Register a SA Forums Account here!
JOINING THE SA FORUMS WILL REMOVE THIS BIG AD, THE ANNOYING UNDERLINED ADS, AND STUPID INTERSTITIAL ADS!!!

You can: log in, read the tech support FAQ, or request your lost password. This dumb message (and those ads) will appear on every screen until you register! Get rid of this crap by registering your own SA Forums Account and joining roughly 150,000 Goons, for the one-time price of $9.95! We charge money because it costs us money per month for bills, and since we don't believe in showing ads to our users, we try to make the money back through forum registrations.
 
  • Post
  • Reply
TheBeardyCleaver
Jan 9, 2019


For goblin fights I like to put my ranged guys which have decent ranged defence up front along with any shield lads and others that can dodge an arrow. That way the archers can counter snipe while the backline has a low-ish chance to get hit. Often this will draw out the skirmishers to try and get at the archers, and the backline pops in to cleave through using the front goblins as cover. Yes, your archers will take hits, but with bone attachments/unhold cloak and nimble, goblin arrows are like gnat bites. This is also fights where fencers shine, quite easily killing 3 per turn and causing routs.

A few kite shields are nice on exposed bros, since a 1h is enough to kill most gobbers in a couple of hits, and helps when getting the lines engaged.

Fabricated posted:

The worst thing about gobbos is being pissed off at archers enough to have some 2h guy charge in and base like 3 of them up- then out come the loving daggers and they literally never miss their bullshit 5% chance punctures.
Adrenaline or fencers are great for this. Charge in after waiting, pop adrenaline and blather them on the following turn. Hopefully you can kill/rout them or bring in a pike to finish it.

TheBeardyCleaver fucked around with this message at 21:32 on Oct 4, 2020

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

Night10194
Feb 13, 2012

We'll start,
like many good things,
with a bear.


Goblins loving hate fencers and qatal duelists as much as I hate goblin shamans. Which is a lot.

I know there are more dangerous enemies in the game, and Shamans are definitely deal-with-able. But there is no unit I hate more. Especially not after the Orc Crisis and having to fight 16 Orc Warriors and Warlord with a Shaman backing them up. The whole 'they can just decide to net 5 guys in formation' thing and 'if they don't do that, they make one trooper insanely useless and vulnerable for 3 turns' things are a challenge to deal with. Especially when advancing uphill.

TheBeardyCleaver
Jan 9, 2019


Shamans are probably the support unit that causes the most problems in a battle. I don't take bullseye, but every time I fight shamans I wish I did, just for a few more %chance to hit the gnarly fucker. Still, methodically killing your way there is as usual the better and more reliable way. I'll still take any decent potshot I can get though. Their morale is rather poo poo, and a some decent archer shots can send them running.

Night10194
Feb 13, 2012

We'll start,
like many good things,
with a bear.


I would not have won the huge orc fight if my archer hadn't gotten lucky and double 30 domed the Shaman on turn 3.

Shamans in fortifications are also extremely vulnerable to Swordlance and Gun, since they tend to line up in a cluster with the shooters and you can shoot through fairly easily with the gun's spread or just hack down the line.

800peepee51doodoo
Feb 28, 2001

Volute the swarth, trawl betwixt phonotic
Scoff the festune


TheBeardyCleaver posted:

I don't take bullseye, but every time I fight shamans I wish I did, just for a few more %chance to hit the gnarly fucker. Still, methodically killing your way there is as usual the better and more reliable way.

I read through that huge, comprehensive perk guide on steam and the author's discussion on Bullseye was the one weird standout to me. It may be confirmation bias on my part, but it seems like there are rarely opportunities to shoot at completely wide open, vulnerable targets so Bullseye feels like it has a lot of value to me. Usually the targets you want to hit are the ones hiding behind everyone else. If there are open targets, they usually have shields and armor so the hit chances are comparable to covered targets and if you do hit them, it's generally pretty weak. If the plan is to just cut through the line to get to enemy archers/arbalesters/necros, why even have archers? I'm not saying its necessarily wrong, but it feels wrong.

grill youre saelf
Jan 22, 2006
I use my real name, because I'm cool like that.


800peepee51doodoo posted:

I read through that huge, comprehensive perk guide on steam and the author's discussion on Bullseye was the one weird standout to me. It may be confirmation bias on my part, but it seems like there are rarely opportunities to shoot at completely wide open, vulnerable targets so Bullseye feels like it has a lot of value to me. Usually the targets you want to hit are the ones hiding behind everyone else. If there are open targets, they usually have shields and armor so the hit chances are comparable to covered targets and if you do hit them, it's generally pretty weak. If the plan is to just cut through the line to get to enemy archers/arbalesters/necros, why even have archers? I'm not saying its necessarily wrong, but it feels wrong.

I like to not take bullseye. If I'm shooting at the covered archers in the backrow I have a chance to proc overwhelm on multiple dudes

rideANDxORdie
Jun 10, 2010


The perk guide undersells bullseye a little, I find it extremely worthwhile for dedicated bow snipers as a lot of times what you really need these guys for is shooting high value targets from far away and while they're body blocked, so the 25% adds up a lot. Gunners and thrower specialists can easily get by without since most of the time you'll be firing these at targets merely 2 or 3 squares away

Night10194
Feb 13, 2012

We'll start,
like many good things,
with a bear.


Also the real risk on a necromancer is not and never has been raising dead weidergangers or fallen heroes. It's that possession spell. That's the dangerous part of them. Hitting them, even if you don't kill them outright, stops that.

vyelkin
Jan 2, 2011

Jozy loves scoring like a fat kid loves eating cake.



Night10194 posted:

Also the real risk on a necromancer is not and never has been raising dead weidergangers or fallen heroes. It's that possession spell. That's the dangerous part of them. Hitting them, even if you don't kill them outright, stops that.

