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

Warhammer Sea expansion pack (Strawpoll included)

2

Comments

  • Combat_WombatCombat_Wombat Registered Users Posts: 4,092
    And we're back to the sea battle threads.
  • chezequerzchezequerz Junior Member Registered Users Posts: 300
    Personally couldn't really care less one way or the other about sea battles (certainly not enough to pay for it) I always auto resolved them in earlier titles anyway and I don't see that changing for me personally but if there's a significant number of people asking for it then why not I guess.
    wyrd bið ful aræd
  • KGpoopyKGpoopy Registered Users Posts: 2,009
    Bies said:

    So I've seen the Game of Thrones sea battle and some tears dropped from the eye, oh why we did not get naval battles :'(


    Just looking at this you can tell TW warhammer naval battles would be one of a kind.


  • GeldorGeldor Registered Users Posts: 1,115
    CnConrad said:

    Not a chance I wouldn't even want CA to waste time on it to give it to me for free.


    Fall of the Samurai has been the only title I have played that had naval battle even remotely enjoyable.

    This is what I think too. I've never found naval battles in TW even slightly as enjoyable as the land battles.

    And there are so many other nice things they could do instead of focusing on this.

    A naval DLC would be among only a few DLC I'd not buy right away, simple because naval battles were so unenjoyable in the past.


    If they can pull it of, and make it work, sure then I'd buy that too.
  • BiesBies Junior Member Registered Users Posts: 2,327
    Hexi said:

    I would never buy it. Sea battles are the most uninteresting and boring kind of battles you can imagine. There is literally no strategy involved whatsoever.

    I think it would be big difference between warhammer and other historical titles
    - way different ship models
    - magic
    - support units for example dragons and maybe other monsters
    - quests

    "I shivered at the sight of her - her beauty far beyond that of mortal man. But her soul glowed with an inner darkness that chilled my very core."









  • Pinkerton00Pinkerton00 Senior Member Registered Users Posts: 471
    Of course we would buy it, but it doesn't matter.
    CA can't do it unless GW licenses them to use Man-o-War, which they don't seem to want to do.
  • BiesBies Junior Member Registered Users Posts: 2,327

    Of course we would buy it, but it doesn't matter.
    CA can't do it unless GW licenses them to use Man-o-War, which they don't seem to want to do.

    After CA is done with last part nobody will remember this crap game man-o-war which now is on steam so maybe GW will give it to CA :)

    "I shivered at the sight of her - her beauty far beyond that of mortal man. But her soul glowed with an inner darkness that chilled my very core."









  • KGpoopyKGpoopy Registered Users Posts: 2,009

    Of course we would buy it, but it doesn't matter.
    CA can't do it unless GW licenses them to use Man-o-War, which they don't seem to want to do.

    I wouldn't be so sure.

    It's just not a priority in development and direction right now. But CA could use some encouragement and reminders that we want extra after the trilogy, and that definitely includes Naval Battles.

    I don't think getting the licence is the problem, it's CA not wanting to do it like they actually said. Which is why people request that it be done after their priorities are finished. The licence can be acquired when ever. GW is very open to this kind of thing.
  • SiWISiWI Senior Member Registered Users Posts: 11,086
    KGpoopy said:

    Of course we would buy it, but it doesn't matter.
    CA can't do it unless GW licenses them to use Man-o-War, which they don't seem to want to do.

    I wouldn't be so sure.

    It's just not a priority in development and direction right now. But CA could use some encouragement and reminders that we want extra after the trilogy, and that definitely includes Naval Battles.

    I don't think getting the licence is the problem, it's CA not wanting to do it like they actually said. Which is why people request that it be done after their priorities are finished. The licence can be acquired when ever. GW is very open to this kind of thing.
    it is important to remeber who the developers of Man o' War are:
    nobodies.
    And I don't mean that to insult them, but next to CA/Sega they are nobodies hence it is pretty unlikely that GW, with the new licence politic we see the last years, would say no to CA/Sega because of them.

    Also, again, the dreadfleet licence isn't use by anybody I know of, so there are naval battles up for graps.

    BTW:
    if you look at the models in the game, you already see dreadfleet models and MoW models were found as unit cards.
    Ratling_Guns.gif?t=1554385892
  • HexiHexi Registered Users Posts: 1,100
    Bies said:

    Hexi said:

    I would never buy it. Sea battles are the most uninteresting and boring kind of battles you can imagine. There is literally no strategy involved whatsoever.

    I think it would be big difference between warhammer and other historical titles
    - way different ship models
    - magic
    - support units for example dragons and maybe other monsters
    - quests
    None of that changes the fact that sea battles are 100% decided before the battle even begins. Even in real history, the first few lucky shots win the engagement in the extremely rare case that the fleets are equal in size. If the fleets are not equal, the side with less ships will retreat 10 times out of 10 because there is no point. No terrain to use, no formations, no flanking maneuvers are possible unless you outnumber the enemy fleet heavily, not devastating cavalry charges, nothing. It relies completely on stat lineups and nothing else.

