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

At this rate, post WH3, could we expect an AoS Total War game?

135

Comments

  • davedave1124davedave1124 Senior Member Registered Users Posts: 9,745
    I can’t see a 40k WH being a big issue. It can be set on a single planet like Gladius Prime or CA can simply come up with something.

    Our lack of understanding or imagination on how to deal with the differences between those 2 formats isn’t a reflection on CA.

    Super fans like IT, LoS and Indypride have created entire videos on how it can work.
  • CaesarSahlertzCaesarSahlertz Registered Users Posts: 3,295
    SerPus said:

    Erhm... What part of the Warhammer Fantasy format does NOT fit into the Total War format?.... Go ahead and list them, I'll wait...

    But I never said that it doesn't fit, did I?
    No, nevertheless you argued as if your point had any credence... It didn't.

    Literally nothing in the 40k setting lends itself to the Total War format. The warfare cannot translate and the campaign cannot translate. A 40k Total War game is the singularly worst idea imaginable for the Total War franchise...
  • SerPusSerPus Registered Users Posts: 2,915

    Literally nothing in the 40k setting lends itself to the Total War format. The warfare cannot translate and the campaign cannot translate.

    Because you said so, right? Okay, let's wait and see. From what we know, CA already considered that idea not that long ago.
  • AnonimatoAnonimato Registered Users Posts: 218
    Heresy! How dare you speak of AoS.

    Kidding aside, I would not. AoS is even more absurd than Warhammer, now there are elves with hammers.
  • FungusHoundFungusHound Registered Users Posts: 3,820

    Qwerty55 said:

    I don't care about Age of Sigmar, it's an uninteresting, generic D&D/Warcraft-like kitchen sink fantasy.

    This criticism makes no sense considering WHFB has not one original bone in its body and is mostly a hodgepodge of mostly lazy real world references (the goddamn map is just Earth slightly modified FFS), Tolkien and a LOT of Moorcock (Chaos and whole characters are lifted from there). Even the Skaven, the most "original" thing WHFB has, can be traced back to the Rats of NIMH (underground society of highly intelligent rodents stealing from the humans above).

    Also, Warcraft? Warcraft Orks are proud warrior race types instead of violent hooligans, its minotaurs are native-american expies and it has intelligent trolls. What of that is in AoS?
    People's criticisms of AoS sometimes make 0 sense. Comparing it to DnD is especially hilarious since Warhammer Fantasy is far, far closer to DnD than AoS. Its hard to even compare AoS to something like Planescape.

    Actually the Skaven are probably based on something from Fafhrd and the Grey Mouser but no one knows about that series anymore. We could also talk about how the Beastmen are literally just the Broo. I mean literally the Beastmen models were just reused Broo molds that GW didn't want to throw out. Or how Malekith the King of the Dark Elves is technically stolen from Marvel comics (its always funny to watch people who have no idea what they are talking about try to defend that last one).

    Also Warhammer fans hating on Warcraft will never cease to make me laugh.
  • CaesarSahlertzCaesarSahlertz Registered Users Posts: 3,295
    edited October 19
    SerPus said:

    Literally nothing in the 40k setting lends itself to the Total War format. The warfare cannot translate and the campaign cannot translate.

    Because you said so, right? Okay, let's wait and see. From what we know, CA already considered that idea not that long ago.
    Inappropriate Comment removed.

    The Dawn of War format is better suited. The Deathwing format is better suited. The Vermintide format is better suited. Hell, the Diablo format is better suited. The Total War format is a horrible fit, and people clamouring for it, should feel bad.
    Post edited by dge1 on
  • IamNotArobotIamNotArobot Registered Users Posts: 2,354
    It looks like AoS is divisive amongst the fans.
    Justice and CONFEDERATION for the Tomb Kings and Vampire Coast!

    Exclusive DLCs for Tomb Kings, Vampire Coast, BM, CW and WE! #DLCsAreRacesToo

    Remaster all WH1 and WH2 faction icons for WH3!




  • CaesarSahlertzCaesarSahlertz Registered Users Posts: 3,295
    edited October 19
    Quote and Comment deleted. Clamouring for a 40k game in the Total War format is dumb. Instead of asking for CA to waste their time and talents on making a game that will never translate well into that format, you should instead be hoping for CA to make a game that fits to their talents.
  • davedave1124davedave1124 Senior Member Registered Users Posts: 9,745
  • FungusHoundFungusHound Registered Users Posts: 3,820
    Am I the only one who would much rather CA just make their own fantasy setting after this? I would kind of prefer after Warhammer is done their next game isn't a licensed IP from another company so they aren't beholden to only adapt stuff.

