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

Zerkovich's video about siege battles

24

Comments

  • CountTalabecland#2471CountTalabecland#2471 Registered Users Posts: 1,106
    edited April 2022
    I like minor settlement battles.

    The damage from towers needs to be scaled down and the AI shouldn’t be able to cheat on resources to rebuild them.

    Barricades need to be made to work like Attila or removed completely due to poor physics.

    That is all that needs to be done.

  • drogarito#2548drogarito#2548 Registered Users Posts: 1,817

    Theo91 said:

    He's spot on. The minor settlements themselves look absolutely stunning but the pop up towers/ supplies and the frequency of the battles ruins it. so infuriating

    He likes all those things except the frequency of the minor settlement battles. And he still wants more sieges than wh2 ever had. Utter trash solutions.

    Want to say how these are trash solutions? I actually agree with his takes. Minor settlement battles as a concept are cool, they need a bit of polishing and adjustment to their frequency before they become a great addition to the game.
    In my opinion ofc

    I fully respect and accept that zerkvich and you like the insta build trash
    Stealing this poll from a thread from last week, but it looks like the majority of people (at least on Facebook) have a similar opinion to Zerkovich. You do know you can mod out most settlement battles right?


    But here is the poll about should poppable towers be removed from the game or not from this forum:


  • DrazhoaththeAshen#9598DrazhoaththeAshen#9598 Registered Users Posts: 890

    1v0 said:

    After this video I want to play Rome 2 or 3K.

    Yeah, the sieges in Rome II are epic. You can put on pre-deployable traps etc, and you can also put siege artillery like catapults and balistas on certain towers.
    Dont know why is it so hard for CA to maintain the things they do well in future tittles.
    Too many whiteknights are happy to make the excuse, "but Warhammer 2 or Rome 2 took years to get good". They can't comprehend people are supposed to learn from mistakes and not repeat them in the future.
    Your flippancy in using white knight has really devalued the term. At this point it seems to me that white knight is just a term you use to malign anyone who doesn't agree with you.
    What is normal for the spider is Chaos for the fly.
  • Passthechips#4366Passthechips#4366 Registered Users Posts: 1,539

    Theo91 said:

    He's spot on. The minor settlements themselves look absolutely stunning but the pop up towers/ supplies and the frequency of the battles ruins it. so infuriating

    He likes all those things except the frequency of the minor settlement battles. And he still wants more sieges than wh2 ever had. Utter trash solutions.

    Want to say how these are trash solutions? I actually agree with his takes. Minor settlement battles as a concept are cool, they need a bit of polishing and adjustment to their frequency before they become a great addition to the game.
    In my opinion ofc

    I fully respect and accept that zerkvich and you like the insta build trash
    Stealing this poll from a thread from last week, but it looks like the majority of people (at least on Facebook) have a similar opinion to Zerkovich. You do know you can mod out most settlement battles right?


    But here is the poll about should poppable towers be removed from the game or not from this forum:


    I’d argue that this forum is probably a much more niche space than the Facebook group. Not to mention the sample size was smaller in that poll, and the differential in the results still really close, indicating that there isn’t overwhelming agreement even among the more enfranchised fans.

    Also the question is only a fraction of what’s being discussed.

    There is no doubt that the system we have now is far from perfect. I’d like to see a lot of small changes done to minor settlement battles, but that doesn’t mean that CA isn’t on the right path introducing them.
  • Nyxilis#3646Nyxilis#3646 Registered Users Posts: 7,729

    Theo91 said:

    He's spot on. The minor settlements themselves look absolutely stunning but the pop up towers/ supplies and the frequency of the battles ruins it. so infuriating

    He likes all those things except the frequency of the minor settlement battles. And he still wants more sieges than wh2 ever had. Utter trash solutions.

    Want to say how these are trash solutions? I actually agree with his takes. Minor settlement battles as a concept are cool, they need a bit of polishing and adjustment to their frequency before they become a great addition to the game.
    In my opinion ofc

    I fully respect and accept that zerkvich and you like the insta build trash
    Stealing this poll from a thread from last week, but it looks like the majority of people (at least on Facebook) have a similar opinion to Zerkovich. You do know you can mod out most settlement battles right?


    But here is the poll about should poppable towers be removed from the game or not from this forum:


    Still lol to people who die to these towers, I just don't understand what people do except strip naked and stand on a giant shoot me target for as long as it takes.

