Results 1 to 17 of 17

Thread: Drop the multiple health point system for Warhammer

  1. #1

    Default Drop the multiple health point system for Warhammer

    I really see no good reason for switching from the 1HP system to multiple HP system in Rome 2 and Attila. I don't see any advantages to it at all. As far as I can tell all it did was mess up ranged combat/projectile damage. The 1HP system was something unique about Total War and it made the combat more realistic and logical compared to all the Command & Conquer and Starcraft clones. I really hope they go back to the 1HP system for Warhammer.

  2. #2
    Steph's Avatar Maréchal de France
    Patrician Artifex

    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Pont de l'Arn, France
    Posts
    8,395

    Default Re: Drop the multiple health point system for Warhammer

    Do you expect big creature to have only 1 HP as well?

  3. #3
    Påsan's Avatar Hva i helvete?
    Citizen

    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    the north way
    Posts
    13,886

    Default Re: Drop the multiple health point system for Warhammer

    In Med 2 an elephant has 6 hp i think. So obviously not.

    I agree with the OP by the way. The medieval2/rome 1 system was superior.

  4. #4

    Default Re: Drop the multiple health point system for Warhammer

    There had always been a health point system in TW, it's just that rank and file troop had 1hp previously.

  5. #5
    Modestus's Avatar Protector Domesticus
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    On a ship in the middle of the Mediterranean.
    Posts
    4,037

    Default Re: Drop the multiple health point system for Warhammer

    I presume you mean the life bar or the forcefield system? Yes its idiotic but Warhammer is probably the very reason why it was in RTW2 and Attila in the first place.

  6. #6
    Ciciro's Avatar Protector Domesticus
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    The Capital
    Posts
    4,038

    Default Re: Drop the multiple health point system for Warhammer

    Quote Originally Posted by Modestus View Post
    I presume you mean the life bar or the forcefield system? Yes its idiotic but Warhammer is probably the very reason why it was in RTW2 and Attila in the first place.
    Not likely. It was probably put in by the geniuses who also made it so all units have special abilities because they thought it was a good idea.

  7. #7
    Himster's Avatar Praeses
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Dublin, The Peoples Republic of Ireland
    Posts
    9,711

    Default Re: Drop the multiple health point system for Warhammer

    Even elite man sized troops should have only one hit-point.
    Larger troop types should have multiple hit points.
    The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are so certain of themselves, but wiser people are full of doubts.
    -Betrand Russell

  8. #8

    Default Re: Drop the multiple health point system for Warhammer

    Having more health works fine for some units, even historical ones. In Warhammer its going to be pretty much necessary if they want to stick with the fluff though. Things like Trolls and Minotaurs and Daemons can canonically take a cannon ball or two to the face before they get brought down, not to mention Greater Daemons and Dragons which are another level above that entirely. Further, Hero units are huge in Warhammer so they'll need to be a bit more durable than the average bear, and there are also plenty of units with lore reasons to have more hitpoints than average like Orcs, Slayers, etc. The hitpoint system has literally been in since at least Rome, and its a fine abstraction of individual unit toughness, resistance to pain, and will to live. Not that Imperial Spearmen should be able to tank a bullet to the face but Khornate Beserkers, yea maybe a bit tougher.

  9. #9
    Col. Tartleton's Avatar Comes Limitis
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    Cape Ann
    Posts
    13,054

    Default Re: Drop the multiple health point system for Warhammer

    Warhammer wounds are usually close to the hit points in Medieval 2. 1 wound for infantry. 2 wounds for heroes. 3 wounds for lords. 3 wounds for monstrous infantry. 6 wounds for monsters. Usually.
    The Earth is inhabited by billions of idiots.
    The search for intelligent life continues...

  10. #10

    Default Re: Drop the multiple health point system for Warhammer

    Multiple health points have been in total war since rome 1?

  11. #11

    Default Re: Drop the multiple health point system for Warhammer

    Quote Originally Posted by Roboute Guilliman View Post
    Multiple health points have been in total war since rome 1?
    Yes.

  12. #12
    Påsan's Avatar Hva i helvete?
    Citizen

    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    the north way
    Posts
    13,886

    Default Re: Drop the multiple health point system for Warhammer

    Quote Originally Posted by Modestus View Post
    I presume you mean the life bar or the forcefield system? Yes its idiotic but Warhammer is probably the very reason why it was in RTW2 and Attila in the first place.

    What do health bars have to do with warhammer? Do you know anything about the game at all?

