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

What do you expect from a Total War Lord of The Rings?

245

Comments

  • SiWISiWI Senior Member Registered Users Posts: 11,449

    Play Battle For Middle Earth II Reforged when it comes out, that's as close to a LotR TW as you'll get.

    Oh, look, another content denier. Still left with the taste of ash in your mouth after Cathay happened? Don't worry, it'll happen again with Middle Earth Total War.
    funny for someone writing that TW 40k, "can't happen"
    Ratling_Guns.gif?t=1554385892
  • Man2008kindMan2008kind Bucharest, RomaniaRegistered Users Posts: 1,423
    SiWI said:

    Play Battle For Middle Earth II Reforged when it comes out, that's as close to a LotR TW as you'll get.

    Oh, look, another content denier. Still left with the taste of ash in your mouth after Cathay happened? Don't worry, it'll happen again with Middle Earth Total War.
    funny for someone writing that TW 40k, "can't happen"
    If they wanted a 40K Total War so dearley, why'd they chose Warhammer first? As far as I remember, 40K is more popular than Warhammer.
  • DeadpoolSWDeadpoolSW Registered Users Posts: 2,180

    SiWI said:

    Play Battle For Middle Earth II Reforged when it comes out, that's as close to a LotR TW as you'll get.

    Oh, look, another content denier. Still left with the taste of ash in your mouth after Cathay happened? Don't worry, it'll happen again with Middle Earth Total War.
    funny for someone writing that TW 40k, "can't happen"
    If they wanted a 40K Total War so dearley, why'd they chose Warhammer first? As far as I remember, 40K is more popular than Warhammer.
    If they wanted a LOTR Total War so dearley, why'd they chose Warhammer first? As far as I remember, LOTR is more popular than Warhammer.
    Nagash will rule again!

    Justice for Chaos Dwarfs, Ogre Kingdoms, Araby, Albion, Amazons, Halflings, Nippon, Ind & the Hobgoblin Khanate!
  • davedave1124davedave1124 Senior Member Registered Users Posts: 13,167
    If I felt like LotR TW I'd get the mod.. I certainly wouldn't pay £49.99 for it.
  • doclumbagodoclumbago Registered Users Posts: 1,849
    Cvejo said:

    Contrary to popular opinion, there is nowhere enough lore to warrant a LotR Total War.

    AFAIK, so much stuff would have to be improvised to fill in the blanks. We can see with LotR mods all the issues. Total War games are reaching such a huge scale with Warhammer it is literally unreachable.

    Maybe like a standalone mini-TW title, to the style of Thrones of Britannia or perhaps even more precisely Troy. And keep in mind how those turned out.

    One of the main issues of Tolkien's world is that it isn't really a sandbox "total war" world, but a very clearly struggle between two sides, in a nutshell. A large Tolkienesque CA title would probably be significantly criticized by Tolkien-fans due to being forced to literally butcher the lore and spirit of the games, with e.g. "Hobbit World Conquest Let's plays", etcetera.

    Having said that, I stand by that a smaller title TW game with a small number of factions would indeed be interesting. I would really like to play a big Siege of Minas Tirith only CA can create. But the Laboratory and Warhammer 3 show the tech and computer capabilities are not there yet. They're close, but not quite there. The immensely huge battles, with tens of thousands of unit models on the map, is literally at the doorstep. No Tolkien TW would do any justice without that.

    don't see much problems for CA to fill in the blanks to create whole armies for the factions.
    I agree with the point of the narrative is very much all peoples of Middle Earth vs one big baddy
    does not make good sandbox.
    It would be weird to see the Mirkwood/Isengard coalition run rampaging across Umbar

    Maybe you could flesh out the Fall of Numenor, split the good/dark Numenoreans into more playable
    sub-factions and include some conquering/sandboxing in Middle Earth after the fall.


  • SiWISiWI Senior Member Registered Users Posts: 11,449

    SiWI said:

    Play Battle For Middle Earth II Reforged when it comes out, that's as close to a LotR TW as you'll get.

