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.
Wood elves will bring a new definition of benny hill battles in TW:W at the pace it is now. I hope they will introduce a slow pace button for those of us who enjoy micro managing and zooming in. Maybe invite Kam2150 into their studio for some suggestions.
Yeah cause it's not that they don't want slower battles. It's that they don't know how to do it.
Cause we've never, ever had slower battles in any TW before...
Lmfaooo commissarrrr
Humans not knowing how to replicate a battle or a war correctly within a game based setting..........
Wood elves will bring a new definition of benny hill battles in TW:W at the pace it is now. I hope they will introduce a slow pace button for those of us who enjoy micro managing and zooming in. Maybe invite Kam2150 into their studio for some suggestions.
Yeah cause it's not that they don't want slower battles. It's that they don't know how to do it.
Cause we've never, ever had slower battles in any TW before...
Also, wow, anyone fighting VC with VC in early campaign? Takes FOREVER!
Reduce the pace of battle to that of rome1 or medieval totalwar. Much better, way way way better in my opinion.
Or atleast have 2 options like you used to : Arcade or realism! Arcade = fast and whatnot, with realism being slow. Ps: I only call it realism since that was what it was called in the older games. Not making a point of warhammer being overly realistic ^^ Its for the campaign ****, you dont even have to balance it all that much (mp can have fast as hell battles for all i care. In mp faster pace makes sense)
You have the option to cater to BOTH camps.. So why dont you? I do use mods to slow things down, but its not an ideal sollution.
Reduce the pace of battle to that of rome1 or medieval totalwar. Much better, way way way better in my opinion.
Or atleast have 2 options like you used to : Arcade or realism! Arcade = fast and whatnot, with realism being slow. Ps: I only call it realism since that was what it was called in the older games. Not making a point of warhammer being overly realistic ^^ Its for the campaign ****, you dont even have to balance it all that much (mp can have fast as hell battles for all i care. In mp faster pace makes sense)
You have the option to cater to BOTH camps.. So why dont you? I do use mods to slow things down, but its not an ideal sollution.
That would be awesome. I get why MP dudes want to have it somewhat faster but i started a new campaign yesterday and hell.. I couldn´t even do propper flanking maneuvers with my cavalry, since the lines collaps so fast. if you don´t park you cav in range of the enemys ranged units, you wont hit the lines in time. Thats why to arcady for a "epic fantasy universe". All that glorius monster-units kinda loose some of their awesomeness aswell, since they have no time to rage through the enemy.
Bit i doubt we´ll get two speed-levels. It´s hard enough to balance everything once. I wouldn´t want to balance it twice if we get to arround 10 factions ^^
Reduce the pace of battle to that of rome1 or medieval totalwar.
LOL!
Rome1 had lightning-fast battles because the units moved with ludicrous speed! Want that for Warhammer, have every infantrymen move like cavalry and cavalry move like a sportscar plus being able to turn on a dime like the cartoon troopers from R1? Yeah, right.
If I was a betting person, I would put this series with 20+ factions. It would be added work -to add alternate battle pace- but with their success i can't imagine it cutting into the success of the game, if anything boost its support$$. The amount of different types of factions/races only further pushes my support$$ and opinion/suggestion for the battle pace to be addressed-side from modders (who are talented in their own right, but do not have a company $$ or insight behind them).
Reduce the pace of battle to that of rome1 or medieval totalwar.
LOL!
Rome1 had lightning-fast battles because the units moved with ludicrous speed! Want that for Warhammer, have every infantrymen move like cavalry and cavalry move like a sportscar plus being able to turn on a dime like the cartoon troopers from R1? Yeah, right.
Lets go easy on him. He probably only played rome 1 with mods but I 100% agree. Rome 1 was a great game for its time but warhammer is lightyears ahead - especially in the battle department. Medieval 2 also isnt as good as warhammer but I loved the unresponsiveness units had back then. Felt much more realistic.
