On July 17 2016 13:58 xDaunt wrote: Am I doing something wrong, or are gyrobombers simply beyond useless? As in so useless, that they can't even kill artillery? I felt like brimstone gyrocopters did a better job at doing damage.
Well, their bombs are absolutely ridiculous for leadership-damage. Just let the enemy mass against your wall of shields, and bomb 'em good. They'll be taking off in no time.
On July 18 2016 00:07 Artesimo wrote: Its even more retarded since they don't even have vision. Or at least they shoudn't have vision since they arent allied with any of the other factions. Chaos early game is nothing but cheesing the AI and playing like a scared little bitch
sounds just like chaos though, the cheesing and scared like a lil child part.
On July 18 2016 01:19 Vivax wrote: gyrobombers are terrible most of the time (they would need improved RoF). Just go for ironbreakers and organ guns.
Yeah, Ironbreakers are the shit. I like organ guns, but am not sure how many I really want in my army vs thunderers and quarrelers. My current army comp is 8 Ironbreakers, 2 gw quarrelers, 2 thunderers, 2 organ guns, 2 cannons, 2 brimstone gyros (to kill artillery), and 1 master engineer. I'm not sold on the cannons or quarrelers.
On July 18 2016 01:19 Vivax wrote: gyrobombers are terrible most of the time (they would need improved RoF). Just go for ironbreakers and organ guns.
Yeah, Ironbreakers are the shit. I like organ guns, but am not sure how many I really want in my army vs thunderers and quarrelers. My current army comp is 8 Ironbreakers, 2 gw quarrelers, 2 thunderers, 2 organ guns, 2 cannons, 2 brimstone gyros (to kill artillery), and 1 master engineer. I'm not sold on the cannons or quarrelers.
Im experimenting with armies of just thunderers and artillery (typically 2 cannons, 2 or more organs), master engineer to increase range and other stuff and lord perks for thunderers cause it increases missile damage. Only 4 ironbreakers in them.
Thunderers in the middle and ironbreakers on the flank. Artillery behind duh.
how is the storymode in this game? is it story and cutscene heavy or is it not? do the races have individual stories so high replayability? i only play story games really
i was gonna buy 40k armada but reviews said the campaign was lacklustre
also if you guys didn't know, there is an FPS loosely based on the original 1993 Space Hulk in production:
sadly i strongly suspect that they've downplayed the huge strategy element and made it a zergling shootemup instead of an intense labyrinth corridor walk of death like the original .1993 version is here
i think in the new game you can only give basic orders to 2 other guys (instead of completely RTS micromanage and/or jump into 5+ other guys) and the areas they've shown so far have been wide open shooting galleries instead of death corridors where you die in 1 hit to swarms after fucking up an overwatch position or your bolter jams at the wrong time coz you paniced and pressed space bar too much. also the devs literally dont speak on the dev forum from what i saw (lots of people whining there about it) . but still im hyped , if they can get near the atmosphere of the original game it will be epic (if they fail then i guess ill just have to put it on Hard mode to make it scarier ... :/ )
this is the only longish gameplay video so far, idk why the devs seem to be in german-only mode wtf, dont they want to hype their game?
i got triggered coz someone just posted this Chaos set for a hero in Dota
Just finished my Dwarf campaign. It is SOOOO much easier than the Empire campaign. Your southern flank is completely secured once you capture everything in the Badlands and beat off the Bjornling invasion. Also, Dwarf troops are damned cheap compared to Empire troops when comparing the best troops. And of course, you can completely game all of the battles to your advantage by keeping everything in the tunnels where it is impossible for your armies to be flanked. All you need is a wall of eight ironbreakers and then a shitton of artillery behind them. At that point, it's GG. I still don't like that the Gyrobombers are so terrible. Brimstone Gyrocopters are superior.
I think I'm going to get some mods to increase unit diversity and overhaul the campaign a bit (Radious mod looks good).