Yeah exactly. I'll take Bullseye to shoot a necromancer not because he might raise two weidergangers, but because he might possess a Fallen Hero who then acts before all my guys and whacks somebody twice with a greataxe.

The Lord Bude
May 23, 2007

I'M DISAPPOINTED THAT CORTANA WILL BE A CIRCLE AND NOT THE ACTUAL SEXY WOMAN FROM THE GAME.


Instead of wasting a perk on bullseye; give your archers fast adaptation instead.

800peepee51doodoo
Feb 28, 2001

Volute the swarth, trawl betwixt phonotic
Scoff the festune


^^^I'm not sure if the math works out in your favor with FA but maybe?

rideANDxORdie posted:

The perk guide undersells bullseye a little, I find it extremely worthwhile for dedicated bow snipers as a lot of times what you really need these guys for is shooting high value targets from far away and while they're body blocked, so the 25% adds up a lot. Gunners and thrower specialists can easily get by without since most of the time you'll be firing these at targets merely 2 or 3 squares away

I think so too, which is why I thought it was a bit weird. Its something that would be hard to calculate directly with a simulation, too, so its just down to opinion and playstyle I think. One thing I was thinking is that if you only consider a single archer then the argument makes more sense but I usually try to have at least three archers in my backline for most situations. Focusing three archers on a blocked target significantly increases your chances to hit and Bullseye on all three makes a big difference there. If you have three archers taking two 20% shots each, the chance to hit goes up to almost 75% that at least one will connect. Without Bullseye it drops to about 50%, which is significant. Archers aren't generally perk starved either so its just free aim unless you're doing a specific type of build that needs a bunch of non-standard perks. I kind of wonder if that guide author is just a bit contrarian because he also had some hot takes about rotation not being necessary if you just, you know, play good

800peepee51doodoo fucked around with this message at 02:32 on Oct 5, 2020

Broken Cog
Dec 28, 2009

We're all friends here


The Lord Bude posted:

Instead of wasting a perk on bullseye; give your archers fast adaptation instead.

That really doesn't help hitting targets behind cover/shielded frontline, since IIRC a hit against a shield or an environmental object counts as as "hit" so it resets the FA modifier. I would actually strongly advice against using FA on archers because of this.

Palcontent
Mar 23, 2010



800peepee51doodoo posted:

I kind of wonder if that guide author is just a bit contrarian because he also had some hot takes about rotation not being necessary if you just, you know, play good

Ehh, I think he's right about that. If you play perfectly you should never need it, but I can't play perfectly so I still put it on 2-3 tanky bros. To my surprise I haven't had any trouble rescuing people when necessary, and it frees up a lot of perk points across your offensive brothers.

The Lord Bude
May 23, 2007

I'M DISAPPOINTED THAT CORTANA WILL BE A CIRCLE AND NOT THE ACTUAL SEXY WOMAN FROM THE GAME.


Broken Cog posted:

That really doesn't help hitting targets behind cover/shielded frontline, since IIRC a hit against a shield or an environmental object counts as as "hit" so it resets the FA modifier. I would actually strongly advice against using FA on archers because of this.

A shield does not count as a hit. A hit that scatters and hits a different hex is though.

FA significantly improves your overall hit rate with archers. Bullseye is bad because you shouldnít be trying to hit blocked targets; itís a waste of time. Aim at the guy standing in front instead. Having your archers effectively doing nothing for half a dozen rounds because theyíre trying to snipe a necromancer or a shaman is dumb when you could have been using those turns to actually kill things and bring you closer to winning. (Shamans will sometimes stand in the open; in which case shoot away) With goblins in particular if you kill some of them youíll cause morale drops which snowball.

When you take bullseye you still have an extra 50% chance to miss - and thatís additive. It doesnít just cut your chance in half it reduces the percentage by 50. If you had a 75% chance of hitting a target in the open; even with bullseye youíll only have a 25% chance of hitting it under cover.

And goblins have high rdef; so even in the open you were never going to have a really high chance to hit guys down the back. Fast adaptation makes a big difference and if you miss the first quick shot you usually hit on the second.

Iíd also suggest that you donít necessarily need to be aiming at the back line - a good archer can one shot goblins when killing frenzy is up; use the archers to pick off the medium range ones that you have a high chance of hitting. Morale failures will take care of the rest.

Goblin archers do gently caress all damage to bros with nimble or battle forged bros with additional fur padding. Just ignore them. I never put a single point into rdef on a front liner; and I never take back liners past about 12 or so; its never been an issue.

Side note: I have a suspicion the AI doesnít factor shields into the equation when deciding which front liner to target with arrows - in my last game none of the front liners had more than whatever rdef they started with but goblin archers would always target this one shield bro that had the lowest rdef without a shield; but whom Iíd given a named shield with 30 rdef.

Second side note: goblin champions will often spawn with named goblin bows which always seem to have high hit bonuses - you end up picking up bows with +13% chance to hit or some poo poo. Since goblins have such low health you could if you wanted give these bows to your archers when fighting goblins.

Palcontent
Mar 23, 2010




Mostly agreed about bullseye, but I'm pretty sure the penalty is multiplicative.

Personally I've sidestepped the whole question by never making pure archers anymore.

Palcontent fucked around with this message at 03:04 on Oct 5, 2020

Broken Cog
Dec 28, 2009

We're all friends here


Absolutely disagree on not being worth trying to hit blocked targets, as they are usually high value. For example, with Bullseye, you can get hit chances on covered necromancers up to 40-50% with aimed shot, which can be tremendous value since with warbows they can go down in 2 bodyshots and you can get them out by turn 2 or 3 if you're lucky. And as others have mentioned, hitting them breaks possession. It's also great for taking out Hexen.

