>>2377400
I just can't see it being good when they have to make it work with a controller now they're saying it's gonna be on consoles

>>2377400
I have no hope.

>>2377400
>only 4 factions at launch
>no Chaos
>no Necrons
>no Nyds
I dont know what these retards are thinking. it's going flop hard.

even if it's """""""""""""""""good""""""""""""""""""", you know the AI will be retarded, making it actually unplayable..

File: 1757615272381158.jpg (670 KB, 1390x1194)

670 KB JPG

>>2377400
It's the savior of Total War series, arriving in glory with a new engine, actual faction variety and indepth features like destruction, customization and upgrades never seen before in series

It will honestly render all other TW titles unplayable

>>2377413
Oh it's FUCKED fucked lol

>>2377400
I think it's funny how much you guys want this to fail. Spoiler: it won't, TWWH3 had absolutely everything to fail at launch and still didn't.
This game is going to easily be alive for 10+ years and there will be nothing like it in those years.

>>2377413
AoE4 and AoMR are on controller.
Fucking Anno can be played with a controller, TW is about moving forward and back with some few adjustments, it isn't rocket science.

>>2377696
people don't want (or expect) this to fail. they want it to be good but doubt that it will be.
don't let your persecution complex get the better of you

>>2377702
I can read the thread anon, your argument doesn't stand over even the OP. This won't be another tortanic or concord, I'm really sorry.

>>2377705
>your argument doesn't stand over even the OP
>I can read the thread anon
i don't think you can mate
the op post is expeting the game to be bad, not unsuccessful. now that we've established you can't read this'll be the last (You) i give you.

>>2377702
>don't let your persecution complex get the better of you
In this place faked outrage is 90% of the posts. The other 10 are outright schizophrenic.

>>2377715
Yes anon, because bad RTS games are really successful right? lol lmao

File: 1749230996842418.jpg (202 KB, 568x800)

202 KB JPG

>>2377430
>only 4 factions at launch
This is a norm for strategy games. Always was. Why is still being used as some kind of a gotcha? All strategy games always either had from 2 to 4 very different factions or dozens, but differing only slightly.

The only difference is that back then games were abandoned quickly after release since there was no proper way to distribute updates and expansions and tech was progressing quickly so they were better off making next game, even if it meant having to reinvent the wheel. Case in point, even Warhammer games like Dawn of War were like this, neither being allowed to reach it's full potential and getting all armies represented

This isn't the case now. Gaming tech has peaked, graphics especially. There will be no great jumps in technology now. So developers can afford to properly flesh out games instead of abandoning them.

>>2377728
It's a historicalfag used to play bloated rosters of spearmaniis.

>>2377735
Unless it's medieval 2 even that doesn't make any sense.

>>2377735
>>2377728
tbf there were more factions available at launch in the first warhammer.
however i'm willing to give them the benefit of the doubt and grant that this time there will be systems at play that tw has never had before and they don't want to bite off more than they can chew. warhammer fantasy was closer to what tw was doing before than 40k is

>>2377751
>tbf there were more factions available at launch in the first warhammer.
Empire, Vampire Counts, Dwarfs, Greenskins.

>>2377751
>more factions available at launch in the first warhammer.
there were 4 dude...

>>2377758
>>2377756
no... this can't be happening...

File: 82e33030-2950-47c2-beb2-a(...).gif (923 KB, 245x193)

923 KB GIF

>>2377760
>Warriors of Chaos May 24, 2016
>Beastmen July 28, 2016
>Wood Elves December 8, 2016
>Bretonnia February 28, 2017
>Norsca August 10, 2017

>>2377400
>more warhammer slop

The fact we never got a WW2 Total War game but this is going to exist just made me realize how niche the WW2 genre has become since the 2000s

I feel old

>>2377769
they aren't going to make a TW game where you can play as the nazis in current year dude.

>>2377705
Read the fucking thread. It's Warhammer. Of course it will fucking sell, regardless of how shit it is.

>>2377400
At least CA figured out that Imperial Guard is popular. Regular army dudes might seem a bit boring, but it gives some perspective. What's strange to me is that they didn't do Chaos Space Marines. Half their roster would just be model-swaped regular ones.
Eldar are also a bit confusing. If they only had the resources for four, then Necrons or Nids at least feel more popular, and would be bigger shake-ups to gameplay.
Also how many hours after release until someone makes a mod to change everyone back to their proper names? I have yet to hear someone not paid by GW call them Astra Militarum, or spell it Aeldari

>>2377817
These are the most normie factions available, also the ones with most content for DLC. They aren't making the mistake of adding a vampcounts like faction at the very beginning again and taking ages to update it because it has barely any content.

>>2377760
Also WH2 was only lizards, rats and 2 flavours of elves so also only 4.
WH3 had Cathay, Kislev and chaos. Technically they are 5 factions, daemon prince and the 4 monogods, but on release they were frankly just 1/4 of a demons of chaos roster than really fully fledged factions, they got expanded a lot with further DLCs.
Ogres were in on day 1 but technically they charge for them separately and they are not included in the base game.
People really got used to (Im)Mortal Empires with all the DLCs and forgot that none of total warhammer games really had huge number of factions with big rosters on their own. I think this is sort of a legitimate problem for Total War now. People will get mad other games not having enough content when they are comparing it to 3 full priced games and like twice that over in DLCs.

