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

Please, do NOT slow down battles!

1235

Comments

  • ArecBalrin#2350ArecBalrin#2350 Registered Users Posts: 2,868

    Ok then, enjoy watching thirty 9 feet tall bull men with giant axes hitting over and over again for 10 minutes an army of punny humans while only a bunch of them die because the first world war wasn't deadly enough.

    Allright look, i may not be discovering the americas here but what IF CA added battle stances for units again? like shield walls and spear walls and more open or closed formations or make your units go in skirmish formations and what not. With a spear wall your puny humans should be able to stop the charge of anything, inflict lots of damge and reduce the speed at which they get slaughtered, shield walls would stop most calvary charges if we are talking about dwarves and you wouldn't be able to simply trow your units straight for the enemy but instead attacking the flanks or from behind, that should add more strategy, more time and more entertainment, shouldn't it?

    On the other hand by simply toying around with stats the only thing CA will archive is awkward scenes like the the one i have pointed up, and sure you will say "but that isn't a problem unless you zoom in", good enough, then CA should not only meddle with the stats but also make all units resemble pink boxes with the word "no_texture" written on them and then put the camera so high we don't notice that ****, there, everybody happy.

    What have I ever said that implies I want units to be ridiculously durable like that? What? I've explained time and time again as carefully as I can how and why I think Warhammer's battles are too short and what could be done to make them right in a way that is fair for everyone. But none of that matters because you've decided what my opinions are for me.

    That thoughtful bit in the middle of your post: that's vaguely in the ball-park of where my opinion is. Everything else is bleach-drinking brain-numbing tedium to have to refute all over again.
  • tuputamadretuputamadre Registered Users Posts: 109
    So is it a good or a bad idea?
  • ArecBalrin#2350ArecBalrin#2350 Registered Users Posts: 2,868

    So is it a good or a bad idea?

    In a nutshell: I believe the reason battles are too short are because players are not able to choose tactics and units which would make the battles last longer. This means battles no longer have natural stages and almost all units are committed at once. They are no more or less durable than similar units in older TW games, it's just that most of them are fighting at once that it's all over in a few single-digit minutes most of the time.

    That is the short of it. What you listed are all necessary but incomplete.
  • Kobayashimaru#4773Kobayashimaru#4773 Member Registered Users Posts: 241
    It's just so disheartening and annoying seeing Total War being compared to Starcraft constantly in these threads. Seeing that gives you a good hint something went wrong with this game.
    Since when did a game like Total War become comparable in any way to game like Starcraft?!

    Don't get me wrong, I liked Starcraft, but it should be a whole different category.

    And word like "meta" has no place in any strategy game that wishes to have any depth or be believable in any way.

    There are so many fast paced, action packed, reflex based, simplistic strategy games out there and so few TW-like ones. Please don't take TW in that direction.
  • YitterbumYitterbum Registered Users Posts: 412
    It's a good thing Steel Faith improved the morale system to allow for longer battles.

    Now goblins and other low morale units can actually return to the battle after having their morale break. It makes playing against the greenskins feel like you are actually fighting a green tide, since their units will break and then return once or twice.

    The base game's chain rout system is far too effective, especially for chaos. It also makes the game into this 'one and done' fight where your troops will rarely have the chance to reform before the rest of your army routs.
  • FredrinFredrin Senior Member LondonRegistered Users Posts: 3,026


    In a nutshell: I believe the reason battles are too short are because players are not able to choose tactics and units which would make the battles last longer. This means battles no longer have natural stages and almost all units are committed at once. They are no more or less durable than similar units in older TW games, it's just that most of them are fighting at once that it's all over in a few single-digit minutes most of the time.

    You should have that response mapped to a hotkey, mate ;)

    I agree with it. But I also think that a fully balanced alternative setting would be a good stopgap before a major combat overhaul.

