With the awesomeness that was ToD and the keeping of its model with the upcoming Khorne DLC, as well as the promise of more frequent signifcant updates, CA has regained my trust about future content (even if the question of the remaining length of support is still up in the air). Some time ago, after ToD's release, I re-edited my SoC-induced review into a positive one and in conjunction with the steam summer sale, I went further back, to where the controversy began in my eyes. The Chaos Dwarfs, who lost out on a 4th LL (whether that would've been Gorduz or someone else) and Kislev lost out on a potential FLC LL (which I will always believe that Ulrika could've been). The Chaos Dwarfs, who at the time of their release, because of this misguided focus on LHs at the expense of LLs (and granted, race quality), I refused to endorse and buy. But now, with the game and its focus seemingly back on a better course, I decided to endorse CA again with not just my purchase of ToD, but also of the Chaos Dwarfs.

However, there is a reason that I waited for the steam summer sale. In my mind, no matter how polished a race may be, it will still never be worth 25$/euros with only 3 LLs. By old WH2 standards, such a prize would've equalled 5 LLs. And sure, inflation has been a thing, but not enough to justify a 66% rise in price. But with the summer sale, it dropped down to 17,8. Comparatively, that's roughly an 18% increase from before. That was... acceptable, I suppose, given recent results and future prospects. So, I finally (after holding out for a year and 2.5 months on principle) bought the Chaos Dwarfs, returning to my original pattern of buying everything for WH3. And this is even regarding a race that I will probably only play once or twice, as they don't hold much interest for me.

But know this, this is not a change of heart or acknowledgement of submission regarding the number of LLs that should be in a race pack. Tomb Kings and Vampire Coast still hold the golden standard of 4 (with room for more even, in the future), which should be adhered to. The Chaos Dwarfs can be forgiven for this one, on the account of being a slightly underdeveloped race, but only this once. Looking forward though, towards the day of the Dogs of War, race packs once again need to be done proper justice. Even when ignoring the huge potential of what minor races could be put under the DoW banner, like Halflings, Amazons or Hobgoblins, the golden 4 still needs to be adhered to in order to cover a satisfying amount of race diversity in all matters. Even if its just Tilea, Estalia and the Border Princes, we should still have Borgio, Lucrezia, Marco Colombo and Lietpold (or *insert other names here*). To bring out the fullest that the race can offer in just one swoop (which may be all they have).

4 LLs, CA. Make it happen again.

It is GWs decision here not CAs. DoW will most likely be the last Campaign pack we will ever get sadly. 

​

TheWattman#7460 wrote:
The Chaos Dwarfs, who at the time of their release, because of this misguided focus on LHs at the expense of LLs (and granted, race quality), I refused to endorse and buy.

It wasn’t misguided to make Gorduz an LH. It was the correct choice given who the character was and it was also correct to include him as the sole remaining army book character. It also wasn’t just an LH that the Chaos Dwarfs got over an LL.

The Chaos Dwarfs also ended up with more units, and, more importantly, more generic characters alongside the most detailed set of campaign mechanics in the game. The individual quality of Chaos Dwarf campaigns are head and shoulders above most other campaigns in the game, let alone the TKs or VCoast who have one generic lord and pretty barebones mechanics after all these years.

It was correct to make Ulrika an LH. However, she should have been included in some Kislev DLC, and another FLC LL added instead. Unfortunately, that ship has sailed but hopefully that will be accounted for in time.

TheWattman#7460 wrote:
Even if its just Tilea, Estalia and the Border Princes, we should still have Borgio, Lucrezia, Marco Colombo and Lietpold (or *insert other names here*). To bring out the fullest that the race can offer in just one swoop (which may be all they have).

DoW would also be more than fine with just the core 3 LLs from their army book and an LH. Biorgio, Lorenzo, and Lucrezzia + Mydas/Marco as an LH.

4 LLs is a bit arbitrary as a standard. There are more campaign packs with 3 LLs. 4 LLs forced CA to make dumb decisions like Aranessa. The VCoast would have probably been better off with 3 LLs and a Vangheist LH + an additional generic character than how they ended up.

I am always in favour of getting more LLs and I would have liked a 4th LL for the Chaos Dwarves very much.
But personally, I think that the incredibly great mechanics heavily outweight another LL when it comes to relevant DLC value.

​

Passthechips#4366 wrote:

​

TheWattman#7460 wrote:
The Chaos Dwarfs, who at the time of their release, because of this misguided focus on LHs at the expense of LLs (and granted, race quality), I refused to endorse and buy.