    Also, never a good day when Tennis is leading your charge.
  • Passthechips#4366Passthechips#4366 Registered Users Posts: 1,539
    edited April 2022
    Edit: double posted. Please delete!
    Post edited by Passthechips#4366 on
  • drogarito#2548drogarito#2548 Registered Users Posts: 1,817
    But the poll shows that a lot of people are frustrated with in-battle poppable towers. I think that the game would have been way better if it had the system of pre-deployables as in Rome 2 or Three Kingdoms. The people who didn't play older titles don't even know that these exist. Isn't it better to place siege machines on certain towers to defend the walls just like in Rome 2? Or what's the point of barricades if you can only block 1 part of the street (just like he showed in the video)? If every race had these unique pre-deployable defenses and siege engines (or at least grouped races that share something in common such as Humans, elves, dwarves, demons, vampires, etc.) the game would have been 10000 times better than it is right now. The current system favors the arcade approach at the cost of the strategic approach, and that's what a lot of people don't like about it.
  • Lord_DistamorfinLord_Distamorfin Registered Users Posts: 1,333
    So I never played 3Kingdoms and I haven't played Rome 2 in years, so I totally forgot about the defense-building system that CA had in those games. The fact that CA had a drag-and-drop system all the way back in Rome 2 and used it again as recently as 3Kingdoms, but stuck Warhammer 3 with a frankly garbage pre-determined build system makes me absolutely livid.

    I cannot fathom how CA could have an objectively better build system in multiple previous games that gives the player actual freedom to put what they want down where they want it and replace it with what effectively amounts to Little Timmy's first tower defense game. Even looking at the survival battle mode, which this system was presumably purpose-built for and then just tacked on to settlement and siege battles, the older drag-and-drop system is better there too because you can pick and choose your defensive locations precisely instead of being beholden to wherever CA says you can place stuff. As I play more of WH3 and learn/remember more about older Total War games, the more I just keep seeing WH3 as a pile of missteps and missed opportunities. And it honestly angers and frustrates me to no end considering that this game was supposed to be the ultimate culmination of everything CA has done since WH1.

    And there's no way CA fixes a core gameplay feature like defense building. We're almost certainly stuck with this system more or less how it is absent some minor changes.
  • Tennisgolfboll#5877Tennisgolfboll#5877 Registered Users Posts: 13,492
    People have left in droves. Wh3 has issues.

    Now what exactly those are can be debated. As can their fixes.


    But i think zerkovich is delusional for thinking that if CA just reduces the frequency of minor settlement battles they will have fixed the issues with sieges.

    The problems run much deeper.
    It needs to be pointed out that what people call "cheese" is just playing the game the way it actually exists not in some fictional way they think it is supposed to work.
  • Walkabout#1505Walkabout#1505 Member In a houseRegistered Users Posts: 2,999
    With the current mods that:
    1. Remove popup towers (remove towers mod)
    2. Change gates so spears and daggers can’t break them down as quick (SWO-RD mod)
    3. Slow wall climbing rate and improve how wall towers work (SWO-RD)
    4. Add a 25-50 % chance of the minor settlement battle occurring outside the settlement when the player is the attacker (SWO-RD and other mods)

    there are only a couple of issues that still plague minor settlement sieges for me, these are:
    1. Traps and barricades only being limited to fixed points, and
    2. The fact that the defender moves effortlessly through traps and barricades.

    The game is improving because CA supports modding.
    Live your life and try to do no harm.

    "I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it." Evelyn Beatrice Hall
  • drogarito#2548drogarito#2548 Registered Users Posts: 1,817
    The number of minor sieges is lesser problem than the tower defense mode
  • Fingolfin_the-Golden#2157Fingolfin_the-Golden#2157 Registered Users Posts: 6,790

    1v0 said:

    After this video I want to play Rome 2 or 3K.

    Yeah, the sieges in Rome II are epic. You can put on pre-deployable traps etc, and you can also put siege artillery like catapults and balistas on certain towers.
    Dont know why is it so hard for CA to maintain the things they do well in future tittles.
    Too many whiteknights are happy to make the excuse, "but Warhammer 2 or Rome 2 took years to get good". They can't comprehend people are supposed to learn from mistakes and not repeat them in the future.
    Looking at the past week of posts and the reaction to the most recent CA video, I really don't understand this weird idea about the whiteknigths being all over the forum and somehow having power over CAs decisions.
    Its copium.