    Furthermore, the A.I is completely incompetent at sea battles but go try a hundred or so sea battles against a human opponent and you'll understand how uninteresting and boring it is.
    There is no such thing as innocence, only degrees of guilt
  • SchwarzhelmSchwarzhelm Registered Users Posts: 1,286
    Hexi said:

    Bies said:

    Hexi said:

    I would never buy it. Sea battles are the most uninteresting and boring kind of battles you can imagine. There is literally no strategy involved whatsoever.

    I think it would be big difference between warhammer and other historical titles
    - way different ship models
    - magic
    - support units for example dragons and maybe other monsters
    - quests
    None of that changes the fact that sea battles are 100% decided before the battle even begins. Even in real history, the first few lucky shots win the engagement in the extremely rare case that the fleets are equal in size. If the fleets are not equal, the side with less ships will retreat 10 times out of 10 because there is no point. No terrain to use, no formations, no flanking maneuvers are possible unless you outnumber the enemy fleet heavily, not devastating cavalry charges, nothing. It relies completely on stat lineups and nothing else.

    Furthermore, the A.I is completely incompetent at sea battles but go try a hundred or so sea battles against a human opponent and you'll understand how uninteresting and boring it is.
    Why do you think CA can't bring tactical depth to sea battles? This being a fantasy game helps a lot to solve this issue. I doubt that the AI would be as incompetent as you say, CA already proved that they could create an (at least for most players) passable one in open Battle.
  • HexiHexi Registered Users Posts: 1,100
    edited July 2017

    Hexi said:

    Bies said:

    Hexi said:

    I would never buy it. Sea battles are the most uninteresting and boring kind of battles you can imagine. There is literally no strategy involved whatsoever.

    I think it would be big difference between warhammer and other historical titles
    - way different ship models
    - magic
    - support units for example dragons and maybe other monsters
    - quests
    None of that changes the fact that sea battles are 100% decided before the battle even begins. Even in real history, the first few lucky shots win the engagement in the extremely rare case that the fleets are equal in size. If the fleets are not equal, the side with less ships will retreat 10 times out of 10 because there is no point. No terrain to use, no formations, no flanking maneuvers are possible unless you outnumber the enemy fleet heavily, not devastating cavalry charges, nothing. It relies completely on stat lineups and nothing else.

    Furthermore, the A.I is completely incompetent at sea battles but go try a hundred or so sea battles against a human opponent and you'll understand how uninteresting and boring it is.
    Why do you think CA can't bring tactical depth to sea battles? This being a fantasy game helps a lot to solve this issue. I doubt that the AI would be as incompetent as you say, CA already proved that they could create an (at least for most players) passable one in open Battle.
    There IS no tactical depth to sea battles, that's the point. Boarding? Better soldiers win every time. Ranged firepower? Bigger guns win every time. You can't outmaneuver fast boarding ships and you can't outflank anything to get to the gun ships before they rip your fleet apart. If they can't rip your fleet apart, they are pointless and then it becomes nothing but 20 boarding ships attack eachother with the outcome being the exact same every time. Better men/guns win.

    A T2 ground army can beat a T3 army with tactics and terrain. A T2 fleet will NEVER beat a T3 fleet in any circumstances.

    There is no such thing as innocence, only degrees of guilt
  • CnConradCnConrad Senior Member Registered Users Posts: 3,163

    Could you please tag the title with game of thrones spoilers? Trying to avoid anything about it until the blu ray is out and I didn't expect it when I clicked on this topic. It was minor but still, lol.

    Your best course of action is to turn off your computer and leave it off until you watch the season.
  • CnConradCnConrad Senior Member Registered Users Posts: 3,163

    I would instantly buy it! Just because CA had problems with this kind of battle doesn't mean they should never try it again. Everyone said that Rome2 and (if I remember correctly) Empire were a too buggy when released. The fans were not happy and what did CA do for Warhammer total war? They learned from their mistake and made a great release version. Why don't you think they can't pull it off for navy battles in Warhammer?

    Just because they said that Warhammer will be Land Battles only doesn't mean that this statement can't change in the future. They already changed their plans regarding DLCs big time.

    ->They will focus on LL instead of Mini Campaigns
    ->They release Norsca even though they said Wood Elves were the last Race DLC this big for Warhammer 1
    ->They suddenly use models from older Editions and flesh out minor factions

    When they work on Naval Battles other content doesn't have to suffer for it. CA is big enough with several Teams working on different kind of parts of the game. I doubt they would suddenly cut for example Kislev for Ships because they know we would pay for both.

    All we have to do is to constantly ask (pester) them to bring naval battles. ;-)


    In that case I suppose I have to keep pestering them to forget naval battles or else I may find they wasted a large amount of time and budget for a usless feature.
  • SiWISiWI Senior Member Registered Users Posts: 11,086
    CnConrad said:

    I would instantly buy it! Just because CA had problems with this kind of battle doesn't mean they should never try it again. Everyone said that Rome2 and (if I remember correctly) Empire were a too buggy when released. The fans were not happy and what did CA do for Warhammer total war? They learned from their mistake and made a great release version. Why don't you think they can't pull it off for navy battles in Warhammer?

    Just because they said that Warhammer will be Land Battles only doesn't mean that this statement can't change in the future. They already changed their plans regarding DLCs big time.

