How would you rank the origin starts?

[KalkiKrosah]

I was looking for an unofficial tier list for the origins and didn't come across one. The game ranks them with 1 skull, 2 skull and 3 skull ranks but I find the in-game ranking vague and inaccurate. How would you rank the origin starts?:

Rebuilding a Company (Tutorial)
A New Company (1 Skull)
Southern Mercenaries (1 Skull)
Peasant Militia (2 Skulls)
Band of Poachers (2 Skulls)
Trading Caravan (2 Skulls)
Deserters (2 Skulls)
Northern Raiders (2 Skulls)
Manhunters (2 Skulls)
Davkul Cultists (2 Skulls)
Beastslayers (3 Skulls)
Gladiators (3 Skulls)
Lone Wolf (3 Skulls)

I don't expect anyone to agree 100% on exact placement (its more fun when there's disparity) but an approximate ranking of each origin would be helpful for anyone googling this topic in the future.

[Heron]

Origin skull ratings

One thing that I feel has been off for a long time are the skull ratings for many origin starts. Especially new players will use these skulls for general orientation regarding origin difficulty, but imo the current ratings aren't accurate and can be misleading.

One problem that I see is that the difficulty can vary greatly depending on the stage of the campaign. Some have an easier early game but tougher late game, some the other way around, making it hard to label them with just skulls from 1-3.

I will briefly discuss all origins and attach my own skull rating to them. Would be great if others could comment and give their opinions and own ratings too see if there is some kind of consens.

My ratings:

------------

Rebuilding a Company: (from )
Difficult to rate. You get a few tips, but on the other hand you get the same start "A New Company" would get and a pretty nasty fight right at the start on top of that. There are easier origins, honestly, which is arguably a problem in itself for something labeled "tutorial campaign", but that's not the topic of this post.

A New Company: (from )
Standard difficulty. There are easier companies.

Southern Mercenaries: (from )
Basically the same as A New Company.

Peasant Militia: (unchanged)
16 bros are just super strong. At the start it's almost impossible to keep everyone alive, but that's not a big drawback. The recruitment limitation is annoying, but you can still find very good recruits. Just got to spend more time looking. Overall one of the easiest origins.

Band of Poachers: (from )
One of the best starts with 3 talented ranged dudes and 2 of the very best campaign buffs there are: faster movement and scout reports. The drawback isn't a deal breaker with enough wagon upgrades. Super strong origin in all campaign stages.

Trading caravan: (from )
Very good early game with all those trade goods in your inventory. You have more money at your disposal to outfit your roster before the 1st engagement, resulting in less risky first engagements and good snowballing potential. 10% better prices is very useful throughout the game. 33% less renown is a little annoying, but doesn't have a huge impact on the overall difficulty. Your starting bros aren't as good as with the "A new Company" start, but more money for better equipment outbalances or even outweights that.

Deserters: (unchanged)
I would rate them slightly more difficult than A New Company. They have great early equipment, but their low resolve can be a dealbreaker in early engagements. A hostile noble house doesn't help either, but the impact of this drawback is very seed dependant. First Run is very useful in any stage of the campaign. The biggest difficulty is to get through those tough first days somehow with their abysmal resolve.

Northern Raiders: (unchanged)
You start in hostile territory, but you get great bros, great gear and a very useful origin buff in the form of more loot. Easier with Blazing Deserts as the City States won't be hostile to you. Overall slightly easier than A New Company imo.
Edit: Very seed depentant, just like deserters, due to the hostile noble house.

Manhunters: (from )
They're early game is... different, but not exactly easier than other starts with all those squishies. Midgame they are very good and fun with 16 men and whip buffs where needed, late game falls off due to the level 7 limit on indebted. Would rank them 3 skulls because they have the most difficult late game of any origin and require a lot of micromanagement and skill to play imo.

Davkul Cultists: (from )
Their late game buffs are insane, but the road to get there is perilous. You're effectively very limited in your recruitment options due to the sacrifice event and need to pay attention to their conversion mechanics to play them well. Cultists aren't the greatest of fighters, so their start is rough. One of the coolest origins but also one of the most advanced ones in my book, alongside Manhunters.

