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

Warriors of Chaos Campaign Redone (Devs are very welcome to express thoughts)

1235»

Comments

  • Ephraim_DaltonEphraim_Dalton Senior Member Posts: 20,405Registered Users

    daelin4 said:



    Making a unit a straight up superior clone of another might solve the former being useless, but then makes the latter useless. That is, assuming you want a Total War game where all units have a role in an army, as opposed to RTW route where it's all about who gets Urban Cohort stacks first.

    It's like that now. This would be a fine argument if we were comparing greatswords to halbards but Chosen literally are "straight up superior clones" of Chaos Warriors already. We can't make them something they already are. The only difference is their smaller unit size, high price, and p+ss poor cost effectiveness.
    So why are you against making them something special?

  • Combat_WombatCombat_Wombat Posts: 4,092Registered Users

    daelin4 said:



    Making a unit a straight up superior clone of another might solve the former being useless, but then makes the latter useless. That is, assuming you want a Total War game where all units have a role in an army, as opposed to RTW route where it's all about who gets Urban Cohort stacks first.

    It's like that now. This would be a fine argument if we were comparing greatswords to halbards but Chosen literally are "straight up superior clones" of Chaos Warriors already. We can't make them something they already are. The only difference is their smaller unit size, high price, and p+ss poor cost effectiveness.
    So why are you against making them something special?
    I think we've had a major miscommunication here. I want Chosen to be better. I think they should have immunity to psychology and immunity to vigor along with a leadership buff and possibly cause fear or terror. That's a hell of a lot more unique than chaos warriors and or any other unit in the chaos roster. They might even become, dare I say, powerful. I don't think a system for giving then random marks of chaos would make then any better than they are now. One mark giving them immunity to psychology is only a start. They need more than that, more than a mark that gives them one thing on top of their current stats.

    I'm not against the TT marks being added to the game. I just don't think they will be enough. They should definitely be added. We just shouldn't rely completely on them to fix Chosen.
  • KGpoopyKGpoopy Posts: 2,009Registered Users
    edited July 2017
    Someone in this discussion someone said Chaos is predictable in battle. Well they always have been and I think they should be.

    But I'm all for adding Chaos marks and blessings because that relieves some of the predictably along with making chosen more interesting. Also the warhrine was important becasue of the eye of the gods feature that buffed your lords abilities and in turn buffed your infantry or whatever units you choose.

    Basically they need more toys to play with, but not only more, but useful toys.

    I bet half my sandwich and a piece of lent that Norsca will show up Chaos! lol
  • DandalusXVIIDandalusXVII Posts: 4,138Registered Users

    daelin4 said:



    Making a unit a straight up superior clone of another might solve the former being useless, but then makes the latter useless. That is, assuming you want a Total War game where all units have a role in an army, as opposed to RTW route where it's all about who gets Urban Cohort stacks first.

    It's like that now. This would be a fine argument if we were comparing greatswords to halbards but Chosen literally are "straight up superior clones" of Chaos Warriors already. We can't make them something they already are. The only difference is their smaller unit size, high price, and p+ss poor cost effectiveness.
    So why are you against making them something special?
    I think we've had a major miscommunication here. I want Chosen to be better. I think they should have immunity to psychology and immunity to vigor along with a leadership buff and possibly cause fear or terror. That's a hell of a lot more unique than chaos warriors and or any other unit in the chaos roster. They might even become, dare I say, powerful. I don't think a system for giving then random marks of chaos would make then any better than they are now. One mark giving them immunity to psychology is only a start. They need more than that, more than a mark that gives them one thing on top of their current stats.

    I'm not against the TT marks being added to the game. I just don't think they will be enough. They should definitely be added. We just shouldn't rely completely on them to fix Chosen.
    Chosen must get access to Gods effects during battle. Especially if WoC get their own warshrine. That's the main difference between them and regular Chaos Warriors along Gods gifts.
  • Ephraim_DaltonEphraim_Dalton Senior Member Posts: 20,405Registered Users
    Let's hypothetically say that Chosen might receive blessings that either give them physical resistance, armour-sundering or a slowing down aura. If the enemy doesn't know what of those a unit of Chosen might bring to the table, he cannot just counterbuild for it, which means there's a valid reason to pay for the Chosen rather than bring more Chaos Warriors/Chaos Marauders.

    It would bring a bit of...chaos to the fight.

  • DandalusXVIIDandalusXVII Posts: 4,138Registered Users

    Let's hypothetically say that Chosen might receive blessings that either give them physical resistance, armour-sundering or a slowing down aura. If the enemy doesn't know what of those a unit of Chosen might bring to the table, he cannot just counterbuild for it, which means there's a valid reason to pay for the Chosen rather than bring more Chaos Warriors/Chaos Marauders.

    It would bring a bit of...chaos to the fight.

    Exactly, well said. That's the purpose of Chosen.
  • iamtherealrazieliamtherealraziel Posts: 243Registered Users
    5 simple things will make Chaos better to play as and against.


