I never really liked Kislev all that much, but the new update really made them dynamic, fun, and interesting. I love how I have to genuinely think about what buildings I need to build, what leaders I need for my armies, stuff like that. The politics feel more alive then ever, and my interest in the lore of the faction is at an all time high.

I’m really excited to continue my run sometime later today (probably today) after yesterday’s run got botched by Throt steamrolling me with early game doom stacks of Weapon Teams and Stormvermin while I was just getting my Light Sleds. No joke. He had 4 armies beeline towards me with Azrael backing him up, haha.

I hope they get 1 more DLC.

What CA changed about Kislev has very limited overlap with the problems I have with it.

I would be surprised if they haven't improved the campaign experience in some ways (it sounds like a mixed bag from what I've seen), but I still strongly dislike the faction and have no wish to play it (nor do I take any joy in playing against it) due to roster issues.

By Our Blood is a poorly-conceived ability which serves very little purpose outside of making battles more all-or-nothing (something which, IMO, just makes the game worse, and often does not benefit either side).  I'd prefer to see it removed entirely, but I'd settle for having it only work when the general is alive.

Kislevite Warriors are overtuned for their tier and cost.  Their "weak stat" in comparison to similar, more expensive units is Leadership, which frankly doesn't mean much of anything when By Our Blood exists.  Otherwise, their stats are pretty much the same as Jade Warriors (Halberds) aside from lacking heavy armour, in spite of being significantly more accessible.  And Jade Warriors are already very good for their tier - having a T1 unit which can be compared that closely to them is crazy.  Empire halberds are more typical, and their stats are also very similar to Kislevite Warriors despite being a tier higher.

the only things I wish CA nerf is Skulltaker, lustria is already not interesting and now he makes it even worst

​

Steelclaw#6359 wrote:

What CA changed about Kislev has very limited overlap with the problems I have with it.

I would be surprised if they haven't improved the campaign experience in some ways (it sounds like a mixed bag from what I've seen), but I still strongly dislike the faction and have no wish to play it (nor do I take any joy in playing against it) due to roster issues.

By Our Blood is a poorly-conceived ability which serves very little purpose outside of making battles more all-or-nothing (something which, IMO, just makes the game worse, and often does not benefit either side).  I'd prefer to see it removed entirely, but I'd settle for having it only work when the general is alive.

Kislevite Warriors are overtuned for their tier and cost.  Their "weak stat" in comparison to similar, more expensive units is Leadership, which frankly doesn't mean much of anything when By Our Blood exists.  Otherwise, their stats are pretty much the same as Jade Warriors (Halberds) aside from lacking heavy armour, in spite of being significantly more accessible.  And Jade Warriors are already very good for their tier - having a T1 unit which can be compared that closely to them is crazy.  Empire halberds are more typical, and their stats are also very similar to Kislevite Warriors despite being a tier higher.

I will admit-I do definitely feel some of the holes in the roster and I still think it’s incredibly weird that the Great Orthodoxy is capable of recruiting Ice Witches.

That’s why I’m REALLY HOPING for 1 more DLC for Kislev.

​

Sera#5545 wrote:

the only things I wish CA nerf is Skulltaker, lustria is already not interesting and now he makes it even worst

I do agree that Lustria needs some touchups.

​

Steelclaw#6359 wrote:
Kislevite Warriors are overtuned for their tier and cost.  Their "weak stat" in comparison to similar, more expensive units is Leadership, which frankly doesn't mean much of anything when By Our Blood exists. 

Yep, Kislevite Warriors are overtuned for T1, they should be pushed to T2 or even T3 or they should be nerfed by significantly reducing MD and AP damage (they're fighting with friggin' pitchforks!). Low tier AP+AL has always proven to be a bad idea (see Deckhand Mob Polearms who completely devalued Depth Guard Halberds) yet CA blithely repeated their mistake.

By Our Blood should also be an ability exclusive to higher tiered units (T3 and up), not to just any trash Kislev can field.

​

TainBoCuailinge#8335 wrote:

​

Steelclaw#6359 wrote:
Kislevite Warriors are overtuned for their tier and cost.  Their "weak stat" in comparison to similar, more expensive units is Leadership, which frankly doesn't mean much of anything when By Our Blood exists. 

Yep, Kislevite Warriors are overtuned for T1, they should be pushed to T2 or even T3 or they should be nerfed by significantly reducing MD and AP damage (they're fighting with friggin' pitchforks!). Low tier AP+AL has always proven to be a bad idea (see Deckhand Mob Polearms who completely devalued Depth Guard Halberds) yet CA blithely repeated their mistake.