For warhammer I just wish some stuff wouldnt kill enemy as fast as they do and troops should be a little slower. This is a minor issue though - battles arent bad if you forget about how annoying skirmisher cavalry is (especially for VC and chaos)
I think it's fair to put the question of correct battle pace in TW games in with the other big ones, like:
What is the meaning of life? What came before the Big Bang Are we alone?
and "Who killed the Dead Sea?"
Lmao I would rather it be out with the group of questions CA can answer: Why while playing do all factions look like ants (zoomed all the way out)? Where's Krell? Are wood elves sanitation and sewer systems really any better than greenskins?
I think it's fair to put the question of correct battle pace in TW games in with the other big ones, like:
What is the meaning of life? What came before the Big Bang Are we alone?
and "Who killed the Dead Sea?"
Lmao I would rather it be out with the group of questions CA can answer: Why while playing do all factions look like ants (zoomed all the way out)? Where's Krell? Are wood elves sanitation and sewer systems really any better than greenskins?
Add to that list:
- Could a flaming torch actually burn down city gates? - Could some highly efficient shipwrights actually construct instant transports? - Is Joey actually the fifth Dark God? - How many McDonald's Happy Meals can you buy with one Charlemagne?
All of CA will be brothers and sisters of Sigmar .....if they add alternate battle pace! Current state feels too close to mobile game style speed. If adding an alternate is out the question, I hope they make 20v20 or40v40 lasting longer than 5-10 min. -in real time.
I made my account and commented three days ago...why hasn't CA announced this fix yet..... ?
I've just about got time to work a flank but I can't really extend my tactical play beyond a very basic plan - there's certainly no time for subtlety. And with multiple heroes, spells and special abilities I think there's probably more micro-management in WHTW battles than in any previous TW and yet I find I have far less time to do it.
I get that the fast pace probably works well for multi player but in single player I want to feel like my success or failure is based on my tactics and strategy, not my ability to out twitch a computer.
It's horses for courses of course, but a slower pace would definitely suit me better.
I have 250h playtime and I have used Proper Combat for maybe 230-40 hours and I believe that Battle Pace is quite hard to balance, even tho the Proper Combat is in my opinion pretty spot on. Except for some units being too slow.
Recently, I tried a Slower Combat mod for Rome II and the result was that I have never played a battle that lasted that long before. It took 55 minutes to end, even tho I repeatedly charged my Cavarly into their backs/sides (although, the Cav vs Cav engagement took like 15 minutes) . During those 40 minutes I had to have my cavarly on hold so it would go from Exhausted to Winded/Active for several minutes.
That didn't make the battles more tactical since the only units you actively use after you have used your, possible, reserves is the cavalry.
hendo1592 The reason why units looks like Ant is because:
1) It they didn't look like ants, it would affect performance quite heavily and would require a good PC. There is a mod that removes Unit LOD, but they still look like ants when zoomed all the way out.
2) If you are far up in the sky (on a roof, in a heli etc) people tend to like like ants.
Now, I don't know if you were serious or not. If you weren't, I'm embarrased.
I have 250h playtime and I have used Proper Combat for maybe 230-40 hours and I believe that Battle Pace is quite hard to balance, even tho the Proper Combat is in my opinion pretty spot on. Except for some units being too slow.
Recently, I tried a Slower Combat mod for Rome II and the result was that I have never played a battle that lasted that long before. It took 55 minutes to end, even tho I repeatedly charged my Cavarly into their backs/sides (although, the Cav vs Cav engagement took like 15 minutes) . During those 40 minutes I had to have my cavarly on hold so it would go from Exhausted to Winded/Active for several minutes.
That didn't make the battles more tactical since the only units you actively use after you have used your, possible, reserves is the cavalry.
I agree it is a difficult task, that is why I think it's a task that is out of reach of modders. I haven't played Rome 2 in awhile but..that battle pace vanilla is slower than TW warhammer...55min battles I think isn't what many people are asking for I would guess they want their battles to last longer than the avg 2 songs. Although, your post highlightens the trouble of balancing units that matches battle pace-without having to wait 10-15 min to reuse units. Difficult task, but CA can do it!
KORPEN : I was just poking fun at the battle pace with the ant comment, but anyways thank you though for your explanation.--no need to be embarrassed dry humor is nearly impossible to detect on forums.
