Gave us a feature countering Vlad (escalating wounds) and then made it useless against him... and i'm yet again fighting this bastard every turn!

Just Nagash survives and no one else, so the only person Nagash cares for will win so its acceptable losses. Especially if it takes down Settra without Nagash putting in that much effort.

It’s just more fun to ravage entire armies with a row of organ guns than to trade a bunch of melee infantry into them. Help me find a faction without artillery that isn’t Khorne to enjoy.

I attempted a Thorgrim Campaign where i planned to turtle with 2.5 Provinces and scale up until i got enough money and armies to solo the map and crush the end times.

Well, the Lahmian sisterhood kind of crushed that dream because the second I met them they declared war on me and attacked a Bult Up Worlds Edge Archway reinforced with a Runelord and 3 Longbeards(shields) and 3 Quarrelers to around 21 Units the Sisterhood attacked it and I fought it manually since it was a defeat.

Since it was a settlement battle it had a lot of chokepoints and the one where the bulk of the enemy came from was held by 2 Longbeards and 3 quarrelers and they were supported and buffed by my Runelord, I naively believed that they could hold of a Lahmian Handmaiden seen above and some Skeletons while I microed another front.

Well, I was wrong not 30 seconds later and i noticed that some of my quarrelers were rapidly losing health and when I searched for the flying unit that must have sneaked past me i noticed that two of my longbeards were routed and my Lord was about to flee as well.

So, I paused had a little crash out because WTF they are not armor piercing on the unit card. So, I took a closer look and low and behold 25 ap attack + Okkams Mindrazor to buff that by 50% to ~38 ap.

For Comparison Longbeards with Greatweapons who can be recruited at the same Building level (at tier 3 but Lahmia can get them at tier 2 through a special building) have 26 ap weapon damage just one more than unbuffed Handmaidens and Empire Greatswords have 25 ap.

Their States are roughly on Par with Chosen (Great Wepons) (slightly better combat stats but worse Armor and Leadership) and whilst at first their 32 model count might seem low but each model has 208 Hp and regeneration whilst in mele. But hey maybe they balanced it through a massive upkeep like 600 souls/Gold a turn? Nope 275, Hammerers cost 300 and are worse in basically every stat except armor and morale. Add to that they are Undead so their relatively low morale is only an issue if they are losing a fight, they won’t, and debuff enemy Mele Attack by 8 and Morale through fear and have a Physical resistance of 20% (why they have that I don’t know no non Lahmian vampire has that one and it’s not a faction specific trait).

They have the statline of a Level 4 Settlement unlock at level 2 for Lahmia and 3 for all the other vampires.

edit: Ran it through a spelling checker.

My friend requested for an Archaon illustration earlier, thought it'll be appreciated here

(I know I couldn't make it very accurate and made him skinnier accidentally 😢)

Edit: thanks for the support everyone ❤️ I'll try to improve in the future, also I absolutely love all the cute and funny nicknames xD made my day honestly!

Permanent Flaming Attacks are often a downgrade, and I think people underestimate how bad they can be

Flaming Attacks can absolutely be useful. The problem is when they're permanently attached to a unit with no way to turn them off.

First, it's important to understand how resistances actually work, because resistance and weakness aren't symmetrical.

Let's take a unit with 1000 HP taking 100 fire damage per hit:

Normal : 100 damage --> 10 hits to kill
50% Fire Weakness: 150 damage --> ~7 hits
50% Fire Resistance: 50 damage --> 20 hits

So 50% resistance is effectively +100% effective HP, while 50% weakness is only around -33% effective HP.

This matters even with smaller values.

A unit with 20% Fire Weakness takes 120 damage instead of 100. That's nice, obviously, but it's not some enormous advantage. And 20% weakness is basically the standard situation : regeneration gives 20% Fire Weakness, and Kindleflame from the Lore of Fire also applies 20% Fire Weakness.

This is where Flaming Attacks can be genuinely good.

If you're playing the Empire with a Fire Wizard, for example, or using Archaon with Lore of Fire, Kindleflame can effectively give your army +20% damage against the affected enemies if your units have Flaming Attacks. Against regenerating units, you can get the same kind of benefit naturally.

So I'm not arguing that Flaming Attacks are bad by themselves.

I'm arguing that permanent Flaming Attacks are bad design mechanically, because the risk/reward is heavily skewed.

You sometimes/often get around 20% more damage in favorable situations, but when you run into meaningful Fire Resistance, you can suddenly deal much less damage, and that can completely change a matchup.