Depends on what you prefer your archers to do really. Bullseye for priority target sniping, FA for more efficient spamming I guess.

800peepee51doodoo
Feb 28, 2001

Volute the swarth, trawl betwixt phonotic
Scoff the festune


Palcontent posted:

Ehh, I think he's right about that. If you play perfectly you should never need it, but I can't play perfectly so I still put it on 2-3 tanky bros. To my surprise I haven't had any trouble rescuing people when necessary, and it frees up a lot of perk points across your offensive brothers.

Well, right. You can play a no perk challenge run and beat the monolith if you're good enough. I mean, I don't take rotation on every bro either but I try to make sure that I have enough to get people out of trouble or to alley-oop 2handers into an attack position. I think rotation is arguably one of, if not the, strongest perk in the game depending on how its used. That part of the guide just kind of felt like a low key flex


The Lord Bude posted:

When you take bullseye you still have an extra 50% chance to miss - and thatís additive. It doesnít just cut your chance in half it reduces the percentage by 50. If you had a 75% chance of hitting a target in the open; even with bullseye youíll only have a 25% chance of hitting it under cover.

Pretty sure that's not true. Wiki has it as multiplicative. I'll check it out next time I play, though.

One thing I couldn't find info on is where FA is positioned in the to-hit calculation. It would be significantly stronger if it were added post block reduction but would be negligible if it was included before. I will disagree with you on the "just shoot whatever" philosophy though since plinking arrows at shielded, armored targets is less useful than shooting at vulnerable, high value targets even with the reduction from cover imo. Also, I'll reiterate that archers aren't perk starved so there's no lost opportunity cost for picking up Bullseye and it can be a significant advantage in a lot of situations.

edit: Actually found how FA is calculated - I somehow missed it when I was looking before:

perk guide posted:

Mechanically it adds to Skill, even though your stat card won't show it. This occurs before things like Morale, Lone Wolf, Nightime, Injuries, etc., meaning those effects will modify the stack value up/down from the base 10% yield.

So, its not a flat +10% added to the final to-hit chance.

800peepee51doodoo fucked around with this message at 03:28 on Oct 5, 2020

The Lord Bude
May 23, 2007

I'M DISAPPOINTED THAT CORTANA WILL BE A CIRCLE AND NOT THE ACTUAL SEXY WOMAN FROM THE GAME.


Broken Cog posted:

Absolutely disagree on not being worth trying to hit blocked targets, as they are usually high value. For example, with Bullseye, you can get hit chances on covered necromancers up to 40-50% with aimed shot, which can be tremendous value since with warbows they can go down in 2 bodyshots and you can get them out by turn 2 or 3 if you're lucky. And as others have mentioned, hitting them breaks possession. It's also great for taking out Hexen.

Depends on what you prefer your archers to do really. Bullseye for priority target sniping, FA for more efficient spamming I guess.

Iíll concede the point on hexen; you certainly want to snipe them. But I disagree strongly on necromancers. For the record I used to take bullseye as well and try to snipe necros. In my last game I tried without, took fast adaptation instead; and realised how much better it was. I also didnít have an archer till relatively late - only gunners and javelins; and that made me realise you donít need to waste time sniping necros. Zombies arenít difficult opponents and you can get a guy in melee range of the necromancer quickly enough. Killing a few more zombies in the mean time isnít that big of a deal. God knows the new recruits could do with the target practice anyway.

Edit: I was wrong, bullseye is multiplicative. I still donít like it.

The Lord Bude fucked around with this message at 03:39 on Oct 5, 2020

The Lord Bude
May 23, 2007

I'M DISAPPOINTED THAT CORTANA WILL BE A CIRCLE AND NOT THE ACTUAL SEXY WOMAN FROM THE GAME.


On perks; I give archers the following (not necessarily in this order):

Student
Fast adaptation
Crippling strikes
Executioner
Bow mastery
Footwork
Nimble
Berserk
Killing frenzy
Recover
Gifted or colossus depending on the starting stats of the bro.

I really donít want to cut any of those. Possibly I could cut recover but I do tend to use it - 3 quick shots per turn add up - and if i did cut it Iíd be more likely to take pathfinder than bullseye.

WarpedLichen
Aug 14, 2008


If you're not sniping priority targets with archers why did you even bring archers?

I feel like the main thing with archers for me is that with bullseye, you get ~50% shots on necros/hexen/goblin shaman whereas if you don't have bullseye you're taking ~50% shots on dudes with shields. If I'm hitting shielded dudes I would rather just have another polearm guy who's not costing me ammo. I have tried a dedicated thrower and he probably doesn't need bullseye, but he burns through ammo fast and I'm not sure if he's worth it compared to a polearm guy.

Palcontent
Mar 23, 2010



Archers/throwers have some of the highest damage potential in the game, and they can focus fire to start killing multiple enemies from round one. If there are no unshielded targets then you don't really need archers, but it also doesn't matter because shielded enemies are harmless and the fight's trivial anyway. IMO late game hexen are the only difficult fights made much easier by sniping high value targets, but aren't important enough to warrant a dedicated perk. OTOH southern armies with a lot of gunners might be another use case for bullseye, which would make it more valuable.

The Lord Bude
May 23, 2007

I'M DISAPPOINTED THAT CORTANA WILL BE A CIRCLE AND NOT THE ACTUAL SEXY WOMAN FROM THE GAME.


I build my archers/throwers for pure damage. I tried some new strategies in my last run, and the key things I've learned are that:

1. Archers are obviously really good, but I was overvaluing them and not using them as efficiently as I should have. I used to focus on sniping archers/necros/shamans/overseers, but now I do a lot less of that. In the general sense I've come to believe quite strongly that it's better to just kill things as quickly as possible than it is to spend time trying to hit a hard target.
2. I was seriously undervaluing throwing javelins, and they are very often better than archers.

