What do you want TW Warhammer to be like?

[zealox]

How would you like Warhammer to be, like being more as "Total war Shogun 2" or "Total War Empire", etc.
I personally wish it would not be as Shogun 2-Atilla Total War. This is mainly for the game design , of how unit's clump up together and the UI of those games , but more like Rome, Medieval 2, and Napoleon. I find that the UI in the newer Total War games are too "messy" or "complicated" for me ( I know that isn't the case for lots of people ) but there seems to be too many buttons or where the interface is.

What are your thoughts?

[HigoChumbo]

Well, I've written miles about this in another threads, so I'm not going to repeat the whole thing again. As a summary (which will most likely confuse more than explain), my ideal Warhammer game would retain large, real time, tactical battles, but would draw some features from other games, like map design (Wargame, Black&White2), physical, raidable, lootable trade routes (Anno 1404), irregular resource placement (Anno 1404, Civilization), strategical resource availability directly tied to unit production (for instance and as an oversimplification, if you had 1000 manpower, 200 iron and 100 horses, you could make 100 mounted knights, 100 armoured soldiers and 800 militiamen, and if u had no iron, you would need to trade, or raid trade routes, conquer a province with the resource, and if you had no way to obtain it, you would be forced to adapt your strategy to fighting with light troops), i'd like the campaign to be understood more as a support platform for the military and trade rather than a citizen welfare simulator, a diplomacy system on par with Europa Universalis 4 and that soldiers managed to feel more like individuals rather than expendable ants.

If I were allowed to dream even further, I'd love to see them try and get rid of the separate turn-based campaign/real time battles system, and make everything happen seamlessly in real time in the same full 3d map instead (as a big rts with TW battles), in which armies would travel slowly, army maneuvering would be key (at the very least in the general lines of Cossacks 2) and hence you should carefully plan your campaigns in advance (as if you were launching dangerous, unpredictable expeditions into the unknown rather than just rightclicking on the next closest city you want to siege as in TW). Leaving the security of a city or your realm should feel really scary and make you thrilled (think for instance in the orc army leaving Minas Morgul in The Lord of the Rings).


I guess you could understand it as an upscaled, very-slow paced, tactical RTS game. Think of it as Anno 1404 in a much larger map with many more cities, with free camera rather than an isometric view (like Black&White 2 or Wargame), with less/no city-building and Total War like armies (again, an oversimplification to make the point). If they were to keep the turn-based system, I'd like to see battles fought differently, as if the battle represented a region rather than a plaing battlefield, so the battle would take place in real time in several stages in the same map, with different areas and objetives. I guess pretty much what Cossack 2 was, but Total War style and in a larger area..

[♘Top Hat Zebra]

While that sounds like a fun game, I wouldn't even consider it a Total War game.


I think it likely that Total War War War War War Hammer War Hammer Hammer War will be about as much like Rome 2, as Rome 2 was like Shogun 2.

[Himster]

I want it to be like Call of Warhammer, but with more lore accurate animations and AI that isn't too obviously scripted.

[Vardeus]

I want it to be released tomorrow. That's what i want the game to be like.

What i really want is a well synchronized atmosphere, in the fashion of the dawn of war games. That series has perfect synergy between gameplay, music and voice-acting...almost like a miracle. CA has been getting it horribly wrong since shogun 2's masterwork. I was extatic when i heard Relic had been bought by SEGA, Total War games with a bit of what made DoW a great franchise would be ERJGKJDGmazing.

That and knightly orders. Lots of them. WAR made it look like the main killers of the empire were the damned wizards. WRONG!

[zealox]

I guess you could understand it as an upscaled, very-slow paced, tactical RTS game. Think of it as Anno 1404 in a much larger map with many more cities, with free camera rather than an isometric view (like Black&White 2 or Wargame), with less/no city-building and Total War like armies (again, an oversimplification to make the point).

I think the things you would like would be good for a new game to look at it in a general view, instead of having a Total War style of game design. Though I don't believe the Anno aspect would work in the Warhammer universe sadly. Nice thoughts!

I want it to be like Call of Warhammer, but with more lore accurate animations and AI that isn't too obviously scripted.

Yeah, think if it was a medieval 2 modification ( CoW ) and just improved upon would be great! Though I yet have to try CoW.

[von stoker]

Chances are it will most resemble Shogun 2. The team that worked on Shogun 2 would have moved onto Warhammer as another team would have been already working on Rome 2. Funny, because when I was playing Shogun 2, I thought the whole style, design and feel of the game would suit a fantasy setting.

[HigoChumbo]

While that sounds like a fun game, I wouldn't even consider it a Total War game.

Well, I never pretended it to be a Total War game (in fact, I might even hate some of those changes in my normal, historical Total War game). I was talking about a new IP which drew inspiration from TW, but didn't just copy it.

I think the things you would like would be good for a new game to look at it in a general view, instead of having a Total War style of game design.

