the saved file?
did he?
It's kinda disappointing that the walled cities didn't see a change with the IE release. Any poll I've seen about walled sieges has been very negative to them, right from WH3 launch. I really hope CA will put aside some manpower and go through all of those maps and remove that victory point, or at least change how the tickets are generated so that just holding the minor point can't outright win while the defender is holding the major one.
I was actually excited when I first saw them with the quest battle demo, the big problem is that all the cool abilities like the ammo replenishment, the healing, and the unit upgrades/unit spawns are unavailable in the regular siege battles which means that every siege breaks down into a slow meat grinder in front of maxed out towers with both sides sitting on a huge cache of unused supplies. There's no reward for the attacker capping points and that means no incentive to recap or hold points for the defender either. The worst part is that the two point thing makes bigger settlements harder to defend than the small ones. In my opinion they need to add those quest battle things to the regular sieges, and they need to make the garrison more dependent on what buildings are built in the settlement so that it's not every settlement has 6 infantry, 4 archers, and 2 cavalry. just grinding those units out under tower fire everywhere you go. It needs to be like oh there's a tier 3 cavalry building here so you'll be fighting 4-6 good cavalry, there's a barracks here, so you'll be fighting 4-6 good infantry, there's economic buildings here so you're fighting 4-6 chaff units. That's been my biggest gripe is the monotony of the garrisons and that we haven't gotten the cool shit from the quest siege in normal sieges.
I mean I think it’s fine, just the ticket loss should be to a minimum. They are positioned that way (I guess) because they effectively represent the main square which does give a huge advantage in holding it. Forward base camp, space to gather forces etc etc. it’s just basically from there a battle of attrition and that’s what it should be. So the timer should be there( even though I personally don’t like it) it should just be slower because you could effectively keep fighting back for days if not weeks in a fortified keep. That’s what they were designed to do. So year I guesstimate a 20 min capture ticket loss after losing the main square should be best
they're especially good when you have one or two in your army on high priority targets that are being tanked by some Saurus warriors
Ya, either remove the secondary point like you suggested, or at least give some special tower types for the internal towers on city maps (especially T4 and T5 walled cities). I'd put up with having to hold a crappy point in the middle of a Tomb King city if it meant my towers were stationary Caskets of Souls.
Very good on the eye. Really fun looking unit at least
couldnt help but laugh at the "god speed" to the 200 health salamander poor guy
Fire mage and an oracle so you have earth blood and kindle flame. Pretty sure salamanders do fire damage in melee yeah? I think the flaw in this army is not buffing the salamanders more with kindle flame.
Normally I wouldn't even bother with tier 3 Lizardmen towers. Tier 4 gives you the ray of light which inflicts blindness and splash damage.
glorious jank stacks here we come
I love watching you get absolutely buggered by the AI and still managing a solid win.
You can tell which faction has the strongest army because the battle music changes!?
I've only played Warhammer 2, and I basically only play HEs. I can tell you all variations of the Salamander units are OP AF against High Elves. their missiles do brutal damage, and seem to prevent the high elves from getting their arrows into the air as they keep stumbling from the impact. It honestly feels like there is no counter to them as HEs lol.
Flamespyre and Arcane Phoenixes and Dragon Princes all have 70% fire resistance in WH2, so those are the best units to use against Salamanders. Especially Phoenixes that are better in melee than Salamanders and can dodge their slow arcing shots to waste their ammo. Also, Nobles are anti-large and can get good fire resist items to deal with Salamanders.
Legend for President!
33:00 look at them go!!
Recapping enemy points in situations like this is valuable still. It decreases the momentum for the enemy.
Sallying out and using the speed for deafeat in dertail at the start might have been good
By which I mean run outside the walls with big groups of lizards and kill one set of units after the next
what a sick hold - great job
Squirrel tactics with ancient salamanders.
The secondary capture point should not just be slower. It should cap out at 50% capture value.