    Oh, look, another content denier. Still left with the taste of ash in your mouth after Cathay happened? Don't worry, it'll happen again with Middle Earth Total War.
    funny for someone writing that TW 40k, "can't happen"
    If they wanted a 40K Total War so dearley, why'd they chose Warhammer first? As far as I remember, 40K is more popular than Warhammer.
    "Usually, when you make a type of game wich requires a licence for the first time, you chose the cheaper one."
    Ratling_Guns.gif?t=1554385892
  • ShiroAmakusa75ShiroAmakusa75 Senior Member Registered Users Posts: 30,633
    Yeah, if CA wanted to make LotR with movie aesthetics, and let's be honest, the game wouldn't sell if it didn't resemble the movies since that's what people associate with LotR nowadays, they had to pay out their noses to get the license from WB, especially if they also wanted characters to resemble the actors playing them.

    40k in comparison is cheap, GW has been handing out that license to everyone and his dog lately.

  • Man2008kindMan2008kind Bucharest, RomaniaRegistered Users Posts: 1,423
    SiWI said:

    SiWI said:

    The LOTR license is obnoxiously expensive and the movie one even more so.

    I dont see it happening.

    Go look at how small the company creating Gollum is. Your point is mute.
    And they will pay an absolute premium for that; it's a huge risk. No one is saying CA couldn't afford it, but will they want to? Most certainly not.

    I'd happily be surprised but I dont think CA will risk another fantasy title for years to come - and when they do it will most likely be 40k.

    Give it a decade and we will see where we are then.
    They will want to. Why? Because LotR is the most popular fantasy IP with the largest fanbase and the most requested fantasy IP for the next Total War game.

    What do you mean "risk"? There's no risk. 40K Total War is not going to happen. The combat, wich is completley ranged focused, doesn't work for a Total War game.
    According to that logic, LotR should have happen before TW WH, yet here wer are with the trilogy of WH and no LotR TW.
    Also and I know that is hard to accept for people, but Warhammer is, as basis for a TW, simply better:
    it has more armies which are more diverse. It is actually a game itself which already helps in many aspects. And it has a perfect balance of being a popular franchise, yet not be too mainstream that requiring it is really expensive.
    LotR is the most popular in its movie version, which will be a lot more expensive. LotR book version is more diffcult in terms of marketing since for many people would see it and not recognize it as the LotR why watch in the cinema.


    I heard "TW Warhammer will never happen because of XY" many times before.
    As for your particular claim:



    (also what do you thin TW Empire, Napoleon or FotS are if not range focused)
    Usually, when you make a type of game wich requires a licence for the first time, you chose the cheaper one.
    LotR has enough diverse armies. Have you looked at the first comment I wrote on this thread? There are some of the races that could make it in.
    none of them makes them as half as interesting as any of the 4 starting races of WH1 or 2.
    Let alone the DLC#s or Wh3.


    Expensive. When talkimg about a LotR Total War I've heard this word many times. It's not like with the money CA aquired thanks to the Warhammer triology they could easily get the licence.

    Sure but why waste it?
    The movie version will be still very expensive in relation to WH and a book version promise less success.
    Also given the circumstances of Covid and even Brexit, CA maybe has less money on hand then you think.

    Napoleon and Empire are ranged focused, but not completley ranged focused. A musket also works differently from an automatic rifle. That's one unit. There are at least 10 main races in 40K. All need more than one melee focused unit.

    Every 40k game, from Final Libertation to the DoW series, before has already mange this "problem".

    And if "one unit" is not enought, luckly I can give you a 2nd one ;)


    even a third one:


    it is almost if you have, once again, no clue what you are talking about.
    They are. Do you know at least half as much LotR lore as everyone else? Giant spiders, Nazgul, Army of the dead, bois that can transform into bears.

