As was foretold, we've added advertisements to the forums! If you have questions, or if you encounter any bugs, please visit this thread: https://forums.penny-arcade.com/discussion/240191/forum-advertisement-faq-and-reports-thread/

[Total War: Discussion] Total WAAAAAAAAGH WARHAMMER!

14445474950101

Posts

  • FleebFleeb has all of the fleeb juice Registered User regular
    Also Europa Barbarorum II, for Medieval II Total War, just came out.

    Oh hell yes. Only took em 7 years :D

  • PriscaPrisca Registered User regular
    Also Europa Barbarorum II, for Medieval II Total War, just came out.

    Finally. It's better news than the Emperor Edition announcement.

    CA should get around to revamping the whacky UI and give modders the ability to change the audio effects/unit dialogues.

  • BubbyBubby Registered User regular
    I refuse to go back to Rome 2 until they fix the horrible UI and add in some actual anti-aliasing. Assuming neither are going to be in the Emperor Edition.

  • IvarIvar Oslo, NorwayRegistered User regular
    What's wrong with the UI?

  • CampyCampy Registered User regular
    To me it just seems clunky, even after a half dozen interations. The AA is a big thing for me, makes what should be beautiful battles into jaggy hell, really off putting.

  • BubbyBubby Registered User regular
    Ivar wrote: »
    What's wrong with the UI?

    Huge and clunky, a far cry from the minimalist beauty of Shogun 2.

  • KadokenKadoken Giving Ends to my Friends and it Feels Stupendous Registered User regular
    Joseon Korea was united for about a century then dude.
    Synthesis wrote: »
    Kadoken wrote: »
    What this means babies is that you can now fight against or play as Korea in the Korean peninsula or Japan. Later, they will be adding the Chinese Ming Dynasty as another faction.

    So this basically turns Shogun 2 into Shogun 2: Imjin War

    Neat.

    I like the idea of including the Korean peninsula, though I assume that graphic is more a demonstration of province/castle town layouts than to suggest that whole of Korea was unified at the time (I know it was a vassal state of the Ming, but I assume that would still allow for a bunch of competing clans).

    I imagine this would also mean recording a lot of loud Korean shouting to replace the loud Japanese shouting, but I imagine someone's working on that.

    Of course I've always hoped for a Total War: Ming for ages, but as modeled like this--it does introduce us to the same dilemmas we had in Napoleon and Empire--namely, how do you account for a massive faction that is largely off-map. One super huge town intended to represent a chunk of their military capabilities? Or is there a historic precedence for this?

  • IvarIvar Oslo, NorwayRegistered User regular
    Bubby wrote: »
    Ivar wrote: »
    What's wrong with the UI?

    Huge and clunky, a far cry from the minimalist beauty of Shogun 2.

    Oh. So by "fix" you mean "completely redesign". I don't think that's going to happen.

    I haven't really noticed the interface being hard to use or looking weird, but that's just me.

  • OpposingFarceOpposingFarce Registered User regular
    I've really enjoyed the Radious series of mods for both Shogun and Rome. They're lighter, modular mods and that preserve the vanilla gameplay rather than go more realistic, although you can choose modules that make it that way.

  • SynthesisSynthesis Honda Today! Registered User regular
    Kadoken wrote: »
    Joseon Korea was united for about a century then dude.
    Synthesis wrote: »
    Kadoken wrote: »
    What this means babies is that you can now fight against or play as Korea in the Korean peninsula or Japan. Later, they will be adding the Chinese Ming Dynasty as another faction.

    So this basically turns Shogun 2 into Shogun 2: Imjin War

    Neat.

    I like the idea of including the Korean peninsula, though I assume that graphic is more a demonstration of province/castle town layouts than to suggest that whole of Korea was unified at the time (I know it was a vassal state of the Ming, but I assume that would still allow for a bunch of competing clans).

    I imagine this would also mean recording a lot of loud Korean shouting to replace the loud Japanese shouting, but I imagine someone's working on that.

    Of course I've always hoped for a Total War: Ming for ages, but as modeled like this--it does introduce us to the same dilemmas we had in Napoleon and Empire--namely, how do you account for a massive faction that is largely off-map. One super huge town intended to represent a chunk of their military capabilities? Or is there a historic precedence for this?

    So we're not going to have any inter-family rivalry gameplay on the peninsula?

    Because that sounds boring, dude.

  • KadokenKadoken Giving Ends to my Friends and it Feels Stupendous Registered User regular
    We might be getting split up provinces or rebel armies or Jurchens.

    The real draw is that you can start the Imjin war against Japan or slowly conquer Korea as a Japanese clan. Then you have the later Ming coming which might end up in a threeway, bro.

