When you decide to play total war warhammer

The white man should have forced every people it conquered to adopt the Latin alphabet.

I think it looks like space alien writing.

Buy a real computer then.

Game is good, runs fine. OP a nigger.

I think your GPU's core is in danger.

No they are not.

I actually like the look of Thai. It looks like Hylian.

Remember that Warhammer game for PS1?

I had no idea what i was even doing but somehow kept clearing the missions.

Oh it was this one.

...

...

And yet somehow my game looks perfectly fine and much better than OPs. Conclusion: OP a nigger.

See webm

No, user - you're the nigger. OP's a dumb piece of shit that aspires to greater niggerhood.

10/10 test of time award for each year

also can we fucking talk about rome:total war with the EB mod?

It only looks ok because you can't see the garbage UI.

The UI is the same as any other modern TW game.

Yeah, trash

PATRICIANS HAVE OCCUPIED THE THREAD
Yes I've been thinking it's about time to start a new game of this.

what the fuck, did they get past the hard faction+province limit or something?

The only thing more autistic than EB are those mods that change every province name and unit to the *~real life ancient language equivalent~* so nobody can tell what the fuck your units are.

...

LEGEND of TOTAL CHAD eats PIZZA and fucks his QT WIFE and plays on MAXIMUM difficulty at the very MINIMUM, while also thinking about ADDITONAL CHALLENGES like winning a campaign by LOSING EVERY BATTLE.

He told the "AKSHUALLY IT'S PRONOUNCED…" people to fuck off once. That's fine in my book.

what was that about?

I recently watched his shogun 1 let's play and his pronounciation of japanese words seems better than average at least. Not that I can really judge.

I am just glad I got to post my meme after I made it a few weeks back and everyone of my total war threads was ignored.

He was playing Rome 2 and people were complaining about his pronounciation in the comments. That's really all to it.

Also the madman actually plays a campaign without winning battles. Well fuck.

Not gonna lie, I am extremely disappointed by the Vampire Counts.

I would have loved to see them similar to some in Dominions 4, where you have a normal nation with gold and all that, but as you build up your regions, the population dieclines, gets even more enslaved for blood rituals, monsters emerge, you no longer have to hide as "just normal aristocrats" in public, but can show your true nature openly, which also should play into diplomacy.

Woodelves and Vampires would be able to inflitrate other noble houses and get the option in a complex spy simulation to take them over, influence them, etc.

I think that would thematically and probably lore wise fit their faction.

But instead Zombies get tired, gold just gets renamed to something edgy, agents work the same as always, you are pretty much just a normal faction.

So disappointing. I really would like to play faction that has a hidden agenda, which only in the very late game you can completly reveal, which fundamentally changes your nation.

He really is the only one who is doing it.
If I ever made a youtube channel I might make him competition on stuff like "declare war on every faction turn one" and stuff like that, but he really is the only one who attempts it and doesn't quit halfway through.

I watch let's plays like that. Not because of perosnality, but because of the challenge.

...

Uh, no. The Vampire Counts in Sylvania are pretty open about just what they are, to the point where the peasants prefer them to human overlords since at least Vampires don't steal most of your already meagre harvest.

I thought I read something about them keeping up appearances. At least nominally.

Op here. I know, i suck cocks, and my id probably changed, but here's a thing - those artifacts disappeared as soon as i disabled blood effects.

Just saying it if anybody else will experience this shit.

It's not fatigue, it's magical binding. It's stronger if they're close to the general, and they crumble almost immediately if the general dies.

Why are they moving like that? Do they have to take a big skelly shit, or are they reeeally nervous?

It's the exact opposite. Rome 1 and Medieval 2 were very simple games and CA have added a bunch of unnecessary complexity that make them less fun.

"okay"

Depends on which lore written by which guy.
In some they're openly leading armies and managing day to day, in others they chill underground and have their thralls keep shit running.

And if you managed to read up on the Roleplay? Well, that shit is like three times more bleak than the tabletop. In the tabletop humanity kinda-sorta has a distant chance of surviving. In the Roleplay it's literally End Times all day erry day.

for a second I thought you were responding in my Morrowind Tribunal thread

lmao, funny how well that fits

…

A better Total War-type of game, or a better Warhammer game? Because I doubt it's very easy to get your hands on license use rights for Warhammer.

I still don't understand the deal with the ayylmao glasses

is that armenian

Total War.