    Even if they will at one point make a 40k Total War, they will first make a WW1/2 Total War since they can experiment with gameplay mechanics whitout dissapointig an IP owner, should the game fail.
  • Man2008kindMan2008kind Bucharest, RomaniaRegistered Users Posts: 1,423
    SiWI said:

    SiWI said:

    Play Battle For Middle Earth II Reforged when it comes out, that's as close to a LotR TW as you'll get.

    Oh, look, another content denier. Still left with the taste of ash in your mouth after Cathay happened? Don't worry, it'll happen again with Middle Earth Total War.
    funny for someone writing that TW 40k, "can't happen"
    If they wanted a 40K Total War so dearley, why'd they chose Warhammer first? As far as I remember, 40K is more popular than Warhammer.
    "Usually, when you make a type of game wich requires a licence for the first time, you chose the cheaper one."
    They are two different types of games. One is medieval fantasy, the other is SCI-FI.
  • davedave1124davedave1124 Senior Member Registered Users Posts: 13,167
    40k is very likely for a number if reasons:

    -There is now a strong working relationship between CA and GW
    -The game has been a huge success for both companies
    -CA recruit directly from GW and int's interesting to note that they recently recruited a GW employee who focuses on 40/30k game design.
    -WHFB:TW sparked a lot of interest from fans, the interest would be a lot higher in a 40K game.

    Personally, I think it's a matter of time.
  • ShiroAmakusa75ShiroAmakusa75 Senior Member Registered Users Posts: 30,633

    SiWI said:

    SiWI said:

    Play Battle For Middle Earth II Reforged when it comes out, that's as close to a LotR TW as you'll get.

    Oh, look, another content denier. Still left with the taste of ash in your mouth after Cathay happened? Don't worry, it'll happen again with Middle Earth Total War.
    funny for someone writing that TW 40k, "can't happen"
    If they wanted a 40K Total War so dearley, why'd they chose Warhammer first? As far as I remember, 40K is more popular than Warhammer.
    "Usually, when you make a type of game wich requires a licence for the first time, you chose the cheaper one."
    They are two different types of games. One is medieval fantasy, the other is SCI-FI.
    One's an expensive, the other a cheap license.

  • Man2008kindMan2008kind Bucharest, RomaniaRegistered Users Posts: 1,423

    SiWI said:

    Play Battle For Middle Earth II Reforged when it comes out, that's as close to a LotR TW as you'll get.

    Oh, look, another content denier. Still left with the taste of ash in your mouth after Cathay happened? Don't worry, it'll happen again with Middle Earth Total War.
    funny for someone writing that TW 40k, "can't happen"
    If they wanted a 40K Total War so dearley, why'd they chose Warhammer first? As far as I remember, 40K is more popular than Warhammer.
    If they wanted a LOTR Total War so dearley, why'd they chose Warhammer first? As far as I remember, LOTR is more popular than Warhammer.
    GW is more open than Tolkein Estates, so it makes sense to pick partenering with someone more open for their first fantasy game.
  • SiWISiWI Senior Member Registered Users Posts: 11,449

    SiWI said:

    SiWI said:

    Play Battle For Middle Earth II Reforged when it comes out, that's as close to a LotR TW as you'll get.

    Oh, look, another content denier. Still left with the taste of ash in your mouth after Cathay happened? Don't worry, it'll happen again with Middle Earth Total War.
    funny for someone writing that TW 40k, "can't happen"
    If they wanted a 40K Total War so dearley, why'd they chose Warhammer first? As far as I remember, 40K is more popular than Warhammer.
    "Usually, when you make a type of game wich requires a licence for the first time, you chose the cheaper one."
    They are two different types of games. One is medieval fantasy, the other is SCI-FI.
    actually very little of Warhammer is actually medieval. The Empire, the "poster boy" of Warhammer is early modern times, not medieval.
    More importantly, I heard the same "argument" before TW Warhammer from the "history only" brigade.

