|
The trick with FotS's version of Realm Divide is IMO a bit different - the trick is that it's not actually one mechanic, but multiple. You can choose the alliance version where AI factions join your side, but you can also choose the Republican version which retains the vanilla version of Realm Divide where all the AI hates you. In my opinion, the real solution to the end game problem is to hand control to the player. Let the player choose whether they want a victory lap or a hardcore challenge. Give them a 'stick your middle finger up at the chaos gods button' where every click adds another chaos wave or something. Add a quick and simple short campaign victory. Add an accelerated campaign start that unlocks all the cool units early and straightaway. And so on.
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2018 12:40
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 7, 2024 00:41 |
|
|
Electronico6 posted:Mentioned in the other thread, but TK limitations of units shows that the best approach is to have limits baked in to the armies themselves, and not boring numbers like growth, PO, global income, and building chains that are designed to slow down the player, not to actual have any gameplay depth. Really just get rid of all the Civ-Lite poo poo. Unit limits per army doesn't work out in a grand campaign where you can have four armies reinforcing each other in one battle.
|
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2018 12:46
|
|
|
Though to be honest anything after 40 units can be more of a detriment then a help if it forces your specialist or best units to arrive late.
|
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2018 13:21
|
|
|
The thing is, if I want to play a game where I just spam low tier units the entire campaign I can play any historical title before Rome 2 and get the same experience. High tier units sucked balls for most of Total War and the last thing I want is more limitations on the one title where those high tier guys consist of stuff like Dragons and Dinosaurs. I find upkeep more than limiting enough honestly. I can put together one doomstack eventually but all my secondary armies are going to be running around with low or mid tier troops to compensate and that's fine. Nothing is stopping players from using whatever army composition they prefer and that's cool with me. Tomb Kings are a little weird in that the unit caps are a huge deal in the early stages and utterly irrelevant faster than you would expect. No race snowballs harder than Tomb Kings.
|
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2018 13:44
|
|
|
Ra Ra Rasputin posted:Though to be honest anything after 40 units can be more of a detriment then a help if it forces your specialist or best units to arrive late. Right, but you can totally cheese individual army limits preventing you from fielding one stack of 19 black dragons by just splitting that stack and treating it like one army.
|
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2018 13:51
|
|
|
I feel like the strongest part of Bretonnia is the strength of a full stack of grail guardians in auto-resolve. These guys take almost no damage in their calculations, it's bananas. My Hippogryph knights have to take a breather every few autos and my heroes died a while back, but the grail guardians are going strong.
Reik fucked around with this message at 15:01 on Apr 3, 2018 |
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2018 14:52
|
|
|
El Cadavo has been a delightful experience with Cataph's Southern Realms and the RoR Submod. Mixed with SFO it's been a delight gatting down rats with pirates and a mercenary riding a star dragon.
|
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2018 15:17
|
|
|
What is the best unit cap mod that isn't some massive overhaul?
|
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2018 16:31
|
|
|
Baron Porkface posted:What is the best unit cap mod that isn't some massive overhaul? I haven’t personally tried it out but Aisriyth’s Unit Cap Mod looks like a good lightweight one
|
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2018 16:41
|
|
|
I thought the TKs campaign was kinda slow, but once you're powerful enough to challenge the book armies, you can pretty much just make an undead strike force and roam the world. Got no books for the first 60 turns as Court of Lybaras, but then got 4 within the next 15 turns. Edit: Also, making you traverse half the world just to trigger the Venom Staff quest battle is a bit of a troll on the dev's part. The battle itself is really fun though. Broken Cog fucked around with this message at 19:36 on Apr 3, 2018 |
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2018 19:34
|
|
|
I think the whole preventing the player from getting too overpowering is something the Paradox games tend to handle well. Wars are more limited in scope, it takes effort to incorporate territory, there's actual internal and external politics. TW games have sadly never had the overworld as anything more than a pretty backdrop to the battles, which as stated, get old fast because of how many you have to fight.