I can't figure out how to quote without quoting my own post as well as yours, making the post unncessarily long.
hendo1592
I don't think that either, 55 minutes is way too long. And yes, you are correct, Rome II vanilla is much slower than TWW. I tried a battle without mods, just vanilla, (same units as the mod and tried to re-create the same scenario as much as I could) and it took around 20-25 minutes.
I think it's fair to put the question of correct battle pace in TW games in with the other big ones, like:
What is the meaning of life? What came before the Big Bang Are we alone?
and "Who killed the Dead Sea?"
You still haven't figured out the meaning of life?
Mortals........
YOU WILL NOT MOCK THE EMPIRE OF MANS MORTALITY, LORD AVADON. WE WILL REST IN SIGMARS HALLS, WHILE YOUR SOUL WILL BELONG TO THE RUINOS GODS FOR ETERNITY.
I've consulted with numerous receptacles of beer this eve and they've filled me with their wisdom. Apparently the secret to winning a Nobel Pace Prize is variable speed options hard coded into the game.
I've consulted with numerous receptacles of beer this eve and they've filled me with their wisdom. Apparently the secret to winning a Nobel Pace Prize is variable speed options hard coded into the game.
Must of been bugmans ale...maybe we should order a case for CA. TW:warhammer has an opportunity to be one of the most versatile games with developing alternative battle pace options. I asked Joey on Reddit what their position was on the matter, I'll link the thread when/if I get an answer. Does anyone know if they have previously commented on this?
i think they said that people who want slower battles should use the existing battle speed toggle that lets you play in half speed so that yuor battle can take all night if you want
that's what i would have said anyway
boyfights you are always here to confirmate every spark of originality or reason burns or acid bruises anyone, stop your gladiator love for agressions.
If they have answered to use the existing battle speed toggle to slow battle pace, they are plainly dumb. I don't think Joey would have answered something like that. We want a slower battle mode here, not some 'money shot' style slow motion display. There is a big difference between the two concepts and I hope they are aware of that in CA.
Team Yennefer
"A blinding flash materialised into a transparent sphere, and inside it loomed a shape, assuming contours and shapes at frightening speed. Dandelion recognised it at once. He knew those wild, black curls and the obsidian star on a velvet ribbon. What he didn’t know and had never seen before was the face. It was a face of rage and fury, the face of the goddess of vengeance, destruction and death." - Time of contempt
I agree the battles are way too fast in TWW. No time to enjoy the setting, the cool monster animations, or the blood splattering everywhere. Pause and slow-mo suck to have to use for this, as both are non-immersive and remove all sound.
I've been playing some Rome 2 lately since I've gotten a bit burnt out on TWW, and the battle length in that game now is what I consider to be pretty much perfect. The only exception may be with hoplite v. hoplite action. Side note: Rome 2 is good now!
Trying to explain why a large group of TWW players prefer longer battles (and long posts haha) than current build :
The game paintball as an explanation (don't laugh stick with it) even if you didn't play, this will be a good imagery explanation.
There are two styles of paintball I played, speed ball and woods ball. Speed ball is kind of self-explanatory, it was fast, intense and a lot of shooting was required (A LOT)often taken place on a course-action was fast and & short rush
Woods ball was slower, intense, and shooting (not as much as speed ball but still plenty)often taking place in wooded setting -action was spread out, and time was necessary for the tactics (which included speedball tactics) to be carried out
TO THE POINT: both styles involved tactics, both were fun, both had players that preferred one over the other. You can think of the shooting as a metaphor for clicking in TWW if that helps any.
Hope that example helps, if not sorry I tried. Share if you think this is a good explanation. Alternate battle pace option or more of a compromise, CA, please and thank you. You Won't regret it$$!
I gotta say, the mention of paintball raised an eyebrow, but that panned out to be a surprisingly good analogy.
What it made me realise most of all is how long it's been since I have needed to even think about ambush tactics or terrain advantage (other than height perhaps) while fighting a TW battle.... Shogun II was it? Napoleon for certain.
