EPTThis weekend TWW2 is free on Steam, a great way to check it out if you haven't already.
TWW1 is 75% off now and TWW 66% off on Steam, a really good deal to get both of them.
Total War: Warhammer II
| Forum Index > General Games |
|
Manit0u
Poland17665 Posts
This weekend TWW2 is free on Steam, a great way to check it out if you haven't already. TWW1 is 75% off now and TWW 66% off on Steam, a really good deal to get both of them. | ||
Xxio
Canada5565 Posts
| ||
|
Latham
9568 Posts
Multiplayer army vs army is pretty competitive and has a sizeable, lively community. This is by far the best Total War ever released. | ||
|
Manit0u
Poland17665 Posts
| ||
|
Vindicare605
United States16121 Posts
I guess Total War Warhammer 2 didn't have a thread though. It is definitely a lot better than the previous one, more complete with more fun dynamics and a greater variety of factions. It's also free to play for the weekend on steam so if you guys haven't tried it yet you should check it out. | ||
|
CuddlyCuteKitten
Sweden2715 Posts
| ||
|
Vindicare605
United States16121 Posts
On April 18 2020 04:14 CuddlyCuteKitten wrote: There has also been amazing support on these games from CA. Basically all the new content is great and worth it AND it almost always comes with a lot of free things too. Definitely, this game has arguably the best monetized DLC model I've ever experienced. Well aside from the Blood Pack, we don't talk about that one. | ||
|
alone
Poland410 Posts
| ||
|
Vindicare605
United States16121 Posts
On April 18 2020 06:11 alone wrote: Tempted to get the game right now, pricing seems great. How do 1 and 2 relate to each other? I read somewhere that when you have both games you can combine map and play content from both in warhammer 2. Do I lose much if I only get one (doesnt matter which)? Don't get Warhammer 1. It's an inferior game it isn't being updated either. Get 2 if you're only going to get one. That's going to limit you to just the Vortex map, which is a good campaign map and the 4 default Warhammer 2 races, but the beauty of having both is unlocking the enormous Mortal Empires map that spans the entirety of both Warhammer 1 and Warhammer 2 (well almost all of it)'s campaign map and unlocks all of the Warhammer 1 starting races (non-DLC) races as well, all of which have been updated in Warhammer 2 to be more fun to play. Except the Greenskins anyway but they're next on the list with an update coming in May. Warhammer 2 is still actively being updated and new content comes out for it a couple times per year. Warhammer 1 was cool when it came out but it's nowhere close to being as good as Warhammer 2 is. If you can though, get them both. Think of Warhammer 1 as a big DLC package that unlocks 5 new factions and a much bigger campaign map. | ||
|
Latham
9568 Posts
But I'd highly advise getting both for the combined campaign map. It's all I ever really play, because of the variety of races you can choose to play and fight against. DLCs might seem costly as well since you'll be buying in bulk, but for us, people who have been buying them since release, the cost over time decreases while the game just gets better with every release. Tomb Kings and Vampire Coast DLCs are god-like quality and bang for your buck. | ||
|
Manit0u
Poland17665 Posts
| ||
|
alone
Poland410 Posts
| ||
|
r00ty
Germany1065 Posts
The community is great though and there's tons of awesome mods, some with more content than most DLC. | ||
|
Elmonti
Spain299 Posts
It has the best AI of any Total War: that has been a problem in the past, even making a game unplayable (Empire Total War... what a waste of that wonderful historical period...). Of course it can be totally outplayed using cheese or some tricks, but that's up to you. It has the most variety of troops, BY FAR. Considering some Total War games have the same roost of troops plus 1-2 exclusive for each faction (Empire, Shogun or 3K) or 4-5 types of armies (Rome 2, Attila), Warhammer has (if you purchase both, which I really suggest) 14... FOURTEEN... totally different armies, each one with 20-30 types of units. I've never seen that variety in any strategy game... This is the main reason why I've spent 1700 hourse on this game. The quality of the DLCs is actually the best of any Total War games, which wasn't very difficult to be honest. But some of them, especially the Tomb Kings or the Vampire Coast packs add new flavour to campaings. Of course, it has its downsides: no naval combat, the empire managment is much simpler than other games (which can be partially fixed with mods like Grindhammer), and its fantasy, which can be unappealing for some people. | ||
|
r00ty
Germany1065 Posts
On April 18 2020 18:14 Elmonti wrote: It has the best AI of any Total War: that has been a problem in the past, even making a game unplayable (Empire Total War... what a waste of that wonderful historical period...). Of course it can be totally outplayed using cheese or some tricks, but that's up to you. Yeah i usually don't use it, only when you get into a situation fighting 3 armies+, or so, but the KI is still something to critique. But Total War series is also my most played single player game next to Mount & Blade. Also encouraged people to get it, when on sale. Told my friend it's like Heroes of Might and Magic with realtime battles and he really likes it. If you take mods and everything into consideration it's well worth the price! | ||
|
Dangermousecatdog
United Kingdom7084 Posts
On April 18 2020 18:14 Elmonti wrote: I also think it's the most polished Total War ever, and that doesn't necessarily mean the best one nor the most realistic one or whatever. It has the best AI of any Total War: that has been a problem in the past, even making a game unplayable (Empire Total War... what a waste of that wonderful historical period...). Of course it can be totally outplayed using cheese or some tricks, but that's up to you. It has the most variety of troops, BY FAR. Considering some Total War games have the same roost of troops plus 1-2 exclusive for each faction (Empire, Shogun or 3K) or 4-5 types of armies (Rome 2, Attila), Warhammer has (if you purchase both, which I really suggest) 14... FOURTEEN... totally different armies, each one with 20-30 types of units. I've never seen that variety in any strategy game... This is the main reason why I've spent 1700 hourse on this game. The quality of the DLCs is actually the best of any Total War games, which wasn't very difficult to be honest. But some of them, especially the Tomb Kings or the Vampire Coast packs add new flavour to campaings. Of course, it has its downsides: no naval combat, the empire managment is much simpler than other games (which can be partially fixed with mods like Grindhammer), and its fantasy, which can be unappealing for some people. It has the same battle AI as the first Rome Total War. It's never changed since then. It has no idea how to respond to well, anything. Every unit acts like an semi-independent unit without any real co-ordination. You don't need cheese or some tricks to fool the rudimentary AI, just the same tactics you have been doing since 15 years ago, because it's the same AI as 15 years ago. | ||
|
Manit0u
Poland17665 Posts
On April 18 2020 22:18 Dangermousecatdog wrote: It has the same battle AI as the first Rome Total War. It's never changed since then. It has no idea how to respond to well, anything. Every unit acts like an semi-independent unit without any real co-ordination. You don't need cheese or some tricks to fool the rudimentary AI, just the same tactics you have been doing since 15 years ago, because it's the same AI as 15 years ago. It's not exactly the same AI since it has many more different tools now (magic, big monsters, summons etc.) so it'll be way more challenging than any of the previous titles. | ||
|
Dangermousecatdog
United Kingdom7084 Posts
