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

"Currently no plan to introduce Araby..." Doesn't mean never

2»

Comments

  • RazmirthRazmirth Registered Users Posts: 2,193
    Personally I don’t care if Araby makes it in or not. There’s still a lot of other content I’d like to see make it in game before them anyway. Grom and eltharion, malus darkblade, thorek ironbrow maybe, boris toddbringer, wood elf lords like Ariel or sisters of twilight, taurox the brass bull....list goes on.

    And shadowblade as legendary hero for dark elves would be a nice addition as well!

    So while it’s a shame Araby is all but gone, there’s plenty of other great DLC that will/could come in future.
  • RikRiorikRikRiorik Registered Users Posts: 7,541
    Razmirth said:

    Personally I don’t care if Araby makes it in or not. There’s still a lot of other content I’d like to see make it in game before them anyway. Grom and eltharion, malus darkblade, thorek ironbrow maybe, boris toddbringer, wood elf lords like Ariel or sisters of twilight, taurox the brass bull....list goes on.

    And shadowblade as legendary hero for dark elves would be a nice addition as well!

    So while it’s a shame Araby is all but gone, there’s plenty of other great DLC that will/could come in future.

    I don't get it when people would rather see a few Legendary Lords, some mechanics and a few more units rather than an entirely new race. I've played many hours with all races, it's not like a new lord and some new unit is going to entirely reinvigorate my interest (except in perhaps the absolute rarest of cases).

    Now that there are 4+ lords to choose from amongst all of the new races and only the riff raff of units missing how can a lord pack ever hold the same levels of interest as an entirely new race?

    Baffling stuff.
    Lord of the Undermountain and your friendly neighbourhood giant (Dwarf)
    Favourite campaigns: Clan Angrund, Followers of Nagash and the new Huntsmarshall’s Expedition
  • neodeinosneodeinos Registered Users Posts: 3,295
    RikRiorik said:

    Razmirth said:

    Personally I don’t care if Araby makes it in or not. There’s still a lot of other content I’d like to see make it in game before them anyway. Grom and eltharion, malus darkblade, thorek ironbrow maybe, boris toddbringer, wood elf lords like Ariel or sisters of twilight, taurox the brass bull....list goes on.

    And shadowblade as legendary hero for dark elves would be a nice addition as well!

    So while it’s a shame Araby is all but gone, there’s plenty of other great DLC that will/could come in future.

    I don't get it when people would rather see a few Legendary Lords, some mechanics and a few more units rather than an entirely new race. I've played many hours with all races, it's not like a new lord and some new unit is going to entirely reinvigorate my interest (except in perhaps the absolute rarest of cases).

    Now that there are 4+ lords to choose from amongst all of the new races and only the riff raff of units missing how can a lord pack ever hold the same levels of interest as an entirely new race?

    Baffling stuff.
    Araby would've been nice indeed but was it to be expected ? Absolutely no, if you're expecting this minor faction you're just setting yourself up for disappointment. It's a shame we're not getting this faction I agree but as much as I want it I really don't care that we're not getting it, there are much more important to be added to the game first and I'd say the most popular lords as FLC and DLC are more important than a footnote faction.
  • RikRiorikRikRiorik Registered Users Posts: 7,541
    neodeinos said:

    RikRiorik said:

    Razmirth said:

    Personally I don’t care if Araby makes it in or not. There’s still a lot of other content I’d like to see make it in game before them anyway. Grom and eltharion, malus darkblade, thorek ironbrow maybe, boris toddbringer, wood elf lords like Ariel or sisters of twilight, taurox the brass bull....list goes on.

    And shadowblade as legendary hero for dark elves would be a nice addition as well!

    So while it’s a shame Araby is all but gone, there’s plenty of other great DLC that will/could come in future.

    I don't get it when people would rather see a few Legendary Lords, some mechanics and a few more units rather than an entirely new race. I've played many hours with all races, it's not like a new lord and some new unit is going to entirely reinvigorate my interest (except in perhaps the absolute rarest of cases).

    Now that there are 4+ lords to choose from amongst all of the new races and only the riff raff of units missing how can a lord pack ever hold the same levels of interest as an entirely new race?

    Baffling stuff.
    Araby would've been nice indeed but was it to be expected ? Absolutely no, if you're expecting this minor faction you're just setting yourself up for disappointment. It's a shame we're not getting this faction I agree but as much as I want it I really don't care that we're not getting it, there are much more important to be added to the game first and I'd say the most popular lords as FLC and DLC are more important than a footnote faction.
    Didn't expect Norsca and didn't expect the Vampire Coast. Didn't expect Araby either. But two of those three have been added and two of those three are objectively rather great additions.

    I am not massively bothered that we're not getting Araby any slivers of hope have been steadily slipping away. I disagree with something though. When you've added four LLs to each faction there comes a point where it isn't really "important" to add something to a race any longer. It becomes niche, it becomes nice. And while entirely new races might not be important in terms of their impact on the grand stage they are more fun than yet another character with the very nichest of units for an already well oiled race.
    Lord of the Undermountain and your friendly neighbourhood giant (Dwarf)
    Favourite campaigns: Clan Angrund, Followers of Nagash and the new Huntsmarshall’s Expedition
  • baronblackbaronblack Registered Users Posts: 3,202
    Ares354 said:

    Goatforce said:

    Ares354 said:

    CA lost money, that all.