Since those games, there has been neither the time nor the space to develop and execute genuinely creative and interesting battle tactics.
Speed ball is great at exercising your trigger (Left Mouse Button) finger, but Woods ball forces you to think adapt your tactic significantly within the course of a single encounter. Let's face it, that's where the real fun is.
Please CA. Bring back woods ball.
Or I will pepper you with semi-auto fire when the marshals aren't looking.
battles are the key factor of total war it never was the campaign
This is pure opinion and I'm pretty sure there are a majority of players who would disagree. The game has always been about both. Indeed, I'm 100% certain CA would tell you the campaign is a huge, huge part of the game.
Comments
Humans not knowing how to replicate a battle or a war correctly within a game based setting..........
Not surprised.........
- Report
0 · Disagree AgreeAlso, wow, anyone fighting VC with VC in early campaign? Takes FOREVER!
- Report
0 · Disagree AgreeMuch better, way way way better in my opinion.
Or atleast have 2 options like you used to : Arcade or realism! Arcade = fast and whatnot, with realism being slow. Ps: I only call it realism since that was what it was called in the older games. Not making a point of warhammer being overly realistic ^^
Its for the campaign ****, you dont even have to balance it all that much (mp can have fast as hell battles for all i care. In mp faster pace makes sense)
You have the option to cater to BOTH camps.. So why dont you?
I do use mods to slow things down, but its not an ideal sollution.
- Report
2 · Disagree AgreeBit i doubt we´ll get two speed-levels. It´s hard enough to balance everything once. I wouldn´t want to balance it twice if we get to arround 10 factions ^^
- Report
1 · Disagree AgreeLOL!
Rome1 had lightning-fast battles because the units moved with ludicrous speed! Want that for Warhammer, have every infantrymen move like cavalry and cavalry move like a sportscar plus being able to turn on a dime like the cartoon troopers from R1? Yeah, right.
- Report
2 · Disagree Agree- Report
0 · Disagree AgreeMedieval 2 also isnt as good as warhammer but I loved the unresponsiveness units had back then. Felt much more realistic.
For warhammer I just wish some stuff wouldnt kill enemy as fast as they do and troops should be a little slower.
This is a minor issue though - battles arent bad if you forget about how annoying skirmisher cavalry is (especially for VC and chaos)
- Report
0 · Disagree AgreeWhat is the meaning of life?
What came before the Big Bang
Are we alone?
and "Who killed the Dead Sea?"
- Report
2 · Disagree Agree- Report
0 · Disagree AgreeEven the mods that I've tried to use to slow battles down are pretty fast compared to previous titles, even Rome 2.
I've never had to pause so often in a total war game, and it's a little off-putting.
- Report
3 · Disagree AgreeI would rather it be out with the group of questions CA can answer:
Why while playing do all factions look like ants (zoomed all the way out)?
Where's Krell?
Are wood elves sanitation and sewer systems really any better than greenskins?
- Report
1 · Disagree AgreeMortals........
- Report
1 · Disagree AgreeAdd to that list:
- Could a flaming torch actually burn down city gates?
- Could some highly efficient shipwrights actually construct instant transports?
- Is Joey actually the fifth Dark God?
- How many McDonald's Happy Meals can you buy with one Charlemagne?
- Report
0 · Disagree Agree...I'm going with the Peace prize.
- Report
0 · Disagree AgreeCurrent state feels too close to mobile game style speed. If adding an alternate is out the question, I hope they make 20v20 or40v40 lasting longer than 5-10 min. -in real time.
I made my account and commented three days ago...why hasn't CA announced this fix yet.....
- Report
3 · Disagree AgreeI've just about got time to work a flank but I can't really extend my tactical play beyond a very basic plan - there's certainly no time for subtlety. And with multiple heroes, spells and special abilities I think there's probably more micro-management in WHTW battles than in any previous TW and yet I find I have far less time to do it.
I get that the fast pace probably works well for multi player but in single player I want to feel like my success or failure is based on my tactics and strategy, not my ability to out twitch a computer.
It's horses for courses of course, but a slower pace would definitely suit me better.