Maybe it is more "challenging" for you to process all the different units, but the battle AI remains the same. It's actually quite spooky seeing the same AI behaviour across all the different titles. Weak melee, strong missile units still do that dumb thing where they go back and forth without shooting, being shot at when faced against a superior melee and missile force, all slow melee units are just as easily pulled apart as in RTW. Horse archers, whatever the form of the mount, lizard, wolf whatever, run into corners the exact same way as RTW / MTW2 / Empire / RTW2 / Shogun2, when a human player would used superior speed to turn away from the battle edge long ago. It's identical. In terms of manoeuvre, the AI is the same. That's not to say it's bad because of it, I cry tears of joy seeing the models I played in my youth now realistically animated on screen, but it's totally wrong to say it has the best AI when it is the exact same AI. There's lots of things going for WTW2 over the rest of the TW series but AI isn't it. | ||
|
Manit0u
Poland17665 Posts
New DLC. Looks amazeballs. | ||
|
Vindicare605
United States16121 Posts
| ||
|
Latham
9568 Posts
| ||
|
Gorsameth
Netherlands22102 Posts
On May 08 2020 04:14 Latham wrote: ehm, this is a revamp?Finally a greenskin centric DLC. Now if only they'd revamp greenskins before WH3 so they're actually playable in vanilla. Changes to faction mechanics, changes tech tree, lord skills, new units, most likely some stat tweaking of existing units. | ||
|
Latham
9568 Posts
On May 08 2020 04:57 Gorsameth wrote: ehm, this is a revamp? Changes to faction mechanics, changes tech tree, lord skills, new units, most likely some stat tweaking of existing units. https://www.totalwar.com/blog/total-war-warhammer-ii-the-warden-the-paunch-faq/ I see it now... well it remains to be seen. Maybe they'll throw poor old Skarsnik a bone or two, because he gets absolutely shit on in any playthrough. Additionally as a player I'd rather drag my ballsack through a kilometre of broken glass rather than play another campaign as him... You guys think every greenskin will be able to recruit River Trolls and Stone Trolls? Giants/Trolls are such underwhelming units on any roster, hopefully they'll make them worth recruitng. | ||
|
Vindicare605
United States16121 Posts
On May 08 2020 05:10 Latham wrote: https://www.totalwar.com/blog/total-war-warhammer-ii-the-warden-the-paunch-faq/ I see it now... well it remains to be seen. Maybe they'll throw poor old Skarsnik a bone or two, because he gets absolutely shit on in any playthrough. Additionally as a player I'd rather drag my ballsack through a kilometre of broken glass rather than play another campaign as him... You guys think every greenskin will be able to recruit River Trolls and Stone Trolls? Giants/Trolls are such underwhelming units on any roster, hopefully they'll make them worth recruitng. Skarsnik's campaign is supposed to be hard, and he is being thrown a bone with this DLC because all of the units that Greenskins are getting in the DLC are units he'll be able to make without having K8P. | ||
|
Manit0u
Poland17665 Posts
On May 08 2020 10:17 Vindicare605 wrote: Skarsnik's campaign is supposed to be hard, and he is being thrown a bone with this DLC because all of the units that Greenskins are getting in the DLC are units he'll be able to make without having K8P. I didn't find Skarsnik's campaign all that awful and I didn't even bother to capture K8P for the longest time since I went with fluffy night gobbos, squigs and spiders. You can definitely make do without the orc units in this game. I wish they would add night goblin big boss as an army leader, with possible squig mount. That would be ballers. By far the worst campaign and mechanic is Wood Elves in my opinion. Extremely boring and uninspired, which is a real pity since they're one of my favorite factions. | ||
|
Vindicare605
United States16121 Posts
With the rework, I am looking forward to playing all of the Legendary Lords, I'll probably save Skarsnik for last though. | ||
|
Vindicare605
United States16121 Posts
This update has me so hyped. The new Waaaagh! Mechanic looks SO MUCH fun! A 2000% improvement over the last one! Just gotta wait a week. Ugh, I dont want to wait! | ||
|
Sbrubbles
Brazil5776 Posts
| ||
|
Vindicare605
United States16121 Posts
On May 09 2020 03:05 Sbrubbles wrote: The new Waaah sounds powerful. It looks like it practically doubles all your armies, without the annoyance of having the second ai army on the map. With no control over what units you get in it however. Also from what I understand you can have it reinforce you as an AI army too if you don't want to micro 40 units. Personally, I think that's an option I'll never take, but it's there if you want it. | ||
|
Latham
9568 Posts
| ||
|
Manit0u
Poland17665 Posts
Grimgor stronk confirmed. | ||
|
Archeon
3263 Posts
@changes: the 40 unit unit cap is something I'd like to see for other trash style factions. F.e. Counts recruiting their raise dead units into an additional pool of 5-10 units, Skaven coming with additional slave rats, Bretonnia with additional peasants. Overall cool changes anyways, sounds pretty broken though. In combination with the buffs to GS lords the power creep sounds enormous. | ||
|
Manit0u
Poland17665 Posts
On May 10 2020 12:30 Archeon wrote: ^Grimgor beat Kholek? Holy fuck, that puts him pretty much at the top of the food chain. He almost lost to Durthu and Vlad though, seems like they're the biggest powerhouses next to him. I'd also like to know how he fares against Archaon, Siggy, Karl and Wulfrik. | ||
|
jdc214
United States122 Posts
| ||
|
Archeon
3263 Posts
So yeah, not great. Ok early on when there aren't a lot of mobile targets and you can kite, ok later on because his boosts to his archers are absurd, but not a fighting powerhouse. IIRC he has splash shots which damage in a line though, so put him on the flanks and pretend he's a shitty gunpowder-unit. Btw @waaagh: The player can choose to control the other 20 units or let them get ai controlled. The waaagh army will also occasionally get spiders and black orcs (a bit dependent on your LL and your waaagh target apparently), so this sounds extremely busted. It costs however a bit of upkeep. | ||
|
Latham
9568 Posts
2 multiplayer matches featuring new units. | ||
|
Archeon
3263 Posts
The river hag and the lions look strong though and Silverin guards look pretty decent as well, charge defense vs all is invaluable. Big Uns might also find their place with these changes. | ||
|
Biff The Understudy
France7982 Posts
Not super convinced about the state of Mortal Empire tbh. The chaos mechanics never really worked but now it's totally irrelevant. Hope TWW3 will be a bit better designed when it comes to late game event. | ||
|
Gorsameth
Netherlands22102 Posts
Hopefully Chaos gets a remake for part 3. I'd love the idea of playing a wall of warriors and chosen (that are not Dwarfs) but the faction just sucks to play. | ||
|
Biff The Understudy
France7982 Posts
Generally speaking, the game has gigantic potential but a few problems that really cripple the experience. | ||
|
Archeon
3263 Posts
Imo supply lines and difficulty scaling in battles need a rework to enable more mixed armies. And I've been calling for a rebalancing of archers and monsters for a long time now, these units just are generally broken in PvE. SFO imo has a better unit balance and SFO's strong suit really isn't balance. | ||
|
Biff The Understudy
France7982 Posts
| ||
|
Latham
9568 Posts
Just SFO SFO + other flavourful mods Unit balance, economy balance, more complete rosters for every faction, better/harder AI (although still very cheesable if you so desire), better autoresolve (so you don't lose every piece of artillery you have in your army vs 1 lord and 2 peasant mobs) and so much more. It's honestly the reason I am still playing this game to this day. It adds TONNES more replayability. Are you asking about Mortal Empires in general, or just ME in SFO? ME combines the map from 1st the game (Old World) with the Vortex map, into 1 giant campaign. It's really the only way you'll experience fighting all factions and can go for a world domination victory for fun. Some starting positions are adjusted for the sake of balance and a little bit because of map distortion. | ||
|
Archeon
3263 Posts
