|
Playing zone defense is incredibly useful. You can base it off province borders to stop raiders or base it off settlements. For example, you don't need to sit in Iron Rock, just have it within your reinforcement zone (the red circle around your stack) if the enemy is one turn away from attacking it. Even if it's just an inch on the screen, now you can reach them easily and they can't reach the settlement without dealing with your main force. If they aren't within reach of a settlement, you can hang out further away such that after your first retreat you become within range of the garrison if you don't want to fight them 1 on 1. This is more useful for keeping them from raiding. If you don't mind going 1 on 1 just set up so your regular move can get you back to the settlement in case other stacks show up from other directions. Reik fucked around with this message at 19:05 on Jun 9, 2016 |
#
?
Jun 9, 2016 18:54
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 13, 2024 22:58 |
|
|
Reik posted:Playing zone defense is incredibly useful. You can base it off province borders to stop raiders or base it off settlements. For example, you don't need to sit in Iron Rock, just have it within your reinforcement zone (the red circle around your stack) if the enemy is one turn away from attacking it. Even if it's just an inch on the screen, now you can reach them easily and they can't reach the settlement without dealing with your main force. Does the circle also show garrison range? I'm having some trouble getting a garrison to reinforce ambush parties.
|
|
#
?
Jun 9, 2016 19:15
|
|
|
Ilustforponydeath posted:Does the circle also show garrison range? I'm having some trouble getting a garrison to reinforce ambush parties. If you select an army garrisoned it should show the reinforcement zone. I'll play with it when I get home and make sure.
|
|
#
?
Jun 9, 2016 19:18
|
|
|
So learning through trial and error there is really no benefit to starving out a besieged city completely; the only time I see it being viable is by min/maxing skills to have some token force with bonuses to reducing enemy holdout time being able to capture/sack distant cities. But that assumes they don't have a lord garrisoned there who will sally out to fight you (which the AI will do if it knows it will be at a progressively worse disadvantage next turn) or a roaming lord/agent nearby to disrupt you somehow. In the dwarf campaign my first playthrough the old guy suggested that sieging a town for several turn was the conservative thing to do since it would in theory minimize casualties by whittling down their garrison. But especially early game, this wastes way too much time; in a lot of situations you could fight immediately, auto resolve, and just camp the following turn to recover the casualties at the very worst.
|
|
#
?
Jun 9, 2016 19:24
|
|
|
Oh hey, that CA Sam guy is answering questions again. Every race has some unique mechanics on the campaign map. Which of those was the hardest to figure out and which one was most fun. And seeing as the development and design side is already thinking about the next game. Without revealing what might be planned, what are the races you are excited to tackle the most from this perspective and which seems the biggest hurdle? Greenskin Waaaghs was probably the most challenging – there was a lot of work that went in to making them work right, especially because they act as an AI companion. It was actually a very late change in development that we made to allow you to control your Waaagh army in the battle, originally that would act as an AI ally in battle. You guys normally use history as a basis for your games. How has it been to start from a well-liked fantasy universe and build up from there. Were the confined put on your by the chosen universe similar to the restriction one would face when working from a excisting time period. And how has the team experienced the change of pace from a more historical title. Harder? Easier? More pressure? In a way, building a game from Warhammer presented much of the same start to a project as a historical title does. We start by reading a load of books and absorbing all the history with whatever time period the historical game is set in. Because Games Workshop has created over many years such a wealth of existing content with all their army books and other various lore books, this project started in very much the same way. It’s still like reading about history, just a fictional one! In some way it is actually easier because for most things there is one account of it and its correct, if we are not sure we can check with GW. With history things are often more vague, particularly the further back in history you go, you can read two accounts of something with massive differences and you have to choose which one to believe. There are quite a few new things in Total War: WARHAMMER. From Magic, unique campaign mechanics, the different approach to commanders and agents who also serve as heroes on the battlefield. Some of these obviously wouldn't fit in a more historic total War game. But have there been certain things in WARHAMMER from which you guys think you have learned valuable lessons learned that could benefit futher titles? (TLDR: WARHAMMER seems like a big departure. Was there that much difference in the approach to this game? And what might be some lessons you learned from