I disagree with building outposts over factories. Factories have a building to add+30% raw material output for your outposts. Abd there are several ressources which add +500 raw materials which can be build in factories. If you build factories to boost raw material output instead of outposts, you will be way more efficient. Every 100 labor in your province reduces control by 1. So using only outposts will require tons of labor, which will mean you end up with control of less than 25. At -25 you will lose 10% labor in that province. At lower even 15% per turn! You do not want that. So build factories to boost your raw material income without needing more labor and thus get your control above -25%. Another thing: The gold production buildings from factories are amazing. And like all Chaos Dwarfs buildings, they get more efficient the higher level you have them. A level 3 factory building takes raw materials and gives you more than double the gold. This output is increased by commandements and research! Outposts on the other hand only provide small amounts of gold per turn and you might want extra control buildings there. Their gold production is also not increased with tech and commandements. You should always do math when playing. You will realise that buildings get more efficient the higher level they are. So focus on building up your core provinces to level 3 factories and outposts quickly.
I think the reason the Chaos Dwarfs are so fun to play (apart from the devastating artillery) is that it's immensely satisfying to build a huge economy with them because there are multiple resources and thus multiple "numbers go up" feel good vibes.
Oh also I would add that settlements which are vulnerable to attack should always be factories because factories are a minor settlement battle by default, and it's much easier to defend a minor settlement than fight a field battle.
Firstly, thanks for taking the time to comment and detail provided. While I stand by my initial stance there's several items you mention that are absolutely correct (I didn't want to over saturate this video and overwhelm newer players with this video, plus there is an economy video). The decline with Low Control is very real as you mention, however, outposts and towers can build control generating buildings to help stem this flow, as can characters with followers. When factories are built, the +30% output building is a must, I agree! However, even with 3 Outposts that will never provide more than another mine could. The advantage is, of course, significantly less labour consumed, and it is more efficient. I think there's fair argument for more defensive play to auto-include a factory in a 4 settlement province, but not in all cases. (I did mention unique buildings can necessitate a Factory). The crux of it comes down, I believe, comes down to input more than output. I think it's OP how CD don't pay supply lines, but here we are and it's very easy for the Chaos Dwarfs to fight several fronts and rake in new workers. If the number you could bring in was harder to obtain I would subscribe to having less Outposts and would favour the tactics you mention. A patch that nerfs captives could easily see my stance on this shift, but at present the general consensus seems to be that workers are easy enough to obtain. The rational behind rushing up to T2 Outposts is because construction costs ramp up significantly at T2, thus building wide gold and mine production is in the short term the most efficient means of increasing production (this is to reclarify the efficiency of building up, where your correctly say T3 is more output efficiency). You're absolutely correct that refineries can produce a tonne of gold. My take is between Towers and Gold Mine (Outposts), there is more than enough gold and conquests will also bring in a truckload. The constraint of the CD economy really stops being about gold by the mid-game. Raw Materials for tower buildings and Armaments for Military buildings for hero caps + unit caps have always stuck out to me as where the true expansive value lies. In my campaigns I will usually have a couple of refineries, but that's only to overcorrect excess armament production. To clarify, I do play on legendary and relatively aggressively, so gold and workers are a plenty. Different play styles could result in less favorable results, though I did try to math out the most simplified, all-comers approach to what is quite a complex and flexible system. None of the above is intended to dismiss nor discredit any of your findings above, as I agree with them all fundamentally - my testing simply prized other conclusions more favorably. Please feel free to refute or clarify, always keen to improve and maybe pickup something new in the process! Cheers
@@ElvenPlotArmour This is a great discussion. I must say the amount of labour you can support depends on the state of the game you are in. Buildings from Towers can add control to adjacent provinces, you have tech, the tower of zarr and landmarks for control bonus. I realised that high level heroes + your army can add something like +15 control in the region you are fighting. So eventually you can support way more labour in a province. Abd of course difficulty setting plays a huge role in reducing your control. The fact that you have to keep all of this in mind and keep adjusting is a very fun challenge. And it feels very rewarding when it works!
