Putting the 'role' back in role-playing games since 2002.
Donate to Codex
Good Old Games
  • Welcome to rpgcodex.net, a site dedicated to discussing computer based role-playing games in a free and open fashion. We're less strict than other forums, but please refer to the rules.

    "This message is awaiting moderator approval": All new users must pass through our moderation queue before they will be able to post normally. Until your account has "passed" your posts will only be visible to yourself (and moderators) until they are approved. Give us a week to get around to approving / deleting / ignoring your mundane opinion on crap before hassling us about it. Once you have passed the moderation period (think of it as a test), you will be able to post normally, just like all the other retards.

New Total War game: Warhammer

thesheeep

Arcane
Patron
Joined
Mar 16, 2007
Messages
9,939
Location
Tampere, Finland
Codex 2012 Strap Yourselves In Codex Year of the Donut Codex+ Now Streaming! Serpent in the Staglands Dead State Divinity: Original Sin Torment: Tides of Numenera Codex USB, 2014 Shadorwun: Hong Kong Divinity: Original Sin 2 BattleTech Bubbles In Memoria A Beautifully Desolate Campaign Pillars of Eternity 2: Deadfire Pathfinder: Kingmaker Steve gets a Kidney but I don't even get a tag. Pathfinder: Wrath I'm very into cock and ball torture I helped put crap in Monomyth
That's a pretty shitty army, though.
Man, early Brettonia game is terrible. A bunch of zombies would be better.
 

Raghar

Arcane
Vatnik
Joined
Jul 16, 2009
Messages
22,503
KutvalZ.jpg

This is how you play fallen enchantress. Wait wrong game, I mean enchantress.
 
Last edited:

Raghar

Arcane
Vatnik
Joined
Jul 16, 2009
Messages
22,503
Boys I feel like they are degrading stuff.

In WH I, when goblins had majority they could cause some damage by charging to back of unit. Charge was additive. Now they are calculating charge as percent of damage, thus 1.4 times nothing is still nothing.

Another problem I seen, was when I borrowed WH 2, and tried Beastmen. While people might ask me why such example of torturing myself by playing beastmen, it's easy faction to test stuff. I seen some differences.
Aafter I screwed up conquering of main Estalia province, and clan Skyre declared war on me, I went quite late to Bretonia, and then seen how Carcasone moved armies from carcasone to small village... I thought they are serving a diner... So I conequred carcasone, then I seen how they moved army from theirs own only remaining town, I thought they are serving a lunch. After Carcasone lost all provinces and just had one army, after two totally insane mishaps. Well first part I'd call griefing. The second part complete insanity.
I didn't seen such dumb AI over 10 years.

Of course these settlements didn't stayed razed long. Empire colonized carcasone two-three turns after razing. And Bretonia, or was it Bordelaux, ate the second ruined city. Yea robbing theirs friends of theirs territories.

Add to that the AI arrived from half a world trespassed into neutral territory just to kill one of my hordes. That reminds me how people complained in early ELEX that when they run they soon accumulate hordes of enemies trailing them. WH 2 is similar, just it's strategy game, and this behavior can cost AI everything.
 

A horse of course

Guest
Boys I feel like they are degrading stuff.

In WH I, when goblins had majority they could cause some damage by charging to back of unit. Charge was additive. Now they are calculating charge as percent of damage, thus 1.4 times nothing is still nothing.

Another problem I seen, was when I borrowed WH 2, and tried Beastmen. While people might ask me why such example of torturing myself by playing beastmen, it's easy faction to test stuff. I seen some differences.
Aafter I screwed up conquering of main Estalia province, and clan Skyre declared war on me, I went quite late to Bretonia, and then seen how Carcasone moved armies from carcasone to small village... I thought they are serving a diner... So I conequred carcasone, then I seen how they moved army from theirs own only remaining town, I thought they are serving a lunch. After Carcasone lost all provinces and just had one army, after two totally insane mishaps. Well first part I'd call griefing. The second part complete insanity.
I didn't seen such dumb AI over 10 years.

Of course these settlements didn't stayed razed long. Empire colonized carcasone two-three turns after razing. And Bretonia, or was it Bordelaux, ate the second ruined city. Yea robbing theirs friends of theirs territories.

Add to that the AI arrived from half a world trespassed into neutral territory just to kill one of my hordes. That reminds me how people complained in early ELEX that when they run they soon accumulate hordes of enemies trailing them. WH 2 is similar, just it's strategy game, and this behavior can cost AI everything.