Beast Slayers: (or ?) (from )
10% worse prices is nasty. Starting bros are comparable to A New Company and they start with a Spetum which is great. More beast trophies is nice I guess, but does it make much of a difference economically, enough to balance worse prices out? I don't think so, even with snake oil. Haven't played them enough to really know though.

Gladiators: (from )
You have the best starting bros of any origin with the best late game potential of any origin. Their drawbacks are severe though with super high wages and the 12 men limit, but I don't think they warrant a 3 skull rating. Not with these 3 super heroes on your team. The additional game over condition (all Glads die) is more impactful in true ironman, but as you have "3 lifes" it's not super bad.

Lone Wolf: (from )
An upkeep free, well decked out hedge knight on day one makes the start of this origin one the easier ones. The lone wolf has insane late game potential too. The 12 men limit is severe though, and so is the additional game over condition in true ironman. 2 skulls in non ironman, 3 skulls in ironman. As the ratings are more important for new players who are (probably) less likely to play true ironman, I suggest 2 skulls.

[Teeyo(Chicken&Rice)]

I do agree with most of your reviews, i would add that the difficulty of the raiders are really seed dependant too, some seed , the ennemy noble house consist of three village/citadel, others its more than half the map.

Gladiator and lone wolf can be a beginner trap too, the overconfidence in early game can be an easy campaign stopper.

Overall really good commentary on each.

[Heron]

Originally posted by Teeyo(Chicken&Rice):

i would add that the difficulty of the raiders are really seed dependant too, some seed , the ennemy noble house consist of three village/citadel, others its more than half the map.

I've edited that part in. Thanks for the comments! (and the award )

[Teeyo(Chicken&Rice)]

Originally posted by Heron:

Originally posted by Teeyo(Chicken&Rice):

i would add that the difficulty of the raiders are really seed dependant too, some seed , the ennemy noble house consist of three village/citadel, others its more than half the map.

I've edited that part in. Thanks for the comments! (and the award )

;)

[The Duck Knight]

The obvious reason why the lone wolf is rated is that there is an additional risk to manage. If he dies, the game is over even IF you win the fight. During early game 3-2 lucky thugs with daggers can cause a game over (that happend to me once ., move in, missed my attack, got three thugs surrounding him with daggers and got punctured down in one turn.). That's why hs is rated instead of .

IN general the skull rating is hard to set on a fix, because an experienced player will always play and see things differen than a new player.
Thats why the new company/rebuilding/southern mercs are easier choices, in my opinion: mistakes are far less gameending.
If you loos your starters....well....sad, but not a game over. Loose the lone wolf....thats it.
And since taken risks are far less hurtfull, the lower difficulty rating makes sense.
Riskmanagement is the key to success (not only in the game), and the less crippling a bad decision can be, the lower the should be.

[Heron]

Originally posted by The Duck Knight:

The obvious reason why the lone wolf is rated :mortis::mortis::mortis: is that there is an additional risk to manage. If he dies, the game is over even IF you win the fight. During early game 3-2 lucky thugs with daggers can cause a game over (that happend to me once :Killmaster: ., move in, missed my attack, got three thugs surrounding him with daggers and got punctured down in one turn.). That's why hs is rated :mortis::mortis::mortis: instead of :mortis::mortis:.

IN general the skull rating is hard to set on a fix, because an experienced player will always play and see things differen than a new player.
Thats why the new company/rebuilding/southern mercs are easier choices, in my opinion: mistakes are far less gameending.
If you loos your starters....well....sad, but not a game over. Loose the lone wolf....thats it.
And since taken risks are far less hurtfull, the lower difficulty rating makes sense.
Riskmanagement is the key to success (not only in the game), and the less crippling a bad decision can be, the lower the should be.

I agree that he's 3 skulls in true ironman, I wrote as much.^^

What do you think about the other ratings?

