The studio behind Iron Harvest was given the DoW franchise and they've been cooking. Slated to release next year they dropped the trailer and gave early access demo to some people. So far all the reviews have been extremely positive.
Trailer:
Early demo review:
Developer interview:
I have to say I haven't been more hyped for a game in a very long time.
Some features:
4 playable races at launch (SM, AdMech, Orks, Necrons). 4 separate campaigns forming an overarching story (written by established GW author John French). Multiplayer with ranked and custom games, Last Stand mode too. Seems like a mix of best features from DoW 1 & 2.
On August 22 2025 19:26 maybenexttime wrote: I can't see it becoming a major competitive RTS, tbh. Four races is a lot to balance. Adding more in expansions would be a nightmare. But we'll see.
WC3 is relatively balanced and all races won major tournaments back in the day.
On August 22 2025 19:26 maybenexttime wrote: I can't see it becoming a major competitive RTS, tbh. Four races is a lot to balance. Adding more in expansions would be a nightmare. But we'll see.
WC3 is relatively balanced and all races won major tournaments back in the day.
Wasn't Undead underperforming most of WC3's history? IIRC, there were a couple of Undead players who were winning major tournaments (MaDFroG comes to mind), whereas other races had a wide cast of well performing players.
On August 22 2025 19:26 maybenexttime wrote: I can't see it becoming a major competitive RTS, tbh. Four races is a lot to balance. Adding more in expansions would be a nightmare. But we'll see.
WC3 is relatively balanced and all races won major tournaments back in the day.
Wasn't Undead underperforming most of WC3's history? IIRC, there were a couple of Undead players who were winning major tournaments (MaDFroG comes to mind), whereas other races had a wide cast of well performing players.
There were times when some races were more dominant than others but typically each race could win at the highest level. It's often down to player skill alone (like Happy dominating WC3 as Undead for a long time now even though other UD players aren't faring as good). Sometimes there's also a period when a new dominant strat is introduced and it takes players a while to figure it out and stop the onslaught (like the recent pally/rifle for HU owning everything).
Overall the balance is fairly good in WC3.
Dawn of War 1 had 9 playable factions and there weren't that many imbalances.
Dawn of War 2 had 6 factions and the balance wasn't terrible either.
I also think that balancing so many factions is super difficult but I guess that if you have that many factions your goal in balancing is to simply not make one faction good vs all the others, this way even if you do have favorable matchups you also have some unfavorable ones so it balances itself out. Just need minor tweaks then so it's never a completely one sided roflstomp even in favored vs unfavored matchup. No need to go for perfect win ratio between all the factions.
And I don't know why you can't see it becoming a competitive RTS. DoW2 had a tournament match posted on YouTube no longer than 22 hours ago as of me posting this. The competitive scene for it isn't big but it's there and has been active for the past 16 years. I don't see a reason why DoW 4 can't also have a competitive scene if it's a well made game.
Any 40K game almost automatically gets a +1 from me to its rating. A weakness of mine.
But I think a good central gameplay loop, fun campaigns and multiplayer that’s at least decent, even if it’s not gonna replace Blizz games in my affection would be a pretty good result all-round
On August 23 2025 00:27 WombaT wrote: What is Last Stand mode?
In DoW2 it was 3 players PvE, each controlling a single hero and fighting waves of tougher and tougher enemies including boss rounds. You got to score points there (for rankings potentially) and also got xp so your hero "leveled up" (no stats increases or anything but you did meta-progression by unlocking more wargear options which changed your heroes stats and gave them different abilities so you could customize your hero in a myriad different ways - customization was before the game starts so once the game starts you're locked in to your build).
Cool and fun stuff, was quite popular and a lot of epic moments.
I remember once I built my hero to be high single target dps, for sniping big baddies but then there's one round where you're fighting your clones and if we didn't gank my clone first it would one-shot us all
On August 23 2025 00:27 WombaT wrote: What is Last Stand mode?
In DoW2 it was 3 players PvE, each controlling a single hero and fighting waves of tougher and tougher enemies including boss rounds. You got to score points there (for rankings potentially) and also got xp so your hero "leveled up" (no stats increases or anything but you did meta-progression by unlocking more wargear options which changed your heroes stats and gave them different abilities so you could customize your hero in a myriad different ways - customization was before the game starts so once the game starts you're locked in to your build).
Cool and fun stuff, was quite popular and a lot of epic moments.
I remember once I built my hero to be high single target dps, for sniping big baddies but then there's one round where you're fighting your clones and if we didn't gank my clone first it would one-shot us all
On August 23 2025 00:27 WombaT wrote: What is Last Stand mode?
In DoW2 it was 3 players PvE, each controlling a single hero and fighting waves of tougher and tougher enemies including boss rounds. You got to score points there (for rankings potentially) and also got xp so your hero "leveled up" (no stats increases or anything but you did meta-progression by unlocking more wargear options which changed your heroes stats and gave them different abilities so you could customize your hero in a myriad different ways - customization was before the game starts so once the game starts you're locked in to your build).
Cool and fun stuff, was quite popular and a lot of epic moments.
I remember once I built my hero to be high single target dps, for sniping big baddies but then there's one round where you're fighting your clones and if we didn't gank my clone first it would one-shot us all
nice, sounds like good news for co-op fans ^_^
There's also co-op campaign (not sure how this works but it's supposed to be there).
One thing that kinda blows my mind when I think about it is that they've made sync animations for close combat for every unit fighting every other unit (so your close combat will look different depending on what's fighting what).
Like this tomb spyder climbing the dreadnaught arm:
This is going to be awesome from the spectator point of view or when making montage videos.
Yeah, looks pretty good actually. I hope I can revise my statement about this becoming another failure.
On August 23 2025 07:12 Manit0u wrote:
There's also co-op campaign (not sure how this works but it's supposed to be there).
But there was a coop campaign in DoW2 already. I assume it will be similar. At least that's what I'm hoping because it was literally the only thing DoW2 had going for it.
King Art Games made Battleworld Kronos 13 years ago. If you like Advance Wars you might like BWK. It is on sale on Steam for $4. For such an old game it does not go on sale very often. To get an idea of the talent level of King Art Games....check it out. https://store.steampowered.com/app/237470/Battle_Worlds_Kronos/
Ok, buckle up 😉 In general, melee combat is kind of a big deal in DoW4. Units that focus on melee always have the disadvantage that they must reach the enemy before they can deal significant amounts of damage. To make them competitive, melee units on average deal more damage. But we also gave them the ability to “bind” enemies in melee. When units fight in melee they kind of “stick” together as long as one of the participating units wants to stay in melee (e.g. a weaker range unit can’t just run away, the melee units tries to keep them engaged).
Copying the Realms of Ruin melee lock mechanic is certainly a choice. Please tell me I'm misreading this.
Ok, buckle up 😉 In general, melee combat is kind of a big deal in DoW4. Units that focus on melee always have the disadvantage that they must reach the enemy before they can deal significant amounts of damage. To make them competitive, melee units on average deal more damage. But we also gave them the ability to “bind” enemies in melee. When units fight in melee they kind of “stick” together as long as one of the participating units wants to stay in melee (e.g. a weaker range unit can’t just run away, the melee units tries to keep them engaged).
Copying the Realms of Ruin melee lock mechanic is certainly a choice. Please tell me I'm misreading this.
Well, that has also been a part of Dawn of War since forever. If you engage in melee you typically can't just run away as easily because members of the unit get stuck in animation locks, knocked down, move slower etc.
Nothing new really.
And it also presents some interesting strategy choices. If you're heavily outgunned you can force one of your weaker shooting units to engage stronger shooting unit in melee and thus reduce your casualties etc.
Ok, buckle up 😉 In general, melee combat is kind of a big deal in DoW4. Units that focus on melee always have the disadvantage that they must reach the enemy before they can deal significant amounts of damage. To make them competitive, melee units on average deal more damage. But we also gave them the ability to “bind” enemies in melee. When units fight in melee they kind of “stick” together as long as one of the participating units wants to stay in melee (e.g. a weaker range unit can’t just run away, the melee units tries to keep them engaged).
Copying the Realms of Ruin melee lock mechanic is certainly a choice. Please tell me I'm misreading this.
They will just add a retreat mechanic again. You press a button and your units run to your base.
On October 02 2025 20:15 Doublemint wrote: liked the single player campaigns immensely. the universe is hilariously silly and good fun.
Well, StarCraft was supposedly meant to be set in this universe but they couldn't make the deal on the IP.
that's something I had no idea about.
thank god it turned out the way it did lol, SC seems way more "grounded" though similarities are undeniable.
