Azhag quest battle video released

[Karnil Vark Khaitan]

The regiment sizes are merely the size you buy them in. On the tabletop, a unit of 20 goblins is next to useless. So a big horde of Goblins is definately right.

and the amount of cash you have :S

I don't play tabletop, have some figures as collectibles and interested in the fluff only, but this further reinforces my point

there should be far more Goblins in the unit. There are, what, 120 for Orcs? There should be at least 240 Goblins in the unit, not 160

Well since naval isn't part of the game (sadly would love to make a naval attack as druchii!) you properly can mod it to what ever size you want ^^

You could do that aleast in attila, but would kill of those men if it went the ship size was to small. (if I remember it correct?)

[joedreck]

We cant compare TW to tabletop. The mechanics at TW works very different. At the end warhammer TW is a total war game with warhammer skin. Mechanics still same as at previous games. Also magic seems new, but remember special abilities. Seems similar to magic, right.

[Beregond]

I will certainly try to mod the sizes, though I'm unfamiliar yet how it's done now.
back in the times of edu etc it was way too easy

[Karnil Vark Khaitan]

I will certainly try to mod the sizes, though I'm unfamiliar yet how it's done now.
back in the times of edu etc it was way too easy

Personally I tried back in the days to mod med2 and rome 1, it went abit so-so.
I never touch any of the other tw games except for rome 2 and attila, and it is insanely easy to make a mod or fix some stats.

and I believe they are properly using the same system, as all the signs points to it.

And I know I will have to fix The druchii then they are released ó_ò

[♘Top Hat Zebra]

Modding unit sizes is quite easy, but also quite tedious since Shogun 2. Shogun 2 was sooo easy, you could just change a single value in a config file to change the amount of men across the board by a certain percentage.

Now you have to mod each individual unit in PFM, and any horses or dogs they have, then change how many men can fit on a boat, or else you'll get multiple ships.

Still easy, but very tedious.

[Red Dox]

I don't play tabletop, have some figures as collectibles and interested in the fluff only, but this further reinforces my point

there should be far more Goblins in the unit. There are, what, 120 for Orcs? There should be at least 240 Goblins in the unit, not 160

That is crap, from a TT player perspective. In a tournament list your main regiment of orcs is around 35 to 40 orcs. By goblins [in goblin only army] you start with 50 (again, talking about main block not your scrummy 20 archer block for fanatics) and go as high as 80 *if* it is 3000 point game.
Just taking more goblins, does not achieve anything. You better start pouring your points in additional heroes or magic equipment that helps your regiment.
A O&G army in the TT will always use Orcs as the main tank/damage block to rampage and some small goblin regiments for synergie, capturing mission targets of flank holding. A Goblin only army will puff up a Nightgoblin block with nets and fanatics, because that block must be able to take a punishing first blow if it carries your Warboss and your battlestandard.

And remember: For this game, you play a O&G army lead by Azhag or Grimgork. The main focus is on Orcs. Goblins are just a neat support. We can talk about blobbing up more Goblins when Skarsnik opens up a Goblin only WAAAGH!

-----Red Dox

[loony]

All TW games - besides the idiot AI - suffer from one more problem: too small battle maps.
Remember Empire where you could start shooting at each other from the get go?

Small maps help the AI, as it has less issues to consider, however, robs the player from the following:
- pre battle maneuvers
- light cavalry /scout usefullness
- fatique? irrelevant!
- skirmishing builds are dead
- avoiding battle on the batle map is impossible while it should not be (i am a horse archer. catch me if you can )

Were the battle maps at least 4 times as large as they are now, we would see something different... but then the poor AI would haunt us even more.

[Charerg]

Larger battle maps would just lead to more boring games, since there would be more marching around and forming up reinforcing armies before the actual combat phase. Increasing the size of the battle map would hardly make skirmishers or scouts more effective, and horse archers are already pretty good, any lack of effectiveness on their part is not due to map sizes. As to fatigue, that can be adjusted via other means, like penalizing running more (admittedly in Shogun II, Rome II and Attila running is not very fatiguing, but that is more of a design decision than something related to map size).