  • PriscaPrisca Registered User regular
    New Total War to be announced at EGX 2014 (September 25th)

    http://www.vg247.com/2014/09/09/new-total-war-game-egx/

    I'm hoping for Medieval III!

  • IvarIvar Oslo, NorwayRegistered User regular
    Prisca wrote: »
    New Total War to be announced at EGX 2014 (September 25th)

    http://www.vg247.com/2014/09/09/new-total-war-game-egx/

    I'm hoping for Medieval III!

    I've played Medieval 2 for a few hundred hours, and I really like the setting, but the interface is a bit clunky. A new game would be nice.

  • Moridin889Moridin889 Registered User regular
    Prisca wrote: »
    New Total War to be announced at EGX 2014 (September 25th)

    http://www.vg247.com/2014/09/09/new-total-war-game-egx/

    I'm hoping for Medieval III!

    I'm hoping for Warhammer

  • KashaarKashaar Low OrbitRegistered User regular
    Moridin889 wrote: »
    Prisca wrote: »
    New Total War to be announced at EGX 2014 (September 25th)

    http://www.vg247.com/2014/09/09/new-total-war-game-egx/

    I'm hoping for Medieval III!

    I'm hoping for Warhammer

    Yup. Me too.

    Indie Dev Blog | Twitter | Steam
    Unreal Engine 4 Developers Community.

    I'm working on a cute little video game! Here's a link for you.
  • NotoriusBENNotoriusBEN Registered User regular
    don't tempt me with a warhammer version of total war
    it gets me a little hot and bothered.

    a4irovn5uqjp.png
    Steam - NotoriusBEN | Uplay - notoriusben | Xbox,Windows Live - ThatBEN
  • VicVic Registered User regular
    So many of the mechanics in Warhammer would work wonderfully in a total war game!

    Skaven armies being screened by large units of slaves, absorbing missile fire and enemy charges until fleeing halfway through the battle, but leaving the rest of the skaven army's morale completely unaffected since they are just slaves.

    Trolls and Giants that are so stupid that they will often ignore orders, standing around slack-jawed while they allies get cut to bits.

    Out-of-control units such as the night goblin fanatics: drugged up maniacs who once released will spin around the battlefield with their huge iron chains, killing friends and foes alike.

    Necromancer generals who reinforce their skeletal armies with the corpses of their newly fallen foes

    Heroic Brettonian knight charges, tanks and war-beasts ripping through whole regiments, spells and artillery fire blasting huge holes in the battlefield, the amount of pure fun possible in a game like this is exhilarating! Realistically, I would expect a Total War: Warhammer game to be limited to a small subset of the available factions and world. The more or less guaranteed includes would be the Empire, Orcs and Goblins and Chaos, and beyond those I suppose Vampire Counts, High Elves and Dwarves would be likely. Anyone got thoughts on this?



  • FleebFleeb has all of the fleeb juice Registered User regular
    Rage of the Dark Gods for M2TW is decent for a while.

    But yeah Warhammer on a modern engine would be completely awesome.

  • OpposingFarceOpposingFarce Registered User regular
    Warhammer was confirmed to be in the works like, what, a year and a half ago? Could be that. Damn I'm so pumped for that.

    Although a medieval title would also be good. I'm just not jazzed about a chinese/korean/another asian setting.

    I would love an Empire 2 with shogun/rome 2 improvements.

  • FreiFrei A French Prometheus Unbound DeadwoodRegistered User regular
    Yes, them working on a (fantasy) Warhammer title was confirmed ages ago.

    It's possible that this will just be another Total War. I think it's unlikely that they'll put the Total War name on the Warhammer name, but you never know, I guess.

    Are you the magic man?
  • OpposingFarceOpposingFarce Registered User regular
    They should consider a WW1 game. They did give that WW1 Empire mod some big modding award hosted by the developers. Maybe it served as a sufficient proof of concept.

    Also the WFB total war game names itself. It's not even an issue!

    I'm actually optimistic this could be the Warhammer announcement, as Games Workshop, the IP owner, needs money right now. Alternatively, development has stalled because Games Workshop needs money right now.

    But just another TW title could also be true, as we are about to see the last real/big update for Rome 2. Surely progress on the next project has been underway since right before Rome 2 launched and a portion of the team works on DLC if they behave like other game companies.

    Also the WFB game will have a metric ton of DLC.

  • KadokenKadoken Giving Ends to my Friends and it Feels Stupendous Registered User regular
    I would love a Warhammer TW or Empire 2 (Victoria: Total War anyone?) I think Warhammer could work on the current engine, but I would really like a new melee based one.