It's just a rumour though. Blizzard will of course deny it for legal reasons etc. but both Warcraft and Starcraft were pretty heavily inspired by Warhammer and Warhammer 40K respectively. Andy Chambers (one of the key figures in Games Wokshop responsible for a lot of lore and game design) was even working as a consultant for StarCraft 2.
I think it's just an urban legend at this point - WarCraft for sure was supposed to be Warhammer seeing how their design for orcs is pretty much 1-1 with WH orcs. If StarCraft was actually going to be set in 40k we'll never know but influences are clearly there. Sure, protoss/eldar is a bit of a stretch but the design on some units like the Phoenix is clearly Eldar and the general vibe of ancient space-faring race with psychic powers as well as housing the spirits of their deceased in constructs (Dragoons) is all there.
On October 02 2025 20:15 Doublemint wrote: liked the single player campaigns immensely. the universe is hilariously silly and good fun.
Well, StarCraft was supposedly meant to be set in this universe but they couldn't make the deal on the IP.
that's something I had no idea about.
thank god it turned out the way it did lol, SC seems way more "grounded" though similarities are undeniable.
It's just a rumour though. Blizzard will of course deny it for legal reasons etc. but both Warcraft and Starcraft were pretty heavily inspired by Warhammer and Warhammer 40K respectively. Andy Chambers (one of the key figures in Games Wokshop responsible for a lot of lore and game design) was even working as a consultant for StarCraft 2.
I think it's just an urban legend at this point - WarCraft for sure was supposed to be Warhammer seeing how their design for orcs is pretty much 1-1 with WH orcs. If StarCraft was actually going to be set in 40k we'll never know but influences are clearly there. Sure, protoss/eldar is a bit of a stretch but the design on some units like the Phoenix is clearly Eldar and the general vibe of ancient space-faring race with psychic powers as well as housing the spirits of their deceased in constructs (Dragoons) is all there.
Eldar ships for comparison.
That's not Starcraft 2 through. That is Starcraft 1. The Scout is 1:1 Eldar ship
On October 02 2025 20:15 Doublemint wrote: liked the single player campaigns immensely. the universe is hilariously silly and good fun.
Well, StarCraft was supposedly meant to be set in this universe but they couldn't make the deal on the IP.
that's something I had no idea about.
thank god it turned out the way it did lol, SC seems way more "grounded" though similarities are undeniable.
It's just a rumour though. Blizzard will of course deny it for legal reasons etc. but both Warcraft and Starcraft were pretty heavily inspired by Warhammer and Warhammer 40K respectively. Andy Chambers (one of the key figures in Games Wokshop responsible for a lot of lore and game design) was even working as a consultant for StarCraft 2.
I think it's just an urban legend at this point - WarCraft for sure was supposed to be Warhammer seeing how their design for orcs is pretty much 1-1 with WH orcs. If StarCraft was actually going to be set in 40k we'll never know but influences are clearly there. Sure, protoss/eldar is a bit of a stretch but the design on some units like the Phoenix is clearly Eldar and the general vibe of ancient space-faring race with psychic powers as well as housing the spirits of their deceased in constructs (Dragoons) is all there.
Eldar ships for comparison.
That's not Starcraft 2 through. That is Starcraft 1. The Scout is 1:1 Eldar ship
I know the post was a bit confusing because it conflated SC2 with SC but I assumed the original SC was already supposed to be set in W40k or heavily borrowed from it for obvious reasons.
On October 02 2025 20:15 Doublemint wrote: liked the single player campaigns immensely. the universe is hilariously silly and good fun.
Well, StarCraft was supposedly meant to be set in this universe but they couldn't make the deal on the IP.
that's something I had no idea about.
thank god it turned out the way it did lol, SC seems way more "grounded" though similarities are undeniable.
It's just a rumour though. Blizzard will of course deny it for legal reasons etc. but both Warcraft and Starcraft were pretty heavily inspired by Warhammer and Warhammer 40K respectively. Andy Chambers (one of the key figures in Games Wokshop responsible for a lot of lore and game design) was even working as a consultant for StarCraft 2.
I think it's just an urban legend at this point - WarCraft for sure was supposed to be Warhammer seeing how their design for orcs is pretty much 1-1 with WH orcs. If StarCraft was actually going to be set in 40k we'll never know but influences are clearly there. Sure, protoss/eldar is a bit of a stretch but the design on some units like the Phoenix is clearly Eldar and the general vibe of ancient space-faring race with psychic powers as well as housing the spirits of their deceased in constructs (Dragoons) is all there.
Eldar ships for comparison.
That's not Starcraft 2 through. That is Starcraft 1. The Scout is 1:1 Eldar ship
I know the post was a bit confusing because it conflated SC2 with SC but I assumed the original SC was already supposed to be set in W40k or heavily borrowed from it for obvious reasons.
Well, both of them have some influences (regarding Protoss/Eldar). Warp Prism seems extremely Eldar-like and SC2 Phoenix is very much an Eldar fighter jet...
At least when wc3 was made, the creators were thinking about WH40k, after all the Gryphon Rider has a voiceline along the lines of "This warhammer cost 40k, hehe" if you select one often enough.. ;>
I stumbled into Dawn of War 1 when Dark Crusade was the current expansion and I gotta say I enjoyed it tremendously. The way they got rid of the base building components in dow2 wasn't really my thing, though, so I didnt check out any of the later titles. I always was pretty annoyed by how obfuscated real information about units' values etc was in that game (i.e. what unit types there are and how much damage which unit'weapon actually does against which unit type etc). The game certianly felt way less figured out than any other rts ive ever actively played, though, but probably that is just due to lower level of play in general.
DoW 1 was a better "RTS" before it's expansions. But it was a better "Warhammer-RTS" with it's expansions. I remember vividly how I hated the dumbing down/streamlining with the first Addon (that I didn't care for any of the new factions/races certainly didn't help) :D.
DoW 2 wasn't my cake, it was good for what it was but well... Not for me.
I'm surprised so many people here are not fond of DoW2. For me it was better than DoW1. Base building being gone isn't much of an issue since you barely had any base building in DoW1 to begin with (most multiplayer games barely required you to go past 5-6 buildings in your base, excluding the listening posts).
DoW2 put way more emphasis on more tactical aspect of the game and made everything just look and feel better. And lategame battles with the big units and all the abilities look so cool...
I'm watching casts with commentary of DoW2 games to this day. There was a surge in DoW1 casts recently with the remastered version but they're not as enjoyable to watch IMO.
On October 17 2025 00:35 Manit0u wrote: I'm surprised so many people here are not fond of DoW2. For me it was better than DoW1. Base building being gone isn't much of an issue since you barely had any base building in DoW1 to begin with (most multiplayer games barely required you to go past 5-6 buildings in your base, excluding the listening posts).
DoW2 put way more emphasis on more tactical aspect of the game and made everything just look and feel better. And lategame battles with the big units and all the abilities look so cool...
I'm watching casts with commentary of DoW2 games to this day. There was a surge in DoW1 casts recently with the remastered version but they're not as enjoyable to watch IMO.
To be fair, I really never gave it a proper shot. It certainly sounds logical and consciously I agree with your points, but at least back in the day, I had a very strong repulsive reaction to what I considered "even less macro", mostly because I felt like the aspect of base building was something I already missed a lot in DoW1 (where I had most fun with the factions that had a somewhat more relevant decision tree in that area, I guess the wc3 background showed). Luckily, SC2 was right around the corner, so DoW2 never got much of my attention..
On October 17 2025 00:35 Manit0u wrote: I'm surprised so many people here are not fond of DoW2. For me it was better than DoW1. Base building being gone isn't much of an issue since you barely had any base building in DoW1 to begin with (most multiplayer games barely required you to go past 5-6 buildings in your base, excluding the listening posts).
DoW2 put way more emphasis on more tactical aspect of the game and made everything just look and feel better. And lategame battles with the big units and all the abilities look so cool...
I'm watching casts with commentary of DoW2 games to this day. There was a surge in DoW1 casts recently with the remastered version but they're not as enjoyable to watch IMO.
To be fair, I really never gave it a proper shot. It certainly sounds logical and consciously I agree with your points, but at least back in the day, I had a very strong repulsive reaction to what I considered "even less macro", mostly because I felt like the aspect of base building was something I already missed a lot in DoW1 (where I had most fun with the factions that had a somewhat more relevant decision tree in that area, I guess the wc3 background showed). Luckily, SC2 was right around the corner, so DoW2 never got much of my attention..
For me it was DoW2 that got my attention as SC2 failed to impress me (and fails to this day).
I had plenty of fun with Dow 2 but after about 3 Weeks everything just felt very samey. Playing a game felt more like going thru the motions than anything else.