[The Wandering Storyteller]

Larger battle maps would just lead to more boring games, since there would be more marching around and forming up reinforcing armies before the actual combat phase. Increasing the size of the battle map would hardly make skirmishers or scouts more effective, and horse archers are already pretty good, any lack of effectiveness on their part is not due to map sizes. As to fatigue, that can be adjusted via other means, like penalizing running more (admittedly in Shogun II, Rome II and Attila running is not very fatiguing, but that is more of a design decision than something related to map size).

Not really
Maps made on 8 X 8 on still have large cities. It doesn't affect much.

[T-Duke]

All TW games - besides the idiot AI - suffer from one more problem: too small battle maps.
Remember Empire where you could start shooting at each other from the get go?

Small maps help the AI, as it has less issues to consider, however, robs the player from the following:
- pre battle maneuvers
- light cavalry /scout usefullness
- fatique? irrelevant!
- skirmishing builds are dead
- avoiding battle on the batle map is impossible while it should not be (i am a horse archer. catch me if you can )

Were the battle maps at least 4 times as large as they are now, we would see something different... but then the poor AI would haunt us even more.

I agree with you about the strong lack of "tactical actions" but definitely not about map size, especially when we have to face an ai which just send all its units crashing in front of you On the contrary, a more tactically deep game shoud have maps more little but with a lot of morphologic variables (swamps, woodlands, bridges etc) and much larger units but a lot more slow. The arcade orientation of CA since the first Rome is unfortunately unuseful larger maps where few "ants units" crazy run forward to each other and crush in a few minutes...

[CK23]

If anything we can agree to disagree that modding will solve some of the apparent unit sizing issues that we have.

I like the size of the battle maps, they are big enough in my eyes.

[hep]

Which of those FLC was an entire reworking of how the game works, both in terms of stats as well as AI?

I don't disagree with CA making a realism mode as you suggested at all, its more I just don't see it happening. From CA's point of view its too much effort for too little gain. As far as battle balance and pace etc everyone has their own preferences. Whilst I would prefer a generally more realistic feeling too (read, a ground-up re-imagining of how battles play out), it is smart for CA to go with one setting and let people mod the game to their preferences whilst focusing on other areas.. That's one area that I won't criticise CA for.

They've never released a unit/stats FLC that re-worked the entire game as far as I'm aware, but the rome 2 emperor edition was a huge FLC, it included a new campaign (imperator augustus) and a whole host of fixes and adjustments, so they have released big FLC patches before.
I imagine the work that went into that would be more than what would go into slowing down battles and removing the arcadey features.

Also, TW:Warhammer is part of a trilogy, that is going to be combinable into one game, therefore each separate game must share the same fundamental design to work together. Any AI improvement for the first game can be considered development of the next 2 games, this is the perfect opportunity to work on the features that get overlooked such as the AI.

CA can tell the moneymen that it is 2nd game development and the fans that it is FLC to show how much they care, win-win.

That is crap, from a TT player perspective. In a tournament list your main regiment of orcs is around 35 to 40 orcs. By goblins [in goblin only army] you start with 50 (again, talking about main block not your scrummy 20 archer block for fanatics) and go as high as 80 *if* it is 3000 point game.
Just taking more goblins, does not achieve anything. You better start pouring your points in additional heroes or magic equipment that helps your regiment.
A O&G army in the TT will always use Orcs as the main tank/damage block to rampage and some small goblin regiments for synergie, capturing mission targets of flank holding. A Goblin only army will puff up a Nightgoblin block with nets and fanatics, because that block must be able to take a punishing first blow if it carries your Warboss and your battlestandard.

And remember: For this game, you play a O&G army lead by Azhag or Grimgork. The main focus is on Orcs. Goblins are just a neat support. We can talk about blobbing up more Goblins when Skarsnik opens up a Goblin only WAAAGH!

-----Red Dox

I think your looking at goblins from the wrong perspective.

They are not some early game unit of hastati from rome 2, which you never build again, once your technology improves. They are a fundamental part of the warhammer lore and therefore must remain relevant throughout the game.

In TT you have a points limit, in TW you have a 20 unit limit, which changes how you build your army completely.
You cannot make a cheap unit in TW, because every unit costs one unit slot, regardless of if it is a unit of black orcs or a unit of goblins.