possible looking at developing a total war with this different mindset.) There are definitely development lessons learnt on how to do things. It's been great to have the opportunity to try a lot of new things out, so we can see what the player reaction to them is. In terms of designs to carry forward in to historical titles, that remains up to the historical design team and also up to what we see the players saying online! There have been some voices that like to call-out certain changes as dumbing down. Total War being a game with 2 big parts, campaign map and battles. One obviously can't become too overbearing on the other, and you can't lose one or you lose the total war identity. Does this influence some decision in regard to streamlining some things, with the fear that a few too many things quickly turns this into a 'paradox' type game. This is a very difficult balance to strike. There are some people who want us to become more like a Paradox game, sure, there are others who want us to go in completely different directions. I think whats important is that we keep the essence that keeps total war special, and keep trying new things within that spectrum that keeps Total War, Total War, but also keeps things fresh. Not much of a deep question, but occasionally some people like to voice the opinion that battle are slightly too fast. This has varied over the different titles in the series, but they have always steered more towards a more fast, brisk experience, instead of some of the more grinding engangement seen in some mods. What are the thought on the design team on that? When you have a game like Total War, with a long history of games and a great following because of that, you do get a lot of divergent opinions. We will always take the design of the game in the direction that we think is the best, but we understand this won't be what every person wants, its hard to please everyone! We are also very happy that we have the option of modding for people who want to tweak the gameplay in different directions. There are a variety of mods out there for each Total War title, from small addition, to major changes, to straight up 'overhauls' of most of the games major systems. Does the development/design team look or experiment with some of the community made things. And do you think there are valuable lessons to be learned? We keep an eye on the mods made and those that become popular as it’s a good way of seeing the kinds of changes people want. There are absolutely lessons to be learnt, we have great respect from the mod community, some of our designers (Jack and Mitch) started in that community, so we have great respect for its ability. What is the stance of the team on the campaign map? With Total War: WARHAMMER there seems to be a move towards a slightly more streamlined campaign map experience. (probably more os a status quo. Building being more streamlines but everyone unique mechanic) What is the overal feeling with the team on how to improve the campaign map. (Guessing this is heading in a direction with warhammer trying for a more thematic experience, while the more historic ones going deeper down the managing an empire hole.) I’m most proud of the time we spent polishing the UI functionality – we’ve never had a more functional and accessible UI that helps you play the game more than what we have now. We managed to find time for a lot of small but numerous quality of life improvements throughout the UI, that as individual things may not stand out, but together significantly improve the overall game experience. This is very significant for a strategy game like Total War, where you spend a lot of time within the UI. Small thing about balance. In multiplayer you obviously need to approach something that resembles balance. But how do you guys approach the balance from a singleplayer view. Do you strife to make them all equal there? Or are there no qualms to have some races/armies that have a significant harder time of things. Balance is tough. Particularly with Warhammer, we aim to make sure that the factions have very different feels to their gameplay. This means pushing their gameplay in different areas, and naturally this can upset the balance. We do aim for every faction to have the ability to respond sufficiently to anything another faction might muster. We may balance something in singleplayer for more flavour and fun filled gameplay, but then offset that in multiplayer by changing the cost of that unit. Generally we try to keep SP and MP on the same footing though. Where would you guys say your go to for ideas and inspirations? A ton of developers play a ton of different games. But do you also venture to other forms of entertainment for ideas. Every game with a turn-based element has a lot of potential to look at modern boardgaming for example. Playing other games is a big one for sure, we play a lot of other strategy games (Paradox games particularly), but also all other genres. Warhammer is fortunate to have a massive number of great games that we can draw inspiration from; Mark of Chaos, Shadow of Horned Rat, Battlefleet Gothic, Verminitide, Warhammer online, etc. Why does Heinrich Kemmler constantly ask "Where is krell?!" Because our Lead Writer Andy Hall loves to tease everyone  I'd be really interested to know what you guys do with the community feedback because you guys are obviously really