>completely removes lots of diplomatic and logistical features included in all previous games
>maps so tiny that tactics are mostly useless
>game is all about frontal engagements and are carried exclusively by unit stats
What a load of crap
 CRIME Shirt $21.68 |
 Ape Out Shirt $21.68 |
CRIME Shirt $21.68 |
>optimal way to play is to have a 100% ranged units and then destroy the AI as it mans their walls
I hated this so much. Ranged units should be basically useless when attacking. Make units artificially invulnerable to projectiles when on walls if you have to.
they could just fix missile arcs so bows don't shoot over walls. Or give missile block and resist to walled units to represent the embattlements and merlons that should be there but the devs can't program.
>represent the embattlements and merlons that should be there but the devs can't program
But those are there anon, you can physically see the walls blocking projectiles which is why handguns suck shit during sieges.
Just get CTT on Steam and your problems are fixed (ranged nerfs, melee buffs). It's a neat overhaul without the garbage bloat that SFO brings.
that isn'f out for Warhammer III yet
OP posted WH2
Invulnerability no, piss off
You rain arrows on dudes standing on a wall, there will hits
Certainly a major resistance to missiles though
Personally my issue with the balance of sieges is everyone getting free ladders and any unit being able to tear down gates with melee attacks within a minute or two
Ladders should be something you have to craft and give to units of your choice like the other siege equipment, and most units shouldn't be able to damage gates at all
I enjoy the ranged meta because it means I actually get to use complex multi layered battle formations in order for direct fire and arch fire ranged troops to work together and not block each others shots and so everyone doesn't get engaged at once when they reach my lines. In total war games with melee metas when ranged troops suck then it's pretty much just your troops stretched in a straight line clashing with the enemies straight line, or at best 2 lines
my only issue with ranged units is that wood elves need to go frick themselves
Hurr click unit on other unit tactix
I felt like drawing it out to explain better, so here's my dwarf formation and army composition. if the enemy gets past my heros then they get stuck on the iron drakes and don't interrupt the thunderers shooting. if they were all in one line, then the enemies would tie up multiple ranged units at once from shooting once they met, but this way they just stop on the iron drakes and the thunderers can shoot diagonally into their sides and never get engaged. Also the thunderers get clear shots all battle and the irondrakes never block them. quarrellers and artillery (usually organ guns) fire over everyones heads the whole battle and never get into combat, and melee troops are just for the flankers. Really fun way to play rather than just a straight line of melee troops or a doomstack of all the same ranges unit.
it's an amazing game, frick off with your homosexualry
>completely removes lots of diplomatic and logistical features included in all previous games
this is also Paradox's strategy to give their games "identity" so they can sell more to different sub fanbases. You can forget about innovation in these genres
what the frick are you and OP talking about? what features? the whole having to move armies to a settlement to retrain after every fricking battle?
>can't arrange unions
>can't exchange territories
>can't trade technologies
>can't ask for vassallage
>can't extort
>can't steal technology
>can't cause rebellions
>can't have armies without a lord
>can't research multiple technologies at once
>doesn't have a time limit for the campaign
The one i hate the most
>doesn't have naval battles
And so on
the first 3 wont work, cuz there is different races and different techs for each, you can "steal tech" tho
as for unions, you can form a confederation with someone of the same race
>can't extort or ask for vassllage
you can, even more so in 3
>can't steal technology
you can
>can't cause rebellions
you can
>can't have armies without a lord
yeah and thank god for that, that shit was garbage
>can't research multiple techs at once
yeah?
>doesnt have a time limit for the campaign
???