    -


    Pathfinding is the major issue along with frequency.
    BEARS, Beets, Battlestar Galactica 🧝‍♀️ Pandas too please CA!
  • SusaVile#9835SusaVile#9835 Senior Member Registered Users Posts: 1,430
    edited April 2022
    Pretty much the type of feedback I have been seeing everywhere, be it on Reddit, here, or in Facebook:

    1 - deployables should be much better, varied, and difficult to destroy, and positioned at the start;
    2 - more land battles required, so some minor settlement battles should turn into land battles;
    3 - should be able to deploy everywhere instead of specific locations;
    4 - toggle option for different system in the start of the campaign menu;

    Issues:

    1 - better and more varied deployables, I am all fine for it. As for only poisitioning at the start, it may create the issue where players will just start using artillery to destroy those at the start of each battle like previously, so I am half-half on this.
    2 - meaningless land battles should not count for this. The lesser garrisons are also the ones that would be fought outside the settlement, so it does not actually change anything. Instead, would change the AI behavior to retreat near the settlement but not inside it, just enough to be in reinforcement range. Or to prepare more ambushes. Or to fight more aggressively, such that even odds or slightly worse it would still try to fight (this happened in previous titles)
    3 - I would love this, but heard that it works better for the player than the AI, who can never make good decisions on where to place stuff. This was actually improved from previous titles. Still, open for that change.
    4 - all up for it. Plenty of customization is always nice. Unit caps, siege battles, chaos invasion, confederation, etc.
    Always learning, be polite, unless he's the enemy:P
    Cheers
    SusaVile
    Total war youtuber
  • Lord_DistamorfinLord_Distamorfin Registered Users Posts: 1,333
    Crajoh said:

    With the current mods that:
    there are only a couple of issues that still plague minor settlement sieges for me, these are:
    1. Traps and barricades only being limited to fixed points, and
    2. The fact that the defender moves effortlessly through traps and barricades.

    The game is improving because CA supports modding.

    I don't know if it's possible, but I really hope that somehow a mod is able to give build freedom for defenses like in 3K.
  • Walkabout#1505Walkabout#1505 Member In a houseRegistered Users Posts: 2,999

    Crajoh said:

    With the current mods that:
    there are only a couple of issues that still plague minor settlement sieges for me, these are:
    1. Traps and barricades only being limited to fixed points, and
    2. The fact that the defender moves effortlessly through traps and barricades.

    The game is improving because CA supports modding.

    I don't know if it's possible, but I really hope that somehow a mod is able to give build freedom for defenses like in 3K.
    Yea but is the AI going to use it properly if it’s a mod?
    Live your life and try to do no harm.

    "I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it." Evelyn Beatrice Hall
  • Darksteel83#1113Darksteel83#1113 Registered Users Posts: 598
    edited April 2022

    People have left in droves. Wh3 has issues.

    Now what exactly those are can be debated. As can their fixes.


    But i think zerkovich is delusional for thinking that if CA just reduces the frequency of minor settlement battles they will have fixed the issues with sieges.

    The problems run much deeper.

    When Warhammer 1 was launched CA changed the battles so that each minor settlement battle was a field battle. This solved a lot problems we had with the older titles. And now we have most of the old problems back.

    To be honest I forgot about the options you had in Rome 2. For deployables. They also look better. The WH3 stuf all looks the same.
  • XxXScorpionXxX#2310XxXScorpionXxX#2310 Registered Users Posts: 6,146
    edited April 2022
    the best fix has already been proposed. Tie minor settlement maps to either tier 3 capital building or tier 2 walls.
    Request scorched body textures, and fire death effects. At least 30% of all damage in this game comes from fire sources. Request Fire for the Fire God DLC.
  • IamNotArobot#8850IamNotArobot#8850 Registered Users Posts: 5,758
    Those polls from the screenshot are not even close to the 20k votes he got, just delete this screenshot cause it is disinformation.
    *Justice, cats and CONFEDERATION ENABLED for the Tomb Kings and Vampire Coast! feat mummies and Apophas.
    *Exclusive DLCs for Tomb Kings, Vampire Coast, BM, CW and WE! #DLCsAreRacesToo
    *Remaster all WH1 and WH2 faction icons for WH3!
    *Ogre Kingdoms core race or death!
    *Bring back settlement conquering artworks!
    *Gnoblar Carpet for Greesus
    *Improve UI


  • PoorManatee6197#6481PoorManatee6197#6481 Registered Users Posts: 2,603

    aMint1 said:

    Surge_2 said:

    TLDR?

    I'm guessing.

    Too many.
    AR too punishing.
    Tower mini game unsatisfying.
    AI bad.
    Pathing bad.

    How did I do?