There's no hard and fast rule of always do this or never do that. Often you will be able to shoot at archers/shaman/etc that are out in the open. Other times you won't and you'll attack other targets. Guys with polearms are very high priority targets for example. Sometimes you just attack a target even if they have a shield. If your archers/throwers are at endgame with ratk in the 90s or even high 80s you will still hit a good proportion of the time. Apart from hexen which are a must kill asap target the main thing is that you're doing as much damage per turn as possible.

For me the main distinction is armour. When you factor in the damage bonus for aiming at a target 2 tiles away (which is what you're doing the vast majority of the time with a thrower) Heavy Javelins and Warbows do exactly the same amount of raw damage, the difference is in Armour penetration capability. If you're fighting lightly armoured opponents, you take bows. If you're fighting heavily armoured opponents, you take javelins. If you're fighting ancient dead, you take throwing axes. A lot of the time I'll take 2 of one and one of the other; other times I take either 2 archers or two throwers and have a third polearm.

Against goblins I find if you just take as many ranged attackers as you put on the field it really doesn't matter if they root you - their melee will still come to you, and you can still pick them off just as well with your ranged attackers. The roots slow things down a bit but they aren't the hugest problem. If your melee guys are spread out a bit and your ranged attackers are all clustered together the shaman will often root the archers. Alternatively fight the goblins at night - the shamans will spend their time casting night vision on the archers instead of rooting you.

TheBeardyCleaver
Jan 9, 2019


I used to have bullseye snipers as well, and sure, sniping things is both fun and useful. I've just (like Bude) found it far more efficient to kill things real fast than trying to get fancy (and I like fancy builds). Instead of bullseye I will now take an additional weapon spec(usually throwing) for the extra killing power. Who cares if a shaman roots you when all his friends are dead?

The Lord Bude
May 23, 2007

I'M DISAPPOINTED THAT CORTANA WILL BE A CIRCLE AND NOT THE ACTUAL SEXY WOMAN FROM THE GAME.


If I was playing one of the starts that restricts you to 12 men Iíd do that too - Iíd have a hybrid archer/thrower; but otherwise Iíd rather build seperate bros so I can tailor the perks.

TheBeardyCleaver
Jan 9, 2019


Sure, a specialist will always beat the jack of many trades, so I'm not advising that people always do this. Just making a point about there being a good many perks that are better to take than bullseye. If you really enjoy sniping though, go for it! I just find it to be a bit of a trap. But a trap is not that much of a trap if you go into it knowingly?

As far as rotation goes, yes you don't need it if you're a master chess player who can think 20 moves ahead (or probably even 2 turns), but it is nice for flexibility and peace of mind. HOWEVER, where it really shines is when you rotate people into place to be able to focus fire down a priority target, like a chosen hammerer, before he can get off that sure fire injury strike. Adrenaline and rotate can pull some nasty tricks here to turn a battle pretty quick. Edit: this is also where recover becomes better, as you can spike damage at a high cost and then spend a turn to do what it says on the tin.

TheBeardyCleaver fucked around with this message at 07:02 on Oct 5, 2020

Tin Tim
Jun 4, 2012

Live by the pun - Die by the pun


The Lord Bude posted:

On perks; I give archers the following (not necessarily in this order):

Student
Fast adaptation
Crippling strikes
Executioner
Bow mastery
Footwork
Nimble
Berserk
Killing frenzy
Recover
Gifted or colossus depending on the starting stats of the bro.

I really donít want to cut any of those. Possibly I could cut recover but I do tend to use it - 3 quick shots per turn add up - and if i did cut it Iíd be more likely to take pathfinder than bullseye.
Isn't crippling strike absoulte rear end for the player? Like the effect is so minor since wounds don't matter when targets die a round or two later(or even on the same turn since you said you want archers to kill asap) and you also still have to rng into a wound that actually would make a meaningful difference. Easy replace for bullsye imo since pathfinder is also super weak as a perk. It never really matters outside of fringe cases and the few fights you're forced to take in swamp during your campaign. Also recover is real good but it's less noticeable on archers until you hit serious fights with 20+ enemies

The discussion between FA and BE is interesting but I feel like people focus too much on sniping casters when explaining why they pick BE. Yes that is a thing that you sometimes do but usually it's better to thin the ranks faster and then be able to charge the casters. For me the value of BE comes from having comfortable chances to quick shot pikes and 2h users that creep towards your line with a shield or other body in front of them. Or doing the same when they can use some terrain cover during their approach. Someone out there probably crunched the numbers between the two perks for such a scenario but to me BE is the solid choice that will "always" apply while FA is fickle since you lose the stack on scatter and on hitting blocking terrain

TheBeardyCleaver posted:

As far as rotation goes, yes you don't need it if you're a master chess player who can think 20 moves ahead (or probably even 2 turns), but it is nice for flexibility and peace of mind.
Rotation saves lives. Pick it it on everyone that stands in the front and never look back. Even if you're a god tier strategiest you will eventually see your dudes eat an unlucky pike, bolt, 2h to their health pool and then they're dead if you can't quickly dig them out of their spot. Or you just use it to save the guy who has been tanking five orcs on your flank for the last ten rounds and can't tank any longer. There's also some nice utillity with it where you use it to rotate a 2h to the front, have them hit and rotate back the shield guy to tank. It's a stamina burn but that's why you run recover. Honestly can't see myself ever not running rotate on the front because you can never really plan in such a way that your few rotate guys will always be in the right spot to save the dying brother

Tin Tim fucked around with this message at 11:51 on Oct 5, 2020

The Lord Bude
May 23, 2007

I'M DISAPPOINTED THAT CORTANA WILL BE A CIRCLE AND NOT THE ACTUAL SEXY WOMAN FROM THE GAME.


