Burning foliage / Buildings?

avvve

The Siege battle 'gameplay' today, did someone else notice the burning buildings and the puff of smoke here and there from buildings?

Have they returned burning buildings from Rome 2 / Attila or 3K? Or is this some kind of trailer cinematic effects that was just wasted into the budget for a gameplay showoff?

I sure hope its not just a cosmetic marketing thing and that its actually a part of the destruction and Chaos of sieges!

P.S. the blood DLC better Goddajmit have burning entities in it too!

Maedrethnir#1968

I wish it to be true, but I feel it's just marketing stuff.

Mazisky#3267

There are burning buildimg in warhammer 2 too. They are just assets with vfx

Alduinee

It's a scripted battle, not the actual final game. Siege escalation from Attila is a lost technology

Bonutz#3949

God, I want burning buildings and trees so badly. Looked great in Atilla and 3K. It really immerses you into the battles and makes it look more apocalyptic.

I would've thought it would be an automatic include for Warhammer 3 and the daemon invasion that is out to destroy the world but guess not unfortunately.

avvve

Mazisky said:

There are burning buildimg in warhammer 2 too. They are just assets with vfx

yeah true, but like ... lighting houses on fire via magic or puffing with your dragons etc. This is something that would be a good addon for the attack in these slogged layer defences.

Mazisky#3267

avvve said:

Mazisky said:

There are burning buildimg in warhammer 2 too. They are just assets with vfx

yeah true, but like ... lighting houses on fire via magic or puffing with your dragons etc. This is something that would be a good addon for the attack in these slogged layer defences.

Im not saying it wouldn't be nice. It would. But I am saying that what we see in the trailer are probably the old wh2 burning static assets rather than 3k burning mechanics

wingren013

This was one of the biggest sources of poor performance in Attila. So CA probably left it out because of that,

3K got it because machines and their codebase has come a long way since.

Still I would like to see it.

saweendra#3399

Maedrethnir said:

I wish it to be true, but I feel it's just marketing stuff.

This but if if its true than CA just gave a player a reason to defend the walls..

mightygloin#2446

The woods better be burnable to the ground as well 🔥🔥🔥

Mr_Finley7#4571

The city destruction was such an awesome feature, it gave you an incentive to actively fight the enemy rather than just holing up and waiting for them to march single file into your kill zone.

avvve

Mr_Finley7 said:

The city destruction was such an awesome feature, it gave you an incentive to actively fight the enemy rather than just holing up and waiting for them to march single file into your kill zone.

City evolution / escalation in Attila total war was awesome! I didnt think i would miss that game so much..

But i mean why wouldnt they implement something like this? Yes it cost money and even so might bring trouble with performance. But alteast gives that Chaotic feeling when defending or attacking, which i guess is what Game 3 is all about? Also i've heard some feels like this siege rework basically only focuses on the defender (atleast what we've seen) and its gonna be a slogg to expand through all these different siege layouts.

Why dont add:
+ ability to burn down buildings and create different debuffs for the defending race.
+ siege escalation, if you lay siege to a city for multi turns the walls and the map will alter.