Putting the 'role' back in role-playing games since 2002.
Donate to Codex
Good Old Games
  • 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.

Warhammer Total War: Warhammer III

Lacrymas

Arcane
Joined
Sep 23, 2015
Messages
18,696
Pathfinder: Wrath
Some thoughts on N'Kari/Slaanesh. The first thing I managed to pick up on is that CA didn't reduce the melee bonuses the AI gets on higher difficulties in order to improve the gameplay, they did it to accommodate all-melee rosters like Slaanesh and, to an extent, Khorne, but mostly Slaanesh. N'Kari starts out at war with a Khorne faction and can easily be dragged into a war with Skarbrand very quickly. The problem is that the only good low tier units Slaanesh has are the daemonettes. While they do good damage, especially when flanking, they are extremely squishy and Khorne units melt them. Marauders of Slaanesh range from borderline useless to garbage. If the AI bonuses were as extreme as before, Khorne would've hard-countered Slaanesh because N'Kari doesn't have any early units that can deal with the armored warriors of Khorne. Even with reduced bonuses, battles against Khornate factions are still always an uphill battle unless you have a succubus/cultist with you that can cast Pit of Shades. Extremely weird and specific balance that forces you into daemonette stacking and Pit of Shades spamming. You could theoretically leave Skarbrand alone and go the other way, but that means you'll be fighting the Norscans. That's also theoretically fine, but they are easily seduced and made into vassals, so you don't have much incentive to fight them. I have more to say, but I want to go to bed and see if a discussion is going to form around this.
 

Maculo

Arcane
Patron
Joined
Jul 30, 2013
Messages
2,589
Strap Yourselves In Pathfinder: Wrath
Lacrymas, how good or bad is N’kari’s economy?

My initial thought on the Khorne match up was to spam agents for magic or consistent unit assaults, but that is an gold investment.
 

Lacrymas

Arcane
Joined
Sep 23, 2015
Messages
18,696
Pathfinder: Wrath
Lacrymas, how good or bad is N’kari’s economy?

My initial thought on the Khorne match up was to spam agents for magic or consistent unit assaults, but that is an gold investment.
He has a building that gives 100 favor (i.e. gold) each turn and an additional 100 if the public order in the region is less than -50. He also has another building that reduces public order and increases all favor gained in a province by up to 50%, so as far as I can gather the idea is to combine everything in a way that keeps your public order lower than -50. Oh, and his technology tree is very shit. If you have a lot of settlements, favor isn't much of a problem, but N'Kari is particularly gold starved in the beginning and can go for quite a while before managing to recruit another army. Tbh, I played this campaign very badly and didn't use everything at my disposal because I was too preoccupied with demolishing Skarbrand as fast as possible, so I'm not the best to ask whether you can finance agent spam. Slaanesh also has devotee economy to worry about, but it's undercooked like all faction mechanics in this game, so it's a non-issue. But yeah, you are right, having a shadow caster to spam Pit of Shades is the most efficient way to play Slaanesh, especially against Khorne. Mind you, I was able to kill all Khorne factions (because that was one of the victory conditions in the victory overhaul mod) with no shadow caster support because I let my succubus die in the beginning. It wasn't the best way to do things, however, because N'Kari has a shit replenishment rate and daemonettes die like flies in each battle against Khorne. If N'Kari wasn't as overpowered, I doubt you could win against Skarbrand with only daemonettes and no shadow caster. My tactic was letting the enemy surround N'Kari and flanking them with the daemonettes. It works, but it's far from what you should be doing and it's always N'Kari who gets 500-600 kills each battle. Also, I think Skarbrand is way overtuned, both as a faction and as an LL. He is at least considerably more powerful than the second most powerful LL/faction. He is so powerful in fact that you should always plan your armies/campaigns around him if you aren't playing the Realms of Chaos narrative (and you really shouldn't).
 
Last edited:

A horse of course

Guest
Since I have been replaying TW games, this looks even worse by comparison.

Rome 2 is in a better state.

Yeah, it really says something when I'm considering downloading Rome 2 again...

Ugh, what I really want out of Total War is Medieval 3, but it's been so many years and the company has moved so far away that I don't think it's in the cards anymore. Even if they do, it won't be anything like 2 anyways...