On July 18 2016 08:00 FFGenerations wrote: how is the storymode in this game? is it story and cutscene heavy or is it not? do the races have individual stories so high replayability? i only play story games really
i was gonna buy 40k armada but reviews said the campaign was lacklustre
also if you guys didn't know, there is an FPS loosely based on the original 1993 Space Hulk in production:
sadly i strongly suspect that they've downplayed the huge strategy element and made it a zergling shootemup instead of an intense labyrinth corridor walk of death like the original .1993 version is here
i think in the new game you can only give basic orders to 2 other guys (instead of completely RTS micromanage and/or jump into 5+ other guys) and the areas they've shown so far have been wide open shooting galleries instead of death corridors where you die in 1 hit to swarms after fucking up an overwatch position or your bolter jams at the wrong time coz you paniced and pressed space bar too much. also the devs literally dont speak on the dev forum from what i saw (lots of people whining there about it) . but still im hyped , if they can get near the atmosphere of the original game it will be epic (if they fail then i guess ill just have to put it on Hard mode to make it scarier ... :/ )
this is the only longish gameplay video so far, idk why the devs seem to be in german-only mode wtf, dont they want to hype their game?
1. WTW isn't story driven. The campaigns I played so far had 1-2 hd cutscenes and ~6-9 questbattles with voiced introduction in ingame-graphics, but in the end the campaigns are pure domination campaigns. Warhammer elements seem mostly represented ingame from what I can tell, but again, while it's decently atmospheric, it's not driven by the atmosphere or the story (which barely exists).
2. @space hulk deathwing: Corridors are supposed to be part of the game, as well as elements like shutting down doors and tactical commands to your allies like "go to that position" or "use that ability". Devs promise 3-5 man coop (they didn't decide on that yet) or 2 ai-controlled allies in single player. You won't go down in one hit, as one of your allies is a healer (apothecarius) and that'd make him pretty useless. They also seem to have a medkit function (limited to 4 per mission) in the game and mild roleplay elements. The guy who has an idea what he's talking about compared it to republic commando.
On July 18 2016 08:00 FFGenerations wrote: how is the storymode in this game? is it story and cutscene heavy or is it not? do the races have individual stories so high replayability? i only play story games really
i was gonna buy 40k armada but reviews said the campaign was lacklustre
also if you guys didn't know, there is an FPS loosely based on the original 1993 Space Hulk in production:
sadly i strongly suspect that they've downplayed the huge strategy element and made it a zergling shootemup instead of an intense labyrinth corridor walk of death like the original .1993 version is here
i think in the new game you can only give basic orders to 2 other guys (instead of completely RTS micromanage and/or jump into 5+ other guys) and the areas they've shown so far have been wide open shooting galleries instead of death corridors where you die in 1 hit to swarms after fucking up an overwatch position or your bolter jams at the wrong time coz you paniced and pressed space bar too much. also the devs literally dont speak on the dev forum from what i saw (lots of people whining there about it) . but still im hyped , if they can get near the atmosphere of the original game it will be epic (if they fail then i guess ill just have to put it on Hard mode to make it scarier ... :/ )
this is the only longish gameplay video so far, idk why the devs seem to be in german-only mode wtf, dont they want to hype their game?
Campaigns are great and the best part of this game.. But there are basically no cut scenes beyond a couple. The stories really arent different, its all one campaign, but each race plays very differently in style and units, and has different sets of problems to deal with. No 2 campaigns are ever the same.
Case in Point: I am playing VC and decide that Dwarves would be a good trading partner. So I restart the campaign and target Bloody Spears to get on Zhufbar's good side. Well, Zhufbar lost the war despite my help and now I needlessly antagonized the Greenskins.
On July 18 2016 00:07 Artesimo wrote: Its even more retarded since they don't even have vision. Or at least they shoudn't have vision since they arent allied with any of the other factions. Chaos early game is nothing but cheesing the AI and playing like a scared little bitch
The problem is that it seems the AI sees how powerful your stacks are. This is what makes the chaos campaign so boring, you need to focus strongly on building up, and many times being several turns just playing whack'a'mole with the starting towns just to get to the point where you want to be (3 hordes). From there you need to be quite swift and start awakening and subduing northern tribes, that way they will be automatically on war with anything you are at war with, and act as a real buffer.
On July 18 2016 16:36 Godwrath wrote: The problem is that it seems the AI sees how powerful your stacks are. This is what makes the chaos campaign so boring, you need to focus strongly on building up, and many times being several turns just playing whack'a'mole with the starting towns just to get to the point where you want to be (3 hordes). From there you need to be quite swift and start awakening and subduing northern tribes, that way they will be automatically on war with anything you are at war with, and act as a real buffer.
More importantly, the AI also always knows where your stacks and your awakened/subjected tribes are and comes straight for them. This makes things difficult which isn't even my main concern. My main concern is that it really breaks the immersion seeing some borderprince running all the way to the north through territories they are at war with only to bash your awakened tribe. The ever watcher or northern tribes camping right next to way stronger/weaker armies they are at war with but ignoring them since they wait for you to leave your new horde too far away. It is really weird seeing multiple parties that are at war with each other almost acting like they were one army and best friends.