    TLDR
    He is utterly clueless. Says that there were to many land battles in wh2 (there isnt if anything there are to many sieges). Land battles are way less common on wh3 and he wants a happy medium between the two games. Which is a garbage solution. As ive said there were still to many sieges in wh2.

    And he says the instant build trash and new sieges are good fun just to many. Again just garbage.
    That's not really what he said.

    He said he would prefer far fewer settlement battles and that he didn't like the towers or barricades. Then he proposed solutions to them, which I think were quite measured and achievable.
    He says at 0.50 talking about instant build trash and i quote:

    "I am glad they are in the game and i do like minor settlement battles."
    That quote is literally about minor settlement battles in general. He was disparaging about pop-up towers specifically.
    No he says about them specificaly and again i quote (parenthasis below mine):

    "I am glad they are in the game (instant build barricades and towers) and i do like minor settlement battles."


    Literally 2 secons before that he sais "I'm not a fan of the supply system and the instant pop-up defenses". He is glad they are in game because is better than nothing.

    Later in the video he sais he doesnt hate it (as in, dislike yes, but not hate) and hopes it doesnt come back in future titles, refering to defenses.
    #MakeDwarfsGreatAgain Josef Bugman, Thorek Ironbrow, Alrik Ranulfsson, Grimm Burloksson, Kazador Thunderhorn, Byrrnoth Grundadrakk, Malakai Makaisson, Gotrek Gurnisson, Garagrim, Dragon slayer, Deamon slayer, Doomseekers, Brotherhood of Grimnir, Giant slayers, Thunderbarge, Shieldbearer mount, Master brewer, Goblin Hewer, Norse dwarf war mammoth, Tractator engine, Rune golem, Shard dragon, proper Anvil of Doom, Ulther's dragon company, Lond Drong's slayer pirates, Everguard, Karak Varn, Karag Agrilwutraz, Karaz Bryn, Karag Dum, Karak Vlag, Kraka Dorden, Kraka Ornsmotek, Kraka Ravnsvake, Karak Vrag, Karak Azorn, Karak Krakaten.


    All those missing things are grudges in the great book, is in your hand to settle them, CA. Khazukan kazakit-ha!

    IT'S HOBGOBBO TIME!!!!!!!
    #JusticeForKurgan
  • Itharus#3127Itharus#3127 Senior Member Registered Users Posts: 16,483
    Deployable towers can be fixed by making them pre-battle only and no mid-battle fixing or any shenanigans like that.
  • PTree#4895PTree#4895 Registered Users Posts: 979
    Zerkovich is right. Probably the best content creator for Total War games.
  • T_MACCABBEET_MACCABBEE Registered Users Posts: 700
    Just copy 3K lmao.
    It even solved minor settlement battles being chores because you can just choose to burn everything down.


  • LegendaryArticuno#9965LegendaryArticuno#9965 Registered Users Posts: 501

    Just copy 3K lmao.
    It even solved minor settlement battles being chores because you can just choose to burn everything down.


    Or you could charge elephants through since there's actually destructible terrain. In WH3 your giant Stonehorns will get stuck on indestructible wooden fences.
  • T_MACCABBEET_MACCABBEE Registered Users Posts: 700

    Just copy 3K lmao.
    It even solved minor settlement battles being chores because you can just choose to burn everything down.


    Or you could charge elephants through since there's actually destructible terrain. In WH3 your giant Stonehorns will get stuck on indestructible wooden fences.
    I literally got N'Kari die at one point because he got stuck in a barricade while getting shot at by towers. It doesn't help that his AI pathfinding completely bugs out in tight corners because for some reason he ALWAYS just has to do that dumb spinning attack whenever he engages a new target, which he can't in a narrow road filled with people running all over the place, causing him to just stand around like an idiot.
  • Fingolfin_the-Golden#2157Fingolfin_the-Golden#2157 Registered Users Posts: 6,790

    Just copy 3K lmao.
    It even solved minor settlement battles being chores because you can just choose to burn everything down.


    Or you could charge elephants through since there's actually destructible terrain. In WH3 your giant Stonehorns will get stuck on indestructible wooden fences.
    I literally got N'Kari die at one point because he got stuck in a barricade while getting shot at by towers. It doesn't help that his AI pathfinding completely bugs out in tight corners because for some reason he ALWAYS just has to do that dumb spinning attack whenever he engages a new target, which he can't in a narrow road filled with people running all over the place, causing him to just stand around like an idiot.
    Nkari in all his lore did this and died.
    BEARS, Beets, Battlestar Galactica 🧝‍♀️ Pandas too please CA!
  • T_MACCABBEET_MACCABBEE Registered Users Posts: 700

    Just copy 3K lmao.
    It even solved minor settlement battles being chores because you can just choose to burn everything down.