>>2377912
For the sake of argument you didn't have too many real factions in rome 2 either. Romans, successors, mainland hellenic, celtic and germanic.

There will never be another good TW game. The only audience are people dumb enough to believe the complaints have mainly been about 'historical vs. fantasy', when all the problems with modern TW begin with Rome 2. Anyone who believes there is a new engine coming after seeing the embarrassing 'gameplay' CA's marketing strung together, with units shooting through each other, pre-canned animations, more GUI-bloat than ever before replacing actual gameplay feedback; you get what you fucking deserve.

There never was a good TW game to begin with.

>>2377430
tyrannids are popular? they're so lame

>>2377951
>Old good new bad
Get better material.

>>2377430
Deeply retarded post

>>2377823
Eldar aren't popular on tabletop.
Or orks

>>2378020
Wrong

>>2377400
The battlefield and combat they showed looked like dogshit, but I have hope for the strategic layer.

>>2378146
Based on the few interviews they did the campaign is going to be very weird and not TW like. Because it doesn't really make sense for most 40k factions to build up in a typical TW fashion it's going to be more short campaigns that soft reset and you pick another procgen sector to conquer and carry over only some buffs modifiers like it was a roguelite.
It's possible it turns out fine, but it's going to be weird as fuck. It's TW in name only. It's pure branding decision, might as well have called that dawn of war, but sega lost that one and someone else is making it so they had to pick another strategy brand for it.

I don't follow the development, but which CA team is developing it, the main Total War team or the "action" one? Or are they assembling a new one like they did for Alien and Halo Wars 2.

>>2378181
Most people quit their TW campaigns 50 turns in, so the system they have planned might actually be interesing.

>>2378185
Regarding the 50 turn campaigns I feel like that is bit of a circular problem. People don't play very long campaigns because they are just a boring slog at that point and in response they make overpowered LLs that just get to that point faster, so people drop campaigns earlier so CA makes a lord that can get the invincible doomstack by turn 30. They are trying to cram the whole campaign progression into fewer number of turns rather than realise people just don't want to play the endgame because it's bad.
The resets do feel like one approach to that problem though. The meta progression will tell you you purged 0,2% of the galaxy so number goes up and people feel like it's progress, but you never get to the point a turn takes 2 hours because you just have too many armies and settlements to manage.

>>2377728
>So developers can afford to properly flesh out games instead of abandoning them.
lol

>>2377728
Can only hope this is bait and you're not actually retarded.

File: 1748595379558192.webm (1.06 MB, 640x360)

1.06 MB WEBM

>>2378218
Yes
Instead of simply adding Tyranids to DoW they had to move onto a sequel. Because of this they had to reinvent a wheel and make from scratch Space Marines, Eldar and Orks again. DoW1 forever remained unfinished. And then a sequel too. Such an absurd waste of time, effort and money.

Similar with Med2. Garbage game, true, but it could be improved and fixed. Instead they simply shat out worthless expansion adding 4 random and pointless minicampaigns instead of fixing and improving main campaign, the only thing of importance. They could have made proper expansion to flesh out HRE so it doesn't play like any other centralized country, but that never happened. No Mongol expansion for playable horse fuckers either. Hell, they could just flesh out world with those factions, eliminating those retarded Rebels. No fixes for fucked up behaviors of units or even basic mechanics like damn Crusades. Because game was simply aborted to make another one. Such a waste, but a norm back then.

This fortunately doesn't happen anymore. Game is released and properly iterated upon for years or more. Being polished and expanded to reach it's true potential.
>>2378262
no u

>>2377769
We know they worked on WW1 already
Since they have an engine capable of supporting vehicles and ranged combat like in 40k, it's safe to assume they will use to adapt similar settings. WW2 and yeah even fucking Star Wars are possible now as well, reskining TW40K into them would be trivial

>>2378296
And the WW1 games was obviously scrapped if it was ever meant to be a full title and not just an internal tech demo for the new engine version. Instead they rushed ahead the med3 announcement even though the game is years away to not get lynched by hisfags.
Also at the risk of reading too much into the small snippets we've seen it doesn't seem like TW40k will have super advanced vehicle and squad mechanics. It looked like DoW at best with blobs shooting at each other. You can sort of squint and accept it because 40k is dumb anyway but I don't think it would work for an actual world wars game. It's possible it has more features than it seems, but I don't think I'd give them the benefit of the dount.

nobody has gotten trench warfare right in a game, so im not playing

>>2377400
Imperial guard bros, we are eating good tonight

File: tau entered the wrong bar.jpg (533 KB, 4096x2067)

533 KB JPG

I hope the dlc add new factions sooner rather then later cause it would be abhorrent if you get every space marine legion as dlc before any xeno beyond the same 4 are in the game

File: 1773314916736653.jpg (69 KB, 763x1000)

69 KB JPG

wake me up when they add bug puss-err, I mean Genestealer Cults

>>2378081
No that's correct.