I have never played a Total War game and I feel like trying it out.
Should I try any games in particular or stay away from any? I remember reading about Rome 2 being a mess when it released.

If you like guns go Fall of the Samurai or modded Empire/Napoleon, otherwise you're looking at Medieval 2 with some form of stainless steel or Rome 1 with one of the fuckzillion mods for it. Alternatively, if you just want to install and play get Shogun 2 with darthmod.

Rome 2 EE is decent if nothing special, and Attila is a well polished shit.

You haven't played the game yet you're judging it? The game is so much more "complex" than the previous entries, if you're fighting up hill and get flanked good fucking luck because you've already lost even if you have some elite units vs previous entries where your elites can last fucking foreve no matter what.

There are a few exceptions like when you have the steam tank, but seriously fuck off with your regurgitated shit, until you can tell me how it's dumbed down I'm sticking with you being a massive faggot

How are these acceptable 2016 graphics?

inb4 outdated rome 2 cavalry charge footage

we had mark of chaos. it had 4 races with no additional ones added.

Ultimate general not ringing bells?

If you're talking strictly about battle mechanics The Kings' Crusade, Imperial Glory and even Mark of Chaos blew their contemporary TWs out of the water. Campaign wise/overland map in TWW is objectively worse then that WHFB mod for M2, less factions, less units per faction and far less events, lore and fluff.

The real charm and potential of Total War came from the amazingly weird autistic shit people modded in, and CA killed it in favor of dlc.

Todd Howard

Darth had some incredibly shitty luck for the release to coincide with the ban of the Confederate flag

Don't forget shit like the XIII Century

Well good thing you pirated it, you can just uninstall that crap and move on

It sold well and I think more people bought it because of it, plus his upcoming game looks fantastic

Frankly I don't know, must be a mod I have active. Normally the skeletons all march in perfect lockstep.

SH2 is universally seen as the high point of the "modern" TWs. Medieval 2 or Rome 1 are great depending on your liking of slightly clunky gameplay.

Rome 2 is still pretty meh, Attila improves on it every aspect.

Warhammer is fine too, but probably the most arcade-y in the series.

Darth is a dumbass only outdone by Radious.

If anyone cares, here's a quick webm of charges in TW: Warhammer.

Third Age mod is fucking amazing and I need to go download it again.

Strategy game graphics have hit the ceiling long before FPS AAA games. Mostly cause of processing power and bad code optimization. Plus still games look better when everything is moving and fully animated from a distance compared to a still image zoomed in up close.

Graphics are not much of an issue for me anyway, I mean shit some Holla Forumsirgins are still making Turok threads.

*strategy games look better

How do I recover from watching Legend of Total War?

I feel like he sapped all the fun out of the game. :(

bravo CA

Why is he so dreamy Holla Forums

Poetic, too.

It's a shame Chaos is such a bad faction in Campaign.

Here's hoping.

Oh, he's an autist without a doubt but I don't remember him ever flooding or replying to the wrong post :^)

Rome 1 is a classic and is a must play. Play vanilla first, then try out Europa Barbarorum or some of the other total conversion mods. You get huge unit sizes and massive battles that actually feel like battles rather than arcadey bullshit like in the newer games. Med 2 is good, feels a bit clunky to me. The Third Age mods is worth checking out. Shogun 2 is good, the AI is actually fairly good and challenging. Pretty good multiplayer, relies a bit too much on micro for my liking. All the new ones are shit, don't bother.

You have only yourself to blame.
Not that I recommend anything after Medieval 2, but I know a lot of people like Shogun 2 and I myself honestly liked Empire and Napoleon if only for the time period, so I can't really judge.

Step 1: Return to risk map.

There's not point in playing EB for Rome 1 when EB2 for Medieval 2 exists.

But do play both vanilla Rome 1 and Med 2 (they also have expansions that you can look into). The latter has a huge selection of mods that you can dive into when you're done with the regular campaigns.

Any genuine reasons?

Less pointless micromanagement, the AI can handle the strategic map better, more emphasis on strategic decision making, etc.

The AI actually knew how to use the risk map would be the main one, it's also better balanced for time/movement abstractions, naval battles/interception and possibly for province management and chokepoint/terrain/general readability.

The only point that I could agree with would be the AI being slightly improved.
But I don't see what "pointless micromanagement" you're talking about or how this could lead to deeper strategic choices.

