One thing about the downhill cav charge is that they can send models flying down to the bottom of the hill with the mass they have; which can kill the models instantly if the hill is steep enough.
I remember one devastating charge of silverhelms vs nurgle great weapons in multi-player match on turins channel. On a launch of wh3 irrc, domination mode, the map have 2 parts of low and high ground with hill in a middle across in them. Great weapons died from 100% to 20% in a matter of seconds, mostly of fall damage. That was... beautiful...
@@easytanksgaming3238yes, this is especially useful when besieging enemy settlements. If you have something flying with big mass, dragons, Vargheists, the putred flies of Nurgle, they'll push down the enemies and insta kill them almost always when they fall from the walls.
Yeah in a siege not too long ago was fighting de and had some canon shooting the wall a master was standing on that section of the wall went from 100% health to less than 10 and broken
It's funny because I swear I remember the Warhammer 3 tutorial mentioning something about height advantage but I so often forget about it in actual battles. Definitely good to remember.
Your cav charge downhill has more speed, so your impact-damage calculated by mass and speed will indeed be higher. The reason why it doesn't seem to work is because you also send more units flying with that higher speed, but this has the drawback that units on the ground are immune to attacks until they stand up again. So your higher impact damage gets somewhat neutralized by the enemy being unattackable for some time. Charging cav vs cav downhill you get the exspected damage-advantage, since models don't get knocked down. But i'd argue that cav vs infantry charges downhill are still extremly important. Yes, you don't deal extra damage, but you take significantly less since enemies on the ground cannot hit back. It's also a lot easier to pull your cav unit through the enemy line, when you send 80% of it flying. Easy access to the enemy backline. Suddenly 6 ranks of infantry isn't deep enough to get your cav stuck.
Thank you for adding that comment at the end about strider ability. There's actually a lot of items and banners and effects that grant it. There's one that gives speed, accel/deceleration and strider, which is amazing to not get your lord stuck, especially if they are awkward like a chariot etc.
If you're at a height and ranged disadvantage there are a few things you can do. 1) If the enemy just sits on their hill, use their immobility to your advantage and take your time walking to a less disadvantageous position, or rush there just out of range of the enemy so you can sit and rest before engaging. 2) Look for the enemy's weak points in their defenses and rush them with your strongest, most damaging forces so you can break through a funnel your army through the gap. At the very least, you'll end up fighting with a decent enough portion of your army on even ground. And make use of your other forces to try and pull the enemy out of position before and during your assault so the enemy can't just reinforce the weak point you're attacking. Don't be afraid to make sacrifices and loses elsewhere so you can create advantages for yourself in the places where it counts. 3) Don't charge the enemy straight up the hill. At the very least, go in at a diagonal to reduce that high ground bonus as much as you can. 4) Use your skirmishers or other fast, squishy or otherwise prime targets to bait the enemy into chasing, running themselves out of position. The less reserves the enemy has to reinforce their positions, the better chance you have a breaking through. 5) Change the lineup of your front lines as you're approaching to throw the enemy off. If you do it at the right moment, either they can't take full advantage of their charge as they reposition to match you, or you get to pick the unit engagements to be more favorable to you. You might even be able to open up gaps in their defenses. If you do, rush whatever you can through, even if you have to take some losses to do it. So long as you can start switching up those high ground advantages, it's worth it. The reversal of advantages isn't just 30% more and less. It's 60% more and less! And it can snowball if your breakthrough forces ends up throwing your enemy into disarray. As the saying goes, "There is opportunity within chaos". 5) Keep in mind the type of battle you're in or going into. Who loses if the battle timer runs out? Can you retreat and try for another battle with different starting points? If you want to and are in a position to avoid a battle, consider avoiding risky fights with enemy forces you know you have a decent chance to lose against since the terrain can end up benefiting the enemy, starting you off in a losing position. And even if you don't, you're more liable to lose more in a relatively even battle, so make it your norm to engage with a superior force. That way, even if the terrain doesn't favor you, you still have a chance for a strong win.
I mean, it's one of the most basic strategies of warfare. I've always used them ever since I played Medieval 2. Those with the high ground will, most of the time, have the biggest advantage
Important to remember even as far back as medieval 2. These kinds of tactics are a mainstay for keeping your army alive and intact when you don't have the stupid auto-replenishment systems in play.
I feel like that was more impactful in medieval 2. Especially against cavarly it mattered a lot as a single charge could break even mid tier units. IN WH3 due the campaign and lord bonuses these kind of differences are getting lost.
