Official Codex Discord Server

  1. Welcome to rpgcodex.net, a site dedicated to discussing computer based role-playing games in a free and open fashion. We're less strict than other forums, but please refer to the rules.

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

New Total War game: Warhammer

Discussion in 'Strategy and Simulation' started by Merkwürdigliebe, Dec 6, 2012.

  1. Corporate_Jew_Master Arcane

    Corporate_Jew_Master
    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2012
    Messages:
    6,649
    Location:
    Rape
    Like I wrote above, even those with 980Ti run the game like shit while older gen, inferior AMD gpus max it out at ultra with no fps issues, same with attila. When a 970 user gets 50 fps in battle zoomed in with everything set to ultra and a 980Ti user barely 30 it means that someone didn't do their work.
     
    • Brofist Brofist x 1
    ^ Top  
  2. Blaine Cis-Het Oppressor Patron

    Blaine
    Joined:
    Oct 6, 2012
    Messages:
    1,871,492
    Location:
    Roanoke, VA
    Grab the Codex by the pussy
    Yeah, but for some reason, the game now runs extremely smoothly for me. G-Sync might have something to do with it.

    People have reported their FPS jumping wildly, up to 200 FPS, so perhaps where high-end cards are concerned that's a factor, one that G-Sync may eliminate.
     
    • Brofist Brofist x 1
    ^ Top  
  3. Taskityo Educated

    Taskityo
    Joined:
    Nov 14, 2015
    Messages:
    68
    Was kind of looking forward to this, since I stopped following this series with the disappoint that was Rome 2, hoping CA would add more immersive depth, but for whatever reason they skimped on some areas or just simply removed features in TW:W. From watching some vids, the sieges for example are oddly dumbed down - TW for me hit the high point of where they were going with combat in Rome: Total War and Medieval: Total War 2 (4 sides to defend + multi-tier defense, where the A.I. was smart enough to overwhelm/attack multiple sides). Sieges were steadily some of my favorite combat moments in the oldest titles. After that, it's been one strange design choice after another, AKA decline and doesn't make me too enthused for future total wars :\.

    Some steam reviews pointing out issues here and there.

    Also I'm surprised how 'clean' breaks in a wall looks in Total War: Warhammer, compared to decades favorites like the first Medieval TW and Rome TW:

    Show Spoiler


    Warhammer
    [​IMG]


    Rome 1
    [​IMG]


    Med 1
    [​IMG]

    Med 1
    [​IMG]


    All in all, from what I'm reading/seeing, I think I'll be skipping this one until there is a very steep discount. I know for sure I wouldn't spend much time with it as past games and probably be bored of the Sieges pretty quick to spend a full $60... man.
     
    • Brofist Brofist x 2
    ^ Top  
  4. Blaine Cis-Het Oppressor Patron

    Blaine
    Joined:
    Oct 6, 2012
    Messages:
    1,871,492
    Location:
    Roanoke, VA
    Grab the Codex by the pussy
    Yeah, I've been reading through various Total War forums, and there are mixed reactions to the siege changes and simplifications made to the campaign mechanics. Some think that the "streamlined" features are more appropriate for a fantasy universe in which food stores and sanitation are nonentities for example, and that the added features (monstrous and flying units, very unique factions, magic, elaborate and diverse lord and hero skill trees, equipment, and abilities, etc.) make up for it.

    The consensus seems to be that this is a "branch" of TW more appropriate for Warhammer, rather than a historical game, and that it's not the final, be-all direction of the entire series... although, I'm personally disinclined to touch Rome 2 or Attila with a ten-foot pole and will be sticking to Medieval II and Shogun 2 for the foreseeable future, unless CA manages to make another good historical TW someday.

    Whether or not you should skip Total Warhammer depends primarily upon your preferences. For me, the most exciting and interesting thing about Total War is when two armies meet on the open field, and formations and maneuvering thereof. Smaller-sized armies are a plus, although those soon become unviable. Small skirmishes where you can win or lose decisively based on just a few decisions, that's good stuff. Yeah, the siege changes are puzzling and annoying. Also, combats should not end in 2 minutes. Everything dies too quickly.

