GATHER THE WAR-HERDS! THE BEASTMEN COMETH!!!

[Karnil Vark Khaitan]

What is this then? There are many more cities present than in the Grand campaign. Too bad that it'd probably be extremely short and that you can't play as Empire..

Yeah biggest issue with the small campaign I have, it would have been nice to have a small campaign, were 2 players could quickly make a small face of.

[Påsan]

The two Beastmen lords will start in estralia and the badlands, so they wont bother the Empire much until much later. although its a bit of a given that there will be more beastmen stacks roaming around like the savage orks do.

Next up is the wood elves I guess alongside the Bretonnia Free-lC. There's a need for more good factions.


Also do something about Kislev CA!

[Markas]

Well look at it this way, even if you don't buy it you will have a new race to play against on the campaign map. For free. If you don't like the product, show your displeasure in the most effective way and don't buy it.

Cue lots of 'But Beastmen should have been in from the beginning!!' fatuous arguments.

[RGA]

According to CA, 52 regions which could take 10-20 hours to complete. It looks like the mini-campaign would be more story-driven than the Grand Campaign.

[Beregond]

wow, this looks veeeery good!

But why did they chose not to let us play the Empire provinces Hope the modders will be able to unlock them for relatively bug-free experience

[zsimmortal]

Whats wrong with people? Of course its expemsive but whats so different that say Hannibal at the gates? Same romans same carthaginians 2 extra generic factions that nobody cared for and a new map. Just because you can complain about everything nowadays doesnt mean its smart to do so..... ill probably get this one.

Sent from my SM-G900F using Tapatalk

Both Caesar in Gaul and Hannibal at the Gates gave 3 unlocked factions for the GC (and units?) for a lesser price. Both campaigns let you play multiple factions, giving it more replay potential.

But more importantly, compare that mini-campaign and the 2 Attila campaigns, and the difference in content is just abhorrently massive. You're playing a single faction (that you just paid to unlock in the GC) against a bunch of factions with the exact same roster as their own selves (or similar factions) in the GC. There's literally nothing different except the map and possibly some events/quests. What are you going to do after you've completed it? Probably shelf it for the rest of the game's existence.

The faction itself looks mildly interesting but I'm already disappointed enough in Warhammer that I'll wait until it is at a much lower price.

[Beregond]

btw, if we follow this map, the starting positions of both Lords aren't fluff-friendly after all



though you never know where you can find some Beastmen..

[sataricon]

The amount of content here is not that high so i guess a sale is a nice option.
It isn't bad mind you but not essential.

[Aenerion1]

btw, if we follow this map, the starting positions of both Lords aren't fluff-friendly after all

What I said earlier. Depends on objectives.

[RGA]

Both Caesar in Gaul and Hannibal at the Gates gave 3 unlocked factions for the GC (and units?) for a lesser price. Both campaigns let you play multiple factions, giving it more replay potential.

But more importantly, compare that mini-campaign and the 2 Attila campaigns, and the difference in content is just abhorrently massive. You're playing a single faction (that you just paid to unlock in the GC) against a bunch of factions with the exact same roster as their own selves (or similar factions) in the GC. There's literally nothing different except the map and possibly some events/quests. What are you going to do after you've completed it? Probably shelf it for the rest of the game's existence.

The faction itself looks mildly interesting but I'm already disappointed enough in Warhammer that I'll wait until it is at a much lower price.

Speaking from my own experience, only Rome in Ceasar in Gaul and Carthage in Hannibal at the Gates are worth playing. Other factions are rather boring. And after counting how many times I replay the same Roman Gallic campaign or Belisarius expedition over and over again, I'm rather sure that I won't shelf this DLC anytime soon.

[M2TWRocks]

The dlc is expensive. $15+ for a single faction? Whatever. Guess I'm waiting on a 75% off sale again. (If I even buy it then.)

[The Holy Pilgrim]

Except that's not all that you're getting out of it.

If you want to see it like that, be my guest, but it's not $15+ for just a new faction.