I remember back in the day I only used my general bodyguard cavalry because I knew they would regenerate and I'd continually blood them on crap so the bodyguards grew larger and larger.... Nostalgic cheese 🤌
Funny seeing the different sides to this, I've always liked both systems! In a grounded setting based on the real world it feels natural to have to deal with the logistics of replenishing my troops somewhere we can actually get more of them, and it slows the game down strategically in a way I kinda like, you can't just keep rolling through with one army at speed if they take heavy casualties. For Warhammer though, I like the passive replenishment. It's a high fantasy conquer-fest with a massive map and I don't think Med2 style replenishment would work quite as well for it in tone or strategy.
Charging small entities from high ground throws them back more than on flat ground. Following such a cavalry charge with flanking or rear charges with friendly infantry will envelop models that have been thrown about. When an enemy infantry unit is defending high ground and is engaged by friendly infantry charging them from behind with cavalry will deposit flying knocked back infantry inside your infantry unit where they will quickly get blended up from attacks on multiple sides.
So I guess that's why my skavenslaves have been dealing waaay more damage than skavenslaves should normally do when I rear charge them with mercenary Mournfang Cavalry back in WH2 (which is still the one I play). Now that's a great way to increase area of contact to your damage advantage besides traditional infantry flanking which only really stacks leadership penalties! I really have to start paying more attention to the model-by-model action of the battles to formulate better melee tactics such as this. Maybe that's the real main function of monstrous infantry in combined arms?
i actually didn't know that striders terrain penalty immunity also included elevation! i probably still wouldn't charge my rangers up a hill to take more damage, but that is definitely worth knowing
This is why I find some of the maps you run into in campaigns really annoying, particularly when you're defending from the bottom of a map that's just a giant slope. Like guys, we got to pick the ground for this battle, can't we have picked somewhere other than the bottom of a giant hill?
I knew only that units get additional leadership by getting high ground, but I never thought that it actually has battle bonuses, though I still always used a high ground just because looks cool.
I used to do it anyway. Mostly so guns can fire above front liners heads and be place them in layers that can fire above each other. I wasn't really aware of the damage bonus though and thought just running up ramps tires the units out but if you're defending at the bottom of a hill and not moving, it wouldn't matter. Also does this also apply to larger units? Like if say a giant monster is fighting a human sized one, say a hero on foot, does it get a damage boost too or not since it's center is higher than the center of a lowly footslogger? I would have thought it only considers ground elevation but since this also applies to flying units..?
This is how i most reliably get heroic victories against superior armies. A mad dash to the highest elevation on the map, and defending like there was no tomorrow
Interesting, I've been aware high ground still counted in TWWH, but didn't realise it was this magnitude. TBH, I haven't noticed the high-ground advantage having as much effect as way, way back with the original Shogun - those cliff-style hills and those cute little sprites - Good old days!
You want to know a pretty magical one? At least in WH1 and WH2, in a flat ground, no control test, 2 units of empire swordsmen could beat a unit of Cairn Wraiths. They would do almost no damage to the Wraiths but because they were getting hit and thought they were losing, they would start crumbling and die. Despite doing huge damage with each hit and only taking 4 damage per hit from the swordsmen. Despite how their stats were very close. It was horrific, and I complained about it a lot. I havent played much WH3 to test it.
That s not something which can be easy answered. It is different for every single ranged unit. Generally speaking dont shoot with artillery on it, only if theres maybe a way more expensive enemy model fighting your infantry. Or i fyou shoot a big target less shots actually land on your own units rather then the big beast of the enemy which is why i always focus large beasts first with archers even if they may not be as valuable as the infantry.
Consider also that this will only help units who do damage. Empire swordsmen can dish it out but a skavenslave or zombie has no hope against an orc boy. They'll last a little longer though!
With the cavalry charge it doesn't really surprise me how little it matters. Cav is weird in Warhammer. But In Rome 1, a downhill cav charge was absolutely devastating, and an uphill one barely brushed the enemy. Granted, cav is great in Rome 1, but it was still a huge difference. With infantry too, it was huge. Units running uphill to fight broke so fast. Honestly it sometimes feels like in some areas Rome 1 has a lot more depth than modern ones, though the unit diversity of Warhammer is of course, unmatched.
It kinda feels like rome 1 overexaggerated these effects, rather than having actual depth. What's being taken into account hasn't changed, it's just that the actual impact is lower.