Really this was a viable doomstack in warhammer 2 where you could shoot from afar, then ball these guys up & give them all 60% physical resistance with flesh to stone. Now that flesh to stone is single target it has really nerfed the lore of life's utility. That & shield of thorns being reduced to one unit really sapped the lore of some diversity, but at the same time they made awakening of the wood and the dwellers below way more powerful which is nuts, because those spells were both already good damage dealers for their costs.
moderate mobility ranged weapon fire dmg.. Big hit box.. GL
Some like it hot... (seriously thought with regen flaming attacks work well)
Can you do a Grom the paunch playthrough in WH3 PLEASE PLEASE LEGEND
Imagine if this was Stegadons/Ancient Stegadons instead. Wouldn't even have made it into a video.
The final point should be the ONLY ONE for ticket decay, the minor cap point should just be a buff like it is in non-walled settlements, idk why CA does this shit I hate doing siege battles as the defender unless I have a 20 stack army sitting in one lmao
Salamander are quite viable as a doomstack in open ground
Wait, why does the vampire counts army come in to reinforce from the start even when you don't control large army?
Because the tomb king army and the vampire army are two separate factions, if I'm not mistaken ^^
I seem to recall that making it possible for them to show up despite that
@@Scarface39212 yes that's correct, if it's different factions, it's multiple 20 units armies. If it's the same faction, it's 1 big armie so only 20 can join. When outnumbered some times, a cool tip is to activate "pc control" on your own re-enforcement and this will allow you to have 40 units (half controlled by the pc) but 20 units for the enemi because the pc create a temporary faction during the fight
its 20 units per faction
By the title I took a guess that this was going to be rating your doomstack.
Finally someone did salamander doomstack
I wouldn't necessarily call it a doomstack, more like a doomed stack.
Thanks for the video
Very impressive
So in this scenario, if the vampire counts were to be all wiped out would the tomb kings be allowed to start bringing in more units (up to the max 40?) or since its a different factions units once they die off only more vampire count units would be allowed in, since there are none no new unit enters?
It's per faction.
Wait, there is a way to restore ammunition via the supplies mechanic? Can someone please let me know how?
I think you put your unit on the ranged barricade and it replenishes ammo. I may be wrong, as I've never tested it, but have seen him talk about it on stream.
@@MrAiirborne ill have to test it, thanks
@@MrAiirborne yes, exactly. You dock a ranged unit on the barricade and their ammo gets replenished. Repeat until ammo is fully restored.
would you use the same strategy of defense if they had stegodons instead? I'm new and im trying to build stegodon stack (cuz i love stegodon) and I just want to know how to use them properly.
It would arguably be better imo, more health, better fighters overall
The same strat would have had a much better result with stegodons, especially with the engine of the god's ability. Keep them in a blob, use magic, and you can beat most armies you'll encounter in the campaign.
@@gustavosanches3454 Exactly, most of the time the Salamanders were stuck in melee anyway.
@@zulemaalderete5299 I had troubles winning battles when they had lots of archers. how should i deal with them? Like similar scenario but they had some melee to pin my stegadons and use archers from the back so I couldn't do much.
@@seungkim1170 Depends on what kind of stegodons you have. The engine of the gods varient is the best in my opinion and you can use their ability to get rid of the archers or infantry so you can get to the archers. The ancient stegadons have an artillery piece on their back so you can use that to deal damage to the archers while the enemy comes at you. Magics can work as well, archers have a tendency to stay still they're firing so that's when you should cast on them. The ability that spawns cold ones would also be very useful here, though you need to activate a rite for that
32:30 SERPENTINE!
Cool！ wanted to watch this long time ago
tough fight, that was fun
Fuck yeah
They are dope asf so that helps. Better in wh2 imo
Hey Legend have you considered a new rating system of just thumbs up and thumbs down?