    Once in UK muslim will say game are bad, and their God dont support it, will they stop making games as well?. Because not doing Araby for sake of no hurting anyone sound just the same.

    Do you have an ounce of proof that "offensiveness" is the reason Araby hasn't been done? To my knowledge there is no evidence for this claim.
    Yes because big company will tell. Ofc making game that will offend big group of people is hard choice. How many idiots attacked Witcher 3 because it lack black people in world >? do you need any more proofs ? Making Araby faction, that is based on % of Arabic, easter mytology can be problematic, and can harm people who are very religious. CA and Sega are world wide company, they wont take that kind of attack with no losees, both in money and PR.
    Then why Skaven exist... their backstory is literally WW2 fascist Italy. Ah yes. Not Human.
  • GoatforceGoatforce Registered Users Posts: 3,602
    Ares354 said:

    Goatforce said:

    Ares354 said:

    CA lost money, that all.


    Once in UK muslim will say game are bad, and their God dont support it, will they stop making games as well?. Because not doing Araby for sake of no hurting anyone sound just the same.

    Do you have an ounce of proof that "offensiveness" is the reason Araby hasn't been done? To my knowledge there is no evidence for this claim.
    Yes because big company will tell. Ofc making game that will offend big group of people is hard choice. How many **** attacked Witcher 3 because it lack black people in word >? do you need any proofs ? Making Araby faction, that is based on in some % Araby mytology can be problematic, and can harm people who are very religious. CA and Sega are word wide company, they wont take that kind of attack with no losees, both in money and PR.
    Okay, so you don't understand what proof is. Saying some idiots attacked Witcher 3 over diversity, and making vague claims about CA and Sega not wanting to offend is not evidence of CA not wanting to include Araby for political reasons at all. It is just pretty weak conjecture for a completely baseless claim.

    In fact your point on the Witcher goes against your claim, as all the human factions in game are "white Europeans", so by the "Witcher got attacked for lacking diversity" argument, CA should be attempting to include Araby for a more diverse roster (especially since CA would have a fair amount of room to adapt things and could remove or tone down what they fear would cause a backlash).
  • RazmirthRazmirth Registered Users Posts: 2,193
    edited September 2019
    RikRiorik said:

    Razmirth said:

    Personally I don’t care if Araby makes it in or not. There’s still a lot of other content I’d like to see make it in game before them anyway. Grom and eltharion, malus darkblade, thorek ironbrow maybe, boris toddbringer, wood elf lords like Ariel or sisters of twilight, taurox the brass bull....list goes on.

    And shadowblade as legendary hero for dark elves would be a nice addition as well!

    So while it’s a shame Araby is all but gone, there’s plenty of other great DLC that will/could come in future.

    I don't get it when people would rather see a few Legendary Lords, some mechanics and a few more units rather than an entirely new race. I've played many hours with all races, it's not like a new lord and some new unit is going to entirely reinvigorate my interest (except in perhaps the absolute rarest of cases).

    Now that there are 4+ lords to choose from amongst all of the new races and only the riff raff of units missing how can a lord pack ever hold the same levels of interest as an entirely new race?

    Baffling stuff.
    I don’t know why it’s baffling at all.

    Araby was a faction that wasn’t barely supported and exists today as an afterthought. Vampire coast was similar true, and they were a fun addition to the game. More factions are great and all. I’m not against more factions.

    That said, vampire coast while neat, is also to me, one of the most boring army lists in the entire game. Half of the list is alll zombies with variations of pistols/guns. The other half is pretty cool as I like their mosnter units, but even their artillery is just run of the mill except big Bess of course.

    It’s just I’d rather see established lords, heroes and races make it into the game before obscure ones. Especially old world factions that are missing several lords and units like wood elves/greenskins.

    Please bear in mind I probably don’t play as much as others do. Many of you have thousands of hours invested. I think I have 400-500 hours across both tww1 and 2 over a 3 year period. So for me, there’s a lot of content I have yet to try out.

    Also, my favourite faction is coming in game 3 (chaos dwarfs). So it’s not against logic to say that I prefer to see other content come before Araby, an obscure faction that hasn’t been supported since warnaster in 2007, and never saw a WHF table top release.
  • Ares354Ares354 Registered Users Posts: 2,565
    Goatforce said:

    Ares354 said:

    Goatforce said:

    Ares354 said:

    CA lost money, that all.


    Once in UK muslim will say game are bad, and their God dont support it, will they stop making games as well?. Because not doing Araby for sake of no hurting anyone sound just the same.

    Do you have an ounce of proof that "offensiveness" is the reason Araby hasn't been done? To my knowledge there is no evidence for this claim.
    Yes because big company will tell. Ofc making game that will offend big group of people is hard choice. How many **** attacked Witcher 3 because it lack black people in word >? do you need any proofs ? Making Araby faction, that is based on in some % Araby mytology can be problematic, and can harm people who are very religious. CA and Sega are word wide company, they wont take that kind of attack with no losees, both in money and PR.
    Okay, so you don't understand what proof is. Saying some idiots attacked Witcher 3 over diversity, and making vague claims about CA and Sega not wanting to offend is not evidence of CA not wanting to include Araby for political reasons at all. It is just pretty weak conjecture for a completely baseless claim.