Well, exactly. Same as above I love Total War, but the formula has got really, really stagnant and uninspired in the few past years, so I think that CA could actually benefit from making a new IP inspired on previous work. I think Warhammer would have been the perfect excuse to try that, and that's why no matter how good the game is, if it ends up just being a modified version of Attila, I will not be able to help it but think of it as a missed opportunity.

Though I don't believe the Anno aspect would work in the Warhammer universe sadly.

The thing about including Anno's physical trading routes and irregular resource placement is not really because I want a trading simulator a la Patrician, but because something as simple as adding those routes immediatly makes military action A LOT more meaningful and interesting, it gives you a motivation to attack a neighbour other than "my sole purpose in this life is to paint your provinces in my faction's colour". For instance, you might desperately need iron to build armor, or horses for cavalry or even some exotic spice to keep your higher classes happy and you might have not been able to create a settlement in a zone which had access to those resources, so you would be forced to trade for them with other players. If those players refused to trade or you felt like the deal was by no means worth it to you, you might end up in a position in which you would be forced to attack someone whom you didn't really want to attack, be it as a "pirate" to raid their trade routes and steal the "loot" in from the ships you attack, or directly invading and conquering a region which has those resources.

That creates really, really interesting combat scenarios: for instance, you raid a trade route, you destroy or capture the enemy's trade ships with their precious cargo (which might range from resources to some kind of legendary weapon or even an important character), but that cargo is not instantly and magically added to your resource pool... no, they are physical items inside the cargo bay of your ships (aka, an inventory), so you still have to bring those items to one of your cities to store them, and the enemy might try to counter attack before that happens and get back what is rightfully theirs, so you would have to escort the ships/cargo in what could become a really tense "mission" (and that's not an artificial, prefixed "quest" the game gives you, it's narrative drawn directly from the organic sandbox gameplay). Even if you managed to bring back the items safely to your warehouses, they would still not be safe, because they would still be physical items stored there (you transfer them from the "ships' inventory" to the "warehouse's inventory") and, depending on how important they are, the enemy might mount a large scale offensive to get them back, so you would be in turn forced to defend strategical cities that you might have just ignored in TW (there is little consequence to losing a city there). So if you have the only mine of iron in the entire map, you might need to pour a lot of resources into defending it, same if you have managed to capture an important character or item.




For a Warhammer game it would be a little bit more complicated, since for instance I don't imagine the orcs "raiding merchant ships to get spices to maintain their nobles happy" or even establishing trade routes themselves at all, but it could be adapted in some other way (for instance, while a human player might raid a horse shipment to have access to cavalry, an orc player might just use the horses as food). But in any case, I've re-read your post and I agree, I got a bit carried over and mixed what I'd want for TW in general and what I'd want for Warhammer, and I although I think trading would add tons of fun in the game I'm envisioning, even if it was based on Warhammer, I have to agree that for Total War:Warhammer specifically, trading would not really be in my priority list.

[zealox]

Well, I never pretended it to be a Total War game (in fact, I might even hate some of those changes in my normal, historical Total War game). I was talking about a new IP which drew inspiration from TW, but didn't just copy it.




Well, exactly. Same as above I love Total War, but the formula has got really, really stagnant and uninspired in the few past years, so I think that CA could actually benefit from making a new IP inspired on previous work. I think Warhammer would have been the perfect excuse to try that, and that's why no matter how good the game is, if it ends up just being a modified version of Attila, I will not be able to help it but think of it as a missed opportunity.



The thing about including Anno's physical trading routes and irregular resource placement is not really because I want a trading simulator a la Patrician, but because something as simple as adding those routes immediatly makes military action A LOT more meaningful and interesting, it gives you a motivation to attack a neighbour other than "my sole purpose in this life is to paint your provinces in my faction's colour". For instance, you might desperately need iron to build armor, or horses for cavalry or even some exotic spice to keep your higher classes happy and you might have not been able to create a settlement in a zone which had access to those resources, so you would be forced to trade for them with other players. If those players refused to trade or you felt like the deal was by no means worth it to you, you might end up in a position in which you would be forced to attack someone whom you didn't really want to attack, be it as a "pirate" to raid their trade routes and steal the "loot" in from the ships you attack, or directly invading and conquering a region which has those resources.

That creates really, really interesting combat scenarios: for instance, you raid a trade route, you destroy or capture the enemy's trade ships with their precious cargo (which might range from resources to some kind of legendary weapon or even an important character), but that cargo is not instantly and magically added to your resource pool... no, they are physical items inside the cargo bay of your ships (aka, an inventory), so you still have to bring those items to one of your cities to store them, and the enemy might try to counter attack before that happens and get back what is rightfully theirs, so you would have to escort the ships/cargo in what could become a really tense "mission" (and that's not an artificial, prefixed "quest" the game gives you, it's narrative drawn directly from the organic sandbox gameplay). Even if you managed to bring back the items safely to your warehouses, they would still not be safe, because they would still be physical items stored there (you transfer them from the "ships' inventory" to the "warehouse's inventory") and, depending on how important they are, the enemy might mount a large scale offensive to get them back, so you would be in turn forced to defend strategical cities that you might have just ignored in TW (there is little consequence to losing a city there). So if you have the only mine of iron in the entire map, you might need to pour a lot of resources into defending it, same if you have managed to capture an important character or item.