    If you love Warhammer or just fantasy in general and don't mind the removal/streamlining of certain features in exchange for others, it's worth getting, I think. Maybe not for full price if that's an issue, though.
     
    • Brofist Brofist x 2
    ^ Top  
  5. BlackAdderBG Arcane Patron

    BlackAdderBG
    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2012
    Messages:
    1,807
    Location:
    Little Vienna
    Codex 2013 Codex 2014 PC RPG Website of the Year, 2015 Codex 2016 - The Age of Grimoire Grab the Codex by the pussy Codex USB, 2014 Pillars of Eternity 2: Deadfire Pathfinder: Kingmaker

    This comment is pure gold.

    "I've got more hours than you in TW overall, actually.I think this is a fine Total War game. Sure, it's dumbed down but that's so the Warhammer fans can get used to the series. I'm sure CA will implement more features in the next two expansions (considering they will form into one massive game).They had to get rid of some things in order to make all these non-copy pasta units for each faction. It would have probably strained their budget too much if they were to add everything from before and then all these unique things on top of that.If you don't like it, then that's fine. There's many more Total War titles out there and at least we'll still be getting historical ones if a fantasy setting isn't your cup of tea.Personally, I'm loving this. I haven't had this much fun in a Total War game since Shogun 2. Mods will only make it better."
     
    • Brofist Brofist x 1
    • Fabulously Optimistic Fabulously Optimistic x 1
    ^ Top  
  6. Lone Wolf Arcane

    Lone Wolf
    Joined:
    Apr 17, 2014
    Messages:
    1,969
    For the record, I don't think it's dumbed down. The emphasis of depth has shifted - lots more customization of leader characters, much deeper rock/paper/scissors system, magic, unique playstyles for the different factions etc. They've made sieges simpler for the AI, which is fine (unlike some, I don't recall Rome or Medieval 2 siege AI fondly, when it had to deal with four walls). Ditto with the taxation stuff; you think you'll miss it until you just don't.

    This is one of CA's best products, in my opinion.
     
    ^ Top  
  7. MoLAoS Guest

    MoLAoS
    Considering your other shitty opinions that's not shocking. Game is clearly dumbed down. Granted TW was always dumbed down outside the combat.
     
    ^ Top  
  8. Blaine Cis-Het Oppressor Patron

    Blaine
    Joined:
    Oct 6, 2012
    Messages:
    1,871,492
    Location:
    Roanoke, VA
    Grab the Codex by the pussy
    Dumbed down in what way? You're referring to the lack of a tax slider, governors, family tree, sanitation, food production, provincial improvements (roads and so on), that sort of thing?

    So, you admit that TW was "always dumbed down outside the combat," are mad that the campaign has been dumbed down further, but refuse to give the game any credit for new features or for the combat—which arguably is well done, diverse, and enjoyable, while the AI and collisions are substantially and very noticeably improved. Hell, so is the performance. Those were actually the big three complaints about recent TW games: AI's dumb, collisions suck, performance is shit.

    Presumably the reason they altered sieges was to make them easier for the AI to handle properly, and I think that's an understandable choice. If the more elaborate, open siege maps were still in, people would be bitching about the retarded AI instead. It's a lot easier to redesign a map and tweak some mechanics than to redesign the AI, and there's a limit to what game AIs can be made capable of.

    Sounds to me like you're the one with shitty opinions. It's a shame those additional details are missing from the campaign (although the absence of some is clearly appropriate for a Warhammer game), especially the tax slider, but most were no more than braindead fluff to begin with. Many of them were just mindless button-clicks, only managed very occasionally, or else were dead easy to manage.

    You think that managing shitters and the option to marry your daughter to some asshole to get +1 diplomatic relations is more important than focusing on magic spells, monsters, flying units, magic armor and swords and shit in a Warhammer game? Come on, man.
     