    Also you don't even can address the fact that you contradict your own arguments.
    Ratling_Guns.gif?t=1554385892
  • Man2008kindMan2008kind Bucharest, RomaniaRegistered Users Posts: 1,423

    SiWI said:

    SiWI said:

    Play Battle For Middle Earth II Reforged when it comes out, that's as close to a LotR TW as you'll get.

    Oh, look, another content denier. Still left with the taste of ash in your mouth after Cathay happened? Don't worry, it'll happen again with Middle Earth Total War.
    funny for someone writing that TW 40k, "can't happen"
    If they wanted a 40K Total War so dearley, why'd they chose Warhammer first? As far as I remember, 40K is more popular than Warhammer.
    "Usually, when you make a type of game wich requires a licence for the first time, you chose the cheaper one."
    They are two different types of games. One is medieval fantasy, the other is SCI-FI.
    One's an expensive, the other a cheap license.
    No, both Warhammer licenses are cheap. GW has been handing to anybody both licenses, but people prefer 40K cause it's more popular.
  • SiWISiWI Senior Member Registered Users Posts: 11,449

    SiWI said:

    SiWI said:

    The LOTR license is obnoxiously expensive and the movie one even more so.

    I dont see it happening.

    Go look at how small the company creating Gollum is. Your point is mute.
    And they will pay an absolute premium for that; it's a huge risk. No one is saying CA couldn't afford it, but will they want to? Most certainly not.

    I'd happily be surprised but I dont think CA will risk another fantasy title for years to come - and when they do it will most likely be 40k.

    Give it a decade and we will see where we are then.
    They will want to. Why? Because LotR is the most popular fantasy IP with the largest fanbase and the most requested fantasy IP for the next Total War game.

    What do you mean "risk"? There's no risk. 40K Total War is not going to happen. The combat, wich is completley ranged focused, doesn't work for a Total War game.
    According to that logic, LotR should have happen before TW WH, yet here wer are with the trilogy of WH and no LotR TW.
    Also and I know that is hard to accept for people, but Warhammer is, as basis for a TW, simply better:
    it has more armies which are more diverse. It is actually a game itself which already helps in many aspects. And it has a perfect balance of being a popular franchise, yet not be too mainstream that requiring it is really expensive.
    LotR is the most popular in its movie version, which will be a lot more expensive. LotR book version is more diffcult in terms of marketing since for many people would see it and not recognize it as the LotR why watch in the cinema.


    I heard "TW Warhammer will never happen because of XY" many times before.
    As for your particular claim:



    (also what do you thin TW Empire, Napoleon or FotS are if not range focused)
    Usually, when you make a type of game wich requires a licence for the first time, you chose the cheaper one.
    LotR has enough diverse armies. Have you looked at the first comment I wrote on this thread? There are some of the races that could make it in.
    none of them makes them as half as interesting as any of the 4 starting races of WH1 or 2.
    Let alone the DLC#s or Wh3.


    Expensive. When talkimg about a LotR Total War I've heard this word many times. It's not like with the money CA aquired thanks to the Warhammer triology they could easily get the licence.

    Sure but why waste it?
    The movie version will be still very expensive in relation to WH and a book version promise less success.
    Also given the circumstances of Covid and even Brexit, CA maybe has less money on hand then you think.

    Napoleon and Empire are ranged focused, but not completley ranged focused. A musket also works differently from an automatic rifle. That's one unit. There are at least 10 main races in 40K. All need more than one melee focused unit.

    Every 40k game, from Final Libertation to the DoW series, before has already mange this "problem".

    And if "one unit" is not enought, luckly I can give you a 2nd one ;)


    even a third one:


    it is almost if you have, once again, no clue what you are talking about.
    They are. Do you know at least half as much LotR lore as everyone else? Giant spiders, Nazgul, Army of the dead, bois that can transform into bears.

