The forums talk about balance a lot. But one thing I haven't seen is a thread for tier lists. Even though it is an over simplification of the complex calculus that is balance, I've always really enjoyed reading tier lists for games. I was hoping to see how other people would rank all the currently released units in the game.

Here is mine (with the caveat that I'm ranking on what I think the max potential of their best formations is, not average performance over all builds):

S+: dominates games, very difficult to counter
S: same as S, just a little less potent/more counterable
A: always a solid pick
B: generally a solid pick, but can run into some issues with the wrong builds/are more counterable
C : these need to have the army designed in the right way to use them
D : need very specific builds to get their points out of, and are easily countered

S+: Kari
S: Ravos, Spined Threshers, Berserkers, Aliana
A: Deepwood Archers, Heavy Crossbowmen, Maegan, Death Knights, Carrion Lancers, Scions, Wraiths, Leonx Riders
B: Oathsworn Cav, Hawthorne, Reanimate Archers, Flesh Rippers, Reanimates, Spearmen
C : Outland Scouts, Darnati
D : Rune Golems, Ankaur, Ardus

So what do other people think? How would you rate the released units?

3 hours ago, Rattt said:

S+: Kari   
S: Ravos,  Spined Threshers, Berserkers, Aliana
A: Deepwood Archers, Heavy Crossbowmen, Maegan, Death Knights, Carrion Lancers, Scions, Wraiths, Leonx Riders
B: Oathsworn Cav, Hawthorne, Reanimate Archers, Flesh Rippers, Reanimates,  Spearmen
C : Outland Scouts, Darnati
D : Rune Golems, Ankaur, Ardus  

I'm not comfortable with all units, and I think S+ and D makes it too wide, but this is a fun thing so:

S: Spined Threshers, Ravos,

A: Heavy Crossbow, Scions, Aliana, Kari, (Kethra, VorunThuul, Ventala Skirmishers)

B: Oathsworn, Scouts, Hawthorne, Leonx, Maegan, Darnati, Deepwood archers, Reanimate archers, Carrion Lancers, Death Knights*, Wraiths, Flesh rippers, Berserkers

C : Spearmen, Reanimates, Ardus, Ankaur, Rune Golem

* Would have been A if Ravos' direct wound surge ability didn't circumvent their defensive ability.

My preference would be that everything was nerfed/strengthened too fit into A and B. You can't get perfect balance (and that is not even desirable), but currently some things are quite observably out over the edges in my opinion.

Yeah, S+ is probably unnecessary, I just felt Kari deserved her own tier. Seems like we mostly agree, but what made you put wraiths so low?

41 minutes ago, Rattt said:

Yeah, S+ is probably unnecessary, I just felt Kari deserved her own tier. Seems like we mostly agree, but what made you put wraiths so low?

I've found Kari susceptible to cavalry and Lancers. And she is not THAT cheap. She's fine in my opionion, though her melee lightning bolt ability is thematically weird to say the least.

Know what, I'll change (edit my post) the Wraiths to a B. I had really high hopes so I'm a bit disappointed at them and probably was too harsh. My issues are that:

-Their attacks have too high initiative in relation to their damage and health.

-They don't have access too rerolls (you should not play them as the 2x2 because then you can't fly over anything).

-They don't combo with any of the heroes (who needs combo-buddies to be efficient).

-Their unique uppgrades are laughable compared to the Spined threshers' (though that goes for most units I guess).

Let us hope that Vorun’Thul joins Kari in that vaunted tier, and Zachareth lifts Golems at least out of the dumpster.

I’m a little skeptical about a rating system for runewars for a couple of reasons.

1. The game features a mix of unit types and tray formations and how one tray formation of one type plays in one list may be very different from how a different type plays in another. So a blanket statement for a unit like spearman doesn’t work. Heroes I think we can range, and units if it is done tray by tray.

2. Player pool for this game is so small that what a player thinks about the units is always at the mercy of their experiences. Have a good player for your faction’s units? They probably look good in the ratings. The reverse is true if you don’t. And it is hard to get the experience necessary to make a broadly applicable judgement.

And a "best formation" is a good illustration of both points. For my primary faction, I've played almost all of its units in every formation. Just when I thought I'd never play one formation because I just couldn't see how you'd build for that formation, a build comes up where that formation is perfect. Sure, I have my preferences, but almost every formation has a use at one point or another.

I could never rank units because I've never played a full 200-point game with or against Latari Elves. I think this underscores the point above about a player's unique experiences having a drastic effect on their tier lists.

A comparison in the different unit-types would be interesting. Comparing infantery to infantery, ranged to ranged and so on. In shuch a way you could also have different poppular builds/formations to be compared internaly in a unit.

@Maktorius Ah, yeah, those are all valid points. Wraiths are only unit I listed that I haven't played with or against at least 2+ times, so I'm much less confident about my thoughts about them.