    Honestly if they had to adapt another TT game I would much prefer Iron Kingdoms over another GW IP but that won't ever happen. Too bad Privateer Press trusted some random indie studio to make a Kickstarter Warmachine game that was just awful. Iron Kingdoms is probably a little too focused on single entities anyways though at least they would have hard caps. At least there would be plenty of diverse factions: Cygnar, Khador, Cryx, Protectorate of Menoth, Retribution of Scyrah, Convergence of Cyriss, Crucible Guard, Infernals, Trollbloods, Circle Orboros, Legion of Everblight, Skorne, and Grymkin. Not to mention the lesser factions like the Thornfall Alliance or Talion Charter
  • ROMOBOYROMOBOY Registered Users Posts: 2,246
  • Mogwai_ManMogwai_Man Registered Users Posts: 4,136
    Most of ya'll don't even wargame. So I'm not sure why you bitch about AoS. You wouldn't buy models anyway.
  • Surge_2Surge_2 Registered Users Posts: 2,978

    Most of ya'll don't even wargame. So I'm not sure why you bitch about AoS. You wouldn't buy models anyway.

    I don't see much bitching, it's just discussion on the challenges of using the AoS setting for a Total War.

    This is fairly well understood to be an issue for 40k as well, it's just a huge scope, and trying to get everyone in the same space is tough.
  • FungusHoundFungusHound Registered Users Posts: 3,820
    edited October 19

    Most of ya'll don't even wargame. So I'm not sure why you bitch about AoS. You wouldn't buy models anyway.

    Yeah a lot of people are just on the anti AoS bandwagon.

    My largest complaints involve them making new armies out of subsections of old armies but add virtually nothing new. I understand wanting to keep using the old models but just throw in one or two new things. For example, I love the idea of the Flesh Eater Courts but its very barebones. My other main issue is the lack of named characters which is much more specific to certain races. Some of the armies have cool new characters and others have virtually no characters.

    Edit: I should say I actually don't want an AoS Total War but not because I hate AoS. There IS a lot of AoS hate on the forums though.
  • Mogwai_ManMogwai_Man Registered Users Posts: 4,136
    Surge_2 said:

    Most of ya'll don't even wargame. So I'm not sure why you bitch about AoS. You wouldn't buy models anyway.

    I don't see much bitching, it's just discussion on the challenges of using the AoS setting for a Total War.

    This is fairly well understood to be an issue for 40k as well, it's just a huge scope, and trying to get everyone in the same space is tough.
    Oh I don't mean you dude. I mean the guys who go "REEE" when AoS comes up.
  • Mogwai_ManMogwai_Man Registered Users Posts: 4,136

    Most of ya'll don't even wargame. So I'm not sure why you bitch about AoS. You wouldn't buy models anyway.

    Yeah a lot of people are just on the anti AoS bandwagon.

    My largest complaints involve them making new armies out of subsections of old armies but add virtually nothing new. I understand wanting to keep using the old models but just throw in one or two new things. For example, I love the idea of the Flesh Eater Courts but its very barebones. My other main issue is the lack of named characters which is much more specific to certain races. Some of the armies have cool new characters and others have virtually no characters.

    Edit: I should say I actually don't want an AoS Total War but not because I hate AoS. There IS a lot of AoS hate on the forums though.
    Yeah it's a bandwagon from a niche game in a niche forum.

    As for AoS it's going to keep growing and I'm looking forward to it all. I don't care if CA makes an AoS Total War or not though. I'll keep wargaming either way.
  • FungusHoundFungusHound Registered Users Posts: 3,820

    Most of ya'll don't even wargame. So I'm not sure why you bitch about AoS. You wouldn't buy models anyway.

    Yeah a lot of people are just on the anti AoS bandwagon.

    My largest complaints involve them making new armies out of subsections of old armies but add virtually nothing new. I understand wanting to keep using the old models but just throw in one or two new things. For example, I love the idea of the Flesh Eater Courts but its very barebones. My other main issue is the lack of named characters which is much more specific to certain races. Some of the armies have cool new characters and others have virtually no characters.

