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.


Is it just me or is late game boring?

Shogun2FanShogun2Fan Registered Users Posts: 26
edited July 2021 in General Discussion
Talking about WH1 here. The late game seems incredibly boring. Not challenging, but boring. Okay, so this has literally been the last 300 turns for me...

Dwarfs send a full stack

I kill a full stack

5 turns later

Dwarfs send an elite full stack

I kill a full stack

5 turns later

rinse and repeat for 300 turns

You get the point. Late game seems like a chore. Again, it's not challenging; I always manage to kill the full stacks, but it's just boring. You're fighting stack after stack after stack which the player could never build that fast. It's no fun fighting stack after stack after stack of elite units.

For those who say "Git gud" remember, I said I can kill the full stacks. It's just boring. Every 5 turns stack after stack after stack of elite dwarf units.


  • ALHDONALHDON EstaliaRegistered Users Posts: 596
    dont say this. certain people will call you bad at the game because you dont want to finish a campaign because of this gameplay cycle.

    in all seriousness the game gets seriously boring later on. I feel like most campaigns are fun until roughly turn 140~
    Warhammer 3 = Pogu Content
  • neverendingneverending Senior Member Registered Users Posts: 2,927
    This has been the bane of TW games since forever unfortunately. All of CA's attempts to mitigate late game snowballing haven't really paned out well. I'm not going to pretend I have a neat and compelling solution myself. It's usually the first 100 turns at best when you have the best game play.
    5900x @ stock , 4x8gb 3600mhz 14-16-16-36
    ASUS TUF 3080 12 GB
    4TB Sabrent NVMe SSD PCIe 4.0 w/ Windows 10 Pro 64bit
  • Nitros14Nitros14 Junior Member Registered Users Posts: 2,400
    edited July 2021
    It's been a problem with many total war games.

    The total war games with more complex and rewarding empire management (Empire Total War, Attila Total War) feel better in that regard in the late game. Three Kingdoms lets you use diplomacy to convince the AI to surrender when it's obvious you're going to win so you don't have to grind out its last 100 regions.

    In Total Warhammer you have nothing to think about in regards to Empire management and certain factions have an obscenely powerful economy (Dwarfs).

    I thought the Vortex campaign did an alright job of avoiding the endlessly grindy late game and letting you declare victory before it gets too bad. I'd like it if Mortal Empires had much more limited and lore appropriate victory conditions.
  • saweendrasaweendra Registered Users Posts: 18,315
    it is boring without heavy mods

    #givemoreunitsforbrettonia, my bret dlc

  • Mogwai_ManMogwai_Man Registered Users Posts: 5,805
    Major battles are meaningless due to the insane recruitment and replenishment rates.
  • Nitros14Nitros14 Junior Member Registered Users Posts: 2,400
    edited July 2021

    Major battles are meaningless due to the insane recruitment and replenishment rates.

    I tend to agree.

    People complain about the game being too slow or whatever when recruitment and replenishment aren't insanely high.

    But the same insane recruitment and replenishment rates make the game super grindy because battles are almost never decisive, you and the AI recover from them way too fast.
  • Surge_2Surge_2 Registered Users Posts: 10,444
    Once you have 'won' but its not over, yes its a chore.
    Glory matters not.

  • Fingolfin_the-GoldenFingolfin_the-Golden Registered Users Posts: 5,706
    After you complete what you want, or a strong enough no one will beat you. Yes.
    I find after turn 100-150 it’s time to start a new campaign.
    Never bother with the old victory conditions.
    BEARS, Beets, Battlestar Galactica 🧝‍♀️ Pandas too please CA!
  • Docpain222Docpain222 WI, USRegistered Users Posts: 435
    I agree with you. All buildings are built and it just becomes sending my armies to destroy the next location and occupy... rinse and repeat. In the early, mid, and chaos stages I have to actively react to threats from all over.
  • Docpain222Docpain222 WI, USRegistered Users Posts: 435
    I do have to say though it is a little different depending on what race/LL you play with and the start position.
  • ItharusItharus Senior Member Registered Users Posts: 15,454
    Honestly... if you don't like conquering things on the campaign map, or fighting battles in the best-in-genre (even with bugs, quirks, and stuff) RTS army fighting... you probably just don't like Total War all that much.