    In fact your point on the Witcher goes against your claim, as all the human factions in game are "white Europeans", so by the "Witcher got attacked for lacking diversity" argument, CA should be attempting to include Araby for a more diverse roster (especially since CA would have a fair amount of room to adapt things and could remove or tone down what they fear would cause a backlash).
    Its not about if Witcher 3 made white cast only, because netflix didint make white cast only, THEY are afraid of backlash. Bam.

    Its point Witcher 3 was attack, because of lack of black people in game. ITs happen, not matter what kind of harm they done or not.

    And Araby can offend many people if inclued. And I dont talk about normal people, but very religious and conservative one.

    An d you cant say CA wont make money on that race its bs. Race is in high demand
  • GoatforceGoatforce Registered Users Posts: 3,602
    Ares354 said:

    Goatforce said:

    Ares354 said:

    Goatforce said:

    Ares354 said:

    CA lost money, that all.


    Once in UK muslim will say game are bad, and their God dont support it, will they stop making games as well?. Because not doing Araby for sake of no hurting anyone sound just the same.

    Do you have an ounce of proof that "offensiveness" is the reason Araby hasn't been done? To my knowledge there is no evidence for this claim.
    Yes because big company will tell. Ofc making game that will offend big group of people is hard choice. How many **** attacked Witcher 3 because it lack black people in word >? do you need any proofs ? Making Araby faction, that is based on in some % Araby mytology can be problematic, and can harm people who are very religious. CA and Sega are word wide company, they wont take that kind of attack with no losees, both in money and PR.
    Okay, so you don't understand what proof is. Saying some idiots attacked Witcher 3 over diversity, and making vague claims about CA and Sega not wanting to offend is not evidence of CA not wanting to include Araby for political reasons at all. It is just pretty weak conjecture for a completely baseless claim.

    In fact your point on the Witcher goes against your claim, as all the human factions in game are "white Europeans", so by the "Witcher got attacked for lacking diversity" argument, CA should be attempting to include Araby for a more diverse roster (especially since CA would have a fair amount of room to adapt things and could remove or tone down what they fear would cause a backlash).
    Its not about if Witcher 3 made white cast only, because netflix didint make white cast only, THEY are afraid of backlash. Bam.

    Its point Witcher 3 was attack, because of lack of black people in game. ITs happen, not matter what kind of harm they done or not.

    And Araby can offend many people if inclued. And I dont talk about normal people, but very religious and conservative one.

    An d you cant say CA wont make money on that race its bs. Race is in high demand
    I was talking about the Witcher 3, not Netflix's Witcher. My point would have made no sense if I was talking about Netflix's adaptation so I have no clue why you thought that is what I was talking about.

    Saying some people would be offended over Araby is not proof that CA is not including Araby because of fear of offence. That is a completely illogical non-argument, without proof there is absolutely no reason to connect those 2 things.
  • Ares354Ares354 Registered Users Posts: 2,565
    Goatforce said:

    Ares354 said:

    Goatforce said:

    Ares354 said:

    Goatforce said:

    Ares354 said:

    CA lost money, that all.


    Once in UK muslim will say game are bad, and their God dont support it, will they stop making games as well?. Because not doing Araby for sake of no hurting anyone sound just the same.

    Do you have an ounce of proof that "offensiveness" is the reason Araby hasn't been done? To my knowledge there is no evidence for this claim.
    Yes because big company will tell. Ofc making game that will offend big group of people is hard choice. How many **** attacked Witcher 3 because it lack black people in word >? do you need any proofs ? Making Araby faction, that is based on in some % Araby mytology can be problematic, and can harm people who are very religious. CA and Sega are word wide company, they wont take that kind of attack with no losees, both in money and PR.
    Okay, so you don't understand what proof is. Saying some idiots attacked Witcher 3 over diversity, and making vague claims about CA and Sega not wanting to offend is not evidence of CA not wanting to include Araby for political reasons at all. It is just pretty weak conjecture for a completely baseless claim.

    In fact your point on the Witcher goes against your claim, as all the human factions in game are "white Europeans", so by the "Witcher got attacked for lacking diversity" argument, CA should be attempting to include Araby for a more diverse roster (especially since CA would have a fair amount of room to adapt things and could remove or tone down what they fear would cause a backlash).
    Its not about if Witcher 3 made white cast only, because netflix didint make white cast only, THEY are afraid of backlash. Bam.

    Its point Witcher 3 was attack, because of lack of black people in game. ITs happen, not matter what kind of harm they done or not.

    And Araby can offend many people if inclued. And I dont talk about normal people, but very religious and conservative one.

    An d you cant say CA wont make money on that race its bs. Race is in high demand
    I was talking about the Witcher 3, not Netflix's Witcher. My point would have made no sense if I was talking about Netflix's adaptation so I have no clue why you thought that is what I was talking about.

    Saying some people would be offended over Araby is not proof that CA is not including Araby because of fear of offence. That is a completely illogical non-argument, without proof there is absolutely no reason to connect those 2 things.
    Because if game, Witcher 3 was attack because of lack of black people, Netflix cant do the same, because they will lose money and will be attacked by some people.

    And those two things lead to this game. Araby is like barrel full of tnt. Muslims are people who can be offended by anything really, and CA wont risk it, of GW, that all.