By Our Blood should also be an ability exclusive to higher tiered units (T3 and up), not to just any trash Kislev can field.

Make them T1 and not T0, both kossars units should be T0.

​

Dragonage2ftw#8884 wrote:

I will admit-I do definitely feel some of the holes in the roster and I still think it’s incredibly weird that the Great Orthodoxy is capable of recruiting Ice Witches.

That’s why I’m REALLY HOPING for 1 more DLC for Kislev.

I can't imagine Kislev gets 1 dlc while Cathay gets 2-3 dlc. I think GW are a little unsure about what to do with them, but they'll likely get one more at least. Hopefully with a generic Orthodoxy Patriarch/Matriarch lord and a Boyar hero of some kind. Would finish out the 4 groups.

Ice Witch L, Ice Witch H

Druzhina L, Hag H

_______, Patriarch

Boyar, ________

So a support lord, and a melee hero

​

TainBoCuailinge#8335 wrote:

​

dogoska#1535 wrote:
Make them T1 and not T0, both kossars units should be T0.

Kislevite Warriors are better than Empire Halberdiers (which are T2) in every regard that matters, so T1 is too low. Either nerf by reducing MD and AP (and remove By Your Blood) or push them to T2 with at least 600g recruitment cost and 150 upkeep.

Kossars are also way too powerful for T0. Compared to High Elf Archers they have the same ranged DPS but trade 40 range for way better melee combat stats and lower cost plus By Your Blood and that means they can't be countered by Warhounds. That's way too good for T0. Same as with Kislevite Warriors they either need a nerf or a tier upgrade + price hike.

The only stat where Kislevite Warriors are better than Empire Halberdiers are in speed, and the latter are better than warriors in everything else than charge bonus and armor. Yes 25 secs of unbreakable when it is needed most is ridiculous on a T1 unit, but not by that much.

HE Archer also have martial prowess, which closes the gap between their melee stats by a bit from what the stat card says (though kossars still come out ahead) I'd also argue that extra range is nothing to dismiss, as 180 range outranges almost anything that isn't artillery, which is more enemies dead before they can close the gap to attack or shoot back.

​

Foefaller#9840 wrote:
HE Archer also have martial prowess, which closes the gap between their melee stats by a bit from what the stat card says (though kossars still come out ahead) I'd also argue that extra range is nothing to dismiss, as 180 range outranges almost anything that isn't artillery, which is more enemies dead before they can close the gap to attack or shoot back.

To join in the Kossars vs High Elf Archers debate, I would argue that Kossars truly shine when given spears (and thus compared to Sea Guard instead).  They're far more practical to spam than Sea Guard in terms of both cost and effectiveness, plus By Our Blood is really nice for tying things up long enough to let your other Kossars shoot them.  They're not *better* Sea Guard, but archers-with-spears are inherently more powerful when they exist at a tier when fewer possible counters exist (I don't think spear-kossars really *have* an at-tier direct counter).

​

Foefaller#9840 wrote:
he only stat where Kislevite Warriors are better than Empire Halberdiers are in speed, and the latter are better than warriors in everything else than charge bonus and armor. Yes 25 secs of unbreakable when it is needed most is ridiculous on a T1 unit, but not by that much.

False. They are cheaper while carrying just as much of a punch and being available at T0. By Your Blood counters leadership issues and terror routing. Those are massive perks, but even with that, they also have a 20% faster attack speed than Halberdiers! They are better in every regard that matters. They can counter low and mid-tier cavalry and even high-tier cavalry takes huge damage when fighting them. They also can hold up low and mid and high tier infantry and if the shooty Kislev units shoot into the melee, they'll just win.

What makes them especially OP is that they synergize greatly with the shooty parts of Kislev's army because they can roadblock almost everything that would be a threat and you have to overinvest to overcome them. And that's with all the shooty Kislev units being pretty powerful in melee themselves for shooty units.

They are way too powerful for where they are. They need a pricehike or a downgrade, no ifs and buts.

Kislev is perfectly fine as they are. Most of these complaints are not even issues in need of being addressed. The rest of them are just bad suggestions.

No reasonable person would recruit warriors at tier-two over Kossars with great weapons. No one. No race should have to build a building in order to get basic infantry units. It's just silly. 

​

Funzo#7954 wrote:

Kislev is perfectly fine as they are. Most of these complaints are not even issues in need of being addressed. The rest of them are just bad suggestions.

No reasonable person would recruit warriors at tier-two over Kossars with great weapons. No one. No race should have to build a building in order to get basic infantry units. It's just silly. 