They would make it "character-driven" like Three Kongdoms or something, probably.
 

Maculo

Arcane
Patron
Joined
Jul 30, 2013
Messages
2,589
Strap Yourselves In Pathfinder: Wrath
He has a building that gives 100 favor (i.e. gold) each turn and an additional 100 if the public order in the region is less than -50. He also has another building that reduces public order and increases all favor gained in a province by up to 50%, so as far as I can gather the idea is to combine everything in a way that keeps your public order lower than -50. Oh, and his technology tree is very shit. If you have a lot of settlements, favor isn't much of a problem, but N'Kari is particularly gold starved in the beginning and can go for quite a while before managing to recruit another army. Tbh, I played this campaign very badly and didn't use everything at my disposal because I was too preoccupied with demolishing Skarbrand as fast as possible, so I'm not the best to ask whether you can finance agent spam. Slaanesh also has devotee economy to worry about, but it's undercooked like all faction mechanics in this game, so it's a non-issue. But yeah, you are right, having a shadow caster to spam Pit of Shades is the most efficient way to play Slaanesh, especially against Khorne. Mind you, I was able to kill all Khorne factions (because that was one of the victory conditions in the victory overhaul mod) with no shadow caster support because I let my succubus die in the beginning. It wasn't the best way to do things, however, because N'Kari has a shit replenishment rate and daemonettes die like flies in each battle against Khorne. If N'Kari wasn't as overpowered, I doubt you could win against Skarbrand with only daemonettes and no shadow caster. My tactic was letting the enemy surround N'Kari and flanking them with the daemonettes. It works, but it's far from what you should be doing and it's always N'Kari who gets 500-600 kills each battle. Also, I think Skarbrand is way overtuned, both as a faction and as an LL. He is at least considerably more powerful than the second most powerful LL/faction. He is so powerful in fact that you should always plan your armies/campaigns around him if you aren't playing the Realms of Chaos narrative (and you really shouldn't).

No disagreement here; Skarbrand is a beast. On top of it, I recall Skarbrand receives magic resistance based on local winds of magic, which is hard to plan around.

In my opinion, Skarbrand is an example of CA successfully executing on a faction concept, rather than overtuned. Momentum and blood host armies fit his themes perfectly, and enhance his gameplay. In contrast, N'Kari, Cathay, Kislev, etc. seem held back by their faction mechanics. Obviously, this is just my opinion.
 

Lacrymas

Arcane
Joined
Sep 23, 2015
Messages
18,696
Pathfinder: Wrath
No disagreement here; Skarbrand is a beast. On top of it, I recall Skarbrand receives magic resistance based on local winds of magic, which is hard to plan around.

In my opinion, Skarbrand is an example of CA successfully executing on a faction concept, rather than overtuned. Momentum and blood host armies fit his themes perfectly, and enhance his gameplay. In contrast, N'Kari, Cathay, Kislev, etc. seem held back by their faction mechanics. Obviously, this is just my opinion.
It doesn't have much to do with his mechanics, I think his stats are just bloated. He can take anyone 1v1 even with a ridiculous level difference (he could demolish my 21 level N'Kari while he was 9) and the vast majority of his units are better than any comparable unit from other rosters. Fighting him before having a high tier doomstack is an actual challenge and he can considerably set you back even if you win against him. This isn't true for any other faction in the entirety of this trilogy. Playing as him, however, seems boring to me and I've seen others expressing this opinion as well. He's just too powerful compared to all the others and effortlessly massacres everything he comes into contact with. I am 99.9999% sure that either he will get nerfed or everyone else will be buffed to get to his level. The second option is probably better because the majority of tech trees and mechanics of the other factions are terrible and, like you pointed out, sometimes actively detrimental.
 