It's not really a secret, it literally tells you this in the little tutorial campaign with Yuri, and has done in both 1 and 2 during the tutorial battle as well...
Cav is broken. They removed the collision damage to a point that it makes no difference unless its by a heavy monster with huge mass difference. And only the first rank of Cav gets their attack in, but Infantry charging downhill vs Cav, penetrate more into the formation, so they are taking hits from the Cav 2nd rank. It's really messed up.
love watching cavalry playing bowling with the last enemy model for like 10 mins straight while it's got less than 10hp left but still taking no damage getting rammed and ran over constantly
More proof that they broke cavalry in Warhammer. Cavalry surely should have at least the same clear advantage charging downhill as infantry. But their charges just don't work properly.
Something I've wondered with ranged units that have very low arcs (i.e. gunpowder units) if it winds up being more advantageous to fire up hill to get better firing arcs on the enemy units. Even if they cause less damage, they may have more opportunity to hit more targets. Especially when tied up in melee they may have enough of an arc to fire over the heads of their allies. Just my thoughts, anyone have an opinion/experience on the topic?
With gunpowder, if you are firing downhill, you want your infantry to hold the enemy near or on the flat ground, so your ranged units on the slope have a better angle. If you are firing uphill, you want your ranged units on the flat ground, and your infantry holding the enemy on the slope, for the same good angle. In reality, if you plan to make use of gunpowder, you want to leave open gaps in your line for your ranged units to shoot through.
The reason for cavalry charges not doing much damage from uphill to downhill is probably because of the 70 maximum collision damage rule. It's, well, the maximum amount of damage a model can do against another upon collisions in charges.
It is actually easier to fight upwards. The fighter with the high ground can only attack your head and shoulders, If they have shields you can relatively easy block attacks from above. On the other hand its is harder to defend attacks against your legs and feet, wich would be the target for the lower standing swordsman. The only disadvantage that you have in an uphill battle is that it is more tiring to run uphill.
Hey, how do you do these tests? i am having a lot of problems running 2 warhammers simultaneosly to do these tests, do you have 2 computers? or are you able to open 2 games on the same pc? or maybe a mod to control both armies?
@@edwardking9359 Doesn't help the veterans left aye? This new team probably won't have a scooby about that concern. Espicially if they've labelled it "spaghetti code".
the ai likes to sit upon hills to bad it feels forced to come down the moment any of its units gets touched by the firing arc of any of my own ranged units , CA really needs to deal with this issue , the only game where this isnt really present is shogun 2 for some unknown reason
I've got a question that anyone can answer. Is overkill damage a thing? For example a skaven slave has 120 models with 40hp per model. Would a sniper hero with perfect accuracy kill slave unit in 120 shots or like 20 shots?
It's too bad tho how much the line of sight issues of Gunpowder units limit you when trying to take advantage of the high ground. In my experience using those units on hills etc makes them very unreliable in practice.
Yeah, if you're making heavy use of guns I find it's most reliable to put infantry really close to the bottom of the hill and guns a good bit above. This way the enemy infantry gets locked into combat at the bottom and your guns have a pretty clear shot at them, and your infantry *might* still grt a little bit of advantage.
In earlier videos of Zerk playing he never evened out the diplomacy tab for that free juicy money when partaking in diplomacy Does anybody know why? Is there something I don't know when not taking the money?
If an entity falls off of something, such as a ladder or wall, it will straight up die. This is why the rice paddies in Cathay maps were such a problem (might still be, not sure if they ever got fixed).
it definitely does work on walls. Gotta love flying cav units like the doom knights of Tzeentch crashing down onto enemy units on walls and straight up deleting half the unit in a second.
A bunch of things to a unit's stats, but most importantly reduces their melee attack by up to -30% at full exhaustion. Very significant debuff. It also reduces speed, charge bonus and even armor at the higher levels. There are other effects which are listed on the table in the wiki along with each fatigue level.
Well yeah, makes perfect sense. If you go outside right now and find the nearest hill, you get on an incline and try swinging a 10-15lb object, (average weight of a sword,) upwards a few times. It’ll feel heavier after a few swings, and it’ll also hit softer because you’re going against gravity. If you’re on a higher part of the hill, you’ll be able to swing a sword downwards, it’ll hit HARDER, and you can swing many more times because you’re going WITH gravity.
Historical greatswords were 6-10 lbs, longswords 2.4 to 4.4lb and arming swords somewehere around 2.5 lb. So it's not quite as tiring as what you said.