On July 27 2020 20:37 Biff The Understudy wrote: Do you recommend SFO? What's the difference and how does Mortal Empire play? In terms of AI the AI doesn't pile on you as much, fields more armies and is less buffed on the battlefield in exchange. It also uses spells much better, which is quite spicy on occasion. I had some really harmful vortices hit my backline. Lots of rebalances of units, spells and race mechanics. The big things for me are that archer accuracy is down and especially infantry hp is up, so unit type balance is less one-sided. Battles take a bit longer. Unit complexity is a bit up and most weak vanilla units get their own niche they can perform in, but generally high tier units are a bit stronger. This gets somewhat counterbalanced by lvl ups being more impactful. SFO comes with lower supply lines but a system that otherwise punishes large empires economically. It does a lot of things that are more loreful which just make sense, f.e. vampires are much faster than normal infantry and halberds are better at punishing cav that tries to pull out. LL buffs to certain units tend to be stronger. Not everything is perfect and the feeling is quite a bit different at times, but imo SFO is WH's more complex big brother with better battlefield balance and deeper mechanics. So yes, if you are looking for a fresh experience in wh I 100% recommend trying out SFO. Oh and chaos is a threat. Like fullstack + garrison vs chaos stack fights where you roll over vanilla chaos are pretty tough in SFO, T2+ chaos units are super strong. | ||
|
Biff The Understudy
France7982 Posts
No confed makes the game much more uncertain. You can't expect Couronne to do nothing, confederate everyone around just because and become a superpower. There is much more continuity in who does well and who doesn't. Confederation is a bad mechanics, badly implemented imo. I hope they make it better in wh3 | ||
|
Manit0u
Poland17665 Posts
On September 14 2020 23:03 Biff The Understudy wrote: Playing a Karak Kadrin campaign with the no confederation mod. That's so much more fun. Also slayers buffed by Ungrim end up with 90+ Melee attack which is hilarious. No confed makes the game much more uncertain. You can't expect Couronne to do nothing, confederate everyone around just because and become a superpower. There is much more continuity in who does well and who doesn't. Confederation is a bad mechanics, badly implemented imo. I hope they make it better in wh3 Confederation in itself is not that bad. When you're playing a faction that can confederate it can save you a ton of time when you beat someone into submission and they just hand over the rest of their settlements without the need for protracted war. It is however pretty bad when AI does it and some factions just default to insta-confederating after some time has elapsed. I think it has to do with the fact that actual faction power ratings are calculated badly (just like army strength in autoresolve is calculated badly). It generally favors factions that spam a lot of weak stacks as opposed to having a bit more compact empire but with better developed settlements and fewer high quality stacks. If it irks you too much you can always play beastmen or chaos (I hate having to manage a very wide empire, there's a lot of charm in just razing everything to the ground). | ||
|
Latham
9568 Posts
On September 15 2020 00:46 Manit0u wrote: Confederation in itself is not that bad. When you're playing a faction that can confederate it can save you a ton of time when you beat someone into submission and they just hand over the rest of their settlements without the need for protracted war. It is however pretty bad when AI does it and some factions just default to insta-confederating after some time has elapsed. I think it has to do with the fact that actual faction power ratings are calculated badly (just like army strength in autoresolve is calculated badly). It generally favors factions that spam a lot of weak stacks as opposed to having a bit more compact empire but with better developed settlements and fewer high quality stacks. If it irks you too much you can always play beastmen or chaos (I hate having to manage a very wide empire, there's a lot of charm in just razing everything to the ground). I also personally use the no confederation mod. Confederation makes the game super predictable. Ordertide is a thing - Empire always forms, Dwarves muster themselves into a deathball, Britannia confeds, Helfs and sometimes Lizardmen too, then they all get to spanking everybody else. Empire stacks are somehow broken in autoresolve and almost always are at an advantage and wipe vamps or leave them alone, and then absolutely wipe the floor with chaos. Britannia often times goes for a crusade in the North and wipes Norsca. Dwarves shit on greenskins. I've seen it far too many times for it to be entertaining anymore. With no confed mod and SFO Karl still confeds the Empire, but slower and forcefully. That gives Chaos a fighting chance to actually be relevant for a time. Greenskins get a little more breathing space as well with slower Dawi consolidation of power. If you really want a unique and fun experience eveytime you need no confederation mode as well as all random starting positions. Only then you can get a chance to see the usual fodder factions rise to become juggernauts. | ||
|
akatama
Romania982 Posts
Flying monsters still dominate the walls. Unit caps push suboptimal units aside even more. The AI still can't win battles vs a player stack so you just clean two/three armies and then take province capitals; the AI becomes unable to fight back, best they can do is flip flop between a few minor settlements. They still take their sweet time to besiege a city and build siege equipment even if they can easily take the battle without it. I've also been slapped with an event spawning a trashy Empire army a short while after taking Altdorf. They managed to take 2 minor settlements from Reikland before I got an army back to clean them up. It's the strategy game equivalent of a jumpscare. On the topic of confederations, I do agree they let some factions get away from trouble. Still, the AI needs to blob to stand a chance against the player. I think the fundamental problem is that good factions buddy up thanks to diplomacy techs and less aversion. If Dark Elves, Greenskins and Skaven come out on top, you can still use diplomacy to get some allies and not fight everyone. If Empire, Dwarfs and High Elves come out on top they are all good buddies and you either side with them or against them (or you try to sweet talk Karl and Thorgrim only to end up with Karak Hirn declaring war on you and dragging everyone else along). Another thing that should really go away are those Empire techs granting bonuses vs their main enemies. They turn greatswords into unbreakable swordmasters and they trivialize autoresolve, letting Empire mow down city after city with no slowing down. Hell, the only thing that can beat them is Skaven stalk ambushes (which also need toning down, there's no way a unit of skavenslave slingers can kill 40 dwarf warriors in a regular battle). | ||
|
andrewlt
United States7702 Posts
| ||
|
aradii
Iran3 Posts
| ||
|
Gorsameth
Netherlands22102 Posts
On September 23 2020 22:17 aradii wrote: A combination of artillery (Eagleclaw bolt throwers ) of your own to draw the enemy to come forward to attack you and Eagles to attack their artillery once they are vulnerable.Plying as high elves one of my problem is Empire artillery, i want to know what's your strategy against empire and their helstorm rocket battery?? Any suggestion would be helpful. Late-game you have dragons. | ||
|
Manit0u
Poland17665 Posts
On September 23 2020 22:31 Gorsameth wrote: A combination of artillery (Eagleclaw bolt throwers ) of your own to draw the enemy to come forward to attack you and Eagles to attack their artillery once they are vulnerable. Late-game you have dragons. Bolt throwers are necessary for sieges. Eagles and phoenixes are kinda crap though. Early to mid-game I'm just using cheap cavalry for that (elyrrian reavers or silver helms, reaver archers are always nice since once they've done their job you can set them to skirmish formation and forget about them). | ||
|
aradii
Iran3 Posts