|
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2018 21:26
|
|
|
Cpt_Obvious posted:Just resign yourself to the fact that you may lose some minor cities. Capitals with walls can hold out till help arrives, but others are just going to need some rebuilding. It's part of the game. The only time I even had unreasonable soawns was my Lothern game. If you hold all Ulthuan, the Vortex stacks appear to be coded to spawn (1) on the continent and (2) wherever your armies are least capable of responding. I tried spreading stacks evenly across the whole continent but that just invited defeat in detail and it was ultimately chaper to keep my forces concentrated in a couple areas and lost some minor cities. In all my other runs, the ritual stacks spawned in the same place every time with only minor variations. This rules as Skaven because you can camp all your armies there and chain ambush them before they even take their first turn.
|
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2018 23:48
|
|
|
Acute Grill posted:The only time I even had unreasonable soawns was my Lothern game. If you hold all Ulthuan, the Vortex stacks appear to be coded to spawn (1) on the continent and (2) wherever your armies are least capable of responding. I tried spreading stacks evenly across the whole continent but that just invited defeat in detail and it was ultimately chaper to keep my forces concentrated in a couple areas and lost some minor cities. Yeah, I was playing as Tyrion (with all of Ulthuan conquered), so this was my scenario. Might be better for the other factions. Anyway, just finished a game as Tomb Kings, and I have to say I enjoyed the Book collecting campaign more than the Vortex. The final battle was really neat, though fairly easy. I just went for it immediately after finding the last book, with a half-healthy army, and had no issues. For WH3, I hope CA focuses on making an "unique" campaign for each faction, instead of just the "Destroy these factions, control this many provinces/Gather this many things" objectives they have now. They already have the system in place for more interesting campaigns with the Quest Battle system, just need to integrate it into more aspects of the game.
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2018 01:04
|
|
|
Broken Cog posted:Yeah, I was playing as Tyrion (with all of Ulthuan conquered), so this was my scenario. Might be better for the other factions. Same here as well. Are the bullshit realm-destroying spawns just a High Elves thing? If so I'll run the campaign with another race. Eimi posted:I think the whole preventing the player from getting too overpowering is something the Paradox games tend to handle well. CK2 broke my heart and I'll never forgive it. Paradox is/was very effective at keeping you from getting powerful and similarly effective at knocking you out of power. With the methods they used, not the least of which being constant nerfs, it was less about escalating difficulty/managing an empire and more about them yelling in your face just stay small you jerk. CK2 in particular also shared TWW's love of magic spawns.
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2018 02:09
|
|
|
Eimi posted:I think the whole preventing the player from getting too overpowering is something the Paradox games tend to handle well. Wars are more limited in scope, it takes effort to incorporate territory, there's actual internal and external politics. TW games have sadly never had the overworld as anything more than a pretty backdrop to the battles, which as stated, get old fast because of how many you have to fight. I dunno if we play the same paradox games
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2018 02:12
|
|
|
Edgar Allen Ho posted:I dunno if we play the same paradox games Yeah seriously. Paradox games, especially CK2, are probably the best of any strategy game I've ever played when it comes to finding inventive and fun ways to truly challenge the player throughout a full game.
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2018 02:19
|
|
|
Giggle Goose posted:Yeah seriously. Paradox games, especially CK2, are probably the best of any strategy game I've ever played when it comes to finding inventive and fun ways to truly challenge the player throughout a full game. Comparing CK2 to Total War is like comparing Mario to Contra in that they're both the same vague broad genre but the two games are entirely different in focus. CK2 abstracts the gently caress out of the military aspect of the equation and goes all in on politics, diplomacy, and dynasty management whereas the strategic layer in a Total War game is meant to be fancy dressing to usher you from battle to battle.
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2018 02:24
|
|
|
Mailer posted:CK2 broke my heart and I'll never forgive it. Paradox is/was very effective at keeping you from getting powerful and similarly effective at knocking you out of power. With the methods they used, not the least of which being constant nerfs, it was less about escalating difficulty/managing an empire and more about them yelling in your face just stay small you jerk. CK3 beta sounds awesome. Too bad CK2 is the opposite of this. EDIT: To clarify, I think CK2 actually does the best at this of the Paradox games, but all of them are really, really susceptible to snowball. It's the nature of strategy games.
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2018 03:08
|
|
|
 Come on Tyrion, that's not a very nice thing to say.