@@hakuslayer7918 It’s still a matter of going with or against gravity. And I’m sure sustained fighting uphill with the grass turning to mud would see soldiers start to slip and fall, tripping their guys up for easy stabs/cuts. Thanks for the correction.
I could argue, what in reality, the lower side would have an advantage, because of the curvature you dont have to protect your legs, when the higher side becomes more open for the attack
Though that can often be countered by simple weight, in a tight melee the strength of sides pushing against each other, and a much easier time flanking a hemmed in opponent.
Didnt even bother to watch the video. You just now figured this out? Total War has been doing this from their very first game. Just place a ranged unit on the same hill and watch their range increase
Actually irl high ground is a disadvantage. Your lower half is much harder to defend while enemy need to defend only thier upper half. It's really dangerous.
Nope, the opposite - with shields + armor you can easily protect your lower half if you have the high ground. And a better position for stabbing & hacking, especially on the heads
@@frankkobold aren't you forgetting that the foe has much less to defend now? Also try it yourself. Shields do make it less of a problem but it doesn't help that much... Since polearms are the king. I am speaking not only for myself as a hema enthusiast, but also for literally dozens of people who states the same, being a part of hema as well. As for the part of said people you might have known - search for Skallagrim, Shadiversity and etc
@@samarkand1585 there sre 2 main reason of the high ground importance which i recall right now. 1. Ranged. Archers, crossbowmen and etc have much more range, options and etc. 2. Stamina and etc. Good thing that if you defend said archers (or other kind of ranged threat) - foes' ability to rush to you might be limited and it might fatigue them even more than usual march and etc. (I m not speaking of hussite wagon and etc, cause it's more of a fortification advantage then a just high ground.)
Don't thunderers still get their missile block chance even if they arent holding their shield? I swear I've heard that somewhere before, same with lothern sea guard.
One thing about the downhill cav charge is that they can send models flying down to the bottom of the hill with the mass they have; which can kill the models instantly if the hill is steep enough.
I remember one devastating charge of silverhelms vs nurgle great weapons in multi-player match on turins channel. On a launch of wh3 irrc, domination mode, the map have 2 parts of low and high ground with hill in a middle across in them.
Great weapons died from 100% to 20% in a matter of seconds, mostly of fall damage. That was... beautiful...
@@easytanksgaming3238yes, this is especially useful when besieging enemy settlements. If you have something flying with big mass, dragons, Vargheists, the putred flies of Nurgle, they'll push down the enemies and insta kill them almost always when they fall from the walls.
Yeah in a siege not too long ago was fighting de and had some canon shooting the wall a master was standing on that section of the wall went from 100% health to less than 10 and broken
“It’s over b*tch, I got the high ground yo!”
Finally someone who gets the quote right, word for word
So that explains why Obi-Wan won, he got a 30% damage boost on Anakin while Anakin was doing 30% less damage.
Anakin also had a debuff from being near sand
So Obi-won?
Anakin had a charge bonus from the dark side of the force, but like all Jedi, Obi Wan had charge reflection.
The 30% dmg boost will cost an arm and legs XD
“I’ll try spinning, That’s a good trick!”
‘Don’t try it!’
2:19 My knee hurt watching that old man jump against gravity uphill.
It's funny because I swear I remember the Warhammer 3 tutorial mentioning something about height advantage but I so often forget about it in actual battles. Definitely good to remember.
Your cav charge downhill has more speed, so your impact-damage calculated by mass and speed will indeed be higher. The reason why it doesn't seem to work is because you also send more units flying with that higher speed, but this has the drawback that units on the ground are immune to attacks until they stand up again. So your higher impact damage gets somewhat neutralized by the enemy being unattackable for some time. Charging cav vs cav downhill you get the exspected damage-advantage, since models don't get knocked down.
But i'd argue that cav vs infantry charges downhill are still extremly important. Yes, you don't deal extra damage, but you take significantly less since enemies on the ground cannot hit back. It's also a lot easier to pull your cav unit through the enemy line, when you send 80% of it flying. Easy access to the enemy backline. Suddenly 6 ranks of infantry isn't deep enough to get your cav stuck.
Okay yeah but you’re forgetting fall damage exists and can instakill models sent far enough downhill, like nurgle greatweapons
Thank you for adding that comment at the end about strider ability. There's actually a lot of items and banners and effects that grant it. There's one that gives speed, accel/deceleration and strider, which is amazing to not get your lord stuck, especially if they are awkward like a chariot etc.
