Welcome

Please register for Total War Access to use the forums. If you're an existing user, your forum details will be merged with Total War Access if you register with the same email or username. For more information please read our FAQ’s here.

Categories

[Wishful Thinking] Battle-only Campaigns

konokonokonokono Registered Users Posts: 300
So here's the deal. I'm loving this game and the best thing about it is, of course, the battles. Nothing more fun than smashing huge mobs of fantasy units together and managing the battlefield chaos.

But what I'm finding is that battles are diminished in fun and importance as you get further in the campaign. For a few reasons:
1. In the long run, economic superiority will trump battlefield tactics. So the game becomes less about the battles and more about economic management.
2. Unbalanced economies lead to unbalanced armies which lead to fewer battles. Usually, one side is dominant and the other side retreats. In fact, I feel quite lucky to have just one evenly matched battle in a two-hour play session, especially late game.
3. Poor and unvaried recruitment choices by the AI. Not only does the AI seem to not make effective army comps, but they seem to send the same comps at you over and over again. It becomes boring after a while to face the same armies and use the same strategies.

I find myself wishing for a campaign mode that features only battles. Not as a replacement for the strategic campaign, but as an additional game mode.

What I envision is a narrative-driven sequence of set-piece battles, basically like quest battles, but where you can choose what army to take with you on a point-buy system. This will allow you to face much more unique and interesting battlefield situations. It would also allow you to experiment beating the same scenario with vastly different army comps.

In order to facilitate a sense of progression, your troops and general can earn experience through the campaign, and you should be able to unlock new units after certain battles. Perhaps you can even choose the order in which you tackle some battles, thus unlocking some units before others.

I'd really love to see something like this. So, take note CA: I'd gladly spend money for a battle-driven campaign.

Comments

  • epic_159733007811cHJwei4epic_159733007811cHJwei4 Senior Member United StatesRegistered Users Posts: 3,549
    I think if CA could just improve the AI's ability to recruit high end units and maybe "scripted" in around 10 - 15 "comps" that the AI tried to build, it would go a long way.

    As it is, the AI seems to be allowed to recruit whatever it thinks is valuable and the AI values strange things (like missiles at the expense of any kind of melee).
  • GaussiaGaussia Junior Member Registered Users Posts: 1,260
    Not at all at the level you suggest (which, by the way, sound awsome. Especially now when the campaign is kinda bad) the did with fall of the Samurai. There the Historical battles formed a sequence, after you won one you unlocked the next one. I think it was only 6 of them, and no options for army, character development and such, but at least something along the lines of it.
  • DemicoreDemicore Registered Users Posts: 6
    Ay OP, just like Warhammer: Dark Omen, in my opinion one of the greatest games of all time. I share your dream :)
  • ArgonArgon Senior Member ItalyRegistered Users Posts: 1,501
    Well, a dlc like the dragon wae of dall of the samurai would be cool
    My favorite factions in TW titles:
    Rome 1 - House of Julii
    Medieval 2 - Milan
    Empire - UK
    Napoleon - France
    Shogun 2 - Tokugawa
    Rome 2 - Macedon
    Attila - Western Roman Empire
    Warhammer - Empire (Karl Franz)
    Three kingdoms - Sun Jian
  • ROdaROda Registered Users Posts: 84
    Demicore said:

    Ay OP, just like Warhammer: Dark Omen, in my opinion one of the greatest games of all time. I share your dream :)

    Shadow of the horned rat too.

    I tell ya, if CA had the money they should buy up the licenses or whatever for SOTHR and DO and make them campaigns with the TW battle systems.

    Hrng...

    But anyway...

    I agree with Honey, the Ai flees most engagements, spams rubbish units and comes along to smack you about when it thinks it outnumbers you 2-1/3-1 but fails, mostly because of its wonky configurations, like too many missile units and whatnot.
  • TheShiroOfDaltonTheShiroOfDalton Senior Member Registered Users Posts: 34,001
    edited July 2016
    Dark Omen encouraged a super-passive and defensive playstyle. Your mages, skirmishers and artillery were the main dealers of damage. Going into melee was discouraged because of the high cost of repleneshing troops. Shadow of the Horned Rat was even worse about this since you couldn't even reliably replenish after every battle.