Tho i have told my co mate to recruit Ancient salamanders, that cuz of their range breathe attack, and that they do have infantry holding the line... i wouldnt imagine if someone thought it be viable doomstack xD
The Ancient Salamanders really suck now. I swear they were better in like every way when they first came out. I tried a Salamander stack as one of my first things in TWW3 to relive those memories and... oh no. What have they done to muh boys. I watched one actually lose to Dreadspears while in TWW2 I remember beating Blackguard with them. The suffering.
Lack of fire slann for fire weakness is dissapointing.
Salamanders are basically artillery... idk why anyone would doom stack them like this,, would need some heros or something to draw enemy attention.
‘Not at all’ it looks like.
wouldnt controlling large army make it 40 vs 60 instead of 20 vs 40? and giving you fodder allowing the salamanders to use their ammo?
it would and it'd have been actually the better option but legend has always struggled with defensive siege garrisons fsr even back in wh2 if you actually look, kind of worst case scenario for salamanders right there having to sit on place and be in melee instead of hit and run or half of them sniping half meleeing single entities
You also have to take into account, that there were several strong lord in that battle necrophix after necrophix and a couple of zombie dragons, tho it might seem like priority should be to expend their ammo, it might also cause friendly fire
tho i can see and i dont know why legend didnt target the Terrorgist and zombie dragons, as much as possible as early as possible, being that they do regen which is weaken with fire attacks
I think main problem of a proper ancient salamander army is that, as oppose to stegadons or ancient stegadons ability to withstand several forms of attack, Salamanders are probobly also worse cuz their low health, smaller hit box, but still pretty large for melee units compare with health diffrence with stegadons
I notable to add if the Sphinxes had been switch out with necrophix, i trully belive Legend would lost
is that a false swipe gaming reference ?
Load times are connected to how long you've had the game up prior to launching a game, the longer you play the shorter the load times.
That's just caching of assets into ram. Sure if you have a huge amount of ram you can cache the entire game but having a fast ssd you load in quickly at the start so you don't have to cache stuff. And it's not longer -> shorter load times. It's I have already loaded these assets in -> faster load times.
LOL, the lord name is loompia. is it fellow indonesian or malaysian?
He could win that last fight, he had Phoenix guard
This army looks like too much work. It needed some melee units so the AS can actually shoot without enough micro to cause carpal tunnel surgery
I bet if you did it again with controlling large armies no salamander would die.
honestly, its these sieges that make me keep playing twwh2 i actually like sieges in 2, yea they are a bit samey, but at least they are predictable and pretty fun with the right kinds of armies, but in 3 they are just too much fiddling around with shit and worrying about supplies and towers etc. I wouldnt mind a bit of each type, and just less sieges overall but constant tower wars in twisty maps gets real old real fast.
Agreed.
I downloaded a mod that only lets you/AI place towers/barricades before the battle starts, using only the supplies you or the AI start with. It has made it a decent feature now instead of tower defense
Saving your disaster doomstack? haha
They are truly terrible units. They have too little health, too short range, not enough range damage, horrible in melee, and get shot to pieces by enemy archers. Probly the worst unit of lizardmen.
they cute though
You saying its stupid for a defensive position to be that not defensive - well I'd argue. Its a Piramid, something important, big structure. In history there were also places, cities that were inhabited even though it wasn't safe or there were important cities, structures that were built even though it would be hard to defend if needed, also mostly in history not many of the "designers" even thought about that kind of scenarios - only castles, some cities (but they were mostly castles that got really developed) and forts, military camps were built with that aspect in mind.
But it's much harder to accept poorly defended settlements in a universe as hostile as Warhammer.
This is warhammer… do you know what world warhammer is in and what it’s like?
WH2: almost endless magic reserves. Often no need for normal troops
WH3: Only 100 magic, can't depend on forever healing magic and can't stomp slow armies with just a flying wizard anymore
Unless you are Kairos Fateweaver.
God I hate warhammer III still playing 2 as it's epic.