On September 23 2020 22:31 Gorsameth wrote: A combination of artillery (Eagleclaw bolt throwers ) of your own to draw the enemy to come forward to attack you and Eagles to attack their artillery once they are vulnerable. Late-game you have dragons. Thanks, you know the eagle and phoenixes are good recommendations because of their speed but the main problem is most of the time they killed by hand gunners and archers, and they couldn't destroy the whole units of helstorm rocket battery! On September 24 2020 00:54 Manit0u wrote: Bolt throwers are necessary for sieges. Eagles and phoenixes are kinda crap though. Early to mid-game I'm just using cheap cavalry for that (elyrrian reavers or silver helms, reaver archers are always nice since once they've done their job you can set them to skirmish formation and forget about them). Interesting idea for using cheap cavalry and forget about them, I use this one in my next battle, thanks | ||
|
Manit0u
Poland17665 Posts
Another perk is that they get vanguard deployment so can already start in better position. Edit: The more I think about it the more perks to fielding like 2 units of them I find really. Since they're so fast and maneuverable you can not just use them for flanking and rear-charging (they have the same melee stats as regular reavers, just less charge bonus) but they're also excellent at chasing fleeing units down and preventing them from reforming and ever coming back. So, in summary, you can either use them the easy way - kill some arty then set to skirmish mode and focus on other stuff, or if you don't mind micromanaging a bit more use them to great effect to support other units and disrupt your enemy where it's needed most. Really versatile unit, just beware of large missile units, skirmish cav have trouble with those (I guess reavers can always just charge those and win against anything that's not super elite like shadow walkers and the like). | ||
|
akatama
Romania982 Posts
| ||
|
Manit0u
Poland17665 Posts
On September 25 2020 20:54 akatama wrote: Empire is one of the hardest factions to face in campaign. Rockets, demis and guns cover each other so well in the hands of the AI. Your best bet would be to deploy as far back as possible and force the enemy to advance with magic, then have some hidden units or fliers tear into unprotected artillery pieces. I've always thought Empire was rather weak as an opponent. Hellstorms are easy to avoid, demis aren't what they used to be. Just need a force that can advance relatively fast but I remember I've had 0 problem with them even with slower armies like Chaos and Vampire Counts (and if you ambush them they can't do shit). | ||
|
akatama
Romania982 Posts
On September 25 2020 21:57 Manit0u wrote: I've always thought Empire was rather weak as an opponent. Hellstorms are easy to avoid, demis aren't what they used to be. Just need a force that can advance relatively fast but I remember I've had 0 problem with them even with slower armies like Chaos and Vampire Counts (and if you ambush them they can't do shit). Hellstorms do some nasty things when they do connect. I had black knights go from full health to crumbling because they ate a single close range rocket volley as they charged the battery. Empire leadership is through the roof since their update. Gold chevron state troops go over 100 leadership and at least on Legendary the AI gets the experience insanely quick. Hell I've seen Greatswords get nuked, only 3 models left alive and they were steady. I have also been slapped with two armies of 46 MA swordsmen on turn 8 as Ghorst. The only thing left to do in campaigns like that is either to restart and pray the AI doesn't get the versus techs too quick or pray the AI does something stupid. | ||
|
Biff The Understudy
France7982 Posts
1- The game is actually very, very well balanced without confederations, and main factions are mostly powerhouses anyway. Empire is super strong. Grimgor wiped out the dwarves of KaK all the same. 2- Ungrim slayers are STUPID good. We are talking 92 melee attack so they melt absolutely everything and everyone in seconds. They don't lose any model until they are below 50% health (journey's end buff) AND regenerate 30% thanks to Ungrim. That means almost every battle ends with your slayer stack having taken 0 loss and perfectly healthy. With lightning strikes you can kill 3 skaven doomstacks in one round without losing one model. It's ridiculous. 3- I am playing on very hard and frankly it's a bit tedious. I fight sooooo many battles that are super repetitive, especially with Ungrim stack. Dwarf rush army is quite bland. 4- Chaos sucks. I was waiting for them with three doomstacks until I realized they were so bad that one was more than enough. Will see when Archaon shows up but geez, those guys are incompetent. | ||
|
Latham
9568 Posts
Word on the street has been for years that Warhammer 3 will focus on completely revamping Chaos (and probably beastmen), add in Chaos Dwarves, Ogre Kingdoms and | ||
|
andrewlt
United States7702 Posts
On September 26 2020 03:35 akatama wrote: Hellstorms do some nasty things when they do connect. I had black knights go from full health to crumbling because they ate a single close range rocket volley as they charged the battery. Empire leadership is through the roof since their update. Gold chevron state troops go over 100 leadership and at least on Legendary the AI gets the experience insanely quick. Hell I've seen Greatswords get nuked, only 3 models left alive and they were steady. I have also been slapped with two armies of 46 MA swordsmen on turn 8 as Ghorst. The only thing left to do in campaigns like that is either to restart and pray the AI doesn't get the versus techs too quick or pray the AI does something stupid. Are they that good? Last time I played Empire was Warhammer 1 and I preferred mortars, tanks and arks to the rockets. Even on lower difficulties, Franz can be a time with a doomstack with 4-6 tanks. | ||
|
Vindicare605
United States16121 Posts
On October 08 2020 09:07 andrewlt wrote: Are they that good? Last time I played Empire was Warhammer 1 and I preferred mortars, tanks and arks to the rockets. Even on lower difficulties, Franz can be a time with a doomstack with 4-6 tanks. In campaign Hellstorm Rocket batteries are the best unit in the entire Empire Roster and it's not close at all. Mortars are good early on, but Hellstorms massively outclass them in every situation except for defensive siege battles where Mortars reign supreme. | ||
|
Manit0u
Poland17665 Posts
https://www.belloflostsouls.net/2020/10/total-war-warhammer-2-nutcracker-dlc-spotted.html | ||
|
Vindicare605
United States16121 Posts
The bigger mystery is who the other race is going to be. It's unlikely to be Beastmen they're not going to get new content probably until Warhammer 3 (although I would love to be wrong about this) so I'm guessing either something Dwarf or something Dark Elf. | ||
|
Manit0u
Poland17665 Posts
| ||
|
akatama
Romania982 Posts
I am having a really hard time seeing where Moulder could end up on the Vortex map. Lustria and the Southlands both have 2 rat LLs starting there and Tretch is up north in DE lands. | ||
|
Archeon
3263 Posts
DE have most of their roster and while they really could use some lord specific overhauls of their Lord specific campaign mechanics (all of them suck) I doubt that CA is going to do that unless they have a big overhaul planned for WH3. It's more probable that DEs will get a FLC lord eventually. On the flipside if there's a more or less complete WE overhaul that would mean that Skaven for the first time since Tretch doesn't get the majority of the budget (tbf in the Shadow & Blade they likely got much less budget in the unit department, just the way better campaign mechanics). Still Skaven is one of the most played wh2 races and Moulder would give them easy access to a monster they could use as dlc seller, which WEs kinda lack. Also while CA did say that they're going to use a wh2 race, there have been been updates to beastmen and WE animations in what seems to be the cloud location of the dlc, so fingers crossed for BM making it. | ||
|
akatama
Romania982 Posts
The only real constant in campaigns I've played or seen is the Empire always coming out on top unless a freak accident occurs. Seriously, it seems to take vampires and Azhag doing well on top of a large civil war in the Empire to bring Karl down. If he's not dead by the time Chaos arrives, he will peace out with other Empire provinces and gobble them up in confederations until he is unstoppable. | ||