it does
>doesn't have naval battles
thank god for that, naval battles were always ass in total war and clunky except for shogun
You can't extort for money or territories. You can't cause rebellions unless you're raiding, which causes a huge diplomatic drop that leads to a war. No agent can directly cause a rebellion based on religion or hatred towards invaders. And you can't steal technologies, you can only slightly speed up your own research because each faction has different technologies. There's no time limit, you don't have 50-100 years to complete an objective, campaigns last for as long as you want and lords never age or die. And frick you, naval battles are awesome and you're a midwit for thinking otherwise
>You can't cause rebellions unless you're raiding
you can, it's an agent skill and they stack (multiple agents can reduce public order and cause rebellions, cause corruption/remove it etc to frick with people)
having an agent that just shits on people doesn't even reduce opinion unless they fail
>No agent can directly cause a rebellion based on religion or hatred towards invaders
again, see the corruption spreading mechanic that agents hvae
>And you can't steal technologies, you can only slightly speed up your own research because each faction has different technologies
yeah that's what the steal technology action does, if it were up to me i'd remove all tech to be honest it's a stupid mechanic that shouldve never been a thing
>There's no time limit, you don't have 50-100 years to complete an objective
in the game's campaign, aka the vortex you do
it's what the game is built around, mortal empires is just an extra edition for people who owned the older game
>And frick you, naval battles are awesome and you're a midwit for thinking otherwise
i think naval battles can be good, i just don't trust CA with them
to add about naval battles, i think they can be amazing but i am traumatized by rome 2's naval battles and how fricking often you have to fight those things
Youre not slick, israelite
what
Can you even have naval battles in Warhammer, because I can't see factions like wood elves, beastmen, skaven or dwarfs having navies.
no, when 2 armies engage at sea they find a piece of land nearby and have a field battle there
dwarves and skaven have navies in the lore
you dont understand, if my shit light cavalry charge doesnt instantly route the enemy then there is no tactics involved!
ogres really suffer from the same issues as chaos when they first got released
god they need a rework, their faction mechanic sucks too
>you dont understand, if my shit light cavalry charge doesnt instantly route the enemy then there is no tactics involved!
its funny because you can still do that if you just cast doom and darkness or aspect of the dread knight first
yeah, they argue that cuz of monsters heroes and magic that means the game has no tactics involved but i fricking beg to differ, those things add so many new layers to the total war formula it's fricking amazing
it's what i always wanted as a child, heroes of might and magic 3 but real time combat
Then don't let the factions who aren't supposed to have navies build navies
Frick forbid Wood Elves are terrifically disadvantaged if they leave their forests
>can't exchange territories
You can
>can't ask for vassallage
You can
>can't extort
You can
>can't steal technology
You can
>can't cause rebellions
You can
>naval battles
The worst, jankiest shit ever made in Total War, something everyone unanimously skipped.
GET THE FRICK OUTTA HERE NO GEAMS homosexual
Basedhammer fans will always buy any slop with the GW tag plastered on it so quality matters very little.
I just played shogun 2 and the game is so hard and fast pased wtf? you actually have to make split-second decisions and one mistake can cost you the whole battle on legendary.
>noooooo where is my free upkeep chaff army? My doomstackerino? My heckin magic spam? The woffin' 100% ward save on my legendary lord?
c**ts like him are the reason CA continues with this garbage. Autistic tryhards obsessed with stats that don't actually enjoy playing but make buck by cheesing the game for the inbred masses to watch
you act like the old games weren't just as cheesy
They aren't but go on.
i used to cheese the shit out of old total war games when i was younger
winning battles in rome 1 with just the general unit and nothing else, lancer spamming as macedon (which you needed to edit the files to allow to be playable)
you have no clue
Bro, you ok? WH3 is A LOT easier than WH2 and some of the new factions are incredibly OP. You can get a those effects a lot easier.
not him but i found wh3 more challenging dealing with the new factions, which is fun
demons can go frick themselves, then again i always play the wh2 factions against the 3 ones
No offense but you're either a newbie or didn't play WH2 that much. It's WAY more difficult even if the more OP factions like Khorne are WH3-only.
Dwarf navvy is really fkn good even if they're not a traditional sea-faring nation. Iirc their navy is one of the reasons why the dwarfs won the War of the Beard.
i played wh2, even beat archaon on legendary
wh2 is way way way easier imo
It's really not. Boot up an Imrik or a Thorgrim campaign in WH2, then go to WH3. Then come back and describe your experience.