active on the forums so I imagine you get to read a lot of the stuff that crops up. So my question is how do you react to the community feedback? Does it ever impact on the decisions you make with the game going forward? (an obvious example would be the AI use of agents) Player feedback is very important to us – we have a couple of channels that we actively engage in and talk about feedback on, such as our forums and reddit, but there are a lot of other players that we read and listen to, like TWcenter or facebook and twitter. We draw all of this feedback in and compare it to our own internal feelings and that of our QA team to see whether it matches up with what we know or whether there is some stuff that surprises us. Usually we will find a mix of the two. With the stuff that we personally immediately agree with, we will usually already have some plan of action, and that confirmation from players helps drive us forward with making those changes. With the stuff that surprises us we will usually take a little longer to validate that feedback and get to and understanding of where its coming from, so that will involve us playing personally or getting QA to investigate. Usually we will come to that same conclusion and make changes, but we will not always necessarily make the changes suggested to reach the same outcome, we may look for alternative solution that solve the same problem. This stuff takes time and its why often you may not get an immediate response from us to something that is receiving a lot of momentum in the community, because we want to verify it ourselves and take time to think about the problem. Considering whether there really is a problem there and how we may go about solving it if there is one. We do not want to rush and make promises to change stuff without having those facts down and having a clear idea about what we are going to do. To those who worked on the earlier Total War titles, whats the biggest improvement in your opinion that you made this time from previously existing mechanics? Having heroes appear within Battles when embedded in armies is a big one. It really changes the role of what were previously agents in Total War. It's quite a game changer. Will replays be improved so they actually replay the battle the way it happened? One issue I have noticed with replays not replaying the battle correctly is that reinforcements doesn't appear in the same spot as they did in the actual battle. This is a bug that we are investigating. Hope to have it fixed in a patch in the near future. Since the Multiplayer is pretty bare bones at the moment, are you planning on making any additions or changes to it? There was a thread yesterday mentioning that ESL picked up the game so the competitiveness is definitely there so it's kinda a shame that you guys don't really focus on that aspect of the game too. I suppose I can say we are thinking about it. We want to gauge interest. It's something that we on the dev team would love to expand upon if the support for it is there. Having said that, some of the stuff we may want to do may not necessarily be compatible with a competitive format. We are very much open to suggestion on this stuff at the moment! What is your favourite faction? and Why? Might as well ask something you guys will answer Dwarfs. Artillery, Axes, Beards and Beer. What more can a man want. [–]Ninjahundaaagh! 6 points 8 days ago What's been the hardest design choices? Did the historical team do anything? Without being mean to them, this game is miles ahead of any previous Total War, in terms of AI, optimization and intensity and what not. Except multiplayer, hint hint. Region occupation is definitely one that was a tough decision. That is the decision to allow certain races to only occupy certain areas of the map. We have talked at length about the underlying decisions behind this, and we totally understand arguments on both sides for and against it. I think in the end, what we’ve seen and heard about the public opinion on the choice is still quite split, but there are a lot of people that like it. It’s very difficult to ever make any design decision that will appease everybody, particularly with Warhammer where we have quite a few different pockets of players playing. We have old Total War Fans, Warhammer fans, Fantasy Strategy fans, some who fit in to none of those labels. Finding something that everyone agrees with in the office is hard enough! But, I think it’s important that we make these changes and we try different stuff. We know there are some over arching flaws to our formula and things that we want to improve upon, and unless we try shaking things up and pushing for new things we wouldn’t ever progress and our games would become stale. That is not something we ever want to happen, so that’s why we try new things, even if we know that not everyone may agree with our decisions. I hope that some of the people who argued against the idea of it have actually found it to be fun to play with. It’s important that people know we do see Warhammer and our historical titles as different games within the same franchise. Some things work in one and not the other, not everything we’ve done in Warhammer will work in a historical game, and that’s totally fine. Why are there no women Legendary Lords? (Legendary Ladies?) I know the lore is pretty restrictive, but there are some women in