    Like you, I'm definitely at the point where I will give up my TW hobby if combat is not significantly improved in the next historical game.
  • tuputamadretuputamadre Registered Users Posts: 109
    edited August 2017
    So why don't we make a list with ALL the things needed to make battles last longer (without **** up , A.K.A making damage sponges and nerfed dolls), we recopilate all that stuff in a post or thread and we tell CA "THIS, PUT IT IN THE GAME, NOW!! pretty please" and done.........instead of hitting a dead horse with it's own mummified **** over and over like we are doing with all this threads. After all it's pretty much obvious by looking at some of our ideas, like the guy on top of me, that there is a way of pleasing both sides, making battles longer without taking out the cinematic elements.
    Post edited by tuputamadre on
  • WingZero#8424WingZero#8424 Junior Member Registered Users Posts: 835
    Valkaar said:


    But for me, it always was just so I could take a breath, and enjoy engagements. I sometimes liked to pick a guy out of a unit, and "root" for him, see how many guys that model could kill before he died, or you really did have to start paying attention.

    Thats what battle replays are for.
    ''The difficulty of tactical maneuvering consists in turning the devious into the direct, and misfortune into gain.
    -Sun Tzu

    "Tolerance, Diversity, Strength"
    - Seleucid

    Team Chaos Dwarf
  • WingZero#8424WingZero#8424 Junior Member Registered Users Posts: 835

    You are confusing multitasking ability with reflexes. TW requires good multitasking ability not quick reflexes

    So if you left a unit of skirmishers exposed and a regiment of heavy cavalry is bearing down on them, you don't need reflexes to save the situation?
    Lol no
    ''The difficulty of tactical maneuvering consists in turning the devious into the direct, and misfortune into gain.
    -Sun Tzu

    "Tolerance, Diversity, Strength"
    - Seleucid

    Team Chaos Dwarf
  • FredrinFredrin Senior Member LondonRegistered Users Posts: 3,026

    So why don't why make a list with ALL the things we need to make battles last longer (without **** up , A.K.A making damage sponges and nerfed dolls), we recopilate all that stuff in a post or thread and we tell CA "THIS, PUT IT IN THE GAME, NOW!! pretty please" and done.........instead of hitting a dead horse with it's own mummified **** over and over like we are doing with all this threads. After all it's pretty much obvious by looking at some of our ideas, like the guy on top of me, that there is a way of pleasing both sides, making battles longer without taking out the cinematic elements.

    This has been tried on many occassions over the years. Too many to mention!

    A couple of problems are:

    - players' suggestions are often impossible or very hard to implement. We are not familiar with the many complexities in bringing about what we're asking for as we have no hands-on knowledge of how the game is designed and coded.
    - CA will always seek out the most cost-effective solution to a problem. Or if it's sufficiently costly, just not address it at all, which is probably the case with the idea of an alternative speed setting.

    My feeling is that dissatisfaction with the pace of combat has reached such a pitch, it's perhaps worth them going to this effort. But frankly, none of us except or the devs know what that involves and they are very tight-lipped on the matter.
  • The user and all related content has been deleted.
  • Southern_HunterSouthern_Hunter Registered Users Posts: 170
    There is now a poll up so we can add some data about the numbers who want it changed vs stay the same.

    https://forums.totalwar.com/discussion/200168/battle-speed-poll#latest
  • FabiFabi Registered Users Posts: 227
    edited August 2017

    So why don't why make a list with ALL the things we need to make battles last longer (without **** up , A.K.A making damage sponges and nerfed dolls), we recopilate all that stuff in a post or thread and we tell CA "THIS, PUT IT IN THE GAME, NOW!! pretty please" and done.........instead of hitting a dead horse with it's own mummified **** over and over like we are doing with all this threads. After all it's pretty much obvious by looking at some of our ideas, like the guy on top of me, that there is a way of pleasing both sides, making battles longer without taking out the cinematic elements.

    Because a certain Dalton and friends will troll the thread until it becomes an unconstructive mess which the mods then have an excuse to close. That is why Dalton and friends are allowed free-reign to abuse people. CA really don't want to hear feedback of this sort. This has happened too many times and no amount of explanation or compromise works.
    This is as unconstructive and personal as it can get.
  • hendo#1695hendo#1695 Registered Users Posts: 3,001
    edited August 2017
    Fabi said:

    So why don't why make a list with ALL the things we need to make battles last longer (without **** up , A.K.A making damage sponges and nerfed dolls), we recopilate all that stuff in a post or thread and we tell CA "THIS, PUT IT IN THE GAME, NOW!! pretty please" and done.........instead of hitting a dead horse with it's own mummified **** over and over like we are doing with all this threads. After all it's pretty much obvious by looking at some of our ideas, like the guy on top of me, that there is a way of pleasing both sides, making battles longer without taking out the cinematic elements.

