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

Considering purchasing 3K - as a Warhammer player

IsrafilIsrafil Registered Users Posts: 59
edited September 2020 in General Discussion
I missed the sale but still thinking about it - so far, my primary TW experience has been with Warhammer, aside from a brief stint with Empire several years ago. The latter didn't go well - to the point I almost didn't try WH (glad I gave it a go regardless).

That being said, despite a less than stellar experience with historical TW, I've recently become interested in the idea of 3K. The aesthetic, the setting, etc are all appealing. I know there can be something of a divide between historical and fantasy but are there any other crossover players (especially since 3K, like Troy, seems to blend history with mythology somewhat) here who can give an opinion on gameplay (that is to say, both battles and campaign)?

Essentially, I enjoy WH - a lot - so is there a good chance I'll enjoy 3K or does it cater to a completely different kind of TW player? Similarly, if they're fairly similar in a sense, should I even bother - seeing as it is $70 plus when you factor in getting at least one DLC (cause let's face it, when a game has multiple DLC packs, it's tough not to get at least one on purchase).

Thoughts?
Follow me on twitter @perchancetogame. I write about our own End Times - or climate change. But End Times sounds cooler.
Post edited by Israfil on

Comments

  • QiangLordQiangLord Registered Users Posts: 67
    edited September 2020
    There are similarities between Warhammer and 3K, but not enough that one makes the other redundant. In fact, that's something unique to Warhammer and 3K as latter-day Total War games. You could reasonably accuse most games in the series of being, essentially, a generic Total War skin pasted over whatever time period, but Warhammer and 3K both bring unique ideas to the table, instead.

    I often think of it this way: what Warhammer did for Total War's battles, 3K did for its campaign map. They're actually great complements to each other, in that way. And with the option to choose between Romance and Records, there's something for everyone when it comes to battles.

    If you're a Warhammer player, you might be quite into the high drama of that universe, too -- in which case, this is a great chance to get into the Romance of the Three Kingdoms, which is a fantastic "franchise" in its own right.
  • RewanRewan Senior Member Registered Users Posts: 4,802
    Okay my honest opinion.

    Right now the game is in a very weird state, it's definitely playable but there is a ton of bugs. Some minors (with UI dun goofin here and there) and some being pretty major (like the treachery bug or the "floor is caltrops" bug)

    As far as the battle gameplay experience goes, it's closer to older Total War than TW:Warhammer for sure, and even then it's kinda stand-off-ish as it relies on a very "streamlined" roster of units. Pretty much imagine TW:Warhammer but only featuring the Empire with all factions sharing the Empire unit roster.
    Some people really disliked the lack of diversity while some people actually liked the harmonized roster (because it leads to a balanced experience) - and some people don't care.
    Right now with the Nanmans released we have a distinct and different culture in the south (which greatly pleased the people wanting diversity at all costs) and they actually do play a bit differently as well. So there's that.

    I took the Empire exemple above because I felt that back in WH1 it was really the faction that played the most like a traditionnal Total War (bar Demigryphs) where you would always have ranged units, a line (usually spearmen or swordsmen) and use hammer and anvil tactic to fight battles. And you don't really have monsters at your disposal.

    The single entity models (the heroes leading your armies in Romance) are in a weird spot in the game. Damaging abilities on heroes are way. too. strong (basically because numbers are too high and damage dealt is actually not spread between models like with auto-attacks). But the auto-attack themselves feel weak : all heroes start the battle mounted on horseback and actually have relatively small hitzones when mounted (except for one or two moves that actually hit a broader area) but if dismounted (thinking you are trading mobility for damage) suddently are heavily gated by matched kills animations (which only target one model, basically wasting both damage AND attack rate stats). This essentially means that there's a giant gap between Heroes with damaging abilities (that can easily rake up in the 1000s of kills with little to no effort / investment ) and heroes who do not.

    And in Records heroes lose most of their identity I feel, they pretty much are all elite cavalry units. Which is good because cavalry is OP but at the same time can be a bit boring because Records do not have skills for the generals.


    Objective-wise all factions had the same objective : which is capture 3 seats of power that spawn during the course of the game and hold 95 counties (including ones held by allies and vassals). However this win-con can feel very boring because of how the map is : with most factions starting roughly in the same areas. (Which can lead to all campaigns unfolding the same way)
    Now the Nanmans actually have a different one (which is just to unite the Nanman tribes and hold 50 counties for at least 20 turns) and they start in a wholly different location so they got that going for them.


