4 new videos,new gameplay footage about vampires and Empire! campaign, siege,battle

[craziii]

The ladders, while weird, are probably a huge boon to the AI when they can go up the walls anywhere they want like Shogun 2. Also all these videos are set within the first 50 turns so I expect the cities to expand as the level of the cities increases.

I simply don't understand this. from the video, they are even narrowing the siege battles(this could kill the TWW for me) with just a small part of the cities. even if the back drop looks gorgeous, doesn't make up for the narrow/corridor style siege. another corridor game design just like how the campaign map got the same treatment with impassable terrain.

kinda weird how rome 1 BAI can retreat when it lost it's siege weapons but not the newer games since.

as long as I can mod out the ladders, I am fine with it. hardcoded would just make it into another major flaw. it seems every tw game needs 1 or a few major flaws. I wonder how many years till corridor campaign map would finally be gone if ever.

[uzo70]

Something i noticed while watching the videos and correct me if i am wrong, since it is more of a rome 1 and medieval 2'ish fighting style and no more choreographed fighting, which i actually feel is a good thing, is that when people zoomed into the battle, units never did block, they got got hit/hurt, staggered and died, but as far as i saw no blocking, i did not see a single guy do a block.

If any of you can see a block in any of the videos, please give me a time stamp

[Red Dox]

I noticed, CA, Essen is now Eschen.

I feel somewhat heard (and this).

Are you sure about that?




Essen is part of the Empires Ostermark: http://warhammerfantasy.wikia.com/wiki/Ostermark

-----Red Dox

[Thelann]

The more I watch the videos, the more hyped I am about the all thing (well done marketing). I really like the general feel and atmosphere they tried to create, it feels really "warhammery" to me. They seem also to respect the lore gameplaywise. Vampires with no moral? Check. No archers? Check. Even a corruption feature on the campaign map, I did not ask for that much!

Actually, I also like the fact they try to reduce the scoop of siege maps (at least some of them). It focuses the action on a few chock points instead of having a map three time too big for the number of units. It brings this feeling of overcrowded mess that I would expect from a siege. And know, what do I hear? No one to one animation and a more Medieval2 combat system. did my sweetest dreams just come true?

To be fair, I will probably miss the one to one animation. In shogun 2 in really looked great when you closed up on the battlefield. Here I was not too impressed by how the melee looked. But from a gameplay point of view, it is definitely better. I wish they could mix it a bit, in the way of a Dawn of war for instance, where you had time to time an animation trigger for some epic effect.

It may be the first game I will ever pre-order...

PS: Pasan, thanks for clever handling of the troll.

[Modestus]

Well that is one really impressive castle.


I believe this is Altdorf.

[Winco_SVK]

Why are you happy that one to one animation has been removed? I really enjoyed to watch fight animation in Shogun 2, in Attila and Rome wasnt so good because of seccondary attack. I find it like step back. Of course there are some animation with beast but simply its not enought for me.

[KAM 2150]

I simply don't understand this. from the video, they are even narrowing the siege battles(this could kill the TWW for me) with just a small part of the cities. even if the back drop looks gorgeous, doesn't make up for the narrow/corridor style siege. another corridor game design just like how the campaign map got the same treatment with impassable terrain.

kinda weird how rome 1 BAI can retreat when it lost it's siege weapons but not the newer games since.

as long as I can mod out the ladders, I am fine with it. hardcoded would just make it into another major flaw. it seems every tw game needs 1 or a few major flaws. I wonder how many years till corridor campaign map would finally be gone if ever.

What I fear the most from Rome 2 way of dealing with things is that ladder will not be possible to mod out of the game like torches and actually it will make things a lot worse then it sounds.

One of the reasons why sieges in Rome 2 sucked was that there was no retreat button so AI can't retreat if their siege engines are gone, same for the player.

Second thing is that AI will most likely never siege a castle and wait to siege stuff to get build, why? In Rome 2 AI was able to attack cities right from the start as AI saw that it can attack, since it could torch down the gate, it would never wait for ladder or towers to get build. I am strongly convinced that this will be the exact same case as AI can attack now every single part of the wall so actually defending side will be at a bigger disadvantage then in open field battle, because defending side will be squized in one place and won't be able to utilize the wall advantage or have enough space to do some flanking or other manouvering, at least till fighting will be moved further behind the walls.