    I loved the game to death when it came out (and it was what got me into Warhammer in the first place) but this sort of playstyle wouldn't at all fit with the epic battles I've come to expect from TW.
  • DebaucheeDebauchee Junior Member Registered Users Posts: 1,418
    @Ephraim_Dalton
    Sounds like a problem with balancing replenishment costs, rather than a fundamental flaw in game design.
    As for passive playstyle, the game can provide scenarios, where AI has artillery superiority, but not so many fronline soldiers.
  • Lexen_RapierLexen_Rapier Junior Member Registered Users Posts: 264
    First thing I thought when playing the first scripted battle (using a quest line).


    Someone should remake Shadow of the Horned Rat on this.

    I think you could probably mod it to be a series of quests that appear in order in the right places on the map. Remove enemy AI (or have them locked away in some corner of the map not used, like Norsica if you can't have no enemies and still play on).

    Make Burnhart into a horde - then he can encamp to recruit new units.
  • TheShiroOfDaltonTheShiroOfDalton Senior Member Registered Users Posts: 34,001
    edited July 2016

    @Ephraim_Dalton
    Sounds like a problem with balancing replenishment costs, rather than a fundamental flaw in game design.
    As for passive playstyle, the game can provide scenarios, where AI has artillery superiority, but not so many fronline soldiers.

    No, having to be careful with the lives of your men was a feature and it does make the campaign challenging, but it simply doesn't allow for big, epic clashes.

    Also, there were missions in Dark Omen where the enemy had superior artillery and skirmishers. There's the infamous Kislev mission where your goal is to get up a mountain while Skeleton Archers and Skull Catapults rain fire on you. The best way to do this without suffering much casualties was to honestly solo it with a cavalry unit equipped with a Shield of Ptholos and the Banner of Wrath.
  • TijuTiju TulifurdumRegistered Users Posts: 109
    Sounds like a nightmare to me. Wouldn't it be a quite different game then? I prefer the campaign-battle mixture of TW. But ok, tastes differ.
  • Zwirbaum#3466Zwirbaum#3466 Senior Member Registered Users Posts: 392

    @Ephraim_Dalton
    Sounds like a problem with balancing replenishment costs, rather than a fundamental flaw in game design.
    As for passive playstyle, the game can provide scenarios, where AI has artillery superiority, but not so many fronline soldiers.

    No, having to be careful with the lives of your men was a feature and it does make the campaign challenging, but it simply doesn't allow for big, epic clashes.

    Also, there were missions in Dark Omen where the enemy had superior artillery and skirmishers. There's the infamous Kislev mission where your goal is to get up a mountain while Skeleton Archers and Skull Catapults rain fire on you. The best way to do this without suffering much casualties was to honestly solo it with a cavalry unit equipped with a Shield of Ptholos and the Banner of Wrath.
    Or hope your mage randomized Wings of Fire. It was ez-pz with it as well.
  • tqhung87tqhung87 Senior Member Registered Users Posts: 411
    The A.I fail to manage a decent economy. That's why even in legendary they can only dominate early game when base income matter more than region income.
  • SetheusIXSetheusIX Registered Users Posts: 717
    I've been playing a lot of campaigns by just holding 2 provinces and letting the fights come to me. Then just mop up after chaos at the end. I find you have loads of more interesting fights if you let everyone get powerful before you fight them
  • konokonokonokono Registered Users Posts: 300

    First thing I thought when playing the first scripted battle (using a quest line).


    Someone should remake Shadow of the Horned Rat on this.

    I think you could probably mod it to be a series of quests that appear in order in the right places on the map. Remove enemy AI (or have them locked away in some corner of the map not used, like Norsica if you can't have no enemies and still play on).

    Make Burnhart into a horde - then he can encamp to recruit new units.

    Interesting suggestion! I wish I had time to get into modding. Maybe one day I will find some time. But before that, I really wish an enterprising modder could do this!


Sign In or Register to comment.