EPTOn November 25 2017 11:27 Jerubaal wrote:
I have no intention of approaching a neckbeard to inquire.
I have no intention of approaching a neckbeard to inquire.
https://1d4chan.org/wiki/Malekith
The Internet provides.
Total War: Warhammer - Page 91
| Forum Index > General Games |
|
Manit0u
Poland17397 Posts
https://1d4chan.org/wiki/Malekith The Internet provides. | ||
|
Sermokala
United States14038 Posts
| ||
|
xDaunt
United States17988 Posts
On November 28 2017 09:34 Sermokala wrote: Get Ultimate general:civil war. Its all the things and is made by an old school total war modder. What I have come to realize playing Warhammer is that it is going to be really hard for me to go back to playing a Total War game where there is substantial similarity between the factions. | ||
|
Sermokala
United States14038 Posts
On November 28 2017 12:23 xDaunt wrote: What I have come to realize playing Warhammer is that it is going to be really hard for me to go back to playing a Total War game where there is substantial similarity between the factions. I was thinking playing the game "man empire 2 total war would look amazing", then I remembered that every faction uses the same two units. | ||
|
Tal
United Kingdom1017 Posts
On November 28 2017 12:23 xDaunt wrote: What I have come to realize playing Warhammer is that it is going to be really hard for me to go back to playing a Total War game where there is substantial similarity between the factions. And historically that is hard to get past. There are times in history where you have elites with tech vs masses without tech, but nothing like the difference between Undead and Dwarves or something.... Maybe the only way is with tightly scripted campaigns, where the maps and balance of forces keep it interesting - I remember in the old Close Combat games it was great fun holding off tank heavy German armies for the first half of the game, and then finally getting tanks of your own to turn the tide. | ||
|
xDaunt
United States17988 Posts
| ||
|
Sermokala
United States14038 Posts
On November 29 2017 01:15 xDaunt wrote: It's not just the interfactional diversity. There's a lot of intrafactional diversity, too. From flying goon squads, to monster hordes, to massed gunpowder armies -- there are a ton of viable ways to play each faction. Compare that to Rome where you can choose between legions and more legions, which is why I am completely uninterested in the new Rome 2 stuff that is coming out. If you've been away from Rome 2 for a while I would recomend Divide et Impera. It made the game a bit more fun for me. Its hard to disagree with the blah of legion on legion combat that empire divided promises even though it shows CA is learning from the success's of warhammer. | ||
|
Biff The Understudy
France7916 Posts
I mean, no offense, but samurai shit just doesn’t cut it after that. And god knows how much i love samurais. | ||
|
xDaunt
United States17988 Posts
On November 29 2017 04:48 Biff The Understudy wrote: WH is my first Total War, and I fail to see how any other title could be as fun. The warhammer universe is such a wargame gem; and history doesn’t really provide much in terms of army diversity that can rival a dinosaur equipped with laser firing into a rat driving an insane hamster wheel running over stuff while buzzing green jedi lightning all around. I mean, no offense, but samurai shit just doesn’t cut it after that. And god knows how much i love samurais. The original appeal of Total War for me was the fairly realistic battles with massive armies. The history fetishists also loved the settings, but I considered that to be a secondary concern (despite being a history buff myself) to the gameplay. The depth of the gameplay that comes with Warhammer's unit diversity is way beyond anything from the previous Total War games. I just don't see myself going back, even if CA released the Victoria: Total War that I always wanted. | ||
|
Biff The Understudy
France7916 Posts
On November 29 2017 05:55 xDaunt wrote: The original appeal of Total War for me was the fairly realistic battles with massive armies. The history fetishists also loved the settings, but I considered that to be a secondary concern (despite being a history buff myself) to the gameplay. The depth of the gameplay that comes with Warhammer's unit diversity is way beyond anything from the previous Total War games. I just don't see myself going back, even if CA released the Victoria: Total War that I always wanted. I have to say the new Britannia title with vikings looting everything will probably get my attention. I love vikings. But ye, it’s hard to do more varied and entertaining than such a self indulgent fantasy setting. Tried playing as Belegar on hard, and I got roasted. Is there any other way to win than abuse the etherial heroes to death and roflrush Karak eight slots? Anyway, I gave up and now I’m playing Grombrindal, whise blue tree is really absurd. Here is a problem i noticed. I killed greenskins at turn 15 or so. That means those guys will never confederate if i understand the game mechanics, and so will never be a threat anymore. The same happened in an old Bretonnia campaign: I killed Norsca super early, and the tribes remained divided and therefore quite weak the whole game. How is it that minor factions can’t confederate when the main faction has been killed? Or can they? Because that’s an extremely exploitable feature imo. | ||
|
B.I.G.