there. Particularly for the Vampires, there are all the Lahmians, who are almost all women, and some of them are as big a deal, or even a bigger deal, than some of the current LL's. Seems a shame to have stuck with a bunch of dudes instead. Whether a character is male or female was not so much a consideration for their inclusion, rather, who would be the most appropriate for our first release. So, faction leaders, whoever is the most recognisable, etc. It's just the way things panned out rather than some deliberate decision. That's not to say there won't be female Legendary Lords in the future though People found unit cards depicting ships for all races. Were dedicated naval units something that was planned but cut during development? Yes. We had planned to have campaign navies (note, this is very different from naval battles), but cut it during development when we found that with the current land mass, navies were very unimportant and adding unnecessary complexity. TW:WH features so many more skeletons. Did this also result in more different animations overall? If yes, how did the team deal with such an increase in work load - especially since so many creatures couldn't be mo-capt. Did you just tripple the amount of your animators? Lots more animators, lots more time Does CA stand in contact with relic in any form, now that both teams are developing Games-Workshop licensed games under SEGA? We have some contact with Relic, yes. But not as much as we would like as they are in a different continent/ time zone. Might future expansions add any new content or mechanics to the main races of this installment? It almost certainly will. Chariots were originally announced as mount option for Chaos and Green Skin characters. Can you comment why they didn't make it into the game and if there's a chance for then to appear in a future update? We hit technical issues with them which we didn't have time to resolve. I do not know if they will make a return or not. Going to say "Maybe" Was the Advisor character modeled after the actor who played the Light Wizard in the pre-rendered cinematic trailer? No relation Several mechanics introduced in Attila ( and Age of charlemagne ) seem to have made it into Warhammer in some form or another. I wonder, were they developed for Attila first and then adopted by Warhammer - or were they allready designed with Warhammer in mind, and Attila was ment to be maybe some sort of testing ground. Developed for Attila and then imported in to Warhammer. However, when developing any mechanic for a single game, we do always think about the long term future of Total War, and where that mechanic may fit. What are the chances of seeing new mechanics introduced in Warhammer in future, historical titles? Very hard to say, some mechanics may work very well, some may not. Time will tell! Can you comment on Warhammer hitting sales expectations? We are very happy with current sales I asume Warhammer was designed with the goal of attracting new audiences - like Warhammer fans who haven't played any Total War games before. If thats the case, will future expansions follow the same design philosophy or developed based on the idea that the new playerbase is now familiar enough with the series' formula? Future titles are likely to build upon the same level of complexity/accessibility found in Warhammer rather than introducing too much additional complexity.
|
|
#
?
Jun 9, 2016 19:24
|
|
|
Reik posted:If you select an army garrisoned it should show the reinforcement zone. I'll play with it when I get home and make sure. I'm bummed there isn't a faction with some kind of 'Home guard' upgrade which increases the radius that the garrison will contribute to the battles nearby. This would be hugely helpful when you have areas with multiple settlements near each other since you could take advantage of their upkeep-free forces.
|
|
#
?
Jun 9, 2016 19:26
|
|
|
Less settlements and bigger zones of control would go a long way to making the campaign map feel less like chasing someone around a table in a small room., and more like armies on the march.
|
|
#
?
Jun 9, 2016 19:33
|
|
|
Hmm I kind of wish the AI would still control your extra WWWAAAAGGHH army in battle, it surely would lead to interesting and unorganized battles. Very Orcy I would think.
|
|
#
?
Jun 9, 2016 19:34
|
|
|
Chomp8645 posted:They should just give armies bigger zones of control. Half the reason AI armies are so annoying is it that it's basically impossible to impede movement in any way (besides an agent action). Hell you can be in the middle of a loving mountain pass and they'll walk right by you even without the underway. Zones of control are stupid small as may well not exist in the current implementation. I agree completely, but I think the issue lies with retreat ranges. If they don't actually get outside the zone of control when retreating, they cannot move the following turn. I've noticed it working this way when sieging certain towns, when you break siege you get that free movement because if you didn't you cannot move the next turn. It's a weird system and could probably be fixed in general. But yeah bigger zones of control would really solve the problem since then you wouldn't need to rely on tricking AI into ambushes to keep them from just walking casually around your giant army. Mazz fucked around with this message at 19:38 on Jun 9, 2016 |
|
#
?
