Reduce replenishment to improve the game

[KoboldUtopian]

Playing N'Kari (VH/VH) and struggling with Slanesh's miserable replenishment made me think the game overall would be better if everyone had lower replenishment. N'Kari only struggles because everyone else can replenish to full in a turn or two. It's tough, but it felt much more interesting and challenging than being able to essentially fight a fresh battle every turn. If every faction were like this it would slow down the inevitable snowball and force much harder strategic choices since taking damage would actually matter for the next turn.

[Ashardalon]

yea that would be one of the changes
generally slowing down the game would be to its benefit
among other things would be reducing campaign map movespeed so that hopping from town to town would be impossible so that armys can be caught out of town

[Havean]

Agreed. When it only takes 1 turn to get back to full strength you stop caring when you lose men in a unit.
Fighting a losing battle is pointless right now.

[Dagy47]

Back in the good old days we actualy had to pay money to retrain our troops, it made u care about casualties. Nowadays u just hop your army to a city or encamp stance and its problem solved in a turn or two, no biggie....

[CrUsHeR]

Replenishment is evidently capped at 50%, so "full in 1 turn" is vastly exaggerated. At most you could go from 1hp to 50%, and that already requires a large sum of bonuses (tech, skill, hero, buildings etc)

You also make it sound as if the AI would replenish so fast; well that isn't the case, as the AI will frequently do things like recruiting right next to a city, ignoring that you no longer get a replenishment bonus in encamp stance (was changed to only garrisoned in WH3)
Or run around while taking attrition, without taking a healing break before attacking.

Every skilled player will also always prefer replenishment bonuses where possible, simply because sitting around for several turns is not fun. Not to mention auto-resolve results.

So please don't ask CA to turn the game into a slow boring old people simulator. There are mods for that purpose.

[Ashardalon]

its a turn based game
less happening per turn doesnt make the game slower
speed isnt even a thing, only significance
wich is currently very low for everything in the game

[Ashley]

Yeah make the already slog of a campaign even more a slog. Brilliant idea

[AurumHawke]

Wait, you lose entities while playing N'kari, the Ploughdozer, the Asur-blaster, the... Asur-dozer.
Speed * Mass = Win.
https://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=3199755138
If only Autoresolve knew how to use him - it claimed that one would be a "Crushing Defeat".
Ok, granted, triple-gifting Eltharion is a slugfest you'll have barely recovered enough from by the time you get to Tyrion.
Use the trees, archers and cavalry hate trees. Daemonettes are uncharacteristically clumsy around trees though.

Originally posted by Ashardalon:

among other things would be reducing campaign map movespeed so that hopping from town to town would be impossible so that armys can be caught out of town

Unfortunately, they'd still be recruiting while garrisoned because the AI doesn't prepare their armies.
And the replen's tied to difficulty because the AI...

[Ashardalon]

yes its sensible to recruit while garrisoned
but it would still take several turns to take the recruited army somewhere
a move that can then be intercepted
currently the only intercept possible is a pitiful ambush stance joke

[Tommytools]

Originally posted by CrUsHeR:

ignoring that you no longer get a replenishment bonus in encamp stance (was changed to only garrisoned in WH3)

More accurately: no bonus when in your own territory, in hostile territory you still get a replenishment bonus. Try moving your encamped army across the border from your territory to enemy territory and you'll see the replenishment amount increase.

Originally posted by CoerciveUtopian:

-snip-

Computer controlled armies replenish at the end of their turn, rather than the beginning of their next turn like players do. This can make it seem like they replenish faster than a player.

Reducing replenishment will just make players hit end turn more often while waiting for their armies to replenish, making for a more tedious game. While the already poor computer controlled enemies will be even weaker than they are now if their replenishment is nerfed.

I've played with a mod that made attrition affect the computer controlled armies more (similar to a player) in the past, it just made the game even easier and frankly quite boring. I suspect nerfing replenishment for computer controlled enemies will have the same effect.