It wasn’t misguided to make Gorduz an LH. It was the correct choice given who the character was and it was also correct to include him as the sole remaining army book character. It also wasn’t just an LH that the Chaos Dwarfs got over an LL.

The Chaos Dwarfs also ended up with more units, and, more importantly, more generic characters alongside the most detailed set of campaign mechanics in the game. The individual quality of Chaos Dwarf campaigns are head and shoulders above most other campaigns in the game, let alone the TKs or VCoast who have one generic lord and pretty barebones mechanics after all these years.

It was correct to make Ulrika an LH. However, she should have been included in some Kislev DLC, and another FLC LL added instead. Unfortunately, that ship has sailed but hopefully that will be accounted for in time.

TheWattman#7460 wrote:
Even if its just Tilea, Estalia and the Border Princes, we should still have Borgio, Lucrezia, Marco Colombo and Lietpold (or *insert other names here*). To bring out the fullest that the race can offer in just one swoop (which may be all they have).

DoW would also be more than fine with just the core 3 LLs from their army book and an LH. Biorgio, Lorenzo, and Lucrezzia + Mydas/Marco as an LH.

4 LLs is a bit arbitrary as a standard. There are more campaign packs with 3 LLs. 4 LLs forced CA to make dumb decisions like Aranessa. The VCoast would have probably been better off with 3 LLs and a Vangheist LH + an additional generic character than how they ended up.

1. It wasn't necessarily just Gorduz that the Chaos Dwarfs missed out on with the focus on inwards quality. One of the chief gripes to this day about the Chaos Dwarfs (besides not getting a Bull Centaur LL) is the lack of diverse starts, with all of their options essentially in the Dark Lands (Zhatan isn't far away enough). Baring the moving of Zhatan (who lorefully also belongs in the Dark Lands) or any of the others, there were prime established characters (in Chaos Dwarf terms) that could've easily brought this crucial diversity, even if Tordrek was never an option since being from Dreadfleet:

- Rykarth the Unbreakable (Nemesis Crown Campaign) -> Talabecland, searching for the Nemesis Crown

- The Black Dwarf (White Dwarf 201) -> Kislev area, wanting to seize control of trade routes/burn Praag and Salzenmund

- Abnagg Helbeard (Plague Fleet) -> Southlands, seeking to conquer the Fortress of Dawn (IE-only, western sea in RoC)

2. The race packs of WH1 aren't really comparable (as Beastmen even launched with only 2) and 4 provides a satifactory number of perspectives. The Vampire Coast was a result of heavy GW interference due to the failure of Dreadfleet. Then again, Tomb Kings are nearly always hailed as a perfect race pack and DLC as a whole, with just enough content omitted to make a good final update in WH3. A DoW with only 3 LLs, given the diversity of such a race, would feel incomplete and needlessly narrowed down, especially by those wanting Halflings and the like.

​​

TheWattman#7460 wrote:
1. It wasn't necessarily just Gorduz that the Chaos Dwarfs missed out on with the focus on inwards quality. One of the chief gripes to this day about the Chaos Dwarfs (besides not getting a Bull Centaur LL) is the lack of diverse starts, with all of their options essentially in the Dark Lands (Zhatan isn't far away enough).

See I’ve been told otherwise by several users here that this in fact not a big problem. I don’t know who to believe at this point. If this is a chief gripe, it’s clearly a contested one.

TheWattman#7460 wrote:

- Rykarth the Unbreakable (Nemesis Crown Campaign) -> Talabecland, searching for the Nemesis Crown

- The Black Dwarf (White Dwarf 201) -> Kislev area, wanting to seize control of trade routes/burn Praag and Salzenmund

- Abnagg Helbeard (Plague Fleet) -> Southlands, seeking to conquer the Fortress of Dawn (IE-only, western sea in RoC)

These are all generic characters that essentially play into the same archetypes existing characters play into. They have the most basic characterization and mostly overlap with Zhatan. Rykarth’s items were even rolled into Zhatan!

At a certain point it would be adding characters just to add characters for quantity’s sake.

TheWattman#7460 wrote:
2. The race packs of WH1 aren't really comparable (as Beastmen even launched with only 2) and 4 provides a satifactory number of perspectives. The Vampire Coast was a result of heavy GW interference due to the failure of Dreadfleet

4 perspectives being the standard versus 3 perspectives is arbitrary. I’d wager many players often just stick to a single 1-2 characters they like to play. It depends wholly on who those characters are and whether adding them is worth it over additional campaign depth in the form of other content.  The VCoast, regardless of GW interference or not, wasn’t made that much better for the inclusion of Aranessa or even Cylostra. The former remaining an abject pain point for many. Both being the much less popular LLs in spades.