File: ss_f91e9896a4c4aeaa29f9d4(...).jpg (1018 KB, 1920x1080)

1018 KB JPG

>>2378181
i'm okay with this. those hideous screenshots of blobs mashing against each other head on in what looked like moba lanes would be much easier to stomach if they were part of a series of quick and dirty fights like in battlefleet gothic as part of a roguelite campaign.

yeah it's not total war but as far as i'm concerned the series doesn't have a respectable legacy to tarnish anymore, it's been shit for a while, might as well try something completely different, i'm open to it.

File: 1765609561838169.jpg (247 KB, 1680x888)

247 KB JPG

>>2378942
I may be having a stroke, but I see Midgar from FF7 when I look at this map.

>>2378185
>>2378203
The 50 turn problem is not just player attention span but also CA's bad backend design. They give AI cheats and resource bonuses because they can't actually program them to be intelligent. Inevitably you end up with the player being surrounded on all sides by enemies that just sit on their fortifications and instantaneously zero in on undefended provinces even if they can't actually see them so the entire thing becomes extremely not-fun.

>>2378942
>Moba lanes is when theres a map with chokepoints
terminal retardation.

>>2378296
Putting the 'corporate' head on - there are a vast number of tactical WW2 games out there. A Total War version would have vastly more competition. For all the griping, they more or less own the "tabletop wargame but it moves" market, for linear warfare. And even with that caveat, really I can't think of many extant competitors that don't involve the ACW. Even turn based there's what, FoG and derivatives? But move into Shermans and Tigers, oh boy...

File: minimappinning-296x300.jpg (15 KB, 296x300)

15 KB JPG

>>2378974
well it does look pretty reminiscent of it i'd say, even down to the minimap. it's fine to disagree, but you shouldn't call me retarded, that's no way to carry a conversation

>>2378942
Campaign aside, I can't see them changing the formula of battles too much even with the new engine.
It wouldn't surprise me if this played almost exactly like WH3 but most units have ranged weapons now, with all the issues that come from not putting much thought into the ramifications of such in regards to balance, AI behaviour, pathfinding and targetting, kinda like how Empire turned out. Let's not forget it took them 3 games to get gunpowder warfare sort of right with FOTS.

>>2378183
bumping the question

>>2377400
This might finally kill CA for good
And that's a good thing

>>2379046
>Their biggest game with an almost assured success will kill them
Delusional, the only way I see this flopping that hard is it being literally unplayable at launch.

>>2379085
>the only way I see this flopping that hard is it being literally unplayable at launch.
Like almost every game they made?

>>2379087
I could run all of them at launch, being buggy is another thing.
If TWWH was unplayable at launch it would never have had 2 other games, get real.

>>2379046
There’s not just CA but also GW. And it will be the largest and most expensive Wh40K game, so its very unlikely to fuck up.

>>2379095
>TWWH was unplayable at launch
...it kinda was tho. The only question for CA games is whether it will sell enough for them to patch it post launch. And it didn't have two other games, it had two relaunches each stocked with dlc.

>get real
They can put a 40k stamp on a .jpg of dogshit and it will sell. Real enough for you sunshine?

>>2379108
>it kinda was tho
Not really. TWWH3 was the one with an almost unplayable game.
>That goalpost moving
Lol

>>2379156
This >>2379046 wasn't mine lad.

>>2379038
In the hands of a player, units in Empire do mostly what you expect (or at least, they aren't any more unweildy than M2TW units) but the AI does absolutely stupid stuff 90% of the time which makes battles trivial

>>2379038
Napoleon was the pinnacle of TW gunpowder gameplay. FotS was a marked devolution.

>>2379038
>>2379408
i liked the longer kill times in empire, i agree with>>2379203
that it was the ai (and sometimes your units spazzing out) not knowing how to play that was the main problem.
in fots, and to a somewhat lesser degree in napoopan, units got mown down too quickly. i guess it makes sense since they're set a century after empire, when technology was more lethal, and i can't deny napoopan and fots were lots more fun to play, but still, i would have appreciated battles going on for longer. i'm not even mentioning artillery, which in fots practically ends the game, as soon as you get armstrong guns.

>>2379203
Pretty sure certain formations in Empire (and Napoleon) were bugged, so the units only worked as intended at the most basic level. The fact that it was better to have your units walk into range and use fire-at-will to attack instead of manually targetting so your unit didn't spazz out or turn unecessarily made the gunpowder games pretty awkward to play, too. There's also the scale, which was completely wrong, but that's an issue with all TW games.

Am I the only one quite optimistic for 40k total war? The Engine has trouble with things like melee units and cavalry, or chariots. But ranged infantry works pretty well. It would be nice to have a button like in steel division where you can see what a unit would be able to shoot at in any given location. but that is all it needs really.

>>2379517
If you want optimism wait for the post release threads. Pre-release ones, no matter the game, are almost always gloomfagging.