I think you matched what size province with what kind of settlements backwards. You want the smaller provinces to have outposts, while 4+ settlement provinces should be factory only. The reason for this is to take maximum advantage of the Furnaces and the armament commandment, while also limiting the amount of labor needed in each province for raw material production. The lower the amount of total labor, the higher your control, and the more labor you keep. If you have 3 fully upgraded mines in a single province, you need 1500 labor, which gives you -15 control! and you would lose a minimum of 75 labor per turn to attrition, probably more due to the low control. Now imagine 2 provinces with 3 mines total, one has 2 mines, the other has one. Still need 1500 labor, but one province is only getting a -10, while the other gets a -5. A -10 to control can be controlled by a single tower control building and the outpost control building, while a -5 can be controlled by only the tower control building, while a -15 is going to require multiple outpost control buildings AND the tower building. Furthermore, the Furnace is not a building you want to be building everywhere, you want to concentrate your factories in places where you can either take advantage of iron/wood or in large, 4 settlement provinces, as not building a furnace means you can fit another military building, or the building that provides +2 hero and +2 Lord recruitment rank, factionwide!! Meanwhile, the control building attached to towers to control labor is ALSO a huge campaign movement speed buff for any army that starts in the local province, so you kinda want them everywhere anyway, including factory provinces when you can fit it.
The Chaos Dwarfs to me are a masterpiece I consider them and the tomb kings and the skaven the 3 perfectly developed races if CA never touched those three races again they'll be the most fun 3 factions to play and best designed for the lifespan of TWW3 also this nonsense about power creep shows smooth brains abound. To state clearly I will take any chaos dwarfs army ever fielded with a bretonian or woodelves or high elves or dark elves or vampire pirates army. People act like Chorfs are walking gods. I will give credit where credit is due because CA deserves it with Chorfs I believe they saved the game.
I agree with the reasoning for Chaos Dwarfs, Skaven and Tomb Kings being perfected. I'd personally add Wood Elves to that list - making a faction that focuses on holding a few valuable settlements work so well. The Vampire Coast are also underrated in terms of unique campaign experience (personally, I think some people try to play every race the same and write off the race while missing the point of why it's different. Powercreep is only an issue if older races don't get addressed - which CA are doing. CD are powerful but they have early game limitations and economy that makes you work, hardly handing you the world. Personally I'd have liked some climate impact with them as it does make for interesting decision, but I'm a longtime fan of these guys and they were worth the wait!
@@ElvenPlotArmour it funny because I was literally just thinking I forgot VC and woodelves they amazing to play to loooooved my VC campaigns the sea shanties are hilarious and your army actually sings them!!!!
@ElvenPlotArmour and people say CD are the most powerful I'll take any CD army with a skaven army their whole game dies when you get to their arty unless they run pure bull centaurs or some other dumb shit but I'll take any balanced CD army with any balanced skaven army, empire army, slaneesh army and I can take chorfs all day with belakor
Dwarf player with Warhammer: Fantasy Kharadron Overlords in Age of Sigmar Imperial Guard are kitbashed as Squats, on top of my League of Votann for Warhammer 40,000 Love playing as Dwarfs/Dwarves in any game that allows it, so ya damn right I play the Dwarfs in the Total War: Warhammer franchise. Now I can play Dwarfs that said "Fuck it, Industrial Revolution"
I love the idea of the chaos dwarves and your vidios have really helped me learn, but instill struggle in the early game, can you do an early game guide please, like the first 30ish turns*for hard/multi player?
I feel they'd work best as a dominant co-op campaign or they could work head-to-head. First suggestion would be to gun straight for each other for a quick game, the other is to ally for most of the game then have a grand civil war to rule the world!
Gret video. Just 1 disagreement. There really isn't a need to focus all your factories into 1 province. Unless there is marble/obsidian. Spreading your labour wide is better than focusing, as it means there is less of a PO burden. On VH and above, PO can easily drop far into the negatives. And a settlement with a massive labour requirement will have crap PO and therefore bleed a massive chunk of labour every turn.