3251 Posts
If for example someone had killed Napoleon before he gathered followers France would never become that powerhouse. The difference in game is that we know what their potential is. | ||
|
Biff The Understudy
France7916 Posts
On November 29 2017 22:37 B.I.G. wrote: Doesn't it make sense militaristically that taking out a certain faction with strong potential in it's infancy would prevent an entire region from living up to its potential at that time? If for example someone had killed Napoleon before he gathered followers France would never become that powerhouse. The difference in game is that we know what their potential is. Well, right but if Karl Franz get killed and never get to reunite the empire, it makes sense that someone else will? I mean why voluntarily cut so many alternative narratives where actually, Boris Todbringer reunited the empire, or Karak Azul built the new dwarf empire after the destruction of Karaz a Karak? Maybe it would be cool to see Alberic take over Bretonnia after Lioncoeur got roasted by the beastmen. Also, my problem is how exploitable it is currently. Early crusades to kill off greenskins, Norsca or vampire counts simplify the game by several orders of magnitudes. | ||
|
xDaunt
United States17988 Posts
Following up on the earlier remarks regarding intrafactional diversity, Gelt is rolling with a new stack in my Empire campaign. He has 6 greatswords, 4 handgunners, 4 outriders, 2 outriders with grenade launchers, 2 luminarks (1 is the RoR), and a witch hunter. I'll eventually replace the greatswords with tanks so that he is completely decked out with stuff that he has specced into skill-wise. It's been pretty funny watching the luminarks and the witch hunter murder enemy generals and heroes. Holding a line hasn't been very hard, either. I've been relying heavily upon Gelt's Transmutation of Lead, which is an absolutely crippling debuff. I don't think that this is a good army for taking cities, but it is very good in the field, which is why I currently have Gelt parked in Praag where he is taking on Chaos stacks as they appear. | ||
|
andrewlt
United States7702 Posts
| ||
|
B.I.G.
3251 Posts
| ||
|
Artesimo
Germany563 Posts
On December 06 2017 10:14 B.I.G. wrote: When it says 15% of success for a hero's action it's already predetermined if it will work or not right? Reloaded an assassination attempt 20 times and all 4 heroes failed each time even though they all had 15% chance.. Not sure about the second game, but in the first game you could definitely savescum heros actions, at least when your game crashed. Played a MP campaign with a friend where one battle would randomly crash, I blocked the army movement first with an agent and the outcome was different with almost every reload until I finally decided to just autoresolve the battle. I also always did the same -> load save -> block army -> attack with either one or 2 armies depending on the success of the block action, so in Game 1 it wasnt even a sequence but most likely rolled new every time. Otherwise you can propably switch it up via doing some other actions beforehand since most likely only a sequence of "rolls" is generated in advance from which the game propably picks the first(XCOM does it this way I believe). | ||
|
Sermokala
United States14038 Posts
The laboratory Aka the best god damm thing released this year. The trailer is gold and lowered gravity is cold. DLC of they year. | ||
|
xDaunt
United States17988 Posts
| ||
|
Razhil
Belgium208 Posts
| ||
|
Divine-Sneaker
Denmark1225 Posts
| ||
| ||