Tin Tim posted:

Isn't crippling strike absoulte rear end for the player? Like the effect is so minor since wounds don't matter when targets die a round or two later(or even on the same turn since you said you want archers to kill asap) and you also still have to rng into a wound that actually would make a meaningful difference. Easy replace for bullsye imo since pathfinder is also super weak as a perk. It never really matters outside of fringe cases and the few fights you're forced to take in swamp during your campaign. Also recover is real good but it's less noticeable on archers until you hit serious fights with 20+ enemies

The discussion between FA and BE is interesting but I feel like people focus too much on sniping casters when explaining why they pick BE. Yes that is a thing that you sometimes do but usually it's better to thin the ranks faster and then be able to charge the casters. For me the value of BE comes from having comfortable chances to quick shot pikes and 2h users that creep towards your line with a shield or other body in front of them. Or doing the same when they can use some terrain cover during their approach. Someone out there probably crunched the numbers between the two perks for such a scenario but to me BE is the solid choice that will "always" apply while FA is fickle since you lose the stack on scatter and on hitting blocking terrain

Rotation saves lives. Pick it it on everyone that stands in the front and never look back. Even if you're a god tier strategiest you will eventually see your dudes eat an unlucky pike, bolt, 2h to their health pool and then they're dead if you can't quickly dig them out of their spot. Or you just use it to save the guy who has been tanking five orcs on your flank for the last ten rounds and can't tank any longer. There's also some nice utillity with it where you use it to rotate a 2h to the front, have them hit and rotate back the shield guy to tank. It's a stamina burn but that's why you run recover. Honestly can't see myself ever not running rotate on the front because you can never really plan in such a way that your few rotate guys will always be in the right spot to save the dying brother

It's expendable, but it does help - I only have room for it on throwers and archers. On throwers, you're often attacking stuff like orc warriors or barbarian chosen. Crippling strikes pretty much means you give them an injury on the first or (with orcs) the second attack. They have big health pools so the injury does work. plus the damage bonus from executioner is substantial and crippling strikes helps to activate it. On archers it's more debateable since you're more likely to be hitting things with smaller health pools but I still like it. You injure on the first shot, kill them on the second shot with the extra damage. I used to take it on polearms but now I only take executioner, so that I can fit in both overwhelm and fearsome.

Crippling strikes is definitely a personal choice of mine though and not by any means an essential perk.

I used to use bullseye, in the last game for the first time I cut it in favour of fast adaptation and I definitely prefer FA. even the best archers miss quite a bit and FA reduces misses considerably. You could take both of course but if you've only got room for one or the other I definitely think FA does more work.

I would actually argue that Recover isn't nearly as good as most people think it is, EXCEPT on archers and some other builds - you very rarely use it, and often on a melee bro once you run out of stamina (and I invest very heavily in stamina) you're better off mathematically switching to the single target attack (which does more damage than the AOE in any case) than you are wasting a turn on recover. I cut recover in favour of pathfinder on my 2handers and so far I'm not regretting it.

Where recover is good is:

Archers and throwers (although I can't fit it in my throwing build) because you often attack 3 times per turn, and they do so much damage; plus you burn through fatigue really fast.

Duellists, particularly if you're using a heavy orc weapon.

With these two archetypes because they only use 4 ap per attack you can attack once to kill an enemy, get the 4 ap back from beserk, and then use recover on the same turn.

Polearms - The warscythe does a lot of work; it's easier to deploy the AoE so you tend to use it more and you often do it twice per turn; and they don't need as many perks as frontline 2handers so it's easier to fit recover in.

The Lord Bude fucked around with this message at 12:29 on Oct 5, 2020

Tin Tim
Jun 4, 2012

Live by the pun - Die by the pun


The Lord Bude posted:

I would actually argue that Recover isn't nearly as good as most people think it is, EXCEPT on archers and some other builds - you very rarely use it, and often on a melee bro once you run out of stamina (and I invest very heavily in stamina) you're better off mathematically switching to the single target attack (which does more damage than the AOE in any case) than you are wasting a turn on recover. I cut recover in favour of pathfinder on my 2handers and so far I'm not regretting it.
I actually find myself using recover in almost every fight that's bigger than like a random group of raiders. I too invest in stamina on almost every level and only skip once or twice if I get a poo poo roll and have to feed a few rolls into health/res. Recover comes into play for me on my 2h brothers and tanks more than any other build but those dudes tend to need it to push on halfway during the fight. It mainly shines against large zombo groups or orcs/unholds/chosen where your tanks have to keep indom and taunt up a lot. There's a little trick with adrenaline where you pop it on a tank that's getting close to fatigued to have them start first and pop indom+taunt so that the others brothers around them can recover and then push next turn when the tank then recovers. Archers have already been mentioned but I find that when you're like halfway through your second quiver is where you can run out of stam for aimed shots so that's when recover does work. There are deffo a lot of fights where recover isn't needed(especially against average human groups) but I find it to be one of those toolkit perks that I always regret not having when I think I can get by without it

Night10194
Feb 13, 2012

We'll start,
like many good things,
with a bear.


I almost never need Recover. It's very much my 'I'd rather have something that makes sure they're dead faster than something to use if this drags out' skill.

E: You know, I thought some of the 3 skulls I was taking seemed way too drat easy. The patch today fixes 'some locations needing to be destroyed for contract not generating the proper defenders'.