This is a very valid argument. I almost feel that natural resources are so wide spread, by design the spread of factories ends up being relatively even, making the "strictness" expressed here ends up far less in reality. I feel labor can be replaced rather easily, but that point is playstyle dependant. These guys are quite dynamic and I feel we're both essentially right subject to conditions and playstyle. Still, I learn from having ideas challenged and sometimes bested so appreciate the time to comment!
@@ElvenPlotArmour Yes, I must admit the Chorfs are complex enough that there isn't a single right way of playing. Which is refreshing! I favour a labour heavy economy to blitz the tower and developing a smaller pool of settlements initially. Your raw materials focused build seems to work better in wider builds, where you get influence from loads of towers and need a lot of outposts to get enough raw materials for development.
Dont know why you called Infernal Ironsworn an equivalent of Dwarf Slayers. When they are clearly the Dawi Zharr equivalent of Ironbreakers - High Armor, Good Melee, Shielded, with an explosive low-range missile attack!
I agree, they are essentially Chaos Dwarf Ironbreakers. You've missed my context. Lore wise they are forced to adorn the burning helmet upon being disgraced and must fight for redemption (this is why they are similar to slayers). On the battlefield they are the exact opposite haha
@@ElvenPlotArmour Yeah. Sorry. I wrote that comment, but later thought "Is it because of the lore?". Though I think there is still a a difference between the two. In that supposedly (though extremely unlikely), the Ironsworn and Infernal Guard in general. Can achieve "Great Glory" and thus redeem themselves, while staying alive. Where as, the Slayers Oath is Until Death, except that one time a certain Dwarf King's son found a loophole to share his Fathers Oath and died in battle, freeing his parent in the process. A sacrifice which proceeded to be quickly thrown out the window, when his father went and grabbed another Slayer's Oath.
Same I used to say that its more difficult to lose as skaven than it is to win but chaos dwarfs make skaven look weak lol. Its a weird situation because so many people disregard the power creep and CA seems to follow along with just going further and further Im worried that they will take the potential and turn the game in to a complete mess.
@@Crucial_End I think this is a very valid thought. I also have a strong dislike for powercreep and believe it ruins games, becoming an arms race for the new while leaving the old in the dust. Chaos Dwarfs are very strong, but they are actually quite balanced in most areas in the early and mid game, but by that point it's very hard to lose as them. The ability to T5 settlements should require more Influence, but this is the only really absurd thing about them. The unit caps are quite well thought out and a fair amount of skill does play into civil development. I think they perhaps are a bit too heavy on the mechanics side of things and hope this isn't the template moving forward because mechanics should flavor a campaign, but they don't make it.
100 percent disagree with these guys chaos dwarfs are like tomb kings to me only two perfect races in the game if you never touched them again they'd be fun to play every day for the rest of the games life span
@@redluke8119I mean Tomb Kings did get a mild rework in Immortal Empires, a lot of units got shifted down a tier, which is honestly for the best, you can now recruit and increase the unit cap of Ushabti great bows and tomb scorpions in minor settlements.
![COMPLETE Tzeentch Campaign AND Formations Mastery Guide [Total Warhammer 3]](/img/1.gif)
Thanks a lot for the guide, just got the base game and chorfs, love their aesthetic so much
My fav evil faction alongside Dark Elves.... give em hell!
Love all of your guides, top quality and great format. Keep it up!
Thanks mate. Cheers!
Worth the wait! Thanks dude!
Cheers for the patience!
Bro you're great, good to see more WH3 content from ya
Thanks mate, cheers for the comment!
Wow this is really good! Can't wait for your next Imrik guide :D
Coming next :D
I disagree with building outposts over factories. Factories have a building to add+30% raw material output for your outposts. Abd there are several ressources which add +500 raw materials which can be build in factories.
If you build factories to boost raw material output instead of outposts, you will be way more efficient. Every 100 labor in your province reduces control by 1. So using only outposts will require tons of labor, which will mean you end up with control of less than 25. At -25 you will lose 10% labor in that province. At lower even 15% per turn! You do not want that.