Therefore, why would you ever recruit goblins into your 20 stack army once your economy/technology allows you to recruit stronger units?

I'm not saying that goblins should be made into big enough units to take on a unit of black orcs in combat, what I'm saying is that goblins should be made into big enough units to serve a purpose, which would justify there inclusion over another unit of black orcs.
Goblins are cheap in the TT and numerous in the lore, they are supposed to be deployed in large numbers, regardless of how you would take them in a tournament.
But more importantly, if goblins were in large numbers then they would serve a purpose and therefore would justify being included in your 20 stack army.

The reasons that a large unit of goblins would serve a purpose are; 1) large units can soak up ranged damage, so you could use them for tasks such as pushing a battering ram or other siege equipment or for distracting enemy ranged infantry/gunline to allow your powerful lower numbered units to advance 2) large units can soak up melee damage, so you could use them to bog down a strong enemy unit in lengthy combat whilst you deal with the rest of his army. 3) large units can be used to shield your main battleline, so that the enemy skirmishers must target your goblins first and so that the enemy must charge the large unit first, which allows you to counter charge with your battle line units.

Take for example the yari ashigaru from shogun 2, the first unit that was available in game and because it came in such significant numbers it served a purpose in late game armies, when you could have afforded samurai or monks instead, many people would say that it is one of the better units in the game, despite not being the best unit in direct combat.

in thundering falls battle, there were 140 dwarfs per unit of warriors and 160 goblins per unit. why would you ever take goblins over a unit of orc boyz. That few extra goblins isn't going to allow the goblins to soak up any more damage than the orcs, because they have lower morale so would break earlier, you may as well take a unit of orc boyz that could soak up the same amount of damage and perform alright in combat.
Goblins need to be significantly bigger than the other recruitment options available to be worthwhile using from early to late game and therefore remain relevant.

[Manu La Canette]

I hope they we've been shooting this on extra low quality, because the whole thing looks rugged and not immersive at all.

Two colors themed armies of clones again... How is this attractive at all and gives you to play? This is pure laziness, a Bretonnian army should have a tons of colors and different shield variations... And don't serve me the "it's only alpha" sauce again, we're a couple months from release, that ain't gonna change.

Still nothing about Vampire Counts, yet all DLCs seem to be packed and ready. Still not buying.

[jaca42]

Gameplay looks just about like what i was expecting however the music is a bit of a letdown.

Loved the spell effect by Fay le Fay as she charged into battle, the vortex spell was pretty fun to watch as well.

[CK23]

They've never released a unit/stats FLC that re-worked the entire game as far as I'm aware, but the rome 2 emperor edition was a huge FLC, it included a new campaign (imperator augustus) and a whole host of fixes and adjustments, so they have released big FLC patches before.
I imagine the work that went into that would be more than what would go into slowing down battles and removing the arcadey features.

Also, TW:Warhammer is part of a trilogy, that is going to be combinable into one game, therefore each separate game must share the same fundamental design to work together. Any AI improvement for the first game can be considered development of the next 2 games, this is the perfect opportunity to work on the features that get overlooked such as the AI.

CA can tell the moneymen that it is 2nd game development and the fans that it is FLC to show how much they care, win-win.



I think your looking at goblins from the wrong perspective.

They are not some early game unit of hastati from rome 2, which you never build again, once your technology improves. They are a fundamental part of the warhammer lore and therefore must remain relevant throughout the game.

In TT you have a points limit, in TW you have a 20 unit limit, which changes how you build your army completely.
You cannot make a cheap unit in TW, because every unit costs one unit slot, regardless of if it is a unit of black orcs or a unit of goblins.

Therefore, why would you ever recruit goblins into your 20 stack army once your economy/technology allows you to recruit stronger units?

I'm not saying that goblins should be made into big enough units to take on a unit of black orcs in combat, what I'm saying is that goblins should be made into big enough units to serve a purpose, which would justify there inclusion over another unit of black orcs.
Goblins are cheap in the TT and numerous in the lore, they are supposed to be deployed in large numbers, regardless of how you would take them in a tournament.
But more importantly, if goblins were in large numbers then they would serve a purpose and therefore would justify being included in your 20 stack army.