@Vergilius and @Budgernaut those are all fair points, I agree tier lists are kind of silly. But I do think there are two advantages of making them at an individual level:

First we often compare units between one another at a micro level, trying to look at the whole game holistically is a step beyond that in analysis, and thinking about things in a new way is always useful for new insights. This has the drawbacks mentioned, with the high level of abstraction and atomizing units which are part of larger factions, but I found it useful.

Second, the real reason I made this post: I find it really fun to read other people's tier lists. They are basically snap shots of what other people think of the game balance, and while I kinda like when other people's opinions match mine (cause I like confirmation), I really like when peoples opinions radically differ, because it leads to interesting conversations.

@Datskor yeah, that sounds fun. Here is mine for unit type comparison:

Infantry:
A : Berserkers
B : Spearmen, Reanimates
C : Outland Scouts, Darnati

Ranged Infantry:
A : Deepwood Archers, Heavy Crossbows
B : Reanimate Archers
C :

Siege Units:
A : Spined Threshers
B: Scions, Carrion Lancers
C : Rune Golems

Cavalry:
A: Oathsworn, Leonx, Death Knights, Flesh Rippers
B : Wraiths
C :

Heroes:
A: Kari, Ravos, Aliana
B: Meagan, Hawthorne
? Ardus, Ankaur

edit: I messed up the C for the Heroes, but honestly I kinda think Ardus and Ankaur belong on the joke tier, so I'm going to leave it

1 hour ago, Rattt said:

@Maktorius Ah, yeah, those are all valid points. Wraiths are only unit I listed that I haven't played with or against at least 2+ times, so I'm much less confident about my thoughts about them.

@Vergilius and @Budgernaut those are all fair points, I agree tier lists are kind of silly. But I do think there are two advantages of making them at an individual level:

First we often compare units between one another at a micro level, trying to look at the whole game holistically is a step beyond that in analysis, and thinking about things in a new way is always useful for new insights. This has the drawbacks mentioned, with the high level of abstraction and atomizing units which are part of larger factions, but I found it useful.

Second, the real reason I made this post: I find it really fun to read other people's tier lists. They are basically snap shots of what other people think of the game balance, and while I kinda like when other people's opinions match mine (cause I like confirmation), I really like when peoples opinions radically differ, because it leads to interesting conversations.

Point 2 fair point. Often times these lists are fluff. One of my favorite armada blogs does this for the commanders, but they’ve n get done it for all of the units in the game because that is generally not very useful.

I think for heroes, the commmunity as a whole probably agrees with slight variation.

some other general trends are there. But probably most of the units are in a middle build tier with each other.

Infantry:
A :
B : Berserkers, Spearmen, Outland Scouts*, Darnati*,
C : Reanimates

* Guestimations of powerlevel

When comparing Spearmen and Berserkers the mayor difference is their 3x3 cost diffrence 50 to 59 and dials. While the hitmodifyer on the berserkers dile is good i belive the int 3 attack is more than making up for it. Lance corporal is also a stand out uniqe that is wourth mentioning. But if i would have to decide on a best infantery the Berserker would be the stronger of the two due to diffrence in cost and their more dammaging nature in small low threath formations.

Ranged:
A : Heavy Crossbows, Ventala Skirmishers*
B : Reanimate Archers, Deepwood Archers
C :

* Guestimation of powerlevel

Reanimate archers lacks some equipmentslots to get the upgrade-utility of the crossbows and deepwoods, but get that oh so sweet blight. Heavy Crossbows in their 3x1 is the stand out without it they would be eaqual to Deepwoods. Between Reanimates and Deepwoods i belive that the Reamimates are slighly stronger. Reanimates can often** winn pure ranged duels with blight and raven standardbearer (int 4 attack).

Firstly sige units are the most diverse sort of unit in the game, some with compleatly different roles. Directly comparing them is therfore a tall order, but tiering them in a list not so much.

Siege Units:

S: Spined Threshers
A : Carrion Lancers, Scions
B:
C : Rune Golems

Carrion lancers are a sort of cavellery, Sicon a ranged, blocking, suporting unit. Spine Threshers and Rune Golems are both some sort of dammaging brute units. Between Sicons and Carrion Lancers the comunity seems to be favoring the Sicons, im of a different opinion and think the lancers are slightly stronger.

Cavalry:
A:
B : Death Knights, Leonx, Oathsworn, Flesh Rippers, Wraiths*
C :

* Guestimation of powerlevel

Maybe the most competitive type of unit. Some with obvious weakneses and strengths. Death kninghts shuld maybe be at A but are hindered by the direct wound abilities of some units (why not mortalstrike?). A stand out for the death knights is the move-reform enabeling them too set up good charges and positions. Lenox are shifty and boncy bastards with some armorbusting ability. Oathsworn Cavallery is a powerhouse in direct engagements with int 3 attack- armor up, but suffers in the mobility department before giving them windrune. Flesh Rippers are the fastest and quite mobile with their dead sprint, versus infantery they excell and vs armor they falter a bit.