    Even if they will at one point make a 40k Total War, they will first make a WW1/2 Total War since they can experiment with gameplay mechanics whitout dissapointig an IP owner, should the game fail.
    Sounds like a poor mans Warhammer ripoff. Giant spiders? We have them and squgis. Nazgul? Vagule undead/ghost bad guys we have tons of them. Vampires, Ghost, and less literally WoC heroes/Lords. "Army of the dead"? Warhammer already had 2 (thanks to TW now 3). In fact the diversity of undead anlone proves the point:
    we have "classic" dracula vampires, with have egypt undead and we have Vampire pirates. LotR? "We have an undead army".

    Given that they probably will make a big histroical TW next (after Wh3) anyway, I don't see the suppose problem.
    Ratling_Guns.gif?t=1554385892
  • Man2008kindMan2008kind Bucharest, RomaniaRegistered Users Posts: 1,423
    SiWI said:

    Play Battle For Middle Earth II Reforged when it comes out, that's as close to a LotR TW as you'll get.

    Oh, look, another content denier. Still left with the taste of ash in your mouth after Cathay happened? Don't worry, it'll happen again with Middle Earth Total War.
    funny for someone writing that TW 40k, "can't happen"
    You know, I'm very specific about my words. Can't. Won't. Can't. Won't. CAN'T. WON'T. I see a diference.
  • davedave1124davedave1124 Senior Member Registered Users Posts: 13,167
    SiWI said:

    SiWI said:

    SiWI said:

    Play Battle For Middle Earth II Reforged when it comes out, that's as close to a LotR TW as you'll get.

    Oh, look, another content denier. Still left with the taste of ash in your mouth after Cathay happened? Don't worry, it'll happen again with Middle Earth Total War.
    funny for someone writing that TW 40k, "can't happen"
    If they wanted a 40K Total War so dearley, why'd they chose Warhammer first? As far as I remember, 40K is more popular than Warhammer.
    "Usually, when you make a type of game wich requires a licence for the first time, you chose the cheaper one."
    They are two different types of games. One is medieval fantasy, the other is SCI-FI.
    actually very little of Warhammer is actually medieval. The Empire, the "poster boy" of Warhammer is early modern times, not medieval.
    More importantly, I heard the same "argument" before TW Warhammer from the "history only" brigade.

    Also you don't even can address the fact that you contradict your own arguments.
    Skaven appear to be early Victorian Steam Punk..Gatling Guns indeed..
  • SiWISiWI Senior Member Registered Users Posts: 11,449
    edited February 14

    SiWI said:

    Play Battle For Middle Earth II Reforged when it comes out, that's as close to a LotR TW as you'll get.

    Oh, look, another content denier. Still left with the taste of ash in your mouth after Cathay happened? Don't worry, it'll happen again with Middle Earth Total War.
    funny for someone writing that TW 40k, "can't happen"
    You know, I'm very specific about my words. Can't. Won't. Can't. Won't. CAN'T. WON'T. I see a diference.
    if you are so specific with your words, does that mean you actually mean the BS you spell out? It would make all of your post kinda worst since it would imply that you try "hard" to be this bad...
    I mean besides from some sloppy typing, you saying that it "won't" happen, doesn't make you less of a hypocrite.

    You argue that 40k "won't happen" but at the same time you take cathay, oh the irony, you need TW Wh to help you out, as suppose example how "contend deniers", which by your definition would be you, are wrong to say that LotR "won't happen"
    Ratling_Guns.gif?t=1554385892
  • Man2008kindMan2008kind Bucharest, RomaniaRegistered Users Posts: 1,423
    SiWI said:

    SiWI said:

    SiWI said:

    The LOTR license is obnoxiously expensive and the movie one even more so.

    I dont see it happening.

    Go look at how small the company creating Gollum is. Your point is mute.
    And they will pay an absolute premium for that; it's a huge risk. No one is saying CA couldn't afford it, but will they want to? Most certainly not.

    I'd happily be surprised but I dont think CA will risk another fantasy title for years to come - and when they do it will most likely be 40k.

