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

The Long Campaing Woes

dogoska#1535dogoska#1535 Registered Users Posts: 103
It is no secret that right now total war warhammer III has a very poor mid to late game experience and I think I know the reason why.
After RoC, a lot of bad changes were made to the campaing map such as but not limited to:

-Unagrassive AI that hardly leave settlements and don't seem to have a goal of its own;
-Dumbing down of Public Order malus at the same time corruption was made trivial with the new system (it is either fully corrupter or fully untainted no inbetween);
-As such rebels are no longer a problem and so is Public Order;
-Faster growth for everyone which results in very rapid elite armies for the player;
-Ai does not seek to win the game, but rather more or less just annoy the player;
-Poor garrisons make autoresolves or conquering too easy ( easier now with the removal of small town fights).
-The decrease of supply lines was much needed change, unfortunatelly, you'll be swimming in gold by mid game, even TK have no more worries about it.

Those are just a few, right now, conquering the world is not a challenge but more of a chore, tbf I don't know why CA is reluctant to add old features such as:

-More and new PO malus wit and return to -20 from corruption and its damning effects of on province growth;
-Agressive AI willing to take the fight to everyone;
-Slower growth and less income but return migration to the game and add a tax system of older games;
-Raiding should be more severe to raided faction;
-Some type of unit upgrade such as Attila in the tech tree (no reason for spearmen with no shields);
-More events apart from the end game scenarios to spin up the game(chaos incursions, vampiric risings, ork waaghs);
-More diplomatic control and improved diplomacy (gifts should always be accepted);
-Trading made more important and resources dictates buildings or units some factions can recruit (such as Shogun II);
- More provincial control (change capital is a must), trade routes for extra income;
- Lastly governors and separatism should be possible with all factions, which begs the question why chaos, vampires, orcs and even humans don't try to seccede (internal politics),

The game feels dumbed down, just go and conquer and don't fret about, but even conquering has become chore, when the older games had some nice features.
Tagged:

Comments

  • DarthEnderX-#6513DarthEnderX-#6513 Registered Users Posts: 5,252
    I've not been having an issue with lack of AI expansion in my current IE campaign. Minor factions are pretty much all gone and I'm down to about 30 LLs left, and only about a quarter of that is me.
    "Assassination's a dirty job, but someone's got to do it."
  • #62422#62422 Registered Users Posts: 366
    If an AI takes an Allied AI's racial capital then that race is screwed. Happens so damn much as well AI need to understand and use region trading ASAP. Reikland stealing Karaz a Karak and just keeping it is a joke and would never happen in lore and should never happen in gameplay.
  • dogoska#1535dogoska#1535 Registered Users Posts: 103
    #62422 said:

    If an AI takes an Allied AI's racial capital then that race is screwed. Happens so damn much as well AI need to understand and use region trading ASAP. Reikland stealing Karaz a Karak and just keeping it is a joke and would never happen in lore and should never happen in gameplay.

    Something I forgot to add in Attila the AI had randominised personality traits this meant in a playthrough the AI would like Rome in another they would hate it, resulting in a different gameplay everytime.
Sign In or Register to comment.