Page 4 of 39 FirstFirst 123456789101112131429 ... LastLast
Results 61 to 80 of 771

Thread: Total War: Warhammer II announced

  1. #61

    Default Re: Total War: Warhammer II announced

    Quote Originally Posted by antred View Post
    Good job, CA. If you were looking for the most efficient way to anger your loyal customer base even more, you've found it. It wasn't this juvenile fantasy arcade nonsense that made the TW series a success.
    CA makes a new total war every year, only every third is complete release: "CA you anger your customers damn you, games are filled with bugs and they are subpar, Rome II was a disaster!"

    vs.

    CA makes a one big project to make it the best they can to make a single game as good as it can get: "CA you anger your customers, why don't you make a new total war every year!?!"

    SO yeah it's a world of choices

  2. #62

    Default Re: Total War: Warhammer II announced

    Why i keep visiting these topics is beyond me


  3. #63
    reffan's Avatar Laetus
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Location
    Katowice, Upper Silesia
    Posts
    5

    Default Re: Total War: Warhammer II announced

    Quote Originally Posted by antred View Post
    Good job, CA. If you were looking for the most efficient way to anger your loyal customer base even more, you've found it. It wasn't this juvenile fantasy arcade nonsense that made the TW series a success.
    Just because YOU don't like it does not mean you are whole "loyal customer base". And just because YOU don't like it, does not mean that fantasy setting suck. Deal with it.


    Best part of posts like this is that people who don't like Warhammer try to invent some sort of division of fans into "true loyal fans" who like only historical titles and "casual noobs" who like Warhammer. lol.

  4. #64

    Default Re: Total War: Warhammer II announced

    Quote Originally Posted by Dumanthis View Post
    I for myself am happy that they decided to sit down a while at one project. We have seen enough half-made games since Empire total war. Shogun 2 and Warhammer are the only ones that can stand in daylight as vanilla compared to other titles that came after medieval 2. Do we really want them to churn out a historic total war every year, even when we know every third game is only complete?
    Totally agree. I also think keeping the naval battle on auto-resolve it's a good idea expecially if they are going to introduce brand new gameplay features for campaign and battle mode for the whole game (so for the first release too). As to historical game, well after Rome II and Attila I' m definitely not holding my breath...

  5. #65
    God-Emperor of Mankind's Avatar Apperently I protect
    Moderator Emeritus

    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    Malmö, Sweden
    Posts
    21,640

    Default Re: Total War: Warhammer II announced

    Quote Originally Posted by antred View Post
    Good job, CA. If you were looking for the most efficient way to anger your loyal customer base even more, you've found it. It wasn't this juvenile fantasy arcade nonsense that made the TW series a success.
    Oh please, you are not the entire loyal customer base and not everyone thinks like you.
    I'm a part of this "loyal customer base", buying CAs games since Shogun 1 and I'm not ashamed to say that Warhammer is the best Total War game that CA has done.
    TW-games has always been arcade, it's what made TW-series popular. You didn't need to be a history buff or hardcore gamer to play and enjoy the TW Games, it was accessible to all.
    And while the "historical" games(what a laugh considering how everytime there is a new historical game people keep complaining about how unhistorical it is) put CA on the map, Warhammer was the game that the TW series needed.
    Let's face it and many reviewers pointed out the same, the TW-series was getting stale. It's gameplay was still enjoyable sure but it was still the same.
    Warhammer gave it the kick on the ass that it needed. While the core is still the same, the addition of monsters, quests and magic brought new life back to it. Combine this with releasing it in a good shape and the game became the biggest selling game in the franchise, well deserving as well.

  6. #66

    Default Re: Total War: Warhammer II announced

    They got me at Naggaroth.

  7. #67

    Default Re: Total War: Warhammer II announced

    Quote Originally Posted by Mhaedros View Post
    According to the Steam page it will have 4 playable races, the 4th just isn't announced yet. It will likely be Skaven though.
    One can only hope, I never got the chance to play them Warp rats on the table, I was also too busy with my Dark elves and Night gobbo's tiny Waaagh armies at the time, then the end of times abominable heresy came along....

    And the rest is niche.
    Last edited by Sgt¹_Daemon; April 01, 2017 at 07:02 AM.

  8. #68
    jackwei's Avatar Primicerius
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    London, UK
    Posts
    3,239

    Default Re: Total War: Warhammer II announced

    I didn't buy Warhammer and I don't think I ever will until convinced otherwise despite thinking about it but I guess it must've done incredibly well for CA to do a sequel so soon although Personally I am bit disappointed they didn't do a historical total war and visited somewhere like Ancient China for a change but oh well you cannot always get what you want in life so will sit this one out for now.

  9. #69

    Default Re: Total War: Warhammer II announced

    You don't have to buy it if you don'T like WH, I'm a fan of TW and I like WH Tabeltop Gams, so TW WH was a great idea, and it was from the start on announced that they plan a big Warhammer Game consisting of 3 Parts
    so its not a surprise that they annound another Warhammer game, because its not like S2, R2 or M2 a new version of an previous title is the 2nd Part of a Trilogy similar to Star Craft 2 which was split in 3 parts.