For a Warhammer game it would be a little bit more complicated, since for instance I don't imagine the orcs "raiding merchant ships to get spices to maintain their nobles happy" or even establishing trade routes themselves at all, but it could be adapted in some other way (for instance, while a human player might raid a horse shipment to have access to cavalry, an orc player might just use the horses as food). But in any case, I've re-read your post and I agree, I got a bit carried over and mixed what I'd want for TW in general and what I'd want for Warhammer, and I although I think trading would add tons of fun in the game I'm envisioning, even if it was based on Warhammer, I have to agree that for Total War:Warhammer specifically, trading would not really be in my priority list.

Yeah, a bit more of a better trading aspect would be nice. Though in Warhammer case maybe the trading might just not work, I am not a Warhammer fan but I don't think greenskins are the trade guys, so maybe it wouldn't work? And that response you gave me about Anno seems good too, like a civilization or any other 4x games where you need a certain resource, the play has to somehow gain it either through trade or conquest,etc . Though maybe in Total Wars case it might be uneccesary because the name is "Total War" and you would be conquering lots of regions anyways, unless the map would be bigger.

[HigoChumbo]

Though maybe in Total Wars case it might be uneccesary because the name is "Total War" and you would be conquering lots of regions anyways, unless the map would be bigger.

Well, we are speaking of a franchise in which not building sewers, theatres or temples has a much bigger impact than conquering or losing a city, and since I'd rather have the game to be more military focused (more total war), I'd rather have a management mechanic which enhances combat and makes it more meaningful (trade) rather than a management mechanic which is mostly a growth limitation and in many cases just a mere annoyance (like the happines/rebellion system) which is much more connected to pure empire management than to actual military strategy.

[zealox]

Well, we are speaking of a franchise in which not building sewers, theatres or temples has a much bigger impact than conquering or losing a city, and since I'd rather have the game to be more military focused (more total war), I'd rather have a management mechanic which enhances combat and makes it more meaningful (trade) rather than a management mechanic which is mostly a growth limitation and in many cases just a mere annoyance (like the happines/rebellion system) which is much more connected to pure empire management than to actual military strategy.

Yeah I see your point, though I personally I enjoy the empire management that doesn't effect much in your army ( not always ).

[Påsan]

Probably the best game for me would be if they took the med 2 engine, updated it with modern animations and graphics and got rid of the hardcoded elements. Then just made something similar to Call of Warhammer with less scripts and more free flowing AI.

All in all though CoW is a pretty good iteration of the warhammer world despite the general lack of magic, heroes and flying creatures.

[HigoChumbo]

I don't think they can make a good game up to today's standards with such an old engine. In my opinion what they should do is gather all the expertise they got from working on Total War all these years and design the game from scratch, making a new engine adapted to their current needs (and with sights in the future).


Making a great engine can be profitable as hell, I don't know why they fear wasting resources on that so much. If not, look at stuff like Source or Frostbite. If you make the effort to create a great, malleable engine, you can keep making good quality (and very different) games for years. TW3 is much more a limitation to CA's work than it is a tool to help them fulfil their ambitions.

[Col. Tartleton]

They should go back to TW1.

MEDIEVAL TOTAL WAR WAS ONE OF THE BEST TOTAL WARS OF ALL TIME!

[zealox]

Yeah, seems like it would be best to create a game similar to medieval 2 with a new engine...!

[HigoChumbo]

Well, it was, 10 years ago. Now it is not. Yes, the battles had a good sense of weight but that's about it. Going back to an older engine doesn't really seem like a good idea to me, if anything, they should create a new one and try to replicate with it that feeling of mass medieval had.

[Påsan]

Med 1 was an excellent game at release. And there was more to Med 2 then just the feel of mass. People are still playing it because it was a damn solid game all around.

[Markas]

Med 1 was an excellent game at release. And there was more to Med 2 then just the feel of mass. People are still playing it because it was a damn solid game all around.

It was about as solid as a jelly about to go over the top in 1916. People are still playing it because it was fun, which is what every game needs to be above all else.

[paradamed]

Put the best elements from the TW franchise and you have a winner. I want good collision, family trees like in RTW, want to develope my general like in S2, want to have the building system and upgradeable units like in M2TW, want to have neat 1v1 animations and beautiful landscapes like in Attila. CA do not need to reach outside of the franchise to build a fantastic game. Everything is already there. They just need to keep the focus and not create a new fiasco.

[Garensterz]

Put the best elements from the TW franchise and you have a winner. I want good collision, family trees like in RTW, want to develope my general like in S2, want to have the building system and upgradeable units like in M2TW, want to have neat 1v1 animations and beautiful landscapes like in Attila. CA do not need to reach outside of the franchise to build a fantastic game. Everything is already there. They just need to keep the focus and not create a new fiasco.

This one really sums up a "Dream Come True:Total War"