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2018 06:40
|
|
|
Want more ratbois in the Badlands? Leylos might have your back: http://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=1350326216 It's a set of scripts that moves around a bunch of factions, most notably AI Skarsnik and Tretch into Eight Peaks and Black Iron Mine, respectively. A Skaven clan now occupies Karak Azgal and Kradtommen, while the Northern Grey Mountains Dwarfs have been moved entirely down south to the Vaults per lore. Lastly, all-Goblin Greenskin factions are now a thing; they'll have Skarsnik's roster.
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2018 09:35
|
|
|
Kanos posted:Comparing CK2 to Total War is like comparing Mario to Contra in that they're both the same vague broad genre but the two games are entirely different in focus. CK2 abstracts the gently caress out of the military aspect of the equation and goes all in on politics, diplomacy, and dynasty management whereas the strategic layer in a Total War game is meant to be fancy dressing to usher you from battle to battle. I don't think you need to directly compare them, but there is nothing wrong with wanting a little more depth on the campaign map area. A true fusion of the styles of game that Paradox and CA put out may be entirely impractical to produce, but a little cross over may be a solution to some of the issues the campaign map has in the Total War games.
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2018 09:50
|
|
|
The warscore system from paradox would go really well in TW I think. One of the problems TW wars have is the endless grind of sieges to take territory after you smash several armies decisively in the field. Getting warscore from winning major battles decisively which you spend to take territory in a peace deal would get around this nicely. Of course CA would need to fix their "close victory" poo poo then
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2018 10:10
|
|
|
Please never bring in the warscore system into total war, thank you very much based CA.
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2018 19:59
|
|
|
Giggle Goose posted:Yeah seriously. Paradox games, especially CK2, are probably the best of any strategy game I've ever played when it comes to finding inventive and fun ways to truly challenge the player throughout a full game. Every pdox game since EU2 I’ve played involves abandoning the game far before the end date because you become a superpower very easily. CK2 is an outlier because it’s a lot easier for things to go balls up via rng but even CK2 it ain’t that hard to outdo Rome. They have the same issue as TW there. Wafflecopper posted:The warscore system from paradox would go really well in TW I think. One of the problems TW wars have is the endless grind of sieges to take territory after you smash several armies decisively in the field. Getting warscore from winning major battles decisively which you spend to take territory in a peace deal would get around this nicely. Of course CA would need to fix their "close victory" poo poo then That is not how warscore works in practice, at all. The AI fights every war like it’s Ostfront 1942. Every shitfuck AI minor will circumnavigate the globe to land the entirety of its 3000-man army in your one lovely undefended fort thousands of miles from the war zone and they will not give in until you offupy their land, no matter the odds. Edgar Allen Ho fucked around with this message at 23:13 on Apr 4, 2018 |
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2018 23:09
|
|
|
Gejnor posted:Please never bring in the warscore system into total war, thank you very much based CA.
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2018 00:34
|
|
|
Friendly Fire posted:I don't think you need to directly compare them, but there is nothing wrong with wanting a little more depth on the campaign map area. A true fusion of the styles of game that Paradox and CA put out may be entirely impractical to produce, but a little cross over may be a solution to some of the issues the campaign map has in the Total War games. I agree with some of the earlier thread consensus that what the campaign maps need to become are outlets to stage big, awesome battles; I don't think increasing the intricacies of +5% Income from Agriculture do well to help that along.
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2018 00:39
|
|
|
loving Total War game campaign maps have sucked ever since they decided to actually have your guys walk everywhere instead of just having them move from province to province and no one can convince me otherwise. gently caress's sake I don't want to watch my dude slog for 7 turns on automove through basically identical provinces to fight on basically the same maps except for basically the same ambush stances when everything would be better from a province to province perspective.
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2018 04:49
|
|
|
Anyone else had AI Exiles of Nehek just not do anything? I wanted to buddy up with him as Mazdamundi to keep him as a buffer for the Dark Elves, but he's been sitting on his island, slowly building up massive doomstacks, for the last 40 turns. I even went and razed all the Cult of Pleasure settlements in the area, hoping he would resettle them, but no dice. Edit: Also, just got a blessed quest to make a trade agreement with Naggarond, who I'm currently at -200 reputation with. Might be a challenge. 