    Edit: I should say I actually don't want an AoS Total War but not because I hate AoS. There IS a lot of AoS hate on the forums though.
    Yeah it's a bandwagon from a niche game in a niche forum.

    As for AoS it's going to keep growing and I'm looking forward to it all. I don't care if CA makes an AoS Total War or not though. I'll keep wargaming either way.
    Also as someone pointed out earlier, Frontier is developing an AoS game right now anyways and I figure that will go on for some time. Probably be nickeled and dimed for minor pieces of content knowing Frontier though. People complain about Warhammer DLC but they have no clue.
  • GoatforceGoatforce Registered Users Posts: 5,029

    Surge_2 said:

    Most of ya'll don't even wargame. So I'm not sure why you bitch about AoS. You wouldn't buy models anyway.

    I don't see much bitching, it's just discussion on the challenges of using the AoS setting for a Total War.

    This is fairly well understood to be an issue for 40k as well, it's just a huge scope, and trying to get everyone in the same space is tough.
    Oh I don't mean you dude. I mean the guys who go "REEE" when AoS comes up.
    There is a lot of bitterness.

    But yeah the comparison of AoS with D&D and warcraft is ridiculous, I know it has already been said but Fantasy was closer to both of these than AoS. As I recall Fantasy was to a large part derived from D&D and Warcraft was derived from WHFB (wasn't it meant to be WH?).

    Personally I think AoS has a lot of potential, it needs time to grow but is a fun game. I would love to see the Nighthaunt in TW, with Olynder and Kurdos in all their glory!
  • CaesarSahlertzCaesarSahlertz Registered Users Posts: 3,295
    AoS would be a very weird fit for the Total War format. I could easily see them adapt the Realmgate Wars (or other such conflict) for the format, where they would shrink down the dimension spanning conflict into a single theater of the war.. But the entire setting? Not a chance.
  • HowTheStarsBurnHowTheStarsBurn Registered Users Posts: 197
    So everyone jsut ignored the part where I said a AoS Sigmar RTS game is already being developed?
  • FungusHoundFungusHound Registered Users Posts: 3,820

    So everyone jsut ignored the part where I said a AoS Sigmar RTS game is already being developed?

    I mean I didn't but the forum ignores things they don't like usually.
  • davedave1124davedave1124 Senior Member Registered Users Posts: 9,745

    AoS would be a very weird fit for the Total War format. I could easily see them adapt the Realmgate Wars (or other such conflict) for the format, where they would shrink down the dimension spanning conflict into a single theater of the war.. But the entire setting? Not a chance.

    I don’t know what this is based on. Can’t CA use a system similar to Empire TW? Can’t they simply make the different Realms smaller? Can the very experienced people within CA work a way around it? I’m pretty sure they could.

    Not forgetting AoS is the post popular fantasy TT setting and has a huge following.

    No one knows what CA could do with the setting. To claim you objectively know how hard it would be is a serious overreach.
  • Mogwai_ManMogwai_Man Registered Users Posts: 4,136
    Goatforce said:

    Surge_2 said:

    Most of ya'll don't even wargame. So I'm not sure why you bitch about AoS. You wouldn't buy models anyway.

    I don't see much bitching, it's just discussion on the challenges of using the AoS setting for a Total War.

    This is fairly well understood to be an issue for 40k as well, it's just a huge scope, and trying to get everyone in the same space is tough.
    Oh I don't mean you dude. I mean the guys who go "REEE" when AoS comes up.
    There is a lot of bitterness.

    But yeah the comparison of AoS with D&D and warcraft is ridiculous, I know it has already been said but Fantasy was closer to both of these than AoS. As I recall Fantasy was to a large part derived from D&D and Warcraft was derived from WHFB (wasn't it meant to be WH?).

    Personally I think AoS has a lot of potential, it needs time to grow but is a fun game. I would love to see the Nighthaunt in TW, with Olynder and Kurdos in all their glory!
    Apparently Blizzard was never in talks with GW to make a WHFB RTS. The folks at Blizzard were D&D fans and always wanted to make an RTS around Orcs & Humans.

    The closest thing from D&D to AoS I think would be Planescape. But AoS is tame compared to that.