Also: Focus on 3v3 certainly was one of the decisions of all time. No chatroom/lobbies...
On October 17 2025 20:05 Velr wrote: I had plenty of fun with Dow 2 but after about 3 Weeks everything just felt very samey. Playing a game felt more like going thru the motions than anything else.
Also: Focus on 3v3 certainly was one of the decisions of all time. No chatroom/lobbies...
The 3v3 focus meant I bought and played it in multiplayer. I never touched multiplayer in DoW 1. It was also something that made me slightly interested in Stormgate until they decided not to care about more than 1vs1.
Though I see a lot of proof that 1vs1 is popular with titles like Mechabellum being the most successful title in the space in recent years. Oh wait that is an auto battler, there hasn't been a non-auto battler that is successful in the PvP RTS sphere in years. Closest I guess is Beyond All Reason where the majority play 4v4 and up due to lack of matchmaking. And AoE 4 where 1vs1 is somewhat popular.
I am honestly of the opinion that you should budget for and develop a game for single player or coop modes if you are doing an RTS. If you have some spare cash you throw in a PvP mode and see if it sticks around.
I think 3v3-4v4 team based RTS can work. But not like it was done in DoW 2 (iirc Command and Conquer also tried it?). A team mode shouldn't just mean that 3 people do basically the same stuff in parallel just in a bigger clusterfuck when compared to 1on1.
Games like Supreme Commander/Beyond all reason imho have the better Idea on how this should be done with players basically having specific roles depending on their spawn location (which your totally free to ignoredeviate from, but then you better know damn well what your doing) and the games having wide/ deep enough Tech trees to make that feasible, iirc DoW 2 lacked that.
On October 17 2025 23:16 Velr wrote: I think 3v3-4v4 team based RTS can work. But not like it was done in DoW 2 (iirc Command and Conquer also tried it?). A team mode shouldn't just mean that 3 people do basically the same stuff in parallel just in a bigger clusterfuck when compared to 1on1.
Games like Supreme Commander/Beyond all reason imho have the better Idea on how this should be done with players basically having specific roles depending on their spawn location (which your totally free to ignoredeviate from, but then you better know damn well what your doing) and the games having wide/ deep enough Tech trees to make that feasible, iirc DoW 2 lacked that.
I think you could approach it more like Dota and all its spinoffs do. Where you have different strengths and weaknesses on top of how you are expected to play. A faction with no defensive units or buildings and tons of skirmishing units, another one with big beefy ones etc. This works in team games better than in 1vs1 where you have to be able to do everything at least a little or you just die.
I enjoyed BattleForge where you built your own unit set and mostly played PvE where having things you did well and others you did poorly was a big part of it. I think there was also another title recently where you built your own army that folded. This approach would allow hyper specialization where one player has stronger economy, another stronger air and a third strong static defenses for an air raiding style.
That is also a big part of how tabletop Warhammer is played, picking the units that make up your army for that round.
Sadly not suitable for Warhammer would be something like a mix of strategy types. One person playing an auto battler, another doing mostly tactics focus with high APM etc.
On October 17 2025 23:16 Velr wrote: I think 3v3-4v4 team based RTS can work. But not like it was done in DoW 2 (iirc Command and Conquer also tried it?). A team mode shouldn't just mean that 3 people do basically the same stuff in parallel just in a bigger clusterfuck when compared to 1on1.
Games like Supreme Commander/Beyond all reason imho have the better Idea on how this should be done with players basically having specific roles depending on their spawn location (which your totally free to ignoredeviate from, but then you better know damn well what your doing) and the games having wide/ deep enough Tech trees to make that feasible, iirc DoW 2 lacked that.
I think they had good kernels for that in WC3 but they didn't really develop it enough. I'd totally dig an RTS that lets you do cool stuff in 2v2/3v3 that isn't really feasible in 1v1.
What I'm talking about is how players got creative with WC3 team resource sharing. Where in 2v2 you could send resources to your teammate and that introduced a whole new world of alternate tech paths and strategies since you now had different timing windows etc. There were even strategies where one player would forgo teching completely and send the majority of resources to the teammate so they can amass highest tier units before opponents have a chance to counter them.
The truly multiplayer aspect of RTS (FFA, 2v2+ etc., not 1v1) is a vastly unexplored space with a lot of potential in my opinion.
On October 17 2025 23:27 Yurie wrote: Sadly not suitable for Warhammer would be something like a mix of strategy types. One person playing an auto battler, another doing mostly tactics focus with high APM etc.
Are you familiar with the Savage game series? They did an awesome blend of RTS/MOBA/RPG but they were too ahead of their time and it didn't catch on. Basically, you had one player being the commander and playing RTS, with top-down view, making buildings and using spells to buff players etc. while other players were playing as units with abilities in a MOBA like style (capturing locations, destroying opponent locations, fighting enemies and getting xp to get more abilities, switching to more powerful units as commander built up the tech tree etc.). Hell, you could even play as a builder unit and help out your commander.
It was truly amazing but not many people could fully grasp the concept (it was before MOBAs got popular). Also, the game was hard. The action/combat was very high paced and skill-based (good players could 1v3 or 1v5) with different abilities, dodging etc. (think souls-like multiplayer).
S2 Games sadly were ahead of their time. Truly a visionary studio. Savage was great and then Heroes of Newerth were the best MOBA by far but they lost IceFrog to Valve and took the game in some weird directions instead of sticking with their established universe which spelled their doom.
On October 17 2025 23:27 Yurie wrote: Sadly not suitable for Warhammer would be something like a mix of strategy types. One person playing an auto battler, another doing mostly tactics focus with high APM etc.
Are you familiar with the Savage game series? They did an awesome blend of RTS/MOBA/RPG but they were too ahead of their time and it didn't catch on. Basically, you had one player being the commander and playing RTS, with top-down view, making buildings and using spells to buff players etc. while other players were playing as units with abilities in a MOBA like style (capturing locations, destroying opponent locations, fighting enemies and getting xp to get more abilities, switching to more powerful units as commander built up the tech tree etc.). Hell, you could even play as a builder unit and help out your commander.
It was truly amazing but not many people could fully grasp the concept (it was before MOBAs got popular). Also, the game was hard. The action/combat was very high paced and skill-based (good players could 1v3 or 1v5) with different abilities, dodging etc. (think souls-like multiplayer).
Nuclear Dawn had a similar system, although RTS+FPS, and sadly also didn't catch on. I enjoyed that one.
On October 17 2025 23:27 Yurie wrote: Sadly not suitable for Warhammer would be something like a mix of strategy types. One person playing an auto battler, another doing mostly tactics focus with high APM etc.
Are you familiar with the Savage game series? They did an awesome blend of RTS/MOBA/RPG but they were too ahead of their time and it didn't catch on. Basically, you had one player being the commander and playing RTS, with top-down view, making buildings and using spells to buff players etc. while other players were playing as units with abilities in a MOBA like style (capturing locations, destroying opponent locations, fighting enemies and getting xp to get more abilities, switching to more powerful units as commander built up the tech tree etc.). Hell, you could even play as a builder unit and help out your commander.
It was truly amazing but not many people could fully grasp the concept (it was before MOBAs got popular). Also, the game was hard. The action/combat was very high paced and skill-based (good players could 1v3 or 1v5) with different abilities, dodging etc. (think souls-like multiplayer).
Nuclear Dawn had a similar system, although RTS+FPS, and sadly also didn't catch on. I enjoyed that one.
Natural Selection 2 does RTS+FPS very well. I would say Natural Selection 1 and 2 are more similar to Savage 1 than they are to Savage 2 though. They're all excellent games.
Dawn of War is a great series. Looking forward to this game. Thanks for bringing it to my attention Manit0u.
i am under NDA. if this truly is a very small # of participants.. its prolly because I played a beta version of the King Arts game Battleworld Kronos before it got to Steam. I gave them lots of feedback.
i will share what i can within the spirit of the NDA agreement.
On November 04 2025 09:41 JimmyJRaynor wrote: i am under NDA. if this truly is a very small # of participants.. its prolly because I played a beta version of the King Arts game Battleworld Kronos before it got to Steam. I gave them lots of feedback.
i will share what i can within the spirit of the NDA agreement.
Sure thing. Any extra info would be nice but no need to break the NDA. It'll all be revealed in due time. Enjoy your early access
On November 04 2025 09:41 JimmyJRaynor wrote: i am under NDA. if this truly is a very small # of participants.. its prolly because I played a beta version of the King Arts game Battleworld Kronos before it got to Steam. I gave them lots of feedback.
i will share what i can within the spirit of the NDA agreement.
How is the WAAAAAAGH?