[The Duck Knight]

Originally posted by Heron:

Originally posted by The Duck Knight:

The obvious reason why the lone wolf is rated is that there is an additional risk to manage. If he dies, the game is over even IF you win the fight. During early game 3-2 lucky thugs with daggers can cause a game over (that happend to me once ., move in, missed my attack, got three thugs surrounding him with daggers and got punctured down in one turn.). That's why hs is rated instead of .

IN general the skull rating is hard to set on a fix, because an experienced player will always play and see things differen than a new player.
Thats why the new company/rebuilding/southern mercs are easier choices, in my opinion: mistakes are far less gameending.
If you loos your starters....well....sad, but not a game over. Loose the lone wolf....thats it.
And since taken risks are far less hurtfull, the lower difficulty rating makes sense.
Riskmanagement is the key to success (not only in the game), and the less crippling a bad decision can be, the lower the should be.

I agree that he's 3 skulls in true ironman, I wrote as much.^^

What do you think about the other ratings?

The riskmanagement does not only count for ironman, or do you save before every battle in not-ironman runs?
So i'm not making a difference between ironman and not ironman on my rating, but only on new player and experienced player.

setting my mind on that, the rating for raiders and deserters would be somewhere between and .
Imagine being a new player that played maybe one run with one crisis on beginner and switching to vet with the northern raiders and an unexplored map. chances are very high that your run is doomed, because a new player lacks the experience to move around in hostile areas, finding a save way south to get supplies and recruits, so the chances or failing are really high.
for an experience player the raiders are one of the easiest starts, because honestly: The starting barbarians are beasts and they already got a level up, so you can just adrenalin your way past early game enemies rather save and an experienced player has moved deep in hostile areas before a few times during noble war, so he know when it's better to no follow roads and roughly where to go for savety.

So in fact the northern raiders start can be between and depending on how good the player is.
Same does apply for nearly every origin in some way.

You are an expierienced player so you know how to use the advantages of each origin and in most cases you pointed these out, thats why your rating makes sense for you.
I would honestly rate the trading caravan origin as even more beginner friendly, because of an advantage/disadvantage you only saw as an disadvantage: lower reknown.
It can be an advantage for new players, because, as far as I know (might have changed already, not sure), a crisis can only start when you got a certain reknown, so the first crisis will start far later giving a new player more time to learn the game before the first big thing to happen.

But the same thing makes it less good of an option for experienced players, because it takes longer to get the reknown needed to get noble house contracts.

On the other hand, become a rating for less and less important the better the player gets, so you should really focus your rating with new players in mind and not for your own standards. Or maybe make two ratings: one for new one for experienced players.....but there might also be players between these extremes.

It also depends a lot on your playstyle, for example: the peasant militia starts feels harder to me than the raiders, because I already skipped the first level with my raiders and can use tactics to reduce the risk of getting attacked by enemies with attackspikes (I LOVE adrenalin), while the weaker stats and lower level of the peasants starters mean the chances that enemies have a chance to attack is higher, making it more likely to loose brothers during early game and I really am good with handling the raiders start.

[Santo]

Regarding the merchant caravan: it's slower, but for me it was definitely easier. Back then I still struggled to reach the first crisis in good shape, and that origin helped me quite a lot for the reasons Duck stated.

[The Duck Knight]

Originally posted by Santo:

Regarding the merchant caravan: it's slower, but for me it was definitely easier. Back then I still struggled to reach the first crisis in good shape, and that origin helped me quite a lot for the reasons Duck stated.

somehow this gave me an idea:
maybe the Rating should be splitt in categories:
Example:
Trading Caravan
Quality of starting Brothers:
Economy :
Additional risks:

Lone Wolf
Quality of starting Brothers:
Economy:
Additional risks:

or something like that.
Just thinking.

[Heron]

Originally posted by The Duck Knight:

The riskmanagement does not only count for ironman, or do you save before every battle in not-ironman runs?

Well, you can reload after any battle. If your lonewolf dies you start from your last save. So all it does in non ironman is to make you reload a little more often and, if things went south unexpectedly, replay more days.

Originally posted by The Duck Knight:

So i'm not making a difference between ironman and not ironman on my rating, but only on new player and experienced player.