    ->They will focus on LL instead of Mini Campaigns
    ->They release Norsca even though they said Wood Elves were the last Race DLC this big for Warhammer 1
    ->They suddenly use models from older Editions and flesh out minor factions

    When they work on Naval Battles other content doesn't have to suffer for it. CA is big enough with several Teams working on different kind of parts of the game. I doubt they would suddenly cut for example Kislev for Ships because they know we would pay for both.

    All we have to do is to constantly ask (pester) them to bring naval battles. ;-)


    In that case I suppose I have to keep pestering them to forget naval battles or else I may find they wasted a large amount of time and budget for a usless feature.
    given the fact that they already waste a lot of money in making footnote races like the BM (and what thank you did they get? "but the unit I googled is missing and hence all is lost!"), I happily will lobby for sea battles.
    Ratling_Guns.gif?t=1554385892
  • FinishingLastFinishingLast Registered Users Posts: 4,340
    SiWI said:

    CnConrad said:

    I would instantly buy it! Just because CA had problems with this kind of battle doesn't mean they should never try it again. Everyone said that Rome2 and (if I remember correctly) Empire were a too buggy when released. The fans were not happy and what did CA do for Warhammer total war? They learned from their mistake and made a great release version. Why don't you think they can't pull it off for navy battles in Warhammer?

    Just because they said that Warhammer will be Land Battles only doesn't mean that this statement can't change in the future. They already changed their plans regarding DLCs big time.

    ->They will focus on LL instead of Mini Campaigns
    ->They release Norsca even though they said Wood Elves were the last Race DLC this big for Warhammer 1
    ->They suddenly use models from older Editions and flesh out minor factions

    When they work on Naval Battles other content doesn't have to suffer for it. CA is big enough with several Teams working on different kind of parts of the game. I doubt they would suddenly cut for example Kislev for Ships because they know we would pay for both.

    All we have to do is to constantly ask (pester) them to bring naval battles. ;-)


    In that case I suppose I have to keep pestering them to forget naval battles or else I may find they wasted a large amount of time and budget for a usless feature.
    given the fact that they already waste a lot of money in making footnote races like the BM (and what thank you did they get? "but the unit I googled is missing and hence all is lost!"), I happily will lobby for sea battles.
    You just came up with the solution. Give the Beastmen a boat called the Jabberslythe. Everyone wins! No one would complain about that!
    Later
  • TheGhostOfProman16TheGhostOfProman16 Senior Member Registered Users Posts: 1,749
    Idk the luck system in Napoleon and FOTS didn't guarantee bigger fleets always win.

    Sometimes little ships could get a lucky shots and blow up the big ships or catch them on fire

    Wind also played a factor in tactics the ship with wind could easy get around ships going against the wind for some critical rear and front shots
    Died during the great YOYO wars
  • SiWISiWI Senior Member Registered Users Posts: 11,086

    SiWI said:

    CnConrad said:

    I would instantly buy it! Just because CA had problems with this kind of battle doesn't mean they should never try it again. Everyone said that Rome2 and (if I remember correctly) Empire were a too buggy when released. The fans were not happy and what did CA do for Warhammer total war? They learned from their mistake and made a great release version. Why don't you think they can't pull it off for navy battles in Warhammer?

    Just because they said that Warhammer will be Land Battles only doesn't mean that this statement can't change in the future. They already changed their plans regarding DLCs big time.

    ->They will focus on LL instead of Mini Campaigns
    ->They release Norsca even though they said Wood Elves were the last Race DLC this big for Warhammer 1
    ->They suddenly use models from older Editions and flesh out minor factions

    When they work on Naval Battles other content doesn't have to suffer for it. CA is big enough with several Teams working on different kind of parts of the game. I doubt they would suddenly cut for example Kislev for Ships because they know we would pay for both.

    All we have to do is to constantly ask (pester) them to bring naval battles. ;-)


    In that case I suppose I have to keep pestering them to forget naval battles or else I may find they wasted a large amount of time and budget for a usless feature.
    given the fact that they already waste a lot of money in making footnote races like the BM (and what thank you did they get? "but the unit I googled is missing and hence all is lost!"), I happily will lobby for sea battles.
    You just came up with the solution. Give the Beastmen a boat called the Jabberslythe. Everyone wins! No one would complain about that!
    except those who say that it was bigger in their coloring book...
    Ratling_Guns.gif?t=1554385892
  • ChaosDragonBornChaosDragonBorn Registered Users Posts: 1,487
    SiWI said:

    KGpoopy said:

    Of course we would buy it, but it doesn't matter.
    CA can't do it unless GW licenses them to use Man-o-War, which they don't seem to want to do.

    I wouldn't be so sure.

    It's just not a priority in development and direction right now. But CA could use some encouragement and reminders that we want extra after the trilogy, and that definitely includes Naval Battles.

    I don't think getting the licence is the problem, it's CA not wanting to do it like they actually said. Which is why people request that it be done after their priorities are finished. The licence can be acquired when ever. GW is very open to this kind of thing.
    it is important to remeber who the developers of Man o' War are:
    nobodies.
    And I don't mean that to insult them, but next to CA/Sega they are nobodies hence it is pretty unlikely that GW, with the new licence politic we see the last years, would say no to CA/Sega because of them.

    Also, again, the dreadfleet licence isn't use by anybody I know of, so there are naval battles up for graps.