    Last edited: May 27, 2016
    • Brofist Brofist x 2
    ^ Top  
  9. hivemind Guest

    hivemind
    Combat has also suffered from over simplification. Gone are your unit formations (you only have two, misssle front, missle rear). Combat is also incredibly fast. It may be nitpicky, but I really liked zooming in on close combat and watching the models kick the tar out of each other in amusing ways. Now, units are destroyed and flee at such a pace as it makes enjoying the scene practically impossible. Elsewhere it has been mentioned that there is some sort of mechanic that buffs armies that have greater numbers than their foes. In the days of yore, a well thought out defense, making use of terrain, unit strengths, and cover meant you could outwit and defeat a much larger and better equipped force, or at least bloody their noses enough to slow them down. Now, if you are outnumbered, the battles are incredibly lopsided, no matter what you do. This mechanic plays in your favor as well. A small AI force can be routed almost instantly, and you will take minimal casualties. One final mention on battles, ranged weapons and artillery are DEVASTATINGLY accurate. Not only are they accurate, but they are an absolute menace, to you or the AI. Artillery can wipe out entire units long before they ever engage, and fire with accuracy that would make an olympic marksman green at the gills, regardles of cover.

    - Attacking villages just results in a field battle because they couldn't be bothered to model villages
    - Units don't have animations for unnecessary things like reloading
     
    • Brofist Brofist x 1
    ^ Top  
  10. Blaine Cis-Het Oppressor Patron

    Blaine
    Joined:
    Oct 6, 2012
    Messages:
    1,871,492
    Location:
    Roanoke, VA
    Grab the Codex by the pussy
    Who the fuck uses predefined formations? I never used that trash, and neither does any other serious player, which might be why they didn't bother. Also, the "outnumbered debuff" may be apocryphal. If not, there'll be a mod for it toot sweet. Should be real simple to fix.

    Combat is absolutely too fast though, I readily agree, and I do wish there were more trees and hills. They seem a bit sparser than in Shogun 2.

    I think you may be right that ranged units are bit too accurate, now. Certainly, village models would be nice, but that can very easily be fixed by someone. It doesn't bother me because I prefer open-field battles anyway.

    I really don't understand the complaints about no animations for unnecessary things. If there's anything to not waste development man-hours on so that they're free to work on other things instead, that might be one of the first things I pick. It's pure eye candy. Every race has many different units with totally different wireframe models and animations than all the others, so I think it's 100% understandable that they'd cut something like that.
     
    • Brofist Brofist x 1
    ^ Top  
  11. Merkwürdigliebe Arcane

    Merkwürdigliebe
    Joined:
    Nov 15, 2009
    Messages:
    2,786
    Location:
    Third Reich from the Sun
    Regarding sieges in M2 and Rome, the AI basically never did multiple side assaults in those games. Only exception when it had reinforcing stacks and those stacks had siege artillery. Otherwise they would just run around to join the main force.
     
    ^ Top  
  12. Blaine Cis-Het Oppressor Patron

    Blaine
    Joined:
    Oct 6, 2012
    Messages:
    1,871,492
    Location:
    Roanoke, VA
    Grab the Codex by the pussy
    One feature that needs to be added, in my opinion, is progressively more speed on the campaign map for progressively smaller armies, and more options for small forces to escape larger ones. This is not only realistic historically speaking, but would allow for more choice and versatility in gameplay. One unit of cavalry could "scout" without taking up an agent slot, for example, and small forces could raid minor settlements and engage with other smaller forces. As it is, by midgame, if you're not fielding a doomstack, you're vulnerable.

    Mainly I'd like to see this because I also enjoy smaller-sized battles. They're simpler in a way, but much more punishing or rewarding of bad or good decision-making, unit composition, and formations.
     
    • Brofist Brofist x 1
    ^ Top  
  13. hivemind Guest

    hivemind
    [​IMG]
     
    • Brofist Brofist x 1
    ^ Top  
  14. Corporate_Jew_Master Arcane

    Corporate_Jew_Master
    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2012
    Messages:
    6,649
    Location:
    Rape
  15. Lone Wolf Arcane

    Lone Wolf
    Joined:
    Apr 17, 2014
    Messages:
    1,969
    You calling my opinions shitty is no insult at all, considering the drivel you deliver with depressing regularity.