>20 unit limit
Why do they refuse to move past this?

Personally I'm looking forward to yet another disastrous release in a long line of failures, and stand by with some 'Fell For It Again' awards to hand out to the utter spastics who never learn from the past and believe every false promise and greedily and unquestioningly swallow AI made hype slop.

>>2379603
No idea, you can mod Shogun 2 by changing 1 line in a save file to have 41 units and the UI, everything scales to it just fine, so they must have internal testing for more units.
It's most likely that a dev somewhere higher up is convinced that the 20 unit limit is necessary for the gameplay somehow since the engine can handle more units per army just fine.

>>2379840
Funny how the devs keep bitching at fans to stop nostalgia'ing the past and buy the new slop.
Yet they lazily rehash past design decisions.

>>2379603
>>2379840
I think the biggest issue with high unit counts is unit card readability. They should add a toggle for units and groups that collapse them into a mouseover popup on the side. That way if you have units standing in guard mode/suicide chaff that you form a big line and charge the enemy with they're not squishing more important unit cards.

>>2379873
They could have it so you can have 20 high tier units that don't stack on each other but all of your shitter Tier 1 archermanni, spearmanni and swordsmanni stack on top of each other. Would give you a good reason to use the lower tier stuff en mass while also allowing you to have clear unit card readability for the units that actually matter.

>>2377430
obviously to sell them as DLC, do you even SEGA/CA now?

>>2379873
They could make control groups actually useful to save UI real estate. The current system is too basic and unreliable.

>>2377964
tyranids are not lame
they always inherit gravitas from other factions and key characters so its cool
>cyrus being grimdark in DoW2
>Heinrix genuinely losing his shit, i mean he wasnt that spooked by the damn chaos space marine as he was jean steelers
im sure theres more but those two were pretty good

>>2378293
i dont know why you bother to reply
TWWH essentially will be in service for 10 fucking years in may. and the only reason they're slowing to a crawl is because they put out a video explaining "the warscape engine can barely handle the amount of shit we put in"
Yes it was dumb for them to abandon3K, yes I wish we had a more fleshed out Troy
No, there's no conceivable reason CA would pump and dump 40k of all things

>>2380279
>"the warscape engine can barely handle the amount of shit we put in"
On that note it is incredible that they stuck with Warscape for this long when it was obviously terrible from the get go. Awful to work with, buggy, unstable, bad physics... that CA waited for most of the fans to sour on them before finally getting rid of it feels like stubborness or even hubris.

>>2377400
theres many reasons it may suck but it being developed for xbox and ps as well is just a guarantee it’ll be horrible

>>2379517
>The Engine has trouble with things like melee unit
It's a new engine anyway, so who knows how it's going to be? The melee has to be great since M3 is on it.

>>2381545
Oh is it? I thought that the new engine was for Med 3 and that TW40k was going to be the last warscape game.

>>2381589
dont believe so, could be wrong but i think both are developed to this new engine

which might be good, might mean both have gamebreaking issues on launch

>>2381589
TW40k is the first game on a new engine
WWI would be first, but was cancelled

>>2381639
>>2381615
Well, this should tell us a lot about how M3 is going to be when it comes out then.

>>2381651
It'll have a WAY more mature engine that's for sure.
40k will come in hot.
But I really like what they're doing with destruction in 40k. Also wargear is already in, now I just hope we get some EXPANSIVE maps so we have an excuse to use transports.

>>2377968
No better material than the truth. CA has been hollowed out by the shitheads in marketing and doesn't want to hire competent system designers.

>>2381669
I think 40k actually gives CA room to be very experimental with the engine since people are going to be buying it no matter how bad it is. So they can take more risks with design. If they get experimental for M3 and it does not work out people won't buy it.

File: CA.jpg (305 KB, 1080x1608)

305 KB JPG

>>2379046
Modern vidya industry devs don't die outright they just keep slowly marching on as a zombie bereft of all soul. An arm or an ear might fall off here and there, it may just be a walking husk of what it once was - but it keeps on marching along as if nothing is wrong.

There won't be an 80s collapse for these devs, just a slow quiet death over the span of decades.

>>2379046
You underestimate the NEED of the 40k fandom to CONSOOM everything related to their fandom, regardless of quality

>>2381811
Go play Trench Crusade then, chud.
Oh wait, you're not welcome in that fandom either. lmao

File: bridge.jpg (100 KB, 640x360)

100 KB JPG

>>2378942
I figured that was just their equivalent of the "bridge" battle maps.

I can't find a quick screenshot, but several of these "bridge" type maps will have multiple bridges or passes your dudes have to go through.

>>2381834
The map even has multiple bridges like these.
My hope is that we get a great variety of map types and objectives, begone with either siege or open field battles.

>>2381849
My hope is that the maps themselves will be much bigger. TotalWarhammer maps are only just big enough as is when every unit does NOT have ranged attacks.

>>2381742
WHFB gave them that. They decided what TW needed was inconsistent art direction between games in the trilogy, more GUI elements, and more stat-modifiers and less actual gameplay.