TheWattman#7460 wrote:
Then again, Tomb Kings are nearly always hailed as a perfect race pack and DLC as a whole, with just enough content omitted to make a good final update in WH3.

Which is mostly due to rose-tinted glasses. The Tomb Kings were the first DLC of WH2 and their main competition were the absolutely lackluster DLCs and mechanics of WH1. If the race was to be released today as is it would be panned for its relatively boring non-mechanics, and several of its content and design decisions. I say this as someone whose favorite race is the Tomb Kings.

TheWattman#7460 wrote:
A DoW with only 3 LLs, given the diversity of such a race, would feel incomplete and needlessly narrowed down, especially by those wanting Halflings and the like.

The diversity of the DoW was never about its LLs but the varied armies you could field under them. Even then your proposed selection of LLs doesn’t even touch upon that diversity to begin with. While characters like Lietpold would be fine additions, they don’t really add that much. I’m not saying I wouldn’t like Lietpold, but if there was a trade-off between him or another generic character + LH, I’d probably take the later.

​

Captain_Rex#1635 wrote:

It is GWs decision here not CAs. DoW will most likely be the last Campaign pack we will ever get sadly. 

Yes yes, its always GW's fault.

​

Passthechips#4366 wrote:
See I’ve been told otherwise by several users here that this in fact not a big problem. I don’t know who to believe at this point. If this is a chief gripe, it’s clearly a contested one.

There definitely are two opposed opinions on lord location. Group A want all the lords to be in their territory (Empire lords in the Empire, HE lords in Ulthuan, Chorf lords in Darklands, Kislev lords in Kislev ect), and Group B want them spread out for more diverse starts.

Passthechips#4366 wrote:
I’d wager many players often just stick to a single 1-2 characters they like to play.

True, but it's not the same couple characters for everyone. I've never touched Setrra or Noctilus, my cousin doesn't play Arkhan or Cylostra, and the other friend I play with doesn't touch Khatep or Aranessa. So not adding that extra character would mean one of us would be down a character depending on who you ask.

Surge_2#1464 wrote:

Yes yes, its always GW's fault.

I mean... in this case it very likely is GW saying "You can't make this race because we do not want to support it or create lore for it" Rather than CA who have said "We want to do the entire Warhammer world" and are the ones that convinced them to allow Cathay (And if what I've heard is true, it was GW seeing how CA did the Vampire Coast that made them say ok to Cathay)

​

Passthechips#4366 wrote:

TheWattman#7460 wrote:

- Rykarth the Unbreakable (Nemesis Crown Campaign) -> Talabecland, searching for the Nemesis Crown

- The Black Dwarf (White Dwarf 201) -> Kislev area, wanting to seize control of trade routes/burn Praag and Salzenmund

- Abnagg Helbeard (Plague Fleet) -> Southlands, seeking to conquer the Fortress of Dawn (IE-only, western sea in RoC)

These are all generic characters that essentially play into the same archetypes existing characters play into. They have the most basic characterization and mostly overlap with Zhatan. Rykarth’s items were even rolled into Zhatan!

At a certain point it would be adding characters just to add characters for quantity’s sake.

TheWattman#7460 wrote:
2. The race packs of WH1 aren't really comparable (as Beastmen even launched with only 2) and 4 provides a satifactory number of perspectives. The Vampire Coast was a result of heavy GW interference due to the failure of Dreadfleet

4 perspectives being the standard versus 3 perspectives is arbitrary. I’d wager many players often just stick to a single 1-2 characters they like to play. It depends wholly on who those characters are and whether adding them is worth it over additional campaign depth in the form of other content.  The VCoast, regardless of GW interference or not, wasn’t made that much better for the inclusion of Aranessa or even Cylostra. The former remaining an abject pain point for many. Both being the much less popular LLs in spades.

TheWattman#7460 wrote:
Then again, Tomb Kings are nearly always hailed as a perfect race pack and DLC as a whole, with just enough content omitted to make a good final update in WH3.

Which is mostly due to rose-tinted glasses. The Tomb Kings were the first DLC of WH2 and their main competition were the absolutely lackluster DLCs and mechanics of WH1. If the race was to be released today as is it would be panned for its relatively boring non-mechanics, and several of its content and design decisions. I say this as someone whose favorite race is the Tomb Kings.