    Because a certain Dalton and friends will troll the thread until it becomes an unconstructive mess which the mods then have an excuse to close. That is why Dalton and friends are allowed free-reign to abuse people. CA really don't want to hear feedback of this sort. This has happened too many times and no amount of explanation or compromise works.
    This is as unconstructive and personal as it can get.
    But true nonetheless. In the OP it criticizes the viewpoint of slower battle pace saying they must be crippled with a drug. Mods seem very loose for the other side.
  • boyfightsboyfights Junior Member Registered Users Posts: 4,023
    Imo make combat 50% faster, but units move 50% slower. Now your battles last a little longer and I still don't have to spend half an hour watching computer mans hacking at each other fruitlessly
    boyfights you are always here to confirmate every spark of originality
    or reason burns or acid bruises anyone,
    stop your gladiator love for agressions.
  • boyfightsboyfights Junior Member Registered Users Posts: 4,023
    Or preferably just leave it the way it is (ie perfect)
    boyfights you are always here to confirmate every spark of originality
    or reason burns or acid bruises anyone,
    stop your gladiator love for agressions.
  • boyfightsboyfights Junior Member Registered Users Posts: 4,023
    Oh I just got it. Infantry move and fight 50% slower, cavalry move and fight 50% faster. Everybody is happy
    boyfights you are always here to confirmate every spark of originality
    or reason burns or acid bruises anyone,
    stop your gladiator love for agressions.
  • FredrinFredrin Senior Member LondonRegistered Users Posts: 3,026
    edited August 2017
    hendo1592 said:



    But true nonetheless. In the OP it criticizes the viewpoint of slower battle pace saying they must be crippled with a drug. Mods seem very loose for the other side.

    You can look at his profile and see the OP has on average been flagged for abuse more than once every day since the new forums were introduced.

    You might think that would call for a ban or something...
  • boyfightsboyfights Junior Member Registered Users Posts: 4,023
    hendo1592 said:

    Fabi said:

    So why don't why make a list with ALL the things we need to make battles last longer (without **** up , A.K.A making damage sponges and nerfed dolls), we recopilate all that stuff in a post or thread and we tell CA "THIS, PUT IT IN THE GAME, NOW!! pretty please" and done.........instead of hitting a dead horse with it's own mummified **** over and over like we are doing with all this threads. After all it's pretty much obvious by looking at some of our ideas, like the guy on top of me, that there is a way of pleasing both sides, making battles longer without taking out the cinematic elements.

    Because a certain Dalton and friends will troll the thread until it becomes an unconstructive mess which the mods then have an excuse to close. That is why Dalton and friends are allowed free-reign to abuse people. CA really don't want to hear feedback of this sort. This has happened too many times and no amount of explanation or compromise works.
    This is as unconstructive and personal as it can get.
    But true nonetheless. In the OP it criticizes the viewpoint of slower battle pace saying they must be crippled with a drug. Mods seem very loose for the other side.
    I am a fast-battels proponent who is constantly crippled by drug. It's no shame imo
    boyfights you are always here to confirmate every spark of originality
    or reason burns or acid bruises anyone,
    stop your gladiator love for agressions.
  • FredrinFredrin Senior Member LondonRegistered Users Posts: 3,026
    edited August 2017
    boyfights said:



    I am a fast-battels proponent who is constantly crippled by drug. It's no shame imo


    Image removed.
    Post edited by dge1 on
  • boyfightsboyfights Junior Member Registered Users Posts: 4,023
    Fredrin said:

    hendo1592 said:



    But true nonetheless. In the OP it criticizes the viewpoint of slower battle pace saying they must be crippled with a drug. Mods seem very loose for the other side.

    You can look at his profile and see the OP has on average been flagged for abuse more than once every day since the new forums were introduced.