Night10194 fucked around with this message at 14:09 on Oct 5, 2020

Moonshine Rhyme
Mar 26, 2010

Hate Hate Hate Hate Hate

Just finished my second holy war, never working for the north again. Southerners are a way bigger pain in the butt to fight, it seems like conscripts just hold up better than foot men and assassins are a much bigger nuisance than any of the special units the north has

Fabricated
Apr 9, 2007

Living the Dream


Moonshine Rhyme posted:

Just finished my second holy war, never working for the north again. Southerners are a way bigger pain in the butt to fight, it seems like conscripts just hold up better than foot men and assassins are a much bigger nuisance than any of the special units the north has
I was punished for being a cheat by picking a Barbarian start with Noble War as my first crisis so I could do whatever I wanted and get a free reset after the war. I spent a ton of time in the south and got in very good with the one noble house that wasn't pissed off at me at the start. Then right after it a holy war starts.

The Lord Bude
May 23, 2007

I'M DISAPPOINTED THAT CORTANA WILL BE A CIRCLE AND NOT THE ACTUAL SEXY WOMAN FROM THE GAME.


I feel like you give up too much siding with the south in the Holy War. Southern armies are a good source of gear you'd otherwise struggle to get like assassin's Armour and headpiece which have better durability than anything else that fits within the 15 stamina nimble limit.

TheBeardyCleaver
Jan 9, 2019


The Lord Bude posted:

Where recover is good is:

Archers and throwers (although I can't fit it in my throwing build) because you often attack 3 times per turn, and they do so much damage; plus you burn through fatigue really fast.

Duellists, particularly if you're using a heavy orc weapon.

With these two archetypes because they only use 4 ap per attack you can attack once to kill an enemy, get the 4 ap back from beserk, and then use recover on the same turn.

Polearms - The warscythe does a lot of work; it's easier to deploy the AoE so you tend to use it more and you often do it twice per turn; and they don't need as many perks as frontline 2handers so it's easier to fit recover in.

This is pretty much where I put recover as well. On archer/throwers I have to choose between footwork/pathfinder and this though, and I'm not sure what I like best yet. It really depends on the fight.

As far as rotation goes I've also put it on my one shield tank, my battleforged swordlancer, and my bardiche. The latter just because i wanted one more rotator to switch in. I find that 3 is enough to pull arse out of fire, but variance of mileage and all that. It's a very nice perk though, and I haven't really regretted it when taken.

Yet another edit: about to come up on a holy war as fourth crisis, and haven't done one yet. Anyone have an opinion on what's best to side with when you're well geared and moneyed? I suppose fighting the north is more profitable in the sale of salvage, but what about champion stuff? Not sure if there are many champions on the spawned armies though. What about reputation hits? I assume the opposing faction gets cold status when it's done?

TheBeardyCleaver fucked around with this message at 22:12 on Oct 5, 2020

Toozler
Jan 12, 2012



The Lord Bude posted:

On perks; I give archers the following (not necessarily in this order):

Student
Fast adaptation
Crippling strikes
Executioner
Bow mastery
Footwork
Nimble
Berserk
Killing frenzy
Recover
Gifted or colossus depending on the starting stats of the bro.

I really donít want to cut any of those. Possibly I could cut recover but I do tend to use it - 3 quick shots per turn add up - and if i did cut it Iíd be more likely to take pathfinder than bullseye.

Rofl. If you're a new player please don't follow anything posted by above

e: Sorry, too crass. I'm all for playing how you want to and having fun, but don't post lists like this as the 'true archer build' or whatever because there's some serious garbo in there

Toozler fucked around with this message at 23:38 on Oct 5, 2020

800peepee51doodoo
Feb 28, 2001

Volute the swarth, trawl betwixt phonotic
Scoff the festune


That is an...interesting...archer build for sure. I'm still not convinced that CS+EX is useful in enough cases to warrant the perks, especially with a bow spec'd archer. Heavy javs maybe, but bows don't have enough armor pen to make it worthwhile on the really scary health pools, I don't think. I haven't tried it though, so I'm not going to try to make a declarative statement about it one way or another. Its certainly not going to help with goblins, though. I would 1000% take gifted over FA. Gifted is strong af.

One thing I have been doing in the new expansion is auto-picking Colossus on literally everyone. New recruit has good stats/stars? Student->Colossus->[build plan]. Bad stats? Colossus->Gifted->FA->[probably dead by now]. There aren't many cases where you're gonna be like, "I think this bro has too many hit points". The way it scales with Nimble is insane and it's added protection from the big, armor penetrating attacks for BF bros. The reduction in wounds is huge, too, and it makes Gifted better. I'm surprised to see some folks not putting it into their builds.


TheBeardyCleaver posted:

This is pretty much where I put recover as well. On archer/throwers I have to choose between footwork/pathfinder and this though, and I'm not sure what I like best yet. It really depends on the fight.

That's super interesting - I can't imagine an archer without recover. Berserk is strong and bowshots are fat intensive even with the spec.

The Lord Bude
May 23, 2007

I'M DISAPPOINTED THAT CORTANA WILL BE A CIRCLE AND NOT THE ACTUAL SEXY WOMAN FROM THE GAME.


I mean; I have gifted in the list; it is in fact super good. I do take it second; I was just being lazy when I wrote the list and didnít remember it till the end. I happily admit that crippling strikes isnít the flashiest perk but Iím all about maximising damage of my archers and I donít have a great many useful alternative options. As I said; I donít take bullseye any more because I realised it isnít getting much use; and my testing has shown that FA significantly increases the consistency of hits which in turn improves damage.

Also: saying crippling strikes is bad because archers have low armour pen is staggeringly dumb. If a bro has low armour pen crippling strikes becomes more useful because they need the extra help to cause injury. Again however; Iím well aware itís the least impactful perk but there really isnít a better option.