TheWattman#7460 wrote:
A DoW with only 3 LLs, given the diversity of such a race, would feel incomplete and needlessly narrowed down, especially by those wanting Halflings and the like.

The diversity of the DoW was never about its LLs but the varied armies you could field under them. Even then your proposed selection of LLs doesn’t even touch upon that diversity to begin with. While characters like Lietpold would be fine additions, they don’t really add that much. I’m not saying I wouldn’t like Lietpold, but if there was a trade-off between him or another generic character + LH, I’d probably take the later.

1. Such characters could be redeveloped, just like Kislev was

2. Aranessa would've been highly popular if she had been done proper justice. And people having their favorites is true for any race, but with 4, its more likely that you'll have someone for everyone beyond 1 or 2 "homeland characters" and just one "special case".

3. That would be due to the premise and the limitations of WH2 back then (just remember how bland the High Elves or Lizardmen feel right now), hardly to blame on the number of LLs.

4. Those LLs offer diversity of starting perspectives rather than within the race itself. For real diversity for the DoW, you'd have to include plenty of subraces. If it was feasible, then DoW would ideally be a 10+ LL race, but that is not gonna happen (and having the subraces without LLs to lead them is pointless). Hence diversity have to be found elsewhere, when you just have the core aspects to work with. Borgio and Lietpold offer the homeland perspective, Lucrezzia the eastern and Marco Colombo the unique Lizardmen-friendly style in the west. Anything less than that and you don't really get a diverse experience. Hence why 4 is an optimal number. Like your own Tomb Kings can testify to. I mean, would you've been willing to sacrifice either Khalida or Khatep, having them turned into a LH?

​

mecanojavi99#6562 wrote:
I have some differing opinions on some of the topics brought up by OP, but I definitely agree with the core idea that DoW should have 4 LLs and I even would push it further by saying that Chorfs should be part of Lord Pack down the line adding the few remaining units they are missing and their missing 4th LL.

+1

​

mecanojavi99#6562 wrote:

I have some differing opinions on some of the topics brought up by OP, but I definitely agree with the core idea that DoW should have 4 LLs and I even would push it further by saying that Chorfs should be part of Lord Pack down the line adding the few remaining units they are missing and their missing 4th LL.

Indeed and they can certain provide for themselves:

​

If Dark Elves don't get a DLC with the Magma Dragon, throw that in as well, replacing the Kollossus. That way, you only pull from Monstrous Arcanum, 4th and 3rd edition and the Wulfrik novel. Doesn't even have to be Tordrek either, pull a Cylostra-style Bull Centaur to make everybody happy.

​

TheWattman#7460 wrote:

​

Passthechips#4366 wrote:

TheWattman#7460 wrote:

- Rykarth the Unbreakable (Nemesis Crown Campaign) -> Talabecland, searching for the Nemesis Crown

- The Black Dwarf (White Dwarf 201) -> Kislev area, wanting to seize control of trade routes/burn Praag and Salzenmund

- Abnagg Helbeard (Plague Fleet) -> Southlands, seeking to conquer the Fortress of Dawn (IE-only, western sea in RoC)

These are all generic characters that essentially play into the same archetypes existing characters play into. They have the most basic characterization and mostly overlap with Zhatan. Rykarth’s items were even rolled into Zhatan!

At a certain point it would be adding characters just to add characters for quantity’s sake.

TheWattman#7460 wrote:
2. The race packs of WH1 aren't really comparable (as Beastmen even launched with only 2) and 4 provides a satifactory number of perspectives. The Vampire Coast was a result of heavy GW interference due to the failure of Dreadfleet

4 perspectives being the standard versus 3 perspectives is arbitrary. I’d wager many players often just stick to a single 1-2 characters they like to play. It depends wholly on who those characters are and whether adding them is worth it over additional campaign depth in the form of other content.  The VCoast, regardless of GW interference or not, wasn’t made that much better for the inclusion of Aranessa or even Cylostra. The former remaining an abject pain point for many. Both being the much less popular LLs in spades.

TheWattman#7460 wrote:
Then again, Tomb Kings are nearly always hailed as a perfect race pack and DLC as a whole, with just enough content omitted to make a good final update in WH3.

Which is mostly due to rose-tinted glasses. The Tomb Kings were the first DLC of WH2 and their main competition were the absolutely lackluster DLCs and mechanics of WH1. If the race was to be released today as is it would be panned for its relatively boring non-mechanics, and several of its content and design decisions. I say this as someone whose favorite race is the Tomb Kings.

TheWattman#7460 wrote:
A DoW with only 3 LLs, given the diversity of such a race, would feel incomplete and needlessly narrowed down, especially by those wanting Halflings and the like.