    Diplomacy on the other hand is probably one of the best we've had, but the bugs are clearly damaging the experience on that front. Also CA did nerf some things that were abusable lately but it kinda left diplomacy in a "eh" state. (The constant spam of ancillary trade request for 80 gold whereas you would need to spend a thousand for the AI to accept the reversed deal, yeah no thanks)


    Overall, I'm not quite sure if I answer your question. I would tell you to wait for another sale (to give time for CA to try to sort out the spaghetti they have on their hands) and just buy the base game, play it a bit and if you like it, then get the Nanman DLC. As much as I like playing 3K right now I can't recommand the game. And it's a damn shame.
    _________________________________

    My personal collection of hazardous tests and quickfixes (yes this is a link).
    Wondering why you get some traits on your characters this may give you a vague idea

    Balance enthusiast, I like tinkering and messing with stuff and values. Cool heads prevails !
  • LESAMALESAMA Member Registered Users Posts: 2,172
    I played both warhammer and 3k. Although i’m more of a history fan i liked both games. 3k imo is the better one and i’ve even deleted warhammer out of mu library. Can’t get into it anymore as 3k is much more superior on the diplomacy part. No discussion there. Character wise i also think 3k has a better system but that might depend upon your taste.

    Overall i would say wait for the upcoming patch and than give it a go. It’s the best total war currently available imo.
  • EmeraldThanatosEmeraldThanatos Registered Users Posts: 2,906
    Three kingdoms is the best total war game I've played since Shogun 2, and it's definitely worth buying. Serious Trivia did a good guide on what dlcs include and which are worth getting.
    Ranking of all Total War games I've played:
    1. Three kingdoms
    2. Attila
    3. Warhammer (1, 2 & 3)
    4. Medieval 2
    5. Shogun 2
    6. Thrones
    7. Rome 2
    8. Napoleon
    9. Empire


  • IsrafilIsrafil Registered Users Posts: 59
    @Rewan Thanks for the in-depth response - I'll bear it in mind! Waiting may be a good idea - going to watch some more let's plays to see if I get that "must buy" feeling.

    @QiangLord That's a great way of looking at it too. They scratch different itches. The depth in the campaign aspect was definitely a big draw for me, so I wanted to understand whether the battles would be so comparatively uninteresting that it would affect the overall experience.

    @LESAMA Yeah, probably should wait for the patch regardless.
    Follow me on twitter @perchancetogame. I write about our own End Times - or climate change. But End Times sounds cooler.
  • Prkl8rPrkl8r Junior Member Registered Users Posts: 1,080
    3k started kinda meh because all the factions were esentially the exact same and there was very little variety.

    That has been changing with each new content drop though and they have added a lot more unique units and mechanics to the game.

    The Nanman faction added in the last one is really fun to play, and the bandits have some unique gameplay now as well.

    It doesn't have the variety that TWW has, and never will as it's based on a historical period, but as far as the historical games goes, it's much better off than anything that came before it. On top fo that, the diplomacy and spy aspects of the game are much better than anything including TWW.

    As somebody who has played every total war game for hundreds of hours, and who had mostly just been playing TWW before 3k I like 3k a lot. I jump between TWW and 3k.

    If you held a gun to my head I'd still pick TWW as my favorite current gen TW game but 3k isn't a bad second and worth playing in it's current state (at least will be after the bugs introduced in the last update are fixed).
  • totalwarfanatiktotalwarfanatik Registered Users Posts: 101
    So I've played all the TW games, and I didn't really enjoy warhammer as much but managed 1600 hours on medieval 2 when I was a young lad. Point being there is a distinct difference between warhammer and "historical titles". The unit diversity you see in warhammer is for obvious reasons non-existent, but the gameplay of three kingdoms is superior to every other total war game, with the exception of the warhammer series because it's basically a different game with all the unique cultures and mechanics it has. Three kingdoms has some of the best graphics and most exciting gameplay, but the catch is that it has a heavy focus on the characters from the novel.