Experienced players don't need the ratings, so they should be guidance for new players. We agree on that.

I think my ratings are applicable for both new and experienced players. The advantages and disadvantages layed out above apply to anyone after all; if you differ regarding specific origins from a newbie perspective, please point it out, as you did with the raiders. I can see how they might be 3 skulls for a new player.

Then again, they just need to figure out that they should run south as fast as possible and avoid large patrols on the way. Isn't that kinda common sense?

Would be great if a new player could comment on Northern raiders. xD

Originally posted by The Duck Knight:

Originally posted by Santo:

Regarding the merchant caravan: it's slower, but for me it was definitely easier. Back then I still struggled to reach the first crisis in good shape, and that origin helped me quite a lot for the reasons Duck stated.

somehow this gave me an idea:
maybe the Rating should be splitt in categories:
Example:
Trading Caravan
Quality of starting Brothers: :legendarysword:
Economy : :RogueMoneybags::RogueMoneybags::RogueMoneybags:
Additional risks: :mortis:

Lone Wolf
Quality of starting Brothers: :legendarysword::legendarysword::legendarysword:
Economy: :RogueMoneybags::RogueMoneybags:
Additional risks::mortis::mortis:

or something like that.
Just thinking.

A brief text under the flavor text / special rules or as a loading screen with an ultra condensed breakdown of the origin's characteristics would be best imo if additional info were to be displayed. Ratings just have a hard time to account for everything, from early vs late game to economy, the impact of the special rules and map seed dependance.

But I have doubts that anything will happen in this regard, so I'd be glad to find a consensus on skull ratings for now.

[Heron]

Originally posted by Santo:

Regarding the merchant caravan: it's slower, but for me it was definitely easier. Back then I still struggled to reach the first crisis in good shape, and that origin helped me quite a lot for the reasons Duck stated.

Well, can't go lower than 1 skull, can we? =D

[The Duck Knight]

Originally posted by Heron:

Originally posted by Santo:

Regarding the merchant caravan: it's slower, but for me it was definitely easier. Back then I still struggled to reach the first crisis in good shape, and that origin helped me quite a lot for the reasons Duck stated.

Well, can't go lower than 1 skull, can we? =D

why not?

Diffculty of Trading Caravan: or maybe

[JCSato]

Originally posted by Heron:

Originally posted by Santo:

Regarding the merchant caravan: it's slower, but for me it was definitely easier. Back then I still struggled to reach the first crisis in good shape, and that origin helped me quite a lot for the reasons Duck stated.

Well, can't go lower than 1 skull, can we? =D

A fleshy, severed head?

[Teeyo(Chicken&Rice)]

Originally posted by The Duck Knight:

Originally posted by Santo:

Regarding the merchant caravan: it's slower, but for me it was definitely easier. Back then I still struggled to reach the first crisis in good shape, and that origin helped me quite a lot for the reasons Duck stated.

somehow this gave me an idea:
maybe the Rating should be splitt in categories:
Example:
Trading Caravan
Quality of starting Brothers: :legendarysword:
Economy : :RogueMoneybags::RogueMoneybags::RogueMoneybags:
Additional risks: :mortis:

Lone Wolf
Quality of starting Brothers: :legendarysword::legendarysword::legendarysword:
Economy: :RogueMoneybags::RogueMoneybags:
Additional risks::mortis::mortis:

or something like that.
Just thinking.

I mean if we reached a semi consensus on the difficulty overall by the categories, it could be great to maybe make a pin thread to help new players have better idea of what to expect?

[Desperado]

i disagree with two:
The ranger start. You have 3 nice bros but they are not usefull in the begining, you need to take like 3 guys for the first line but cant equip them well and your 3 archer are crap. So you stack already 6 bros => welcome raiders and they wreck your team. Realy hard start imo. (love it but its tricky).

Cultist is way easier, yes you need to anticipate the sacrifice but its not that bad, and they got insane buff. Convertion helps a lot, davkul armor is even more insane... Davkul is dope!