The diversity of the DoW was never about its LLs but the varied armies you could field under them. Even then your proposed selection of LLs doesn’t even touch upon that diversity to begin with. While characters like Lietpold would be fine additions, they don’t really add that much. I’m not saying I wouldn’t like Lietpold, but if there was a trade-off between him or another generic character + LH, I’d probably take the later.

1. Such characters could be redeveloped, just like Kislev was

2. Aranessa would've been highly popular if she had been done proper justice. And people having their favorites is true for any race, but with 4, its more likely that you'll have someone for everyone beyond 1 or 2 "homeland characters" and just one "special case".

3. That would be due to the premise and the limitations of WH2 back then (just remember how bland the High Elves or Lizardmen feel right now), hardly to blame on the number of LLs.

4. Those LLs offer diversity of starting perspectives rather than within the race itself. For real diversity for the DoW, you'd have to include plenty of subraces. If it was feasible, then DoW would ideally be a 10+ LL race, but that is not gonna happen (and having the subraces without LLs to lead them is pointless). Hence diversity have to be found elsewhere, when you just have the core aspects to work with. Borgio and Lietpold offer the homeland perspective, Lucrezzia the eastern and Marco Colombo the unique Lizardmen-friendly style in the west. Anything less than that and you don't really get a diverse experience. Hence why 4 is an optimal number. Like your own Tomb Kings can testify to. I mean, would you've been willing to sacrifice either Khalida or Khatep, having them turned into a LH?

You don't really need to think too much about it to find 4 DoW LLs that offer both interesting start positions and diversity inside the Race.

Borgio (Tilean LL, start somewhere fulfilling a contract)

Lucrezzia (Tilean LL, Start in Miragliano)

Issabela (Estalian LL, start in Magritta)

Lietpold (Border Prince LL, start in any Border Princes settlement)

​

mecanojavi99#6562 wrote:

​

You don't really need to think too much about it to find 4 DoW LLs that offer both interesting start positions and diversity inside the Race.

Borgio (Tilean LL, start somewhere fulfilling a contract)

Lucrezzia (Tilean LL, Start in Miragliano)

Issabela (Estalian LL, start in Magritta)

Lietpold (Border Prince LL, start in any Border Princes settlement)

1. Borgio, is the Karl Franz of the DoW, so he would naturally start in Miragliano.

2. Isabela who?

​

TheWattman#7460 wrote:

​

mecanojavi99#6562 wrote:

​

You don't really need to think too much about it to find 4 DoW LLs that offer both interesting start positions and diversity inside the Race.

Borgio (Tilean LL, start somewhere fulfilling a contract)

Lucrezzia (Tilean LL, Start in Miragliano)

Issabela (Estalian LL, start in Magritta)

Lietpold (Border Prince LL, start in any Border Princes settlement)

1. Borgio, is the Karl Franz of the DoW, so he would naturally start in Miragliano.

2. Isabela who?

Borgio is also a mercenary, he can start away leaving his wife Lucrezzia in charge of Miragliano.

The current head of the entire Cult of Myrmidia, the Volkmar of the Southern Realms.

​

mecanojavi99#6562 wrote:

Borgio is also a mercenary, he can start away leaving his wife Lucrezzia in charge of Miragliano.

Yeah, but Borgio is also the ruler of the primary city, so that makes him the automatic obligatory capital character (who can still go and do contracts) that every race has. Borgio is also married to Dolchellata, Lucrezzia's sister, not Lucrezzia herself. And Lucrezzia herself holds power in Pavona.

​

TheWattman#7460 wrote:

​

mecanojavi99#6562 wrote:

Borgio is also a mercenary, he can start away leaving his wife Lucrezzia in charge of Miragliano.

Yeah, but Borgio is also the ruler of the primary city, so that makes him the automatic obligatory capital character (who can still go and do contracts) that every race has. Borgio is also married to Dolchellata, Lucrezzia's sister, not Lucrezzia herself. And Lucrezzia herself holds power in Pavona.

My bad I confused Lucrezzia with her sister.

Still, it wouldn't be out of the realm of possibility for Borgio to be abroad and

his Sister in Law taking power in his absence, it's not like Lucrezzia is known for being trustworthy.

We also have examples of Race leaders starting abroad, Yuan Bo for example.

​

Passthechips#4366 wrote:

Do people exist that like Aranessa or Cylostra the most? Totally. Do they make up enough of the playerbase to warrant their inclusion as is over other content? Dunno.

Fair