I believe Kislev needs more early unit choice the armoured kossars and their cavalry need to be more acessible. Also their cavalry needs to be more accessible and their horse archers should be tier 0 to allow them more use in the campaing map.

​

John_Kimble#3765 wrote:

​

Funzo#7954

 wrote:No reasonable person would recruit warriors at tier-two over Kossars with great weapons. No one. No race should have to build a building in order to get basic infantry units. It's just silly. 

Yes in a vacuum for sure, but to be fair Warriors are cheaper and pretty much do the very same job. In the context of a campaign, in the early game Kislev is not necessarily drowning in cash and a frontline of Warriors backed by archer spam is just as good as a frontline of Kossars with GW, while costing less.

In my current Kislev campaign, i'm actually still using Warriors well beyond turn 50. Between multiple stacks the difference in upkeep adds up so i actually see no reason to get Armored Kossars at the moment. Warriors hold just fine, they have AP and AL, everything's slowed down by spells and by the time the enemy army hits my frontline it's already largely debilitated. Warriors themselves are easily buffable by magic and do just fine...

Warriors are simply way too good for their cost/tier. I honestly think they should take out the AP. Just leave them where they are, but as early game meatshield with AL only. I mean cmon, crappy peasent pithforks penetrating chosen armor is a bit silly in terms of balance.

That's fine, but my point is no one is building to tier-two for Warriors instead of Kossars with great weapons. A tier-three basic halberd unit should not be a thing, and if you can select a better version of that halberd unit at tier-two, you will. That only leaves tiers one or zero. It's just math. It's why the Lizardmen are in such an undesirable position at their infantry position. 

​

Funzo#7954 wrote:
No reasonable person would recruit warriors at tier-two over Kossars with great weapons. No one. No race should have to build a building in order to get basic infantry units. It's just silly. 

Then CA shouldn't give them T2 stats, it's that simple.

​

TainBoCuailinge#8335 wrote:
they also have a 20% faster attack speed than Halberdiers

Source?  If you're looking at the attack interval stat, I've been told by modders that it doesn't accurately reflect a unit's attack speed since it's effectively multiplied together with the (unit-specific) animation length to get the "true" attack speed.

Funzo#7954 wrote:
No reasonable person would recruit warriors at tier-two over Kossars with great weapons. No one. No race should have to build a building in order to get basic infantry units. It's just silly. 

Other way around.  Great weapon Kossars have no charge defense or bonus vs large, their ranged attack is weak, and they're far more expensive.  The cases in which I would consider using great weapon Kossars are minimal, but Kislevite Warriors are still very competitive at T2.  They might not be if they were *priced* at T2 with their current stats, but that's another question entirely.

dogoska#1535 wrote:
I believe Kislev needs more early unit choice the armoured kossars and their cavalry need to be more acessible. Also their cavalry needs to be more accessible and their horse archers should be tier 0 to allow them more use in the campaing map.

Disagree, they're already plenty accessible.  I don't want to see factions homogenized by them all having access to every unit type in the earlygame.

Funzo#7954 wrote:
at's fine, but my point is no one is building to tier-two for Warriors instead of Kossars with great weapons.

I'm pretty sure you're wrong about this.  Charge defense vs large and bonus vs large are valuable enough to trade the heavier armour and weak ranged attack for in many cases, especially with the lower upkeep.

Funzo#7954 wrote:
A tier-three basic halberd unit should not be a thing

Stormvermin, phoenix guard, jade warriors, tomb guard, temple guard, and grave guard say hi.  I'm not sure exactly which definition of T3 you're using (unit card tier or recruitment building tier) but some of those should apply regardless.  It's okay for not every race to get halberds at low tier - some don't get them at all, and that's also okay.

Funzo#7954 wrote:
and if you can select a better version of that halberd unit at tier-two, you will

Armoured kossars are not halberds.  They cannot do the same things.

Funzo#7954 wrote:
It's why the Lizardmen are in such an undesirable position at their infantry position. 

They're not, though?  Their infantry is great - roster-wise they're a solid infantry/monster faction.  Their biggest weakness is their ranged, with an arguable secondary weakness of not having strong enough cavalry to counter their counters.

TainBoCuailinge#8335 wrote:
Then CA shouldn't give them T2 stats, it's that simple.

This too.  T0 halberds is pushing it, but I wouldn't be outright complaining if their melee stats sucked like deckhand polearms or they lacked AP like normal T0 anti-large.

I think Kislevite Warriors are fine, personally.

They do what they’re supposed to-not reduce the early game of Kislev into ‘Spam Kossars.’