I've only played three Beastmen campaigns - the mini-campaign in WH1 (which was garbage) and two main campaigns. Both of these were right after the DLC came out so I don't know how much things have changed for the player. I'm one of the few people who seemed to like the Beastmen mechanics (from the player's POV anyway) as they felt very much in line with the lore - only attacking damaged or undefended settlements, hiding after each battle and ambushing enemy armies when they were at their weakest. I've read people complaining about being chased all over the world, but I personally never witnessed it because I was in hidden encampment mode every 2 or 3 turns. Perhaps the AI was adjusted to be aware of your general location since then. I do strongly dislike the Beastmen as an AI faction, as they're liable to wipe out established factions due to a wonky auto-resolve bonus (watch Khazrak annihilate max-tier Dwarf settlements with both an army and a maxed garrison inside) and the AI's inability to deal with armies that can vanish into thin air. Beastmen (and now rogue armies who can spawn out of nowhere and instantly attack) are the reason that literally every single one of your settlements should have walls and a garrison.

Regarding ruins - AI can colonize without any monetary cost whatsoever, and have both troop replenishment and growth cheats, so there's literally no downside to AI colonizing ruins...unless they don't realize you're hiding a stack in the nearby forest.





As a sidenote, the Warhammer "New Content team" (that means Warhammer 2 DLC/FLC, not Warhammer 3 AKA Fantasy team) are doing a Q+A on r*ddit in a couple of days. If we're very lucky there might be an announcement of the new race pack, although considering the next DLC after that is scheduled for 2019, they probably want a September or October release to pace the content.
 

Frusciante

Cipher
Joined
Aug 24, 2012
Messages
716
Project: Eternity
What is the codex consensus now on this game?

Remember there was quite a lot of hate on it earlier but I have to admit I keep returning to it. In fact I havent had this much fun with a strategy game in a long time. The quantity, quality and diversity of the factions just makes it a very cool game to play. Combat I really enjoy as well (especially in multiplayer) - empire building I find less interesting though.
 

A horse of course

Guest
What is the codex consensus now on this game?

Remember there was quite a lot of hate on it earlier but I have to admit I keep returning to it. In fact I havent had this much fun with a strategy game in a long time. The quantity, quality and diversity of the factions just makes it a very cool game to play. Combat I really enjoy as well (especially in multiplayer) - empire building I find less interesting though.

The battles are generally pretty good and CA deserve a lot of credit for introducing new elements like large, single-entity monster units and flying units in a way that makes them useful, fun to use but also balanced with appropriate counters. Meanwhile, magic is somewhat shallow (you can't counter wizards with other wizards, just spam buff/debuff and damage spells). Hero units are a pretty average addition - they look fucking stupid in action when you have one dude holding back 300 spearmen, and in Warhammer 1 they were absurdly tanky, though they've been made more vulnerable. I seriously hope they integrate the duel system from the upcoming Three Kingdoms into Warhammer. Ranged units are a little overtuned as well - I prefer them as skirmish and general support units from previous games, not glass cannons who can wipe out a quarter of a unit with a single volley. There are also some unreasonably powerful abilities like the Sword of Khaine and certain unique Legendary Lord skills which can wipe out entire units with absolutely no way to defend against them.

The campaign is one of the weakest in the entire history of the Total War series. Most factions lack basic features from historical titles and the compensation for this are rebranded gimmicks like the broken food system for the Skaven or the entirely meaningless Loyalty for Dark Elves. Even new features, like "Underway" or "Beast Paths", are completely broken and the AI can neither use nor defend against them properly. Every faction is frozen in time and will retain the exact same characters and faction identity every time you play. Research trees are boring trash buffs and debuffs. Basic AI behaviour on the campaign map is moronic, with racial enemies inviting each other to join wars against you despite being halfway across the world with a Non-Aggression Pact and positive relations. Unit recruitment is tied to expensive building chains, so enjoy seeing armies composed of nothing but catapults because the AI didn't have anything else in the area. "Quest Battles" require you to perform a series of potentially extremely long-winded and expensive, counter-intuitive actions so as to fight a scripted battle and get an artifact. These aren't so bad with the Warhammer 2 factions, but some of the Warhammer 1 Lords have notoriously stupid requirements like having obscure max-level units in your army and marching literally halfway across the map - in effect, things you would only bother with once you've pretty much already won the campaign. Also, the lack of naval battles is extremely noticable on the Warhammer 2 map. And of course, the coolest feature of Warhammer - customization - is absent.

