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

If you confederate a faction with a positive climate trait you don't have you should gain it.

overtaker40overtaker40 Registered Users Posts: 660
Like if you were playing as empire and confederate TGO you get mountains or HME you gain jungles. Seems logical to me. Don't think it's op and for lore you could argue that as part of the confederation the faction is teaching you it's "ways".
I like all the races. Equally. Wood elves are just the first among equals.

Comments

  • TheShiroOfDaltonTheShiroOfDalton Senior Member Registered Users Posts: 34,001
    No, you should not.

    1.Confedertation is already an OP feature with too little downsides
    2.Climate is a feature that barely matters already
    3.You're subsuming a faction into your own, of course it will lose its special features. You don't gain their special mechanics and bonuses either
  • LordCommanderLordCommander Registered Users Posts: 2,771
    No. Climate is irrelevent as it is (thanks RO haters)
    Observe the power of the edgy internet axegrinders and how quickly some have changed their tune- https://forums.totalwar.com/discussion/300358/what-would-make-you-buy-the-game/p1

    Just as a warning against making predictions- https://forums.totalwar.com/discussion/290416/time-to-admit-there-will-be-no-new-dlc-for-twwh-2#latest

  • ArneSoArneSo Hamburg, Germany Registered Users Posts: 31,430
    The climate system should be removed in general and get replaced with something better.
    Nurgle is love, Nurgle is life
  • ArneSoArneSo Hamburg, Germany Registered Users Posts: 31,430

    No. Climate is irrelevent as it is (thanks RO haters)

    I really hope CA will bring back RO and settlements changing their skins in WH3.
    Nurgle is love, Nurgle is life
  • TsuyaraTsuyara Registered Users Posts: 278
    I think in general there should be some feature-integration. I just feel kind of bad for people who start as Tyrion, who then miss out on Alarielles climate and units, getting basically nothing in return. It pretty much just makes people play the factions that get stronger effects and abandon the rest.
    ArneSo said:

    No. Climate is irrelevent as it is (thanks RO haters)

    I really hope CA will bring back RO and settlements changing their skins in WH3.
    They abandoned it because all the factions made it untenable, by going up really fast as you add them, with 2 factions you need 4 skins, with 3 factions you need 9, with 4 factions you need 16. With our current 11? non-horde factions, it'd be 121 skins.
  • BronzebeardBronzebeard Registered Users Posts: 395
    ArneSo said:

    No. Climate is irrelevent as it is (thanks RO haters)

    I really hope CA will bring back RO and settlements changing their skins in WH3.
    I hope RO dosent come back. It hurt replayability for a faction.
  • ArneSoArneSo Hamburg, Germany Registered Users Posts: 31,430
    Tsuyara said:

    I think in general there should be some feature-integration. I just feel kind of bad for people who start as Tyrion, who then miss out on Alarielles climate and units, getting basically nothing in return. It pretty much just makes people play the factions that get stronger effects and abandon the rest.

    ArneSo said:

    No. Climate is irrelevent as it is (thanks RO haters)

    I really hope CA will bring back RO and settlements changing their skins in WH3.
    They abandoned it because all the factions made it untenable, by going up really fast as you add them, with 2 factions you need 4 skins, with 3 factions you need 9, with 4 factions you need 16. With our current 11? non-horde factions, it'd be 121 skins.
    We don't need new battlemaps if thats your point.

    If you fight a Siege Battle in Chupayotl you only see a normal Naggaoth DE map.
    If you fight a battle in Arnheim you have a basic Ulthuan map.
    If You fight a battle in Scarpels Lair (Khatep) its a basic Nehekara map.

    Sure Cities like Sudenburg, Skeggi and the Crusader Cities have unique battlemaps but they are an exception.

    CA is also already able to change settlement skins later. They did that with Chupayotl, the Black Stone Post and all the TK Cities.
    Nurgle is love, Nurgle is life
  • TsuyaraTsuyara Registered Users Posts: 278
    ArneSo said:

    Tsuyara said:

    I think in general there should be some feature-integration. I just feel kind of bad for people who start as Tyrion, who then miss out on Alarielles climate and units, getting basically nothing in return. It pretty much just makes people play the factions that get stronger effects and abandon the rest.