Is it like WAAAGH or more like WAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAGH!!11!!!
Shiiiiet I just got an e-mail from them that said I didn't get in Super sad because this actually looks promising for once, and I haven't been this excited about an alpha ever since StarCraft 2: Wings of Liberty. This, D.O.R.F. and Dust Front are pretty much the only 3 RTSes that I have any hopes for, currently.
if people are wondering how good King Art games is... their Advance Wars style turned based strategy game "Battleword Kronos" is on sale on Steam for under $5.
On December 13 2025 06:43 JimmyJRaynor wrote: Dawn of War 4 Announcement Trailer. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QeCItSg-wmI in the far future of a world besieged my non-stop, brutal, warfare only one fundamental, metaphysical question remains unanswered...
On December 13 2025 06:43 JimmyJRaynor wrote: Dawn of War 4 Announcement Trailer. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QeCItSg-wmI in the far future of a world besieged my non-stop, brutal, warfare only one fundamental, metaphysical question remains unanswered...
On December 13 2025 10:12 WombaT wrote: Not one but two potentially kick arse 40K games in the strategy space in the pipeline? Sign me up!
Well, 40K games in the strategy space have been doing pretty well recently. Barring the DoW 3 blunder there's been Gladius, Chaos Gate and Battlesector and they got pretty good reviews. Mechanicus was excellent, Battlefleet Gothic was great. Overall it seems that there's plenty of good games to pick in the 40k strategy.
On December 15 2025 00:11 BLinD-RawR wrote: total war 40k which just got announced.
Sorry, I wasn't specific enough. I'm not familiar with Total War games so I'm not sure why it's not a traditional RTS nor why it would devour another RTS if it isn't in the same genre? Also which "more traditional 40k RTS" does he fear will be devoured by Total War 40k? Dawn of War 4?
On December 15 2025 00:11 BLinD-RawR wrote: total war 40k which just got announced.
Sorry, I wasn't specific enough. I'm not familiar with Total War games so I'm not sure why it's not a traditional RTS nor why it would devour another RTS if it isn't in the same genre? Also which "more traditional 40k RTS" does he fear will be devoured by Total War 40k? Dawn of War 4?
Total War definitely has a large overlap with the RTS community, especially TW Warhammer, which I assume will have largely the same fanbase as the upcoming TW: WH40k.
So yeah, these games might cannibalize each other if they get released in the same timeframe, which would be a shame.
On December 15 2025 00:11 BLinD-RawR wrote: total war 40k which just got announced.
Sorry, I wasn't specific enough. I'm not familiar with Total War games so I'm not sure why it's not a traditional RTS nor why it would devour another RTS if it isn't in the same genre? Also which "more traditional 40k RTS" does he fear will be devoured by Total War 40k? Dawn of War 4?
Total War definitely has a large overlap with the RTS community, especially TW Warhammer, which I assume will have largely the same fanbase as the upcoming TW: WH40k.
So yeah, these games might cannibalize each other if they get released in the same timeframe, which would be a shame.
I think they'll be different enough. I suspect that DoW will attract more of the multi-player crowd while TW series cater more to lengthy solo sessions (there is a competitive multiplayer community there but it isn't very large and mp isn't really the core focus of the game).
TW multiplayer format is also vastly different from traditional RTS, there are no bases, you pick your whole army before the battle and that's what you use.
On December 15 2025 07:19 Archeon wrote: AdMechs over Chaos is an interesting choice.
Either way, what we can see so far looks good imo. Carefully hyped here.
On December 15 2025 02:24 Miragee wrote:
On December 15 2025 00:11 BLinD-RawR wrote: total war 40k which just got announced.
Sorry, I wasn't specific enough. I'm not familiar with Total War games so I'm not sure why it's not a traditional RTS nor why it would devour another RTS if it isn't in the same genre? Also which "more traditional 40k RTS" does he fear will be devoured by Total War 40k? Dawn of War 4?
Total War definitely has a large overlap with the RTS community, especially TW Warhammer, which I assume will have largely the same fanbase as the upcoming TW: WH40k.
So yeah, these games might cannibalize each other if they get released in the same timeframe, which would be a shame.
I think they'll be different enough. I suspect that DoW will attract more of the multi-player crowd while TW series cater more to lengthy solo sessions (there is a competitive multiplayer community there but it isn't very large and mp isn't really the core focus of the game).
TW multiplayer format is also vastly different from traditional RTS, there are no bases, you pick your whole army before the battle and that's what you use.
Which is quite similar to table top Warhammer where you pick your army and then fight with it.
On December 15 2025 07:19 Archeon wrote: AdMechs over Chaos is an interesting choice.
Either way, what we can see so far looks good imo. Carefully hyped here.
On December 15 2025 02:24 Miragee wrote:
On December 15 2025 00:11 BLinD-RawR wrote: total war 40k which just got announced.
Sorry, I wasn't specific enough. I'm not familiar with Total War games so I'm not sure why it's not a traditional RTS nor why it would devour another RTS if it isn't in the same genre? Also which "more traditional 40k RTS" does he fear will be devoured by Total War 40k? Dawn of War 4?
Total War definitely has a large overlap with the RTS community, especially TW Warhammer, which I assume will have largely the same fanbase as the upcoming TW: WH40k.
So yeah, these games might cannibalize each other if they get released in the same timeframe, which would be a shame.
I think they'll be different enough. I suspect that DoW will attract more of the multi-player crowd while TW series cater more to lengthy solo sessions (there is a competitive multiplayer community there but it isn't very large and mp isn't really the core focus of the game).
TW multiplayer format is also vastly different from traditional RTS, there are no bases, you pick your whole army before the battle and that's what you use.
Which is quite similar to table top Warhammer where you pick your army and then fight with it.
Yes, it is. But at the same time it's very different from a more "traditional" RTS where you build up your forces gradually, have to think about economy and tech tree etc. In TW you just set up your army and fight. There are of course different modes, in some of those you have a pool of reinforcements that you can pull stuff from by expending resources you gain during battle but it's still mostly just battle.
On April 21 2026 06:03 maybenexttime wrote: Shouldn't the Necrons be like gods to AdMech adherents? ;o
No, why? I'm not too familiar with the entire W40k but from what I know AdMech are quite religious (ironically) and admiring or learning from Necrons would be considered heresy. There are probably some Techpriests that admire or at least acknowledge the high level technology of the necrons though.
On April 21 2026 06:03 maybenexttime wrote: Shouldn't the Necrons be like gods to AdMech adherents? ;o
This is kinda complicated. For AdMech there's this duality about seeking knowledge, ascending towards the machine etc. but then the mankind's history makes it so that they're mostly only allowed to re-create old stuff and are absolutely forbidden from making AI and thinking machines (humanity was almost wiped out by AI in the past in this setting). So most of their research and knowledge-seeking relates to archeological digs and trying to recover the tech humans had at their peak.
Then there's the fact that on Mars (AdMech home planet) there's a shard of C'tan known as Void Dragon (C'tan are old star gods that created the Necrons and were in turn split into shards and enslaved by the Necrons) which is probably what influenced the Cult of the Machine God in the first place.
On a theological level Necrons are also kind of abominations to the AdMech. They're basically souls forcibly trapped in mechanical bodies (not to be confused with spirits inhabiting all machines as they believe) while the mechanicus try to become one with the machine from their own volition. Every priest replaces his fleshy bits with mechanical parts and thus gets closer to the ideal form as part of their own journey. The process of ascension through constant self-upgrade.
Honestly, what a horrendous trailer. Let's analyze: 1) Why do the Skiitari show up only AFTER the AdMech guy is done getting his data? Shouldn't they have gone in first to... make sure the coast is clear & it is safe to enter? 2) Why in God's name would be Necrons who possess some of the most advanced technology in the known galaxy, willingly go into melee range with those huge guns? Why did they miss all their shots even from point blank? 3) That death scene with lights flashing was cringe and corny as fuck...
On April 21 2026 06:03 maybenexttime wrote: Shouldn't the Necrons be like gods to AdMech adherents? ;o
No, why? I'm not too familiar with the entire W40k but from what I know AdMech are quite religious (ironically) and admiring or learning from Necrons would be considered heresy. There are probably some Techpriests that admire or at least acknowledge the high level technology of the necrons though.
I only have a surface level of WH40k lore. I just thought they were into blending flesh and machine, and becoming more and more of a machine was sort of like reaching Buddhahood.
On April 21 2026 17:26 Latham wrote: Honestly, what a horrendous trailer. Let's analyze: 1) Why do the Skiitari show up only AFTER the AdMech guy is done getting his data? Shouldn't they have gone in first to... make sure the coast is clear & it is safe to enter? 2) Why in God's name would be Necrons who possess some of the most advanced technology in the known galaxy, willingly go into melee range with those huge guns? Why did they miss all their shots even from point blank? 3) That death scene with lights flashing was cringe and corny as fuck...