That's not to say I don't enjoy playing a campaign - but that's thanks to the battles and the Warhammer setting, and virtually nothing to do with the actual gameplay mechanics. I deserve everything I get for pre-ordering literally everything that comes out for this particular series, but anyone who isn't a Total War + Warhammer nut must have brain damage if they spend money on this series before 2020 or whatever.
 

Frusciante

Cipher
Joined
Aug 24, 2012
Messages
716
Project: Eternity
What is the codex consensus now on this game?

Remember there was quite a lot of hate on it earlier but I have to admit I keep returning to it. In fact I havent had this much fun with a strategy game in a long time. The quantity, quality and diversity of the factions just makes it a very cool game to play. Combat I really enjoy as well (especially in multiplayer) - empire building I find less interesting though.

The battles are generally pretty good and CA deserve a lot of credit for introducing new elements like large, single-entity monster units and flying units in a way that makes them useful, fun to use but also balanced with appropriate counters. Meanwhile, magic is somewhat shallow (you can't counter wizards with other wizards, just spam buff/debuff and damage spells). Hero units are a pretty average addition - they look fucking stupid in action when you have one dude holding back 300 spearmen, and in Warhammer 1 they were absurdly tanky, though they've been made more vulnerable. I seriously hope they integrate the duel system from the upcoming Three Kingdoms into Warhammer. Ranged units are a little overtuned as well - I prefer them as skirmish and general support units from previous games, not glass cannons who can wipe out a quarter of a unit with a single volley. There are also some unreasonably powerful abilities like the Sword of Khaine and certain unique Legendary Lord skills which can wipe out entire units with absolutely no way to defend against them.

The campaign is one of the weakest in the entire history of the Total War series. Most factions lack basic features from historical titles and the compensation for this are rebranded gimmicks like the broken food system for the Skaven or the entirely meaningless Loyalty for Dark Elves. Even new features, like "Underway" or "Beast Paths", are completely broken and the AI can neither use nor defend against them properly. Every faction is frozen in time and will retain the exact same characters and faction identity every time you play. Research trees are boring trash buffs and debuffs. Basic AI behaviour on the campaign map is moronic, with racial enemies inviting each other to join wars against you despite being halfway across the world with a Non-Aggression Pact and positive relations. Unit recruitment is tied to expensive building chains, so enjoy seeing armies composed of nothing but catapults because the AI didn't have anything else in the area. "Quest Battles" require you to perform a series of potentially extremely long-winded and expensive, counter-intuitive actions so as to fight a scripted battle and get an artifact. These aren't so bad with the Warhammer 2 factions, but some of the Warhammer 1 Lords have notoriously stupid requirements like having obscure max-level units in your army and marching literally halfway across the map - in effect, things you would only bother with once you've pretty much already won the campaign. Also, the lack of naval battles is extremely noticable on the Warhammer 2 map. And of course, the coolest feature of Warhammer - customization - is absent.

That's not to say I don't enjoy playing a campaign - but that's thanks to the battles and the Warhammer setting, and virtually nothing to do with the actual gameplay mechanics. I deserve everything I get for pre-ordering literally everything that comes out for this particular series, but anyone who isn't a Total War + Warhammer nut must have brain damage if they spend money on this series before 2020 or whatever.

I agree with most of what you're saying but the conclusions is a bit strong. I was not familiar with Warhammer but the factions are recognizable and interesting enough without knowing anything about Warhammer. Also I still think despite some flaws in the campaign this is a good title to play for any fan of strategy games.
 

A horse of course

Guest
I agree with most of what you're saying but the conclusions is a bit strong. I was not familiar with Warhammer but the factions are recognizable and interesting enough without knowing anything about Warhammer. Also I still think despite some flaws in the campaign this is a good title to play for any fan of strategy games.