Thank you so much for these video's! I've played Warhammer 2 and 3 in to the thousands of hours but I always learn something from you :)
1:22 looked up quote ... accurate, word by word.
Worth noting that a lot of maps have slopes that give a lot less then max height advantage and also make bullets hard to aim.
Always knew about that high ground had the advantage but never tested it. That’s a significant boost!
If you're at a height and ranged disadvantage there are a few things you can do.
1) If the enemy just sits on their hill, use their immobility to your advantage and take your time walking to a less disadvantageous position, or rush there just out of range of the enemy so you can sit and rest before engaging.
2) Look for the enemy's weak points in their defenses and rush them with your strongest, most damaging forces so you can break through a funnel your army through the gap. At the very least, you'll end up fighting with a decent enough portion of your army on even ground. And make use of your other forces to try and pull the enemy out of position before and during your assault so the enemy can't just reinforce the weak point you're attacking. Don't be afraid to make sacrifices and loses elsewhere so you can create advantages for yourself in the places where it counts.
3) Don't charge the enemy straight up the hill. At the very least, go in at a diagonal to reduce that high ground bonus as much as you can.
4) Use your skirmishers or other fast, squishy or otherwise prime targets to bait the enemy into chasing, running themselves out of position. The less reserves the enemy has to reinforce their positions, the better chance you have a breaking through.
5) Change the lineup of your front lines as you're approaching to throw the enemy off. If you do it at the right moment, either they can't take full advantage of their charge as they reposition to match you, or you get to pick the unit engagements to be more favorable to you. You might even be able to open up gaps in their defenses. If you do, rush whatever you can through, even if you have to take some losses to do it. So long as you can start switching up those high ground advantages, it's worth it. The reversal of advantages isn't just 30% more and less. It's 60% more and less! And it can snowball if your breakthrough forces ends up throwing your enemy into disarray. As the saying goes, "There is opportunity within chaos".
5) Keep in mind the type of battle you're in or going into. Who loses if the battle timer runs out? Can you retreat and try for another battle with different starting points? If you want to and are in a position to avoid a battle, consider avoiding risky fights with enemy forces you know you have a decent chance to lose against since the terrain can end up benefiting the enemy, starting you off in a losing position. And even if you don't, you're more liable to lose more in a relatively even battle, so make it your norm to engage with a superior force. That way, even if the terrain doesn't favor you, you still have a chance for a strong win.
Played these games for ages and knew there was some advantages with high ground but never really used it. Didn't know it was this substantial, thanks!
I mean, it's one of the most basic strategies of warfare. I've always used them ever since I played Medieval 2. Those with the high ground will, most of the time, have the biggest advantage
Cool to see the bonus quantified. Thanks.
Very good and informative video. I definitely learned some useful info I was unaware of before watching.
Didn't know that strider mitigated that! nice!
This was a really good video mate, interesting too - had no idea high ground was this influential.
Important to remember even as far back as medieval 2. These kinds of tactics are a mainstay for keeping your army alive and intact when you don't have the stupid auto-replenishment systems in play.
I feel like that was more impactful in medieval 2. Especially against cavarly it mattered a lot as a single charge could break even mid tier units. IN WH3 due the campaign and lord bonuses these kind of differences are getting lost.
I'll take every bad thing about new tw if that mean I don't have to deal with the med2 replenishment
I remember back in the day I only used my general bodyguard cavalry because I knew they would regenerate and I'd continually blood them on crap so the bodyguards grew larger and larger.... Nostalgic cheese 🤌
Only weirdos hate auto replenishment because they feel the need to bring it up all the time
Funny seeing the different sides to this, I've always liked both systems! In a grounded setting based on the real world it feels natural to have to deal with the logistics of replenishing my troops somewhere we can actually get more of them, and it slows the game down strategically in a way I kinda like, you can't just keep rolling through with one army at speed if they take heavy casualties.
For Warhammer though, I like the passive replenishment. It's a high fantasy conquer-fest with a massive map and I don't think Med2 style replenishment would work quite as well for it in tone or strategy.
Charging small entities from high ground throws them back more than on flat ground. Following such a cavalry charge with flanking or rear charges with friendly infantry will envelop models that have been thrown about. When an enemy infantry unit is defending high ground and is engaged by friendly infantry charging them from behind with cavalry will deposit flying knocked back infantry inside your infantry unit where they will quickly get blended up from attacks on multiple sides.