As for colossus I always take it on front liners but I usually donít on back liners because I can get to my desired hp target without it unless their starting hp is super bad. you raise attack and stamina every turn; you take resolve to 50 ish; and after that thereís nothing really to do with your stats but raise health every turn; my archers usually end up in the high 70s or low 80s. Yes colossus is really good but there is still a point where you donít really need more health.

TheBeardyCleaver
Jan 9, 2019


I need to look at the numbers on CS again. Haven't really been paying attention to injuries properly, but I have executioner on a couple of guys since they didn't really need gifted or an extra weapon (yes, i know most bros could do benefit from a polearm in the pocket).

Been giving the lads a perk every 5 veteran levels now to test things, may try to see if CS/EX will give them that extra edge. Won't do anything against Skellington&Gobber, but still interesting. I try to keep my core builds to level 11 and just add the fluff in veterancy to keep things in the vicinity of honest, and this may be a thing that isn't strictly needed to function, but nice to have.

Editorial:

800peepee51doodoo posted:

That's super interesting - I can't imagine an archer without recover. Berserk is strong and bowshots are fat intensive even with the spec.
It's great in long fights and on archers with less than stellar stamina, but for 140 Sta archers in a regular fight there's no need for it. For longer fights, by the time they need it the lines tend to be so jumbled that said archer have a hard time not hitting friendlies and can regain some Sta for a potshot while getting into position, especially with pathfinder. I won't claim that it's really ever wrong to take on an archer though, it's a valuable perk

TheBeardyCleaver fucked around with this message at 13:13 on Oct 6, 2020

Tin Tim
Jun 4, 2012

Live by the pun - Die by the pun


One important thing for the recover discussion is also what difficulty you play on I think. If you just play for casual fun then it's likely that you don't really need it because the game rarely throws large enough groups to fight at you(outside of zombo hordes). But if you're playing on higher difficulty settings then I have a hard time seeing how you get through 20+ gobbos/orcs/ancient undead regularly without popping at least a few recovers after ten turns of constant combat

800peepee51doodoo posted:

One thing I have been doing in the new expansion is auto-picking Colossus on literally everyone.
With the increase in armor pen attacks the perk deffo has raised in value, even before the new dlc. Archers/hybrids don't need it imo but everyone else is a canidate. I think you pick between gifted/colossus depending on the starting health pool. If two or maybe three good rolls can get you to your target range then get gifted but otherwise yeah beef it up.

TheBeardyCleaver posted:

This is pretty much where I put recover as well. On archer/throwers I have to choose between footwork/pathfinder and this though, and I'm not sure what I like best yet. It really depends on the fight.
Pathfinder is a waste outside of that stam neutral 2h build, don't pick it. The effect is miniscule and almost never ever makes a difference. You're picking a perk that does nothing in nine out of ten fights only to have it do a tiny bit in that tenth fight. It's a waste. Footwork also falls into the same category but I understand why some people pick it. However once you understand how to play the game its value plummets hard for archers/hybrids. With indom on your front the enemies will never push into your backline. And with tanks on the sides you can tie up like five enemies with each of them to stop them from flanking. The rest comes down to smart positioning and anticipating how the next round will go. It's a crutch perk for new players imo and should be ignored once you got a handle on the combat. The only build I run it on is my banner because I build him to be a bit tanky for emergencies so that he can rotate in, take a mean hit and step away next round.

TheBeardyCleaver posted:

I need to look at the numbers on CS again. Haven't really been paying attention to injuries properly, but I have executioner on a couple of guys since they didn't really need gifted or an extra weapon (yes, i know most bros could do benefit from a polearm in the pocket).
I'm generally not a fan of the executioner/CS combo but saying that somebody doesn't need gifted really rubs me the wrong way. Bigger numbers are everything in this game

The Lord Bude posted:

As for colossus I always take it on front liners but I usually don’t on back liners because I can get to my desired hp target without it unless their starting hp is super bad. you raise attack and stamina every turn; you take resolve to 50 ish; and after that there’s nothing really to do with your stats but raise health every turn; my archers usually end up in the high 70s or low 80s. Yes colossus is really good but there is still a point where you don’t really need more health.
Uhh back line doesn't need resolve. Like not at all. All my back line(except for the banner obviously) is at like 32 and I'm on the way to my second crisis in the run. Resolve is a waste on them and seriously not worth the points if you just do it for the confident morale start. Archers get Ratt/def and stamina every level with a few dips to get their hp to 60. With nimble that has always been enough for me. I mean you can say "oh but what about when that sneaky orc beserker manages to jump around your flank??" but my reply would be that it's your own fault for letting it happen and not having someone to rotate/taunt for them.

The Lord Bude posted:

Also: saying crippling strikes is bad because archers have low armour pen is staggeringly dumb. If a bro has low armour pen crippling strikes becomes more useful because they need the extra help to cause injury. Again however; I’m well aware it’s the least impactful perk but there really isn’t a better option.
I don't have the numbers available but I would assume that if you have low armor pen then you also don't do enough health damage to trigger wounds even with the bonus?

Tin Tim fucked around with this message at 17:36 on Oct 6, 2020

800peepee51doodoo
Feb 28, 2001

Volute the swarth, trawl betwixt phonotic
Scoff the festune


The Lord Bude posted:

Also: saying crippling strikes is bad because archers have low armour pen is staggeringly dumb. If a bro has low armour pen crippling strikes becomes more useful because they need the extra help to cause injury. Again however; Iím well aware itís the least impactful perk but there really isnít a better option.

I mean, I understand how the perk works. Its more of a question of why you would be using archers in a Chosen/Orc fight in the first place. Again, maybe a throwing spec for the big damage increase at short range but I find it hard to see how bows help against Orc Warriors and the like. Not opposed to being shown different though!


Tin Tim posted:

Pathfinder is a waste outside of that stam neutral 2h build, don't pick it.