    1. Corruption stays unless actively being brought down. If i burn my way through kislev the corruption should not auto clean up until someone rebuilds those cities.
    2. There is no reason chaos can't lay trap like other factions. Allow chaos to use the ambush stance.
    3. Allow chaos to build something in ruins to support their war efforts. Like with Norsca totems to the gods, skull pyramids etc.
    4. Remove infighting, as stated before this is even more common with greenskins and makes chaos uncompetetive
    5. Allow vassals to actually provide income to chaos.
  • KGpoopyKGpoopy Posts: 2,009Registered Users
    I can agree with that.
  • Ephraim_DaltonEphraim_Dalton Senior Member Posts: 20,405Registered Users
    edited July 2017


    4. Remove infighting, as stated before this is even more common with greenskins and makes chaos uncompetetive

    You can argue that it's pretty lame as one of their "unique" mechanics, but making them "uncompetitve"? In MP this doesn't come into play at all and on campaign WoC have one of the easier campaigns right now, if you ignore the north and just go rampaging in the south, even if you never recuit any other stack.


  • iamtherealrazieliamtherealraziel Posts: 243Registered Users


    4. Remove infighting, as stated before this is even more common with greenskins and makes chaos uncompetetive

    You can argue that it's pretty lame as one of their "unique" mechanics, but making them "uncompetitve"? In MP this doesn't come into play at all and on campaign WoC have one of the easier campaigns right now, if you ignore the north and just go rampaging in the south, even if you never recuit any other stack.

    have you played head to head? Being unable to support multiple armies in close proximity is necessary to victory in head to head
  • KGpoopyKGpoopy Posts: 2,009Registered Users


    4. Remove infighting, as stated before this is even more common with greenskins and makes chaos uncompetetive

    You can argue that it's pretty lame as one of their "unique" mechanics, but making them "uncompetitve"? In MP this doesn't come into play at all and on campaign WoC have one of the easier campaigns right now, if you ignore the north and just go rampaging in the south, even if you never recuit any other stack.

    have you played head to head? Being unable to support multiple armies in close proximity is necessary to victory in head to head
    also

    Recruiting and building up new armies can be frustrating because the enemy can pick it off in it's infancy because you have to move it far enough away from the army you recruited it from. So not only do you take attrition from recruitment, but you then have to build it up in insecure areas all the time giving the chance that it gets attacked before you even recruit 3 units....

    There is problems with chaos cooperative play that is annoying as well, like reinforcing sieges, let alone starve out sieges.

    This kind of difficulty or challenge mechanic is like shooting yourself in the foot and then joining the race calling it "a challenge". :smile:

    Infighting needs to be relieved by a new skill tree or taking out as far as I'm concerned about it.
  • Combat_WombatCombat_Wombat Posts: 4,092Registered Users
    KGpoopy said:


    4. Remove infighting, as stated before this is even more common with greenskins and makes chaos uncompetetive

    You can argue that it's pretty lame as one of their "unique" mechanics, but making them "uncompetitve"? In MP this doesn't come into play at all and on campaign WoC have one of the easier campaigns right now, if you ignore the north and just go rampaging in the south, even if you never recuit any other stack.

    have you played head to head? Being unable to support multiple armies in close proximity is necessary to victory in head to head
    also

    Recruiting and building up new armies can be frustrating because the enemy can pick it off in it's infancy because you have to move it far enough away from the army you recruited it from. So not only do you take attrition from recruitment, but you then have to build it up in insecure areas all the time giving the chance that it gets attacked before you even recruit 3 units....

    There is problems with chaos cooperative play that is annoying as well, like reinforcing sieges, let alone starve out sieges.

    This kind of difficulty or challenge mechanic is like shooting yourself in the foot and then joining the race calling it "a challenge". :smile:

    Infighting needs to be relieved by a new skill tree or taking out as far as I'm concerned about it.
    Remove it entirely. There is nothing Bout horde infighting that gives it any sort of justification to be in the game.
  • UrgatUrgat Posts: 992Registered Users


    2. There is no reason chaos can't lay trap like other factions. Allow chaos to use the ambush stance.

    Well, it's not really in character, if you ask me. Certainly not when we'll get Khorne stuff.
    I'd rather they got a difference stance, dunno, something like a "We're here we'll punch your face" stance or something.

  • KGpoopyKGpoopy Posts: 2,009Registered Users
    If the dwarves can set up an ambush, then the Warriors of chaos can do so even more. At least they should.

    People have to consider that the warriors of chaos are not brainless bashers like Orcs are. And they are known for moving creepily fast in heavy armor.

    It's all in the cards for Chaos, CA is just not playing them.
  • DandalusXVIIDandalusXVII Posts: 4,138Registered Users
    edited July 2017
    Urgat said:


    2. There is no reason chaos can't lay trap like other factions. Allow chaos to use the ambush stance.

    Well, it's not really in character, if you ask me. Certainly not when we'll get Khorne stuff.
    I'd rather they got a difference stance, dunno, something like a "We're here we'll punch your face" stance or something.

    Exactly.
    KGpoopy said:

    If the dwarves can set up an ambush, then the Warriors of chaos can do so even more. At least they should. People have to consider that the warriors of chaos are not brainless bashers like Orcs are. And they are known for moving creepily fast in heavy armor. It's all in the cards for Chaos, CA is just not playing them.

    Exactly also.


    The way to implement a stance like this for Chaos is to give them a stance which makes all Chaos army vanguard like Vlad so they can deploy very close to enemy army or everywhere they want around the enemy deployment zone (fix deployment zones for God's sake) fitting Chaos nature in ambush way.

Leave a Comment

BoldItalicStrikethroughOrdered listUnordered list
Emoji
Image
Align leftAlign centerAlign rightToggle HTML viewToggle full pageToggle lights
Drop image/file