Third thing, ladders appear out of nowhere....seriously CA? Why units could not simply start with those ladders and just walk with them to the walls? They would slow down the units a bit giving some advantage to the defending side, but at the same time it would still follow CA design of "fun" sieges. Climbing ropes, ninjas, torches and now magic ladders...Better go with easy and lazy design then give it at least a minute of thought on how to make it not ridiculous while not fully ditching their idea.

So to conclude, instead of epic sieges that we would have if AI would wait a turn or two to build towers/ladders/rams, we will have straight on city assaults without siege equipment, at least only monsters can destroy the gate, and units flodding the walls completly taking away the defending side advantage of having a wall, but hey...we will have morale debuff...

[HigoChumbo]

Are you sure about that?




Essen is part of the Empires Ostermark: http://warhammerfantasy.wikia.com/wiki/Ostermark

-----Red Dox

Damn

[joedreck]

All this Videos was Made longer ago, so hopefully CA add any combat animations as we saw in Rome2. I would not understand why CA would not use them.

[KAM 2150]

They would not use it as there is too many variations of units so each and every single unit would need special custom made animation with every single other unit in the game. Not to mention that some units like heroes would be stuck inside them forever.

[craziii]

What I fear the most from Rome 2 way of dealing with things is that ladder will not be possible to mod out of the game like torches and actually it will make things a lot worse then it sounds.

One of the reasons why sieges in Rome 2 sucked was that there was no retreat button so AI can't retreat if their siege engines are gone, same for the player.

Second thing is that AI will most likely never siege a castle and wait to siege stuff to get build, why? In Rome 2 AI was able to attack cities right from the start as AI saw that it can attack, since it could torch down the gate, it would never wait for ladder or towers to get build. I am strongly convinced that this will be the exact same case as AI can attack now every single part of the wall so actually defending side will be at a bigger disadvantage then in open field battle, because defending side will be squized in one place and won't be able to utilize the wall advantage or have enough space to do some flanking or other manouvering, at least till fighting will be moved further behind the walls.

Third thing, ladders appear out of nowhere....seriously CA? Why units could not simply start with those ladders and just walk with them to the walls? They would slow down the units a bit giving some advantage to the defending side, but at the same time it would still follow CA design of "fun" sieges. Climbing ropes, ninjas, torches and now magic ladders...Better go with easy and lazy design then give it at least a minute of thought on how to make it not ridiculous while not fully ditching their idea.

So to conclude, instead of epic sieges that we would have if AI would wait a turn or two to build towers/ladders/rams, we will have straight on city assaults without siege equipment, at least only monsters can destroy the gate, and units flodding the walls completly taking away the defending side advantage of having a wall, but hey...we will have morale debuff...

this actually gives the defenders a huuuuge boost. and with the towers instantly firing as they are always in range in a siege battle. maybe people would actually bother with tower upgrades now. tower range and full garrisons = really good defense for all actually.

I like your third point alot. why not let the units carry it? would solve all the problems I have with it. I always find it ridiculous that in previous games that 1 turn/year = 2 ladders for siege. free ladders but units have to carry it would solve all problems. this is the best solution.

[joedreck]

They would not use it as there is too many variations of units so each and every single unit would need special custom made animation with every single other unit in the game. Not to mention that some units like heroes would be stuck inside them forever.

Not sure about that, cause the most units have similar to human sceleton. So an Orc could use animations same as a vampire zombie or sceleton or chaos warrior. Most mounten units too. So just special units could not and they are rare. So let's say 80% of the units in video could use the animations. And for special fight it would be ok as it is. Now we have 0%. Also I would think if 2 hero fight each other this would be looking amazing awesome, but it's looks like diablo I. CA should look also at mark of chaos and copy some good ideas. Hero add into unit and hero vs hero fight.

Also other though. This are normal Nummer of units in graphics options. What if i choice small. Varghulf is just one. Do it get worst specs for balancing!?