This has been my biggest change in playstyle lately, but in the opposite direction. I never ever took Pathfinder and thought of it as a mostly useless perk but changing my perspective and viewing it as a stam buff made me reconsider. Now I've started putting it on my 2Handers, as you say, and its been pretty legit so far.

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

The Lord Bude
May 23, 2007

I'M DISAPPOINTED THAT CORTANA WILL BE A CIRCLE AND NOT THE ACTUAL SEXY WOMAN FROM THE GAME.


Tin Tim posted:

One important thing for the recover discussion is also what difficulty you play on I think. If you just play for casual fun then it's likely that you don't really need it because the game rarely throws large enough groups to fight at you(outside of zombo hordes). But if you're playing on higher difficulty settings then I have a hard time seeing how you get through 20+ gobbos/orcs/ancient undead regularly without popping at least a few recovers after ten turns of constant combat

With the increase in armor pen attacks the perk deffo has raised in value, even before the new dlc. Archers/hybrids don't need it imo but everyone else is a canidate. I think you pick between gifted/colossus depending on the starting health pool. If two or maybe three good rolls can get you to your target range then get gifted but otherwise yeah beef it up.

Pathfinder is a waste outside of that stam neutral 2h build, don't pick it. The effect is miniscule and almost never ever makes a difference. You're picking a perk that does nothing in nine out of ten fights only to have it do a tiny bit in that tenth fight. It's a waste. Footwork also falls into the same category but I understand why some people pick it. However once you understand how to play the game its value plummets hard for archers/hybrids. With indom on your front the enemies will never push into your backline. And with tanks on the sides you can tie up like five enemies with each of them to stop them from flanking. The rest comes down to smart positioning and anticipating how the next round will go. It's a crutch perk for new players imo and should be ignored once you got a handle on the combat. The only build I run it on is my banner because I build him to be a bit tanky for emergencies so that he can rotate in, take a mean hit and step away next round.

I'm generally not a fan of the executioner/CS combo but saying that somebody doesn't need gifted really rubs me the wrong way. Bigger numbers are everything in this game

Uhh back line doesn't need resolve. Like not at all. All my back line(except for the banner obviously) is at like 32 and I'm on the way to my second crisis in the run. Resolve is a waste on them and seriously not worth the points if you just do it for the confident morale start. Archers get Ratt/def and stamina every level with a few dips to get their hp to 60. With nimble that has always been enough for me. I mean you can say "oh but what about when that sneaky orc beserker manages to jump around your flank??" but my reply would be that it's your own fault for letting it happen and not having someone to rotate/taunt for them.

I don't have the numbers available but I would assume that if you have low armor pen then you also don't do enough health damage to trigger wounds even with the bonus?

Back line needs resolve if you are using fearsome. With gunners and warscythes you can mass apply fearsome and it does huge amounts of work. I put it on everyone that carries a gun, a polearm or a 1h weapon. I can have those large 20+ groups of orcs all fleeing by round 3. I took out a party of over 40 orcs when I attacked a camp at the same time a roving band of orcs was just close enough to be dragged into the combat. Fearsome is insane now. Outside of that I think you should still maintain a minimum standard so you don't have your archers breaking; it's not like you need other stats - ranged defence is the big waste that people invest in, it's pretty pointless - once you have around 15 or so enemy archers will mostly just target something else, and between nimble, bone plating, and the fact that enemy archers have poo poo accuracy it really doesn't matter if your archers eat an arrow every now and then. Almost 1k hours put into this game, and even now playing on expert I've never bothered to give anyone more than mid teens ranged def and it's never, ever been an issue.

Sometimes you take a couple of max rolls in initiative on builds with overwhelm. Overwhelm has been a big sleeper for me, I take it on polearms and gunners and nimble duelists; and it makes a huge difference. Applying a stack of overwhelm is like giving your entire front line a few extra levelups of mdef.

I think footwork is pretty important on the back line, you can't always rely on rotate. On the front line I actually use it offensively, to get my 2handers into optimal AoE position; but I skip it on duelists since they don't need to reposition to aoe.

I wouldn't be comfortable with 60 hp on anyone. armour pen is more common now, and I don't believe in my back line being total glass cannons when it's easy to get them to 75-80. My front line is generally at 100 with colossus, although on nimble front liners since they take less damage I've settled on 80 as enough. Higher health pools mean less chance of getting an injury.

on CS - with CS an archer with a warbow has a very good chance of inflicting an injury with one shot (typical targets orc young/beserker noble war soldiers, nomads etc - against orc warriors/chosen I wouldn't bring archers); then following up with a damage boost on the second hit. Also want to emphasise that CS and executioner don't need to be a combo and for eg I skip CS on polearms but still take executioner.

As for recover and pathfinder I take one or the other on different builds and I'm still very much experimenting - I think the in depth perk guide has a very good analysis on both. I do maintain that people tend to over estimate the usefulness of recover and underestimate pathfinder - pathfinder reduces your overall fatigue build up quite a bit on anything other than vanilla terrain; and I've found I very rarely use recover even on long fights because by the time you need it you're either just mopping up leftovers, or you no longer have tight clusters of enemies to AoE so you use the single attack - which usually does more damage. I used to take recover religiously on everyone and I never used to take pathfinder but the past couple of games I've been analysing how much use I actually get out of it and I don't think it stacks up outside of sunken library/black monolith - and the monolith was an absolute cakewalk on my last run; It was over in 12 rounds and I didn't lose a single guy.

One thing that I think people have missed is that potions are very good now that they get used on the overworld map and last an entire combat. It's not a big deal to just give your entire company 'Better than iron lungs' for the 2 or 3 fights in the game where you need it.

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • Post
  • Reply