    You need proof, say too all people who where killed in charlie hebdo. Muslin cant take a joke, and are offended way easier then all other folks.
  • Lord of CinderLord of Cinder Registered Users Posts: 324
    Just wanted to post once more before the thread is closed.
  • Xenos7Xenos7 Registered Users Posts: 5,239
    It's marketing speech. It means 99% never.
  • Xenos7Xenos7 Registered Users Posts: 5,239
    Ares354 said:

    neodeinos said:

    Ares354 said:

    Ares354 said:

    Goatforce said:

    Ares354 said:

    CA lost money, that all.


    Once in UK muslim will say game are bad, and their God dont support it, will they stop making games as well?. Because not doing Araby for sake of no hurting anyone sound just the same.

    Do you have an ounce of proof that "offensiveness" is the reason Araby hasn't been done? To my knowledge there is no evidence for this claim.
    Yes because big company will tell. Ofc making game that will offend big group of people is hard choice. How many idiots attacked Witcher 3 because it lack black people in world >? do you need any more proofs ? Making Araby faction, that is based on % of Arabic, easter mytology can be problematic, and can harm people who are very religious. CA and Sega are world wide company, they wont take that kind of attack with no losees, both in money and PR.
    Then why Skaven exist... their backstory is literally WW2 fascist Italy. Ah yes. Not Human.
    Because most Europe dont have problem with it, but same cant be said about easter, very religious nation, who cant even take a joke. Charlie Hebdo ring a bell ?
    Holy **** I can't believe you brought Charlie Hebdo to this. This is getting so freaking stupid, keep ridiculising yourself bro.
    Why not. They where killed because of some people where offended. This show, that some people from some cultures, cant really take jokes.
    Please stop, this is getting ridiculous. 1) Because ten people don't represent 2 billions Muslims and 2) Because nothing GW ever said about Araby was offensive on CH level.
  • GoatforceGoatforce Registered Users Posts: 3,602
    Ares354 said:

    Goatforce said:

    Ares354 said:

    Goatforce said:

    Ares354 said:

    Goatforce said:

    Ares354 said:

    CA lost money, that all.


    Once in UK muslim will say game are bad, and their God dont support it, will they stop making games as well?. Because not doing Araby for sake of no hurting anyone sound just the same.

    Do you have an ounce of proof that "offensiveness" is the reason Araby hasn't been done? To my knowledge there is no evidence for this claim.
    Yes because big company will tell. Ofc making game that will offend big group of people is hard choice. How many **** attacked Witcher 3 because it lack black people in word >? do you need any proofs ? Making Araby faction, that is based on in some % Araby mytology can be problematic, and can harm people who are very religious. CA and Sega are word wide company, they wont take that kind of attack with no losees, both in money and PR.
    Okay, so you don't understand what proof is. Saying some idiots attacked Witcher 3 over diversity, and making vague claims about CA and Sega not wanting to offend is not evidence of CA not wanting to include Araby for political reasons at all. It is just pretty weak conjecture for a completely baseless claim.

    In fact your point on the Witcher goes against your claim, as all the human factions in game are "white Europeans", so by the "Witcher got attacked for lacking diversity" argument, CA should be attempting to include Araby for a more diverse roster (especially since CA would have a fair amount of room to adapt things and could remove or tone down what they fear would cause a backlash).
    Its not about if Witcher 3 made white cast only, because netflix didint make white cast only, THEY are afraid of backlash. Bam.

    Its point Witcher 3 was attack, because of lack of black people in game. ITs happen, not matter what kind of harm they done or not.

    And Araby can offend many people if inclued. And I dont talk about normal people, but very religious and conservative one.

    An d you cant say CA wont make money on that race its bs. Race is in high demand
    I was talking about the Witcher 3, not Netflix's Witcher. My point would have made no sense if I was talking about Netflix's adaptation so I have no clue why you thought that is what I was talking about.

    Saying some people would be offended over Araby is not proof that CA is not including Araby because of fear of offence. That is a completely illogical non-argument, without proof there is absolutely no reason to connect those 2 things.
    Because if game, Witcher 3 was attack because of lack of black people, Netflix cant do the same, because they will lose money and will be attacked by some people.

    And those two things lead to this game. Araby is like barrel full of tnt. Muslims are people who can be offended by anything really, and CA wont risk it, of GW, that all.

    You need proof, say too all people who where killed in charlie hebdo. Muslin cant take a joke, and are offended way easier then all other folks.
    The Witcher 3 was a huge commercial success, saying that CA will do something because of the tiny group of idiots who attacked the huge commercial success for stupid reasons is utter nonsense. Are you trolling because I can't see how anyone can actually think that a benchmark in gaming and one of the industries greatest success stories like Witcher 3 would inspire fear of offending people due to a small group of idiots that gamers don't care about getting offended.

    So show me the bodycount of Call of Duty, or Counterstrike? Could it be there isn't one? What about 24? No?
  • Bonutz619Bonutz619 Registered Users Posts: 1,450
    Allright, this thread is completely derailing now to an argument about what’s racist and what isn’t. Give it a rest.

    To your point, OP. I think this is reaching. Araby is dead and CA have made that clear. They phrased it in a way that still kind of leaves the door open for Araby but that couldn’t be further from the truth. It’s just a nice, PR way of saying that Araby is dead and buried. I’d move on from it.

