​That thread is not ‘universally agreed’. The stat changes suggested in that thread are basically based on multiplayer battles. I play mostly singleplayer campaigns, sometimes play multiplayer campaigns with friends, but I never play multiplayer battles.

Using the same set of stats for single player campaigns and multiplayer battles is somehow a laziness, and sadly, CA basically did it.

CA's called out looking at the thread for changes publicly so I think noting it as a resource is fair game. Obviously CA is capable of using their own internal metrics and other suggestions when making balance changes as they regularly do. The key point, which I think everyone would agree with, is that more consistent patches aimed at improving balance in small ways would be positive for player experiences and the overall game health. Everyone who has been here for a while can attest to my strong desire for a chariot balance pass. :P

​

yanghaohit#5017 wrote:

​That thread is not ‘universally agreed’. The stat changes suggested in that thread are basically based on multiplayer battles. I play mostly singleplayer campaigns, sometimes play multiplayer campaigns with friends, but I never play multiplayer battles.

Using the same set of stats for single player campaigns and multiplayer battles is somehow a laziness, and sadly, CA basically did it.

Basing unit balancing on single-player is fruitless as long as you can stack a million permanent buffs on your units with very little effort. Those -2s and +1s that MP balancing usually consists of are obsolete only a few turns into any campaign. 

That's why I know whenever someone says they want single-player based balancing, they are actually saying "don't touch my overpowered toys!".

​

yanghaohit#5017 wrote:

​That thread is not ‘universally agreed’. The stat changes suggested in that thread are basically based on multiplayer battles. I play mostly singleplayer campaigns, sometimes play multiplayer campaigns with friends, but I never play multiplayer battles.

Using the same set of stats for single player campaigns and multiplayer battles is somehow a laziness, and sadly, CA basically did it.

I believe that splitting unit stats between Multiplayer battles and Campaigns would be a waste of resources and wouldn't benefit any side, especially since in campaign you can buff units extensively through tech trees, lords, heroes, landmarks. Any changes made to benefit the Battles crowd could be either undone if the change was a nerf, or could let a unit be even better through buffs, especially if it's a percentage buff.

A thread for campaign specific balance problems could always be created by the campaign crowd. I have doubts that it would be beneficial because of the inherent sandbox design of it.

​

TainBoCuailinge#8335 wrote:
That's why I know whenever someone says they want single-player based balancing, they are actually saying "don't touch my overpowered toys!".

​There is no logical connection between the two points. In fact, if you're a regular on this forum or go through some of my previous posts, you'll see that I'm one of the biggest proponents of nerfing those overpowered toys on this forum, and that I've long campaigned against the growing phenomenon of powercreep and all sorts of anti-strategy game design in Warhammer 3.

And by the way, unit balancing isn't about all nerf or all buff, it's both. ‘Don't touch my overpowered toys!’, that's a pretty funny retort.

​

TainBoCuailinge#8335 wrote:
Basing unit balancing on single-player is fruitless

​You're misunderstanding what I'm saying. 

Is there a possibility that single player campaigns don't require the same unit balancing as multiplayer battles. Of course, single player battles need some sort of balancing (and not just units, but techs, skill trees, etc.), I'm saying that they don't need the sort of unit balancing that is traditionally basing on multiplayer competitiveness and antagonism. Diverse units of different races need to maintain their characteristics (based on lore and campaign positioning), and they shouldn't be subject to random campaign stat adjustments just because they underperform or overperform in multiplayer battles.

What I'm calling for is the building of two sets of unit stats , not 'basing unit balancing on single-player'.

Really appreciated the updates, having more like this would definitely aid in maintaining the game between the larger patches.

​

yanghaohit#5017 wrote:

​That thread is not ‘universally agreed’. The stat changes suggested in that thread are basically based on multiplayer battles. I play mostly singleplayer campaigns, sometimes play multiplayer campaigns with friends, but I never play multiplayer battles.

Using the same set of stats for single player campaigns and multiplayer battles is somehow a laziness, and sadly, CA basically did it.

Multiplayer campaigns typically do end up becoming multiplayer battles. Unless you only do co-op campaigns. 

I pretty much play head-to-head multiplayer campaigns with friends once a week or once a fortnight. So it's nice for CA to try and balance the sandbox.