Last edited:

Justicar

Dead game
Glory to Ukraine
Joined
Apr 15, 2020
Messages
4,614
Location
Afghanistan
Worst game ever (consoles and pc) after 17 months.
trashegklq.png


Total war gayhammer 3 (pc exclusive) after 2 months.
trash22mje5.png
 

Space Satan

Arcane
Vatnik
Joined
May 13, 2013
Messages
6,406
Location
Space Hell
Same happened to Vortex - playerbase dropped after people finished vortex campaiign and then skyrocketed after MI because that's what everyone were playing till WIII
 

Lacrymas

Arcane
Joined
Sep 23, 2015
Messages
18,696
Pathfinder: Wrath
Well, not exactly the same thing. WH2's initial rush was 80k and the playerbase never dipped below 20k average per month since September 2018 before WH3 came out. On the other hand, WH3 peaked at more than double WH2's numbers and now struggles to break 10k average a month. But here's the thing - when IE releases, there will literally be zero reason to play WH2 anymore unless you really like the vortex campaigns for some DLC lords, so imo WH3 will either have the exact same or higher average player count. CA are slow to release patches because a) they know this very well and b) the IE map requires monumental work to be up to the standards of WH3, so if they are working on that it's understandable there aren't many patches or news. I'm not simping for CA, I think their management is mindbogglingly incompetent, I'm just stating what I think are most likely the facts.
 
Last edited:

Fedora Master

STOP POSTING
Patron
Edgy
Joined
Jun 28, 2017
Messages
31,609
You're assuming they will be able to bring WH3 to the level of quality that 2 currently has by the time IE arrives...
 

Lacrymas

Arcane
Joined
Sep 23, 2015
Messages
18,696
Pathfinder: Wrath
It depends on what you mean by that. They might be able to fix some or hopefully all tech trees, but the factions won't get the complete rework they desperately need.
 

thesheeep

Arcane
Patron
Joined
Mar 16, 2007
Messages
10,098
Location
Tampere, Finland
Codex 2012 Strap Yourselves In Codex Year of the Donut Codex+ Now Streaming! Serpent in the Staglands Dead State Divinity: Original Sin Torment: Tides of Numenera Codex USB, 2014 Shadorwun: Hong Kong Divinity: Original Sin 2 BattleTech Bubbles In Memoria A Beautifully Desolate Campaign Pillars of Eternity 2: Deadfire Pathfinder: Kingmaker Steve gets a Kidney but I don't even get a tag. Pathfinder: Wrath I'm very into cock and ball torture I helped put crap in Monomyth
You're assuming they will be able to bring WH3 to the level of quality that 2 currently has by the time IE arrives...
I honestly don't expect them to. I mean, one can HOPE, but we all know CA.
I do expect modders to eventually do that, though, and even surpass WH2.

But ask me about that again next year...
 

Maculo

Arcane
Patron
Joined
Jul 30, 2013
Messages
2,589
Strap Yourselves In Pathfinder: Wrath
It doesn't have much to do with his mechanics, I think his stats are just bloated. He can take anyone 1v1 even with a ridiculous level difference (he could demolish my 21 level N'Kari while he was 9) and the vast majority of his units are better than any comparable unit from other rosters. Fighting him before having a high tier doomstack is an actual challenge and he can considerably set you back even if you win against him. This isn't true for any other faction in the entirety of this trilogy. Playing as him, however, seems boring to me and I've seen others expressing this opinion as well. He's just too powerful compared to all the others and effortlessly massacres everything he comes into contact with. I am 99.9999% sure that either he will get nerfed or everyone else will be buffed to get to his level. The second option is probably better because the majority of tech trees and mechanics of the other factions are terrible and, like you pointed out, sometimes actively detrimental.

I think we are having a glass half full versus half empty debate. I don't necessarily disagree with you, but my annoyance is more so channeled on how CA balanced the other legendary lords. While I can understand why Skarbrand feels overpowered, I view that as more so a testament to just how undercooked the other legendary lords are. Skarbrand and his mechanics are straight forward and simple, but they work. In a campaign where gold is scarce and you can only support so many armies early game, Skarbrand felt like a proper demonic threat (Kairos too).

This is 100% my personal opinion (and possibly my faulty memory), but I recall the balance between the starting legendary lords in Warhammer 2 was much closer. Malekith, Morathi, Tyrion, Kroggar, Skrolk, etc. could each pack a punch in their own right, whereas outside of Skarbrand and Kairos (maybe Zhao Ming), I don't view the other WH3 legendary lords as particularly impactful.
 