Rule of cool.
40K has basically never actually made sense in any pragmatic sense whatsoever and it’s showing no signs of changing
A plausible 40K would basically just be the Necron leveraging their tech to wipe out all resistance remotely, which is much less fun
On April 24 2026 03:35 TelecoM wrote: How is the online PvP compared to like SC2? Tournaments? Never played, going to have to see how the economy / etc works.
How would we know? The game is still in alpha behind an NDA for testers. If you're asking about this franchise as a whole, the scene would definitely be smaller and less payout for tournaments. As far as we know the in-game economy will be like the other 3 Dawns of War, i.e. capture & hold territories to improve your base trickle of resources. It (should) follows the basic Company of Heroes design - you have 2 resources: 1) Manpower & 2) Fuel. You recruit basic units with just manpower, and then upgrade them with fuel or make them cast abilities with fuel. Imagine you produce a squad of 4-6 Terran Marines at a time, they don't move individually but as a whole squad and you upgrade for each individual squad stimpacks & shields. Also to cast stimpack every time it would cost vespene gas (fuel in CoH) Then you have the advanced units like tanks, APCs, artillery etc. that cost both manpower & fuel to build and you also have to tech up to them which again, cost time, manpower & fuel.
The pacing of individual matches should be slower than StarCraft and micro is much more emphasized than macro play. Its also not so much an RTS (keyword: strategy) as a tactical game. You don't go for the jugular and raze the base of the enemy, you compete for map control and slowly starve them out until they bleed out of command points. Kinda like old Terrans like Thorzain used to play in Wings of Liberty - boa constrictor style. I actually don't know if DoW 4 will have command points or not. Company of Heroes has them, Dawn of War 2 had them. Dawn of War 1 didn't I think? You actually did go destroy your enemy's base in Dawn of War 1...
Units will gain veterancy, become more accurate & have higher HP per model in a squad with each veterancy they gain so it is in your best interest not to let a squad get wiped and for them to stay alive all game long.
Maybe watch a DoW1: DE match to get the basic idea:
On April 24 2026 03:35 TelecoM wrote: How is the online PvP compared to like SC2? Tournaments? Never played, going to have to see how the economy / etc works.
How would we know? The game is still in alpha behind an NDA for testers. If you're asking about this franchise as a whole, the scene would definitely be smaller and less payout for tournaments. As far as we know the in-game economy will be like the other 3 Dawns of War, i.e. capture & hold territories to improve your base trickle of resources. It (should) follows the basic Company of Heroes design - you have 2 resources: 1) Manpower & 2) Fuel. You recruit basic units with just manpower, and then upgrade them with fuel or make them cast abilities with fuel. Imagine you produce a squad of 4-6 Terran Marines at a time, they don't move individually but as a whole squad and you upgrade for each individual squad stimpacks & shields. Also to cast stimpack every time it would cost vespene gas (fuel in CoH) Then you have the advanced units like tanks, APCs, artillery etc. that cost both manpower & fuel to build and you also have to tech up to them which again, cost time, manpower & fuel.
The pacing of individual matches should be slower than StarCraft and micro is much more emphasized than macro play. Its also not so much an RTS (keyword: strategy) as a tactical game. You don't go for the jugular and raze the base of the enemy, you compete for map control and slowly starve them out until they bleed out of command points. Kinda like old Terrans like Thorzain used to play in Wings of Liberty - boa constrictor style. I actually don't know if DoW 4 will have command points or not. Company of Heroes has them, Dawn of War 2 had them. Dawn of War 1 didn't I think? You actually did go destroy your enemy's base in Dawn of War 1...
Units will gain veterancy, become more accurate & have higher HP per model in a squad with each veterancy they gain so it is in your best interest not to let a squad get wiped and for them to stay alive all game long.
On April 24 2026 03:35 TelecoM wrote: How is the online PvP compared to like SC2? Tournaments? Never played, going to have to see how the economy / etc works.
How would we know? The game is still in alpha behind an NDA for testers. If you're asking about this franchise as a whole, the scene would definitely be smaller and less payout for tournaments. As far as we know the in-game economy will be like the other 3 Dawns of War, i.e. capture & hold territories to improve your base trickle of resources. It (should) follows the basic Company of Heroes design - you have 2 resources: 1) Manpower & 2) Fuel. You recruit basic units with just manpower, and then upgrade them with fuel or make them cast abilities with fuel. Imagine you produce a squad of 4-6 Terran Marines at a time, they don't move individually but as a whole squad and you upgrade for each individual squad stimpacks & shields. Also to cast stimpack every time it would cost vespene gas (fuel in CoH) Then you have the advanced units like tanks, APCs, artillery etc. that cost both manpower & fuel to build and you also have to tech up to them which again, cost time, manpower & fuel.
The pacing of individual matches should be slower than StarCraft and micro is much more emphasized than macro play. Its also not so much an RTS (keyword: strategy) as a tactical game. You don't go for the jugular and raze the base of the enemy, you compete for map control and slowly starve them out until they bleed out of command points. Kinda like old Terrans like Thorzain used to play in Wings of Liberty - boa constrictor style. I actually don't know if DoW 4 will have command points or not. Company of Heroes has them, Dawn of War 2 had them. Dawn of War 1 didn't I think? You actually did go destroy your enemy's base in Dawn of War 1...
Units will gain veterancy, become more accurate & have higher HP per model in a squad with each veterancy they gain so it is in your best interest not to let a squad get wiped and for them to stay alive all game long.
There's tons of chance-based stuff in multiplayer games.
WC3 has damage ranges, evasion etc
Dota obviously uses a bunch of WC3 mechanics, also has 50% uphill miss, also has damage ranges in addition to intentionally 'random' elements.
Nevermind 'proper Warhammer' being run largely on dice rolls.
...or Poker, for that matter.
I don't think 'chance' is as big a deal as you think it is. In most competitive games you're dealing with things beyond your control, and part of the skill expression is navigating the probabilities.
On April 26 2026 16:34 Fleetfeet wrote: There's tons of chance-based stuff in multiplayer games.
WC3 has damage ranges, evasion etc
Dota obviously uses a bunch of WC3 mechanics, also has 50% uphill miss, also has damage ranges in addition to intentionally 'random' elements.
Nevermind 'proper Warhammer' being run largely on dice rolls.
...or Poker, for that matter.
I don't think 'chance' is as big a deal as you think it is. In most competitive games you're dealing with things beyond your control, and part of the skill expression is navigating the probabilities.
Exactly. Some random chance is good to keep things fresh and everyone on their toes. It's only bad when it's the only or primary factor influencing the outcome.
How many great moments were had with clutch uphill miss when some key unit survived on 1hp or something?
On May 05 2026 09:03 JimmyJRaynor wrote: if you guys want a look at King Art Games' previous work. Battle WOrld Kronos is on sale on Steam for $4. https://store.steampowered.com/app/237470/Battle_Worlds_Kronos/ its a serious, grown up version of Nintendo/Intelligent Games Advanced Wars.
It is actually more like Battle Isle. I personally loved the Battle Isle Series and Battle World Kronos is good too.
On May 05 2026 09:03 JimmyJRaynor wrote: if you guys want a look at King Art Games' previous work. Battle WOrld Kronos is on sale on Steam for $4. https://store.steampowered.com/app/237470/Battle_Worlds_Kronos/ its a serious, grown up version of Nintendo/Intelligent Games Advanced Wars.
So they intentionally release an unfinished game as full release and add some DLCs later? great...
Aside from that, I'm considering to buy it this year actually, which is crazy because I usually get my games 2-5 years after release.
Weren’t previous DoW’s greatly expanded by well, expansions?
I’m not a massive fan of the bare bones + DLC model in general, although in mitigation from what I’ve heard this game doesn’t have all that big a budget, so maybe a less ambitious core game + decent sales into new content is the way to go there
So they intentionally release an unfinished game as full release and add some DLCs later? great...
Aside from that, I'm considering to buy it this year actually, which is crazy because I usually get my games 2-5 years after release.
Weren’t previous DoW’s greatly expanded by well, expansions?
I’m not a massive fan of the bare bones + DLC model in general, although in mitigation from what I’ve heard this game doesn’t have all that big a budget, so maybe a less ambitious core game + decent sales into new content is the way to go there
Yes, I don't like the expansion model, either, but at least expansions were usually beefy and it's an understandable compromise between customer friendliness and business. For DoW4, there is also a real expansion in the pipeline, which is fine. However, on the way, they are going to drip-feed DLCs from the looks of it. A new mode here, a new hero there.