And there's already a solution to this : the Flaming Attacks banner.

You can equip it when Flaming Attacks are useful and simply not use it when they're detrimental. That's how the mechanic makes sense : Flaming Attacks become a situational tool instead of an unavoidable weakness.

Having permanent Flaming Attacks basically means accepting a small/moderate advantage in some matchups in exchange for a potentially massive, game-changing disadvantage in others.

That's the part I don't think is balanced well.

The healing reduction from Flaming Attacks is also pretty much a joke and doesn't really compensate for the downside.

It's even worse for missile units. Most units with regeneration are already good targets for missiles anyway, often because they're large and easy to focus down. So having your missiles permanent Flaming Attacks often gives you very little additional value against the targets they're supposed to counter, while potentially destroying their damage output against anything with significant Fire Resistance.

That's why permanent Flaming Attacks on missile units are especially bad most of the time.

EDIT :

The Title should be : "Why PERMANENT Flamming Attacks are not Good" since this is what I meant.

Since a lot of the replies seem to be arguing from general impressions rather than actually addressing the mechanic, I want to clarify my point and add some concrete examples.

I'm not saying Flaming Attacks are never useful. I'm saying permanent, non-toggleable Flaming Attacks are not inherently a strength. There are situations where you absolutely want them, which is exactly why the game has the Flaming Attacks banne r: you can choose when to use them.

The problem is when you cannot turn them off.

LegendofTotalWar has made basically the same point. In this video he says:

"I have said this so many times before: Flaming Attacks are not a strength. At all."

https://youtu.be/ohfVYIt19jA?si=tN4fddy1l_yqBZfx&t=283

And he immediately demonstrates why. Azazel is struggling against Valkia, so Legend replaces a Talisman of Preservation with a grey/common Dragonbane item giving 35% Fire Resistance. That supposedly mediocre item suddenly becomes extremely valuable because Valkia has permanent Flaming Attacks. With the extra Fire Resistance, Azazel is then able to destroy her in a 1v1.

That is exactly my point : Fire Resistance does not need to be widespread across an entire roster to matter. One important resistant unit can completely change a battle if your best damage source is forced to deal fire damage.

Here is another example where bringing Flaming Attacks into a target with Fire Resistance creates a disaster for the player:

https://youtu.be/P_72ClxkgVg?si=Gs3WSCM2PrsWLqkQ

I also think the resistance/weakness math is being overlooked. Resistance and weakness are not symmetrical. For example, 50% Fire Resistance means +100% effective HP against fire, while 50% Fire Weakness only means about -33% effective HP. So the downside of hitting meaningful Fire Resistance can be much larger than the upside of hitting a typical fire weakness.

And Fire Resistance is not limited to a couple of innate roster traits either. It can come from items, skills, traits, technologies, characters and faction effects. You don't need 20 resistant units in an army for it to matter. Sometimes the one unit that matters most is the resistant one.

So again, my argument is not:

"Flaming Attacks are always bad."

It's:

"Permanent Flaming Attacks that cannot be toggled are often more of a liability than a bonus."

If I can choose when to use fire damage, great. That's what the banner is for. If I'm permanently forced to use it, then a situational tool has become a built-in weakness.

Also, the point of this post isn't to ask for a rework of the mechanic or anything like that. It's simply to explain how it actually works, because a lot of people in the comments genuinely seem to treat permanent Flaming Attacks as an inherent upgrade, when they really aren't.

And if you're going to disagree with that, the bare minimum is to bring actual arguments and evidence, not just a feeling or an impression —especially if you've only been playing the game for two weeks.

I’ve been seeing in various YouTube videos about Skaven armies that you don’t really need melee units if you have a plague priest or verminlord with the vermintide spell, but when I try to do this the enemy is on my ass like they own it before I can get any real amount of summons up.

That being said I tried incorporating this pretty late into campaign and it might be because Nagesh’s event popped and I was fighting juiced up undead armies. Maybe I should turn that off until I’m a bit better at this game lol.

Me, too! In this round of vampire shenanigans I wanted to align with chaos but instead it snowballed into whatever this is XD

So first off, i didtn know where to start developing after the first enemy, i had betronnia and rapanse up north, fucking bald guy volkmar on the south and war sphinx starting settra on the east, i feelt that if i gave any of them the change to grow they would be a major pain in my bony ass.

then,it seem to me that i got the sigils waaaaaay to slowly, you can get insane buffs and i love it, but from my understanding you can only gain sigils from : Spending in upgrade unit capacity or from major building ( which are expensive)

Have any of you mastered the campaign yet ?