    BTW:
    if you look at the models in the game, you already see dreadfleet models and MoW models were found as unit cards.
    Yup
    Bretonnia
    wh_main_brt_shp_buccaneer
    wh_main_brt_shp_corsair
    wh_main_brt_shp_galleon
    Chaos ships
    wh_main_chs_shp_bloodship
    wh_main_chs_shp_deathgalley
    wh_main_chs_shp_norscan_longship
    Dwarven Ships
    wh_main_dwf_shp_dreadnaught
    wh_main_dwf_shp_ironclad
    wh_main_dwf_shp_monitor
    Empire
    wh_main_emp_shp_greatship
    wh_main_emp_shp_wargalley
    wh_main_emp_shp_wolfship
    Orcs
    wh_main_grn_shp_bigchukka
    wh_main_grn_shp_drillakilla
    wh_main_grn_shp_hulk
    Vampire ships
    wh_main_vmp_shp_direwolf_ship
    wh_main_vmp_shp_griefship
    wh_main_vmp_shp_vargalley
    Transport
    wh_main_shp_transport
    Dwarf ships:
    "Monitor"
    "Dreadnaught"
    "Ironclad"

    Vampire Counts ships:

    "Griefship"
    "Vargalley"
    "Direwolf Ship"

    Empire:

    "Wolf Ship"
    "Great Ship"
    "War Galley"

    Chaos:

    "Norscan Longship"
    "Bloodship"
    "Deathgalley"

    Greenskins:

    "Bigchukka"
    "Drillakilla"
    "Hulk"
  • BiesBies Junior Member Registered Users Posts: 2,327

    SiWI said:

    KGpoopy said:

    Of course we would buy it, but it doesn't matter.
    CA can't do it unless GW licenses them to use Man-o-War, which they don't seem to want to do.

    I wouldn't be so sure.

    It's just not a priority in development and direction right now. But CA could use some encouragement and reminders that we want extra after the trilogy, and that definitely includes Naval Battles.

    I don't think getting the licence is the problem, it's CA not wanting to do it like they actually said. Which is why people request that it be done after their priorities are finished. The licence can be acquired when ever. GW is very open to this kind of thing.
    it is important to remeber who the developers of Man o' War are:
    nobodies.
    And I don't mean that to insult them, but next to CA/Sega they are nobodies hence it is pretty unlikely that GW, with the new licence politic we see the last years, would say no to CA/Sega because of them.

    Also, again, the dreadfleet licence isn't use by anybody I know of, so there are naval battles up for graps.

    BTW:
    if you look at the models in the game, you already see dreadfleet models and MoW models were found as unit cards.
    Yup
    Bretonnia
    wh_main_brt_shp_buccaneer
    wh_main_brt_shp_corsair
    wh_main_brt_shp_galleon
    Chaos ships
    wh_main_chs_shp_bloodship
    wh_main_chs_shp_deathgalley
    wh_main_chs_shp_norscan_longship
    Dwarven Ships
    wh_main_dwf_shp_dreadnaught
    wh_main_dwf_shp_ironclad
    wh_main_dwf_shp_monitor
    Empire
    wh_main_emp_shp_greatship
    wh_main_emp_shp_wargalley
    wh_main_emp_shp_wolfship
    Orcs
    wh_main_grn_shp_bigchukka
    wh_main_grn_shp_drillakilla
    wh_main_grn_shp_hulk
    Vampire ships
    wh_main_vmp_shp_direwolf_ship
    wh_main_vmp_shp_griefship
    wh_main_vmp_shp_vargalley
    Transport
    wh_main_shp_transport
    Dwarf ships:
    "Monitor"
    "Dreadnaught"
    "Ironclad"

    Vampire Counts ships:

    "Griefship"
    "Vargalley"
    "Direwolf Ship"

    Empire:

    "Wolf Ship"
    "Great Ship"
    "War Galley"

    Chaos:

    "Norscan Longship"
    "Bloodship"
    "Deathgalley"

    Greenskins:

    "Bigchukka"
    "Drillakilla"
    "Hulk"
    but still not elves ships cards ?

    "I shivered at the sight of her - her beauty far beyond that of mortal man. But her soul glowed with an inner darkness that chilled my very core."









  • SiWISiWI Senior Member Registered Users Posts: 11,086
    Bies said:

    SiWI said:

    KGpoopy said:

    Of course we would buy it, but it doesn't matter.
    CA can't do it unless GW licenses them to use Man-o-War, which they don't seem to want to do.

    I wouldn't be so sure.

    It's just not a priority in development and direction right now. But CA could use some encouragement and reminders that we want extra after the trilogy, and that definitely includes Naval Battles.

    I don't think getting the licence is the problem, it's CA not wanting to do it like they actually said. Which is why people request that it be done after their priorities are finished. The licence can be acquired when ever. GW is very open to this kind of thing.
    it is important to remeber who the developers of Man o' War are:
    nobodies.
    And I don't mean that to insult them, but next to CA/Sega they are nobodies hence it is pretty unlikely that GW, with the new licence politic we see the last years, would say no to CA/Sega because of them.

    Also, again, the dreadfleet licence isn't use by anybody I know of, so there are naval battles up for graps.