>>2381899
TWWH has the most fun battle gameplay in the franchise, it has the most variation of units.
It does lack in campaign stuff, but they're addressing this with each update.

The only thing History has going for them right now is campaign depth.

>>2381824
Bro, Trench crusade killed itself lol
Turns out, making your lore intentionally shitty and liberal drives off more than the chuds lmao

File: 1761684752525219.png (103 KB, 320x240)

103 KB PNG

>>2381824
Trench Crusade is one of those derivative socially critical settings that thinks it's being witty and cool by appealing to people that don't like its source material. The vast majority of people are indulging in the FOR SUPER EARTH and DEUS VULT aspects, so condemning people for doing that and trying to drive them out of your community basically just kills the whole thing. In ten years more people will still be playing fuckin' Warmachine than Trench Crusade.

>>2382067
>TWWH has the most fun battle gameplay in the franchise,
In what universe? Out of all the Total War games, Total Warhammer is the one that most feels like every engagement is just two stat blobs rubbing up against each other until the one with the biggest numbers wins. Battles never have a satisfying moment because it's just a blur of health bars having at it until one health bar is left standing. You have all these pretty units. Fucking great. Shame that battles are all over so quickly that you never get to take a look at what's actually happening and even if you could, the economy and strategy are just punishing enough that messing around with memestacks is suicide unless you're a hyperoptimised cheeselord.

>>2382337
>Warmachine
What's going on with that one anyway? I played it in like Mk1 and 2 but then I moved and the new town didn't have a group so I sort of forgot about it. Only recently I found my minis while sorting some old boxes and checked it for old times sake but apparently someone bought out the game and did effectively a complete reboot? Most of the stuff I ran back in the day doesn't even have rules as far as I can tell.

>>2382480
It's gaining a bit of traction but is still sitting on the margins. Despite being very accessible it just doesn't have the exposure and fanbase to do as well as 40k. A lot of people have probably seen it or heard of it but just as quickly forgot about it including people that run tabletop stores.

>>2382337
>FOR SUPER EARTH and DEUS VULT aspects
I don't understand that honestly, the "All of humanity is united in jingoism" "Humanity fuck yea" shit, seems like an effective vector to get people to be less racist. Why would the libtards not go all in when making settings that allow humans of all races and cultures to unite together?

File: 1760605943168431.png (750 KB, 721x1081)

750 KB PNG

>>2382591
>Why would the libtards not go all in when making settings that allow humans of all races and cultures to unite together?
You tell me. They're the first ones that line up to take shots at Heinlein's Starship Troopers novel because the movie was a satire made by some asshole that didn't even read the book. They're too busy trying to tell you how bad you should feel for indulging in fictional rhetoric. "For the Emperor" is fascist, "Service guarantees citizenship" is fascist. Fighting to keep the Earth from being overtaken by demons by any means necessary is apparently morally comparable to baby-killing cannibal legions of Satan that want to rape you to death. Why? Because religious people have done bad things in the past or something.

>>2382591
>He thinks leftists want unity
Lol, lmao even

>>2382627
>Fighting to keep the Earth from being overtaken by demons by any means necessary is apparently morally comparable to baby-killing cannibal legions of Satan that want to rape you to death.
Days on /vst/ without antisemitism: 0

>>2377728
The problem is not 4 factions but the 4 choices.

Space marines - shouldn't regularly fight eachother. Badab war and such. Before you get autistic remember the word.
>REGULARLY
Imperial guards - should not regularly fight space marines, if they fight other guards it's liable to be lost and the damned.
Eldar - fight the Imperium regularly enough, but not a 24/7 kind of foe.
Orks - was made fer fightin.

Imagine if Warhammer fantasy total war released with:
Empire
Bretonnia
Wood Elves
Orks

>>2382713
I thought this is be an issue but the game won't actually have anything close to a traditional TW campaign with factions holding territories. As far as I can tell from interviews and snippets there won't be guard one province minors filling out the map or diplomacy. It's going to be mostly orks vs imperium with eldar teleporting around to achieve whatever their win condition is, but they don't occupy any terrain.

>>2377561
I will wait and see how this is actually implemented and works. Ideas sound great, but not in the total war formula

>>2382713
It's more like
Ogres
Empire
High Elves
Orks

I think the variety is nice.

>>2381824
You know there are wargames other than 40k and trench crusade right? 40kids are truly braindead.

>>2382627
>Heinlein's Starship Troopers novel because the movie was a satire made by some asshole that didn't even read the book
False, Edward Neumeier wrote the original script for Starship Troopers and he read the book. Paul's job was to direct the movie and refine the script, not create the idea for it by himself.

>>2382713
80% of battles in 40k should be against Orks and Imperial Guard (Or PDF) to be fair. They are the most common groups you will find in the universe. They are the foundation. Eldar and Space marines are more like spice to add to the release game faction lineup.
The Buggos or Chaos should be next up.

>>2382794
I feel like you can't have a chaos faction without a traitor imperial guard regiments and cultists. There should be chaos flavour meat too I think.