    On the bright side, DoW got a huge increase in their likelihood for the preorder.
  • dge1dge1 Moderator Arkansas, USARegistered Users, Moderators, Knights Posts: 19,154
    Deleted a large number of posts, but have decided to close the thread. It's not going anywhere useful.
    "The two most common things in the universe are Hydrogen and Stupidity." - Harlan Ellison
    "The right to be heard does not automatically include the right to be taken seriously." - Hubert H. Humphrey
    "Never argue with an idiot. They will only bring you down to their level and beat you with experience.” - George Carlin
  • Ares354Ares354 Registered Users Posts: 2,565
    Xenos7 said:

    Ares354 said:

    neodeinos said:

    Ares354 said:

    Ares354 said:

    Goatforce said:

    Ares354 said:

    CA lost money, that all.


    Once in UK muslim will say game are bad, and their God dont support it, will they stop making games as well?. Because not doing Araby for sake of no hurting anyone sound just the same.

    Do you have an ounce of proof that "offensiveness" is the reason Araby hasn't been done? To my knowledge there is no evidence for this claim.
    Yes because big company will tell. Ofc making game that will offend big group of people is hard choice. How many idiots attacked Witcher 3 because it lack black people in world >? do you need any more proofs ? Making Araby faction, that is based on % of Arabic, easter mytology can be problematic, and can harm people who are very religious. CA and Sega are world wide company, they wont take that kind of attack with no losees, both in money and PR.
    Then why Skaven exist... their backstory is literally WW2 fascist Italy. Ah yes. Not Human.
    Because most Europe dont have problem with it, but same cant be said about easter, very religious nation, who cant even take a joke. Charlie Hebdo ring a bell ?
    Holy **** I can't believe you brought Charlie Hebdo to this. This is getting so freaking stupid, keep ridiculising yourself bro.
    Why not. They where killed because of some people where offended. This show, that some people from some cultures, cant really take jokes.
    Please stop, this is getting ridiculous. 1) Because ten people don't represent 2 billions Muslims and 2) Because nothing GW ever said about Araby was offensive on CH level.
    There can be even 6 bilions of muslim. They are most aggresive religion out there, and their people cant take joke, or force their law in your county.
  • RikRiorikRikRiorik Registered Users Posts: 7,541
    Razmirth said:

    RikRiorik said:

    Razmirth said:

    Personally I don’t care if Araby makes it in or not. There’s still a lot of other content I’d like to see make it in game before them anyway. Grom and eltharion, malus darkblade, thorek ironbrow maybe, boris toddbringer, wood elf lords like Ariel or sisters of twilight, taurox the brass bull....list goes on.

    And shadowblade as legendary hero for dark elves would be a nice addition as well!

    So while it’s a shame Araby is all but gone, there’s plenty of other great DLC that will/could come in future.

    I don't get it when people would rather see a few Legendary Lords, some mechanics and a few more units rather than an entirely new race. I've played many hours with all races, it's not like a new lord and some new unit is going to entirely reinvigorate my interest (except in perhaps the absolute rarest of cases).

    Now that there are 4+ lords to choose from amongst all of the new races and only the riff raff of units missing how can a lord pack ever hold the same levels of interest as an entirely new race?

    Baffling stuff.
    I don’t know why it’s baffling at all.

    Araby was a faction that wasn’t barely supported and exists today as an afterthought. Vampire coast was similar true, and they were a fun addition to the game. More factions are great and all. I’m not against more factions.

    That said, vampire coast while neat, is also to me, one of the most boring army lists in the entire game. Half of the list is alll zombies with variations of pistols/guns. The other half is pretty cool as I like their mosnter units, but even their artillery is just run of the mill except big Bess of course.

    It’s just I’d rather see established lords, heroes and races make it into the game before obscure ones. Especially old world factions that are missing several lords and units like wood elves/greenskins.

    Please bear in mind I probably don’t play as much as others do. Many of you have thousands of hours invested. I think I have 400-500 hours across both tww1 and 2 over a 3 year period. So for me, there’s a lot of content I have yet to try out.

    Also, my favourite faction is coming in game 3 (chaos dwarfs). So it’s not against logic to say that I prefer to see other content come before Araby, an obscure faction that hasn’t been supported since warnaster in 2007, and never saw a WHF table top release.
    The last bit is like wanting to see Chaos Dwarfs before Norsca even though Norsca fit perfectly in game 1 and Chaos Dwarfs didn't. Much the same holds true for now with Araby. And for races that are already in game and thus bound to recieve goodies along the way it just doesn't feel as interesting to get them in the here and now.

    I do agree that the army roster isn't that interesting for the Vampire Coast. But that's my subjective view. I just can't get into digging them. But objectively I do think they have some very nice elements and so I don't mind their inclusion. Especially as enemies I think they are okay.

    But you do you friend. We're all different :smile: .
    Lord of the Undermountain and your friendly neighbourhood giant (Dwarf)
    Favourite campaigns: Clan Angrund, Followers of Nagash and the new Huntsmarshall’s Expedition
  • NyxilisNyxilis Registered Users Posts: 3,404
    Eh, no plan for the preorder yet, no pla for Araby yet. Plans can change right?

    If you dont think so then you better get ready for some chaos game 3.
  • RikRiorikRikRiorik Registered Users Posts: 7,541
    Nyxilis said:

    Eh, no plan for the preorder yet, no pla for Araby yet. Plans can change right?

    If you dont think so then you better get ready for some chaos game 3.