    AoS is definitely shaping up to be something that not even GW anticipated. Sons of Behemat looks fun as hell to play as.
  • GoatforceGoatforce Registered Users Posts: 5,029

    AoS would be a very weird fit for the Total War format. I could easily see them adapt the Realmgate Wars (or other such conflict) for the format, where they would shrink down the dimension spanning conflict into a single theater of the war.. But the entire setting? Not a chance.

    I don’t know what this is based on. Can’t CA use a system similar to Empire TW? Can’t they simply make the different Realms smaller? Can the very experienced people within CA work a way around it? I’m pretty sure they could.

    Not forgetting AoS is the post popular fantasy TT setting and has a huge following.

    No one knows what CA could do with the setting. To claim you objectively know how hard it would be is a serious overreach.
    Yes, yes they could. It would be huge, as each realm is larger than the fantasy world as I recall, but we are talking about a game that would be released approaching 2030 at the earliest, I would hope the tech would be there by then
  • davedave1124davedave1124 Senior Member Registered Users Posts: 9,745
    Goatforce said:

    AoS would be a very weird fit for the Total War format. I could easily see them adapt the Realmgate Wars (or other such conflict) for the format, where they would shrink down the dimension spanning conflict into a single theater of the war.. But the entire setting? Not a chance.

    I don’t know what this is based on. Can’t CA use a system similar to Empire TW? Can’t they simply make the different Realms smaller? Can the very experienced people within CA work a way around it? I’m pretty sure they could.

    Not forgetting AoS is the post popular fantasy TT setting and has a huge following.

    No one knows what CA could do with the setting. To claim you objectively know how hard it would be is a serious overreach.
    Yes, yes they could. It would be huge, as each realm is larger than the fantasy world as I recall, but we are talking about a game that would be released approaching 2030 at the earliest, I would hope the tech would be there by then
    And even if they can't they can pull an ME on us and squash the different realms.

    I also hope that in a later edition the creation story finishes and through a sacrifice or some other story the material world comes into being again.
  • WeezheatWeezheat Senior Member Registered Users Posts: 161
    100% NO.

    Warhammer Fantasy still has several years in its life cycle for CA.
  • Qwerty55Qwerty55 Registered Users Posts: 546
    edited October 20
    Age of Sigmar tabletop is it's own thing and is incredibly successful and I wish all the best for it. I am not talking about the tabletop, I am talking about the lore which is nothing special. AoS isn't some fantastic, original setting worthy of being put on a pedestal. The problem with AoS is that it's pretty forgettable there are so many better alternative settings that can be made into a total war format. LOTR, D&D, Warcraft and WHFB as shown.

    For those who say that WHFB isn't original, they are right but truth is that there really is nothing like Warhammer Fantasy, it's a collection of stolen ideas, tropes and cliches that have somehow been made into their own unique world. Seriously good luck finding another setting just like Fantasy that has Landsknechts, Samurai and Hussars fighting dragons, aztec lizards and ogres. Fantasy actually had it's own unique feel, something that AoS lacks. AoS doesn't have a unique feel, it's an abstract, crazy kitchen sink fantasy that relies on it's predecessor for good lore.

    I would still buy an AoS: Total War if one ever came out but what I am saying is that there are so many better alternative fantasy settings that CA could do. AoS isn't a unique, special setting and is nowhere as mainstream as other fantasy settings.
    Post edited by Qwerty55 on
  • ShiroAmakusa75ShiroAmakusa75 Senior Member Registered Users Posts: 27,350
    edited October 20
    D&D itself also mostly an amalgamtion of Tolkien + old-timey myths.
    Qwerty55 said:

    Age of Sigmar tabletop is it's own thing and is incredibly successful and I wish all the best for it. I am not talking about the tabletop, I am talking about the lore which is nothing special. AoS isn't some fantastic, original setting worthy of being put on a pedestal. The problem with AoS is that it's pretty forgettable there are so many better alternative settings that can be made into a total war format. LOTR, D&D, Warcraft and WHFB as shown.

    For those who say that WHFB isn't original, they are right but truth is that there really is nothing like Warhammer Fantasy, it's a collection of stolen ideas, tropes and cliches that have somehow been made into their own unique world. Seriously good luck finding another setting just like Fantasy that has Landsknechts, Samurai and Hussars fighting dragons, aztec lizards and ogres. Fantasy actually had it's own unique feel, something that AoS lacks. AoS doesn't have a unique feel, it's an abstract, crazy kitchen sink fantasy that relies on it's predecessor for good lore.