    I suggest you watch on youtube the show that it's based on, Three Kingdoms (the 2010 version). You'll have to watch it in 480p I believe and with subtitles, but it's great television and great story telling, and if you dislike the show the odds are you will dislike the game. The reason being is that each faction is essentially identical except for 2-3 unique units that the faction has. The mechanics from faction to faction are not very unique, something warhammer was the opposite of, so your enjoyment of the game is based heavily on how much you enjoy the actual story of the romance of the three kingdoms. The game essentially intertwines all the characters in a sandbox style with random events scattered about telling you of various things happening in the story. In the story each character is like a superhero of some sort, so the game gives you many options to customize them (various armors, weapons, items, horses, and retainers), so there is no shortage of fun in playing around with the unique characters in the game. A large portion of the community really enjoys this and is always looking forward to new characters introduced in the game. But as I said, if you are disinterested in the plot of Three Kingdoms or you don't care about the characters, the game unfortunately does not have that much to it. Each faction behaves very similarly having entirely the same unit roster, and there are some bugs. But I don't think the bugs are as bad as others make them out to be, but I'm slightly biased since I love this game xD
  • ComradCommodoreComradCommodore Senior Member Registered Users Posts: 919
    Coming from someone who leans more towards the historical titles as my "cup of tea" I'd say wait a bit, but absolutely get it

    I say wait only because, as many have mentioned, the game is a bit of a mess. With every major patch they are clearly experimenting/trying to balance things but it's unfortunately just something we are all going to have to be patient on. Along with the bugs, there are some serious balance issues that need to be looked at over time (cavalry strength, ranged strength, Yuan Shao lol (I like the direction but my God the doom stacks have gotten worse))

    I would absolutely die on the hill of Three Kingdoms easily has the highest ceiling of where it will be ranked amongst all TW games so far (diplomacy alone)

    It also depends though on what you really enjoyed from Warhammer. The fantasy aspect and wide variety of units is just too much for alot of people to get away from. TK is based in China so much of the roster is the same (I think this will slowly change overtime , example being Ma Teng)

    Someone said it perfectly earlier, what WH does to battles TK does to the campaign map. City management is great, diplomacy is great. The battles are going to be hit or miss, I've had some really great tug of wars that came down to me executing troop movement perfectly , but alot of them also come down too hammer anvil/mass route

    This was longer than I wanted lol, I'd say wait for a sale. Christmas is coming soon, always a nice winter sale, maybe some.bugs will be fleshed out by then
  • Misaka_ComplexMisaka_Complex Registered Users Posts: 3,707
    My 2 cents is that this game is hard to enjoy if you don't appreciate the setting or the narrative. From what I've heard from Warhammer fans this game lacks a lot of unit diversity and differences between factions that Warhammer has, so if you aren't in it for the lore and just want unit diversity Warhammer is probably the better alternative.

  • LESAMALESAMA Member Registered Users Posts: 2,172

    My 2 cents is that this game is hard to enjoy if you don't appreciate the setting or the narrative. From what I've heard from Warhammer fans this game lacks a lot of unit diversity and differences between factions that Warhammer has, so if you aren't in it for the lore and just want unit diversity Warhammer is probably the better alternative.

    Not entirely. I personally was only mildly interested in the 3k period but still easily 3k is my favorite game.
  • Misaka_ComplexMisaka_Complex Registered Users Posts: 3,707
    LESAMA said:

    Not entirely. I personally was only mildly interested in the 3k period but still easily 3k is my favorite game.

    It would help if you explain why.

  • QiangLordQiangLord Registered Users Posts: 67
    I mean, I've never been "into" the Napoleonic era, myself, but games like Total War can definitely provide an inroad on historical topics. 3K has been the first game since Dynasty Warriors' time in the mainstream to bring a new wave of Western fans to Three Kingdoms, I feel, especially with CA doing so much legwork to introduce the period in the early marketing.

    That said, I actually advocate for Dynasty Warriors as the single most accessible way of getting into the period. Yes it's anime as heck, but it's SO over the top that you can't help but remember all the key characters and events, with all the major moments shown off as the stages. Also, basically anyone can pick up a Dynasty Warriors game and play it--they aren't that complicated. Then you just unlearn all the silly aspects as you play 3K, read the book, watch the show etc.

    Just don't go for DW9.

    The video Oversimplified made in collab with CA is a pretty good lead-in, too.
  • LESAMALESAMA Member Registered Users Posts: 2,172

    LESAMA said:

    Not entirely. I personally was only mildly interested in the 3k period but still easily 3k is my favorite game.

    It would help if you explain why.
    Massive battles
    Good diplomacy
    Food and ancillaries as a tradeable resource
    Court develops when your faction gains prestige
    Research tree is fenomonal
    Lot’s of ui customization for the player
    Good end game which lacks in previous titles
    Damn good designed campaign map with lot’s of choke points
    Good grapics and music
    Etc etC

    Only downside are the bugs and empire mechanic which is shallow at it’s best.
  • Whiskeyjack_5691Whiskeyjack_5691 Registered Users Posts: 4,246
    I would say the game is very much worth picking up if you're interested. It introduces a massive amount of new features, improvements and refinements to the series that have made it difficult for me to go back to older games, including Warhammer. It's an incredibly fun game, and still has a vast amount of potential to be even better.