Broken Cog fucked around with this message at 05:03 on Apr 5, 2018 |
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2018 04:50
|
|
|
Benagain posted:gently caress's sake I don't want to watch my dude slog for 7 turns on automove through basically identical provinces to fight on basically the same maps except for basically the same ambush stances when everything would be better from a province to province perspective. The counterpoint to this is, some provinces are so small that you can move through 3 or 4 with one armies movement points, where in the old Risk style it would have taken as many turns as there were provinces to move through. My pipe-dream wish for the Campaign map would be to move it to a real time mode with time acceleration options as this would enable proper manoeuvring of armies for appropriate terrain, and all but illuminate the situation where your army can't quite blockade a pass because its control area is just a sliver too small. I want to be able to strategically move in response to my enemies but you pretty much have to sit armies in spots forever to control parts of the map at the moment.
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2018 11:58
|
|
|
Broken Cog posted:Anyone else had AI Exiles of Nehek just not do anything? I wanted to buddy up with him as Mazdamundi to keep him as a buffer for the Dark Elves, but he's been sitting on his island, slowly building up massive doomstacks, for the last 40 turns. I even went and razed all the Cult of Pleasure settlements in the area, hoping he would resettle them, but no dice. I did as Khalida. I finally got up to him as I approached the late game and found him with 3 armies and just his starting city. I had to raze everything around him and corral him into settling things. Then of course he runs down and curbstomps Mazdamundi instead of helping me against the dark elves I'd run up to save him from.
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2018 12:32
|
|
|
Gejnor posted:Please never bring in the warscore system into total war, thank you very much based CA.
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2018 12:59
|
|
|
I like how the game is called total war but people keep wanting to make the war part lesser
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2018 13:36
|
|
|
Gamerofthegame posted:I like how the game is called total war but people keep wanting to make the war part lesser I like there to be more Strategy in my Strategy games.
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2018 13:37
|
|
|
Making the battles more meaningful would improve the game a lot
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2018 13:46
|
|
|
kidkissinger posted:Making the battles more meaningful would improve the game a lot Yeah this is the way to go. Midgame on and a crushing victory or defeat means you take or lose maybe one city before another doomstack replaces the dead one.
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2018 13:51
|
|
|
Someone needs to pick a couple of good historical campaigns, Mak their narratives and work backwards to how to replicate them in TW. Best campaign narrative I ever saw in a game was the diaries from Myth, where every single battle won just saw the situation getting bleaker until the final, cataclysmic battle. And then you come back in Myth 2 and re-form the empire and kick rear end righteously.
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2018 14:01
|
|
|
Are vanilla beatmen still hosed/op?
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2018 14:38
|
|
|
Gamerofthegame posted:I like how the game is called total war but people keep wanting to make the war part lesser Yeah, gently caress diplomacy and all that other poo poo THIS IS TOTAL WAR!!! But seriously you are missing the point. At the moment I may as well play a series of random maps and opponents for all the differences moving armies on the campaign map makes. Deepening the campaign map choices makes the battles you do have mean more and makes it about war, not just a series of battles.
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2018 16:01
|
|
|
The campaign side of Thrones sounds like it has alot of features that I'm hoping show up in WH3. The removal of campaign agents in particular is a blessed change that I hope gets backported to Warhammer.
|
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2018 16:40
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 7, 2024 00:41 |
|
|
Most of the campaign strategy in paradox style games are about either avoiding wars you don't want, or about trying to ensure wars that do happen are essentially forgone conclusions because you have so much more stuff than them. The sort of battles Total War excel at - battles where the player is at a significant disadvantage, with large losses if you fail are kinda exactly the sort of thing a good grand strategy players never get into. 'Deepening the campaign map choices' to make the 'battles you do have mean more' is harder than it sounds. It's really hard to avoid the situation where a player can offset bad decisions on the battlefield with good decisions on the campaign map - a situation that implies that the more complex you make the campaign layer, the *less* the battles mean. Fangz fucked around with this message at 17:03 on Apr 5, 2018 |
|
#
?
Apr 5, 2018 16:57
|
|