    BTW:
    if you look at the models in the game, you already see dreadfleet models and MoW models were found as unit cards.
    Yup
    Bretonnia
    wh_main_brt_shp_buccaneer
    wh_main_brt_shp_corsair
    wh_main_brt_shp_galleon
    Chaos ships
    wh_main_chs_shp_bloodship
    wh_main_chs_shp_deathgalley
    wh_main_chs_shp_norscan_longship
    Dwarven Ships
    wh_main_dwf_shp_dreadnaught
    wh_main_dwf_shp_ironclad
    wh_main_dwf_shp_monitor
    Empire
    wh_main_emp_shp_greatship
    wh_main_emp_shp_wargalley
    wh_main_emp_shp_wolfship
    Orcs
    wh_main_grn_shp_bigchukka
    wh_main_grn_shp_drillakilla
    wh_main_grn_shp_hulk
    Vampire ships
    wh_main_vmp_shp_direwolf_ship
    wh_main_vmp_shp_griefship
    wh_main_vmp_shp_vargalley
    Transport
    wh_main_shp_transport
    Dwarf ships:
    "Monitor"
    "Dreadnaught"
    "Ironclad"

    Vampire Counts ships:

    "Griefship"
    "Vargalley"
    "Direwolf Ship"

    Empire:

    "Wolf Ship"
    "Great Ship"
    "War Galley"

    Chaos:

    "Norscan Longship"
    "Bloodship"
    "Deathgalley"

    Greenskins:

    "Bigchukka"
    "Drillakilla"
    "Hulk"
    but still not elves ships cards ?
    those were from game 1 from the release.
    Ratling_Guns.gif?t=1554385892
  • ChaosDragonBornChaosDragonBorn Registered Users Posts: 1,487
    Bies said:

    SiWI said:

    KGpoopy said:

    Of course we would buy it, but it doesn't matter.
    CA can't do it unless GW licenses them to use Man-o-War, which they don't seem to want to do.

    I wouldn't be so sure.

    It's just not a priority in development and direction right now. But CA could use some encouragement and reminders that we want extra after the trilogy, and that definitely includes Naval Battles.

    I don't think getting the licence is the problem, it's CA not wanting to do it like they actually said. Which is why people request that it be done after their priorities are finished. The licence can be acquired when ever. GW is very open to this kind of thing.
    it is important to remeber who the developers of Man o' War are:
    nobodies.
    And I don't mean that to insult them, but next to CA/Sega they are nobodies hence it is pretty unlikely that GW, with the new licence politic we see the last years, would say no to CA/Sega because of them.

    Also, again, the dreadfleet licence isn't use by anybody I know of, so there are naval battles up for graps.

    BTW:
    if you look at the models in the game, you already see dreadfleet models and MoW models were found as unit cards.
    Yup
    Bretonnia
    wh_main_brt_shp_buccaneer
    wh_main_brt_shp_corsair
    wh_main_brt_shp_galleon
    Chaos ships
    wh_main_chs_shp_bloodship
    wh_main_chs_shp_deathgalley
    wh_main_chs_shp_norscan_longship
    Dwarven Ships
    wh_main_dwf_shp_dreadnaught
    wh_main_dwf_shp_ironclad
    wh_main_dwf_shp_monitor
    Empire
    wh_main_emp_shp_greatship
    wh_main_emp_shp_wargalley
    wh_main_emp_shp_wolfship
    Orcs
    wh_main_grn_shp_bigchukka
    wh_main_grn_shp_drillakilla
    wh_main_grn_shp_hulk
    Vampire ships
    wh_main_vmp_shp_direwolf_ship
    wh_main_vmp_shp_griefship
    wh_main_vmp_shp_vargalley
    Transport
    wh_main_shp_transport
    Dwarf ships:
    "Monitor"
    "Dreadnaught"
    "Ironclad"

    Vampire Counts ships:

    "Griefship"
    "Vargalley"
    "Direwolf Ship"

    Empire:

    "Wolf Ship"
    "Great Ship"
    "War Galley"

    Chaos:

    "Norscan Longship"
    "Bloodship"
    "Deathgalley"

    Greenskins:

    "Bigchukka"
    "Drillakilla"
    "Hulk"
    but still not elves ships cards ?
    Wood elves have 1 or 2 last time I checked.
  • SchwarzhelmSchwarzhelm Registered Users Posts: 1,286
    CnConrad said:

    I would instantly buy it! Just because CA had problems with this kind of battle doesn't mean they should never try it again. Everyone said that Rome2 and (if I remember correctly) Empire were a too buggy when released. The fans were not happy and what did CA do for Warhammer total war? They learned from their mistake and made a great release version. Why don't you think they can't pull it off for navy battles in Warhammer?

    Just because they said that Warhammer will be Land Battles only doesn't mean that this statement can't change in the future. They already changed their plans regarding DLCs big time.

    ->They will focus on LL instead of Mini Campaigns
    ->They release Norsca even though they said Wood Elves were the last Race DLC this big for Warhammer 1
    ->They suddenly use models from older Editions and flesh out minor factions

    When they work on Naval Battles other content doesn't have to suffer for it. CA is big enough with several Teams working on different kind of parts of the game. I doubt they would suddenly cut for example Kislev for Ships because they know we would pay for both.