My best experience so far was having a weakened Archaon sitting left to the northmen camp above the dwarves in the north. Kislev and Ostland where hunting him down but also are at war which eachother. Ostlands stack was pretty weak so they stayed just out of range so I positioned my archaon in a way that they blocked of the pass for the Kislev doomstack which had to go around then. Bought me the 2 turns to recruit new troops, blocked their army with an agent and slayed the bear. It felt good from a tactical standpoint, but immersion wise it was retarded. Kislev and Ostland were at war, Kislev could have just wiped the Ostland stack without any losses and marched towards me, forcing me to break camp and denied me any of my chaos knights which ultimately killed their stack.
And unless you don't want to cheese Kholek into an unkillable 1 man army, the lack of ambush is also critical because otherwise you really need a hero that can block armies early on. If you have Kholek you can use him as “ambush” since the AI will think it stands a chance.
I'm 90% sure that during my chaos campaign I got multiple ambushes just by being in forests. IIrc chaos gets an automatic ambush/hidden in everything over 70% ambush chance. I also multiple times didn't get engaged just by hiding in forests. Baiting with weak stacks while hiding strong ones was my solution to Russia trying to kill my northern tribes but dodging my doom stack.
But yeah ai hate is retarded, esp. since it doesn't work that way when you are not chaos. In my empire campaign nordland was getting trashed by chaos/skaeling, which didn't stop them from declaring war on me and razing some border provinces while loosing their capital.
On July 18 2016 13:45 Jerubaal wrote: Case in Point: I am playing VC and decide that Dwarves would be a good trading partner. So I restart the campaign and target Bloody Spears to get on Zhufbar's good side. Well, Zhufbar lost the war despite my help and now I needlessly antagonized the Greenskins.
Honestly I have never been able to ally with the greenskins with any faction. They just hate everyone.
On July 18 2016 13:45 Jerubaal wrote: Case in Point: I am playing VC and decide that Dwarves would be a good trading partner. So I restart the campaign and target Bloody Spears to get on Zhufbar's good side. Well, Zhufbar lost the war despite my help and now I needlessly antagonized the Greenskins.
Honestly I have never been able to ally with the greenskins with any faction. They just hate everyone.
You can bribe them off to make them hate other people slightly more then you.
On July 18 2016 13:45 Jerubaal wrote: Case in Point: I am playing VC and decide that Dwarves would be a good trading partner. So I restart the campaign and target Bloody Spears to get on Zhufbar's good side. Well, Zhufbar lost the war despite my help and now I needlessly antagonized the Greenskins.
Honestly I have never been able to ally with the greenskins with any faction. They just hate everyone.
I dunno buddy, as vamp counts, they seem to love me. Maybe because I love bullying the dwarves a lot.
Anyhow, after having forced myself to play no-quickbattles for a couple weeks, I now feel brave enough to try out legendary later today!
I expect many manly tears and curses at my horrible choices in life.
On July 20 2016 21:38 plated.rawr wrote: I dunno buddy, as vamp counts, they seem to love me. Maybe because I love bullying the dwarves a lot.
Anyhow, after having forced myself to play no-quickbattles for a couple weeks, I now feel brave enough to try out legendary later today!
I expect many manly tears and curses at my horrible choices in life.
In case of tears, I suggest playing very hard instead, unless you really want the camera limitations. Legendary is the same as very hard, only you don't have the strategic map, no minimap, in general no hints like threat lvl etc. , you can't hit slow motion or give orders while pausing the battle and in a battle you can't move the camera to far away from your units. The AI receives on legendary the same buffs as on very hard and it is the same with your penalties. It is more or less an inconvenient very hard
Honestly, the only really big difference between Legendary and Very Hard is the ability to save and load at will. I'd suggest making sure that you have a good grasp of the AI and the game's mechanics on the strategic layer before doing Legendary. Otherwise, you're very likely to make campaign-ending errors.
On July 21 2016 04:53 xDaunt wrote: Honestly, the only really big difference between Legendary and Very Hard is the ability to save and load at will. I'd suggest making sure that you have a good grasp of the AI and the game's mechanics on the strategic layer before doing Legendary. Otherwise, you're very likely to make campaign-ending errors.
Oh yeah, forgot the most important change since I never save scumed. Very good summary of legendary Artesimo : D
EPT