    I guess if they would have named the First Game TW WH Part1 [or Title]
    and the next one TW WH Part2 [or Title] would have been a better idea.
    Last edited by Chlodwig I.; April 01, 2017 at 07:22 AM.

  10. #70

    Default Re: Total War: Warhammer II announced

    Warhammer is the best total war game ever made, and I absolutely HATED and DETESTED the idea of a fantasy total war game when it was first announced. I'm happy to admit when im wrong and I was totally wrong about this.

    Really looking forward to the second game, the lizardmen will be amazing. My hope is that the next historical title will have the same campaign feature as the warhammer series RE bolting on extra parts of the map. Would love a Medieval 3 game that was expanded to include all of Europe, Eurasia and the Far East.

  11. #71

    Default Re: Total War: Warhammer II announced

    Very exciting indeed.

  12. #72

    Default Re: Total War: Warhammer II announced

    Funny how people think CA rushing a new Historical title out on a new engine is a good idea, when in reality if they did release such a game so quickly it'd be as big a -show as Rome 2. And just like after Med2 there needed to be an overhaul with a new engine so too does there need to be now.
    Also, don't forget the 3-year gap between M2TW and Empire; obviously Kingdoms fell into this gap, but Attila also had an expansion released a year after launch with Charlamange, so based on the talk of an independent TW spin-off historical title before the main one the wait won't actually be that long.

  13. #73
    Påsan's Avatar Hva i helvete?
    Citizen

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

    Default Re: Total War: Warhammer II announced

    New historical title will hopefully be on a new engine with the development time in mind. Also i realise not everyone keeps tabs on TW news, but a historical title anouncement was really never in the cards at all at this announcement, even before they outright stated a week ago it was going to be warhammer 2, a historical title now would have made no sense whatsoever.

    Also for you pople that has never tried it, Warhammer got more tactical depth to it than any TW I ever played. Behind the "childish fantasy" lies more than double the variables that went into Atilla or R2 decision making. If you dont know your faction and the enemy faction in this game and dont have a specific counter strategy, you'll loose any game at the army selection screen.
    Last edited by Påsan; April 01, 2017 at 07:23 PM.

  14. #74

    Default Re: Total War: Warhammer II announced

    i find it funny that some consider players who demand more STRATEGY in a strategy game as a HardCore players... what will be next?

  15. #75

    Default Re: Total War: Warhammer II announced

    Quote Originally Posted by Påsan View Post
    New historical title will hopefully be on a new engine with the development time in mind. Also i realise not everyone keeps tabs on TW news, but a historical title anouncement was really never in the cards at all at this announcement, even before they outright stated a week ago it was going to be warhammer 2, a historical title now would have made no sense whatsoever.

    Also for you pople that has never tried it, Warhammer got more tactical depth to it than any TW I ever played. Behind the "childish fantasy" lies more than double the variables that went into Atilla or R2 decision making. If you dont know your faction and the enemy faction in this game and dont have a specific counter strategy, you'll loose any game at the army selection screen.
    Most things I read of total war warhammer seem to point to the rapid combat, less campaign strat management and terrible sieges. I never really heard of the good stuff and it turned me off getting the game, amongst other reasons. I'm keenly aware when I get into a new total war game of changed mechanics and such.

  16. #76
    Anna_Gein's Avatar Primicerius
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    Paris
    Posts
    3,606

    Default Re: Total War: Warhammer II announced

    Quote Originally Posted by Lin Huichi View Post
    Most things I read of total war warhammer seem to point to the rapid combat, less campaign strat management and terrible sieges. I never really heard of the good stuff and it turned me off getting the game, amongst other reasons. I'm keenly aware when I get into a new total war game of changed mechanics and such.
    Same here. I watch a few in-game video on Youtube from CA and unofficial Let's play. I was shocked by the lack combat animation

  17. #77
    God-Emperor of Mankind's Avatar Apperently I protect
    Moderator Emeritus

    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    Malmö, Sweden
    Posts
    21,640

    Default Re: Total War: Warhammer II announced

    The combat is just as fast as vanilla Rome 2 and the campaign well, it all depends on the faction that you play.
    Påsan is correct that if you think that you can just pick a faction and expect it to be like any other TW-game then you will lose since they all play differently.
    Let's say Rome 2 and you pick a greek faction and then play say a gaul faction, mechanics-wise they are identical, the major diffence is how they are on the battlefield and you can say the same about any faction in Rome 2, they are identical when it comes to mechanics.
    In Warhammer however they are not. In broad strokes yes it's all about getting money to upgrade and buy more troops and growth to ensure that you can upgrade your cities but how you get it is very different depending on the faction.
    Bretonnia for example, your nobles are your hard hitters but they are all on horseback which makes sieges a bit tricky since you might want some infantry support to either take the walls or just grind the enemy down but all your infantry are peasants which includes your archers and your artillery. But the peasants run the economy since they are the ones working the fields and harvesting the crops. If you get peasants for your army not only do you pay upkeep for them but you actually lowering you general income as well since you are taking people that would have been working on your fields otherwise. So you got a nice balance act going since the peasants are cheap but they run your economy which your nobles don't but they are generally expensive.
    You also got a chivalry code to go after which means you should behave in a certain way otherwise you will lose respect of your nobles which means that your army will have lower leadership since they don't want to follow someone without honor and if you are really dishonorable it will lead to revolt since even the peasants would have had enough.
    Now this sounds like it would fit nicely in a medieval game(and it would and I hope they copy it if they make Medieval 3) but you would see this for every christians faction(maybe even all of them) but here this is just for 1 faction.