    ArneSo said:

    No. Climate is irrelevent as it is (thanks RO haters)

    I really hope CA will bring back RO and settlements changing their skins in WH3.
    They abandoned it because all the factions made it untenable, by going up really fast as you add them, with 2 factions you need 4 skins, with 3 factions you need 9, with 4 factions you need 16. With our current 11? non-horde factions, it'd be 121 skins.
    We don't need new battlemaps if thats your point.

    If you fight a Siege Battle in Chupayotl you only see a normal Naggaoth DE map.
    If you fight a battle in Arnheim you have a basic Ulthuan map.
    If You fight a battle in Scarpels Lair (Khatep) its a basic Nehekara map.

    Sure Cities like Sudenburg, Skeggi and the Crusader Cities have unique battlemaps but they are an exception.

    CA is also already able to change settlement skins later. They did that with Chupayotl, the Black Stone Post and all the TK Cities.
    The point is that you need 121 settlement skins for each type.
    Because you'd need:
    Dwarf
    Dwarf occupied by empire
    Dwarf occupied by vampire
    Dwarf occupied by... etc
    Unless you are suggesting they just entirely replace them so if you take karaz-a-karak as empire it'll just turn into altdorf.
  • ArneSoArneSo Hamburg, Germany Registered Users Posts: 31,430
    Tsuyara said:

    ArneSo said:

    Tsuyara said:

    I think in general there should be some feature-integration. I just feel kind of bad for people who start as Tyrion, who then miss out on Alarielles climate and units, getting basically nothing in return. It pretty much just makes people play the factions that get stronger effects and abandon the rest.

    ArneSo said:

    No. Climate is irrelevent as it is (thanks RO haters)

    I really hope CA will bring back RO and settlements changing their skins in WH3.
    They abandoned it because all the factions made it untenable, by going up really fast as you add them, with 2 factions you need 4 skins, with 3 factions you need 9, with 4 factions you need 16. With our current 11? non-horde factions, it'd be 121 skins.
    We don't need new battlemaps if thats your point.

    If you fight a Siege Battle in Chupayotl you only see a normal Naggaoth DE map.
    If you fight a battle in Arnheim you have a basic Ulthuan map.
    If You fight a battle in Scarpels Lair (Khatep) its a basic Nehekara map.

    Sure Cities like Sudenburg, Skeggi and the Crusader Cities have unique battlemaps but they are an exception.

    CA is also already able to change settlement skins later. They did that with Chupayotl, the Black Stone Post and all the TK Cities.
    The point is that you need 121 settlement skins for each type.
    Because you'd need:
    Dwarf
    Dwarf occupied by empire
    Dwarf occupied by vampire
    Dwarf occupied by... etc
    Unless you are suggesting they just entirely replace them so if you take karaz-a-karak as empire it'll just turn into altdorf.
    No you don’t. Just change the skin, period.

    Dwarf Skins should look the same everywhere, doesn’t matter if in Lustria, the old World or Nehekara.
    Nurgle is love, Nurgle is life
  • AkiAmazAkiAmaz Registered Users Posts: 508
    No.

    Why?

    This:

    No, you should not.

    1.Confedertation is already an OP feature with too little downsides
    2.Climate is a feature that barely matters already
    3.You're subsuming a faction into your own, of course it will lose its special features. You don't gain their special mechanics and bonuses either


  • dreagondreagon Senior Member Registered Users Posts: 2,282
    I would like it if would upgrade the suitability by one step.
    "The dog is a peasant and the cat is a gentleman." H.P. Lovecraft
  • IamNotArobotIamNotArobot Registered Users Posts: 5,253
    What is RO?


    Also, some constructions like Dwarf forts, etc can't be built on for example lustria. The soild is different, they would have to design regional buildings for each race, also the occupied skins. A lot of work but hell, isnt that why we work?
  • doclumbagodoclumbago Registered Users Posts: 2,337
    To OP
    Nope. Climate is OK as it is
  • Rasmus242Rasmus242 Registered Users Posts: 671
    Tsuyara said:

    ArneSo said:

    Tsuyara said:

    I think in general there should be some feature-integration. I just feel kind of bad for people who start as Tyrion, who then miss out on Alarielles climate and units, getting basically nothing in return. It pretty much just makes people play the factions that get stronger effects and abandon the rest.