    Let me know when you finish your magnum opus. I'm looking forward to seeing what a 'everything-is-shit' advocate unleashes upon an unsuspecting, innocent world.
     
    ^ Top  
  16. Blaine Cis-Het Oppressor Patron

    Blaine
    Joined:
    Oct 6, 2012
    Messages:
    1,871,492
    Location:
    Roanoke, VA
    Grab the Codex by the pussy
    Simmer down that sass. I don't need to be enlightened by my own intelligence to know that predefined formations are shit.

    Anyway, I think part of the reason battles are faster now than they were in previous Warscape engine games is because the synced one-on-one combat animations that everyone hated for obvious reasons have been done away with, which is very, very good.
     
    • Brofist Brofist x 1
    ^ Top  
  17. Steve Savant

    Steve
    Joined:
    Aug 25, 2011
    Messages:
    348
    I don't think it's dumbed down either, it's just streamlined in a good way. The campaign map has always served no other purpose than to make the player to care about the outcome of the battles, nobody ever has played a total war game for the empire management. There's just a lot less fiddling around (There still could be more) and I found my campaign going a lot faster than in any other TW game.

    AI also seems to be able to build proper armies this time, a lot less of those annoying 4-5 unit forces, however the AI doesn't seem to be able to handle corruption at all. They pretty much ignore it and take huge attrition.

    I liked how when Archaon finally came, everybody made a non-aggression pact and started fighting the common foe, I wonder how much of it was scripted but it brought some nice flavor. After the chaos forces were defeated there was a nice silent period where everybody just rebuilt the ruined provinces, pretty much the entire Empire area was gone and was split between Bretonnia and me (Vampire counts)
     
    Last edited: May 27, 2016
    • Brofist Brofist x 1
    ^ Top  
  18. BlackAdderBG Arcane Patron

    BlackAdderBG
    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2012
    Messages:
    1,807
    Location:
    Little Vienna
    Codex 2013 Codex 2014 PC RPG Website of the Year, 2015 Codex 2016 - The Age of Grimoire Grab the Codex by the pussy Codex USB, 2014 Pillars of Eternity 2: Deadfire Pathfinder: Kingmaker
    And thank god it didn't split forces in sieges in M2,as seen in Shogun 2 it was super easy to beat even with 1 to 3 superiority as long you had decent troops(i.e. not ashigaru) to beat them piece by piece while 2 units block the gates/walls.In Medieval2 the big problem always was bugging AI just doing nothing.But if they attack it's harder to defend against evenly matched forces without good heavy cavalry.

    Are you saying battles actually matter?Like you don't have to rush conquest cities for AI to stop spawning out of sight stacks? :lol:

    Just like in Rome2. And it's not some kind of AI ,just a consequence of no move without general.

    :deadtroll:
     
    • Fabulously Optimistic Fabulously Optimistic x 1
    ^ Top  
  19. Trash Pointing and laughing.

    Trash
    Joined:
    Dec 12, 2002
    Messages:
    29,658
    Location:
    About 8 meters beneath sea level.
    Personally, I too enjoy smaller skirmishes and battles as these tend to be a lot more tactical and versatile. Not every battle needs to be a doomstack vs doomstack affair. I do however get why they didn't increase the speed of smaller stacks. In the TW system it would mean that the player would move his doomstack around as a group of smaller stacks forming a blob on the map. Thus gaining a marked increase in speed but still being able to field a full doomstack army when battle commences. It's the old march divided and fight concentrated maxim but would give the player too big an edge in their game system.

    Anyway, playing as the dwarves one of the ways I do get those pesky greenskin half stacks to not run away from my stunties is to send smaller stacks after them. The AI figures it has a shot and engages. After which my dwarves get rid of another raiding nuisance. Only problem is when the small stack gets mobbed by greenskin hordes that suddenly materialise out of nowhere. Then it's just another grudge. It's the badlands after all.