The reasons that a large unit of goblins would serve a purpose are; 1) large units can soak up ranged damage, so you could use them for tasks such as pushing a battering ram or other siege equipment or for distracting enemy ranged infantry/gunline to allow your powerful lower numbered units to advance 2) large units can soak up melee damage, so you could use them to bog down a strong enemy unit in lengthy combat whilst you deal with the rest of his army. 3) large units can be used to shield your main battleline, so that the enemy skirmishers must target your goblins first and so that the enemy must charge the large unit first, which allows you to counter charge with your battle line units.

Take for example the yari ashigaru from shogun 2, the first unit that was available in game and because it came in such significant numbers it served a purpose in late game armies, when you could have afforded samurai or monks instead, many people would say that it is one of the better units in the game, despite not being the best unit in direct combat.

in thundering falls battle, there were 140 dwarfs per unit of warriors and 160 goblins per unit. why would you ever take goblins over a unit of orc boyz. That few extra goblins isn't going to allow the goblins to soak up any more damage than the orcs, because they have lower morale so would break earlier, you may as well take a unit of orc boyz that could soak up the same amount of damage and perform alright in combat.
Goblins need to be significantly bigger than the other recruitment options available to be worthwhile using from early to late game and therefore remain relevant.

I wonder if we compare stats of Goblin archers compared to Orc archers if they matter or if they have higher ranged damage or whatnot. I wonder if thats a factor.

I hope they we've been shooting this on extra low quality, because the whole thing looks rugged and not immersive at all.

Two colors themed armies of clones again... How is this attractive at all and gives you to play? This is pure laziness, a Bretonnian army should have a tons of colors and different shield variations... And don't serve me the "it's only alpha" sauce again, we're a couple months from release, that ain't gonna change.

Still nothing about Vampire Counts, yet all DLCs seem to be packed and ready. Still not buying.

Already noted that it was messed up because of YT's compression. Units actually look pretty good from the glimpses we've had of them, especially the Dwarves. I'll agree with the whole Bretonnian color-thingy, I hope we see some diversity with them and the differences between the different duchies and provinces.

VCs were slated for March so I imagine we'll be seeing a bunch about them, to boot, we only have 1 DLC confirmed and havent really heard much about them tbh.

Gameplay looks just about like what i was expecting however the music is a bit of a letdown.

Loved the spell effect by Fay le Fay as she charged into battle, the vortex spell was pretty fun to watch as well.

The Fey spell was dope. Wrecked a unit of Goblin archers.

[Red Dox]

I think your looking at goblins from the wrong perspective.

They are not some early game unit of hastati from rome 2, which you never build again, once your technology improves. They are a fundamental part of the warhammer lore and therefore must remain relevant throughout the game.

In TT you have a points limit, in TW you have a 20 unit limit, which changes how you build your army completely.
You cannot make a cheap unit in TW, because every unit costs one unit slot, regardless of if it is a unit of black orcs or a unit of goblins.

Therefore, why would you ever recruit goblins into your 20 stack army once your economy/technology allows you to recruit stronger units?

I'm not saying that goblins should be made into big enough units to take on a unit of black orcs in combat, what I'm saying is that goblins should be made into big enough units to serve a purpose, which would justify there inclusion over another unit of black orcs.
Goblins are cheap in the TT and numerous in the lore, they are supposed to be deployed in large numbers, regardless of how you would take them in a tournament.
But more importantly, if goblins were in large numbers then they would serve a purpose and therefore would justify being included in your 20 stack army.

The reasons that a large unit of goblins would serve a purpose are; 1) large units can soak up ranged damage, so you could use them for tasks such as pushing a battering ram or other siege equipment or for distracting enemy ranged infantry/gunline to allow your powerful lower numbered units to advance 2) large units can soak up melee damage, so you could use them to bog down a strong enemy unit in lengthy combat whilst you deal with the rest of his army. 3) large units can be used to shield your main battleline, so that the enemy skirmishers must target your goblins first and so that the enemy must charge the large unit first, which allows you to counter charge with your battle line units.