Jun 9, 2016 19:35
|
|
|
Panfilo posted:I'm bummed there isn't a faction with some kind of 'Home guard' upgrade which increases the radius that the garrison will contribute to the battles nearby. This would be hugely helpful when you have areas with multiple settlements near each other since you could take advantage of their upkeep-free forces. It would be really cool to have an alternate path to the Defense buildings that instead of providing a big garrison to one town, provided a few extra units to any battle fought in that province. Whether as reinforcements or just adding to the parent stack. I think it would be a cool way to create the feel of a heavily reinforced area.
|
|
#
?
Jun 9, 2016 19:38
|
|
|
Panfilo posted:I'm bummed there isn't a faction with some kind of 'Home guard' upgrade which increases the radius that the garrison will contribute to the battles nearby. This would be hugely helpful when you have areas with multiple settlements near each other since you could take advantage of their upkeep-free forces. I'm not sure if that's exactly what you mean, but the lightning strike skills do increase commander's reinforcement range. I'm not actually sure if that means the range from which they can reinforce or the range at which they can be reinforced, though. Also, IIRC, zones of control and reinforcement size are modifiable. Kaza42 posted:It would be really cool to have an alternate path to the Defense buildings that instead of providing a big garrison to one town, provided a few extra units to any battle fought in that province. Whether as reinforcements or just adding to the parent stack. I think it would be a cool way to create the feel of a heavily reinforced area. Unfortunately, I don't believe there is any way to do this. It is, conversely, trivial to add garrisons to existing buildings via modding, so people could certainly make it so that, for example, every farm you built gave you a few units of militia in the garrison.
|
|
#
?
Jun 9, 2016 19:41
|
|
|
So I have an idea for a mod: Remember the watchtowers you could build in the old games to give you vision into other areas? I was thinking about those the other day and realized you could probably do something really cool along those lines with razed settlements. Basically, when a faction clicks on a razed settlement they cannot use, they would get a prompt to build a watchtower. All this settlement option does is "claim" the zone and reveal its borders like you have a settlement there. It has no income or anything, and when an enemy attacks it they get to immediately raze it, like an undefended settlement. The problems I see though are 1. I have no loving idea on how to actually accomplish this yet, and 2. I don't know how unbalanced it would be if it turned that land into friendly territory, which greatly increases replenishment speed. I bet I could apply modifiers to solve that problem though, along with extending the movement bonuses you get from the movement mod to these new "settlements." I'm going to take a look at Dresdens settlement mods and see if I can flesh this out any further. I expect it to require messing with startpos, which I don't want to do at all 
Mazz fucked around with this message at 19:51 on Jun 9, 2016 |
|
#
?
Jun 9, 2016 19:45
|
|
|
Kaza42 posted:It would be really cool to have an alternate path to the Defense buildings that instead of providing a big garrison to one town, provided a few extra units to any battle fought in that province. Whether as reinforcements or just adding to the parent stack. I think it would be a cool way to create the feel of a heavily reinforced area. I'd love to see two defense paths, one of which gave walls, the other giving the ability for the garrison to get a field battle with stacks going through their sub-province. I really wanted to be able to build giant limitanei forts in Attila and really use them to guard my borders.
|
|
#
?
Jun 9, 2016 19:54
|
|
|
  Epic as gently caress!  I had no idea Bretonnia was this fleshed out already. Should I be concerned about walking up a hill into 6 grail knights? Arglebargle III fucked around with this message at 20:04 on Jun 9, 2016 |
|
#
?
Jun 9, 2016 19:58
|
|
|
Mazz posted:Dwarf lords also get that sick ability to put down 15% attrition damage every turn in a siege, when arguably they need something like that the least. I'd love something like that as vampire counts, the dwarves and the massive amount of siege in every army? not so much.
|
|
#
?
Jun 9, 2016 20:00
|
|
|
Did the raise dead bug come up in the AMA?
|
|
#
?
Jun 9, 2016 20:07
|
|
|
Mazz posted:So I have an idea for a mod: It would completely change the Chaos campaign, but probably more in a quality-of-life rather than "this-is-unbalanced" way since it would make replenishment a viable alternative to merging units/dismissing the dregs/re-recruiting after every major battle. If you wanted an extra mechanical effect you could give each "watchtower" a small effect on provincial corruption, though this would probably be more for flavor than anything mechanically useful.
|
|
#
?