|
Vindicare605
United States16121 Posts
I'd rather see them do some more with other areas of the map before they start focusing in on that region in the next game, assuming that's where they expand to next but I don't see anywhere else they could go since WH2 went as far west as the Warhammer map allows. | ||
plated.rawr
Norway1676 Posts
I'm so thirsty for Kislev. | ||
|
Vindicare605
United States16121 Posts
On October 08 2020 23:40 plated.rawr wrote: Isnt the Nutcracker a russian ballet piece? I'm so thirsty for Kislev. There's no way they add in Kislev as part of a random update to WH2. That's a full new faction. But the Russian reference might just be more of a clue to Clan Moulder since Hellpit is in the same general area. | ||
|
Manit0u
Poland17665 Posts
On October 08 2020 23:40 plated.rawr wrote: Isnt the Nutcracker a russian ballet piece? I'm so thirsty for Kislev. It's a Russian ballet based on a German story. It has magical kingdom and slaying of mouse king in it though so that would point to WE + Skaven. It can also be just a meaningless name of the update branch to make people speculate. | ||
|
Vindicare605
United States16121 Posts
On October 09 2020 01:54 Manit0u wrote: It's a Russian ballet based on a German story. It has magical kingdom and slaying of mouse king in it though so that would point to WE + Skaven. It can also be just a meaningless name of the update branch to make people speculate. Nah at this point CA leaves easter eggs for people. They've been doing that for a while, they know their fans are going to datamine their shit. The one I still don't know is the "keep an EYE" out line that Grace dropped on Reddit a while back. Speculation obviously goes straight to Khazrak One Eye but that's too obvious. | ||
|
Manit0u
Poland17665 Posts
![[image loading]](https://us.v-cdn.net/5022456/uploads/editor/bp/8nwfthh5wvlg.jpg) Edit: I would settle for Ghorros too. Centigor who only fights, fucks and drinks for centuries. Epic. | ||
|
akatama
Romania982 Posts
They really need to redesign corruption and/or climate for game 3. Chaos factions razing a city should be impactful, not just instant recolonization. | ||
|
Sbrubbles
Brazil5776 Posts
On October 09 2020 03:31 akatama wrote: Yes, a new lord to play whack-a-mole with! They really need to redesign corruption and/or climate for game 3. Chaos factions razing a city should be impactful, not just instant recolonization. Honestly, if the razed city kept a small garisson of chaos units (marauders/gors and chaos spawn), it would probably be enough to stop the whole whack-a-mole recolonization thing, and it would be reasonably thematic. | ||
|
Manit0u
Poland17665 Posts
| ||
|
KobraKay
Portugal4252 Posts
Then again that is not my only wish no....my other wish was that they stopped listening to their official forum and reddit. | ||
|
Manit0u
Poland17665 Posts
You know, Slaanesh has plenty of models like that: + Show Spoiler + | ||
|
andrewlt
United States7702 Posts
On October 08 2020 09:50 Vindicare605 wrote: In campaign Hellstorm Rocket batteries are the best unit in the entire Empire Roster and it's not close at all. Mortars are good early on, but Hellstorms massively outclass them in every situation except for defensive siege battles where Mortars reign supreme. I might make that my next campaign after finishing Three Kingdoms, then. I have a thing for artillery and ranged units. Looking forward to the new WE DLC, even though that's the only faction so far I've played multiple times. | ||
|
Biff The Understudy
France7982 Posts
Skavens, meh. I think they are really obnoxious to fight against and have already a lot of toys. I would have preferred them to focus on another dlc / WH1 race but clearly it's not gonna happen. | ||
|
akatama
Romania982 Posts
On October 09 2020 14:17 andrewlt wrote: I might make that my next campaign after finishing Three Kingdoms, then. I have a thing for artillery and ranged units. Looking forward to the new WE DLC, even though that's the only faction so far I've played multiple times. You're gonna love dwarfs in that case. | ||
|
Latham
9568 Posts
Skaven are like the favourite child of WH2 I feel, but with that said, I still want Stormfiends  | ||
|
Biff The Understudy
France7982 Posts
I don't mind them being strong, but so many of their mechanics are just complete BS. | ||
|
Jerubaal
United States7684 Posts
| ||
|
Biff The Understudy
France7982 Posts
On October 10 2020 03:58 Jerubaal wrote: Is it me or did they add a lot of special lords for the minor factions? I don't know if they have any special abilities, but they seem to have unique models and lines. Afaik the only factions that have legendary lords are the playable ones. Except the Everwatcher, they are all playable. So depends a bit what you mean by minor faction. | ||
|
Branch.AUT
Austria853 Posts
| ||
|
Gorsameth
Netherlands22102 Posts
| ||
|
Manit0u
Poland17665 Posts
On October 11 2020 22:11 Branch.AUT wrote: I finally have a machine that coul run twwh2, is it still worth getting, or should I wait for part 3? I had a blast with the old world campaign of warhammer 1! 2 has some definite improvements over 1 and if you already own twwh1 it's even better as you get access to mortal empires campaign where you can play any faction on a humongous map. | ||
|
Biff The Understudy
France7982 Posts
| ||
|
Jerubaal
United States7684 Posts
On October 11 2020 02:50 Biff The Understudy wrote: Afaik the only factions that have legendary lords are the playable ones. Except the Everwatcher, they are all playable. So depends a bit what you mean by minor faction. I guess it's just unique faction leaders that have voicelines for interactions but not actual models. | ||
|
Archeon
3263 Posts
On October 10 2020 00:24 Biff The Understudy wrote: They are SUCH a nuisance in campaign though. They pull seemingly endless devastating lightnings out of their @&€, get free units every 30 seconds that they can just spawn on your artillery and have unreachable suppressing units that transform your dragons into immobile sitting ducks. I don't mind them being strong, but so many of their mechanics are just complete BS. For me it's the other way round. Imo Skaven should be about having bs mechanics that you need to take into account, I like menace below f.e. because to me this fits well and is unique. What I don't like is that their ranged units are actually really strong on their own. For Sc2 I always didn't like how Protoss had the great book of cheese while the units all talked about honor and they had this elitism theme going on. Skaven imo should be exclusively about cheese and weird ways to counter units, they should always be a quirky faction utilizing smoke and mirror tactics and not one that drops a nuke on your head and corner camps because their ranged is busted. On October 11 2020 02:50 Biff The Understudy wrote: Afaik the only factions that have legendary lords are the playable ones. Except the Everwatcher, they are all playable. So depends a bit what you mean by minor faction. IIRC there are a bunch of somewhat unique Lords that aren't playable. IIRC most of the minor faction leaders are somewhat scripted, immortal and static. Popular examples are Surtha Ek (who gives a LL trait to some) and Boris, but I seem to remember that the Ghrond faction always has the same sorceress and that many of the elector counts at least have immortal generic Lords with a scripted name. @Jerubaal Mixxu's Lords mods go a lot further in giving them unique models, mechanics and abilities and are something I highly recommend even in a mostly vanilla game. | ||
|
Archeon
3263 Posts
| ||
|
Manit0u
Poland17665 Posts