    I think most of us have braced for impact though.
    Lord of the Undermountain and your friendly neighbourhood giant (Dwarf)
    Favourite campaigns: Clan Angrund, Followers of Nagash and the new Huntsmarshall’s Expedition
  • TD2013TD2013 Registered Users Posts: 41
    The lack of Araby in game 2 would not hurt so much if it wasn't for the fact that the Two new dlc armies we did get were both Undead factions, which is very one sided in my opinion. Some of us have very serious Undead fatigue in games and I personally feel the need to scream if I see another Undead announcement. These are so overused.

    What I preferred was at least *one* normal, human culture pack. Be it Kislev (though they look really silly) or Araby. And Araby at least had it's entire region depicted on the map, so not adding them feels weird. But again it would not hurt so much if what we did get wasnt Undead spam of two factions.

    To repeat. Some of us have very serious Undead fatigue. I'm tired of skellies and zombies.

    Even Sartosa as a Human pirate faction would have been a relief.

    I still feel that Araby is a great oportunity to expose a western audience to Middle eastern mythology and culture. Aladin sells billions, and no one is complaining about that movie in the context complaints are feared by this community.

    And on top of that Game3 will likely be nothing but demons and devils, which pretty much makes my eyes roll. I'd prefer some human factions and not just monsters and undead only.
  • NyxilisNyxilis Registered Users Posts: 3,404
    RikRiorik said:

    Nyxilis said:

    Eh, no plan for the preorder yet, no pla for Araby yet. Plans can change right?

    If you dont think so then you better get ready for some chaos game 3.

    I think most of us have braced for impact though.
    I have now and always only expected main book factions. When I get something like Norsca or Vampire Coast great. Hoped for Araby and the like but yeah always kept the reservation it won't happen.
  • AmonkhetAmonkhet Registered Users Posts: 1,754
    Ares354 said:

    Xenos7 said:

    Ares354 said:

    neodeinos said:

    Ares354 said:

    Ares354 said:

    Goatforce said:

    Ares354 said:

    CA lost money, that all.


    Once in UK muslim will say game are bad, and their God dont support it, will they stop making games as well?. Because not doing Araby for sake of no hurting anyone sound just the same.

    Do you have an ounce of proof that "offensiveness" is the reason Araby hasn't been done? To my knowledge there is no evidence for this claim.
    Yes because big company will tell. Ofc making game that will offend big group of people is hard choice. How many idiots attacked Witcher 3 because it lack black people in world >? do you need any more proofs ? Making Araby faction, that is based on % of Arabic, easter mytology can be problematic, and can harm people who are very religious. CA and Sega are world wide company, they wont take that kind of attack with no losees, both in money and PR.
    Then why Skaven exist... their backstory is literally WW2 fascist Italy. Ah yes. Not Human.
    Because most Europe dont have problem with it, but same cant be said about easter, very religious nation, who cant even take a joke. Charlie Hebdo ring a bell ?
    Holy **** I can't believe you brought Charlie Hebdo to this. This is getting so freaking stupid, keep ridiculising yourself bro.
    Why not. They where killed because of some people where offended. This show, that some people from some cultures, cant really take jokes.
    Please stop, this is getting ridiculous. 1) Because ten people don't represent 2 billions Muslims and 2) Because nothing GW ever said about Araby was offensive on CH level.
    There can be even 6 bilions of muslim. They are most aggresive religion out there, and their people cant take joke, or force their law in your county.
    You are really racist.
  • RazmirthRazmirth Registered Users Posts: 2,193
    edited September 2019
    RikRiorik said:

    Razmirth said:

    RikRiorik said:

    Razmirth said:

    Personally I don’t care if Araby makes it in or not. There’s still a lot of other content I’d like to see make it in game before them anyway. Grom and eltharion, malus darkblade, thorek ironbrow maybe, boris toddbringer, wood elf lords like Ariel or sisters of twilight, taurox the brass bull....list goes on.

    And shadowblade as legendary hero for dark elves would be a nice addition as well!

    So while it’s a shame Araby is all but gone, there’s plenty of other great DLC that will/could come in future.

    I don't get it when people would rather see a few Legendary Lords, some mechanics and a few more units rather than an entirely new race. I've played many hours with all races, it's not like a new lord and some new unit is going to entirely reinvigorate my interest (except in perhaps the absolute rarest of cases).

    Now that there are 4+ lords to choose from amongst all of the new races and only the riff raff of units missing how can a lord pack ever hold the same levels of interest as an entirely new race?

    Baffling stuff.
    I don’t know why it’s baffling at all.

    Araby was a faction that wasn’t barely supported and exists today as an afterthought. Vampire coast was similar true, and they were a fun addition to the game. More factions are great and all. I’m not against more factions.

    That said, vampire coast while neat, is also to me, one of the most boring army lists in the entire game. Half of the list is alll zombies with variations of pistols/guns. The other half is pretty cool as I like their mosnter units, but even their artillery is just run of the mill except big Bess of course.

    It’s just I’d rather see established lords, heroes and races make it into the game before obscure ones. Especially old world factions that are missing several lords and units like wood elves/greenskins.

    Please bear in mind I probably don’t play as much as others do. Many of you have thousands of hours invested. I think I have 400-500 hours across both tww1 and 2 over a 3 year period. So for me, there’s a lot of content I have yet to try out.