    All we have to do is to constantly ask (pester) them to bring naval battles. ;-)


    In that case I suppose I have to keep pestering them to forget naval battles or else I may find they wasted a large amount of time and budget for a usless feature.
    Of course, you can but don't be surprised if the majority outvotes you. ;-)
    In my opinion it would bring so much depth into the game.

    ->You could be forced to protect your trade routes
    ->you could block a port and attack the growth/wealth of the player
    ->it could mean great siege battles with Towns near sea
    ->pirates
    ->SEAMONSTER!!!!
    ...the list goes on^^
  • SchwarzhelmSchwarzhelm Registered Users Posts: 1,286
    Hexi said:

    Hexi said:

    Bies said:

    Hexi said:

    I would never buy it. Sea battles are the most uninteresting and boring kind of battles you can imagine. There is literally no strategy involved whatsoever.

    I think it would be big difference between warhammer and other historical titles
    - way different ship models
    - magic
    - support units for example dragons and maybe other monsters
    - quests
    None of that changes the fact that sea battles are 100% decided before the battle even begins. Even in real history, the first few lucky shots win the engagement in the extremely rare case that the fleets are equal in size. If the fleets are not equal, the side with less ships will retreat 10 times out of 10 because there is no point. No terrain to use, no formations, no flanking maneuvers are possible unless you outnumber the enemy fleet heavily, not devastating cavalry charges, nothing. It relies completely on stat lineups and nothing else.

    Furthermore, the A.I is completely incompetent at sea battles but go try a hundred or so sea battles against a human opponent and you'll understand how uninteresting and boring it is.
    Why do you think CA can't bring tactical depth to sea battles? This being a fantasy game helps a lot to solve this issue. I doubt that the AI would be as incompetent as you say, CA already proved that they could create an (at least for most players) passable one in open Battle.
    There IS no tactical depth to sea battles, that's the point. Boarding? Better soldiers win every time. Ranged firepower? Bigger guns win every time. You can't outmaneuver fast boarding ships and you can't outflank anything to get to the gun ships before they rip your fleet apart. If they can't rip your fleet apart, they are pointless and then it becomes nothing but 20 boarding ships attack eachother with the outcome being the exact same every time. Better men/guns win.

    A T2 ground army can beat a T3 army with tactics and terrain. A T2 fleet will NEVER beat a T3 fleet in any circumstances.

    Mhmm... Just spontaneous suggestion not really thought through:


    -Ships speed varies
    -lighter armed ships are faster and so able to outmanoeuvre heavy armed ships
    -lighter armed ships are needed to protect the "flanks" of the heavy hitter
    -if you don't have the firepower (and micro) you can try to board the ship to compensate
    -other ships can move to intercept boarding (and could board itself)
    -if a ship takes heavy damage and/or is attack from multiply sides the leadership goes down like in land battles
    -if the leadership breaks the unit could be routing or just does not work effectively since the crew is in panic
    -maybe some random events like Monster or heavy fog

    Like I said, just some thoughts how maayyyybeee it could be better :smile:
  • KGpoopyKGpoopy Registered Users Posts: 2,009

    Bies said:

    SiWI said:

    KGpoopy said:

    Of course we would buy it, but it doesn't matter.
    CA can't do it unless GW licenses them to use Man-o-War, which they don't seem to want to do.

    I wouldn't be so sure.

    It's just not a priority in development and direction right now. But CA could use some encouragement and reminders that we want extra after the trilogy, and that definitely includes Naval Battles.

    I don't think getting the licence is the problem, it's CA not wanting to do it like they actually said. Which is why people request that it be done after their priorities are finished. The licence can be acquired when ever. GW is very open to this kind of thing.
    it is important to remeber who the developers of Man o' War are:
    nobodies.
    And I don't mean that to insult them, but next to CA/Sega they are nobodies hence it is pretty unlikely that GW, with the new licence politic we see the last years, would say no to CA/Sega because of them.

    Also, again, the dreadfleet licence isn't use by anybody I know of, so there are naval battles up for graps.

    BTW:
    if you look at the models in the game, you already see dreadfleet models and MoW models were found as unit cards.
    Yup
    Bretonnia
    wh_main_brt_shp_buccaneer
    wh_main_brt_shp_corsair
    wh_main_brt_shp_galleon
    Chaos ships
    wh_main_chs_shp_bloodship
    wh_main_chs_shp_deathgalley
    wh_main_chs_shp_norscan_longship
    Dwarven Ships
    wh_main_dwf_shp_dreadnaught
    wh_main_dwf_shp_ironclad
    wh_main_dwf_shp_monitor
    Empire
    wh_main_emp_shp_greatship
    wh_main_emp_shp_wargalley
    wh_main_emp_shp_wolfship
    Orcs
    wh_main_grn_shp_bigchukka
    wh_main_grn_shp_drillakilla
    wh_main_grn_shp_hulk
    Vampire ships
    wh_main_vmp_shp_direwolf_ship
    wh_main_vmp_shp_griefship
    wh_main_vmp_shp_vargalley
    Transport
    wh_main_shp_transport
    Dwarf ships:
    "Monitor"
    "Dreadnaught"
    "Ironclad"

    Vampire Counts ships:

    "Griefship"
    "Vargalley"
    "Direwolf Ship"

    Empire:

    "Wolf Ship"
    "Great Ship"
    "War Galley"

    Chaos:

    "Norscan Longship"
    "Bloodship"
    "Deathgalley"

    Greenskins:

    "Bigchukka"
    "Drillakilla"
    "Hulk"
    but still not elves ships cards ?
    Wood elves have 1 or 2 last time I checked.
    An agent and a transport though, and they don't have unit cards, I think. So it's hard to say if we'll even get full auto-resolve naval battles. eeeesh
  • IcysmoothIcysmooth Registered Users Posts: 100
    I suspect such a expansion would be quite expensive on account of all the complex ship and sea monster models that would be required for it.