I'm sure plenty of people could have fun on their first (few) campaigns, but they'll burn out very fast due to the lack of depth. I think it's a mistake to bore yourself when you could wait for a "True" version of the game with all the races in one. I guess the optimal way to play for more casual players would be to play Warhammer 1 plus all DLC in a "sale", wait until Warhammer 2 is completely finished and do the same, then wait another 2-3 years and do it again with Warhammer 3.
 

thesheeep

Arcane
Patron
Joined
Mar 16, 2007
Messages
9,939
Location
Tampere, Finland
Codex 2012 Strap Yourselves In Codex Year of the Donut Codex+ Now Streaming! Serpent in the Staglands Dead State Divinity: Original Sin Torment: Tides of Numenera Codex USB, 2014 Shadorwun: Hong Kong Divinity: Original Sin 2 BattleTech Bubbles In Memoria A Beautifully Desolate Campaign Pillars of Eternity 2: Deadfire Pathfinder: Kingmaker Steve gets a Kidney but I don't even get a tag. Pathfinder: Wrath I'm very into cock and ball torture I helped put crap in Monomyth
I agree with most of what you're saying but the conclusions is a bit strong. I was not familiar with Warhammer but the factions are recognizable and interesting enough without knowing anything about Warhammer. Also I still think despite some flaws in the campaign this is a good title to play for any fan of strategy games.

I'm sure plenty of people could have fun on their first (few) campaigns, but they'll burn out very fast due to the lack of depth. I think it's a mistake to bore yourself when you could wait for a "True" version of the game with all the races in one. I guess the optimal way to play for more casual players would be to play Warhammer 1 plus all DLC in a "sale", wait until Warhammer 2 is completely finished and do the same, then wait another 2-3 years and do it again with Warhammer 3.
You completely forget about mods.
Playing with mods such as SFO is an experience that is so much better than vanilla it is almost criminal.
You can have fun for a while playing vanilla, but once you get bored or when you come back to the game, you really should use one of the overhaul mods. None of them can fix the games worst downsides, but make them a bit more bearable, as well as making the good things even better.

I would say 2/3rd of my playtime is due to mods (in my case SFO, but others prefer other overhaul mods).
In that fashion, TW:W is similar to Mount & Blade.
 

A horse of course

Guest
I agree with most of what you're saying but the conclusions is a bit strong. I was not familiar with Warhammer but the factions are recognizable and interesting enough without knowing anything about Warhammer. Also I still think despite some flaws in the campaign this is a good title to play for any fan of strategy games.

I'm sure plenty of people could have fun on their first (few) campaigns, but they'll burn out very fast due to the lack of depth. I think it's a mistake to bore yourself when you could wait for a "True" version of the game with all the races in one. I guess the optimal way to play for more casual players would be to play Warhammer 1 plus all DLC in a "sale", wait until Warhammer 2 is completely finished and do the same, then wait another 2-3 years and do it again with Warhammer 3.
You completely forget about mods.
Playing with mods such as SFO is an experience that is so much better than vanilla it is almost criminal.
You can have fun for a while playing vanilla, but once you get bored or when you come back to the game, you really should use one of the overhaul mods. None of them can fix the games worst downsides, but make them a bit more bearable, as well as making the good things even better.

I would say 2/3rd of my playtime is due to mods (in my case SFO, but others prefer other overhaul mods).
In that fashion, TW:W is similar to Mount & Blade.

All the Total War games have overhaul mods, though. In fact Warhammer is (intentionally) a lot more difficult to mod than previous titles.
 

A horse of course

Guest
The AMA is over, nothing wildly exciting but I'll list some of the things CA said:

Warhammer II sold very well and was successful for them, though they wouldn't comment on whether it would get updates for as long as Rome II has, saying it was too far in the future to speculate.

They're never adding naval combat but they know everyone hates the current naval autoresolve system. They didn't comment on any of the suggestions to just make them land battles on an island or something.

Although they're focusing on Warhammer 2 races, they are definitely adding things (including possible Lords, units, Heroes etc.) to the Warhammer 1 races. On this subject:

- there will be a revamp for one of the Warhammer 1 races later this year
- they will probably change the Wood Elf amber system to reward amber for taking settlements rather than occupying them (i.e. you can't "lose" amber except by spending it)
- they don't like the way Chaos Invasions work but they didn't give specifics
- they'll take another look at Grimgor to make him more useful

They will definitely be messing around with the Mortal Empires map by adding new settlements, adjusting the geography etc. They cited the next Race Pack as including something like this.

They'll continue the policy of making unique Hero characters from the tabletop into Legendary Lords rather than Heroes because it's just not worth the time and resource investment of creating a unique Hero, but then not giving them their own campaign mechanics, so they may as well go all the way and make them into full-blown Legendary Lords with Quest Battles etc.