Take for example the yari ashigaru from shogun 2, the first unit that was available in game and because it came in such significant numbers it served a purpose in late game armies, when you could have afforded samurai or monks instead, many people would say that it is one of the better units in the game, despite not being the best unit in direct combat.

in thundering falls battle, there were 140 dwarfs per unit of warriors and 160 goblins per unit. why would you ever take goblins over a unit of orc boyz. That few extra goblins isn't going to allow the goblins to soak up any more damage than the orcs, because they have lower morale so would break earlier, you may as well take a unit of orc boyz that could soak up the same amount of damage and perform alright in combat.
Goblins need to be significantly bigger than the other recruitment options available to be worthwhile using from early to late game and therefore remain relevant.

Why would I recruit them? Fanatics. Nasty skulkers. Possible Goblin shaman carrier. Archers. Flank defense/support against other light units. Since we should have to pay for them, Goblins are way cheaper then orcs. If we pay every turn for them, maybe some WAAAGH! can not afford a "I pick only Blackorcs, Orcboyz, and boar rider" armystyles.
I can honestly say, I have no clue, how they will behave in Combat in this game. I do not know if any of you have an answer to that question but still there is the "The unit is way to small" talk.

At your other points
1.)I would never, ever, let Goblins push a battering ram or othger siege equipüment if I could have Orcs to do it. It is a toughness & leadership thing. There is a reason why Goblins work on warmachines, far away from the frontlines and still get a Orc overseer to keep them there (or as a helping hand if a hunting party attacks).
2.)Why on gods green world, would I try to pin an enemy with Goblins, if I could have an Orc regiment to do a better job? Goblin only army, yeah sure. Nothing else there but in a O&G composition?
3.)Which Goblins can do even with 160 noses per unit. And so we have another fine canon fodder example why one or two of this unist can not hurt

Your thunderfall example, when is decided when the goblins take a leadership test? At 25% casualties like in the TT? Another crunchy rnumber because Warmachines are probably more destructive since they are several ones per slot? They will take their breaktest fast enough. No way around it, besides dirty tricks and nearby leaders. I do not see how it would make a difference if the goblin unit here would be 300 instead of 160. The tabletop rule is "the bigger the unit, the better for a stonethrower/mortar/etc template". But again, I do not know how the gameplay mechanic will work in detail. Without that, it is kinda mood to speculate that "bigger will be better".

So back to the basics: Goblins can fulfill specific roles but they are not your tank unit. They are not your damage dealer. Depending on how the game crunches numbers, they might even not worth to use as flank support. Even if you would get 300 per slot, that would not change. There is a reason, why in TT nightgoblin units are taken for the minimal points and maximum fanatic power. There is a reason why an O&G army has one or two big orc regiments instead of goblins.

That said, there is the option to play Goblin only armies (like I do @TT). If Goblins is everything you have, then you take big regiments. Since they have to tank. Damage however, comes from somewehre else (Squigs, Trolls, chariots, plenty of warmachines, entire rows of goblin heroes in your regiments). But as mentioned before, *if* such a gameplay mechanic comes, it would be with Skarsnik. For the lol-effect I think we can build a Goblin army around Grimgork but in TT, we have the proper tools to do so (magic items, several heroes in one regiment). As far as we know, we do not even have Squigs yet. I would not field a Goblin army without these beauties...so why the fuzz about Goblin numbers now? ^^

-----Red Dox

-----Red Dox

[hep]

Why would I recruit them? Fanatics. Nasty skulkers. Possible Goblin shaman carrier. Archers. Flank defense/support against other light units. Since we should have to pay for them, Goblins are way cheaper then orcs. If we pay every turn for them, maybe some WAAAGH! can not afford a "I pick only Blackorcs, Orcboyz, and boar rider" armystyles.
I can honestly say, I have no clue, how they will behave in Combat in this game. I do not know if any of you have an answer to that question but still there is the "The unit is way to small" talk.