- Report
1 · Disagree AgreeRecently, I tried a Slower Combat mod for Rome II and the result was that I have never played a battle that lasted that long before. It took 55 minutes to end, even tho I repeatedly charged my Cavarly into their backs/sides (although, the Cav vs Cav engagement took like 15 minutes) . During those 40 minutes I had to have my cavarly on hold so it would go from Exhausted to Winded/Active for several minutes.
That didn't make the battles more tactical since the only units you actively use after you have used your, possible, reserves is the cavalry.
hendo1592 The reason why units looks like Ant is because:
1) It they didn't look like ants, it would affect performance quite heavily and would require a good PC. There is a mod that removes Unit LOD, but they still look like ants when zoomed all the way out.
2) If you are far up in the sky (on a roof, in a heli etc) people tend to like like ants.
Now, I don't know if you were serious or not. If you weren't, I'm embarrased.
- Report
0 · Disagree AgreeKORPEN : I was just poking fun at the battle pace with the ant comment, but anyways thank you though for your explanation.--no need to be embarrassed dry humor is nearly impossible to detect on forums.
- Report
0 · Disagree Agree- Report
4 · Disagree Agreehendo1592
I don't think that either, 55 minutes is way too long. And yes, you are correct, Rome II vanilla is much slower than TWW. I tried a battle without mods, just vanilla, (same units as the mod and tried to re-create the same scenario as much as I could) and it took around 20-25 minutes.
Haha, I figured.
- Report
0 · Disagree Agree- Report
0 · Disagree Agree- Report
0 · Disagree Agree- Report
0 · Disagree Agree- Report
1 · Disagree Agreethat's what i would have said anyway
or reason burns or acid bruises anyone,
stop your gladiator love for agressions.
- Report
0 · Disagree AgreeTeam Yennefer
"A blinding flash materialised into a transparent sphere, and inside it loomed a shape, assuming contours and shapes at frightening speed. Dandelion recognised it at once. He knew those wild, black curls and the obsidian star on a velvet ribbon. What he didn’t know and had never seen before was the face. It was a face of rage and fury, the face of the goddess of vengeance, destruction and death." - Time of contempt- Report
3 · Disagree AgreeI've been playing some Rome 2 lately since I've gotten a bit burnt out on TWW, and the battle length in that game now is what I consider to be pretty much perfect. The only exception may be with hoplite v. hoplite action. Side note: Rome 2 is good now!
- Report
1 · Disagree AgreeThe game paintball as an explanation (don't laugh stick with it) even if you didn't play, this will be a good imagery explanation.
There are two styles of paintball I played, speed ball and woods ball.
Speed ball is kind of self-explanatory, it was fast, intense and a lot of shooting was required (A LOT)often taken place on a course-action was fast and & short rush
Woods ball was slower, intense, and shooting (not as much as speed ball but still plenty)often taking place in wooded setting -action was spread out, and time was necessary for the tactics (which included speedball tactics) to be carried out
TO THE POINT: both styles involved tactics, both were fun, both had players that preferred one over the other. You can think of the shooting as a metaphor for clicking in TWW if that helps any.
Hope that example helps, if not sorry I tried.
Share if you think this is a good explanation.
Alternate battle pace option or more of a compromise, CA, please and thank you. You Won't regret
- Report
2 · Disagree AgreeI gotta say, the mention of paintball raised an eyebrow, but that panned out to be a surprisingly good analogy.
What it made me realise most of all is how long it's been since I have needed to even think about ambush tactics or terrain advantage (other than height perhaps) while fighting a TW battle.... Shogun II was it? Napoleon for certain.
Since those games, there has been neither the time nor the space to develop and execute genuinely creative and interesting battle tactics.
Speed ball is great at exercising your trigger (Left Mouse Button) finger, but Woods ball forces you to think adapt your tactic significantly within the course of a single encounter. Let's face it, that's where the real fun is.
Please CA. Bring back woods ball.
Or I will pepper you with semi-auto fire when the marshals aren't looking.
- Report
2 · Disagree Agree- Report
1 · Disagree Agree