    You got the Vampire counts who are fairly basic but you got vampiric corruption to tend to which mean if you try to expand outside of your homeland your army still start to take losses since there isn't enough magic in the ground to keep your army animated.
    So you either have to bring alot of armies to make up for your losses or take your time and use heroes to spread corruption so that your armies can invade safely. Can point out that this applies to other factions as well, if you enter a land with high vampiric corruption(or chaos) you will start taking losses.

    Then you got Warriors of Chaos and Beastmen(same thing really) who has no settlements and never will so money and growth is a issue and you get money from raiding and sacking towns which you need since your troops got high upkeep but in order for your horde to grow and get better troops you need growth and to do that you need to sacrifice towns and armies but doing so provides no cash. So you can see the balancing act. New armies will have a tough time since they will be starting on square 1 and you can't even be close to another friendly army(if you play Warriors of Chaos) since they will start fighting each other and of course, they cost money.
    So right there you got more mechanics then most total war games provide for the entire game and I didn't even go into the mechanics that the remaining factions have(even tho I would argue that The Empire is the most vanilla faction of them all, they play like any other faction from the other Total war games do).
    So there is definiately more depth to it then previous games.

    Sieges aren't terrible per say, they are the same as in Rome 2 pretty much, once you breach the walls then you are in and it's either slaughter everyone, make them run away or take the center. It's sadly not like in Medieval 2 where you have to through 2 walls but they aren't bad. Only thing that drags it down is lack of diversity, the design of the maps are identical which is a shame but thankfully we got mods to help us out there.
    And as with Rome 2, if you don't like the vanilla combat speed then there are mods that will help you get it to the speed that you like.
    But I would say that I find the speed to be slower then Attila which I thought was way too fast, Warhammer feels a bit better.

    I was shocked by the lack combat animation
    Which shouldn't have been a shock since CA said that from the start that they removed it to improve performance and they aren't missed at all, not when I can play huge battles without frame-rate drops like it did in Rome 2 and Attila.
    Last edited by God-Emperor of Mankind; April 02, 2017 at 07:09 AM.

  18. #78
    Mhaedros's Avatar Brave Heart Tegan
    Content Emeritus

    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    Finland
    Posts
    8,575
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default Re: Total War: Warhammer II announced

    Everything God Emperor said above ^

    And before someone say's animations are more important than performance; maybe a strategy game isn't right for you, there is plenty of close action in something like Ryse Son of Rome or For Honor that might fit you better if that is the sort of thing you're looking for
    Under the patronage of Finlander. Once patron to someone, no longer.
    Content's well good, innit.


  19. #79
    God-Emperor of Mankind's Avatar Apperently I protect
    Moderator Emeritus

    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    Malmö, Sweden
    Posts
    21,640

    Default Re: Total War: Warhammer II announced

    Well there are still some, like if gorebulls(not sure if it applies to minotaurs as well) are fighting infantry, sometimes a infantry man will get impaled on their horns and the gorebull will shake his head to toss them off.

  20. #80
    Anna_Gein's Avatar Primicerius
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    Paris
    Posts
    3,606

    Default Re: Total War: Warhammer II announced

    Quote Originally Posted by God-Emperor of Mankind View Post
    Which shouldn't have been a shock since CA said that from the start that they removed it to improve performance and they aren't missed at all, not when I can play huge battles without frame-rate drops like it did in Rome 2 and Attila.
    I could not care less what CA said. I am shock to find this kind of animations in a 2016 AAA game. They are comparable to RTW animations : a game 13 years old. Even Medieval II total war, a 11 year old game has better animations. Come on.

    I have no issues during Rome 2 and Atilla 20 units vs 20 units battles. But that is just me.

    Anyway CA should either fix its graphic engine or works with the textures which are the sole source of trouble and are not even than great for today standard. This CA tradition to break feature X in order to hide Y trouble is why I am not as enthusiast with the license as I used to be. It is the same trick everywhere : siege are broken to hide the AI, animations are broken to cover performance, diplomacy is broken as the AI can not cope with it, etc

    Quote Originally Posted by Mhaedros View Post
    Everything God Emperor said above ^

    And before someone say's animations are more important than performance; maybe a strategy game isn't right for you, there is plenty of close action in something like Ryse Son of Rome or For Honor that might fit you better if that is the sort of thing you're looking for
    Nice game. If so I rather play Mount and Blade Warband : more tactical and more strategic.

    Not that I understand why Strategy game should be ugly
    Last edited by Anna_Gein; April 02, 2017 at 07:47 AM.

Posting Permissions

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