  13. #13
    Col. Tartleton's Avatar Comes Limitis
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    Cape Ann
    Posts
    13,054

    Default Re: Drop the multiple health point system for Warhammer

    Quote Originally Posted by Roboute Guilliman View Post
    Multiple health points have been in total war since rome 1?
    Yeah bodyguard cavalry were multiple HP. As were Elephants etc.
    The Earth is inhabited by billions of idiots.
    The search for intelligent life continues...

  14. #14
    Yomamashouse's Avatar Semisalis
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Ontario, Canada
    Posts
    401

    Default Re: Drop the multiple health point system for Warhammer

    Why? Multiple hitpoints were only for bodyguards and elephants in the old Total War games. Bodyguards could do without it, but how would you implement elephants without multiple HP? Now imagine a world where there are trolls, 8-foot tall orc warbosses, demons, lizardmen riding dinosaurs... etc. I agree that a normal sized humanoid should have 1 hitpoint as per the classical TW games - but big monsters and non-human humanoids like Orcs seem to necessitate multiple HP.

  15. #15

    Default Re: Drop the multiple health point system for Warhammer

    Some folks are getting a bit confused. The OP is refering to the current gen system with greatly increased granularity on the stats, as oposed to med 2's that he favours (e.g. 80 hp for infantry instead of 1, elephants having 1000 hp instead of 6).

    Personally i like the current system. From my pov, with med 2 system you'd have armour accounting for toughness and armour save from the warhammer system. I prefer the rome 2 one, where hp will probably represent toughness and wounds (and regeneration for trolls and the like); while armour will represent armour saves and possibly ward saves/magic resistance. There is probably going to be specific armour types for very tough creatures (dragons, trolls etc). For all we know though, CA might be adding a toughness stat just to give proper warhammer flavour to the game.

    I've also had some bad experiences with the low granularity system in med2/rome1 where units with multiple hit points are utterly unstoppable. Generals, elephants, spartans, berserkers...you name it. Another thing that bothered me, precisely in rage of dark gods, is when a unit with virtually no prospects of harming a troll keeps chain staggering/stunning the poor thing by poking at it with sticks. It'd be nice if that kind of hard crowd control was somehow attached to hp loss in the current gen system.

    And then there's magic. How do you get a 1 hp being to benefit from something like regeneration? Do you allow them to ignore the next killing blow? Similarly, having 1 hp entities limits your possibilities when it comes to offensive magic (like giving a plague aura to nurgle units that apply an area damage over time effect on the enemy). Are a human and a skeleton with the same armour both as likely to be eliminated by the same attack? And what happens if i revive a recently deceased imperial soldier, isn't it better if i bring it back with its original health pool with a certain percentage lost?

    I like to dream of getting a more deep weapon damage system in the future, where a blunt weapon can be expected to deal more damage against a chainmailed soldier than it would to a full plated one. I believe the current system is a better foundation in that regard. I would also like to see bleed damage, that's only possible with an hp pool i'd say. The increased granularity is a boon in regards to unit variety as well.

    I don't like seeing the health points as hit 0 = dead, but rather see 0 representing the soldiers' incapability to fight on (whether he's dead, utterly exhausted or simply wounded/incapacitated). Terror could cause single soldiers to run from the enemy, counting as a casualty (and this could be countered by the health pool among other things like experience) and run off the field like a horse whose rider has been killed in rome 2. Or a tzeenchian mage trolling orc grunts and making them go mad. To go in line with this premise, i'd like to see different combat animations that can induce you to think the victim is simply wounded (along with the return of wounded recovery mechanic from pre TW 3 games), and seeing the odd soldier running around like a headless chicken. I prefer that approach to fear and terror over the old meh morale debuff that we, sadly enough, are most likely to get. Just to sumarize, 0 health can be much more than "Oh look, my innards are touching the ground. Perhaps i should fall down".

    Don't get me wrong, i still play med 2 and its system is alright. Simple and effective. But i can see some merits to the ways certain things are tackled in the newer TW iterations, and feel those left behind are becoming a bit outdated. I have a similar problem with the replenishment system in the older games (thinking it's a bit outdated and all). i'm too lazy to micromanage units back and forth to replenish them and in the end i just use the most overpowered/less likely to take huge casualties units (cav and archers) just to preserve my sanity, resulting in strange battles that look nothing like a historically accurate engagement. That doesn't happen in shogun 2/rome 2, i use my armies without regret. This is an important aspect to me as i put great value in unit viability for the sake of replayability and min-maxing. I must say though that i still think the manpower system of med 2 is nothing short of brilliant. i'd simply advocate for something very similar to be integrated into the auto-replenishment system of napoleon-onwards with supply lines length/infrastructure, unit quality, season and military buildings with technology as a multiplier being responsible for determining how fast units replenish.