    Give it a decade and we will see where we are then.
    They will want to. Why? Because LotR is the most popular fantasy IP with the largest fanbase and the most requested fantasy IP for the next Total War game.

    What do you mean "risk"? There's no risk. 40K Total War is not going to happen. The combat, wich is completley ranged focused, doesn't work for a Total War game.
    According to that logic, LotR should have happen before TW WH, yet here wer are with the trilogy of WH and no LotR TW.
    Also and I know that is hard to accept for people, but Warhammer is, as basis for a TW, simply better:
    it has more armies which are more diverse. It is actually a game itself which already helps in many aspects. And it has a perfect balance of being a popular franchise, yet not be too mainstream that requiring it is really expensive.
    LotR is the most popular in its movie version, which will be a lot more expensive. LotR book version is more diffcult in terms of marketing since for many people would see it and not recognize it as the LotR why watch in the cinema.


    I heard "TW Warhammer will never happen because of XY" many times before.
    As for your particular claim:



    (also what do you thin TW Empire, Napoleon or FotS are if not range focused)
    Usually, when you make a type of game wich requires a licence for the first time, you chose the cheaper one.
    LotR has enough diverse armies. Have you looked at the first comment I wrote on this thread? There are some of the races that could make it in.
    none of them makes them as half as interesting as any of the 4 starting races of WH1 or 2.
    Let alone the DLC#s or Wh3.


    Expensive. When talkimg about a LotR Total War I've heard this word many times. It's not like with the money CA aquired thanks to the Warhammer triology they could easily get the licence.

    Sure but why waste it?
    The movie version will be still very expensive in relation to WH and a book version promise less success.
    Also given the circumstances of Covid and even Brexit, CA maybe has less money on hand then you think.

    Napoleon and Empire are ranged focused, but not completley ranged focused. A musket also works differently from an automatic rifle. That's one unit. There are at least 10 main races in 40K. All need more than one melee focused unit.

    Every 40k game, from Final Libertation to the DoW series, before has already mange this "problem".

    And if "one unit" is not enought, luckly I can give you a 2nd one ;)


    even a third one:


    it is almost if you have, once again, no clue what you are talking about.
    They are. Do you know at least half as much LotR lore as everyone else? Giant spiders, Nazgul, Army of the dead, bois that can transform into bears.

    Even if they will at one point make a 40k Total War, they will first make a WW1/2 Total War since they can experiment with gameplay mechanics whitout dissapointig an IP owner, should the game fail.
    Sounds like a poor mans Warhammer ripoff. Giant spiders? We have them and squgis. Nazgul? Vagule undead/ghost bad guys we have tons of them. Vampires, Ghost, and less literally WoC heroes/Lords. "Army of the dead"? Warhammer already had 2 (thanks to TW now 3). In fact the diversity of undead anlone proves the point:
    we have "classic" dracula vampires, with have egypt undead and we have Vampire pirates. LotR? "We have an undead army".

    Given that they probably will make a big histroical TW next (after Wh3) anyway, I don't see the suppose problem.
    Now who's the one who doesn't know what he's talking about? LotR a Warhammer ripoff? 🤣🤣🤣 Seriously?
    Calling the Nazgul standard Warhammer undead proves that you're either
    a) trolling.
    b) don't have any vague idea of LotR lore.
    The ary of the dead can esily be havily outnumbered and still win. That the case in Warhammer? Again, you've absolutley no idea what you're talking about.
  • SiWISiWI Senior Member Registered Users Posts: 11,449

    SiWI said:

    SiWI said:

    SiWI said:

    Play Battle For Middle Earth II Reforged when it comes out, that's as close to a LotR TW as you'll get.