Heroes:

S: Ravos, Prince Faloan*, Lord Vorun'thul*
A: Aliana, Kari, Baron Zacareth*, Hawthorne, Meagan,
B: Ankaur
C: Ardus

* Guestimation of powerlevel

Within A tier the powerlevel is the order they stand in.

I like @Datskor 's post. He's got explanations of his thought process, and a note about guestimations of power levels of some units that are really too new to have a sense of. I think it is also a good illustration of how our experiences can differ and can affect evaluations.

@Datskor maybe worth splitting Ventala skirmishers into ranged cavalry new section? They are classified as cavalry as far as I am aware of.

True, @Edgedeer but i think maybe just clasify the group as ranged will do.

Would like to see some more tier list's :-)

B : Berserkers, Spearmen, Outland Scouts, Darnati, Reanimates

I'm going to more or less copy/paste @Datskor and then write my own comments. I've found that infantry gets shredded by about the same kinds of things, and that each faction has some kind of build that it can use to about the same level of effectiveness. Nothing really stands out here. I play both Uthuk and Latari, and I find both Bezerkers and Darnati to be equally flexible. The Darnati, thanks to the surge/lethal, have one of the best 2x1 formations for damage in the game, and one that combines well with mobility, like the Bezerkers, and combines with various utility upgrades in the skill slot. The 3x2 and 3x3 of each can both be impressive, albeit with different upgrades that fit the themes of the faction.

Ranged Infantry:

B : Reanimate Archers, Deepwood Archers, Heavy Crossbows

You see some forum bias toward the X-bows, but that is largely because there is virtually nothing at the price point of 3x1 Xbows to which to compare them. You can get two 2x1 Latari ARchers for the same price point, and which do just a touch under damage. Of course, you'd be a fool to put both of them in target range to trade fire with Xbows on the same turn, but if all these ranged units are firing at other targets, the damage point is similar for the overall pricepoint. The same is true if we calculate the damage done on more complex combinations. I don't run a 2x2 very often, but there's usually some kind of Fire Rune mischief afoot. A 2x2, 2x1 and Malcornes runs the same price point as two 3x1 Crossbows, but the damage and dial flexibility allows those Elf archer units to considerably outpace them in average damage (and we have to go by what the math says). What the elf archers bring is a kind of dial flexibility that should allow you to engage the opponent at range-5 on turns where you carry initiative, and can bounce out of range with your double surge. I think Reanimate Archers need to serve a different roll in a Waiqar list, and are useful for that reason.

Siege Units:

S: Spined Threshers
A : Carrion Lancers, Scions

B : Rune Golems

I'm with everyone else in Spined Threshers producing some major threat and therefore being easy to take. You really have to build some portion of your list to address the presence of a 2x1 Scuttling Horror. I think there's some build out there that can manage it better, but it is tough to do. I've seen good performance when playing against Carrion Lancers, so I respect the unit. I've seen good performance out of Scions. Rune Golems are tough, but I've still seen some good Daqan players use them effectively and think their fix comes with the next Daqan hero.

Cavalry:

B : Death Knights, Leonx, Oathsworn, Flesh Rippers, Wraiths*

Most of these can be scary in the right circumstances, or uninteresting. The Flesh Rippers may be one of the absolute best 2x1 Calvary units in the game. If you can get them to collide with infantry, the extra surge damage is very nice. Leonx are powerful, but if played poorly, can be outright the worst. Death Knights and Oathsworn are tough in different ways.

Heroes:

S: Ravos, Prince Faloan*, Lord Vorun'thul*
A: Aliana, Kari, Baron Zacareth*, Hawthorne, Meagan,
B: Ankaur
C: Ardus

I'm going to leave this list the same, though some of it has a harder time appreciating then others. What has been revealed of Prince Faloan makes him sound pretty vicious, and very defensive, and he'll fuel anything that relies upon inspiration that the elves wish to build. I'm going to enjoy games where my opponent challenges me with Vorun'thul. He's going to be tough. Kethra looks to be really good. I haven't ordered her and have no idea when I'd be able to put her on the table. As a Latari player, I like both Aliana and Maegan. I find Maegan the higher damaging hero in my experience. If you can get Aliana in the right unit match-up, she's a surgeon. A well played Kari is much easier to deal with Hawthorne. I think Baron Zacareth will add much overall to Daqan. Ankaur is deceptive. He's a unit that when you get him right, he's downright nasty, but can be horribly misplayed, resulting in a quick exit.