So build factories to boost your raw material income without needing more labor and thus get your control above -25%.
Another thing: The gold production buildings from factories are amazing. And like all Chaos Dwarfs buildings, they get more efficient the higher level you have them. A level 3 factory building takes raw materials and gives you more than double the gold.
This output is increased by commandements and research! Outposts on the other hand only provide small amounts of gold per turn and you might want extra control buildings there. Their gold production is also not increased with tech and commandements.
You should always do math when playing. You will realise that buildings get more efficient the higher level they are. So focus on building up your core provinces to level 3 factories and outposts quickly.
I think the reason the Chaos Dwarfs are so fun to play (apart from the devastating artillery) is that it's immensely satisfying to build a huge economy with them because there are multiple resources and thus multiple "numbers go up" feel good vibes.
Oh also I would add that settlements which are vulnerable to attack should always be factories because factories are a minor settlement battle by default, and it's much easier to defend a minor settlement than fight a field battle.
Firstly, thanks for taking the time to comment and detail provided. While I stand by my initial stance there's several items you mention that are absolutely correct (I didn't want to over saturate this video and overwhelm newer players with this video, plus there is an economy video).
The decline with Low Control is very real as you mention, however, outposts and towers can build control generating buildings to help stem this flow, as can characters with followers.
When factories are built, the +30% output building is a must, I agree! However, even with 3 Outposts that will never provide more than another mine could. The advantage is, of course, significantly less labour consumed, and it is more efficient. I think there's fair argument for more defensive play to auto-include a factory in a 4 settlement province, but not in all cases. (I did mention unique buildings can necessitate a Factory).
The crux of it comes down, I believe, comes down to input more than output. I think it's OP how CD don't pay supply lines, but here we are and it's very easy for the Chaos Dwarfs to fight several fronts and rake in new workers. If the number you could bring in was harder to obtain I would subscribe to having less Outposts and would favour the tactics you mention. A patch that nerfs captives could easily see my stance on this shift, but at present the general consensus seems to be that workers are easy enough to obtain.
The rational behind rushing up to T2 Outposts is because construction costs ramp up significantly at T2, thus building wide gold and mine production is in the short term the most efficient means of increasing production (this is to reclarify the efficiency of building up, where your correctly say T3 is more output efficiency).
You're absolutely correct that refineries can produce a tonne of gold. My take is between Towers and Gold Mine (Outposts), there is more than enough gold and conquests will also bring in a truckload. The constraint of the CD economy really stops being about gold by the mid-game. Raw Materials for tower buildings and Armaments for Military buildings for hero caps + unit caps have always stuck out to me as where the true expansive value lies. In my campaigns I will usually have a couple of refineries, but that's only to overcorrect excess armament production.
To clarify, I do play on legendary and relatively aggressively, so gold and workers are a plenty. Different play styles could result in less favorable results, though I did try to math out the most simplified, all-comers approach to what is quite a complex and flexible system. None of the above is intended to dismiss nor discredit any of your findings above, as I agree with them all fundamentally - my testing simply prized other conclusions more favorably. Please feel free to refute or clarify, always keen to improve and maybe pickup something new in the process! Cheers
@@ElvenPlotArmour This is a great discussion. I must say the amount of labour you can support depends on the state of the game you are in. Buildings from Towers can add control to adjacent provinces, you have tech, the tower of zarr and landmarks for control bonus. I realised that high level heroes + your army can add something like +15 control in the region you are fighting. So eventually you can support way more labour in a province. Abd of course difficulty setting plays a huge role in reducing your control.
The fact that you have to keep all of this in mind and keep adjusting is a very fun challenge. And it feels very rewarding when it works!
In general, more outposts is just better. You still will generally want most of your provinces to have at least one factory.
That's my experience.
Thanks for this - super useful reference guide (as usual!)
Cheers, thanks for watching!