>>2382784
So whose idea was it to dress Neil Patrick Harris in an SS uniform and lobotomize the rank-and-file bugs?

>>2377400
total war toddlers will buy it anyway

File: time.jpg (85 KB, 810x534)

85 KB JPG

>>2377761
>Bretonnia February 28, 2017
>Norsca August 10, 2017

>Stopped playing warhammer when bretonnia was such a let down that i decided to wait for norsca to release
>Never actually went back
>It's been almost 10 years

There are hundreds of millions of retards in the world who actively seek out hype and marketing bs in order to be tricked into spending money they don't have on garbage games, so they can spend the next few months rage posting online about being scammed.

>>2382835
Is that your preemptive cope once the game is successful?
Hell we've been seeing many games flopping nowadays, just because they're bad games, if this game is truly trash, it'll die just like the others.

>>2382823
Chaos already has these on tabletop though, it'll certainly be a tier 0~1 unit.

>>2377400
Doesn't matter. 40k fans are even more retarded than normal warhammer fans.

>>2377561
>and just because there are lots of guns, tanks, and even spaceships in 40k, it shouldn't differ significantly from what we know. After all, Warhammer Fantasy already featured huge explosions, tanks, and flying units.
It actually annoys me how someone can be so stupid that they can't see the difference between ancient formation based warfare where the average soldier has a sword or a spear, and modern style skirmish warfare where the average soldier is equipped with a high capacity automatic long ranged weapon. You can't put 100 guys with assault rifles into a big square and expect it to work the same as a big square of 100 spearmen, but idiots like this are incapable of seeing warfare and tactics on any deeper level than "there are tanks and explosions and stuff".

>>2382952
>You can't put 100 guys with assault rifles into a big square and expect it to work the same as a big square of 100 spearmen
that's how dawn of war worked (as in guys with assault rifles in squares, obviously not 100 model units) and it was fine honestly. yeah i prefer the dow 2/coh approach but that's never going to happen in a total war scale game

>>2377561
it's cool and all but there isn't a single white dev left in CA

I don't see it being that good. Hope I am wrong but CA has been shitting the bed hard for a long time.

>>2382954
The size of the formation is very important here. There's a reason why gun armed troops were used in wide, shallow lines as opposed to the deep, thick squares of melee infantry. A guy standing at the back of a formation 10 men deep would be incapable of firing his gun without hitting someone in his own formation. A big part of what makes Total War unique among strategy games is that it actually adheres, at least somewhat, to these rules as opposed to just letting friendly units fire straight through each other as you see in most other strategy games. Positioning your gunpowder units to be able to shoot the enemy is a big part of gunpowder factions.
High capacity automatic weapons also spelled the death of the large infantry formation, because now one guy with a machinegun could easily kill the entirety of that 100 man infantry line. With it no longer being feasible to pack hundreds of men into a single formation without devastating losses, warfare moved to smaller squads of soldiers using skirmish tactics. You know, like the scale in Dawn of War.
The point is you can't give all of your Total War guys assault rifles and expect that everything is still going to work the same.

>>2382996
Nigga China was still using deep melee formations using SKS's with bayonets against Vietnamese machine gun nests.
it even worked sometimes!

>>2382996
>The size of the formation is very important here
disagree completely. the rigidity and shape are what's important. in dawn of war square formations armed with assault weapons stood in place and shot at each other and it was fine. it would look the same if you multiplied squad sizes 10 or 20 times. it'd be much harder to take coh and dow2's more dynamic and flexible squads that assumed cover and moved cover to cover and attempt to make hundreds of models behave like that.
>High capacity automatic weapons also spelled the death of the large infantry formation, because now one guy with a machinegun could easily kill the entirety of that 100 man infantry line. With it no longer being feasible to pack hundreds of men into a single formation without devastating losses, warfare moved to smaller squads of soldiers using skirmish tactics
this is stupid. there isn't a single person on this website who doesn't realize this is how it works in real life. we're talking about how much you can stretch a game's abstraction. i say you can have formations stand around and shoot each other without it feeling too dumb, because you had the same thing in dow.

>>2383010
>in dawn of war square formations armed with assault weapons stood in place and shot at each other and it was fine
Yeah, and that was Dawn of War, not Total War. Believe it or not, they are actually completely different series despite the fact that they both have War in the title. Again, a big part of what makes Total War what it is is that this ISN'T the case and units CAN'T just fire through each other like it's nothing, and this affects the tactics that the player uses.
And even on the subject of "stretching abstraction", it's far easier to abstract that a unit of 10 men can avoid shooting each other when firing than a unit of 100 men.

>>2382828
>dress Neil Patrick Harris in an SS uniform
Probably Paul's
>lobotomize the rank-and-file bugs
Phil Tippett designed the warrior bugs for the movie

>>2383023
Gunpowder units have been able to shoot through each other since warhammer 1, no matter how deep their formation is, they can only be blocked by other, separate units. I don't think CA gives a fuck anymore. I haven't played the other nu-TW games like pharaoh or troy but I wouldn't be surprised if their ranged unit model didn't care about adjusting their individual trajectory for a target right in front of them.