At your other points
1.)I would never, ever, let Goblins push a battering ram or othger siege equipüment if I could have Orcs to do it. It is a toughness & leadership thing. There is a reason why Goblins work on warmachines, far away from the frontlines and still get a Orc overseer to keep them there (or as a helping hand if a hunting party attacks).
2.)Why on gods green world, would I try to pin an enemy with Goblins, if I could have an Orc regiment to do a better job? Goblin only army, yeah sure. Nothing else there but in a O&G composition?
3.)Which Goblins can do even with 160 noses per unit. And so we have another fine canon fodder example why one or two of this unist can not hurt

Your thunderfall example, when is decided when the goblins take a leadership test? At 25% casualties like in the TT? Another crunchy rnumber because Warmachines are probably more destructive since they are several ones per slot? They will take their breaktest fast enough. No way around it, besides dirty tricks and nearby leaders. I do not see how it would make a difference if the goblin unit here would be 300 instead of 160. The tabletop rule is "the bigger the unit, the better for a stonethrower/mortar/etc template". But again, I do not know how the gameplay mechanic will work in detail. Without that, it is kinda mood to speculate that "bigger will be better".

So back to the basics: Goblins can fulfill specific roles but they are not your tank unit. They are not your damage dealer. Depending on how the game crunches numbers, they might even not worth to use as flank support. Even if you would get 300 per slot, that would not change. There is a reason, why in TT nightgoblin units are taken for the minimal points and maximum fanatic power. There is a reason why an O&G army has one or two big orc regiments instead of goblins.

That said, there is the option to play Goblin only armies (like I do @TT). If Goblins is everything you have, then you take big regiments. Since they have to tank. Damage however, comes from somewehre else (Squigs, Trolls, chariots, plenty of warmachines, entire rows of goblin heroes in your regiments). But as mentioned before, *if* such a gameplay mechanic comes, it would be with Skarsnik. For the lol-effect I think we can build a Goblin army around Grimgork but in TT, we have the proper tools to do so (magic items, several heroes in one regiment). As far as we know, we do not even have Squigs yet. I would not field a Goblin army without these beauties...so why the fuzz about Goblin numbers now? ^^

-----Red Dox

-----Red Dox

Correct me if I'm wrong, but aren't fanatics and nasty skulkers found in nightgoblin regiments only? as opposed to goblin regiments.
I believe there was a video which showed the night goblin unit card and it was fairly different to the normal goblin unit card, I believe the upkeep was around 800ish for night goblins, which would make them a more elite unit, if the typical TW unit pricing is being used. (could be wrong)

Also, TW doesn't allow us to put heroes and shamans etc. in units.

I agree with your point about recruiting them because they are cheaper, but my post states "why would you ever recruit goblins into your 20 stack army once your economy/technology allows you to recruit stronger units?"
What that means is that when your economy is up and going and you have unlocked the better technologies then you would not need to recruit goblins because they are cheaper, therefore what is the benefit when you can recruit all elite armies?
This would happen in the mid and late game that you will no longer need to use the cheaper units, you will be able to recruit all elite armies, like you have been able to do in all of the previous total wars. Therefore if the benefit of goblins is that they are cheap, then they will no longer be needed.

regarding how they will behave, they will more than likely behave like the cheap, poorly disciplined units from previous total wars. The sort of units that you stopped recruiting as soon as you could afford the better units, the exception being the ashigaru units from shogun 2, because of the combination of how many per unit there were and how cheap they were, they were a very useful unit even in the late game when you had access to every unit and a huge economy.
Basically I want them to be cheap and numerous, not to the point where they become overly powerful, just to the point where they become useful to have one or two units per army.

1) I would always have a cheap numerous unit push siege weapons towards an enemy castle. In previous TW games the enemy gates are typically defended by archer towers which fire an arrow every second or so, which kills whichever soldier it hits with an extremely high kill rate, regardless of toughness. Also bear in mind that the empire and dwarfs have access to cannons, which not even black orcs will survive. Therefore more bodies is better against such threats.
Due to how well defended TW castles are you need to use the units that can soak up a lot of damage whilst being expendable. Goblins are perfect for this in TW.
Toughness and leadership don't stop cannonballs or the special arrows that towers fire that seem to have 100% accuracy and kill rate.

2) you would try and pin a powerful unit like a steamtank in position with goblins, because you don't mind if the steam tank wipes out the unit of goblins. Also, the steam tank would take longer to wipe out a large unit of goblins than it would a medium unit of orcs, purely because of the amount of hits the one steamtank could put out a minute, which is the benefit of tarpitting the steamtank in combat with a worthless unit to protect your more useful units, which the steamtank would be able to destroy.