    Am enjoying the game. I do miss a lot of the map and gameplay features from the earlier Rome and Medieval 2 game. The battle maps no longer being 1-1 depictions of the campaign map remains my biggest pet peeve. The simplistic sieges, lack of smaller settlement maps and lack of buildings that have been build showing up on town maps piss me off. Battles are awesome though, and while I do want them to be a tad slower they are fun and varied. The different factions playing markedly different also feels genuinly fresh. I'm still hoping for someone someday making a game that combines CK2, Ageod's Alea Jacta Est and Rome/Medieval 2 but know it won't be CA that will. If ever anyone will. Had some hope to see it with the King Arthur game but that fizzled out by the time its sequel hit. For now, this will do. Which is more than I expected.
     
    • Brofist Brofist x 1
    ^ Top  
  20. Steve Savant

    Steve
    Joined:
    Aug 25, 2011
    Messages:
    348
    Absolutely yes, they're the bread and butter of the series. Guess what you have to do in order to conquer those cities ;)

    The empire management has always been pretty shallow in TW games, they just removed most of the bloat that the series have never really needed. I wouldn't mind them removing the campaign map in its entirety and just focus on making a series of good and interesting battles, something like Shadow of the horned rat or Dark omen would be really neat. Ideal would be if they returned to Shogun/Medieval style gameboard style map instead of the 3D monstrosity but that's not likely to happen.
     
    Last edited: May 27, 2016
    • Brofist Brofist x 2
    ^ Top  
  21. Zewp Arcane

    Zewp
    Joined:
    Sep 30, 2012
    Messages:
    3,495
    Location:
    Das Land des Bieres
    Codex 2013
    I have to say, I don't know how they could label the Dwarfs the Easy campaign. Playing them on Hard I got completely fucked up twice. The Greenskins just absorb all the other tribes and become a near-unstoppable force with seemingly endless resources. Good luck staying alive when the idiotic dwarfs in the south keep losing to them, making them get fightiness points and free WAAAGH stacks. I'm on my third attempt and this time seems to be going better. I just turtled in Silver Valley and fed the other dwarf factions gold to keep their armies up and it seems to be going better. At 100 turns and the Chaos just invaded the Greenskin lands. If they fuck them up a bit I'll move in and take their provinces.
     
    ^ Top  
  22. hivemind Guest

    hivemind
    you are a disgrace

    time to buy some orange paint
     
    • Brofist Brofist x 1
    ^ Top  
  23. Zewp Arcane

    Zewp
    Joined:
    Sep 30, 2012
    Messages:
    3,495
    Location:
    Das Land des Bieres
    Codex 2013
    I blame the AI. That's just how I roll.

    In all seriousness, the battles feel more challenging to me than many of the more recent Total Wars (didn't play atilla so can't comment on that). You actually have to concentrate on army composition and make use of every advantage you get. And things can go bad in a second if you're not paying enough attention.

    In other Total War games I could just assemble any army I felt like and chances were I could fuck the enemy up without too much strategic thought.
     
    ^ Top  
  24. vonAchdorf Prestigious Gentleman Arcane

    vonAchdorf
    Joined:
    Sep 20, 2014
    Messages:
    7,626
    Often the campaign map gets boring more slowly than the tactical battles, of which you fought most by auto-resolve later in the games.
     
    • Brofist Brofist x 1
    ^ Top  
  25. mutonizer Arcane Patron

    mutonizer
    Joined:
    Sep 4, 2014
    Messages:
    1,041
    I agree, overall much more challenging vanilla than anything Total War produced for a long ass time. Said so before but it's been years since I had fun playing one of these games without complete overhaul mods like DEI and whatnot.
    Also, high level, geared up, heroes can fuck you up something fierce. I once had an enemy agent get lucky and assasinate my big dude followed by the enemy leader attacking my main stack and man, they just wiped the floor with me. Took me a while to recover because I didn't have any other hero to lead anything proper. Some probably hate that but personally I love it, really fits the fantasy aspect.

    And siege battles are far from dumbed down, they are just sorted more efficiently to cut down all the stupid shit that's been plaguing TW series forever. Now you can actually play tactically in sieges which is a breath of fresh air. I guess that's the advantage of the Warhammer franchise compared to "historical" fit, they can do proper gameplay that just works better.
     
    ^ Top  

(buying stuff via the above buttons helps us pay the hosting bills, thanks!)