Most factions (with some exceptions like the Empire) will have a much harder time in WH2 because:
>WH3 AI is extremely moronic, even by CA standards - both in battles and the campaign map
>Sieges are braindead easy because the AI can't handle the new WH3 system
>Battles are easier as well cause the AI keeps blobbing up, reshuffling or sometimes even refuses to fight
>Public Order doesn't even matter, you don't need to worry about it in 90% of cases
>I think growth was buffed as well
There's more of this shit but it's been a while since I played WH2 to give you a more complete rundown.
i never played imrik, cuz i hate the way elves play (i hate hybrid infantry so much) but i have played a very hard thorgrim campain in wh2 and it was a fricking blast
it was challenging yeah but i wouldnt say this makes it harder than warhammer 3
the AI was fixed in wh3, tho i am not sure if the game will ever be finished after the hyenas shit
Imrik is fairly unique (and an amazing FLC), I really recommend giving him a try.
>the AI was fixed in wh3
No, it really wasn't. It's actually more moronic and broken now than in WH2. The only major AI problem of WH2 is it derping out during ambush battles - a bug CA introduced very late into the development.
doesn't he just play like a high elf Rakarth
Sort of, but his mechanics are more fleshed out.
Imrik seiges in WH2 are braindead because you start with a dragon
try kislev in 3 on high difficulty
Already did (I said most factions in my post) and Kislev wasn't even playable in WH2.
I honestly don't understand this guy, all he does is to cheese the living shit out of the games, it's just tedious as hell to play. Every battle takes forever and the campaign is just grinding the same battle over and over again.
You will never understand his genius.
What a tactical pioneer.
An absolute maverick of the art of war.
It's honestly impressive that he still has a channel. Every video of a "disaster battle" is him tucking the entire army away in a corner, taking some flying ward save hero/lord to exhaust all ammo, and then come in with a flying caster and nuke the battle with magic. Every single time. For 45 minutes. Who the frick watches this? Hell, who watches it routinely?
i dont know, but he manages to be in every SINGLE game community i play
i almost screamed when someone linked a video fo his on anno 1800 in /vst/
The only good TW eceleb is lionheartx10 and maybe MonstersAbound
>rent free
literally every single game genre was casualized to sell millions.
>fighting games
>rts disappearing
>league
>FPS
>open world "RPG"
eceleb gaywatchers don't even make up for 1% of total sales.
>cap framerate to 30fps in my graphics driver, not in game settings
>final PC stops overheating like crazy and sounding like a jet engine on the world map
apparently this game is coded like shit and the campaign map draws as much power as it possibly can from your GPU. highly recommend doing this
>game is all about frontal engagements and are carried exclusively by unit stats
nah in wh2 you can kill everything with ranged units or burning head
this, it shows the OP never played the damn game
Also the "carried exclusively by unit stats" also shows how moronic it is. Since sure, you can play EZ mode and just blast shit with ranged firepower, but you can just as well just outplay the enemy with flanking, or dragging the enemy trough mud, creating chokepoints and just dropping spells on them.
I mean frick it with loads of factions you just use trash units untill you can afford the highest tier unit because the AI is so easy to outplay.
>Play on normal campaign difficulty
>Play on hard battle difficulty
There. Now I can play a full cav army, or whatever thematic army I want without having to cheese because the AI has cheated bloated stats so much that a goblin unit can rout a dwarfen warrior unit, or the AI can respawn a full stack elite army 5 turns after destroying the same army.
>b-but muh legendary difficulty
I dont care. I'm having legendary fun with Normal/Hard difficulty. Enjoy your soulless 20 archer spam, I'm having dino dash for breakfast.
legendary is horseshit, but for me i go the opposite of you
hard campaign and normal battle
i just wish the AI leveled up its generals correctly to stand a chance
It depends on what I play. Empire and dwarfs I go normal campaign because their unique systems are more of a handicap than anything, so normal I'm already being fricked enough without playing whack a mole with hostile armies.
Lizardmen, High Elves and Orcs I go hard campaign.
I'd love to play Ogres, but goddamn do they suck. Greasus is an even worse Tyrant, its insane.
Don't you have this backwards? Battle difficulty is what gives the ai cheat stats and allows a goblin unit to beat a dwarf unit. I always play very hard campaign normal battle for that reason. Hard battle difficulty is the unfun stat manipulation that throws off the whole balance
Very hard campaign gives the AI massive gold boost and lower upkeep. Its basically whack a mole the game. While you can barely afford 2 full stacks the AI has elite 5 full stacks and their legendary lord respawns with a full stack 5 turns after you defeat him. So sometimes the AI lord you just defeated ilcomes bavk stronger than the army you beat him with the 1st time, just because he makes a new stack after than your current army heals itself.