On October 12 2020 01:47 Archeon wrote: For me it's the other way round. Imo Skaven should be about having bs mechanics that you need to take into account, I like menace below f.e. because to me this fits well and is unique. What I don't like is that their ranged units are actually really strong on their own. For Sc2 I always didn't like how Protoss had the great book of cheese while the units all talked about honor and they had this elitism theme going on. Skaven imo should be exclusively about cheese and weird ways to counter units, they should always be a quirky faction utilizing smoke and mirror tactics and not one that drops a nuke on your head and corner camps because their ranged is busted. I also agree with Skaven being cheesy (and liking it). I think that their ranged being so strong should be toned down. I don't mind it being strong, but it should be limited somehow (not to mention crazy synergies with warpgale and such). Personally I'd love for all the factions to receive the TK mechanic where you need to build specific buildings to recruit limited amounts of certain units. This would go a long way with leveling the playing field (effectively destroying the concept of a doomstack). I think it might also help with order-ball and a lot of bullshit in general. I'm of the opinion that the game should be tailored to encourage the use of mixed arms and various units. This would definitely make battles more enjoyable. | ||
|
andrewlt
United States7702 Posts
My annoyance with them is how powerful their stupid towers are when defending sieges. Siege battles are already my most disliked type of battle and this makes it even worse. I get that defenders need to have an advantage but it's done in a way that's no fun right now. I pretty much employ the cheesiest tactics I can think of in siege battles. | ||
|
akatama
Romania982 Posts
On October 12 2020 12:23 Manit0u wrote: Personally I'd love for all the factions to receive the TK mechanic where you need to build specific buildings to recruit limited amounts of certain units. This would go a long way with leveling the playing field (effectively destroying the concept of a doomstack). I think it might also help with order-ball and a lot of bullshit in general. I'm of the opinion that the game should be tailored to encourage the use of mixed arms and various units. This would definitely make battles more enjoyable. That doesn't happen with unit caps. If anything it pushes suboptimal units aside more because I can't slap a single smithy and pump out 6-8 chariots for a meme stack. You still build mage towers and dragon keeps in every province because of extra heroes and factionwide effects as HE for example. That means a ton of dragons and swordmasters available. It doesn't limit doomstacks at all. Want a non-speculative example? Look at Tomb Scorpions, Necrosphinxes or the snake cav. Cool units but limited effectiveness, it's better to slap down Hierotitans, Warsphinxes, Ushabti and Bone Giants instead. Your average Tomb Kings city looks like this: Industry Walls Harbor/Resource/Landmark Ushabti Bone Giant (gives factionwide lord recruit rank) That's 5 building slots locked in out of 7. God forbid you have both a resource and a pyramid to build. The final slots go to barracks, hierotitans, warsphinxes or PO buildings. Catapults are never on my mind because one building slot for one catapult is terrible slot management. I'd rather build a barracks, it gives me more units to use overall. Doomstacks happen because of a combination of factors. The most important is momentum. The AI always recruits faster and has better units, even on lower difficulties. The moment you start being reactive instead of proactive your campaign goes south. You want a quality army that takes minor losses from standard engagements and never takes more than the turn you spend in the settlement you just captured to replenish. The second is ammo, healing cap and magic power reserve recovering after every battle combined with Lighting Strike letting you abuse those mechanics. Third is supply lines murdering any idea of having more, less elite armies entirely. | ||
|
Jerubaal
United States7684 Posts
| ||
|
Manit0u
Poland17665 Posts
On October 14 2020 06:08 Jerubaal wrote: For Skaven, tone down ranged, beef up melee (especially leadership) a bit? The whole idea behind skaven is that they're cowardly. They should definitely not up their leadership. I don't remember if they have scurry away though (increased movement when fleeing). In theory Skaven should be a bit like trolls, running away but coming back later and with increased movement speed it would require fast cavalry to chase them down. It would make them super annoying, but would be true to the lore (they should get bonus leadership depending on how many of the units at full strength remain, going into penalties when they drop below 50% - strength in numbers). | ||
|
Gorsameth
Netherlands22102 Posts
| ||
|
akatama
Romania982 Posts
Fun fact: because Eshin doesn't use loyalty, a tech buffing loyalty is replaced by one giving their units extra +6 MA and MD at the cost of +20% upkeep. Now as a tech I find it of questionable use given the high price, but as a skill on a Warlord it would be perfect to make melee skaven more of a thing. | ||
|
Archeon
3263 Posts
The problem with army diversity is imo mostly related to the lack of rock-paper-scissor in the lategame and due to supply lines. In midgame halberds can stop monstrous infantry f.e. and you can run halberd+archers or anti-large cav + aggressive infantry. Once t4 hits the field infantry and cav can't compete anymore with single entities and massing your strongest monster becomes the meta strat. The only alternative is mass ranged because ranged is numerically busted and scales only up with tech. Low tier units are on average more resilient to missile fire than high tier and once these high dps AP ranged units hit the field elite ranged can mow down armies before they get in melee range. On a completely unrelated note I hate Alith Anar with a passion. I'd rather get nuked by Ikkit than ambushed by AA. Fuck this mechanic and fuck it doubly on the already busted HEs. /rant | ||
|
akatama
Romania982 Posts
| ||
|
Biff The Understudy
France7982 Posts
Personally I really can't get myself to make those doom stacks of 18 steam tanks, a mage of life and a general because it just doesn't feel good. But the main thing remains that it shouldn't be possible and / or shouldn't be a winning strategy. Hope that CA addresses some of those issues sometimes. | ||
|
akatama
Romania982 Posts
| ||
|
Manit0u
Poland17665 Posts
On October 15 2020 04:43 akatama wrote: Legend veers too hard into tedious exploits territory. I'm a big fan of unique, non copy-pasta armies, especially for longer campaigns, but my first 2 armies tend to be min-maxed to get out of the spear + bow zone quickly. I actually like the spear + bow zone. Love early to mid game, late game is just tedious mopping up when you steamroll everything. | ||
|
Jerubaal
United States7684 Posts
On October 14 2020 07:15 Manit0u wrote: The whole idea behind skaven is that they're cowardly. They should definitely not up their leadership. I don't remember if they have scurry away though (increased movement when fleeing). In theory Skaven should be a bit like trolls, running away but coming back later and with increased movement speed it would require fast cavalry to chase them down. It would make them super annoying, but would be true to the lore (they should get bonus leadership depending on how many of the units at full strength remain, going into penalties when they drop below 50% - strength in numbers). Even Stormvermin? From many players' perspectives, the Stormvermin are the misleading unit. Everyone expects skavenslaves and clanrats to be crap. It's when they upgrade and spend resources on what's supposed to be at least a reasonable infantry unit and it's not much better than the lower-tier infantry that the race starts to feel a little pigeon-holed. | ||
|
akatama
Romania982 Posts
| ||
|
andrewlt
United States7702 Posts
On October 15 2020 03:53 Biff The Understudy wrote: To be honest, I don't think this game is that interesting when played optimally. I watch Legend of Total War from time to time and the amount of really stupid abuse available to a seasoned player is kind of sad. Personally I really can't get myself to make those doom stacks of 18 steam tanks, a mage of life and a general because it just doesn't feel good. But the main thing remains that it shouldn't be possible and / or shouldn't be a winning strategy. Hope that CA addresses some of those issues sometimes. I don't really give a shit what other people do in a single player game. Experience tells me that the fixes end up negatively impacting my style of play even when it isn't even remotely similar to the exploits. I feel like games like this and the Civ games are way better as purely sandbox, single player games. Attempting to have a balanced multiplayer component is such a negative. | ||