    And enough speculation for the week, i've met my quota.
    Last edited by Vardeus; May 25, 2015 at 03:01 AM.

  16. #16

    Default Re: Drop the multiple health point system for Warhammer

    Quote Originally Posted by Vardeus View Post
    Some folks are getting a bit confused. The OP is refering to the current gen system with greatly increased granularity on the stats, as oposed to med 2's that he favours (e.g. 80 hp for infantry instead of 1, elephants having 1000 hp instead of 6).

    Personally i like the current system. From my pov, with med 2 system you'd have armour accounting for toughness and armour save from the warhammer system. I prefer the rome 2 one, where hp will probably represent toughness and wounds (and regeneration for trolls and the like); while armour will represent armour saves and possibly ward saves/magic resistance. There is probably going to be specific armour types for very tough creatures (dragons, trolls etc). For all we know though, CA might be adding a toughness stat just to give proper warhammer flavour to the game.

    I've also had some bad experiences with the low granularity system in med2/rome1 where units with multiple hit points are utterly unstoppable. Generals, elephants, spartans, berserkers...you name it. Another thing that bothered me, precisely in rage of dark gods, is when a unit with virtually no prospects of harming a troll keeps chain staggering/stunning the poor thing by poking at it with sticks. It'd be nice if that kind of hard crowd control was somehow attached to hp loss in the current gen system.

    And then there's magic. How do you get a 1 hp being to benefit from something like regeneration? Do you allow them to ignore the next killing blow? Similarly, having 1 hp entities limits your possibilities when it comes to offensive magic (like giving a plague aura to nurgle units that apply an area damage over time effect on the enemy). Are a human and a skeleton with the same armour both as likely to be eliminated by the same attack? And what happens if i revive a recently deceased imperial soldier, isn't it better if i bring it back with its original health pool with a certain percentage lost?

    I like to dream of getting a more deep weapon damage system in the future, where a blunt weapon can be expected to deal more damage against a chainmailed soldier than it would to a full plated one. I believe the current system is a better foundation in that regard. I would also like to see bleed damage, that's only possible with an hp pool i'd say. The increased granularity is a boon in regards to unit variety as well.

    I don't like seeing the health points as hit 0 = dead, but rather see 0 representing the soldiers' incapability to fight on (whether he's dead, utterly exhausted or simply wounded/incapacitated). Terror could cause single soldiers to run from the enemy, counting as a casualty (and this could be countered by the health pool among other things like experience) and run off the field like a horse whose rider has been killed in rome 2. Or a tzeenchian mage trolling orc grunts and making them go mad. To go in line with this premise, i'd like to see different combat animations that can induce you to think the victim is simply wounded (along with the return of wounded recovery mechanic from pre TW 3 games), and seeing the odd soldier running around like a headless chicken. I prefer that approach to fear and terror over the old meh morale debuff that we, sadly enough, are most likely to get. Just to sumarize, 0 health can be much more than "Oh look, my innards are touching the ground. Perhaps i should fall down".

    Don't get me wrong, i still play med 2 and its system is alright. Simple and effective. But i can see some merits to the ways certain things are tackled in the newer TW iterations, and feel those left behind are becoming a bit outdated. I have a similar problem with the replenishment system in the older games (thinking it's a bit outdated and all). i'm too lazy to micromanage units back and forth to replenish them and in the end i just use the most overpowered/less likely to take huge casualties units (cav and archers) just to preserve my sanity, resulting in strange battles that look nothing like a historically accurate engagement. That doesn't happen in shogun 2/rome 2, i use my armies without regret. This is an important aspect to me as i put great value in unit viability for the sake of replayability and min-maxing. I must say though that i still think the manpower system of med 2 is nothing short of brilliant. i'd simply advocate for something very similar to be integrated into the auto-replenishment system of napoleon-onwards with supply lines length/infrastructure, unit quality, season and military buildings with technology as a multiplier being responsible for determining how fast units replenish.

    And enough speculation for the week, i've met my quota.
    You raise some fair points, and I think you're right about a certain health range being necessary for a game like this where regeneration and other magic is meant to play a part.

    On the other hand - and this must be rather obvious - it isn't the more realistic system. The fact that it might fit better for Warhammer only goes to suggest otherwise, but it is far from the only reason. It's the kind of system we see in use in most roleplay or shooter games, like Mount & Blade Warband. It works, but there are other games like War Thunder with more advanced damage modelling. What makes the health system unsuitable for large scale tactical/strategical games like Total War is that soldiers often won't have any slightest chance to die by something causing damage in the early stages of any type of combat. As the health is worn down, casualties gradually mount until a point where a wounded unit basically disappears. This type of scenario is very evident in Rome II for example. Heavy cavalry, such as Cataphracts, can flatten (literally) a heavy infantry unit such as Hoplites, without either side taking a single loss. It's very counter-intuitive since you know there are great forces involved that would more than likely render casualties on both sides - be it direct kills, maimed or incapacitated troops or any combination thereof. After a couple of charges, this same event suddenly changes in nature, and casualties do start appearing. Another well known event is when targeting soldiers with ranged units, which works in the same pattern. This means that the exact same action does render vastly different results, depending on how worn down troops' health are.