Jun 9, 2016 20:08
|
|
|
Sinteres posted:Did the raise dead bug come up in the AMA? Actually yes, the CA dude didn't seem to be aware of it. Told him to report it on the main forums as a bug.
|
|
#
?
Jun 9, 2016 20:13
|
|
|
LGD posted:It would completely change the Chaos campaign, but probably more in a quality-of-life rather than "this-is-unbalanced" way since it would make replenishment a viable alternative to merging units/dismissing the dregs/re-recruiting after every major battle. If you wanted an extra mechanical effect you could give each "watchtower" a small effect on provincial corruption, though this would probably be more for flavor than anything mechanically useful. The problem I'm facing is how loving hard this actually going to be to get to work. There is a LOT of variables related to occupation, and I don't have an existing framework like Dresden did since I'm not just replacing the owner faction but creating an entirely new option for the settlement when you choose the appropriate prompt (which is going to be complicated as gently caress in itself). It'll be a loving miracle if I can get the framework in place to do this at all, but if I can it would be relatively easy to give the phantom settlement province traits.
|
|
#
?
Jun 9, 2016 20:17
|
|
|
Arglebargle III posted:
Naaa, it shouldn't be a problem for long.
|
|
#
?
Jun 9, 2016 20:29
|
|
|
Arglebargle III posted:
Could hurt a bit. More importantly: you can press "K" to toggle the interface off if you're making cool screenshots.
|
|
#
?
Jun 9, 2016 20:40
|
|
|
Woaaah I sacked Couronne for 44000 favor and then Louen Leoncour rolled up with two armies and kicked my rear end.
|
|
#
?
Jun 9, 2016 20:50
|
|
|
madmac posted:Actually yes, the CA dude didn't seem to be aware of it. Told him to report it on the main forums as a bug. poo poo. That sounds like it won't get fixed very soon then. RIP (literally)
|
|
#
?
Jun 9, 2016 20:54
|
|
|
Arglebargle III posted:Woaaah I sacked Couronne for 44000 favor and then Louen Leoncour rolled up with two armies and kicked my rear end. Woah.
|
|
#
?
Jun 9, 2016 20:56
|
|
|
I just besieged a Border Princes city and it looked like a quaint English city except every possible mountainous surface had a giant skull carved into it. Warhammer geography is really weird.
|
|
#
?
Jun 9, 2016 20:57
|
|
|
Wilekat posted:I just besieged a Border Princes city and it looked like a quaint English city except every possible mountainous surface had a giant skull carved into it. Vampiric Corruption does that, iirc.
|
|
#
?
Jun 9, 2016 21:04
|
|
|
beejay posted:poo poo. That sounds like it won't get fixed very soon then. RIP (literally) It's been reported at least 3 times on the official forums and the status of the reports are "In Progress".
|
|
#
?
Jun 9, 2016 21:10
|
|
|
Wilekat posted:I just besieged a Border Princes city and it looked like a quaint English city except every possible mountainous surface had a giant skull carved into it. It's like a normal mountain, but eeeevvviillll
|
|
#
?
Jun 9, 2016 21:20
|
|
|
Man it is really hard to go to other Total War games from here. I tried Shogun 2 and while I got through a few battles with similar tactics the entire thing just felt kinda "yeah it's good but I'd be having more fun if those spearmen were skeletons and I was fighting orcs". I'm gonna try Napoleon and hope the different setting and historical technology level make it different enough to not trigger pining for Warhammer.
|
|
#
?
Jun 9, 2016 21:29
|
|
|
ZarathustraFollower posted:This would spike the difficulty for chaos and make them much more annoying to play as. Sack-> encamp is a mainstay of using their armies well. As is, it makes razing a tactical choice, since it leaves you more vulnerable at the end of your turn than just sacking. And for non-hordes too. Hopping back across your border from a sack allows for replenishment of casualties and there's a lot of places that empire/vc can pull that off. It's super helpful when you're suffering attrition when you stay put.
|
|
#
?