    I would GLADLY pay for it


  • GorvarGorvar Registered Users Posts: 109
    I would love to play a rts Man'o'war game...it would be like Gothica...except more fantasy and with more parrots.
  • HexiHexi Registered Users Posts: 1,100
    edited July 2017
    KGpoopy said:

    Bies said:

    SiWI said:

    KGpoopy said:

    Of course we would buy it, but it doesn't matter.
    CA can't do it unless GW licenses them to use Man-o-War, which they don't seem to want to do.

    I wouldn't be so sure.

    It's just not a priority in development and direction right now. But CA could use some encouragement and reminders that we want extra after the trilogy, and that definitely includes Naval Battles.

    I don't think getting the licence is the problem, it's CA not wanting to do it like they actually said. Which is why people request that it be done after their priorities are finished. The licence can be acquired when ever. GW is very open to this kind of thing.
    it is important to remeber who the developers of Man o' War are:
    nobodies.
    And I don't mean that to insult them, but next to CA/Sega they are nobodies hence it is pretty unlikely that GW, with the new licence politic we see the last years, would say no to CA/Sega because of them.

    Also, again, the dreadfleet licence isn't use by anybody I know of, so there are naval battles up for graps.

    BTW:
    if you look at the models in the game, you already see dreadfleet models and MoW models were found as unit cards.
    Yup
    Bretonnia
    wh_main_brt_shp_buccaneer
    wh_main_brt_shp_corsair
    wh_main_brt_shp_galleon
    Chaos ships
    wh_main_chs_shp_bloodship
    wh_main_chs_shp_deathgalley
    wh_main_chs_shp_norscan_longship
    Dwarven Ships
    wh_main_dwf_shp_dreadnaught
    wh_main_dwf_shp_ironclad
    wh_main_dwf_shp_monitor
    Empire
    wh_main_emp_shp_greatship
    wh_main_emp_shp_wargalley
    wh_main_emp_shp_wolfship
    Orcs
    wh_main_grn_shp_bigchukka
    wh_main_grn_shp_drillakilla
    wh_main_grn_shp_hulk
    Vampire ships
    wh_main_vmp_shp_direwolf_ship
    wh_main_vmp_shp_griefship
    wh_main_vmp_shp_vargalley
    Transport
    wh_main_shp_transport
    Dwarf ships:
    "Monitor"
    "Dreadnaught"
    "Ironclad"

    Vampire Counts ships:

    "Griefship"
    "Vargalley"
    "Direwolf Ship"

    Empire:

    "Wolf Ship"
    "Great Ship"
    "War Galley"

    Chaos:

    "Norscan Longship"
    "Bloodship"
    "Deathgalley"

    Greenskins:

    "Bigchukka"
    "Drillakilla"
    "Hulk"
    but still not elves ships cards ?
    Wood elves have 1 or 2 last time I checked.
    An agent and a transport though, and they don't have unit cards, I think. So it's hard to say if we'll even get full auto-resolve naval battles. eeeesh
    Why would Wood Elves need naval ships, they have the world roots and how would they build the ships anyway? Start chopping down Athel'loren and dragging the lumber across Bretonnia? Building ships requires a LOT of wood.

    There is no such thing as innocence, only degrees of guilt
  • FinishingLastFinishingLast Registered Users Posts: 4,340
    Hexi said:

    KGpoopy said:

    Bies said:

    SiWI said:

    KGpoopy said:

    Of course we would buy it, but it doesn't matter.
    CA can't do it unless GW licenses them to use Man-o-War, which they don't seem to want to do.

    I wouldn't be so sure.

    It's just not a priority in development and direction right now. But CA could use some encouragement and reminders that we want extra after the trilogy, and that definitely includes Naval Battles.

    I don't think getting the licence is the problem, it's CA not wanting to do it like they actually said. Which is why people request that it be done after their priorities are finished. The licence can be acquired when ever. GW is very open to this kind of thing.
    it is important to remeber who the developers of Man o' War are:
    nobodies.
    And I don't mean that to insult them, but next to CA/Sega they are nobodies hence it is pretty unlikely that GW, with the new licence politic we see the last years, would say no to CA/Sega because of them.

    Also, again, the dreadfleet licence isn't use by anybody I know of, so there are naval battles up for graps.