    You might think that would call for a ban or something...
    You can also look at any thread containing an argument and see that "abuse" flags generally mean "does not agree with my viewpoint"
    boyfights you are always here to confirmate every spark of originality
    or reason burns or acid bruises anyone,
    stop your gladiator love for agressions.
  • FredrinFredrin Senior Member LondonRegistered Users Posts: 3,026
    boyfights said:



    You can also look at any thread containing an argument and see that "abuse" flags generally mean "does not agree with my viewpoint"

    Lol, I hear ya. But in the case of this particular user... little bit less benefit of the doubt there yagetme
  • ArecBalrin#2350ArecBalrin#2350 Registered Users Posts: 2,868
    Fabi said:

    So why don't why make a list with ALL the things we need to make battles last longer (without **** up , A.K.A making damage sponges and nerfed dolls), we recopilate all that stuff in a post or thread and we tell CA "THIS, PUT IT IN THE GAME, NOW!! pretty please" and done.........instead of hitting a dead horse with it's own mummified **** over and over like we are doing with all this threads. After all it's pretty much obvious by looking at some of our ideas, like the guy on top of me, that there is a way of pleasing both sides, making battles longer without taking out the cinematic elements.

    Because a certain Dalton and friends will troll the thread until it becomes an unconstructive mess which the mods then have an excuse to close. That is why Dalton and friends are allowed free-reign to abuse people. CA really don't want to hear feedback of this sort. This has happened too many times and no amount of explanation or compromise works.
    This is as unconstructive and personal as it can get.
    Describing what someone has done is not an attack on them; it's raising an issue that has yet to be addressed. If Ephraim doesn't want to be called out on what he does, he should stop doing it. Is it really that unconstructive and personal, let alone as bad as it can get? How does being repeatedly called words, most which would be blocked by the profanity-filter on the Steam forum if not for the character circumventions sound? CA's mods seem keen on protecting him rather than treating him like everybody else.
  • Lord_XelosLord_Xelos Registered Users Posts: 1,806
    edited August 2017
    It's simple. He's most likely an astroturf working for CA. He pretends to be a part of community to be more believable but really just enforces CA's vision over ours. It's easily visible in most of his posts.

    Easy explanation for You below:
    Video link removed.

    With this being said - I rarely do so, but I still support THIS topic of his. Battles are good as they are, whether that's CA's standpoint too or not.
    Post edited by dge1 on
  • FredrinFredrin Senior Member LondonRegistered Users Posts: 3,026
    Hehe, that vid is amusingly on point...
  • Galvinized_IronGalvinized_Iron Registered Users Posts: 1,025
    edited August 2017
    Phoenix99 said:

    A bunch of 'pros' who could not get out of bronze league in SC2... please tell me more how good of RTS the battlescape is...

    People here remind me of people claiming that PvP in MMOs is good, but could not ever win in a more competitive game like CS.

    That's why TW needs to do its own thi

    It's simple. He's most likely an astroturf working for CA. He pretends to be a part of community to be more believable but really just enforces CA's vision over ours. It's easily visible in most of his posts.

    Easy explanation for You below:
    Video link removed.
    With this being said - I rarely do so, but I still support THIS topic of his. Battles are good as they are, whether that's CA's standpoint too or not.

    Well that the guy never has any original opinions of his own is a bit suspicious...
    Post edited by dge1 on
  • Kobayashimaru#4773Kobayashimaru#4773 Member Registered Users Posts: 241
    boyfights said:

    Imo make combat 50% faster, but units move 50% slower. Now your battles last a little longer and I still don't have to spend half an hour watching computer mans hacking at each other fruitlessly

    It would never be like that.
  • ArecBalrin#2350ArecBalrin#2350 Registered Users Posts: 2,868

    boyfights said:

    Imo make combat 50% faster, but units move 50% slower. Now your battles last a little longer and I still don't have to spend half an hour watching computer mans hacking at each other fruitlessly

    It would never be like that.
    And it's not what most of us who have been discussing this topic and pressing for longer battles want, it doesn't actually solve the problem because it confuses cause and effect. It's the worst of both worlds outcome.

  • boyfightsboyfights Junior Member Registered Users Posts: 4,023
    Ok ok how about this. Double speed cavalry with slowed down combat, double speed infantry with sped up combat. However, as each combat is won/lost, every other combat gets a little bit faster, or a random chance to slow down instead. now everybody is happy
    boyfights you are always here to confirmate every spark of originality
    or reason burns or acid bruises anyone,
    stop your gladiator love for agressions.
  • hendo#1695hendo#1695 Registered Users Posts: 3,001
    edited August 2017
    Video link and comments removed.

    I get the videos point but she lost me at:
    "You're smart: you consult social media..."
    Post edited by dge1 on
Sign In or Register to comment.