    Or you could charge elephants through since there's actually destructible terrain. In WH3 your giant Stonehorns will get stuck on indestructible wooden fences.
    I literally got N'Kari die at one point because he got stuck in a barricade while getting shot at by towers. It doesn't help that his AI pathfinding completely bugs out in tight corners because for some reason he ALWAYS just has to do that dumb spinning attack whenever he engages a new target, which he can't in a narrow road filled with people running all over the place, causing him to just stand around like an idiot.
    Nkari in all his lore did this and died.
    If you're referring to the part about waltzing around while everything is burning in flames, I think that was the masque of slaanesh.

    N'Kari just kinda exist to job to either the twins or malekith depending on the occasion.
  • Itharus#3127Itharus#3127 Senior Member Registered Users Posts: 16,483
    Anyone remember the awesome settlement battles in Attila where all the devastation happened and you could even do awful crap like massacre the fleeing civilians and what not?

    Grotesque. But the place burning down around you was pretty engrossing.

    Attila grows on me more and more... I just wish they hadn't condensed the game down to 8 rosters. Wasted potential. Also some retrofitting history they did was sketchy af, but otherwise? Good game. Pity it was never optimized.
  • TheMadTypistTheMadTypist Registered Users Posts: 596
    Hmm. I disagree with him on the idea that there were too many field battles in the last game- nobody said that when talking about what they wanted for the siege rework. I think this is retrofitting history to fit his creator-dependent-on-the-current-title bias.

    My experience of the current game is that unless I explicitly use ambush to set up a field battle, they don't happen. The AI is 'smart' enough to always perfectly deny me the chance to attack, unless I 'hide' from them. That's dumb, because field battles have been the strongest part of this series, and the AI way too cowardly for the Warhammer franchise. IE will have serious issues for factions without an ambush stance, or Bretonia who get punished for using theirs and are explicitly a faction that specializes in field battles. Even when I turn up with an army to relieve a siege, the enemy takes one look and runs away. Where are you going, Skarbrand? I thought you liked blood!

    Pretty much every battle revolves around a settlement, because the game is all about either taking territory or defending it. That's always been how the campaign played out, but it wasn't a problem before. People wanted a siege rework, not a rework of the way the whole campaign played, but these "minor" settlement battles have rewritten the vast majority of the experience now, they're effectively the default campaign battle type. I don't think the buildable towers are that much of an issue but I can understand why people who don't like them are so aggravated when they show up in the majority of the game's conquest experience, they can't get away from them.

    I'm getting petty with the next point but the minor settlements don't even seem that minor in scale- some of these things have huge constructs, massive mounds or walls and infrastructure. I've been fighting in Norsca and every little viking raider's village is a massive Chaos symbol with gigantic walls forming the exterior and canyon-deep-lava-moats. If there were 'special' minor settlements, forts and monoliths the like, that behaved this way, it could have been a neat bit of variety to throw in, but as is, it doesn't feel like there are minor settlements, just varying degrees of major ones with or without gaps or climbable walls.

    If a minor settlement hasn't been fortified ahead of time, it shouldn't be one of these new settlement battles. I'm not opposed to them in principal but they are way too frequent, as they are currently implemented the overall experience of the campaign map has suffered for their inclusion.
  • Surge_2#1464Surge_2#1464 Registered Users Posts: 11,954
    So you guys are telling me that other TW games did settlements better, even 3K, and we somehow got this trash Game 3?

    Unreal.
    Kneel

  • SneedGamingSneedGaming Registered Users Posts: 326
    Surge_2 said:

    So you guys are telling me that other TW games did settlements better, even 3K, and we somehow got this trash Game 3?

    Unreal.

    I am convinced that the people who like the current implementation of minor settlements in WH3 have never played another TW game before. Or maybe it's been a while and they don't realize how dumbed down and awful they really are. Attila had extremely engaging minor settlement battles on both attacking and defending sides. Rome 2, for all its faults, had a decent deployable system, wall-mounted artillery, and a huge range of siege engines and siege artillery for attackers. I haven't played 3K but from what I hear the sieges there are close to Rome 2. While the Warhammer series, after 6 years of active development, has finally received these awful convoluted city maps with nonsensical tower defense crap tacked on. Apparently all of the CA employees with any design skill or common sense are assigned to 3 Kingdoms 2 right now because they definitely weren't working on WH3.
Sign In or Register to comment.