The campaign map in R1 and Med2 has it's issues, yes. Namely the slow movement speed of armies and the AI's flaccid attempts to take initiative and attack.

Or maybe CA could sit down and program a competent AI for once.

step 1:

Special for Total War Warhammer:
just ruling it, yields more gold and access to low level human troops
corrupting it, make monster move there, build higher level buildings, and gives more "dark magic gems", which will be a seperate ressource from gold. but reduces the public order, as long as the human population is too high or hasn't been properly enslaved

ALSO YOU SHOULD BE ABLE TO CAST SPELLS AND RITUALS ON THE FUCKING CAMPAIGN MAP!

Like make a whole area dark. Spells akin to Strategic Bombers over German towns, that reduce population and damage buildings, increase corruption, summon demons, etc. Like Dominions 4.

t. Legend of Total War + user's ideas

What do you think, guys?

I'm slightly sympathetic to them here; programming AI is one of the hardest parts of gamedev and I would rather the people at CA responsible would work on the Battle AI. Simplifying the strategic map would make the game more challenging and free up the team to make the actual battles not completely shit. Since they switched to the 3D map they've had to have the AI cheat in the fog to make it difficult. I had far more fun on the strategic map in S1 and M1 when it was actually strategic on not just the terrible mess it is now.

That would also finally introduce proper campaigning seasons, which is still a thing even to today

I think I want a game that's a straight upgrade to Medieval 2 like Rome 1 was.
Also not overdoing it all at once, but making slight changes with each new game, slowly improving everything.

Have they done anything to earn your sympathy in the last few years user?
Have they exerted ANY effort to make the games better, or did they just flood us with shitty DLCs made out of cut content?
Is there any reason to believe that making a proper campaign/battle AI is not possible when all they've done in the last decade was sit with their thumbs up their asses?

I said slightly, faggot. Only nostalgia-blind R1 fags and people who never actually played S1 or M1 think the 3D map is better.

But I still play R1 and have played M1.
I prefer the 3D map anyway. I think it needs changes, not gutting.

No.

t. Legend of Total War

...

Add not just manpower, but war fatigue too. You can't simply keep waging war endlessly and losing men, or at least not without having to fear unrest in the home provinces. This would then create a certain flow to the campaign. You'd have to be careful in your conduct not to lose too many men, because if you deplete the available surplus drawing more will make your provinces less efficient (less men to toil the fields or manufacture stuff).

Then add conversion, not just religious, but also cultural, and the inherent tradeoffs with such a system. You happen to like the auxilia a certain province allows you access to? Then better not push forth their Romanization so you can retain your barbarian units, but also have to fear greater chances of unrest.

And while we're on the topic, make rebellions and civil wars actually have bite, make you fear them and do everything in your power to avoid them.

Characters in general should be more than figurines on the map. Make it more like an RPG, steal some ideas from Crusader Kings, make these characters characters.

Also, tie command level to the number of troops a given commander can have in his stack without suffering penalties (movement, attrition/desertion, morale). There's a world of difference between, say, Cesar, who could ask the impossible of his men and get it, and some shitty, no name officer who gets killed by his own men.

A few more

It needs gutting. It adds nothing to the game other than the tedium of moving a bunch of figurines all over it.

Why can't I simply select a given region/faction, look at my pool of diplomats/spies/priests/princesses/etc. and tell them to go there? Why do I need to painstakingly move them across the map?

Hell, why can't I do the same with armies at the cost of their cohesion?

What does the 3D add to the movement of armies? Sure, you can hide them and wait to ambush someone and set them in a chokepoint, but such situations rarely come into play to have any meaningful impact on gameplay. With a boardgame map it's far easier to let the skill and traits of your generals shine through. He's got five points in leadership and the trait of a grand strategist? Then you will be far more likely to get a map that favors your army when a battle starts.

It wouldn't work. The AI can't manage this shit and there are ~20 paradox games alone that prove it. What they should do is enforce softcaps and AoR more.

They're trying to fix these two since the original Shogun.

Tried and failed. You would end up buying AI units in TWR just to "resettle" them in your cities.

They're already in and generally in the vein of spawn three full gold chevron stacks bullshit.

I don't follow. They're already good and you're already drowning in money.

They need character traits and semi-random shit a'lla Medieval 2 and Rome

How so?