    I assume there is no need for an explanation as to why that isn't a very realistic or sensible system in that regard. There are more examples, though. If you have a soldier with 50 HP initially, who takes a massive blow to the chest from a longsword, resulting in a loss of 45 of those 50 HP, this soldier will live on, and fight on without any problems. He is more likely to die if hit again - regardless of by what and where it hits, e.g. a 5 HP loss which wouldn't be nearly as severe as the original 45 HP loss would be enough to kill/incapacitate him. The 5 HP would, relatively speaking, represent a mildly effective strike at an arm perhaps, yet it is enough to take this soldier out of combat while the 45 damage strike at the chest was not. In essence, a health system will always render inconsistent and illogical results with this design. Contrary to hitpoints, armour is designed as to allow for any outcome. No one soldier is guaranteed to be shielded from crippling damage, but the chance of this is reduced the higher the armour. Health always shields a soldier until it's worn down, leaving said soldier fragile to anything.

    A single hitpoint per soldier allows for virtually any outcome at any stage of combat. Results are predictable, as they are with high health. It isn't the perfect system by any means, but it does a better job at simulating the type of combat belonging to these games. Much as you mentioned, 0 health would still represent various states, such as being killed or severally wounded. A higher health system has the potential to work better if it allows a degree of casualties even if a soldier hasn't lost his full health, for example through a chance that peaks around the mid/high portion of a soldier's health (decreasing the more wounded they are after that as a "little more" damage probably wouldn't matter much if they've made it through such severe wounds already). I'm hoping to see CA up their game for Warhammer and the titles to come, with more advanced damage modelling than we've seen thus far - naturally, a system that makes sense.

    I'll wrap this up with this quote from one of the developers of Medieval II, Ken Turner, taken from a development diary about the combat,


    The two goals for the combat system were that we wanted to make it look spectacular as well as have it feel solid. While we have certainly focused on delivering visually compelling combat, it's far more than just a buff and polish. In fact, we found that the detailed visuals provided more direct feedback by actually showing the player what is really happening.

    There are loads of decisions and calculations that happen every second behind the scenes. Some decisions are physical, like choosing to target the best nearby enemy. Others are purely statistical, like the dice roll to determine the hit result when one soldier strikes another. Ultimately, the more we exchange statistical mechanics (which are hidden) for physical mechanics, the more we can let the player directly experience the game.
    Last edited by Sheridan; May 25, 2015 at 04:38 AM.
    Campaign modder for Ancient Empires


  17. #17
    Modestus's Avatar Protector Domesticus
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    On a ship in the middle of the Mediterranean.
    Posts
    4,037

    Default Re: Drop the multiple health point system for Warhammer

    Quote Originally Posted by Påsan View Post
    What do health bars have to do with warhammer? Do you know anything about the game at all?
    Assuming I have not got it wrong in RTW2 and Attila you have what is a health bar and in combat you will always take damage of some sort, someone with more knowledge could explain exactly how the calculations work but for me its sufficient to say that every soldier on the battlefield that is in combat is slowly having its health bar lowered and even if that unit withdraws from combat and retires to the rear its health remains lowered and does not recover.

    A unit in a defensive Testudo should remain almost invulnerable to a ranged attack, however in RTW2 health will slowly be degraded and remain degraded and even though it may take longer to reach a point where soldiers will start to die the unit is slowly dying even though the whole point of the formation was to prevent this.

    So why have a system that seems unnatural and goes against what you would normally expect to see on a battlefield or more correctly a normal battlefield because what happens if you have an abnormal battlefield with abnormally strong units.

    A one hit one kill mechanic could create problems making strong units too weak but 2 hits could create a situation where they could be too strong and almost unstoppable however if you have a health bar and every hit will cause some damaged then its possible to have abnormally strong units on a battlefield and still have the ability to kill them even though it will take time.

    It seems to me that a one hit one kill with a chance to block is better for humans whereas a health bar with guaranteed damage of some sort is better for Dragons and its very likely that CA have had their eye on the mechanics required for a Warhammer battle a long time ago.

    Of course that is not to say the system cannot be improved.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •