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 BIG WARHAMMER BATTLES SURVEY

13»

Comments

  • LacertusLacertus Senior Member Registered Users Posts: 129
    Was fun, maybe leave it up a bit longer ? Consistent player-base on Steam (That is, excluding May and June 2016 as there's a large drop afterwards) is still around 10 000 people on average, don't know about how many players might have non-steam copies, would be nice to see at least half that as votes. (Though I doubt there will be much change percentage-wise).

  • Vanilla_Gorilla#8529Vanilla_Gorilla#8529 Registered Users Posts: 39,113
    Valeli said:

    Fun survey, filled it out.

    Part of me feels obligated to point out that the responses you'll get soliciting a voluntary survey on a website where likely only the more invested users of the series hang out will be incredibly biased and not reliable as a measure of the TW user base as a whole.

    But that aside, fun survey.

    For better or worse hardcore fans like us are often the most critical, and often the most irrelevant.
    "It's no fun fighting people weaker than you." - The Beast

    "There are only two people better than me, and I'm both of them" - Vanilla Gorilla

    Forum Terms & Conditions

    I am The Beast, Descendant of Guanyin, The one who beasts 25 hours a day, 8 days a week, The Vanilla Gorilla, The great bright delight, Conqueror of Mountains, Purveyor of wisdom, Official forum historian, Master Tamer of energy, the one they fear to name, Beastradamus, The Teacher, Master Unbiased Pollster, The Avatar of Tuesday, Chief hype Train Conductor, Uwu Usurper, Pog Wog Warrior, Poggers Patroller, Alpha of the species, Apex protector, Praetor of Positivity, Disciple of the Drybrush

  • hendo#1695hendo#1695 Registered Users Posts: 3,001
    bellyboy said:



    Question 10: I don't think anyone will say they want less tactical options, just disagree on what those options are.

    Interesting. I would. I don't think the quantity of tactical options is relevant (consider the games "Go," "Checkers," or "Chess" as examples of having few tactical options, but high complexity and replayability). Honestly, sometimes I get overwhelmed when I have too many magic items, spells, and different units all demanding my attention. I wouldn't mind narrowing down the quantity and developing each options unique impact on the game.

    However, perhaps by thinking of tactical options as magic items, spells, and different units I've misunderstood the question. If you could clarify what you mean, I'm sure we'd find consensus.
    Good point. Some times too much tactical options in terms of activating on the players end can increase the length of battle but quicken the pace or increase the rate the player has to click-making it chaotic. Now chaotic is an interesting term. Recently, CA has been using it a lot to describe the battle. It appears chaotic means having the player have to frantically click and do many tasks in a short period of time.

    Increased tactics, imo, can also mean: more time to perform either the same (present) tactics or more time to develop different ones-perhaps more in depth multi stage tactics.

    I do not like the current association between chaotic and battles. Battles to feel chaotic does not have to mean frantically clicking or short time to execute orders. There are incredible monsters, flying beasts, magic, and various artillery, cavalry and foot units. There will naturally be much going on and numerous types of engagements happening. This already has a "execution challenge" and a chaotic feeling-there is no need to cram it all in a extremely short period of time.

    I would prefer more time to develop tactics-and doing so, imo, will increase more of them (or variations) and will have the uniqueness of the races stand out more.
  • hendo#1695hendo#1695 Registered Users Posts: 3,001
    Has anyone thought about other "natural areas" the game could improve on if battles were slowed down a bit?

    I can think of a few instantly, but what about animations?
    I am not over critical of the animations of the units, but I wouldn't mind if resources were allocated to making more of them.

    Ever wonder why the most common animations are huge jumps crashing the weapon down on the enemy? My intuition tells me it's because, aside from the big creatures,.that's all you can see in maxed birds few! The game is not designed to be out of max birds view-this is apparent when CA themselves say-"nope don't zoom in," "can't do that," or "going to sneak a peak at units" (paraphrasing).

    I am not insinuating any bad practice on CAs part-just pointing out how a game with fast paced and short battle span will have "natural short cuts" (for lack of better words). A game with longer duration battles may improve the game in other areas-there's always room for improvement :) .
  • FredrinFredrin Senior Member LondonRegistered Users Posts: 3,026



    For better or worse hardcore fans like us are often the most critical, and often the most irrelevant.

    We're also the ones who buy the most titles and DLC when we're kept happy, so not all that irrelevant ;)
  • hendo#1695hendo#1695 Registered Users Posts: 3,001
    @fredrin are you able to run any regression analysis with the data collected? Respondents are anonymous, but can you track respondents answers? In other words can you see how a particular respondent answered all the questions? I'd be curious to analyze moderating variables and see if there are an significant results.
  • FredrinFredrin Senior Member LondonRegistered Users Posts: 3,026
    hendo1592 said:

    @fredrin are you able to run any regression analysis with the data collected? Respondents are anonymous, but can you track respondents answers? In other words can you see how a particular respondent answered all the questions? I'd be curious to analyze moderating variables and see if there are an significant results.

    Knock yourself out ;)

    https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B0a23f6ALYl1M0FIUGZRU2RVYWM/view?usp=sharing

    The software has some filter and comparison functions that work quite well, but if you're looking to narrow it down to individuals or groups, filtering the relevant column in Excel is probably the way to go.

  • hendo#1695hendo#1695 Registered Users Posts: 3,001
    Thanks @Fredrin ! I have a very pricey statistical software that I could use to run analyses. It will be nice to run these while I still have the subscription :) -I won't be renewing for quite some time (I'll have to settle on learning excel for future analyses).
  • FredrinFredrin Senior Member LondonRegistered Users Posts: 3,026
    hendo1592 said:

    Thanks @Fredrin ! I have a very pricey statistical software that I could use to run analyses. It will be nice to run these while I still have the subscription :) -I won't be renewing for quite some time (I'll have to settle on learning excel for future analyses).

    Lol, good to know! Check your inbox
  • FredrinFredrin Senior Member LondonRegistered Users Posts: 3,026
    @hendo1592 - Here's a numeric spreadsheet for results in case that helps with plugging results in to the software

    https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B0a23f6ALYl1dF95YWlYSWIwWFE/view?usp=sharing

  • Galvinized_IronGalvinized_Iron Registered Users Posts: 1,025
    bellyboy said:



    Question 10: I don't think anyone will say they want less tactical options, just disagree on what those options are.

    Interesting. I would. I don't think the quantity of tactical options is relevant (consider the games "Go," "Checkers," or "Chess" as examples of having few tactical options, but high complexity and replayability). Honestly, sometimes I get overwhelmed when I have too many magic items, spells, and different units all demanding my attention. I wouldn't mind narrowing down the quantity and developing each options unique impact on the game.

    However, perhaps by thinking of tactical options as magic items, spells, and different units I've misunderstood the question. If you could clarify what you mean, I'm sure we'd find consensus.
    But that is actually what I mean. Having a ton of options can sometimes feel limiting in its own way. You wanting more complexity, but less buttons to press proves that I am correct.
  • Lord_XelosLord_Xelos Registered Users Posts: 1,806
    Pretty well designed survey.

    Now let's hope the results will directly affect further development, starting this second.
  • HarconnHarconn Registered Users Posts: 943
    I would already be happy if battle speed would be slowed down 10%.
    _______________________________________________________________________________________________________

    My German Youtube-Channel - Let's Plays (Strategy, RPG, Indie,...): https://www.youtube.com/channel/UChwblqvwr8XxKP0GzCcUb8Q
  • SurielSuriel Registered Users Posts: 114
    Just wanted to say that I joined forum to take the survey. Thank you OP for putting your time and effort into it.

    Cheers,
    Suriel

    PS. I do hope that CA will make battles longer. Spending equal times in battle and on loading screen feels off.
  • FredrinFredrin Senior Member LondonRegistered Users Posts: 3,026
    Suriel said:

    Just wanted to say that I joined forum to take the survey. Thank you OP for putting your time and effort into it.

    Cheers,
    Suriel

    PS. I do hope that CA will make battles longer. Spending equal times in battle and on loading screen feels off.

    Welcome to the forums, Suriel and thanks for the kind words :)

    Yes, battles are a bit flash-in-the-pan to pan, to say the least.
  • Lord_XelosLord_Xelos Registered Users Posts: 1,806
    Sooo... When do we see the results?
  • FredrinFredrin Senior Member LondonRegistered Users Posts: 3,026
    Not sure if I linked them here, they're in a separate thread. Here ya go:

    https://forums.totalwar.com/discussion/200262/the-warhammer-battles-survey-results-are-in/p1
  • MercMerc Junior Member Registered Users Posts: 80
    edited August 2017
    i think that total war Warhammer fails both as a Warhammer game and a total war game.

    You need to Let Warhammer play as a total war game but with magic and monsters.

    you also need to take a look at EU4 but not the way they conduct the DLC policy although the Total war series is almost there soon. Gating mechanics and parts of the game behind the DLCs.
    What they should pick up is the diplomacy and economy and force limit/manpower mechanic.

    as for how do you make Warhammer play as a total war game. simple you stick to the lore when it comes to unit strength and weakness for each faction and dont go haywire with stats and give lore wise superior HE swordmasters with the same armor as DE Executioners different armor stats in game no matter how it is. you balance it with cost of the unit and dont break lore.

    i do sometimes think that Warhammer mark of Chaos/ battle march does better lore wise. for example including High Elves from day 1 as they are the most crucial race lore wise to the game. Game one dont work without them simply due to that Chaos invasions into the empire are always followed by a relief fleet from the high Elves to save the pesky humans.

    ohh and i forgot Warhammer mark of chaos and battle march had an army painter.... i dont see any one in total war warhammer. i think that would be quiet easy to make. its been quiet common in Warhammer games since Dawn of war to include that.
  • FinishingLast#1402FinishingLast#1402 Registered Users Posts: 4,856
    Merc said:



    you also need to take a look at EU4 but not the way they conduct the DLC policy although the Total war series is almost there soon. Gating mechanics and parts of the game behind the DLCs.

    Hmmm...
    Europa Universalis IV DLC on Steam: 27 paid; 2 free
    Total War Warhammer DLC on Steam: 7 paid; 6 free

    I'm comfortable in with the TW approach to DLC.
    SiWI: "no they just hate you and I don't blame them."
  • hendo#1695hendo#1695 Registered Users Posts: 3,001
    interesting survey for those who haven't taken it yet!
  • chrissher7chrissher7 Junior Member Registered Users Posts: 2,038
    Merc said:

    i think that total war Warhammer fails both as a Warhammer game and a total war game.

    You need to Let Warhammer play as a total war game but with magic and monsters.

    you also need to take a look at EU4 but not the way they conduct the DLC policy although the Total war series is almost there soon. Gating mechanics and parts of the game behind the DLCs.
    What they should pick up is the diplomacy and economy and force limit/manpower mechanic.

    as for how do you make Warhammer play as a total war game. simple you stick to the lore when it comes to unit strength and weakness for each faction and dont go haywire with stats and give lore wise superior HE swordmasters with the same armor as DE Executioners different armor stats in game no matter how it is. you balance it with cost of the unit and dont break lore.

    i do sometimes think that Warhammer mark of Chaos/ battle march does better lore wise. for example including High Elves from day 1 as they are the most crucial race lore wise to the game. Game one dont work without them simply due to that Chaos invasions into the empire are always followed by a relief fleet from the high Elves to save the pesky humans.

    ohh and i forgot Warhammer mark of chaos and battle march had an army painter.... i dont see any one in total war warhammer. i think that would be quiet easy to make. its been quiet common in Warhammer games since Dawn of war to include that.

    Wrong about the comparison of Warhammer with Paradox games DLC. List one non-race specific game mechanic gated behind DLC like in Paradox games. You won't be able to because there aren't any locked behind DLC like they do with Paradox games. Paradox go too far in that respect and finally lost their free pass on it with the price rises fiasco. I much prefer the way CA do DLC even though Warhammer's is all slightly overpriced and it is different to Paradox.
Sign In or Register to comment.