So I guess that's why my skavenslaves have been dealing waaay more damage than skavenslaves should normally do when I rear charge them with mercenary Mournfang Cavalry back in WH2 (which is still the one I play).
Now that's a great way to increase area of contact to your damage advantage besides traditional infantry flanking which only really stacks leadership penalties! I really have to start paying more attention to the model-by-model action of the battles to formulate better melee tactics such as this. Maybe that's the real main function of monstrous infantry in combined arms?
If I know 1 thing is that the Yari wall will beat anyone if they have 1° of élévation
i actually didn't know that striders terrain penalty immunity also included elevation!
i probably still wouldn't charge my rangers up a hill to take more damage, but that is definitely worth knowing
This is why I find some of the maps you run into in campaigns really annoying, particularly when you're defending from the bottom of a map that's just a giant slope. Like guys, we got to pick the ground for this battle, can't we have picked somewhere other than the bottom of a giant hill?
I knew only that units get additional leadership by getting high ground, but I never thought that it actually has battle bonuses, though I still always used a high ground just because looks cool.
I WANT more Total War Tactics!
I used to do it anyway. Mostly so guns can fire above front liners heads and be place them in layers that can fire above each other. I wasn't really aware of the damage bonus though and thought just running up ramps tires the units out but if you're defending at the bottom of a hill and not moving, it wouldn't matter.
Also does this also apply to larger units? Like if say a giant monster is fighting a human sized one, say a hero on foot, does it get a damage boost too or not since it's center is higher than the center of a lowly footslogger? I would have thought it only considers ground elevation but since this also applies to flying units..?
I heard the difference is measured from the feet, not the center or middle
This is how i most reliably get heroic victories against superior armies. A mad dash to the highest elevation on the map, and defending like there was no tomorrow
Interesting, I've been aware high ground still counted in TWWH, but didn't realise it was this magnitude. TBH, I haven't noticed the high-ground advantage having as much effect as way, way back with the original Shogun - those cliff-style hills and those cute little sprites - Good old days!
You want to know a pretty magical one? At least in WH1 and WH2, in a flat ground, no control test, 2 units of empire swordsmen could beat a unit of Cairn Wraiths. They would do almost no damage to the Wraiths but because they were getting hit and thought they were losing, they would start crumbling and die. Despite doing huge damage with each hit and only taking 4 damage per hit from the swordsmen. Despite how their stats were very close. It was horrific, and I complained about it a lot. I havent played much WH3 to test it.
Zerkovich, if you fire at troops that are in combat, how much do your own troops get hit or damaged?
That s not something which can be easy answered. It is different for every single ranged unit. Generally speaking dont shoot with artillery on it, only if theres maybe a way more expensive enemy model fighting your infantry. Or i fyou shoot a big target less shots actually land on your own units rather then the big beast of the enemy which is why i always focus large beasts first with archers even if they may not be as valuable as the infantry.
Consider also that this will only help units who do damage. Empire swordsmen can dish it out but a skavenslave or zombie has no hope against an orc boy. They'll last a little longer though!
I wish this game would make it out of beta so I could enjoy playing it
Also the bigger Vigor penalty for running up hill
With the cavalry charge it doesn't really surprise me how little it matters. Cav is weird in Warhammer. But In Rome 1, a downhill cav charge was absolutely devastating, and an uphill one barely brushed the enemy. Granted, cav is great in Rome 1, but it was still a huge difference. With infantry too, it was huge. Units running uphill to fight broke so fast. Honestly it sometimes feels like in some areas Rome 1 has a lot more depth than modern ones, though the unit diversity of Warhammer is of course, unmatched.
It kinda feels like rome 1 overexaggerated these effects, rather than having actual depth. What's being taken into account hasn't changed, it's just that the actual impact is lower.
It's not really a secret, it literally tells you this in the little tutorial campaign with Yuri, and has done in both 1 and 2 during the tutorial battle as well...
Tutorials are for pussies (Duke Nukem Forever soundtrack starts playing)
Ahh yes, shield wall on a hill. Just like godwinson
Cav is broken. They removed the collision damage to a point that it makes no difference unless its by a heavy monster with huge mass difference. And only the first rank of Cav gets their attack in, but Infantry charging downhill vs Cav, penetrate more into the formation, so they are taking hits from the Cav 2nd rank. It's really messed up.
love watching cavalry playing bowling with the last enemy model for like 10 mins straight while it's got less than 10hp left but still taking no damage getting rammed and ran over constantly
More proof that they broke cavalry in Warhammer. Cavalry surely should have at least the same clear advantage charging downhill as infantry. But their charges just don't work properly.