They have no plans to add mini-campaigns/alternative maps. They'll continue the policy of Race Packs being 4 Legendary Lords rather than 2 Legendary Lords + Mini Campaign.

They're open to making races/factions that don't have official Army Books from the tabletop (as with Norsca) but the Official 8th Ed races are always the priority.


Everything else was non-answers or too vague/teasing to mention.
 

tabacila

Augur
Joined
Nov 2, 2011
Messages
326
They also said they will probably not change their patching system which ties bugfixing to content updates, meaning that if there's a dry spell of new content you can keep having the same bugs for months on end...
 

A horse of course

Guest
They also said they will probably not change their patching system which ties bugfixing to content updates, meaning that if there's a dry spell of new content you can keep having the same bugs for months on end...

They did but then they also said they would fix the reinforcement bug with a beta patch very soon, so I dunno. This is like the third time they've promised to fix reinforcements since Warhammer 1 though.
 

Raghar

Arcane
Vatnik
Joined
Jul 16, 2009
Messages
22,503
What reinforcement bug? You mean random locations for reinforcements entry? That should be trivial fix.
 

gruntar

Augur
Joined
May 27, 2013
Messages
132
What is the codex consensus now on this game?

Remember there was quite a lot of hate on it earlier but I have to admit I keep returning to it. In fact I havent had this much fun with a strategy game in a long time. The quantity, quality and diversity of the factions just makes it a very cool game to play. Combat I really enjoy as well (especially in multiplayer) - empire building I find less interesting though.

The battles are generally pretty good and CA deserve a lot of credit for introducing new elements like large, single-entity monster units and flying units in a way that makes them useful, fun to use but also balanced with appropriate counters. Meanwhile, magic is somewhat shallow (you can't counter wizards with other wizards, just spam buff/debuff and damage spells). Hero units are a pretty average addition - they look fucking stupid in action when you have one dude holding back 300 spearmen, and in Warhammer 1 they were absurdly tanky, though they've been made more vulnerable. I seriously hope they integrate the duel system from the upcoming Three Kingdoms into Warhammer. Ranged units are a little overtuned as well - I prefer them as skirmish and general support units from previous games, not glass cannons who can wipe out a quarter of a unit with a single volley. There are also some unreasonably powerful abilities like the Sword of Khaine and certain unique Legendary Lord skills which can wipe out entire units with absolutely no way to defend against them.

The campaign is one of the weakest in the entire history of the Total War series. Most factions lack basic features from historical titles and the compensation for this are rebranded gimmicks like the broken food system for the Skaven or the entirely meaningless Loyalty for Dark Elves. Even new features, like "Underway" or "Beast Paths", are completely broken and the AI can neither use nor defend against them properly. Every faction is frozen in time and will retain the exact same characters and faction identity every time you play. Research trees are boring trash buffs and debuffs. Basic AI behaviour on the campaign map is moronic, with racial enemies inviting each other to join wars against you despite being halfway across the world with a Non-Aggression Pact and positive relations. Unit recruitment is tied to expensive building chains, so enjoy seeing armies composed of nothing but catapults because the AI didn't have anything else in the area. "Quest Battles" require you to perform a series of potentially extremely long-winded and expensive, counter-intuitive actions so as to fight a scripted battle and get an artifact. These aren't so bad with the Warhammer 2 factions, but some of the Warhammer 1 Lords have notoriously stupid requirements like having obscure max-level units in your army and marching literally halfway across the map - in effect, things you would only bother with once you've pretty much already won the campaign. Also, the lack of naval battles is extremely noticable on the Warhammer 2 map. And of course, the coolest feature of Warhammer - customization - is absent.

That's not to say I don't enjoy playing a campaign - but that's thanks to the battles and the Warhammer setting, and virtually nothing to do with the actual gameplay mechanics. I deserve everything I get for pre-ordering literally everything that comes out for this particular series, but anyone who isn't a Total War + Warhammer nut must have brain damage if they spend money on this series before 2020 or whatever.

I'm casual player of TW series since Medieval 1, last historical TW game I played is Shogun 2, and I must say that campaign in Warhammer games is a massive improvement compared to predecessors.

The biggest one is how AI is handling its armies. It moves stacks together, utilizes ambushes, and most importantly doesn't suicides trying to mindlessly capture settlements. Latter was my biggest problem in previous games, and easiest way to exploit AI, so I'm very glad it got fixed. I can plan to expand my empire using confederation mechanic.