|
Gorsameth
Netherlands22102 Posts
On October 17 2020 11:26 andrewlt wrote: Or atleast have separate single and multiplayer balancing.I don't really give a shit what other people do in a single player game. Experience tells me that the fixes end up negatively impacting my style of play even when it isn't even remotely similar to the exploits. I feel like games like this and the Civ games are way better as purely sandbox, single player games. Attempting to have a balanced multiplayer component is such a negative. | ||
|
Yurie
12035 Posts
On October 17 2020 18:23 Gorsameth wrote: Or atleast have separate single and multiplayer balancing. Total War does in the pricing of units. Can have the same stats but different costs for the units. | ||
|
akatama
Romania982 Posts
| ||
|
Manit0u
Poland17665 Posts
Speaking of which, I absolutely loved the video of a guy who made his Archaon so badass that he was running without a stack and just solo-killing 4 enemy stacks. Epic. | ||
|
akatama
Romania982 Posts
There's also something to be said about growth and province development in general, strong starts can have T4 core building starting turn 35 and you can already have elite units 45-50 turns in. Cost is a decent throttle for the next 30-ish turns, but outside your recruitment province you only need T3 to max out income for most factions. Once you have 5+ provinces unit costs become a non-issue compared to Supply Lines penalties. | ||
|
andrewlt
United States7702 Posts
That said, I fully support making a pass on the victory conditions. Some of the long campaigns require something ridiculous like 17 out of the 22 (I don't remember the exact count) important cities in the game, and that's just way too many. | ||
|
Biff The Understudy
France7982 Posts
On October 18 2020 04:48 akatama wrote: Oh it can be balanced. First order of business is to redo all short victory conditions so they are achievable in 60-80 turns, not 120+. Give us campaigns that can be finished in 10-15 hours. Easier starting positions can require more ambitious objectives to balance out the player snowballing faster. There's also something to be said about growth and province development in general, strong starts can have T4 core building starting turn 35 and you can already have elite units 45-50 turns in. Cost is a decent throttle for the next 30-ish turns, but outside your recruitment province you only need T3 to max out income for most factions. Once you have 5+ provinces unit costs become a non-issue compared to Supply Lines penalties. Victory conditions are retarded. In my Karak Kadrin campaign I can't finish the short campaign because I need provinces owed by multiple friendly factions and that it makes zero sense to go at war with them even though they will never ally with me. | ||
|
Latham
9568 Posts
TOTAL WAR: WARHAMMER II – THE TWISTED & THE TWILIGHT ![[image loading]](https://i.imgur.com/98e4f4a.png) https://www.totalwar.com/blog/total-war-warhammer-ii-the-twisted-the-twilight-faq/ The Twisted & The Twilight includes: Two unique Legendary Lords leading their own factions: Throt the Unclean, Master Mutator of Clan Moulder and one of the nine Lords of Hell Pit The Sisters of Twilight Naestra and Arahan, Emissaries of Queen Ariel Powerful new units and Heroes for both the Skaven and the Wood Elves, including: Brood Horrors, Mutant Rat Ogres, Packmasters, Wolf Rats, and the terrifying Ghoritch for the Skaven Zoats, Great Stag Knights, Bladesingers, Spellweavers, and Queen Ariel of Athel Loren herself for the Wood Elves An Old World Update for the Wood Elves Sad to see no Stormfiends, but glad that Amber mechanic for WE is going on the chopping block. Some more info from Reddit, that someone compiled from the livestream: + Show Spoiler + Also since this is the top post here, I will post some livestream talking points here: New map, new Amber. WE race now has specific 'Ancient Forest' settlements. They are scattered around the world. One new one in Naggarond, another one in Lustria. This implies both Vortex and ME maps are heavily changed. Gael Vale is also this type but Lothern is not. Old outpost system is still here to discourage players painting the map with WE. To compensate for this, there are more full settlements available for WE around the map now. WE buildings are reworked/buffed as well. There are specific settlements that belongs to the WE race and you need to occupy or let your ally to occupy. My guess is that this mechanics is tied in to the new WE victory condition. You can now abandon a settlement, any race can do this. It's only briefly brought up. World root is now instantaneous teleportation between the major WE settlements. Devs teleported a character from Athel Loren to Gale Vale instantaneously, and the lord also retains the movement. AI can't teleport, lucky us. The two new WE settlements are The Witchwood in Naggarond. This is where Sisters of Twilight starts. If you pick them they can also have Oak of Ages. The other one is called Pool of Life or something The Sacred Pools in Lustria. Sister of Twilight starts on eagle mounts. It's one Lord. Both sisters on the same eagle. Ariel is hero, not a lord. Great Stags unit: On par with Demigryph, a little bit squish but hits hard. Looks cool charging into the battle. Bambi is gonna get some revenge. It's also available as mount. They are shock cav units with shields and armor. SoT post-battle mechanics: After battle, you get a choice: Get a new enhanced weapon or upgrade an existing one. It's a trade-off between long term benefits and short-term sudden burst of combat prowess. 13 days from now, there will be livestream using SoT. That's the Wednesday after the next Wednesday. Q&A from chat: Ariel is available for all WE lords. SoT has easier time getting her. My spectulation is she's similar to Kroak? | ||
|
Latham
9568 Posts
TOTAL WAR: WARHAMMER 3 GET HYPED !!! 4 CHAOS FACTIONS KISLEV GRAND CATHAY 1 UNANNOUNCED RACE PACK PREODER BONUS DLC (HOPEFULLY CHAOS DWARVES) | ||
|
Gorsameth
Netherlands22102 Posts
Still kinda shocked they actually got to add Cathay. First army that isn't from WHFB, having only existed as a Warmaster list I believe. (I'm not counting Norsca here because that is just an amalgamation of a bunch of Chaos stuff from Forgeworld and Marauders) | ||
|
Sbrubbles
Brazil5776 Posts
| ||
|
Archeon
3263 Posts
The feature I'm most hyped about is actually the siege rework they promised a while ago on reddit, but everything else sounds pretty cool, including a possible chaos realm. Wish we got an archer rework, but I guess Venris will eventually put them into a place that doesn't make spamming slinger slaves or bretonian peasant archers a viable strategy. Trailer is also quite literally cool as hell  9 LLs announced, if we assume that's 1 each for DoC and 2 for Kislev/Cathay we have 1 remaining. The steam page might hint that Be'lakor might play a role and it'd be cool to play a chaos undivided faction where you need to subjugate the other chaos factions, but a third Lord for either of the human factions or a second Lord for one of the DoC might very well be a possibility. | ||
|
Cleomin
3 Posts
| ||
|
Gorsameth
Netherlands22102 Posts
On February 04 2021 06:42 Cleomin wrote: Total War games are always chuck full of DLC.Didnt they release DLC for Warhammer 2 every couple of month? And now they are going to release a new game with an DLC already purchasable. They are truly milking their fanbase But its limit to just factions, not gameplay improvements so meh. I'm fine with it. This is how they can justify working on the game the entire time, rather then dumping after launch and working on something else. | ||
|
Cleomin
3 Posts
| ||
|
andrewlt
United States7702 Posts
Btw, the paid DLCs for Warhammer 2 usually come with a free DLC that has a new lord with less significant gameplay changes than the paid DLC. The DLC system sucked when they first introduced it. Definitely felt like they were milking the hell out of their customers when they started doing it (I think it was Rome 2 that started it). Warhammer 2 struck a better balance of making certain DLCs worth it if you're the type who wants to play the new factions or new lords that come with the new DLC. | ||
