Community Legendary Lord Campaign Tier List, UNFINISHED - Total War: Warhammer 3 Immortal Empires

As someone who mostly plays historical titles and just recently started playing WH3 on max difficulties I fell in love with the vampire counts. I get to still play aggressively and I dont get overwhelmed by not being able to pause. Battles are slow paced but prefer that cuz im still learning how to use magic and the ai cheats arent as impactful against my meat shields.

I think on paper Skarsnik looks bad, but his campaign can actually work quite well. Firstly, it's really not that difficult to get to Karak Eight Peaks to gain access to Orks. He also starts with a gold mine available in his capital and begins within spitting distance of eliminating two major dwarf lords and gaining even more mines early on. I would also argue that he is better positioned to quickly confederate more major greenskin factions than most other options, since he starts roughly in the middle of Azhag, Grimgor, and Wurzhag. Once you have the Dwarfs handled, you can pretty much go any direction and make it work.

In short, I think people like his campaign more for his centrally-located start position than for Skarsnik himself. Strength isn't always what people are going for in a campaign. Besides, spamming goblins in the early game can be a rather entertaining experience (though more of a meme than anything).

Would be curious to see how player skill and style affects the results. With 1,500 hours (prob 10k in total war over the last 15 years) and an aggressive playstyle I put Skarband in the top few. Declare war on everyone the second you meet them, fight tons of battles, clear the map in about 70 turns. My friends with less than 10 campaigns (that I've basically forced to play this game lol) would put Tyrion, Vlad and Grimgor top. Easy mechanics and fire and forget lords. I would probably put the three of them in b tier. Fine, but you have to put limitations on yourself to get a challenge.

Alarielle D tier? Wow

Costin, i appreciate your content. Dont let the opinions of others stop you, because we need this type of content. To be fair, this tier list is absolute garbage. You have to be more fair and understanding. The bottom tier should be near unplayable and the top tier should be unstoppable. Its wayy too balanced out(as in the exact same number of lords in each tier almost to make it seem more visually appealing). In my opinion, most of these lords should be closer to the middle. I am a huge chaos fan though, so seeing a lot of lords i had a fun playthrough with near the bottom makes me scratch my head.

ITS ALMOST AS IF SKARSNIK ISNT AS BAD AS YOU MAKE HIM OUT TO BE, COSTIN

I found ogres to be somewhat fun in multiplayer, but I was playing them as a mercenary group lol I would put my camps next to the other players cities so they could recruit units from me and whatnot. Very funny, I hope they give them a good rework and let em move the camps around without deleting them.

All the daemonic factions being F tier smells of skill issue considering they tend to have the hardest campaigns

N'Kari F tier? Really? I don't see that.

The problem of any kind of tierlist would be always about what we are talking about. Rate legendary lords considering a legendary difficult campaign probably is the wise decision, but there will be people who will consider balance, options, mechanins... as the true main disccusion here, so, maybe clarify this....

Wouldn't it be better to make three polls of top 8, bottom 8 and "middle" 8, putting the results in Excel and then giving the top 8 something like 3 points per vote, middle 2 points, bottom 1 point, getting a total of points for each race, getting a ranking from that?

I'm not saying it would be a great method, I just feel like you're doing things in a way that takes more effort over time and is gonna have some issues that could be prevented with a different method.

Also, polling lords this way would be pretty fucked, but still somewhat doable? Maybe? Kinda? That would probably call for a better way of doing everything.

I think there are a couple of reasons the results aren't ad you expected.

People don't have time to play all the campaigns. We work, we look after our kids, we play other games. When we vote here, there will be extra weight given to ones we have actually put time into, and that will often be the first character on the list.

Miao Ying? Top of the list. Tyrion? Franz? Top of the list (and all recommended campaigns for new players). Being top of the list on the character selection screen will make you more likely to be played, and thus more likely to do well in this poll.

Another thing is that we aren't all as good as you. Alith Anar may have interesting mechanics but he is wedged next to Morathi and Malaki who hate his guts. That doesn't make for an easy campaign start for people who aren't that good. So ease of campaign will play more of a factor than unique mechanics for many people.

At the end of the day, the best races are very much subjective, because we all have different reasons for liking different legendary lords.

I didn't get a chance to vote on any of this so I'm just going to ignore this tier list. )

As you said yourself, your polling methodology is nonsense, so why act like the results mean anything?
You lumped all Daemons into one category (which includes Daniel, the worst race in the game) and compared them to WoC and Chaos Dwarfs who both got extremely popular recent DLC, and Skaven, who have a ton of LL's with the best DLCs the game has ever put out.
Somehow losing that poll means that all Daemons are F tier when you specifically compared them to 3 of the best races in the game?
And then only 32% of your own community said they accepted those results, and you make a video saying that you are now "validated" against Reddit somehow?
If you want a true reflection of the overall game community, source from Reddit, not just 1000 odd people from your own channel who are already heavily influenced by your opinions.

Wait, I think Kislev is missing from your list

Nkari F- and Malekith A?? Wtf? LMAO

The problem was always asking if ‘daemons’ are bad and as good as some of them are, I only think about how much work DoC Slaanesh and Tzeentch need. Nurgle and Khorne are not well represented by this

I understand the limitations in the methodology, but whe I voted (I speak just for me in this) In Deamons beign the worst chaos faction, it is not because khorne and nurgle are but is just because the other chaos factions are really good, so i think skarbrand and tamurkhan should be a lot higher than some other legendary lords

None of the demon/chaos/norscan campaigns are fun for me.
You start off in the wastes or frozen and surrounded by mirror matches or 1 or the other 2.
Only a handful of exceptions for variation of opposition.
IDK, i guess they just are not my jam. Glad to see they are so low and I am not just off base.