Something I've wondered with ranged units that have very low arcs (i.e. gunpowder units) if it winds up being more advantageous to fire up hill to get better firing arcs on the enemy units. Even if they cause less damage, they may have more opportunity to hit more targets. Especially when tied up in melee they may have enough of an arc to fire over the heads of their allies.
Just my thoughts, anyone have an opinion/experience on the topic?
With gunpowder, if you are firing downhill, you want your infantry to hold the enemy near or on the flat ground, so your ranged units on the slope have a better angle. If you are firing uphill, you want your ranged units on the flat ground, and your infantry holding the enemy on the slope, for the same good angle.
In reality, if you plan to make use of gunpowder, you want to leave open gaps in your line for your ranged units to shoot through.
i was not aware of that
Thx mate😊
The reason for cavalry charges not doing much damage from uphill to downhill is probably because of the 70 maximum collision damage rule. It's, well, the maximum amount of damage a model can do against another upon collisions in charges.
I have not heard this one before. What is your basis for this knowledge?
@@Cryten0 The Collision Damage video by Battlesey.
Of course !
Love this
Does it also change how morale works. High ground units have more when fighting right?
not directly i think but it will impact it by changing how much they're "losing" or "winning" in any given moment
Except in reality its worst for a swordsman to be uphill because you have to guard and attack lower at an actual disadvantage vs those below you
It is actually easier to fight upwards. The fighter with the high ground can only attack your head and shoulders, If they have shields you can relatively easy block attacks from above. On the other hand its is harder to defend attacks against your legs and feet, wich would be the target for the lower standing swordsman. The only disadvantage that you have in an uphill battle is that it is more tiring to run uphill.
Hey, how do you do these tests? i am having a lot of problems running 2 warhammers simultaneosly to do these tests, do you have 2 computers? or are you able to open 2 games on the same pc? or maybe a mod to control both armies?
Please more tactics🙏😊
It's been like this since Medieval 1 and that had better AI that would at least try to avoid the confrontation on lower ground.
Thing is, warhammer has so much more unit variance that it is going to be much, much harder to program an ai to play all factions well.
@@edwardking9359 Doesn't help the veterans left aye?
This new team probably won't have a scooby about that concern. Espicially if they've labelled it "spaghetti code".
Make sure not to underestimate their power.
the ai likes to sit upon hills to bad it feels forced to come down the moment any of its units gets touched by the firing arc of any of my own ranged units , CA really needs to deal with this issue , the only game where this isnt really present is shogun 2 for some unknown reason
I've got a question that anyone can answer. Is overkill damage a thing? For example a skaven slave has 120 models with 40hp per model. Would a sniper hero with perfect accuracy kill slave unit in 120 shots or like 20 shots?
I don't think damage carries over, but I think sniper heroes' projectiles do carry through multiple enemies.
120 shots but for heroes like the chorfs the snipers got explosive rounds to compensate.
What about flanking?
So does this work in earlier games like Warhammer 1 and 2 as well? I assume it isn't new.
if you haven't seen other comments then people claim that it's a very old mechanic, at least reaching Rome 1
@@mathiasrrybaThat makes sense, thanks.
It's too bad tho how much the line of sight issues of Gunpowder units limit you when trying to take advantage of the high ground. In my experience using those units on hills etc makes them very unreliable in practice.
Yeah, if you're making heavy use of guns I find it's most reliable to put infantry really close to the bottom of the hill and guns a good bit above. This way the enemy infantry gets locked into combat at the bottom and your guns have a pretty clear shot at them, and your infantry *might* still grt a little bit of advantage.
@@cheesi And your Guns might shoot if they feel like it, the weather is nice and they aren't hungry xD
@@CacneaMain Yeah, still a bit janky but this works almost all the time for me! At least a lot more than if I place the infantry higher up the hill.
this apply on Warhammer 1?
Is Zerkovich Taika Waititi? Something in my head makes their 2 voices and accents similar in some way
But what about ork swordsmen vs empire boys?
lmao
I am diasappointed. Tghere was a perfect ooportunity to use elves as the lower elevated unit. Why are there no dead elves in the video?