|
andrewlt
United States7702 Posts
On February 04 2021 06:29 Archeon wrote: Yeah very happy that they split up Demons. Release date is supposed to be this year too and we'll get more info about the free race dlc "in a few months", so a release in summer/fall isn't out of the picture. (I'm getting ready for a planned release in winter and eventual release in fall next year though.) The feature I'm most hyped about is actually the siege rework they promised a while ago on reddit, but everything else sounds pretty cool, including a possible chaos realm. Wish we got an archer rework, but I guess Venris will eventually put them into a place that doesn't make spamming slinger slaves or bretonian peasant archers a viable strategy. Trailer is also quite literally cool as hell 9 LLs announced, if we assume that's 1 each for DoC and 2 for Kislev/Cathay we have 1 remaining. The steam page might hint that Be'lakor might play a role and it'd be cool to play a chaos undivided faction where you need to subjugate the other chaos factions, but a third Lord for either of the human factions or a second Lord for one of the DoC might very well be a possibility. The 2 features I want the most are: 1. Siege battle rework. I don't want more difficulty. I just want siege battles to be fun. They currently aren't. I don't care about "realism" or "defender's advantage" or any of that. I prefer fighting regular open field battles 100% of the time. Siege battles are annoying and they comprise too many of the battles during the course of a game. And no, magically spawning AI enemy stacks is not a good way of forcing more open field battles. 2. More open ended mortal empires style campaign. The chaos invasion event is fun for the first campaign. It gets really monotonous starting from the second. Would be nice not to have an endgame event the focus of every single campaign in the sandbox mode for a game I want to play numerous times over the years. | ||
|
Archeon
3263 Posts
Most larger overhauls nerf archers quite a bit and even then they remain potent, because vanilla balancing is supposed to make archers strong in PvP while ignoring that ranged units are massively superior on the campaign map. For sieges I've mostly deactivated them nowadays, so they don't bother me as much anymore But yes they are in dire need of a rework.I don't care that much about lategame because lategame is always whack in 4x titles. Although I wouldn't mind some growth buffs that enable me to play lategame units before I've snowballed, which I deem more realistic than a company actually getting 4x mid-lategame right. On February 04 2021 06:54 Cleomin wrote: The fact that Total War games are loaded with DLC doesnt make it any better. And factions are gameplay as well. Imagine EA would do that. "OMG EA SO GREEDY FUCK THAT SHIT". Full Price title with release DLC. Seems like everyone is cool with that kind of business. Remember when Blizzard released an Addon for Starcraft 2 every 2-3 years? HOW DARE THEY The fundamental problem about DLCs is the content per prize ratio is way off in most cases. Paying 10 bucks for a map pack with 3-4 maps is just fairly ridiculous. Paying 1-2 € for a custom skin is absurd when you compare it to the content per prize of base games. EA isn't greedy because they release additional content for games, they are greedy because their dlcs are way overprized. Blizz also took the full price for the Sc2 add-ons. Getting a new race for 10 bucks on the other hand is getting a fairly large part of the original game for a somewhat adequate cost. Hero packs are somewhat overpriced, but they still mostly come with race overhauls and custom features. And DLCs are way more accepted for 4x titles where you can upgrade/refine your base game more easily. To boot these titles often get played for 100s if not 1000s of hours, so even if you pay a hundred bucks for the full package it's not like you don't get a lot of value for your money. Also CA gets flag pretty much every time they release a first day DLC, ppl just don't make a huge deal about it anymore because they have come to expect it. You either buy it on release day and get the free dlc full package for the full price, or you wait for one of the regular sales. | ||
|
Erasme
Bahamas15899 Posts
On February 04 2021 10:46 andrewlt wrote: The 2 features I want the most are: 1. Siege battle rework. I don't want more difficulty. I just want siege battles to be fun. They currently aren't. I don't care about "realism" or "defender's advantage" or any of that. I prefer fighting regular open field battles 100% of the time. Siege battles are annoying and they comprise too many of the battles during the course of a game. And no, magically spawning AI enemy stacks is not a good way of forcing more open field battles. 2. More open ended mortal empires style campaign. The chaos invasion event is fun for the first campaign. It gets really monotonous starting from the second. Would be nice not to have an endgame event the focus of every single campaign in the sandbox mode for a game I want to play numerous times over the years. You can disable the chaos invasion. I agree that it makes the game boring, mostly because of the "shield of civilisation" that makes order roflstomp the rest of the factions. You can easily abuse the IA to make their archers useless tho. | ||
|
Archeon
3263 Posts
I wished vanilla battles and campaigns would just work on higher diffs, but playing battles like historical ones instead of parking your pure ranged stack on a hill or in a corner feels like a larger handicap than the actual difficulty penalties. I'm not the biggest fan of hard counter systems, but WH really could use some hard counters to ranged units and single entities. | ||
|
Erasme
Bahamas15899 Posts
Also single entities will get destroyed by an anti large infantry unit + hard hitter like a hero. The infantry unit is here to soak dps while the hero dps | ||
|
Archeon
3263 Posts
Also in some MUs you have both the cav as well as the ranged disadvantage. This would still be somewhat fine if you assume a 1v1 basis where who wins the battle wins the war because often you can push forward with your shielded infantry and eventually overwhelm the archers with high losses, but against AIs with recruitment boni, income boni, replenishment boni and upkeep reduction taking high losses is often catastrophic because you can't recover before getting overwhelmed especially early on. The problem with monsters usually isn't countering small amounts where you can either kite or focus fire, it's that turn 12 rite of primeval glory or the super early dragon stacks among the HE spam. Also monsters are counterable if you go by cost, but per slot they are very strong and the AI doesn't care about costs. Since they push through everything monsters also create very boring gameplay where your only options are kiting or tarpit, making fights against mass monsters incredibly tedious. Early monster stacks are basically the only armies I autoresolve because AR still waaay underestimates how badly monsters pummel infantry. With 15% upkeep increase per army slots matter a lot for the player too, making pure monster stacks often the goto past midgame. If monsters and archers had counters they couldn't easily overcome there'd be incentives to build mixed armies instead of pure mass ranged or mass monster stacks which are currently so much more efficient than any amy that actually fields melee infantry. | ||
|
Manit0u
Poland17665 Posts
| ||
|
Biff The Understudy
France7982 Posts
So you simply wouldn't get all those extra races, additional lords and all of that if there were not an economic mechanism to sustain the people making this content. Paid DLCs are great. It allows people with more modest means to play the game for a reasonable price, and people who want to invest to have the extra goodies. And the people who don't buy them benefit from the DLCs since the content is added anyway as non playable factions and lords. | ||
| ||
