Broken Cog posted:

I feel the Slaneesh rewards are a bit too much. I don't think they should nerf them though, but maybe give them some slightly more severe downsides to go with.

Panfilo posted:

Are we going to get regiments of renown in this game? I missed being able to have an 'elite' variant of each unit that had some fun gimmick.

Scandalous posted:

Terrible Opinions posted:

XCOM2 doesn't take you to a fail state though. If the bar fills up it just gives you a special mission to make the bar go down.

Kanos posted:

It is incredibly easy to just leave a couple bar reduction missions on the map while you do whatever and if you get into the "win or lose" countdown, you just go beat one and not only push the bar back but also reset your doomsday counter.

Ravenfood posted:

Khornate warriors with Nurgle's vanguard-deploy plague is pretty loving mean too.

ScootsMcSkirt posted:

ya, its weird since its behind a tech that says it only gives vanguard to the flesh hounds which is completely useless since they already have vanguard. I wonder if the description is completely wrong, but the tech is working as intended or if its bugged somehow and giving the entire roster vanguard when it should only be a unit or two. Either way, its pretty fun lining up your entire army like 30 feet in front of the enemy right before the battle. Poor bastards never stood a chance

AAAAA! Real Muenster posted:

I'm not speaking for Azran, but yes being able to build towers mid-fight is extremely obnoxious. You should get to place a few pre-battle and thats it, if that. The whole "generate supply points during the battle" thing is just really .... out there? It doesnt make any sense to me. I give zero fucks about how defensive sieges are affected by the change because I fight one defensive siege for every twenty offensive sieges and I'm burned the gently caress out on doing tedious painful grindy repetitive offensive sieges. 3K did sieges extremely well and CA took *zero* lessons from it.

AAAAA! Real Muenster posted:

Minor settlements had 'unique' maps based on the minor settlement type - mines were different than farms were different than ports ect. They had set points that had little archer towers already existed, and those towers had little control points near them that were not as obnoxious to take (took less time, the towers couldnt shoot you while you took them). The towers were not absurdly tall, could not be rebuilt, did not have insane range, and could be shot by artillery or archers with flaming arrows to be disabled (1 for 4 here in WH3). They also didnt have any blockers so that the towers could not inexplicably not shoot something like happens in WH3.

Someone smarter than me could probably explain the major settlement battles, but they just.... feel better. It feels like there are plays and counter-plays without anything being obnoxious. The defender could put a few barricades down before the battle starts to help control the flow of the battle in the city, but couldnt build them on the fly. I'm too fried to think of anything else to say about it but there is just something about them that is way less taxing and tedious than any TWWH siege I've done.

AAAAA! Real Muenster posted:

Thats fair. Its probably just personal preference on my part. Part of it is that I think you can do sieges without artillery better. If you have cav you can send them to the other side of the city to draw some defenders that direction while your infantry take the walls and that kind of stuff that really doesnt work in WH3.

AAAAA! Real Muenster posted:

Jokes was making a joke about playing 2 instead of 3 because the sieges in 2 are better.

KPC_Mammon posted:

I always found it frustrating that AI Ikit only has a single nuke and can't build more. The AI doesn't engage with any workshop mechanics, right?

Kanos posted:

I don't think it lies, I think it's visually imprecise. I got into a habit of always leaving like 5% more than necessary and never ran into a problem.

AAAAA! Real Muenster posted:

lol, uhh, have I done that before? I was genuinely confused at the time and only realized after. I'm married to an editor so I've learned to watch for the little details

Cannibal Llama posted:

Make a 4 lord pack for the Vampire Counts. They only had a single DLC so they deserve it the most.

Actually I guess technically Norsca could use one too but I have no idea what they could do for lords.

KPC_Mammon posted:

I wish there was a mod that gave us back the risk style map, speaking of newer total war stuff that sucks

Anno posted:

This is a fun sync kill

sexpig by night posted:

Settra literally in universe only came short of killing Nagash himself because a chaos god's whisper made it sound like he would be serving their interests as well by doing it and Settra does not serve so he jumped into a fuckin chaos rift to gently caress up the gods themselves as revenge.

I think we all know who runs things.

Comrade Blyatlov posted:

Do they have four hands?

AAAAA! Real Muenster posted:

I havent seen it mentioned before and now I'm curious.

Kanos posted:

I desperately wish this was the case in any way, shape, or form beyond "we ported over the visible diplomacy numbers".

AAAAA! Real Muenster posted:

I disagree. When playing release WH3 I found the diplomatic AI as bad or worse than WH2, I could just see the numbers about why they were being obtuse fuckwads.

AAAAA! Real Muenster posted:

Weren't we on different difficulties because I hated how AR results were tied to your campaign difficulty and I hate the new settlement battles so I played on Normal for the first time in like 3 years? Not that that would make that big of a difference, I guess? I also think I'm ornery about it because I want the AI to be more logical about confederation - in WH3 I found it even more steeply tied to the faction's army strength.

Captain Oblivious posted:

To be fair, you can do this. But it doesn't come from his skill tree, it comes from his body part selection and how you progress through his Glory tree. There are probably other strategies than this, but as an example, one of the absolute strongest tactics for Daniel is to go Khorne focused but make sure you have enough Glory of Nurgle to access the plague system so that you can use the Grey Ague or whichever one it is to give the army vanguard deployment. Khorne armies with vanguard for everyone is an incredibly powerful trick and something Skarbrand explicitly cannot do.

Legendary Ptarmigan posted:

Wait, what!? Do any other colleges have mounts other than horse and pegasus?

Desire to know more intensifies

Twigand Berries posted:

is that lipstick or

Ralepozozaxe posted:

I hope when they add a fourth Khorramshahr lord they take the time and figure out a bonus besides “keeps going after attacking”. It’s a good bonus, but all 3 Khorramshahr lords have the bonus in some form or way.

99pct of germs posted:

CA really hosed Malekith. Valkia to the north, Grombrindal to your west and your starting province got hacked down to 2 settlements(!!). Woof.

Mercrom posted:

Yeah my point is that Ghorst being overpowered in MP is a completely separate from him being "overpowered" in campaign.

I would not want to encounter his faction playing as Skarbrand in campaign though.

Mercrom posted:

The zombies regenerate 50 life per second in melee with basically no healing cap so if the AI blobs up like it usually does only the Blade of Khorne will be able to kill them.