I think you matched what size province with what kind of settlements backwards. You want the smaller provinces to have outposts, while 4+ settlement provinces should be factory only. The reason for this is to take maximum advantage of the Furnaces and the armament commandment, while also limiting the amount of labor needed in each province for raw material production. The lower the amount of total labor, the higher your control, and the more labor you keep. If you have 3 fully upgraded mines in a single province, you need 1500 labor, which gives you -15 control! and you would lose a minimum of 75 labor per turn to attrition, probably more due to the low control. Now imagine 2 provinces with 3 mines total, one has 2 mines, the other has one. Still need 1500 labor, but one province is only getting a -10, while the other gets a -5. A -10 to control can be controlled by a single tower control building and the outpost control building, while a -5 can be controlled by only the tower control building, while a -15 is going to require multiple outpost control buildings AND the tower building. Furthermore, the Furnace is not a building you want to be building everywhere, you want to concentrate your factories in places where you can either take advantage of iron/wood or in large, 4 settlement provinces, as not building a furnace means you can fit another military building, or the building that provides +2 hero and +2 Lord recruitment rank, factionwide!! Meanwhile, the control building attached to towers to control labor is ALSO a huge campaign movement speed buff for any army that starts in the local province, so you kinda want them everywhere anyway, including factory provinces when you can fit it.
so factories in the big provinces and mines in the small provinces?
Just finished a Vlad campaign; it was really hard once I'd seen this video had come out but now I can return to my beloved Astragoth 😂
Haha welcome home!
Been looking forward to this:)
Hey Susa! Appreciate it mate!
thank you for your glorious content btw
The Chaos Dwarfs to me are a masterpiece I consider them and the tomb kings and the skaven the 3 perfectly developed races if CA never touched those three races again they'll be the most fun 3 factions to play and best designed for the lifespan of TWW3 also this nonsense about power creep shows smooth brains abound. To state clearly I will take any chaos dwarfs army ever fielded with a bretonian or woodelves or high elves or dark elves or vampire pirates army. People act like Chorfs are walking gods. I will give credit where credit is due because CA deserves it with Chorfs I believe they saved the game.
I agree with the reasoning for Chaos Dwarfs, Skaven and Tomb Kings being perfected. I'd personally add Wood Elves to that list - making a faction that focuses on holding a few valuable settlements work so well. The Vampire Coast are also underrated in terms of unique campaign experience (personally, I think some people try to play every race the same and write off the race while missing the point of why it's different. Powercreep is only an issue if older races don't get addressed - which CA are doing. CD are powerful but they have early game limitations and economy that makes you work, hardly handing you the world. Personally I'd have liked some climate impact with them as it does make for interesting decision, but I'm a longtime fan of these guys and they were worth the wait!
@@ElvenPlotArmour it funny because I was literally just thinking I forgot VC and woodelves they amazing to play to loooooved my VC campaigns the sea shanties are hilarious and your army actually sings them!!!!
@ElvenPlotArmour and people say CD are the most powerful I'll take any CD army with a skaven army their whole game dies when you get to their arty unless they run pure bull centaurs or some other dumb shit but I'll take any balanced CD army with any balanced skaven army, empire army, slaneesh army and I can take chorfs all day with belakor
... you had me until you called skaven perfect. They start KINDA weak, sure, but they are just so massively op lol.
Love these guys thanks for the video
They're awesome. Been waiting for years for them to drop!
@@ElvenPlotArmour I've waited since wtw1 :D
chaos dwarves are the final arc of "just stop oil"
Ok that's legit funny
Dwarf player with Warhammer: Fantasy
Kharadron Overlords in Age of Sigmar
Imperial Guard are kitbashed as Squats, on top of my League of Votann for Warhammer 40,000
Love playing as Dwarfs/Dwarves in any game that allows it, so ya damn right I play the Dwarfs in the Total War: Warhammer franchise. Now I can play Dwarfs that said "Fuck it, Industrial Revolution"
Hahaha loved this comment
I love the idea of the chaos dwarves and your vidios have really helped me learn, but instill struggle in the early game, can you do an early game guide please, like the first 30ish turns*for hard/multi player?