    Also, my favourite faction is coming in game 3 (chaos dwarfs). So it’s not against logic to say that I prefer to see other content come before Araby, an obscure faction that hasn’t been supported since warnaster in 2007, and never saw a WHF table top release.
    The last bit is like wanting to see Chaos Dwarfs before Norsca even though Norsca fit perfectly in game 1 and Chaos Dwarfs didn't. Much the same holds true for now with Araby. And for races that are already in game and thus bound to recieve goodies along the way it just doesn't feel as interesting to get them in the here and now.

    I do agree that the army roster isn't that interesting for the Vampire Coast. But that's my subjective view. I just can't get into digging them. But objectively I do think they have some very nice elements and so I don't mind their inclusion. Especially as enemies I think they are okay.

    But you do you friend. We're all different :smile: .
    Wel the point I was trying to make with Chaos dwarfs is until they finish game 3, i am not interested in seeing an obscure faction over that.

    I see what you’re saying tho. If Araby is a game 2 faction why not just release them before game 3. Which would be fine. But yeah, I still enjoy to see other lords/existing factions get fixed up and fleshed out.

    The thing is....When I first heard about Araby, I thought it could be a pretty cool DLC. But the more I thought about it, the more I felt it had a chance to be....misinterpreted... If you catch my meaning. I just read in this thread that others have expressed concerns with this same issue and have been jumped on and called ignorant and small minded for even suggesting this, so I just deleted my original comment to not get the same backlash. Not interested in creating more controversy.

    That said I have every confidence CA Would do fine with Araby in the end. I’m sure most of us would have been impressed by it! I do also agree there are some great parts of vampire coast as well. I’m sure Araby would have been just as good in some areas as wel.
    Post edited by Razmirth on
  • NeoYasNeoYas Registered Users Posts: 628
    edited September 2019
    Ares354 said:

    Goatforce said:

    Ares354 said:

    Goatforce said:

    Ares354 said:

    Goatforce said:

    Ares354 said:

    CA lost money, that all.


    Once in UK muslim will say game are bad, and their God dont support it, will they stop making games as well?. Because not doing Araby for sake of no hurting anyone sound just the same.

    Do you have an ounce of proof that "offensiveness" is the reason Araby hasn't been done? To my knowledge there is no evidence for this claim.
    Yes because big company will tell. Ofc making game that will offend big group of people is hard choice. How many **** attacked Witcher 3 because it lack black people in word >? do you need any proofs ? Making Araby faction, that is based on in some % Araby mytology can be problematic, and can harm people who are very religious. CA and Sega are word wide company, they wont take that kind of attack with no losees, both in money and PR.
    Okay, so you don't understand what proof is. Saying some idiots attacked Witcher 3 over diversity, and making vague claims about CA and Sega not wanting to offend is not evidence of CA not wanting to include Araby for political reasons at all. It is just pretty weak conjecture for a completely baseless claim.

    In fact your point on the Witcher goes against your claim, as all the human factions in game are "white Europeans", so by the "Witcher got attacked for lacking diversity" argument, CA should be attempting to include Araby for a more diverse roster (especially since CA would have a fair amount of room to adapt things and could remove or tone down what they fear would cause a backlash).
    Its not about if Witcher 3 made white cast only, because netflix didint make white cast only, THEY are afraid of backlash. Bam.

    Its point Witcher 3 was attack, because of lack of black people in game. ITs happen, not matter what kind of harm they done or not.

    And Araby can offend many people if inclued. And I dont talk about normal people, but very religious and conservative one.

    An d you cant say CA wont make money on that race its bs. Race is in high demand
    I was talking about the Witcher 3, not Netflix's Witcher. My point would have made no sense if I was talking about Netflix's adaptation so I have no clue why you thought that is what I was talking about.

    Saying some people would be offended over Araby is not proof that CA is not including Araby because of fear of offence. That is a completely illogical non-argument, without proof there is absolutely no reason to connect those 2 things.
    Because if game, Witcher 3 was attack because of lack of black people, Netflix cant do the same, because they will lose money and will be attacked by some people.

    And those two things lead to this game. Araby is like barrel full of tnt. Muslims are people who can be offended by anything really, and CA wont risk it, of GW, that all.

    You need proof, say too all people who where killed in charlie hebdo. Muslin cant take a joke, and are offended way easier then all other folks.
    Excuse me but you are mixing two distinct things, Charlie-Hebdo use to make fun of religion, about something real, however Araby is just fantasy, without making fun of anybody nor any religion either.


  • duglandtotoduglandtoto Registered Users Posts: 168
    Amonkhet said:

    Ares354 said:

    Xenos7 said:

    Ares354 said:

    neodeinos said:

    Ares354 said:

    Ares354 said:

    Goatforce said:

    Ares354 said:

    CA lost money, that all.


    Once in UK muslim will say game are bad, and their God dont support it, will they stop making games as well?. Because not doing Araby for sake of no hurting anyone sound just the same.