    ArneSo said:

    No. Climate is irrelevent as it is (thanks RO haters)

    I really hope CA will bring back RO and settlements changing their skins in WH3.
    They abandoned it because all the factions made it untenable, by going up really fast as you add them, with 2 factions you need 4 skins, with 3 factions you need 9, with 4 factions you need 16. With our current 11? non-horde factions, it'd be 121 skins.
    We don't need new battlemaps if thats your point.

    If you fight a Siege Battle in Chupayotl you only see a normal Naggaoth DE map.
    If you fight a battle in Arnheim you have a basic Ulthuan map.
    If You fight a battle in Scarpels Lair (Khatep) its a basic Nehekara map.

    Sure Cities like Sudenburg, Skeggi and the Crusader Cities have unique battlemaps but they are an exception.

    CA is also already able to change settlement skins later. They did that with Chupayotl, the Black Stone Post and all the TK Cities.
    The point is that you need 121 settlement skins for each type.
    Because you'd need:
    Dwarf
    Dwarf occupied by empire
    Dwarf occupied by vampire
    Dwarf occupied by... etc
    Unless you are suggesting they just entirely replace them so if you take karaz-a-karak as empire it'll just turn into altdorf.
    Wrong. Depending on how you do it you could easily make it modular so everything occupied by dwarfs use the same elements applied in a different way and so on.
  • TsuyaraTsuyara Registered Users Posts: 278
    Rasmus242 said:

    Tsuyara said:

    ArneSo said:

    Tsuyara said:

    I think in general there should be some feature-integration. I just feel kind of bad for people who start as Tyrion, who then miss out on Alarielles climate and units, getting basically nothing in return. It pretty much just makes people play the factions that get stronger effects and abandon the rest.

    ArneSo said:

    No. Climate is irrelevent as it is (thanks RO haters)

    I really hope CA will bring back RO and settlements changing their skins in WH3.
    They abandoned it because all the factions made it untenable, by going up really fast as you add them, with 2 factions you need 4 skins, with 3 factions you need 9, with 4 factions you need 16. With our current 11? non-horde factions, it'd be 121 skins.
    We don't need new battlemaps if thats your point.

    If you fight a Siege Battle in Chupayotl you only see a normal Naggaoth DE map.
    If you fight a battle in Arnheim you have a basic Ulthuan map.
    If You fight a battle in Scarpels Lair (Khatep) its a basic Nehekara map.

    Sure Cities like Sudenburg, Skeggi and the Crusader Cities have unique battlemaps but they are an exception.

    CA is also already able to change settlement skins later. They did that with Chupayotl, the Black Stone Post and all the TK Cities.
    The point is that you need 121 settlement skins for each type.
    Because you'd need:
    Dwarf
    Dwarf occupied by empire
    Dwarf occupied by vampire
    Dwarf occupied by... etc
    Unless you are suggesting they just entirely replace them so if you take karaz-a-karak as empire it'll just turn into altdorf.
    Wrong. Depending on how you do it you could easily make it modular so everything occupied by dwarfs use the same elements applied in a different way and so on.
    If it was easy, they'd have done it instead of abandoning the mechanic.
  • Ol_NessieOl_Nessie Registered Users Posts: 4,310

    What is RO?


    Also, some constructions like Dwarf forts, etc can't be built on for example lustria. The soild is different, they would have to design regional buildings for each race, also the occupied skins. A lot of work but hell, isnt that why we work?

    Regional Occupation. The system in Warhammer 1 which limited Humans and Vampires to only occupying temperate, open areas and Dwarfs and Greenskins to the Mountains and Badlands.

    I seem to recall that Dwarfs in WH1 had some settlement Skins that were more like towns instead of forts. Besides, if the LM can build the megalithic temple cities in Lustria I'd wager the Dwarfs could build a Karak there as well.
  • DaGangsterDaGangster Junior Member Registered Users Posts: 1,864
    How about end game techs such as Heavy Clothing for empire that makes snowy climates green or Jungle adaptation that does the same thing for jungle climate. Not sure what other examples would fit, but I'm not for everyone getting a way to gain other climates especially the ones that fit the most like chaos being red for most races. Although id wouldn't mind if climate could change based on corruption level, with a high untainted returning it to its original. They might overhaul the system with the next game like they did between 1+2.

    Team Vampire Counts

    "Many players cannot help approaching a game as an optimization puzzle. What gives the most reward for the least risk? What strategy provides the highest chance – or even a guaranteed chance – of success? Given the opportunity, players will optimize the fun out of a game."