[MulticornRB]

Back to pure missile units it is then (I never actually left)…

[CrUsHeR]

Originally posted by Tommytools:

More accurately: no bonus when in your own territory, in hostile territory you still get a replenishment bonus. Try moving your encamped army across the border from your territory to enemy territory and you'll see the replenishment amount increase.

Only certain factions can replenish in uncontrolled territory, everyone else gets zero without encamp stance (and still misses the controlled province bonus).
For example, WoC can activate foreign replenishment with a Nurgle Gift of Chaos.

Point is that you no longer get a bonus to replenishment when using encamp stance in your own territory - this was the case in WH2, only Beastmen in WH3 still have this as a legacy feature.

Probably because their faction was never really adapted to WH3 changes, except giving them unnecessarily long recruitment time for certain units.




And there are some weird interactions with replenishment. Example if you play Cathay and encamp in an owned Chaos Wastes region, you get 0 replenishment (or like 10 turns to full with bonuses).

While encamping in hostile Chaos Wastes regions gives notably more replenishment.

[The God Ghetto Holy]

N'kari is one of the easiest campaigns in the game. Just finished a game power rank 1 because N'kari is overpowered as hell. Literally had so many incoming cultists that I had like 15 to 20 disciple armies running around?

Make sure you use your advantages when you are playing. N'kari, for example, has a trait that they heal vigor and HP whenever they are near a unit that is wiped out. It has to be wiped out completely. That means even killing the two stragglers who might run away. You will finish every fight with full health for N'kari.

Don't auto-resolve in places you might be attacked soon! Even people that aren't that great at tactics of Warhammer 3 will do WAY better than the auto resolve in combat. Auto-resolve literally just means taking more losses. And Slaanesh autoresolves even worse than other factions, like Khorne, because Armor plays way too much role in auto-resolve calculations.

Autoresolve = more injury so more need for replenishment!

Use your cultists to establish cults. When you establish a cult there is a building that will create another cultist. You can use these to establish more cults. Cults everywhere! This brings in the devotees you need to make disciple armies and overwhelm the enemy with Slaanesh!

Ambush is your friend. Have some easy to beat enemy behind an ambush. The computer AI can't help but try to kill that lone lord standing there. They'll walk right into your army!

Take a lord with you into battle even if it doesn't have units in the army. They power up to get more potent leaders rapidly that way.

Play to your strengths as a faction.

[path2power]

Originally posted by CrUsHeR:

Originally posted by Tommytools:

And there are some weird interactions with replenishment. Example if you play Cathay and encamp in an owned Chaos Wastes region, you get 0 replenishment (or like 10 turns to full with bonuses).

While encamping in hostile Chaos Wastes regions gives notably more replenishment.

Tha's how every faction works for some reason. In an owned uninhabitable (red) climate region, you will get a replenishment penalty, while there is no replenishment penalty for encamping in an un-owned territory, climate doesn't matter for unowned territory.

[FracWiggles]

How about instead of asking the devs to do such a drastic change for everyone, you just get a mod to do that. They exist.

[KoboldUtopian]

Originally posted by FracWiggles:

How about instead of asking the devs to do such a drastic change for everyone, you just get a mod to do that. They exist.

Because I think it would make the game better for everyone.

Originally posted by Tommytools:

Reducing replenishment will just make players hit end turn more often while waiting for their armies to replenish, making for a more tedious game. While the already poor computer controlled enemies will be even weaker than they are now if their replenishment is nerfed.

I think this will give players an interesting strategic choice. Do you make that attack that you wan win but will require several turns of recovery or do you back off and look for a better opportunity. Right now, the issue is that we very quickly get to a point where we can just brute force the campaign because it doesn't matter when an army gets wrecked if it can be back to full strength in a turn or two. So instead of having to make strategic decisions we can (nearly) always attack. Even if the AI armies get wiped, having your army beat to hell means that the garrisons will stop you while the AI has a chance to rebuild.