    BTW:
    if you look at the models in the game, you already see dreadfleet models and MoW models were found as unit cards.
    Yup
    Bretonnia
    wh_main_brt_shp_buccaneer
    wh_main_brt_shp_corsair
    wh_main_brt_shp_galleon
    Chaos ships
    wh_main_chs_shp_bloodship
    wh_main_chs_shp_deathgalley
    wh_main_chs_shp_norscan_longship
    Dwarven Ships
    wh_main_dwf_shp_dreadnaught
    wh_main_dwf_shp_ironclad
    wh_main_dwf_shp_monitor
    Empire
    wh_main_emp_shp_greatship
    wh_main_emp_shp_wargalley
    wh_main_emp_shp_wolfship
    Orcs
    wh_main_grn_shp_bigchukka
    wh_main_grn_shp_drillakilla
    wh_main_grn_shp_hulk
    Vampire ships
    wh_main_vmp_shp_direwolf_ship
    wh_main_vmp_shp_griefship
    wh_main_vmp_shp_vargalley
    Transport
    wh_main_shp_transport
    Dwarf ships:
    "Monitor"
    "Dreadnaught"
    "Ironclad"

    Vampire Counts ships:

    "Griefship"
    "Vargalley"
    "Direwolf Ship"

    Empire:

    "Wolf Ship"
    "Great Ship"
    "War Galley"

    Chaos:

    "Norscan Longship"
    "Bloodship"
    "Deathgalley"

    Greenskins:

    "Bigchukka"
    "Drillakilla"
    "Hulk"
    but still not elves ships cards ?
    Wood elves have 1 or 2 last time I checked.
    An agent and a transport though, and they don't have unit cards, I think. So it's hard to say if we'll even get full auto-resolve naval battles. eeeesh
    Why would Wood Elves need naval ships, they have the world roots and how would they build the ships anyway? Start chopping down Athel'loren and dragging the lumber across Bretonnia? Building ships requires a LOT of wood.

    No no no. They build the ships out of Bretonnians. All that piousness makes them very buoyant.
    Later
  • KGpoopyKGpoopy Registered Users Posts: 2,009
    Hexi said:

    KGpoopy said:

    Bies said:

    SiWI said:

    KGpoopy said:

    Of course we would buy it, but it doesn't matter.
    CA can't do it unless GW licenses them to use Man-o-War, which they don't seem to want to do.

    I wouldn't be so sure.

    It's just not a priority in development and direction right now. But CA could use some encouragement and reminders that we want extra after the trilogy, and that definitely includes Naval Battles.

    I don't think getting the licence is the problem, it's CA not wanting to do it like they actually said. Which is why people request that it be done after their priorities are finished. The licence can be acquired when ever. GW is very open to this kind of thing.
    it is important to remeber who the developers of Man o' War are:
    nobodies.
    And I don't mean that to insult them, but next to CA/Sega they are nobodies hence it is pretty unlikely that GW, with the new licence politic we see the last years, would say no to CA/Sega because of them.

    Also, again, the dreadfleet licence isn't use by anybody I know of, so there are naval battles up for graps.

    BTW:
    if you look at the models in the game, you already see dreadfleet models and MoW models were found as unit cards.
    Yup
    Bretonnia
    wh_main_brt_shp_buccaneer
    wh_main_brt_shp_corsair
    wh_main_brt_shp_galleon
    Chaos ships
    wh_main_chs_shp_bloodship
    wh_main_chs_shp_deathgalley
    wh_main_chs_shp_norscan_longship
    Dwarven Ships
    wh_main_dwf_shp_dreadnaught
    wh_main_dwf_shp_ironclad
    wh_main_dwf_shp_monitor
    Empire
    wh_main_emp_shp_greatship
    wh_main_emp_shp_wargalley
    wh_main_emp_shp_wolfship
    Orcs
    wh_main_grn_shp_bigchukka
    wh_main_grn_shp_drillakilla
    wh_main_grn_shp_hulk
    Vampire ships
    wh_main_vmp_shp_direwolf_ship
    wh_main_vmp_shp_griefship
    wh_main_vmp_shp_vargalley
    Transport
    wh_main_shp_transport
    Dwarf ships:
    "Monitor"
    "Dreadnaught"
    "Ironclad"

    Vampire Counts ships:

    "Griefship"
    "Vargalley"
    "Direwolf Ship"

    Empire:

    "Wolf Ship"
    "Great Ship"
    "War Galley"

    Chaos:

    "Norscan Longship"
    "Bloodship"
    "Deathgalley"

    Greenskins:

    "Bigchukka"
    "Drillakilla"
    "Hulk"
    but still not elves ships cards ?
    Wood elves have 1 or 2 last time I checked.
    An agent and a transport though, and they don't have unit cards, I think. So it's hard to say if we'll even get full auto-resolve naval battles. eeeesh
    Why would Wood Elves need naval ships, they have the world roots and how would they build the ships anyway? Start chopping down Athel'loren and dragging the lumber across Bretonnia? Building ships requires a LOT of wood.

    The wood elves would need ships for the same reasons any other race would need ships. To transverse the sea. They are masters of getting through forests like no other but they can't zip through the ocean like most can't. Also if the wood elves have established trade from sea, that means they have transports, and if you have transport ships that means you need Battle ships to protect it.

    Now, the way the wood elves would make a ship is the same way anyone else learns to make ships. If Orcs can make threatening ships, no doubt the Wood elfs can figure it out. Yes making a ship requires resources but in no total war game has you draw material resources in order to build ships.
Sign In or Register to comment.