Diplomacy finally works. Sure it's barebones, but at least it's reliable now. If I menage to forge alliance with someone, then I know that they wont backstab me for absolutely no reason. Before my "ally" could randomly declare war at any point.

Factions play differently and have unique unique flavor. Choosing your faction leader alone is great fun, should I pick Kholek and made him a combat monster capable of taking a medium army alone, or maybe Archaon Everchoosen for army buffs and spellcasting ? Technology trees are unique for each faction, some faction mechanics are meh (wood elves amber, dwarf grudges) but other works pretty well (vampires corruption, Tomb Kings upkeep) but all in all I don't feel like I'm playing same faction with different color like before.

It's a shame that they couldn't make naval battles work, but let's be honest they were always buggy unfun mess, I'm glad they focused on what is a heart of this series - ground battles. I thought that quest battles were streamlined long time ago. As for army composition that's not my experience at all, AI can keep up with me no problem. Sometimes it creates weird stacks like lord and 19 chariots, but that's a bug. What exactly is broken about Skaven food mechanic ? AI cant utilize pathways in your games ? "Every faction frozen in time", what does it even mean ? You should explain your complains better.
 

A horse of course

Guest
I'm casual player of TW series since Medieval 1, last historical TW game I played is Shogun 2, and I must say that campaign in Warhammer games is a massive improvement compared to predecessors.

The biggest one is how AI is handling its armies. It moves stacks together, utilizes ambushes, and most importantly doesn't suicides trying to mindlessly capture settlements. Latter was my biggest problem in previous games, and easiest way to exploit AI, so I'm very glad it got fixed. I can plan to expand my empire using confederation mechanic.

AI has been pulling off co-ordinated multi-stack manoeuvers for a long time in the series, though it still fluffs them now and again. Not a Warhammer addition. Try to catch out a Hunnic stack in Attila and watch them swarm you and cut off your retreat on the campaign map. I've been ambushed twice in around 600hrs combined of Warhammer 1+2, unless you count Skaven and Alith Anar, which are automatic ambushes. Confederation as it exists in Warhammer has existed since...I think the Barbarians in Rome 2? I don't recall whether it was in Empire or Napoleon for the German states. Scripted confederations were in the Medieval 2 expansion, whilst a vaguely similar mechanic was in Shogun 1 (inheriting lands).

Diplomacy finally works. Sure it's barebones, but at least it's reliable now. If I menage to forge alliance with someone, then I know that they wont backstab me for absolutely no reason. Before my "ally" could randomly declare war at any point.

I personally never witnessed an ally backstab the player in Shogun 2 that wasn't A: Part of the Realm Divide debuff or B: The scripted "Whispers of Betrayal" event, though it can happen. What they did do and STILL do with considerable regularity in Warhammer is to declare war on allies or vassals of their allies for no reason. All AI factions have various silly triggers in the db files such as aggression countdowns where they're effectively forced to declare war on someone - anyone, but preferably the player - upon hitting a certain point. And, again as evidenced in the actual db files, a lot of their decision making is actually geared towards annoying the player rather than self-interest. You can literally go into PFM right now and root around to look at why AI behaves in certain ways on the campaign map.

Factions play differently and have unique unique flavor.

In battle, sure, though this in itself can sometimes be limiting since it narrows the number of possible army compositions compared to historical factions. Some of the factions have battle tactics that simply don't appeal to everyone, and too bad if you want to switch them up a bit. But most people - including me in multiple posts - have praised the battles aside from them being too MOBA-esque depending on the faction.

Choosing your faction leader alone is great fun, should I pick Kholek and made him a combat monster capable of taking a medium army alone, or maybe Archaon Everchoosen for army buffs and spellcasting ?

Legendary lords with unique models and existing templates are obviously going to be a crowd-pleaser, but being able to customize your Generals to fulfill specific needs (defensive, siege tactics etc.) is already a thing in historical titles. Of course there's a limit to what you can do with Generals in battle when you can have characters who are 50 ft tall monsters.

Technology trees are unique for each faction, some faction mechanics are meh (wood elves amber, dwarf grudges) but other works pretty well (vampires corruption, Tomb Kings upkeep) but all in all I don't feel like I'm playing same faction with different color like before.