>>2383023
eh, i get it, but at the same time, who cares? tw has been blobby nonsense for a while now. there's no serious legacy to preserve.
i'm fine with having it like this>>2383339
where you just have to avoid other units + maybe some mechanic that benefits wider line formations, like maybe only have the first three or four ranks being able to fire. fuck it, make it play like napoopan or empire, or ultmate general, i don't give a fuck. far as i'm concerned that's almost as retarded realism-wise as just having them shoot like it's dawn of war. it's 40k. you can put a lot of shit on screen and get away with it

>>2383397
>eh, i get it, but at the same time, who cares?
I don't think that's a good attitude to have.

>>2383820
low effort nigger bastard

>>2383824
I don't think that's a good attitude to have, either.

>>2383825
calling out faggy low effort shitposts is beneficial to everyone actually. it could even be beneficial for you

>>2380322
idk i feel like 3K and troy and pharoah all look great and play well
i havent forgotten pharaoh's
>blood in the nile
gimmick which was genuinely cool
the only problems with the nu total wars is they all have mid combat because
at least in pharaoh,
>archers, infantry, and chariots
is frankly not every riveting gameplay

>>2381856
>TotalWarhammer maps are only just big enough as is when every unit does NOT have ranged attacks.
some maps in TWWH current year are retardedly big

>>2382472
i feel like your complaints are valid...
for TWWH2
>>2383010
idk what the speculation is all about
its clear TWWH40K is going to take a nontrivial amount of inspiration from the tabletop where reasonable
because last i checked thats how TWWHFB works
>>2382966
>Hope I am wrong but CA has been shitting the bed hard for a long time.
define a long time
>>2382835
>so they can spend the next few months rage posting online about being scammed.
this tends to be 3rd worlders whose PC barely runs medieval 2 though

>>2383827
Why do you think saying "who cares if it's shit?" isn't a good attitude to have is a low effort shitpost?

>>2383836
>define long time
idk you've had a few okay games like nap, shogun2 but since empire you've had major fuck up after major fuck up.
rome 2, attila, all the shit out of Sophia, join the ACK, warhammer tw 1/3).

>>2383297
The design is fine, the narrative choice of divesting the lower bugs of their sapience is infantilization of the novel's premise. In the original concept the bugs were only a "lower species" from the standpoint of the UCF's worldview and propaganda. In the film they are entirely subhuman in mental function which, ironically, makes the propaganda accurate.

>>2383828
Pharaoh has cavalry after the Dynasties update, and honestly it plays like every other historical nu-TW at a base level with the exception of a lack of artillery (which are one dimensional as fuck let's be honest). The problem is that on release it was essentially half a game, and even after Dynasties everything about it feels undercooked and there's not enough new about that game relative to the older ones to warrant buying it, and a big part of why is that the engine is garbage to develop with and iterating meaningful new mechanics and improving old ones with their development pipeline and tech debt was pretty much impossible, so a few shallow and disjointed menu-based mechanics don't take that much work to implement by comparison, while most of the development cost goes instead to the one or two new fancy graphical effects and unit reskins.
They charged full price for games that pretty much play the exact same for years, there was clearly something wrong either with the engine or with their management, and everything indicates that it was probably both.

>>2383828
I got Pharoah for cheep and played it, it felt generally competent, the systems worked, the units did unit things, battles were okay.
But I was board, I had no real drive to play other then painting the map. Not sure why, it's like a 6 or 7 out of 10, but it just did not speak to me at all.
I had more fun in the broken, buggy dogshit Napoleon on release.

>>2383955
I didn't play pharaoh but troy made me physically yawn every time I tried to play it I was so bored.

>>2383955
>>2383967
I should clarify, what is there is responsive and plays well
Naturally you two are right because it's in service from a frankly uninteresting time period if you consider the unit types
But the way units handle pathing starting with 3K just feels better
Also 3K to this day has the best cav

>>2383976
I guess from that perspective it does handle pathfinding and unit responsiveness far far better than say empire, rome 2 or the warhammer games.

>>2383955
Napoleonic era is one of the most interesting parts of military history
What you are describing is exactly why EU and Vicky are better paradox series than Imperator, the time period just works better for these types of games

>>2383837
that's not what you said, nor was it what i said. you ignored a whole post to quote a single isolated sentence as some pathetic gotcha. i don't want the game to be shit. i disagreed with your premise that it will be shit unless it's a realistic modern combat simulation.
you know this and that's why what you made was a low effort dishonest shitpost. you can try to walk it back now, but it's too late, you already made the shitpost.
a non-shitpost would have engaged with the whole post and made a cogent reply. try making a non-shitpost next time, cocksucker

>>2384122
It is literally what I said, and it is literally what you said. I quoted your post that said "eh, i get it, but at the same time, who cares?" and said that I don't think that's a good attitude to have. I ignored the rest of your post because I don't really have anything more to say to someone who has repeatedly admitted they don't care if the series just keeps deteriorating and the game just turns into Dawn of War because, in your words, "tw has been blobby nonsense for a while now. there's no serious legacy to preserve". Once again I don't think that's a good attitude to have. What the fuck else do you want me to say when you've made it abundantly clear that you just don't care? Also, I'm sorry that you didn't like me telling you I didn't think you had a good attitude on the matter, but that doesn't make it a shitpost.