    - Soren Johnson
  • TheShiroOfDaltonTheShiroOfDalton Senior Member Registered Users Posts: 34,001
    edited March 2020

    How about end game techs such as Heavy Clothing for empire that makes snowy climates green or Jungle adaptation that does the same thing for jungle climate. Not sure what other examples would fit, but I'm not for everyone getting a way to gain other climates especially the ones that fit the most like chaos being red for most races. Although id wouldn't mind if climate could change based on corruption level, with a high untainted returning it to its original. They might overhaul the system with the next game like they did between 1+2.

    Even if you gave out free parkas and fur coats, people would still not flock to settling in the Antarktis.

    And there's no permanently "untainting" Norsca and other places unless you close the Polar Gates which constantly blow chaos stuff there, so it's completely impossible in other words.
  • overtaker40overtaker40 Registered Users Posts: 660

    How about end game techs such as Heavy Clothing for empire that makes snowy climates green or Jungle adaptation that does the same thing for jungle climate. Not sure what other examples would fit, but I'm not for everyone getting a way to gain other climates especially the ones that fit the most like chaos being red for most races. Although id wouldn't mind if climate could change based on corruption level, with a high untainted returning it to its original. They might overhaul the system with the next game like they did between 1+2.

    Even if you gave out free parkas and fur coats, people would still not flock to settling in the Antarktis.

    And there's no permanently "untainting" Norsca and other places unless you close the Polar Gates which constantly blow chaos stuff there, so it's completely impossible in other words.
    This isn't a good argument against, if the game is still carefull with bonus climates. being taught to live in the mountains by the golden order is not a ridiculous concept and it won't really effect the difficulty of your playthrough. If you can suddenly also occupy mountains late game where it's less difficult than it is frustrating, it would suddenly improve my gameplay experience.

    I mean doesn't everyone lose interest in their campaigns when they snowball and they become frustratingly tedious.
    I like all the races. Equally. Wood elves are just the first among equals.
  • TheShiroOfDaltonTheShiroOfDalton Senior Member Registered Users Posts: 34,001
    No, it would make confederations even more OP, remove the identity of factions and make the lategame even more boring because you could expand even easier.

    Face it, your suggestions would make the game worse.
  • Cadia101Cadia101 Registered Users Posts: 1,400

    How about end game techs such as Heavy Clothing for empire that makes snowy climates green or Jungle adaptation that does the same thing for jungle climate. Not sure what other examples would fit, but I'm not for everyone getting a way to gain other climates especially the ones that fit the most like chaos being red for most races. Although id wouldn't mind if climate could change based on corruption level, with a high untainted returning it to its original. They might overhaul the system with the next game like they did between 1+2.

    Even if you gave out free parkas and fur coats, people would still not flock to settling in the Antarktis.

    And there's no permanently "untainting" Norsca and other places unless you close the Polar Gates which constantly blow chaos stuff there, so it's completely impossible in other words.
    This isn't a good argument against, if the game is still carefull with bonus climates. being taught to live in the mountains by the golden order is not a ridiculous concept and it won't really effect the difficulty of your playthrough. If you can suddenly also occupy mountains late game where it's less difficult than it is frustrating, it would suddenly improve my gameplay experience.

    I mean doesn't everyone lose interest in their campaigns when they snowball and they become frustratingly tedious.
    Would improve mine. I think ca giving mountain climate to Gelt reduce to much the difficulty of is start and make it boring, you don’t have the dilemma to take a city with the wrong terrain or help the dwarves reclaim their hall you just murder the greenskins then the dwarf and you end up with a mountain empire and it just feel wrong and easy.
  • overtaker40overtaker40 Registered Users Posts: 660
    Cadia101 said:

    How about end game techs such as Heavy Clothing for empire that makes snowy climates green or Jungle adaptation that does the same thing for jungle climate. Not sure what other examples would fit, but I'm not for everyone getting a way to gain other climates especially the ones that fit the most like chaos being red for most races. Although id wouldn't mind if climate could change based on corruption level, with a high untainted returning it to its original. They might overhaul the system with the next game like they did between 1+2.

    Even if you gave out free parkas and fur coats, people would still not flock to settling in the Antarktis.