Lacrymas

Arcane
Joined
Sep 23, 2015
Messages
18,696
Pathfinder: Wrath
Tbh, I'd like to see this game move away from one-man-doomstack-tier LLs and focus more on armies and units. Troy has this problem as well btw (on non-historical mode), Diomedes can take on entire armies by himself at one point. It just seems antithetical to what Total War is about. Buffing the other lords to Skarbrand's level won't make everyone as challenging to fight as Skarbrand, it will level the playing field. However, the other factions do need limited or extensive overhauls either way. We'll see how CA handles this situation. I want to see AI reworks too. Given how this is the last game in the trilogy, they might as well go all in and make this game finally good. Or just unlock everything possible to mod like Rome Remastered and it will sort itself out.
 

InD_ImaginE

Arcane
Patron
Joined
Aug 23, 2015
Messages
5,947
Pathfinder: Wrath
Eh I like that heroes/LL are very strong, certainly something unique compared to normal TW games. But it doesn't really have to be mutually exclusive. Buffing LL are just number tweak and maybe changing unique items etc. Making faction more unique in combat is design issue that require massive work. The problem is there are a lot of factions now and it is very unlikely that you can make all of them unique. Cathay will always play like Dwarf, the dime dozen big melee unit faction will also play similarly like Chaos, Norsca, to lesser extend Ork. To make it really2 unique they have to add faction mechanic on tactical level, not just strategical that force player to play differently.


I want to see AI reworks too.

Everybody and their mother want good AI in TW games since 10 years ago. It haven't happened, it ain't happening. In TW2 there was a very good AI mod whose modder got fed off by people bitching about compatibility or patch breaking it.
 

Maculo

Arcane
Patron
Joined
Jul 30, 2013
Messages
2,589
Strap Yourselves In Pathfinder: Wrath
Tbh, I'd like to see this game move away from one-man-doomstack-tier LLs and focus more on armies and units. Troy has this problem as well btw (on non-historical mode), Diomedes can take on entire armies by himself at one point. It just seems antithetical to what Total War is about. Buffing the other lords to Skarbrand's level won't make everyone as challenging to fight as Skarbrand, it will level the playing field. However, the other factions do need limited or extensive overhauls either way. We'll see how CA handles this situation. I want to see AI reworks too. Given how this is the last game in the trilogy, they might as well go all in and make this game finally good. Or just unlock everything possible to mod like Rome Remastered and it will sort itself out.
I understand that sentiment. That is why I appreciated Closer to Tabletop mod so much. The balance went the other direction by emphasizing armies over lords. Even low tier units could kill a legendary lord if you were not careful.

I don’t think it’s coming back though :(
 

Lacrymas

Arcane
Joined
Sep 23, 2015
Messages
18,696
Pathfinder: Wrath
hjQQB4Q.png

Feels good to be the 1%. I used the victory conditions overhaul mod, though, I don't have enough patience for the RoC campaign, and only went for one of the short victories (destroy all Khorne factions). I got it at around 85 turns, which the modder says is normal for each short victory. One of the others is technically faster and I would've gotten it waaay sooner had I realized you can't vassalize your military allies. Anyway, the gameplay feels much better without the ridiculous RoC mechanics and the AI is much more aggressive. There was a complete bloodbath around Kislev and Norsca. It was the Norscan tribes vs Demons of Chaos vs Kislev. I didn't participate in that, though, because I went after Khorne. Once you get Exalted Daemonettes and Fiends of Slaanesh, Khorne is easier to manage due to the armor piercing (if you don't have a shadow caster, which I didn't). I'd say Slaanesh is ok on the campaign map, the devotee armies you can summon can help out in a pinch and I had to use one to successfully siege Skarbrand's capital of Infernius. The cult of Slaanesh, however, is a mixed bag. You can expend devotees to instantly create cults in random human or elven settlements on the map, then you can use that to build buildings that mostly generate more devotees or increase relations, but can also be used to destroy the cult and create an army in that settlement. I never used this tbh because I was neither strapped for devotees nor for relations, gaining an army in a random settlement was never really all that useful.