So they intentionally release an unfinished game as full release and add some DLCs later? great...
Aside from that, I'm considering to buy it this year actually, which is crazy because I usually get my games 2-5 years after release.
Thanks for the video. That was indeed quick from announcement to release.
Ok them having a road map seems standard these days, i just question the starting races.
Not seen enough of the game to form an opinion on it yet, but the more it is like dow1 and the less like 2 and 3, the better for me.
In any case, it will be way down my ladder in terms of interest and priority for this year and next.
It looks much closer to DoW1 and I'm on the same page when it comes to 2 and 3. However, my interest will be in the campaign. The expanding campaign mode (?) could be interesting as well. I'm not going to play DoW4 competitively. DoW is notoriously clunky and thus unfun to play at high apm for me.
So they intentionally release an unfinished game as full release and add some DLCs later? great...
Aside from that, I'm considering to buy it this year actually, which is crazy because I usually get my games 2-5 years after release.
Weren’t previous DoW’s greatly expanded by well, expansions?
I’m not a massive fan of the bare bones + DLC model in general, although in mitigation from what I’ve heard this game doesn’t have all that big a budget, so maybe a less ambitious core game + decent sales into new content is the way to go there
Yes, I don't like the expansion model, either, but at least expansions were usually beefy and it's an understandable compromise between customer friendliness and business. For DoW4, there is also a real expansion in the pipeline, which is fine. However, on the way, they are going to drip-feed DLCs from the looks of it. A new mode here, a new hero there.
So they intentionally release an unfinished game as full release and add some DLCs later? great...
Aside from that, I'm considering to buy it this year actually, which is crazy because I usually get my games 2-5 years after release.
Thanks for the video. That was indeed quick from announcement to release.
Ok them having a road map seems standard these days, i just question the starting races.
Not seen enough of the game to form an opinion on it yet, but the more it is like dow1 and the less like 2 and 3, the better for me.
In any case, it will be way down my ladder in terms of interest and priority for this year and next.
It looks much closer to DoW1 and I'm on the same page when it comes to 2 and 3. However, my interest will be in the campaign. The expanding campaign mode (?) could be interesting as well. I'm not going to play DoW4 competitively. DoW is notoriously clunky and thus unfun to play at high apm for me.
One thing I wasn’t clear on from that roadmap, are they paid DLCs or just additional content you can grab for free?
I play a ton of a game called Brotato, good fun and cheap and cheerful. They did one paid DLC, and there’s another big one in the works, but in between they pumped out new content of all kinds that was of the free variety
I think DoW4 has to do something similar, there’s another disadvantage of tons of DLC/expansions, especially that aren’t free, and that’s playerbase fragmentation. If you get a scenario where players are playing multiple different versions of the game, that can become messy
@Wombat and @Miragee Unfortunately this is Games Workshop we are talking about. They will try and squeeze out as much $$ as possible from every little bit of the game just like they do for all their other software and tabletop adaptations.
i am looking forward to it. obviously, i'm going to watch others play it first. That said, if i like what i see and the "Conquer the Universe" mode is good... i will jump in with both feet.
So they intentionally release an unfinished game as full release and add some DLCs later? great...
Aside from that, I'm considering to buy it this year actually, which is crazy because I usually get my games 2-5 years after release.
Weren’t previous DoW’s greatly expanded by well, expansions?
I’m not a massive fan of the bare bones + DLC model in general, although in mitigation from what I’ve heard this game doesn’t have all that big a budget, so maybe a less ambitious core game + decent sales into new content is the way to go there
Yes, I don't like the expansion model, either, but at least expansions were usually beefy and it's an understandable compromise between customer friendliness and business. For DoW4, there is also a real expansion in the pipeline, which is fine. However, on the way, they are going to drip-feed DLCs from the looks of it. A new mode here, a new hero there.
So they intentionally release an unfinished game as full release and add some DLCs later? great...
Aside from that, I'm considering to buy it this year actually, which is crazy because I usually get my games 2-5 years after release.
Thanks for the video. That was indeed quick from announcement to release.
Ok them having a road map seems standard these days, i just question the starting races.
Not seen enough of the game to form an opinion on it yet, but the more it is like dow1 and the less like 2 and 3, the better for me.
In any case, it will be way down my ladder in terms of interest and priority for this year and next.
It looks much closer to DoW1 and I'm on the same page when it comes to 2 and 3. However, my interest will be in the campaign. The expanding campaign mode (?) could be interesting as well. I'm not going to play DoW4 competitively. DoW is notoriously clunky and thus unfun to play at high apm for me.
One thing I wasn’t clear on from that roadmap, are they paid DLCs or just additional content you can grab for free?
I play a ton of a game called Brotato, good fun and cheap and cheerful. They did one paid DLC, and there’s another big one in the works, but in between they pumped out new content of all kinds that was of the free variety
I think DoW4 has to do something similar, there’s another disadvantage of tons of DLC/expansions, especially that aren’t free, and that’s playerbase fragmentation. If you get a scenario where players are playing multiple different versions of the game, that can become messy
Total War series somehow get away with it. Maybe it's because the audience is rather niche and starved for content but there is an active tournament scene etc.
Total War: Warhammer III currently has 32 different DLCs that add meaningful content to the game (new units, new factions etc.). One of the top players recently won a tournament using exactly 0 DLC stuff so it's not mega crippling as skill > everything.
When it comes to free/payed content, this is what I've heard: You saw the trailer and it had a roadmap? Everything "above" the line of the roadmap will be FLC, while everything below the line will be paid content (or like it says on Steam - year 1 DLC/pre-order bonus).
I don't mind paying for the new factions/armies/races as much because it would truly be a colossal and herculean task to implement all of them before launch. Think about it, in the setting we have:
Space Marines (already in) Orks (already in) Eldar (missing) Chaos Space Marines (missing) Daemons of Chaos (missing but they are usually bundled into CSM) Imperial Guard (partially in - as a nonplayable faction, rumoured to be complete and playable in the first DLC) Tau (missing) Necrons (already in) Mechanicus (already in) Tyranids (missing) Dark Eldar (missing) Sisters of Battle (missing) specialized Chapters of Space Marines (Grey Knights) not very likely, but playable on tabletop - Custodes, league of Votan?, Genestealer Cults?
I think launching with 4 playable factions is OK. Starcraft has 3, Warcraft 3 had 4 playable races.
Whether to get it on launch or not will depend on your personal interest. If you want competitive, healthy ladder its probably better to get it on launch. If you're more of a campaign and comp stomp player, wait a little for reviews, bug fixes, optimization patches etc.. JUST. DON'T. PREORDER. YET.
On May 23 2026 20:28 Latham wrote: JUST. DON'T. PREORDER. YET.
i like the past work of King Art Games and i agree with you.
The guys at King Art Games could be the most wonderful, ethical people on planet earth. if they get into a war with the warhammer megacorp over release dates and content guarantees it'll be the buyers that suffer with a buggy end product that technically fulfills the megacorp's checklist of requirements.
If King Art Games were making an RTS with their own in-house IP i'd have a different perspective.
So they intentionally release an unfinished game as full release and add some DLCs later? great...
Aside from that, I'm considering to buy it this year actually, which is crazy because I usually get my games 2-5 years after release.
Weren’t previous DoW’s greatly expanded by well, expansions?
I’m not a massive fan of the bare bones + DLC model in general, although in mitigation from what I’ve heard this game doesn’t have all that big a budget, so maybe a less ambitious core game + decent sales into new content is the way to go there
Yes, I don't like the expansion model, either, but at least expansions were usually beefy and it's an understandable compromise between customer friendliness and business. For DoW4, there is also a real expansion in the pipeline, which is fine. However, on the way, they are going to drip-feed DLCs from the looks of it. A new mode here, a new hero there.
So they intentionally release an unfinished game as full release and add some DLCs later? great...
Aside from that, I'm considering to buy it this year actually, which is crazy because I usually get my games 2-5 years after release.
Thanks for the video. That was indeed quick from announcement to release.
Ok them having a road map seems standard these days, i just question the starting races.
Not seen enough of the game to form an opinion on it yet, but the more it is like dow1 and the less like 2 and 3, the better for me.
In any case, it will be way down my ladder in terms of interest and priority for this year and next.
It looks much closer to DoW1 and I'm on the same page when it comes to 2 and 3. However, my interest will be in the campaign. The expanding campaign mode (?) could be interesting as well. I'm not going to play DoW4 competitively. DoW is notoriously clunky and thus unfun to play at high apm for me.
One thing I wasn’t clear on from that roadmap, are they paid DLCs or just additional content you can grab for free?