    Oh, look, another content denier. Still left with the taste of ash in your mouth after Cathay happened? Don't worry, it'll happen again with Middle Earth Total War.
    funny for someone writing that TW 40k, "can't happen"
    If they wanted a 40K Total War so dearley, why'd they chose Warhammer first? As far as I remember, 40K is more popular than Warhammer.
    "Usually, when you make a type of game wich requires a licence for the first time, you chose the cheaper one."
    They are two different types of games. One is medieval fantasy, the other is SCI-FI.
    actually very little of Warhammer is actually medieval. The Empire, the "poster boy" of Warhammer is early modern times, not medieval.
    More importantly, I heard the same "argument" before TW Warhammer from the "history only" brigade.

    Also you don't even can address the fact that you contradict your own arguments.
    Skaven appear to be early Victorian Steam Punk..Gatling Guns indeed..
    don't tell the guy who thinks that there is one melee unit in 40k ;)
    Ratling_Guns.gif?t=1554385892
  • davedave1124davedave1124 Senior Member Registered Users Posts: 13,167
    Uh oh, the film licence has blown our budget, we can use Gandalf's original aesthetic but we will have to use Brian Blessed as the voice actor, Ian Mckellen's just out of our league..
  • davedave1124davedave1124 Senior Member Registered Users Posts: 13,167
    SiWI said:

    SiWI said:

    SiWI said:

    SiWI said:

    Play Battle For Middle Earth II Reforged when it comes out, that's as close to a LotR TW as you'll get.

    Oh, look, another content denier. Still left with the taste of ash in your mouth after Cathay happened? Don't worry, it'll happen again with Middle Earth Total War.
    funny for someone writing that TW 40k, "can't happen"
    If they wanted a 40K Total War so dearley, why'd they chose Warhammer first? As far as I remember, 40K is more popular than Warhammer.
    "Usually, when you make a type of game wich requires a licence for the first time, you chose the cheaper one."
    They are two different types of games. One is medieval fantasy, the other is SCI-FI.
    actually very little of Warhammer is actually medieval. The Empire, the "poster boy" of Warhammer is early modern times, not medieval.
    More importantly, I heard the same "argument" before TW Warhammer from the "history only" brigade.

    Also you don't even can address the fact that you contradict your own arguments.
    Skaven appear to be early Victorian Steam Punk..Gatling Guns indeed..
    don't tell the guy who thinks that there is one melee unit in 40k ;)
    That's a shame then, half the Death Guard army rely on melee :-(
  • Man2008kindMan2008kind Bucharest, RomaniaRegistered Users Posts: 1,423

    Uh oh, the film licence has blown our budget, we can use Gandalf's original aesthetic but we will have to use Brian Blessed as the voice actor, Ian Mckellen's just out of our league..

    Question. Do you know CAs budget? No? Tought so.
  • SiWISiWI Senior Member Registered Users Posts: 11,449
    edited February 15
    You are the guy who "knew" that CA doesn't make the difference between Race and Campaign packs.

    And also thinks that 40k has "one melee focused unit"

    And most funny of all: you think that LotR can compete in terms of diverse armies!

    Can one imagine? I mean how **** would one need to be to not see as clear as day that Warhammer is simply better build to be a strategy game, because it IS a strategy game.
    And that the same applies to 40k.

    PS: I never called Nazgul weak warhammer undead, mister "I'm specific with my words" ;)
    Post edited by BillyRuffian on
    Ratling_Guns.gif?t=1554385892
  • SiWISiWI Senior Member Registered Users Posts: 11,449

    Uh oh, the film licence has blown our budget, we can use Gandalf's original aesthetic but we will have to use Brian Blessed as the voice actor, Ian Mckellen's just out of our league..

    Question. Do you know CAs budget? No? Tought so.
    funny, you yourself argued with CA suppose money.
    Ratling_Guns.gif?t=1554385892
  • davedave1124davedave1124 Senior Member Registered Users Posts: 13,167

    Uh oh, the film licence has blown our budget, we can use Gandalf's original aesthetic but we will have to use Brian Blessed as the voice actor, Ian Mckellen's just out of our league..