    However, as the other lads have mentioned, the game is in a very weird state right now in that it's... well... bugged to hell. Picking it up now would mean that you'll run into a huge amount of bugs which would probably sour your impressions of the game.
    If you're disappointed that you missed out on the sale, I would say hold off until the next one and pick it up then - there's probably going to be another Steam Sale before the new year, so not that long to wait. Hopefully the game will have received some major fixes by then, and you'll have a much more pleasant and enjoyable experience.
  • QiangLordQiangLord Registered Users Posts: 67
    Yeah, despite my fairly glowing impression above, this current version is (anecdotally speaking) the buggiest version I've played (excluding any DLC-specific release issues).
  • Naygir_KillazNaygir_Killaz Registered Users Posts: 1,550
    I'd say wait at least 2 more years to see if the game is still bugged.
    It took CA like 6 years to finally fix Rome 2 after all.
  • Misawada01Misawada01 Registered Users Posts: 4
    1. If you can't stand without unit diversity,
    don't bother.

    2. Watch the three kingdoms shows on
    YouTube to see if you like the game
    setting.

    3. Just get the base game first for 80% of
    whole game experience, when on sales
    of course.

    4. Serious Trivia is one of the best
    youtuber to refer to for this game.

    Ultimately it's a game of painting whole map. Three Kingdoms emphasize the enjoyment of micro management and decisions making in achieving just that.

    I love playing like a politician managing personal interests and thinking three steps ahead instead of an angry fuhrer with grand army who simply just bulldoze everyone on the map. Not all war or territories are won by swords (or guns if you're coming from Shogun 2) ;)
  • QiangLordQiangLord Registered Users Posts: 67



    I love playing like a politician managing personal interests and thinking three steps ahead instead of an angry fuhrer with grand army who simply just bulldoze everyone on the map. Not all war or territories are won by swords (or guns if you're coming from Shogun 2) ;)

    Yeah, this is one of the coolest things about 3K. Some factions can play "tall" (to a point, anyway), which is fresh for TW. Whole wars can change their course because a faction leader died, leading to new ruler with a different disposition. Spies can turn over territory to you etc etc. It really blurs the line between TW and more dynamic 4X-style games like CK, Civ, and the like.
  • IsrafilIsrafil Registered Users Posts: 59
    Update! I bought it and it looks really cool so far - though only got like an hour and a half to two hours in at most. Complicated AF but fun - I'm used to just money and trade resources in WH, so different sorts of income, food, and the character conflicts are a lot to balance but I can see how it could be really addictive.

    Might make a new thread but now everyone can just provide tips like what aspects I should worry about or not - like how much to consider/disregard mechanics like harmony/disharmony versus economic/military bonuses XD

    Thanks for the in-depth and thoughtful responses, everyone!

    <3
    Follow me on twitter @perchancetogame. I write about our own End Times - or climate change. But End Times sounds cooler.
  • Whiskeyjack_5691Whiskeyjack_5691 Registered Users Posts: 4,246
    edited September 2020
    Israfil said:

    Update! I bought it and it looks really cool so far - though only got like an hour and a half to two hours in at most. Complicated AF but fun - I'm used to just money and trade resources in WH, so different sorts of income, food, and the character conflicts are a lot to balance but I can see how it could be really addictive.

    Might make a new thread but now everyone can just provide tips like what aspects I should worry about or not - like how much to consider/disregard mechanics like harmony/disharmony versus economic/military bonuses XD

    Thanks for the in-depth and thoughtful responses, everyone!

    Glad to hear you're enjoying it!

    My top piece of advice would be don't ignore corruption! EVER! Assign Administrators to your most profitable commanderies (typically those that focus on industry or commerce income), and build corruption-reducing buildings like the State Workshops in centralized areas (they reduce corruption in neighboring commanderies).
    Corruption will cripple your campaigns and effectively lose you the campaign if you don't tackle it, and although it doesn't become a serious factor until the mid-game, the sooner you begin planning for it, the better. I find using using the Map Pins to set reminders for yourself is very helpful for planning it out.

    Also, don't neglect the Green branch of the reform tree/tech tree, especially the reforms (techs) that increase your food production from farms and fisheries. Food is vitally important, and if you're not careful you can suddenly find yourself going from a big surplus to a massive deficit within a few turns.
Sign In or Register to comment.