I play a ton of a game called Brotato, good fun and cheap and cheerful. They did one paid DLC, and there’s another big one in the works, but in between they pumped out new content of all kinds that was of the free variety
I think DoW4 has to do something similar, there’s another disadvantage of tons of DLC/expansions, especially that aren’t free, and that’s playerbase fragmentation. If you get a scenario where players are playing multiple different versions of the game, that can become messy
Total War series somehow get away with it. Maybe it's because the audience is rather niche and starved for content but there is an active tournament scene etc.
Total War: Warhammer III currently has 32 different DLCs that add meaningful content to the game (new units, new factions etc.). One of the top players recently won a tournament using exactly 0 DLC stuff so it's not mega crippling as skill > everything.
Interesting, are they mutually compatible? I’d assumed vanilla can’t play with x other version if there’s so much as a single general balance change, but if it’s just new stuff and nothing else then you could? You’d be playing the same game, minus unlocks almost
@Latham yeah agreed, indeed I’d argue that one should never preorder unless it’s something like a Kickstarter you really believe in
So they intentionally release an unfinished game as full release and add some DLCs later? great...
Aside from that, I'm considering to buy it this year actually, which is crazy because I usually get my games 2-5 years after release.
Weren’t previous DoW’s greatly expanded by well, expansions?
I’m not a massive fan of the bare bones + DLC model in general, although in mitigation from what I’ve heard this game doesn’t have all that big a budget, so maybe a less ambitious core game + decent sales into new content is the way to go there
Yes, I don't like the expansion model, either, but at least expansions were usually beefy and it's an understandable compromise between customer friendliness and business. For DoW4, there is also a real expansion in the pipeline, which is fine. However, on the way, they are going to drip-feed DLCs from the looks of it. A new mode here, a new hero there.
So they intentionally release an unfinished game as full release and add some DLCs later? great...
Aside from that, I'm considering to buy it this year actually, which is crazy because I usually get my games 2-5 years after release.
Thanks for the video. That was indeed quick from announcement to release.
Ok them having a road map seems standard these days, i just question the starting races.
Not seen enough of the game to form an opinion on it yet, but the more it is like dow1 and the less like 2 and 3, the better for me.
In any case, it will be way down my ladder in terms of interest and priority for this year and next.
It looks much closer to DoW1 and I'm on the same page when it comes to 2 and 3. However, my interest will be in the campaign. The expanding campaign mode (?) could be interesting as well. I'm not going to play DoW4 competitively. DoW is notoriously clunky and thus unfun to play at high apm for me.
One thing I wasn’t clear on from that roadmap, are they paid DLCs or just additional content you can grab for free?
I play a ton of a game called Brotato, good fun and cheap and cheerful. They did one paid DLC, and there’s another big one in the works, but in between they pumped out new content of all kinds that was of the free variety
I think DoW4 has to do something similar, there’s another disadvantage of tons of DLC/expansions, especially that aren’t free, and that’s playerbase fragmentation. If you get a scenario where players are playing multiple different versions of the game, that can become messy
Total War series somehow get away with it. Maybe it's because the audience is rather niche and starved for content but there is an active tournament scene etc.
Total War: Warhammer III currently has 32 different DLCs that add meaningful content to the game (new units, new factions etc.). One of the top players recently won a tournament using exactly 0 DLC stuff so it's not mega crippling as skill > everything.
Interesting, are they mutually compatible? I’d assumed vanilla can’t play with x other version if there’s so much as a single general balance change, but if it’s just new stuff and nothing else then you could? You’d be playing the same game, minus unlocks almost
@Latham yeah agreed, indeed I’d argue that one should never preorder unless it’s something like a Kickstarter you really believe in
In total war: warhammer the dlc just unlocks the ability to play the factions, without them you get the same balance changes and can play against dlc factions, you just can't play them yourselves.
We got a first look at what 1v1 or skirmish will look like:
The casting was pretty amateurish and I personally don't dig the cuts or camerawork of the observer but DoW 4 truly looks like a mix of DoW 1 & 2, which I find to be amazing.
The casting was pretty amateurish and I personally don't dig the cuts or camerawork of the observer but DoW 4 truly looks like a mix of DoW 1 & 2, which I find to be amazing.
The map constantly rotating really mindfcked my starcraft brain lol
The casting was pretty amateurish and I personally don't dig the cuts or camerawork of the observer but DoW 4 truly looks like a mix of DoW 1 & 2, which I find to be amazing.
Eh, for live casting while playing, this was actually pretty good imho.
Pretty good breakdown of Space Marines shown in the 1v1 above. The game was hectic, the cast live & raw so we didn't get very analytical information from it, which this video provides a breakdown of. Another video will come with the Greenskins side breakdown soon.
On July 06 2026 07:18 maybenexttime wrote: The visual cues need a lot of work, imo. All those Space Marine infantry units look the same to me. T___T
I think this will always be a problem for them. It boils down to GW opting for rather bland and generic base design for SM and then you get to making the models where you reuse the base for everything so it all blends together.
It wasn't a problem with fantasy Warhammer, where each and every unit was quite distinct. In 40K you often run into the problem that the only thing differentiating the unit is the weapon it carries, so not the most prominent part. Eldar have the most distinct units out of all 40k factions I believe, since they not only have different armour and weapons but also coloration, making them stand out more from each other.
It was maybe less of a problem in the olden days, where for SM you had scouts (light armour and cloaks), regular marines, devastators (smaller squad with big guns), terminators (bulky armor), assault marines (jetpacks). But now with the advent of primaris marines you have like primaris intercessors, primaris something, primaris other and they all look the same just have different loadouts. All because GW got greedy and discovered they can't copyright "space marine" so they started inventing names and in the process blandified everything even more.
Also an additional problem as not only do various designations of Space Marines look similar, but the devs appear to be leaning into customising squad loadouts.
Which I think is a cool choice and fits the Astartes doctrines, but you end up with a twofold issue. First in quickly identifying which type of space marine squad it is, then in figuring out their loadout before choosing how to engage or avoid an engagement.
Hopefully the devs can figure a clever workaround here that both solves this and fits the setting. Because I can see this being irritating
It looks cool and kinda fun, but I just can't really get into unit combat / movement like this, not really much potential for micro or am I wrong here?
I've never played any of the Dawn of War RTS games.
On July 06 2026 22:32 TelecoM wrote: It looks cool and kinda fun, but I just can't really get into unit combat / movement like this, not really much potential for micro or am I wrong here?
I've never played any of the Dawn of War RTS games.
It is less microable given you manoeuvre squads of infantry around rather than have the ability to control a down to the level of an individual unit
So say, the possibility to really get extra value from elite marine micro à la SC2 isn’t really there in DoW games, or other games that use similar systems
Not my personal preference either, but still pretty good games and I personally love the setting
On July 06 2026 22:32 TelecoM wrote: It looks cool and kinda fun, but I just can't really get into unit combat / movement like this, not really much potential for micro or am I wrong here?
I've never played any of the Dawn of War RTS games.
There should be a lot of micro potential because of the directional cover system (a la Company of Heroes) that this very specific map was strangely and completely devoid of, as well as a veterancy system for units. You build and control a squad of units, rather than a single individual unit (unless that is a commander unit) and when you fight, your units kill enemy models in the opponent's squad. Your squad as a whole gains XP from slain enemy models and then levels up. They become more accurate, gain more hit points and all that jazz. For every model you kill or get picked off from your own squad, both players can reinforce the squad with new recruits that replenishes models for the squad. Basically losing models in squad is not a problem, just make sure the whole squad doesn't get wiped out.
You will have access to tactical gear like jump packs to relocate or flank or disengage more easily, probably some grenades like smokes to cut off line of sight so enemies stop auto firing at your squad or melta/plasma bombs to deal some damage to vehicles or damage tracks/engines to slow down their retreat or advance.
As for vehicles, you make choices as far as their weapons go. A Dreadnaught walker can have either a flamethrower for close combat or twin-linked plasma cannons to be better at mid-range and better vs vehicles. Same with infantry squads. Each unit is modular and can equip some gadgets or different weapons to suit what they are fighting against.
There will be a lot of micro opportunities, just not quite the ones you're used to in Starcraft or Age of Empires.
The game will be much more tactical, and units themselves modular. Best comparison would be Brood War: Terran vs Terran. Not so much about individual vulture micro, but about positioning, trying to deny enemy expansions and choke them out, as well as making that 1 big effort/push to break their entrenched position where they have turrets/tanks/mines/goliaths set up.
On July 06 2026 22:32 TelecoM wrote: It looks cool and kinda fun, but I just can't really get into unit combat / movement like this, not really much potential for micro or am I wrong here?