    Question. Do you know CAs budget? No? Tought so.
    Do you? I'm pretty sure the licence for 40K is a lot cheaper than the film version of LotRs.
  • SiWISiWI Senior Member Registered Users Posts: 11,449

    SiWI said:

    SiWI said:

    SiWI said:

    SiWI said:

    Play Battle For Middle Earth II Reforged when it comes out, that's as close to a LotR TW as you'll get.

    Oh, look, another content denier. Still left with the taste of ash in your mouth after Cathay happened? Don't worry, it'll happen again with Middle Earth Total War.
    funny for someone writing that TW 40k, "can't happen"
    If they wanted a 40K Total War so dearley, why'd they chose Warhammer first? As far as I remember, 40K is more popular than Warhammer.
    "Usually, when you make a type of game wich requires a licence for the first time, you chose the cheaper one."
    They are two different types of games. One is medieval fantasy, the other is SCI-FI.
    actually very little of Warhammer is actually medieval. The Empire, the "poster boy" of Warhammer is early modern times, not medieval.
    More importantly, I heard the same "argument" before TW Warhammer from the "history only" brigade.

    Also you don't even can address the fact that you contradict your own arguments.
    Skaven appear to be early Victorian Steam Punk..Gatling Guns indeed..
    don't tell the guy who thinks that there is one melee unit in 40k ;)
    That's a shame then, half the Death Guard army rely on melee :-(
    let alone the fact that many iconic units and basically always a couple of units in a race, are base on melee.

    Hell even Titans have melee weapons.
    Ratling_Guns.gif?t=1554385892
  • davedave1124davedave1124 Senior Member Registered Users Posts: 13,167
    SiWI said:

    SiWI said:

    SiWI said:

    SiWI said:

    SiWI said:

    Play Battle For Middle Earth II Reforged when it comes out, that's as close to a LotR TW as you'll get.

    Oh, look, another content denier. Still left with the taste of ash in your mouth after Cathay happened? Don't worry, it'll happen again with Middle Earth Total War.
    funny for someone writing that TW 40k, "can't happen"
    If they wanted a 40K Total War so dearley, why'd they chose Warhammer first? As far as I remember, 40K is more popular than Warhammer.
    "Usually, when you make a type of game wich requires a licence for the first time, you chose the cheaper one."
    They are two different types of games. One is medieval fantasy, the other is SCI-FI.
    actually very little of Warhammer is actually medieval. The Empire, the "poster boy" of Warhammer is early modern times, not medieval.
    More importantly, I heard the same "argument" before TW Warhammer from the "history only" brigade.

    Also you don't even can address the fact that you contradict your own arguments.
    Skaven appear to be early Victorian Steam Punk..Gatling Guns indeed..
    don't tell the guy who thinks that there is one melee unit in 40k ;)
    That's a shame then, half the Death Guard army rely on melee :-(
    let alone the fact that many iconic units and basically always a couple of units in a race, are base on melee.

    Hell even Titans have melee weapons.
    Blade Guard sold out immediately..
  • ShiroAmakusa75ShiroAmakusa75 Senior Member Registered Users Posts: 30,633
    Sluggaboyz
    Genestealers
    Hormagaunts
    Lychguard
    Raptors
    Possessed Chaos Space Marines
    Warp Talons
    Howling Banshees
    Aberrants
    Deathshroud Terminators

    That's all pure melee units I can name on top of my head, I could name even more if I delved into the codices. That's already ten times as much as you assumed 40k to have.

  • ShiroAmakusa75ShiroAmakusa75 Senior Member Registered Users Posts: 30,633
    edited February 14
    40k has some armies that lean heavier on ranged firepower than others, like T'au and Necrons, but even they have dedicated frontline sluggers like the Kroot or the Flayed Ones (o my, two more pure melee units in 40k!). Then you have armies that lean more towards stabby like Daemons or Heretic Astartes.

    To make it short, you really have no idea about 40k.

Sign In or Register to comment.