    I would still buy an AoS: Total War if one ever came out but what I am saying is that there are so many better alternative fantasy settings that CA could do. AoS isn't a unique, special setting and is nowhere as mainstream as other fantasy settings.

    I like how you first call out AoS for being a "kitchen sink" only to turn around and call that very same kitchen sink setting a strength of WHFB and then go on to say that WHFB had a "unique" feel and so it's different. That's special pleading because "unique feel" is nothing you can actually quantize. I can easiyl call out WHFB for having the boring Tolkien-style iteration of Dwarfs while AoS Dwarfs are way more original and unique for having the Tolkien kind (Dispossessed), half-naked religious fanatics (Fyreslyers) and Dwarfs that actually don't live underground but in the sky (Kharardon). I can also go and call the setting of AoS way more unique than WHFB's because the latter is, as I said, just earth with a few cosmetic changes.

    No, you are giving WHFB a pass because you grew up with it and lambaste AoS for the same simply because it's new. That's not a new phenomenon, I just wish people were being honest about it.

  • Qwerty55Qwerty55 Registered Users Posts: 546



    I like how you first call out AoS for being a "kitchen sink" only to turn around and call that very same kitchen sink setting a strength of WHFB and then go on to say that WHFB had a "unique" feel and so it's different. That's special pleading because "unique feel" is nothing you can actually quantize. I can easiyl call out WHFB for having the boring Tolkien-style iteration of Dwarfs while AoS Dwarfs are way more original and unique for having the Tolkien kind (Dispossessed), half-naked religious fanatics (Fyreslyers) and Dwarfs that actually don't live underground but in the sky (Kharardon).

    No, you are giving WHFB a pass because you grew up with it and lambaste AoS for the same simply because it's new. That's not a new phenomenon, I just wish people were being honest about it.

    Oh Fantasy is definitely a kitchen sink but what makes it distinct from AoS is that it actually balances low fantasy with high fantasy, grounded with fantastical really well. With AoS the disparity is simply too great that things don't make sense. Like humans living alongside 'duardin', 'aelves' and literal space marines and you want to tell me they still dress in 16th century German clothing? Humans still running around with crappy gunpowder weapons when the person over the next hill has an automatic shotgun? It's not a bad setting, it's just a very different setting. As for Fyreslayers you do know they are just Dwarven Slayers except with everything that made them unique gone (I already mentioned that AoS copies many of the good aspects of it's predecessor). In Fantasy you had aztec lizards, fantastical technology and magical elves, but your average Empire bum would never see them in his lifetime.

    In the end, we're all entitled to our own opinions and views but the main thing I am saying is that there are way better alternatives to a setting like AoS. I would much rather have a total war game set in D&D for example.
  • TexacoV2TexacoV2 Registered Users Posts: 292

    I just think AoS is just too undercooked atm, and probably will be for a while.

    Realistically, we would end up with some kind of pointless sideplot created specifically for the game, where each of the races just happened to be in the same region of the same Plane in order to find some secret artifact or control some points, or conquer the land or something. We would get a bunch of named characters most aren't really familiar with, who don't have a lot of lore to them, and a bunch of factions that have a little bit of lore blurb but not much more to them, and a bunch of settlements and landmarks that don't mean anything to anyone.

    This is a perennial problem for AoS: the setting is too big, too sprawling for there really to be anything in particular to care about or root for, and moreover, any justification to have the race meet up is going to feel contrived beyond a certain number. (40k has the same issue, but is older and so has more goodwill and identity, so it's less glaring, imho)

    Just to be clear, I don't hate AoS, but I don't feel like it thematically lends itself all that well to a Total War-style game with a persistent world map and so on. (Now, an X-Com-style game on the other hand....)

    Perhaps a way to deal with it would be to introduce random map generation, with different tilesets for different Planes, though this would mean a radically different approach to questlines and such. Food for thought, I suppose.

    Or you can have it take place in the center of all the realms.
    As for the factions lacking in lore thats just a incorrect statement, same with namned characters. So there is not much i can say to that. Or you just pick a place all the factions are already present on like the great parch in Aqshy.
Sign In or Register to comment.