It wouldn't matter if the goblins got wiped out because they are expendable, in comparison to a powerful unit of orcs with loads of experience that you dont want to lose. Ideally you would route the rest of the army before you had to tackle the steam tank and maybe the steam tank would start to waver when everyone else starts fleeing.

Its not wise to put units that you don't want to lose into combats that you are going to lose. in the early game, when money is stretched thin it is far better to lose the cheaper units rather than the expensive units. They don't cost as much to replace.

3)yes they can, I agree, but they need to be big to stop themselves from being whittled down by the enemy skirmishers before they have a chance to receive the charge, otherwise they have not achieved anything but been the first unit to flee.
Also the bigger they are, the more of a front they can cover without feeling like you are spaghetti lining.

Re: thundering falls example. Its not as straightforward as 25% casualties, there are factors such as if the battle is going in your favour or not, if the general or other units are nearby, if your flanks are protected etc. so its tough to give a specific time that the goblins would break, but from previous total wars bigger units are better able to soak up damage, than there equivalent small units, you get to see this in battles where one unit starts at half strength because of previous battles and another unit starts at full strength. the reduced number units flee earlier.

I suspect they flee earlier because each death represents a bigger percentage loss in a short space of time. Being able to kill a large portion of a unit in a short space of time such as during a charge or a volley from a ranged unit is able to break units very quickly as opposed to doing the same amount of damage over a longer period of time, they are usually able to hang on for more deaths.

So back to the basics: Goblins can fulfill specific roles but they are not your tank unit. They are not your damage dealer. Depending on how the game crunches numbers, they might even not worth to use as flank support. Even if you would get 300 per slot, that would not change. There is a reason, why in TT nightgoblin units are taken for the minimal points and maximum fanatic power. There is a reason why an O&G army has one or two big orc regiments instead of goblins.

I agree with this completely. Its those "specific roles" that you mentioned that I think large units of goblins can perform, which I don't think small units of goblins can perform well enough to justify there inclusion at the expense of a unit slot.

Being able to utilise specific roles provides the tactical depth that you want in a strategy game, if specific tactics aren't viable because the units you have cant perform them well enough, it just becomes a contest of "who brought the most powerful units?"
Which is what rome 2 became, because all you recruited in the end were elite units, there was not much need to diversify.
On the contrary, shogun 2 required a diverse roster per army because it was so well balanced that most units were useful in a way that justified their inclusion. Shogun 2 is often considered to be one of the peaks of the series and rome 2 is considered one of the low points, (for various reasons)

I agree with your last point aswell, that even if you take big units of goblins then the damage comes from somewhere else, that would be my intention in TW, to use my powerful units to cause the damage, goblins would perform the other specific roles as and when needed.

Goblin numbers matter because they are the only real cheap, numerous horde unit we have seen the numbers of so far. Many armies in warhammer rely on horde units, for example skaven, vampire counts, tombkings and to an extent lizardmen. If we don't criticise CA's horde unit numbers then we may see horde units in the other armies being equally small sized.

Can you imagine a vampire counts army with no zombies or skeletons because they weren't numerous enough to perform the role of a horde unit well enough to justify giving them a unit slot in a 20 stack army?

That is something that I completely hate the idea of. I think it is right to voice our concerns to avoid it happening, especially seeing as CA are currently testing the game and performing the last tweaks before it goes gold in a month or so.

[Påsan]

Meh i use lower level infantry way into the late game unless my economy is infinate. Instead of one stack of elite units you can have two balanced stacks where the trash does most of the compolsuary dying in place of the exspesive elites.

Think about it, two armies are twice as effective as one.

[Person012345]

Meh i use lower level infantry way into the late game unless my economy is infinate. Instead of one stack of elite units you can have two balanced stacks where the trash does most of the compolsuary dying in place of the exspesive elites.

Think about it, two armies are twice as effective as one.

The problem being that 4 armies are not twice as effective as 2.

[August]

The problem being that 4 armies are not twice as effective as 2.

Why in the world not?!!
Four can guard/attack many directions on the campaign map, four can better use Fabian tactics...

Depending on the situation, extra armies may become redundant, but that simply needs to be anticipated and be converted to quality.