    I've been wanting to play Empire with Fall of the Samueai's improvements for years. Added with S2's modding capability, I think it would be a blast.

  • SynthesisSynthesis Honda Today! Registered User regular
    edited September 2014
    I'm in the group who would like to see something modern, but not too modern, building off the experiences from Napoleon and also the FotS DLC for Shogun II. Aside from World War I, I'd really like to see the Russian Civil War, Reds vs. Whites, and then Reds vs. Poles, Americans, Japanese, Czechs, etc.. Still considerable use of cavalry, and not much use of technology like tanks (which would be awkward to simulate), and large formations of moving infantry with the occasional machine gun. I think that could be very good, if they could capture the large scale of it.

    Additionally, the Entente invasion/intervention forces could be pretty well modeled, since they were naturally operating quite far from home--give them the appropriate penalties and bonuses as separate armed groups. Chasing the Entente occupation out of Vladivostok, or defending Vladivostok from the Revolution, would be fun.

    Synthesis on
  • MassenaMassena Registered User regular
    My money is on Medieval 3 or Warhammer. I don't think their foray into modern went as well as they were hoping (though that may have changed since the last stats I saw). They also have a very conservative history when it comes to new areas.

    Still holding out hope for Three Kingdoms though...

  • KonphujunKonphujun Illinois, USARegistered User regular
    I'd absolutely love for the next TW to be Warhammer. Fantasy, though. We have an overload of 40k games and nearly none for fantasy. I'm tired of space marines. Give me skaven.

    Everything: Konphujun(#1458)
  • SynthesisSynthesis Honda Today! Registered User regular
    edited September 2014
    Massena wrote: »
    My money is on Medieval 3 or Warhammer. I don't think their foray into modern went as well as they were hoping (though that may have changed since the last stats I saw). They also have a very conservative history when it comes to new areas.

    Still holding out hope for Three Kingdoms though...

    Indeed. Give me Total War: Han and Total War: Ming before Warhammer/40K.

    Synthesis on
  • KashaarKashaar Low OrbitRegistered User regular
    Total War: Middle East.

    Too soon?

    Indie Dev Blog | Twitter | Steam
    Unreal Engine 4 Developers Community.

    I'm working on a cute little video game! Here's a link for you.
  • Inquisitor77Inquisitor77 2 x Penny Arcade Fight Club Champion A fixed point in space and timeRegistered User regular
    Honestly, given how terrible Rome II was, and how terrible it continues to be, should any of us really care what their next project is?

    At this point, it seems pretty clear that most (if not all) of the people who were responsible for the good stuff in the older games have long since moved on to other endeavors.

  • KashaarKashaar Low OrbitRegistered User regular
    Honestly, given how terrible Rome II was, and how terrible it continues to be, should any of us really care what their next project is?

    At this point, it seems pretty clear that most (if not all) of the people who were responsible for the good stuff in the older games have long since moved on to other endeavors.

    I loved Rome II, and Shogun II, so yes, I care?

    Indie Dev Blog | Twitter | Steam
    Unreal Engine 4 Developers Community.

    I'm working on a cute little video game! Here's a link for you.
  • IvarIvar Oslo, NorwayRegistered User regular
    Kashaar wrote: »
    Honestly, given how terrible Rome II was, and how terrible it continues to be, should any of us really care what their next project is?

    At this point, it seems pretty clear that most (if not all) of the people who were responsible for the good stuff in the older games have long since moved on to other endeavors.

    I loved Rome II, and Shogun II, so yes, I care?

    Me too. I'm having a blast with Rome 2 now, and I have been since it was released.

    In what way is Rome 2 terrible? And what's this "good stuff" that was in the older games that isn't there in the newer ones?

  • FleebFleeb has all of the fleeb juice Registered User regular
    I've also had a good time with Rome 2. My biggest gripe has to be diplomacy (I want to be able to give cities to my allies dammit!), and that's never been a strong point in TW games.

  • KadokenKadoken Giving Ends to my Friends and it Feels Stupendous Registered User regular
    edited September 2014
    Oh I hate Rome 2. But then again, Shogun 2, Fall of the Samurai and Medieval 2.

    CA has made two strikes: Empire (I like it with Darthmod, but it's still kind of meh without it) and Rome 2. I'll give them this next iteration. If it's a piece of shit, then I'll quit the series.

    Kadoken on
  • IvarIvar Oslo, NorwayRegistered User regular
    Kadoken wrote: »
    Oh I hate Rome 2. But then again, Shogun 2, Fall of the Samurai and Medieval 2.