Like Cathay, Slaanesh's mechanics aren't extreme enough, with the possible exception of the devotee armies that you can summon next to a lord (not from a cult in a settlement). The mechanics are extremely limited also due to the extremely limited nature of the campaign map itself. If there was more stuff on the campaign map to do, the mechanics could've been more diverse. Again, look at Troy, you have at least 5 different resources to manage and collect (Sarpedon has 8 and you could get more depending on which mythological beast you've chosen) and you have the cults of the gods. This creates a nice baseline for everyone and then you can build faction mechanics around different things. In WH3 on the other hand, you only have gold as a baseline and nothing else, which means they will eventually start running out of ideas for faction mechanics. Which they did and that's why they started adding different resources for different factions (meat for Skaven and ogres, slaves for the dark elves, skulls for Khorne, devotees for Slaanesh and so on), but they always feel a bit tacked on and foreign. If we had 5+ resources to worry about baseline, not only would that help with balancing army composition, but it would give everyone stuff to do on the campaign map and then adding unique resources for some factions would shake up the game considerably more because there's exponentially more stuff to take care of.

I suppose complaining about how the campaign map feels barebones is a lost cause and pointless at this stage and I don't really have much more to say about Slaanesh. The battle gameplay is admittedly very one-dimensional with the Slaanesh roster, even more so than is typical in this game. The only viable army composition in the beginning is daemonette stacking with an optional sprinkling of marauders here and there. That's because cavalry is, surprise, surprise, useless in this game and chariots aren't working correctly atm. Once you get access to higher tier units, there are a bit more options (Fiends, Exalted Daemonettes, Soulgrinders, Keeper of Secrets, theoretically chariots), but the gameplay is still essentially one-dimensional. I think I got my fill of this game for now, I'd rather play Troy or Rome Remastered when I get the itch to play a TW game. WH3 (and probably this whole trilogy) is a bit too simple for my liking without mods and the gameplay mods that are available are dubious. I guess we'll see what they do with the combined map.
 

Lacrymas

Arcane
Joined
Sep 23, 2015
Messages
18,696
Pathfinder: Wrath
Jesus Christ just stop.

Game is bad and dead. Go back to Troy or something.
That's exactly what I'm planning to do. Well, maybe I'll play a little bit of Rome 1 first and then Troy. We'll see if the combined map can save this mess.
 

Fedora Master

STOP POSTING
Patron
Edgy
Joined
Jun 28, 2017
Messages
31,609
Almost every other TW is better than this. I should know, I've played them again recently. Discounting the shit heap that is Empire, they all work better than this. It's actually hilarious how much of a step back WH3 really is. Even Rome 2 has better gameplay now.
 

Lacrymas

Arcane
Joined
Sep 23, 2015
Messages
18,696
Pathfinder: Wrath
WH has always had bad gameplay when compared to pretty much all other TW games. I wouldn't say WH2 is better than 3 in this regard. Yeah, the RoC campaign is terrible, but you can easily remove it now and play it like a sandbox or with other victory conditions. WH gameplay suffers mostly from two things - overpowered magic + LLs and a lack of diverse battle mechanics/units that leads to stacking of one particular unit and simple battles. All the other bad things (undercooked faction mechanics, uneventful campaign map, terrible tech trees, bad AI, units that are simply spreadsheets, etc.) ultimately feed into these two issues.
 

InD_ImaginE

Arcane
Patron
Joined
Aug 23, 2015
Messages
5,947
Pathfinder: Wrath
Man magic is already OK as it is. It's not that it as a tool is not available for the AI or something. That the AI can't use it effectively is AI fault.

And Lord especially LL being strong is kinda whole differentiator of this vs normal TW. If you want normal TW games just with different skin might as well install a mod for Medieval TW2.
 

Lacrymas

Arcane
Joined
Sep 23, 2015
Messages
18,696
Pathfinder: Wrath
AoE damage spells are the culprit and basically the only spells worth using besides healing. If magic was extremely limited like in Troy, then fine, have all the AoE damage spells you want, but stacking arcane conduits and spamming them gets old by the second battle. I honestly don't understand why people are so enchanted by this trilogy. Gameplay-wise, it does nothing better than other TW titles and the unique things it has are actively detrimental.
 

FreeKaner

Prophet of the Dumpsterfire
Joined
Mar 28, 2015
Messages
6,942
Location
Devlet-i ʿAlīye-i ʿErdogānīye
Overpowered magic is because of the players, who cry and whine about "multiplayer balance ruining the game" as soon as CA does anything to tune down magic. People were already complaining about magic being weak in WH3 compared to 2.
 

As an Amazon Associate, rpgcodex.net earns from qualifying purchases.
Back
Top Bottom