grudge rakers

[StonedCanuck]

im sure its not just me that feels the gun workshop buiding for the dwarfs feels like its a bit wrong.. irondrakes should be teir 3 and rakers tier 2, the dps on a irondrake is 3x that of a grudge raker so there is little point to recruit them over regular thunderers or irondrakes. if the grudge rakers were tier 2 id think they'd see more use. me and my buddies just did a co-op campaign where we played as all the dwarf ll's and none of us recruited grudgerakers unless it was the ROR. it also kinda makes sense, both the gun units at teir 2 and both the irondrake units at tier 3. like as it is i never build tier 3 gun workshop just because if u put 2 irondrakes in any army you literally win every fight. i just feel like the grudge rakers will turn into a forgotten unit seeing as how they dont do the damage of chorf blunderbusses and they are a tier 3 unit and there are better units unlocked at or before that tier. ive even used them in a custom batle and they are pretty lacklustre for a tier 3 unit. they moslt just knock things down unless its a monster or single enitity. they can slap monsters in one volley which is awesome but a cannon or thunderer could have done the same and from further range.im not asking them to literally shoot nuclear missles but a little damage increase to infantry would be PEAK rn grudge rakers dont really have a place in your traditional dwarf army

[Enelith]

Why some people feel the need to just vomit what they want to say ?...
It doesn't really help nor motivate people to even try reading such ... wall... without any paragraphs and else (I didn't, sorry about it ~ you're allowed to say my answer here is completely useless - spoiler : it's not)

[StonedCanuck]

i neither asked for your input or asked you to read this if you dont want to, its more meant for the devs if anything bro..

[StonedCanuck]

its not even that much reading lol how lazy are you? its less than 2 mins of text

[StonedCanuck]

also there is punctuation in there its not just word vomit. there is breaks and pauses everywhere, you just didnt even try to look. you just complained for no reason lol.

[an entire Roman legion]

Originally posted by Enelith:

Why some people feel the need to just vomit what they want to say ?...

could kinda follow your own advice 乁( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°)ㄏ

[Immortalis]

Originally posted by StonedCanuck:

its not even that much reading lol how lazy are you? its less than 2 mins of text

Which doesn't eliminate the need for proper grammar, commas and paragraphs.

All the same, if you are not recruiting grudgerakers now, you would not be recruiting them even if they were dropped at tier 2 because having the option to get either them or the thunderers you'd still go for thunderers.

[Enelith]

Originally posted by StonedCanuck:

also there is punctuation in there its not just word vomit. there is breaks and pauses everywhere, you just didnt even try to look. you just complained for no reason lol.

There's no paragraphs. It's just a big wall of letters which doesn't really motivate people to read, sorry about that.
And yes, as you said, I didn't even try. The content might be interesting, the form isn't.

Originally posted by Albob:

Originally posted by Enelith:

Why some people feel the need to just vomit what they want to say ?...

could kinda follow your own advice 乁( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°)ㄏ

A different kind of "vomit". I meant just write without any concern about readibility.

[StonedCanuck]

i used proper grammar and punctuation oh how dare i post a discussion without using paragraphs even though i never changed subject. and yes i would if they were an early stop gap for anti infantry untill i got flamethrowers, thunderers have their uses and so would grudge rakers.

[StonedCanuck]

the fact youre all complaining about me not using paragraphs speaks alot about what kinda people you are lol, this is steam not college i dont gotta post a ♥♥♥♥♥♥ discussion in apa format

[an entire Roman legion]

now now, lets all get along, sit down and write down what we dont like about each other

[Enelith]

Right. That's a forum. If you want to be read by most people, you need to give them the motivation to read whatever you want to say.
Don't assume people will make an effort to understand what you're writting.

It's all about "catching gaze and interest".

(Actually, it also applies in regular life. Just saying.)

Edit :

Originally posted by Albob:

now now, lets all get along, sit down and write down what we dont like about each other

Nothing, sir. I don't even know the guy.
Just stating the obvious so more people will enjoy his "essay".

[StonedCanuck]

bruh thing is i didn't beg for you interest nor did i want it, you just came here to complain because you're having a bad day. if you don't want to read my opinion on why grudge rakers would be better off at tier 2, and flamethrowers at tier 3 then don't read it.

[Immortalis]

Originally posted by StonedCanuck:

i used proper grammar and punctuation oh how dare i post a discussion without using paragraphs even though i never changed subject. and yes i would if they were an early stop gap for anti infantry untill i got flamethrowers, thunderers have their uses and so would grudge rakers.

The vast majority of players do not improve their armies gradually; they go from "basic ♥♥♥♥ tier infantry" to "endgame doomstacks".

What would be the point of spending 6 turns with your army waiting in a settlement to recruit a bunch of units that you're going to dismiss and replace within the next 10 turns?

Thunderers have the advantage over the rakers because the former stays relevant in the endgame, whilst the latter doesn't as they are quickly outclassed by better units.

It's the same debate surrounding dwarf warriors, longbeards and ironbreakers.
Whyever should I spend the first 10 turn getting together an army of dwarf warriors and replace them (keeping my army parked in a region with the relative building for a few turns) with longbeards when I'm going to replace them all again within 20 or so turns? Particularly since the basic troops, which I can get everywhere and thus easily replenish whatever loss they encounter, are not detrimental to the performance of the army?

If, on the other hand, you're part of the players that build thematic armies then the distinction between tier 2 and tier 3 becomes moot; you are going to recruit a certain unit regardless if you have better options.

Honestly, I don't see the point to the change you're suggesting.

[StonedCanuck]

(Honestly, I don't see the point to the change you're suggesting)
look at the description for the tier 3 gunsmith buiding. it says "The irondrakes spew vicious flames from their drakeguns, forged by and expert at the foundry." i think the devs intended them to be tier 3 and idk about you but theres not many doomstacks for the dwarfs. unless i wanna wait till i get tier 5 and make thunderbarges. flamethrowers at tier 2 is kinda op no? are me and my buddies the only ones that think that? i just think the devs swapped them on accident idk

[Enelith]

Originally posted by StonedCanuck:

bruh thing is i didn't beg for you interest nor did i want it, you just came here to complain because you're having a bad day. if you don't want to read my opinion on why grudge rakers would be better off at tier 2, and flamethrowers at tier 3 then don't read it.

Look, that's the thing : I didn't read it because I didn't feel inclined to.
I would really be interested to read it (no joke), but it's too much effort.
Now I also know you're talking about the tier2 / tier3 for Grudge Rakers / Flamethrowers.

My day is really fine tbh, nothing to complain. Business meetings and stuffs.
I apologize if you feel I have something against you, I really don't, so I won't push this matter any further (but I'd be happy to discuss what you have to say in your original text ~ if that catch my interest eventually)