Jun 9, 2016 21:41
|
|
|
So I tried starting my second campaign as VC and something was...off. I didn't like how reliant you were on chaff in the beginning, and none of the units I tried felt different enough. Mannfred is badass and I see how he could become a powerhouse later down the line, but I don't know how I feel about a lord carrying their whole army. I mostly suck at this game so I'm sure I'm missing something that makes the VC so interesting and popular, so maybe I'll get them when I try again later. I'd like to complete everyone's campaign if possible. Dwarfs, though. I'm only 4 turns in and I can already tell I'm going to love them. I started as Orcs so it's nice being on the other side of downhill Quarreler and Grudge Thrower fire for a change. Who needs cavalry and flanking when you can just force your enemy to run The Gauntlet.
|
|
#
?
Jun 9, 2016 21:42
|
|
|
Pierson posted:Man it is really hard to go to other Total War games from here. I tried Shogun 2 and while I got through a few battles with similar tactics the entire thing just felt kinda "yeah it's good but I'd be having more fun if those spearmen were skeletons and I was fighting orcs". Have an army of Thunderers/HandGunners with Cannons. Your now playing Napoleon, and killing orcs.
|
|
#
?
Jun 9, 2016 21:44
|
|
|
Deified Data posted:So I tried starting my second campaign as VC and something was...off. I didn't like how reliant you were on chaff in the beginning, and none of the units I tried felt different enough. Mannfred is badass and I see how he could become a powerhouse later down the line, but I don't know how I feel about a lord carrying their whole army. I mostly suck at this game so I'm sure I'm missing something that makes the VC so interesting and popular, so maybe I'll get them when I try again later. I'd like to complete everyone's campaign if possible. Take over the western and eastern sides of slyvania within the first 5 turns, turn one or two of the vampire factions into vassals to protect you and trade with you, I stick what remains of templehof in that little fort observer town and keep the main city for my buildings, you can still have a province edict with vassals holding territory, they might backstab you but you can just subjugate them again if they do. From there, you can turtle up and build grave guards, vargheist, crypt horrors or cairn wraiths, they do not require a lot of buildings or money to get started. Once you got your power troops in a couple of armies and have them backed up by cannon fodder, you can go any direction you want, I went after the dwarves because they can become a nuisance and make your homeland unsafe, while I took them out the empire had a lot of in-fighting and I washed over them with a tidal wave of dead by the time I was done with the dwarves. Besides that, on turn 1 just be sure to build a goldmine and recruit a second vampire lord and start getting him skeletons, once you got eschen destroy the barracks in your capital since they only go up to tier 3. Ra Ra Rasputin fucked around with this message at 21:57 on Jun 9, 2016 |
|
#
?
Jun 9, 2016 21:53
|
|
|
Question, how easy would it be to mod skill trees if you wanted to remove entire sections of filler skills or double/triple the effects per point you put in? There are some skill points that are way above the rest and some that I don't even know why you would consider like in the combat section, the choice of 30% health or +9 charge, but the AI values both the same so your lords will become specialized murder machines and their lords will be picking their noses with -3% recruitment cost on the third moon of june.
|
|
#
?
Jun 9, 2016 22:02
|
|
|
Mazz posted:So I have an idea for a mod: All I want is to be able to park my lord in these watchtowers, gain vision, and not be able to be assassinated by an enemy hero. Having to march through VC territory as a dwarf with their stupid heroes following me the whole time and being unable to occupy their cities to avoid assassination is the worst thing in human existence ever.
|
|
#
?
Jun 9, 2016 22:10
|
|
|
quote:Kemmler Or possibly Mannfred is too strong comparatively? We are seeing quite a few conflicting reports on lots of issues of balance. This interview stuff didn't end up giving up much interesting info but I did like this part. I hope they end up buffing Mannfred and nerfing Kemmler in the next patch.
|
|
#
?
Jun 9, 2016 22:44
|
|
|
Vargs posted:This interview stuff didn't end up giving up much interesting info but I did like this part. I hope they end up buffing Mannfred and nerfing Kemmler in the next patch. The argument for Kemmler is mainly about his campaign bonus being awesome for a certain playstyle/Mannfred being easy to get quickly.
|
|
#
?