>2023
>AI still can't dismiss units and replace them with stronger ones
I'm aware but battle difficulty affects unit stats which I find much less fun and the post I was responsing to seemed to have them moxed up because it mentioned goblins beating swarf warriors but was in favor of increasing battle difficulty
Very hard campaign with hard battles is the sweet spot. Below and you are basically fighting disadvantaged AI that is also braindead
>completely removes lots of diplomatic and logistical features included in all previous games
Like what?
>maps so tiny that tactics are mostly useless
Get good
>game is all about frontal engagements and are carried exclusively by unit stats
Like all games in the series
if elitchtv can make infantry work on legendary difficulty then so can you
I wish Ogres were good bros; they suck dick hard
does anyone else find modern tw games to be a complete visual mess? i seriously can't tell whats happening most of the time and spend way more time on busywork actually watching the fights
sometimes if you press k to hide the ui you literally can't even tell a battle is happening just by looking at the field, nevermind which units are yours or their unit role or w/e
but bro it was suppoed to be like the old times when genurals coulnd't see shit and had to guess their sturategies.
>have to post Warhammer 2 because Warhammer 3 actually has the most advanced diplomatic system in any TW game to date
No that'd be 3 kingdoms which they should've taken a bit more of for warhammer 3
Though to be frank they should've made a whole new fricking engine for warhammer 3 to set up the next generation of total war using 3 as the money printer to fuel it but CA is fricking stupid and spent 5 years and a 100 million bucks on hyenas.
>Warhammer 3
PFFFFFFFFFF, 3K came out in 2019 and has far better and more impactful diplomacy, to the point where you can win a campaign without fighting a single battle in Eight Princes
you, the computer, power rank 2, when i, power rank 7, offer you a t1 settlement with a barracks in return for your vassalage
>Warhammer 3 actually has the most advanced diplomatic system in any TW game to date
I doubt anyone, even the biggest WH3 shill, believes this
he's right tho, obviously you are probably a third worlder who is assmad they can't run the new game so why does it matter
Atilla, a game from 2015, is still the best looking Total War game
hah
hahahahaha
hahaaaaa
>he admits that he is a third worlder and that is why he hates the game
my sides
>he thinks his low effort ad hominem deserves a response
neither did your shitpost about atilla but you still got a response didn't you now you fricker
No, i didn't, because I wasn't a part of your autistic delusion.
3chinkdoms has objectively the most diplomacy of any total war
>he's still going
alright now that's a lot of (you)s
attila and rome 2 had some of the best siege maps of any total war game, they looked amazing and being able to burn down settlements in attila was great.
alot of the newer games, the siege maps looked like shit
>Literally btfos both Paradox and CA in terms of strategy game innovation and historical accuracy.
Take the Koei pill everyone.
And despite all of that, it's the best Total War game in existence. Dilate and cope.
>completely removes lots of diplomatic and logistical features included in all previous games
Like what, because the only TW game with good diplomacy pre-WH3 was Three Kingdoms.
Reminder that Warhammer III could have been the best 4x RTS game ever if CA wasn't completely moronic and actually built on their previous games instead of reinventing the wheel every time.
If the TW:WH games had
>Sieges as good as Napoleon/Empire/Shogun 2
>A passable diplomacy system
>Larger battlemaps in general
>No major bugs
It would have been 10/10. Just those 4 things are all that's required.
>larger battlemaps
i dont get this, i already spend so much time marching to the enemy
The maps should be larger but the spawn zones should remain the same distance from each other
>Why
To make corner camping impossible. To make flanking viable. And most importantly, to bring back the simulation feel. A "map border" is a very gamey element that should only be there out of necessity.
Doubling or even tripling the size of the maps won't change that there will be an impassable wall to hug
It will since if both sides still spawn in the center the same distance away from each other as before there is no way any army could ever realistically reach the edge of the map.
Why not?
my thoughts too, it will make corner camping easier cuz the enemy will die of exhaustion before reaching you
that makes sense, i personally dont camp the corner and havent seen the AI do it so it never bothered me