Well I've owned and played every Total War except the first Shogun. I started with Medieval: Total War back in 2002. One thing about CA that I have noticed over the years is that they have constantly tweaked the empire management. In Shogun 2 they hit the balance mark pretty close then they strayed with Rome 2, then nailed almost perfectly in Attila. Now they have strayed a little bit again with Warhammer, but I think it has to do with who their core audience is with this game. By that I think their core audience(s) was for those already established Warhammer fans who have not yet tried the Total War series but who gobble up just about anything Warhammer related. For those they didn't want the empire management to be to complex because most of those guys just mainly want to see those fantasy battles come to life. Warhammer tabletop has never really been about empire building. That's just stuff that fans read about in the books mostly. So making something that requires balancing population happiness, squalor, religion, disease, and inter-faction politics just wouldn't make sense in a way. However, I also think it would make perfect sense based on the on the overall Warhammer setting. On the flip side I think the other obvious audience is for the long time Total War players who have seen different variations of empire management and have just adapted to their changes every time. We might grumble about it for every other game that is released but we always come back for more.
As far as TW:WH being a trilogy, I'm not sure that is true. At least that's the first I have heard of it. However, I'm sure CA will support the Warhammer title for at least a year or two with several faction DLCs and probably a few new campaigns before moving on to their next title in the series.
I'm neithern. I knew nothing of the WH lore. all I knew is it was a tabletop game that Blizzard ripped off for WC and SC and that their much hyped MMO was DOA. It was one of the first supposed WOW killers (I don't remember if it came out before or after AoC)
I am a fantasy fan and am not interested in historical RTS games, which is why I loved WC and the Middle Earth RTS games but couldn't enjoy Age of empires or even starcraft.
Anyway, I've bought a bunch of the older total war games on the steam sale and didn't care for a lot of Rome 1's design after having started with WH. I'm definitely happier with the settlement management in TW:WH.
What I thought you were going to say was that CA is targeting more casual minded players with their latest entries, or at least those that don't want to be bogged down with the minutia of settlement management like sewers and roads and such. Which is probably a good idea.
Well I wouldn't really say it's CA targeting more of the casual minded players. But like I said earlier, I think CA was aiming for newcomers to the series who aren't familiar with how CA implements the balance of empire management and who just wanted to fight some real time Warhammer battles. There hasn't been to many of those types of games and the last one I can think of was Mark of Chaos which was kind of meh. There was also The Dark Omen and Shadow of the Horned Rat. I probably have at least 500 hours between those two titles alone. But yeh, the empire management can be daunting in some of the games, which is something most Total War fans will tell you is what they both love and hate about the game. When it's done right we love it, and when it's done wrong we complain. But we buy the games anyways because there isn't really anything similar to it.
Sure there are grand strategy games, but the combat in those like in Europa Universalis or Crusader Kings is just something that is abstract. Maneuvering units around on a real time battlefield, and I'm not talking zerg style from games like Star Craft or Red Alert, but with actual formations, flanking, and morale is just so damn fun. Since by the very nature of Warhammer tabletop is about grand battles with unit formations I can see why CA focused in on that and streamlined the empire management to bring in new players who just want to simply have some great battles with their favorite factions, unless they haven't been released in a DLC pack yet.
As much as I hate DLC milking in general, I do have to point out that compared to some of the other strategy franchises, Total War's is honestly tame(in comparison, that is). You guys should take a look at some of the other big strategy series: Europa, Crusader Kings, etc.
As far as TW:WH being a trilogy, I'm not sure that is true. At least that's the first I have heard of it. However, I'm sure CA will support the Warhammer title for at least a year or two with several faction DLCs and probably a few new campaigns before moving on to their next title in the series.
That was classic, and yes I blame Trion for it. Maybe we can change the vernacular for gaming. Like if a company gets greedy or does something really bad. For example: "You guys see what the company did? They really pulled a Trion."
OK that was kind of sad but I tried. Maybe you guys/gals can think of a better one.
DLC for Total War is an issue? But if I complain about Crusader Kings 2 and Europa Universalis 4 DLC then I get hated on?
That happens on Steam, Reddit and facebook. A bunch of people who hate Total War DLC practices but yell and troll me if I complain about Ck2 and EU4 dlc lol
My Skyrim, Fallout 4, Starbound and WoW + other game mods at MODDB:
Whilst the DLC prices are very expensive, the base game is still worth it in my opinion. Its the most enjoyable TW game I've played and whilst the empire management is indeed dumbed down in comparison to other games, there are more units to play with, each faction is vastly different and the new features make up for the downsides.
Granted, I am a warhammer fan, but I've been waiting for this game since I played the original Shogun and for once I wasn't let down.
I won't be buying the DLC personally, well at least not for a few more years until more race packs have been created and then I can buy them all in a bundle for cheap. But, the 5 starter races (1st week purchase so I got chaos for free) and usual TW gameplay make the base game worth the money.
Currently Playing: WAR RoR - Spitt rr80 Black Orc | Scrotling rr6X Squig Herder | Scabrous rr5X Shaman
Comments
Sure there are grand strategy games, but the combat in those like in Europa Universalis or Crusader Kings is just something that is abstract. Maneuvering units around on a real time battlefield, and I'm not talking zerg style from games like Star Craft or Red Alert, but with actual formations, flanking, and morale is just so damn fun. Since by the very nature of Warhammer tabletop is about grand battles with unit formations I can see why CA focused in on that and streamlined the empire management to bring in new players who just want to simply have some great battles with their favorite factions, unless they haven't been released in a DLC pack yet.
"If I offended you, you needed it" -Corey Taylor
"If I offended you, you needed it" -Corey Taylor
OK that was kind of sad but I tried. Maybe you guys/gals can think of a better one.
DLC for Total War is an issue?
But if I complain about Crusader Kings 2 and Europa Universalis 4 DLC then I get hated on?
That happens on Steam, Reddit and facebook. A bunch of people who hate Total War DLC practices but yell and troll me if I complain about Ck2 and EU4 dlc lol
My Skyrim, Fallout 4, Starbound and WoW + other game mods at MODDB:
https://www.moddb.com/mods/skyrim-anime-overhaul
Fuck you Sega, see you in a future Steam sale or via other means.
Granted, I am a warhammer fan, but I've been waiting for this game since I played the original Shogun and for once I wasn't let down.
I won't be buying the DLC personally, well at least not for a few more years until more race packs have been created and then I can buy them all in a bundle for cheap. But, the 5 starter races (1st week purchase so I got chaos for free) and usual TW gameplay make the base game worth the money.