Wut? Unique is what way other than UI? The absolute vast majority of factions have tech trees with passive buffs to units and provinces. Off the top of my head the most notable tech trees are the Bretonnian's (unlocking Confederation for the other Dukedoms, considerable battle buffs and diplomatic maluses against certain factions) and the Tomb King's. The rest are virtually identical to the tech trees in historical titles, minus unit unlocking from Attila or ToB. Of course you don't feel like you're playing the same faction as in historical title when they all have completely different units. The trade-off is that when every faction was human and large numbers of factions shared the same culture CA were able to implement more in-depth campaign mechanics like family trees, civil wars, political parties etc. for every faction. In comparison, most factions in Warhammer has extremely superficial or shallow campaign mechanics, so what CA did was chop up all the mechanics from historical titles and distribute them piecemeal to Warhamemr factions. Thus, The Empire and Wood Elves have a pathetic "offices" mechanic, Skaven have "food", Skaven and Delves have "loyalty" and so forth.

It's a shame that they couldn't make naval battles work, but let's be honest they were always buggy unfun mess, I'm glad they focused on what is a heart of this series - ground battles. I thought that quest battles were streamlined long time ago.

Naval battles were fine in Attila with the melee-ranged-artillery trinity and it was actually worthwhile to have a navy due to the "seasick" mechanic for land armies. They also added an extra tactical layer with dual land-sea battles. Their primary failing was simply glitches which CA never bothered to fix, since the exact same bugs still exist in ToB and the latest Rome 2 DLC.

As for army composition that's not my experience at all, AI can keep up with me no problem. Sometimes it creates weird stacks like lord and 19 chariots, but that's a bug.

You're very much in the minority not witnessing bizarre army comps. And the 19 chariots/rock lobbers meme isn't a bug per se, it's due to the way recruitment works combined with campaign recruitment buffs that pile up over time.

What exactly is broken about Skaven food mechanic ?

Positive food couldn't be maintained without metagaming (e.g. Skavenslave raiding spam). Maybe it's fixed now, I don't care, it was a notorious "feature" of Skaven campaigns for the first few months.

AI cant utilize pathways in your games ?

I already explained "pathways" - the teleportation movement implemented to save CA bothering to create an Underway map or make the Beastmen actually follow the lore of moving through dense forests rather than vanishing into a mountainside - and stances. AI regularly fuck them using them (e.g. risks an instant death with teleport stance rather than simply using forced march) or isn't coded to comprehend what's happened when someone else uses them (e.g. assuming Beastmen vanished into thin air because they activated hidden encampment stance, leaving their settlements undefended whilst the Beastmen replenish a full stack).

"Every faction frozen in time", what does it even mean ?

Every faction always has the exact same name, leader and characters, which gets dull after seeing them over and over again. There's very little incentive to play two campaigns in the same general area of the map twice because it feels like deja vu.

You should explain your complains better.

I'm not writing a review, I assume people in a TW thread know what well-known feature, bug, or phenomenon I'm referring to when I gloss over them.
 

Raghar

Arcane
Vatnik
Joined
Jul 16, 2009
Messages
22,503
There are a lot of "sponsored" streams on Twitch. That's crazy. selecting some streamers, forcing them to play game for one hour, and when they have more average viewers than n then pay them for that. That's a new low. Now I don't know if it happened because of SEGA, or Twitch become crazy.
 

Saark

Arcane
Patron
Joined
Jun 16, 2010
Messages
2,205
A Beautifully Desolate Campaign
It's the other way around actually. Twitch introduced a bounty system, where you as a streamer can choose to stream a sponsored game as long as you have a decent reach (must be partnered and most bounties require at least ~200viewers).

If you hit the required viewer count, which isn't an issue for most variety streamers with a decent following, you play the game for an hour and then receive your money. Even if you don't hit the viewer-count, you still get some cash, albeit not as much.

You usually get between 100$ and 300$ for these bounties.
 

Maculo

Arcane
Patron
Joined
Jul 30, 2013
Messages
2,533
Strap Yourselves In Pathfinder: Wrath
I think Malus can/will disappoint people, if only because expectations are so high. There are so many points CA can start from, whether that be the artifact hunt or when he becomes lord of Hag Grief. There also all the various artifacts, Tzarkan, Spite, etc.
 

As an Amazon Associate, rpgcodex.net earns from qualifying purchases.
Back
Top Bottom