Jun 9, 2016 22:46
|
|
|
Kaza42 posted:It would be really cool to have an alternate path to the Defense buildings that instead of providing a big garrison to one town, provided a few extra units to any battle fought in that province. Whether as reinforcements or just adding to the parent stack. I think it would be a cool way to create the feel of a heavily reinforced area. Holy poo poo, yeah, like a Provincial Household Troops or Road Wardens force which comes in as reinforcements (maybe from the direction of the regional capitol city) in battles? That would definitely add the kind of feel you're talking about but I'm betting it would also be really good for AI defenders in AI-vs-AI wars, which I think would be an even greater overall benefit. Especially for mid-late game battles when you've got walls on most of your towns, 4-6 mixed pistol and rifle cavalry (say) showing up outside the walls would be able to seriously gently caress up enemy artillery and also tie up/maul enemy infantry reserves, potentially gently caress up monsters or maybe even snipe leaders, and having to deal with a force like that would add some variety and excitement to knocking down enemy fortified towns, if you like to see all of your fancy endgame toys in action but want to possibly do some actual maneuvering instead of the standard unidirectional turkey shoot followed by a leisurely stroll up to the walls. Folks a couple pages ago were talking about Mazz's (awesome) tier-IV towns mod, so I figured I'd post some shots from my current Empire campaign.  Those Demigryphs and outriders were queued before I realized that the +xp on recruit effect of Empire Captains is limited to region instead of being province-wide, and I didn't want to lose a turn of production just to get another three ranks in the tiny counter-cavalry force of Gelt's wizards-and-black-powder-core force. Note that a general with Headhunter would be adding another 2 xp levels to all recruits, so rank 7 Steam Tanks and rank 9 Helblasters, and after I finally step off to tag-team Archaeon and pals with those steam tanks I should get enough Captain levels to push even the Tanks to rank 9. Oh, yeah, and I still haven't managed to upgrade the gunnery school in Nuln, that would get another 2 levels for at least the volley guns without the Captains returning, haven't checked if it applies to Steam Tanks too.  Pretty much what the final town levels let me do in terms of recruitment is add an additional 3 levels to Infantry units, redundant with the current population of Captains but as soon as this poo poo rolls out I'm going to be training another roving peacekeeper army without them around, so still useful. Still capable of filling Reikland up with Blacksmiths at tier III towns for more recruitment capacity, which if you ask me is the most important benefit of putting the whole province on a war footing like this. The best effect, I believe, is being able to put your Menagerie outside of Altdorf, followed by being able to build upgraded Shrines for more agents. I haven't been able to even max half of my provincial capitols, despite having had the population to do so for quite some time, because completely retooling Reikland is loving expensive. I think if I had thought of this 30 turns before I did, and maybe not have spent so long loving around in Brettonia, which along with The Wastland needs a dedicated anti-revolt patrol and really only gets it when that army isn't defending against Skaeling stacks, I could have gotten 2 stacks like the one Gelt is assembling, plus Karl's planned cavalry-heavy dedicated-reinforcement army ready just after the main Chaos doomstacks started ruining the remains of the north. Right now it's looking like come-lately Karl is going to be supporting with a mixed infantry-outrider force with some mortars and maybe grenade launchers if I can afford the time, and a couple of semi-random stacks I shuffled together from Confederated troops are already up at the front. Awesomely, stacks from basically every cultural group are all over Nordland/Middenheim/Hochland too, and I've fought several joint battles where the AIs just clusterfuck into each other while my artillery shoots into the melee.
|
|
#
?
Jun 9, 2016 22:46
|
|
|
Anyone got pointers for putting Helblaster volley guns to good use, incidentally? In every battle I've played with them, they've accomplished more or less gently caress all - a couple dozen kills at the very most, no matter how I deploy them. They seem to need more or less direct line of sight so unless I have a big hill to put them on, they get put into the checkerboard of the main line like handgunners do; but a single unit of handgunners always accomplishes more than a battery of helblasters does. What am I doing wrong? Or are they really underpowered at the moment?
|
|
#
?
Jun 9, 2016 22:50
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 13, 2024 22:58 |
|
|
Ra Ra Rasputin posted:Question, how easy would it be to mod skill trees if you wanted to remove entire sections of filler skills or double/triple the effects per point you put in? Very easy, you just have to find the table and change the numbers.
|
|
#
?
Jun 9, 2016 22:54
|
|