Like the Titel❤
Well this has been the case since Shogun (1). So.. like 23 years? :D I winder if there is someone who doesn't know these things still.
In earlier videos of Zerk playing he never evened out the diplomacy tab for that free juicy money when partaking in diplomacy
Does anybody know why? Is there something I don't know when not taking the money?
is this also valid in Warhammer II ?
yes
Obi-Wan has taught you well
Is there "fall damage" when you manage to throw some unit downhill? Is that a tactic?
If an entity falls off of something, such as a ladder or wall, it will straight up die. This is why the rice paddies in Cathay maps were such a problem (might still be, not sure if they ever got fixed).
it definitely does work on walls. Gotta love flying cav units like the doom knights of Tzeentch crashing down onto enemy units on walls and straight up deleting half the unit in a second.
huh i thought they removed this after rome 2 and never appeared in warhammer... so what does exhaustion do then?
A bunch of things to a unit's stats, but most importantly reduces their melee attack by up to -30% at full exhaustion. Very significant debuff. It also reduces speed, charge bonus and even armor at the higher levels. There are other effects which are listed on the table in the wiki along with each fatigue level.
but they are never reflected in the stats widnow@@mekingtiger9095
Speed is most noticeable, when they get exhausted even if you tell them to fast march they'll just drag their feet.
@@mathiasrryba There's moving animation changes for that?
@@mekingtiger9095 I didn't pay attention if that's the case, I was speaking in metaphors. Exhausted units are slow as snails
BANANAKIN!
Haven't you done this topic before?
Hello there!
But Darth Maul had the high ground...
Yeah, and Obi Wan pulled the same move. Maybe that's why he was ready for it.
But dwarf thunderes has shields
A fair bit of mic puffing going on. Rough to listen to.
Yay!!!!!🤩
Well yeah, makes perfect sense. If you go outside right now and find the nearest hill, you get on an incline and try swinging a 10-15lb object, (average weight of a sword,) upwards a few times. It’ll feel heavier after a few swings, and it’ll also hit softer because you’re going against gravity. If you’re on a higher part of the hill, you’ll be able to swing a sword downwards, it’ll hit HARDER, and you can swing many more times because you’re going WITH gravity.
Historical greatswords were 6-10 lbs, longswords 2.4 to 4.4lb and arming swords somewehere around 2.5 lb. So it's not quite as tiring as what you said.
@@hakuslayer7918 It’s still a matter of going with or against gravity. And I’m sure sustained fighting uphill with the grass turning to mud would see soldiers start to slip and fall, tripping their guys up for easy stabs/cuts. Thanks for the correction.
I could argue, what in reality, the lower side would have an advantage, because of the curvature you dont have to protect your legs, when the higher side becomes more open for the attack
Though that can often be countered by simple weight, in a tight melee the strength of sides pushing against each other, and a much easier time flanking a hemmed in opponent.
High ground was always battlewinning. Like, in every total war game. How are you guys sleeping on that?
Didnt even bother to watch the video. You just now figured this out? Total War has been doing this from their very first game. Just place a ranged unit on the same hill and watch their range increase
Actually irl high ground is a disadvantage.
Your lower half is much harder to defend while enemy need to defend only thier upper half.
It's really dangerous.
In a duel setting, maybe, in a battlefield one, not so sure
Nope, the opposite - with shields + armor you can easily protect your lower half if you have the high ground.
And a better position for stabbing & hacking, especially on the heads
@@frankkobold aren't you forgetting that the foe has much less to defend now?
Also try it yourself.
Shields do make it less of a problem but it doesn't help that much...
Since polearms are the king.
I am speaking not only for myself as a hema enthusiast, but also for literally dozens of people who states the same, being a part of hema as well.
As for the part of said people you might have known - search for Skallagrim, Shadiversity and etc
Nonsense. If you have the high ground, gravity is literally on your side. Point a spear down at whoever is trying to approach you and that's that.
@@samarkand1585 there sre 2 main reason of the high ground importance which i recall right now.
1. Ranged. Archers, crossbowmen and etc have much more range, options and etc.
2. Stamina and etc. Good thing that if you defend said archers (or other kind of ranged threat) - foes' ability to rush to you might be limited and it might fatigue them even more than usual march and etc.
(I m not speaking of hussite wagon and etc, cause it's more of a fortification advantage then a just high ground.)
Don't thunderers still get their missile block chance even if they arent holding their shield? I swear I've heard that somewhere before, same with lothern sea guard.