It's already a thing. Wealth (trade) is separate from Wealth (agriculture) in say Rome 2.

It's about planning dingus.
You all talk about muh strategy, but I bet you all got outplayed at one point by how the "dumb AI" managed to sneak in a full stack into your territories by going around the mountains.
Because you don't know what scouting is.
Because you can't plan your movement to save your life.

If you want a grand strategy game, play a grand strategy game.
This goes for everyone else in the thread as well.

Good example, using incompetent Swedecucks that "balance" their games around the multiplayer only they play.

CA tries fuckall. Every game since Medieval 2 has been a step back. All they fucking do is make it look shiny for the trailers so the normalfags will buy them, but leave the games hollow, buggy turds, and then sell you DLC to add insult to injury.

There's nothing wrong with the idea behind the mechanic, just CA's usual incompetence.

These are the same idiots that proudly said they had 200+ artists working on Empire but only one guy doing AI, thus ending up with a game where the AI simply can't do naval invasion, so playing as England means you never get invaded by anyone.

Please stop sucking CA's dick, it's embarrassing.

...

I'm defending the 3D map, read the posts retard.

I'd use competent Martians if they made any games that fit the bill. Unfortunately Paradox and CA have set the standard for GSGs, but sure, you could suggest drawing off features from Nobunaga's Ambition or Romance.

And speaking of edgy cocksuckers and vague bullshit, tried King Arthur TRWG?

That's like saying leftists that smear their own feces on canvas in art school have set the standard for art in general.

Truth of the matter is that both of these developers have made a bunch of good games a long, long time ago and have just been copying them over and over again, adding more pointless shit because it's obvious that whoever is in charge has no fucking idea what they're doing.

Well, haven't they? Anyway, like I said, discussing vague bullshit and dealing with your way-out-there deflections is not really what I'm looking for.

Can they implement manpower - yes, should they - probably not, why - because it will end up a stick to beat the player over the head and not a meaningful mechanic. What they should try is expand on the softcap concept, ie certain (elite) unit types share slots so you can have only a certain amount of samurai or monks before you must depend on the ashigaru. AoR or localized units are also a very interesting but underutilized mechanic.

I'm my opinion they should ape the battle from Endless Space, cards and all, for the auto-battle. Also, fix the bloody sieges.

I think that should be more tied to levying units from a province. In ancient times there were mutliple communities in the mediterrenian that produced superb slingers. You shouldn't be able to just copy them, but conquer them and levy troops from them.

So in that parthian example it would be a situation where the Romans subdued Parthia, made them in a sort of autonomous region, so their culture doesn't get just assimilated so they retain their troops that is able to be fielded by the Romans.

Adapting troops like that was very hard, but imo you should be able to do that. Just imagine if some "barbarian" tribe managed to conquer what Rome did. They should have access to better equipment and levy from the locals.

The Byzantines for example were able to adapt the Cataphracts, but it didn't last for long, because they didn't historically preserve them.

Also historically you saw settled societies had a hard time dealing with steppe societies. They all resorted to using diplomacy and employing their own steppe warriros to fight for them, fire against fire sort of. The Byzantines themselves had access to turkish cavalry.

How didn't manpower work in HoI3???

They've never even moved into the direction of making replenishment not free and autoresolve still sucks donkey dick.

not dynamic factions though

no, it's always better to just spam cheap troops

git gud

just watch Legend of Total War if you want to know what the optimal strategy regarding this is, it's the worst in his Chaos campaign

yup

uhhh, like all the points I addressed already, friend? this is just to sum up most of them

No, it's not you retarded little faggot.
Thats just town wealth from a trade building source, its not actuallz trading.

The point would also be to stop the AI from flooding you with full stack after full stack.

Point is that one culture trait you can ascribe to Romans is pragmatism. If they saw something an enemy did better than them they had no qualms about copying it and using it for their own goals. They copied Carthaginians ships, they took the gladius from the Iberians, they adopted Greek culture, etc.

It's always irked me how "on script" all these strategy games are, especially when they let you go into an ahistorical scenario. Why shouldn't the Roman empire be able to field good archery units of their own if the player chooses to invest in them?

That's what I'm talking about. You conquer a province and then either choose to leave them as they are, allowing you access to the units that culture had, or to convert them to your culture, thus losing said units but gaining stability and another recruitment base for your own troops. EBII does something similar.