    CA has made two strikes: Empire (I like it with Darthmod, but it's still kind of meh without it) and Rome 2. I'll give them this next iteration. If it's a piece of shit, then I'll quit the series.

    But why? What is it that makes you dislike it, exactly?

    I'm only asking because I've had a lot of fun with these games over several years, from Medieval 2 to Rome 2, and I don't know what you're talking about.

  • VicVic Registered User regular
    edited September 2014
    This is a discussion we have had over countless games, and I'm afraid it is likely to go the same way here.

    The new games are flawed, as most games are. To many people these flaws combined with changes made to old features they enjoyed are enough to make them hate the new games. It's the same effect seen with almost every game series.

    Edit: This may seem needlessly combative, in which case I apologize. I can absolutely understand why someone would dislike Shogun 2 or Rome 2.

    Vic on
  • IvarIvar Oslo, NorwayRegistered User regular
    Vic wrote: »
    This is a discussion we have had over countless games, and I'm afraid it is likely to go the same way here.

    The new games are flawed, as most games are. To many people these flaws combined with changes made to old features they enjoyed are enough to make them hate the new games. It's the same effect seen with almost every game series.

    Edit: This may seem needlessly combative, in which case I apologize. I can absolutely understand why someone would dislike Shogun 2 or Rome 2.

    I'm not reading much information here.

    "The new games are flawed" - in what way?
    "Changes made" - what changes?
    "I can understand why someone dislikes X" - great! Could you tell me why?

    I'm not trying to criticize your position here, I'm just trying to figure out what it is.

  • Smaug6Smaug6 Registered User regular
    Fleeb wrote: »
    Rage of the Dark Gods for M2TW is decent for a while.

    But yeah Warhammer on a modern engine would be completely awesome.

    What version of Total War does that use? The Post says Empire, but then the top link says Medieval 2. I do love Warhammer Fantasy and its shame it hasn't been done well on the PC yet.

    steam_sig.png
  • KadokenKadoken Giving Ends to my Friends and it Feels Stupendous Registered User regular
    edited September 2014
    Ivar wrote: »
    Kadoken wrote: »
    Oh I hate Rome 2. But then again, Shogun 2, Fall of the Samurai and Medieval 2.

    CA has made two strikes: Empire (I like it with Darthmod, but it's still kind of meh without it) and Rome 2. I'll give them this next iteration. If it's a piece of shit, then I'll quit the series.

    But why? What is it that makes you dislike it, exactly?

    I'm only asking because I've had a lot of fun with these games over several years, from Medieval 2 to Rome 2, and I don't know what you're talking about.

    The graphics are dull and boring compared to Shogun 2's more colorful graphics.

    Rome 2 is poorly optimized.

    I don't like the 1v1 combat animations. In Shogun 2 and somewhat Empire/Nappy, they were fine. Shogun 2 you could go on the excuse that this is like a cinematic Japan, therefore samurai would fight one on one. The shifting around and the ashigaru having katanas because of animation ease looked dumb, but it was forgivable. In Empire, bayonet charges were for scaring or fighting the enemy when one was out of ammo, so the 1v1 animations look okay as I don't think tight formation fighting with muskets were used at this time. Does it look like a bar brawl? Kind of. But I like it. It adds a sense of desperation in two musket troops using melee which they aren't as accustomed to. Rome 2's timeline had armies focus on tight formation combat. I don't expect Barbarian and Easten factions to make tetsudos or phalanxes and stay in formation, but I do expect the Romans and Hellenistic to be able to keep a decently coherent line. Instead, they fight 1v1 battles that look too long and fake. They have general attack animations, but they look awkward and terrible and they never seem to connect.

    The effects for projectiles look meh. Fire arrows look like lasers compared to Shogun 2'a and even the slight white line trailing regular arrows or projectiles look dumb.

    I don't like the over abundance of abilities for the units. I thought it was fine in Shogun 2 when generals were able to get ganbattle, rally, inspire, stand and fight, and maybe warcry. I also liked how some of the more specialist units like monks got one or two abilities that felt right. Rome 2 gives its units too many abilities. They all seem like weird stat boosts than something that could turn the tide of a battle like stand and fight. Some of the abilities feel like they should be automatic, like an ability for pikemen which was something like "Make ready" or something that would help against cavalry or an infantry charge. The infantry should be able to prepare for a charge on their own.

    I also feel like the artillery is over powered.

    Generals don't mean much anymore. In Shogun 2, They lost cool personality traits that were in Medieval 2, but because there were less of them and they could be customized to your liking and they were important for troops be reinforced outside of castles, they felt more useful. In Rome 2, they're just a boring vehicle for ferrying around troops that doesn't mean anything. It doesn't help that the Rome 2 skill tree is not as well presented as Shogun 2's. I don't know what the stats actually mean. What is cunning? Their ties to the political system are also confusing.