>>2384128
>I ignored the rest of your post
you shouldn't have done that.

>>2384133
You're really butt hurt over this, aren't you?

>>2384135
sure, i didn't like your whiny moralfaggot shitpost directed at me. but i wouldn't say i'm more upset than you are. i got you to justify yourself to me, which means you realized you made a lazy shitpost and it made you feel bad so you decided to throw in some more effort, which is what you should have done in the first place.

>>2384137
>but i wouldn't say i'm more upset than you are
I'm not upset at all, honestly. Mostly just bewildered that you're platinum butthurt and accusing me of shitposting because you didn't like my innocuous post. To be honest, it seems more like you're the one feeling called out because I said I didn't think your "who cares?" attitude was a good attitude to have and you're lashing out at me because of it.

>>2383955
You were bored because the game lacks soul. It was a lazy cashgrab made of repurposed DLC assets with quippy Marvel-tier dialogue and half-baked mechanics.
It doesn't do the time period justice, and on release it didn't even cover the whole thing. Technically, it still doesn't.

>>2377400
your favourite guard regiment is a lazy cadian copypaste that does nothing but die and turn traitor?

>>2377413
Red Alert 1 and Warcraft II were on PS1, before the controller even had joysticks.
Controllers where never the issue. Consolefags being mostly gun&ball players is.

>>2383904
>>2383955
i will say i wish napoleon was just an updated empire
and i wish empire was modernized
also anyone who hates the naval combat is an retard

>>2384345
>>2377413
CA technically has experience since they handled Halo Wars 2
not that it matters because controllers really are meh for strategy
yeah it works but starcraft 64 for instance was eugh

>>2377756
>>2377758
Well..... technically.....there were five
Empire
Vampire counts
Greenskins
Dwarfs

AND a very primitive version of Bretonnia. (Half the roster was missing) You could play them in multiplayer on release and you could also play them if you got a mod in campaign.

T.anon who's been playing this series since 2016

>>2384389
empire naval combat is cool and way, way better than autoresolve but it still needs work, mostly in AI and pathfinding
the fact that you can't effectively cross the t because the ships are too close together and the AI will stop rather than sail through a narrow gap is a major problem

>>2384416
>but it still needs work, mostly in AI and pathfinding
right so the same problems as the core gameplay
frankly in my opinion CA didnt nail AI till TWWH3
that doesnt change the fact that the discourse for hte longest time was that
>naval combat was/is ass
which it just wasnt/isnt, and there's nothing quite like it

>>2384425
>that doesnt change the fact that the discourse for hte longest time was that
>>naval combat was/is ass
>which it just wasnt/isnt, and there's nothing quite like it
When looking at empire you have to remember how high people's expectations were back then
every TW game up to that point had been an improvement on the previous one, culminating in M2 which a lot of people still think is the best
then combine that with the hype of the first real gunpowder era TW game, and the fact that people weren't as cynical about AAA releases back then
what seemed like a massive let down at the time is, in hindsight still one of the most unique and ambitious games of its type

>>2384544
im almost convinced considering the discourse over the years that there is one truth
>unbearable amount of thirdworlders who had some copy of medieval 2
>this crowd sort of came from rome, and sort of stayed for shogun 2
transition into
>CA clearly not having maybe the technical knowhow but prioritizing the wrong details for the wrong games to the detriment of the AI teams and you end up with on-paper masterpieces that are in-practice remarkably flawed gameplay experiences
the kicker also is
>NO STRATEGY GAME OUT THERE, NOT A SINGLE ONE, has good AI that DOESNT rely on cheats
so you have a bunch of retards who think they know how to fix the game and CA's biggest flaw is when they placate those people.
Personally Im glad the retarded stat boosts are mostly gone (chosen could barely win vs legendary statesmen)
But the only reason TWWH3 is the best game in the franchise currently is because its the longest running game so the team actually got time to refine the systems and AI logic
Stagnation is usually what the historical fanbase wants, and their consistent inability to support sagas and mainline historicals shows that

And having said all that I havent played a TW game that didnt have something that makes it stand out from literally any other game in the industry, let alone other games in the franchise (then again i havent played all the TW games)

>>2384425
>frankly in my opinion CA didnt nail AI till TWWH3
What makes you think total warhammer's AI was in any way nailed?

>>2384892
the nail is right in their forehead

>>2384892
>What makes you think total warhammer's AI was in any way nailed?
because ive played Empire, Shogun 2, ive seen the complaints for Rome 2, ive played troy and 3K, and ive been playing a hefty amount since TWWH2, the game has come a long way and the AI does sometimes break

but this isn't my first rodeo with AI in a strategy game, although i can see why parroting a baseless popular opinion from an insufferable fanbase that has zero breadth of experience is easier than playing the game