    Do you have an ounce of proof that "offensiveness" is the reason Araby hasn't been done? To my knowledge there is no evidence for this claim.
    Yes because big company will tell. Ofc making game that will offend big group of people is hard choice. How many idiots attacked Witcher 3 because it lack black people in world >? do you need any more proofs ? Making Araby faction, that is based on % of Arabic, easter mytology can be problematic, and can harm people who are very religious. CA and Sega are world wide company, they wont take that kind of attack with no losees, both in money and PR.
    Then why Skaven exist... their backstory is literally WW2 fascist Italy. Ah yes. Not Human.
    Because most Europe dont have problem with it, but same cant be said about easter, very religious nation, who cant even take a joke. Charlie Hebdo ring a bell ?
    Holy **** I can't believe you brought Charlie Hebdo to this. This is getting so freaking stupid, keep ridiculising yourself bro.
    Why not. They where killed because of some people where offended. This show, that some people from some cultures, cant really take jokes.
    Please stop, this is getting ridiculous. 1) Because ten people don't represent 2 billions Muslims and 2) Because nothing GW ever said about Araby was offensive on CH level.
    There can be even 6 bilions of muslim. They are most aggresive religion out there, and their people cant take joke, or force their law in your county.
    You are really racist.
    Sorry but racism is about races, not religions. It is bad to hate someone for his skin colour but you are perfectly free to be in huge disagreement with a sect. ( Or a religion)
  • FinishingLastFinishingLast Registered Users Posts: 4,151

    Amonkhet said:

    Ares354 said:

    Xenos7 said:

    Ares354 said:

    neodeinos said:

    Ares354 said:

    Ares354 said:

    Goatforce said:

    Ares354 said:

    CA lost money, that all.


    Once in UK muslim will say game are bad, and their God dont support it, will they stop making games as well?. Because not doing Araby for sake of no hurting anyone sound just the same.

    Do you have an ounce of proof that "offensiveness" is the reason Araby hasn't been done? To my knowledge there is no evidence for this claim.
    Yes because big company will tell. Ofc making game that will offend big group of people is hard choice. How many idiots attacked Witcher 3 because it lack black people in world >? do you need any more proofs ? Making Araby faction, that is based on % of Arabic, easter mytology can be problematic, and can harm people who are very religious. CA and Sega are world wide company, they wont take that kind of attack with no losees, both in money and PR.
    Then why Skaven exist... their backstory is literally WW2 fascist Italy. Ah yes. Not Human.
    Because most Europe dont have problem with it, but same cant be said about easter, very religious nation, who cant even take a joke. Charlie Hebdo ring a bell ?
    Holy **** I can't believe you brought Charlie Hebdo to this. This is getting so freaking stupid, keep ridiculising yourself bro.
    Why not. They where killed because of some people where offended. This show, that some people from some cultures, cant really take jokes.
    Please stop, this is getting ridiculous. 1) Because ten people don't represent 2 billions Muslims and 2) Because nothing GW ever said about Araby was offensive on CH level.
    There can be even 6 bilions of muslim. They are most aggresive religion out there, and their people cant take joke, or force their law in your county.
    You are really racist.
    Sorry but racism is about races, not religions. It is bad to hate someone for his skin colour but you are perfectly free to be in huge disagreement with a sect. ( Or a religion)
    Judging entire groups of people based on the actions of a few or tired stereotypes is still bigotry. Just because it isn't racism doesn't make it okay.
    Later
  • duglandtotoduglandtoto Registered Users Posts: 168

    Amonkhet said:

    Ares354 said:

    Xenos7 said:

    Ares354 said:

    neodeinos said:

    Ares354 said:

    Ares354 said:

    Goatforce said:

    Ares354 said:

    CA lost money, that all.


    Once in UK muslim will say game are bad, and their God dont support it, will they stop making games as well?. Because not doing Araby for sake of no hurting anyone sound just the same.

    Do you have an ounce of proof that "offensiveness" is the reason Araby hasn't been done? To my knowledge there is no evidence for this claim.
    Yes because big company will tell. Ofc making game that will offend big group of people is hard choice. How many idiots attacked Witcher 3 because it lack black people in world >? do you need any more proofs ? Making Araby faction, that is based on % of Arabic, easter mytology can be problematic, and can harm people who are very religious. CA and Sega are world wide company, they wont take that kind of attack with no losees, both in money and PR.
    Then why Skaven exist... their backstory is literally WW2 fascist Italy. Ah yes. Not Human.
    Because most Europe dont have problem with it, but same cant be said about easter, very religious nation, who cant even take a joke. Charlie Hebdo ring a bell ?
    Holy **** I can't believe you brought Charlie Hebdo to this. This is getting so freaking stupid, keep ridiculising yourself bro.
    Why not. They where killed because of some people where offended. This show, that some people from some cultures, cant really take jokes.
    Please stop, this is getting ridiculous. 1) Because ten people don't represent 2 billions Muslims and 2) Because nothing GW ever said about Araby was offensive on CH level.
    There can be even 6 bilions of muslim. They are most aggresive religion out there, and their people cant take joke, or force their law in your county.
    You are really racist.
    Sorry but racism is about races, not religions. It is bad to hate someone for his skin colour but you are perfectly free to be in huge disagreement with a sect. ( Or a religion)
    Judging entire groups of people based on the actions of a few or tired stereotypes is still bigotry. Just because it isn't racism doesn't make it okay.
    You are free to choose what you believe in. Islam calls "infidel" whoever doesn't share the same belief. However you are not free to choose your skin colour. In other words, You are perfectly free to judge a religion while you cannot for races. Race has nothing to do with choices. Muslims have decided to follow a religion saying "porc eater must go to hell." So you are free to say that you disagree with Muslims.
Sign In or Register to comment.