    I don't like how on the map, regions are split up between walled capitals and I walled ancillary regions. This leads to weird shit like Syracuse and Jerusalem not having walls, cities famed for sieges. I don't like how the regions can only have 4-6 regions. It's too limiting, and it leads to situations where you might have one region while your allies have the rest of the province. That means that region is only working at like a 25% efficiency. And it's not like you can give that region to your allies or your allies give up the rest of the province. I think the Shogun 2 system worked better, where you could feasibly build every chain in a city except two, as long as you were able to commit enough time and money.

    I don't like how they got rid of city growth in terms of money.

    The cities on the map are too big.

    The culture system is weird compared to the other games.

    The politics don't make sense. The random events are also not as interesting or fun as Shogun 2/FOTS's.

    Major factions die out too often. It was fine in Shogun 2 as they shared a similar pool of units and it was cool to see the Tokugawa get swallowed up by the Imagawa. Or even seeing the Ikko Ikki becoming power against all odds. But the problem is that the factions that eat up the cool major factions in Rome 2 are boring ewith boron rosters. I want to fight against the roster of Rome with its cool ancillaries and legions, not the Grand Republic of Arse with its boring spearmen.

    The coasts in the map are blocky and look weird.

    Sicily looks weird.

    The diplomacy is still meh, and the extra options are cool, but the AI never agrees to them. The AI will refuse trade for no reason. In Shogun 2, if you had no resources it made sense the AI with Iron had didn't want to trade as they were getting nothing out of it or vice versa. If you had a lot of resources, but the clan had none, it seemed like they felt you would be making too much profit off of it and they would be making not much, so they say no to slow down your economy. In Rome 2 they don't have an excuse.

    The UI is clunky and a huge step down from Shogun 2's crisp streamlined UI.

    Insta-navies are dumb. They should at least take one turn to make then another to move. They make navies useless.

    Limited armies and general based armies are dumb. I can't garrison parts of my empire just because the local captain can't man up and deal with five hastati? Fuck that.

    It feels like a mediocre game that is not at all up to par with Shogun 2 or Medieval 2's polish.

    Kadoken on
  • FleebFleeb has all of the fleeb juice Registered User regular
    M2TW. What do you mean by "The Post"? Maybe the name is confusing... the full name of the mod is "Rage of Dark Gods. Battle for the Empire v. 1.5.1"

  • Inquisitor77Inquisitor77 2 x Penny Arcade Fight Club Champion A fixed point in space and timeRegistered User regular
    Yeah I don't want to crap all over the thread/game when people are clearly enjoying it. If you think it's great, then awesome. =)

    But if you're asking why Rome 2 in particular gets a bad rap, it's largely because of the terrible AI and the "streamlining" of the campaign mode. I think most of us are fine with changes - the series has changed dramatically since it first came out, and some of us like some of the games while we maybe don't like others. But by and large the quality has been consistent, especially given the game before this was Shogun 2, which is widely considered to be one of the best, if not the best, iteration of the series (not that it was perfect by any means). But Rome 2 seemed to take twelve steps back, especially in the area of the combat AI. Given one of the cores of the game is the tactical battles, having that part fail pretty catastrophically on a regular basis is just not acceptable and really ruins the experience for many people.

  • TraceTrace GNU Terry Pratchett; GNU Gus; GNU Carrie Fisher; GNU Adam We Registered User regular
    Yeah I don't want to crap all over the thread/game when people are clearly enjoying it. If you think it's great, then awesome. =)

    But if you're asking why Rome 2 in particular gets a bad rap, it's largely because of the terrible AI and the "streamlining" of the campaign mode. I think most of us are fine with changes - the series has changed dramatically since it first came out, and some of us like some of the games while we maybe don't like others. But by and large the quality has been consistent, especially given the game before this was Shogun 2, which is widely considered to be one of the best, if not the best, iteration of the series (not that it was perfect by any means). But Rome 2 seemed to take twelve steps back, especially in the area of the combat AI. Given one of the cores of the game is the tactical battles, having that part fail pretty catastrophically on a regular basis is just not acceptable and really ruins the experience for many people.

    Combat in Rome 2 is fine for me, I occasionally see the AI panic in tactical battles and act like it doesn't know what it's doing but that's usually when I've got him surrounded and am pounding the shit out of his guys.

    All of these latest patches have done wonders for the combat in Rome 2. I've been surprised by the AI more than a few time too.

This discussion has been closed.