[async]

I am very happy about the gone matched combat. U like animations, good!
But what if 1 soldier defeats 50 just because his stats are better. Surrounded or not. No sense!
I am really really happy about the comeback to the rome, medieval 2 battle system.
The matched combat was my biggest fear about this game.

[GasMask]

I am very happy about the gone matched combat. U like animations, good!
But what if 1 soldier defeats 50 just because his stats are better. Surrounded or not. No sense!
I am really really happy about the comeback to the rome, medieval 2 battle system.
The matched combat was my biggest fear about this game.

As long as combat animations are still present with the troops that is fine but if they have ditched that the game will be pretty basic and boring.

[Thelann]

Why are you happy that one to one animation has been removed?

They tend to bring weird effects on unbalanced melees, where one side outnumbers the other a lot. In Shogun 2, you could see this effect especially with heroes units. They would be able to hold their ground even outnumbered 1-50. It was pretty unrealistic and a nightmare to proper balance, apparently. BUT they really looked cool.

Coming back to total war warhammer, it seems that this life point system from Rome II is also gone, which I am glad about. In Rome II the kill rate tended to be exponential, and it was very complicated to actually get a visual feedback on who does what in term of battle efficiency. For instance, If you charged with unit a, and then 2 minutes later with unit b, you would not be able to say from the casualty rate who was responsible for the damages, as killing blows tend to happen later in the melee (at 3 minutes, for instance).

The only thing I am not fond of is this stance system for stacks. I preferred to use the campaign map landscape to prepare my ambushes.

[async]

They tend to bring weird effects on unbalanced melees, where one side outnumbers the other a lot. In Shogun 2, you could see this effect especially with heroes units. They would be able to hold their ground even outnumbered 1-50. It was pretty unrealistic and a nightmare to proper balance, apparently. BUT they really looked cool.

Coming back to total war warhammer, it seems that this life point system from Rome II is also gone, which I am glad about. In Rome II the kill rate tended to be exponential, and it was very complicated to actually get a visual feedback on who does what in term of battle efficiency. For instance, If you charged with unit a, and then 2 minutes later with unit b, you would not be able to say from the casualty rate who was responsible for the damages, as killing blows tend to happen later in the melee (at 3 minutes, for instance).

THIS ! Thank you

[The Wandering Storyteller]

Neither did they zoom in, nor did they show the final roster. Let's wait and watch.

[Abdülmecid I]

I think that the point of the new siege battles design is to make sieges just like a normal battle, with one long heightened surface in the middle, which can be easily surpassed by gigantic monsters of magic ladders. The few buildings inside the city serve more as decorative objects, which can limit mobility, but they don't force the armies to use the few available narrow paths. Something like those huge rocks in the middle of the battlefield, which only managed to make deployment trickier back in Rome I (or ruin the battle, by prohibiting any reinforcements from accessing the battlefield).

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

The wide wall also helps the maneuverability of the armies, being essentially more of a weirdly shaped hill than a wall. I'm not necessarily against it, considering that sieges tend to be hilariously broker ever since Medieval II. Perhaps, CA's decision to get rid of them in Empire was the best, although even there we had Spidermen dressed in colourful uniforms trying to climb star-shaped fortresses. On the other hand, I understand why anyone interested in either siege warfare or the huge cities of Warhammer is extremely frustrated by this. After all, CA could have learnt how to properly manage pathfinding after more than four games with the same engine.

[axicup]

But what if 1 soldier defeats 50 just because his stats are better. Surrounded or not. No sense!

Did you actually pay any attention to units fighting in Rome 2 and Attila? I don't even know where you guys keep recycling this myth from. Shogun 2, I guess? In the latest two TW titles, in their current state, there is regular "medieval 2"-styled melee combat, and a lot of it. Like, the majority of what I see when I zoom in is "flailing at an enemy regardless whether he's busy with another guy or not". People drop while doing matched animations, people drop from blows to their sides, to pokes from behind. Surrounded warriors get killed really fast and spend most of their time while still alive recovering from overwhelming strikes from all sides - they are being essentially "stunlocked".

[async]

And some soldiers simple fall down and die without a hit.