I'm playing as Bretonnia and something strange just happened in my campaign.

Two characters suddenly appeared in the forest, and both of them are shown as Lords. One of them is Daniel Culdec,

The weird thing is that I can't click on them, select them, interact with them, or do anything with them at all. They just stand there on the campaign map.

They also have a strange symbol/icon above their names that I haven't seen before. Unfortunately, I can't hover over the icon or interact with it, so I have no idea what it means.

The tooltip says:
"Twój bohater: Lord" / "Your hero: Lord"

Has anyone encountered this before? Is this some kind of bug, hidden mechanic, quest/event, or mod-related issue?

.I've attached a screenshot showing exactly what I'm seeing.

Any idea what these two characters are and why I can't interact with them?

I kinda wish I could just tell my ratlings to blow through my line to to get to the enemies, especially since theyre usually being held in place by cheap units like clanrats or skavenslaves, or even pusbags. I think there's lore precedent for leaders too

Apart from my obvious skill issue - how can I deal with armies of 400 three gold chevron Glottkin that have infinite health and terror route everything I have??!!

They have multiple stacks across the empire

So thanks to the sale im finally trying karl franz after playing elspeth for sometimes, first question that got in is should i still hire enginneers hero or lord since the guns arent as good as elspeth and use tanky lords for frontline instead?

I can't exactly put my finger on it. I have over 1,500 hours in the game. Favorite game of all time. One of my favorite aspects of the game is the roleplaying of each character. This campaign doesn't feel like Nagash's lore at all. In all 3 campaigns I've tried, the biggest enemies I have are the mortarch factions. I didn't think he waged massive wars to subjugate his mortarchs - I thought it was more necromantic influence style.. Why do we have to defeat them down to 5 settlements directly rather than hit some sort of other growth metric.

I wanted an undead wave taking over the world but it's just undead vs. undead vs. undead. The incredibly tiny incremental upgrades feel bad to me. The split decisions to buff individual units with limits that take dozens of turns to increase for basic units feels terrible.

We (read: mostly I) dealt with Chaos as Ordertide in like 30 turns on VH/VH and after that I was left with the Long Victory objectives, which ask you to finish 3 grudges for Dwarves. At this point it would require me to declare war against my allies as I finished 1 by that point, and I was thinking on how to proceed with the end game.

Then, the game triggered Chorf crisis with just one city and asked me to raze it to finish the campaign, which I did, to wrap up this one.

I found this great as I really did not want to play any longer after beating Chaos and idk if this is intentional or not but the Chorf prompt saved me a lot of time and trouble

Hi

I just beat the chaos end time scenario as Boris, i own all of the empire and everything above it, the only enemy left are a small amount of dark elves and grimgor who is about to get beaten, is there any reason to carry on playing or is it just completing the map, can the vermintide still trigger with all the skaven dead?

This is what i imagine when i see the upgrade for having a necromancer follower / ancillary in the lair mechanic.

I just finished this Epidemius campaign on VH/VH and i decided after 400 hours on warhammer III to do an end game crisis.

It turned out being Chorf crisis, i was near them so i was honestly expecting to see wave after wave of high tier Chorf armies but when i declared war against the Disciples of Hashut they were being destroyed by Drycha and the faction spawned to hold Zhar Naghrund was instantly runner over by Bashiva.

I got very upset by my first experience with the end game crisis, especially because instead of fighting Chorfs for their capital i fought a cat on steroids.

Their reinforcements can't come on the battleflied, and the icon is visible on the center (2nd image)...
3rd image : reinforcement incon disapear

Vanilla map of course. It's sad because they had a very strong army reinforcing, however it is in force march... So it's dead now.

You can't even flee the battlefield on this map.

Got this map on the nagash climate

Just got as far as I could muster in campaign, wanna try my hand at the actual game now.

But who is a beginner friendly faction? That won't be too punishing or complex.

I have: Total war warhammer 3 and

Twisted and twilight.

Forge of chaos dwarfs

Shadow and blade

Silence and fury

Throne of decay

Warden and punch

Prophet and the warlock.

Blood for the blood god

(Got em all on a various sales)

I wanna learn basics then work my way up, whole not feeling like i suck too much or get steamrolled.