I've never played any of the Dawn of War RTS games.
Speaking from earlier DoWs, keeping your stacks alive is quite important because it's cheaper to reinforce than building new (also they keep the upgrades). It's also important to kite/split vs the melee troops and focus the right enemies with the right units. As is contesting points on the map, giving lots of way for multitasking.
On July 06 2026 07:18 maybenexttime wrote: The visual cues need a lot of work, imo. All those Space Marine infantry units look the same to me. T___T
I think this will always be a problem for them. It boils down to GW opting for rather bland and generic base design for SM and then you get to making the models where you reuse the base for everything so it all blends together.
It wasn't a problem with fantasy Warhammer, where each and every unit was quite distinct. In 40K you often run into the problem that the only thing differentiating the unit is the weapon it carries, so not the most prominent part. Eldar have the most distinct units out of all 40k factions I believe, since they not only have different armour and weapons but also coloration, making them stand out more from each other.
It was maybe less of a problem in the olden days, where for SM you had scouts (light armour and cloaks), regular marines, devastators (smaller squad with big guns), terminators (bulky armor), assault marines (jetpacks). But now with the advent of primaris marines you have like primaris intercessors, primaris something, primaris other and they all look the same just have different loadouts. All because GW got greedy and discovered they can't copyright "space marine" so they started inventing names and in the process blandified everything even more.
That may well be, but I remember the unit roster in DoW1 being more diverse.
On July 06 2026 22:32 TelecoM wrote: It looks cool and kinda fun, but I just can't really get into unit combat / movement like this, not really much potential for micro or am I wrong here?
I've never played any of the Dawn of War RTS games.
Dawn of War squad movement is painfully slow and clunky. Like your click on that and the react a second later or run into a different direction you clicked in first. Forget about starcraft-esque micro in these games. If there is any micro, it will be about positioning units in proper locations with cover or to use battle powers/spells/skills.
On July 06 2026 07:18 maybenexttime wrote: The visual cues need a lot of work, imo. All those Space Marine infantry units look the same to me. T___T
I think this will always be a problem for them. It boils down to GW opting for rather bland and generic base design for SM and then you get to making the models where you reuse the base for everything so it all blends together.
It wasn't a problem with fantasy Warhammer, where each and every unit was quite distinct. In 40K you often run into the problem that the only thing differentiating the unit is the weapon it carries, so not the most prominent part. Eldar have the most distinct units out of all 40k factions I believe, since they not only have different armour and weapons but also coloration, making them stand out more from each other.
It was maybe less of a problem in the olden days, where for SM you had scouts (light armour and cloaks), regular marines, devastators (smaller squad with big guns), terminators (bulky armor), assault marines (jetpacks). But now with the advent of primaris marines you have like primaris intercessors, primaris something, primaris other and they all look the same just have different loadouts. All because GW got greedy and discovered they can't copyright "space marine" so they started inventing names and in the process blandified everything even more.
That may well be, but I remember the unit roster in DoW1 being more diverse.
Do we know the full roster yet? What do you mean by diverse? DoW Space Marines did not have many different units but I suppose that made them easier to distinguish because you only had standard marines, assault marines, terminators and apothecary, each with clear visual differences.
I feel like that live battle most likely made the game look worse than it is... At least that's what I hope, why would anyone release such a stomp when promoting a game?
On July 07 2026 17:42 Velr wrote: I feel like that live battle most likely made the game look worse than it is... At least that's what I hope, why would anyone release such a stomp when promoting a game?
They've been releasing nothing but crappy ingame footage. They got nothing better
On July 07 2026 17:42 Velr wrote: I feel like that live battle most likely made the game look worse than it is... At least that's what I hope, why would anyone release such a stomp when promoting a game?
I mean, if you don't like this, you would never like a DoW game. It always looks freaking clunky. But DoW4 is a ton better in this regard than it's predecessors and DoW1 was a great series of games. I think DoW4 looks cool af.
doesn't need to be super balanced if its fun. I don't remember DOW being anything hyper serious anyway so I am okay with fun silly stuff honestly as long as its not like, so broken there's only one army being played online.
On July 09 2026 04:34 Maksim2010 wrote: Graphics so far dont look better then SC2 in my opinion which I expect from a 2026 game. Let’s See how it will look ingame. So far disappointing.
I think it looks alright if not outstanding, more noticeable when zoomed in.
I do wonder if it’s a conscious decision. I can’t really think of a traditional RTS that’s got comparably good graphics to top examples in other genres. Aside from performance with tons of assets, I wonder if there’s some kind of line RTS games can’t cross with fidelity without losing readability
Very thematic and designed to be fun, I just don't know how balanced that will be.
Let’s gooooo.
As a giant 40K nut, but having been burned by Stormgate I’ve kept my optimism cautious, but it feels they’re doing a lot right
The factions all feel quite different and distinctive, but also fit their kind of flavour and identity from the wider 40K universe.
Pacing feels OK, albeit the devs have said in these preview vids they’re playing on some of the smaller maps, so the scale may get pretty big on larger ones.
Feels there’s a decent amount of crazy things and spectacle too. One thing you don’t really get in an SC is that ‘oh shit’ power fantasy moment of getting out a particular singular unit really, but you get a bit of that here. Oh shit it’s Imperial Knight time!
So yeah, looking pretty cool. At worst I think it’ll sell decently enough to get an expansion or DLCs to add missing factions, which would be cool.
Maybe it’s not going to be balanced enough or have sufficient depth to foster a real ‘sweaty’ competitive scene, but it definitely looks pretty fun.
Anyone know what other modes are planned? Feels like some kind of co-op mode similar to SC2’s would be a blast, and as it’s not mechanically brutal would be something I could play with Minibat or others who aren’t huge RTS nuts .
On July 09 2026 12:08 PurE)Rabbit-SF wrote: is there sister of battles? :S That's all I care jumping around with SoB and cut some orks, lol
No. In the beginning there will be: - AdMech - Necrons - Space Marines - Orks - possibly Imperial Guard as day 1 DLC? They seem to already have plenty of units for them for the campaign or something and they've been showcased in some videos, not sure if they'll be included from the start or not
On July 07 2026 17:42 Velr wrote: I feel like that live battle most likely made the game look worse than it is... At least that's what I hope, why would anyone release such a stomp when promoting a game?
I mean, if you don't like this, you would never like a DoW game. It always looks freaking clunky. But DoW4 is a ton better in this regard than it's predecessors and DoW1 was a great series of games. I think DoW4 looks cool af.
I think coming from Serral vs Clem marines splitting vs banelings, everything in comparison will look clunky. Really can't properly judge without playing. Could be something, could be nothing
It's completely different because in DoW you control whole squads and not single entities. Depending on how they do it compared to the older titles you also need to factor in stuff like taking cover, upgrading your units with special/heavy weapons which sometimes changes the engagement range of the unit (so not all models in a unit fire at the same time), adds set-up and tear-down times before the unit can fire or move again etc.
On July 07 2026 17:42 Velr wrote: I feel like that live battle most likely made the game look worse than it is... At least that's what I hope, why would anyone release such a stomp when promoting a game?
I mean, if you don't like this, you would never like a DoW game. It always looks freaking clunky. But DoW4 is a ton better in this regard than it's predecessors and DoW1 was a great series of games. I think DoW4 looks cool af.
I loved DoW 1 (until they ruined it with the first addon, was pretty much checked out from MP after that).
The combat in this so far just doesn't look exciting, responsive or anything of the sort. Mind you, it could also just be the players being absolutely horrible.
Dawn of War just generally leans more towards the tactics/strategy side of things than it does the AoW / blizzard micro, no? I assume the Total War franchise would be a better touchstone for what to expect of combat, and while TW combat can seem slow, there was always plenty to do with regards to efficiently moving your units.
I also think the players were intentionally not playing optimally in the Necron/admech showcase. Necron player made scarabs to showcase scarabs, and then never made them again, made some canoptek wraith type unit and just suicided it into the whole army, talked about teleporting in units w tombs but didn't seem to do it much... I think it was intended to just be a showcase of what effectively was zerg streaming units straight into terran mech, and it went about as you'd expect that to.
EPT
![[image loading]](https://i.imgur.com/lXlEROX.png)
![[image loading]](https://i.imgur.com/CPS8kmw.png)
![[image loading]](https://i.pinimg.com/originals/2d/1f/40/2d1f40670459fb0ff39c6866453a94b7.jpg)
![[image loading]](https://liquipedia.net/commons/images/8/8a/SC2Phoenix.jpg)
![[image loading]](https://static0.thegamerimages.com/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2023/01/aeldari-air-units.jpg)