Thanks yous
Could you do a head to head chaos dwarf campaign?
I feel they'd work best as a dominant co-op campaign or they could work head-to-head. First suggestion would be to gun straight for each other for a quick game, the other is to ally for most of the game then have a grand civil war to rule the world!
you said 3 seats are important with tower of zharr but I only saw 2 circled what's the 3rd?
Gret video. Just 1 disagreement. There really isn't a need to focus all your factories into 1 province. Unless there is marble/obsidian.
Spreading your labour wide is better than focusing, as it means there is less of a PO burden. On VH and above, PO can easily drop far into the negatives. And a settlement with a massive labour requirement will have crap PO and therefore bleed a massive chunk of labour every turn.
This is a very valid argument. I almost feel that natural resources are so wide spread, by design the spread of factories ends up being relatively even, making the "strictness" expressed here ends up far less in reality. I feel labor can be replaced rather easily, but that point is playstyle dependant. These guys are quite dynamic and I feel we're both essentially right subject to conditions and playstyle. Still, I learn from having ideas challenged and sometimes bested so appreciate the time to comment!
@@ElvenPlotArmour Yes, I must admit the Chorfs are complex enough that there isn't a single right way of playing. Which is refreshing! I favour a labour heavy economy to blitz the tower and developing a smaller pool of settlements initially. Your raw materials focused build seems to work better in wider builds, where you get influence from loads of towers and need a lot of outposts to get enough raw materials for development.
Dont know why you called Infernal Ironsworn an equivalent of Dwarf Slayers. When they are clearly the Dawi Zharr equivalent of Ironbreakers - High Armor, Good Melee, Shielded, with an explosive low-range missile attack!
I agree, they are essentially Chaos Dwarf Ironbreakers. You've missed my context. Lore wise they are forced to adorn the burning helmet upon being disgraced and must fight for redemption (this is why they are similar to slayers). On the battlefield they are the exact opposite haha
@@ElvenPlotArmour Yeah. Sorry. I wrote that comment, but later thought "Is it because of the lore?". Though I think there is still a a difference between the two. In that supposedly (though extremely unlikely), the Ironsworn and Infernal Guard in general. Can achieve "Great Glory" and thus redeem themselves, while staying alive. Where as, the Slayers Oath is Until Death, except that one time a certain Dwarf King's son found a loophole to share his Fathers Oath and died in battle, freeing his parent in the process. A sacrifice which proceeded to be quickly thrown out the window, when his father went and grabbed another Slayer's Oath.
Kislev
For the motherland!
Just a comment for the algorithm BRUH
Thanks champion!
I've found Chaos Dwarfs too easy to play)
They're very strong once they start rolling!
Same I used to say that its more difficult to lose as skaven than it is to win but chaos dwarfs make skaven look weak lol. Its a weird situation because so many people disregard the power creep and CA seems to follow along with just going further and further Im worried that they will take the potential and turn the game in to a complete mess.
@@Crucial_End I think this is a very valid thought. I also have a strong dislike for powercreep and believe it ruins games, becoming an arms race for the new while leaving the old in the dust. Chaos Dwarfs are very strong, but they are actually quite balanced in most areas in the early and mid game, but by that point it's very hard to lose as them. The ability to T5 settlements should require more Influence, but this is the only really absurd thing about them. The unit caps are quite well thought out and a fair amount of skill does play into civil development. I think they perhaps are a bit too heavy on the mechanics side of things and hope this isn't the template moving forward because mechanics should flavor a campaign, but they don't make it.
100 percent disagree with these guys chaos dwarfs are like tomb kings to me only two perfect races in the game if you never touched them again they'd be fun to play every day for the rest of the games life span
@@redluke8119I mean Tomb Kings did get a mild rework in Immortal Empires, a lot of units got shifted down a tier, which is honestly for the best, you can now recruit and increase the unit cap of Ushabti great bows and tomb scorpions in minor settlements.
Great vid! Thanks
Cheers for watching!
Awesome stuff, comment for the algorithm
Thanks for that!