Funny thing is that other civilizations did attempt to copy the Roman legion, but it never seemed to work out for whatever reason. This goes against what I said above about archers, but I'd rather have a more gamey feature of "design your own unit" than be stuck with the same ones time and again.

Only when they chased after them. The Mongols had an easy time breaking into China, but the moment they entered regions with unsuitable terrain the rate of their conquest grew exponentially.

Also, Romans did manage to punch their version of Mongols so hard they pacified them. They never actually managed to properly conquer them, but they were more than capable of dealing with them.

Not all that well, honestly. Like any numerical resource you either didn't have enough or you had far more then you'd ever need.
Kohan and Supreme Commander knew what's what.

I suppose you never played Medieval 2 for example? Also fairly certain the upkeep increased in several games for replenishing units, but to be fair those may have been mod scripts.

I know what they tried and how they tried it, I also know why if failed. You got a better way?

That could be fun, but how to balance it so that it's not a realm divide tier event where you just lose a bunch of land due to reasons?

Only in Shogun 1 and arguably with line infantry for Empires. You've literally no reason to field peasant armies unless they're cheap broken like the pike militia.

You addressed precisely jackshit other then waah fix it because my favourite jewtuber said so.

Actually (with a Y :^) dear dumbass, trade is already included in the province income, and actually I'm making fun of you actually not getting how internal trade routes a'lla CiV are broken by definition.

And two patches later they'd add manpower cheats like they did for rome to compensate for all AI towns being completely depleted of manpower.

So what is the verdict on Total Warhammer? I feel it does two steps forwards and three steps backwards. The DLC seems outrageously priced, I mean 18 Eurobucks for a single race? Has CA been smoking something?

Actually (with a Y :^) dear dumbass, trade is already included in the province income, and actually I'm making fun of you actually not getting how internal trade routes a'lla CiV are broken by definition.

that is not trade, seriouslz wtf how do zou not know this

and the zy thing is because mz kezboard for some reason went to the us settings and I cant fix it without restarting the pc *I"m German}

have you plazed medieveal 2_
there were actually internal trade routes in that game

Yeah, the ashes of gentile babies.

The same system first introduced in the original Medieval plus the experimental map commodities.

OK, you're just messing with me now.

It gimped all but the major nations
The way they used it in Darkest Hour and earlier games was better than HOI3

You'd be nervous too if you were surrounded by skeletons.

vocaroo.com/i/s0CT0QGGpLzj

You got me there.

they reason it out with 10 bux for an overpriced race and 10 bux for a shitty mini campaign no one gives a shit about that's forced in

you should see the people so bad at the campaign they have mods to increase walk speed in friendly territory because they can't handle the thought of losing a few poorly defended towns and not being able to attack the enemy right away and they're too stupid to have scout armies of their own to do the same thing the ai does

The problem with the mini-campaigns is that they need to give their map designers and what have you something to do too. Just adding new races is easy as fuck but then half the studio would sit idle.

I agree though that that's a weak excuse for jacking up the price of the DLC.

Also, let's not forget that somehow the Beastman DLC took them the same amount of work as the Charlemagne DLC for Attila because… reasons.

vocaroo.com/i/s0YREISqJn1E

Skaven are so sneaky they managed to not be on the cover.

I don't get it. Is he hurt?

Probably. :^)
You know how rats turn on each other when starving? Skaven are like that, but as a society.

What is this shit. It was bad enough that I couldn't get the higher tiers to move in unison but why would anyone do this to their lower skellys.

Fuck if I know, I just googled "gutter runner" and posted the first pic I found. Here's a less shitty one to soothe your autism.

On this note, is the dlc pirateable yet?

Does it actually work like that or are you talking out of your ass?

...

it actually works like that.

I'm surprised we didn't get any retards showing webms of charges into charge resistant units like the dwarves that I saw awhile back.

Somethings realistically wouldn't work

do you even have any idea what youre saying or are you on drugs?

I actually made one but it did indeed look bad. vOv

I'm having a lot of fun playing Legendary, something which I almost never do in TW since the obvious AI cheating grinds my gears. It's alright with the Steel Faith mod though.

...

Ultimate General Civil War is tons of fun, but, unfortunately it lacks substance because technically it's not done yet, so there's only shit up until Fredrickburg which is kinda disappointing, also kinda was hoping for the campaign to be less "cookie cutter-ish"

...