    And there's no permanently "untainting" Norsca and other places unless you close the Polar Gates which constantly blow chaos stuff there, so it's completely impossible in other words.
    This isn't a good argument against, if the game is still carefull with bonus climates. being taught to live in the mountains by the golden order is not a ridiculous concept and it won't really effect the difficulty of your playthrough. If you can suddenly also occupy mountains late game where it's less difficult than it is frustrating, it would suddenly improve my gameplay experience.

    I mean doesn't everyone lose interest in their campaigns when they snowball and they become frustratingly tedious.
    Would improve mine. I think ca giving mountain climate to Gelt reduce to much the difficulty of is start and make it boring, you don’t have the dilemma to take a city with the wrong terrain or help the dwarves reclaim their hall you just murder the greenskins then the dwarf and you end up with a mountain empire and it just feel wrong and easy.
    What if it was locked behind a mission? Say you had to do a quest battle, perhaps help some dwarves and in exchange you gain the mountain positive trait.
    I like all the races. Equally. Wood elves are just the first among equals.
  • TheShiroOfDaltonTheShiroOfDalton Senior Member Registered Users Posts: 34,001

    Cadia101 said:

    How about end game techs such as Heavy Clothing for empire that makes snowy climates green or Jungle adaptation that does the same thing for jungle climate. Not sure what other examples would fit, but I'm not for everyone getting a way to gain other climates especially the ones that fit the most like chaos being red for most races. Although id wouldn't mind if climate could change based on corruption level, with a high untainted returning it to its original. They might overhaul the system with the next game like they did between 1+2.

    Even if you gave out free parkas and fur coats, people would still not flock to settling in the Antarktis.

    And there's no permanently "untainting" Norsca and other places unless you close the Polar Gates which constantly blow chaos stuff there, so it's completely impossible in other words.
    This isn't a good argument against, if the game is still carefull with bonus climates. being taught to live in the mountains by the golden order is not a ridiculous concept and it won't really effect the difficulty of your playthrough. If you can suddenly also occupy mountains late game where it's less difficult than it is frustrating, it would suddenly improve my gameplay experience.

    I mean doesn't everyone lose interest in their campaigns when they snowball and they become frustratingly tedious.
    Would improve mine. I think ca giving mountain climate to Gelt reduce to much the difficulty of is start and make it boring, you don’t have the dilemma to take a city with the wrong terrain or help the dwarves reclaim their hall you just murder the greenskins then the dwarf and you end up with a mountain empire and it just feel wrong and easy.
    What if it was locked behind a mission? Say you had to do a quest battle, perhaps help some dwarves and in exchange you gain the mountain positive trait.
    1.Humans cannot prosper in dank, dark caves. There's eff all some Dwarfs can do about it

    2.Why would Dwarfs make it easier for some Umgis to occupy their Karaks?
  • overtaker40overtaker40 Registered Users Posts: 660
    I don't **** know. Honestly humans can make it work, we have managed to live almost everywhere on earth. I still think factions should have penalties for living in hostile environments but I think adaption should be on the tech tree to some that are less ridiculous. Have you looked at the map as skaven with the climate filter Then compared it to the empire. And I know you will say the skaven can survive anywhere, but other races should have the option to technologically adapt to some places. Even if the research takes ages and is costly.

    I actually like the water mechanic for bretonia in the desert. I think it's far more fun and less frustrating than extra long build times and costs and a **** replenishment rate.
    I like all the races. Equally. Wood elves are just the first among equals.
  • TheShiroOfDaltonTheShiroOfDalton Senior Member Registered Users Posts: 34,001

    I don't **** know. Honestly humans can make it work, we have managed to live almost everywhere on earth. I still think factions should have penalties for living in hostile environments but I think adaption should be on the tech tree to some that are less ridiculous. Have you looked at the map as skaven with the climate filter Then compared it to the empire. And I know you will say the skaven can survive anywhere, but other races should have the option to technologically adapt to some places. Even if the research takes ages and is costly.

    I actually like the water mechanic for bretonia in the desert. I think it's far more fun and less frustrating than extra long build times and costs and a **** replenishment rate.

    Survival =/= prospering. There's a difference between some people managing to live in a hostile environment and having thriving cities there. Greenland has 50 times the size of its parent country Denmark, but Denmark has 100 times as many people living there. Why's that? Because most of Greenland is a frozen wasteland. Yet even that's still better than dank, lightless caves where nothing grows and you can't keep any animals.
Sign In or Register to comment.