It's like saying that all Hannibal at the Gates gave you was Syracuse.

[Påsan]

Both Caesar in Gaul and Hannibal at the Gates gave 3 unlocked factions for the GC (and units?) for a lesser price. Both campaigns let you play multiple factions, giving it more replay potential.

But more importantly, compare that mini-campaign and the 2 Attila campaigns, and the difference in content is just abhorrently massive. You're playing a single faction (that you just paid to unlock in the GC) against a bunch of factions with the exact same roster as their own selves (or similar factions) in the GC. There's literally nothing different except the map and possibly some events/quests. What are you going to do after you've completed it? Probably shelf it for the rest of the game's existence.

The faction itself looks mildly interesting but I'm already disappointed enough in Warhammer that I'll wait until it is at a much lower price.

No new animations, no new gameplay mechanics and no new unit variety.

Thats what Warhammer bring to the TW table. Every faction is unique and require their own set of assets.

[emcdunna]

The beastmen's legs bend the other way, like they have backwards knees. That seriously complicates the animations, guys.

Be happy! We get a new faction! Yay! I mean seriously I feel like the same people who complain about how few faction's there are, are now complaining about the price of the DLC.

Beastmen are a new race to play as OR AGAINST.

If you simply look at what a new race does for replayability, you have to consider how many combinations of battles you can play.

So for example, empire vs empire, empire vs VC, empire vs Greenskins....

Count up how many different faction A vs faction B combos there are. Before beastmen, there are 6 unique faction's, so 6 times 6 is 36 combos.

Add in beastmen, and you now have 7 times 7 combos, or 49 combos. That's a 25% increase in combinations of battles just from adding one faction!

I bought this the second I saw it.

In fact CA probably could have charged me $40 for it and I would have payed that.

I love this game, and if new content improves your gameplay experience tremendously, then it's worth some money.

[Påsan]

You get the race for free as adversaries on the great campaign. Very good incentive for me to skip this actually, I dont care too much about beastmen other than blasting them with artillery.

[Frost, colonel]

[QUOTE=emcdunna;15056286

I bought this the second I saw it.

In fact CA probably could have charged me $40 for it and I would have payed that.

I love this game, and if new content improves your gameplay experience tremendously, then it's worth some money.[/QUOTE]


Whilst I think it's a bit more expensive than I would like, I am with you on this. £12.60 on offer? on Steam, £14 at full price, very expensive compared to the what $15? for the Yanks.

The Beastmen are one of the factions I have been waiting for, and in terms of hrs of play V's cost still a good deal.

As some of us said many months a go, we knew full well this game was in total going to be expensive. And I said at the time if the content was good I didn't mind the cost.

With the wide variety of mods this game is proving to be excellent fun, currently 225 hrs in and was just thinking I could do with some new content.

Long wait perhaps but there are so many factions that I am looking forward too, the High Elves, Lizard-men and the Tomb-Kings been a few.

[drillmaster]

Exactly. The fact that this game is lightning fast at the moment means there needs to be more content so that turns take longer and there are more things to deal with. I can finish a short campaign in a weekend......

Sent from my SM-G900F using Tapatalk

[sataricon]

But ppl the faction isn't even complete.
And it's not a large faction in terms of army roster.

[Frost, colonel]

But ppl the faction isn't even complete.
And it's not a large faction in terms of army roster.

On a CA post they said they would be looking at people's comments.
I read quite a few posts where players were saying that a full roster was more important than mini campaigns, so hopefully they will listen.

[emcdunna]

They will probably listen and give us a full-er roster for wood elves in a few months.

However, I think the beastmen roster is pretty full. I mean they are only missing like 4 units that I can think of... mostly just the jabberslythe and the other big monster.

Now I hope they release those units eventually, but am I gonna throw a fit that they didn't make every single possible unit? No. I'm extremely thankful and excited to rip it this DLC

It will definitely prove interesting to play a coop campaign as beastmen and Warriors of chaos, to say the least, and that alone would provide me enough hours of gameplay to be worth the money