    However much we all rag on TW games at times, there is really NO competitor to them.
  • overtaker40overtaker40 Registered Users Posts: 969
    its a hard problem to fix, I mean id hate the idea of the Ai just cheating to keep up with you. And everything they have tried so far has been hated. personally im a fan of the nemisis system from troy, with a few tweeks i think it would be super effective.
    I like all the races. Equally. Wood elves are just the first among equals.
  • GettoGeckoGettoGecko Registered Users Posts: 1,626
    I mean you are able to finish a campaign within 50-150 turns and painting the whole game 1 map within 200 turns. When you say "the last 300 turns" to me it sounds like you are around 400+ turns which is way over what the average player would experience. Like every game when you maxed out everything than there won't be new stuff and it becomes the same over and over again. Your issue is like playing AoE 2, harvest the whole map and than complaining about the economy is only based on trade routes and relics and having to buy wood and stone in the market to renew farms and building new stuff.
    Most campaigns aren't finished in this game and when you take into account that finishing takes 50-150 turns I assume the average campaign is abbandoned between turn 30-70 so around early to late mid game. Very few players experience a map state when only a couple of power houses are left on the map. My longest campaign was around 250 turns and that was painting ME (combined map of game 1 and 2) so while I get where you comming from its not something most players will even have to deal with.
  • QinshiQinshi Registered Users Posts: 253
    To be honest, their is a simple work around for this.

    When you feel like you 'snowballing' the campaign.
    Just crank up the battle or/and campaign difficulty halfway through you campaign.

    This is a very neat work around.
    The AI will be stronger, the armies you fight against will have higher tier units and the cities of the AI will be bigger.
  • RiddlebickRiddlebick Registered Users Posts: 254
    I guess it would need a previously mentioned stability meter for every faction that lowers with lost battles and lost settlements. Once it reaches 0 and when you capture their capital you gain all their land. Or when it reaches 0 you unlock a Quest battle for the same result.
  • LuciferLucifer Member England U.KRegistered Users Posts: 2,177
    edited July 2021
    There always comes a point in the game, probably any game for that matter where you know you've won. I think the way around this is for more mission types and possibly the chance of civil wars breaking out and emerging factions as a result of that, if public order becomes critical. The same could also happen to ai super powers as they over extend, or your agents keep public order low. The same could apply for stronger rebellions under various mission failures as your people rebel against your awful rule.

    The ai, rather than sending a doomstack every number of turns, group up with allies and then assault as an overwhelming force which could in-fact cause rebellions against them, as uprising to foreign occupation. It could lead to more viable agent missions also. There's a host of ways you could improve the system, and add more in the late game system.

    "Surrender and serve me in life, or die and slave for me in death." - Vlad von Carstein
    Kislev - from darkness to light.19/3

    My steam workshop - mods.
  • Rasmus242Rasmus242 Registered Users Posts: 685
    Almost all strategy games of this kind struggle with this and most of the time the more you snowball and grow the sloggier it becomes.

    Either campaigns need to end faster (which doesn't feel fulfilling as there's plenty of people who still find joy in taking over the world and don't want to feel boxed in) or we need a lot better and interesting scaling difficulty mechanics which usually aren't that easy because people don't really like feeling "punished" for success either.

    I think CA might be on to something with the survival battles. Like instead of having a massive slog as the endgame maybe you could have some special and super tough challenges that focus in on making unique and different battles rather than having you fight tons of smaller battles all over. Problem I see with this route is that it might end up feeling too scripted and not dynamic / reflective of the campaign which hurts replayability and sense of coherence.

    I do hope CA finds a good fix for this but frankly I don't think it's the absolute biggest problem. Also, one player tip is to play ironman if you want less snowballing because I think a lot of players naturally screw themselves over when they play very high risk / high reward and reload until they win thus creating a very maximized amount of snowballing.
  • nyobiennyobien Registered Users Posts: 277
    edited July 2021
    The biggest problem with late game and the reason why nobody finishes campaigns is because of how tedious it gets to manage everything.

    Upgrading 20 settlements every turn, moving 20-50 lords/heroes every turn, spending skill points for 10 heroes/lords every turn, managing 50 Skaven/Vampire Coast undercities every turn etc.

    The game desperately needs more automation and in my opinion; removing agents from the campaign map.
    6 years old Lord of Change with unimpressive animations. Should be based on Kairos's model, not copy and pasted Sarthorael.

    Remove agents/heroes from the campaign map like Three Kingdoms did. They are not fun and only serve to make the game more tedious.

    Champions of Chaos LLs should have been in monogods, but weren't so CA could save money on unique mechanics

  • Jman5Jman5 Registered Users Posts: 1,995

    Major battles are meaningless due to the insane recruitment and replenishment rates.

    It also does not help that we have so many instant-recruit options among various factions. Raise Dead is fine for Undead, but it's gotten out of hand for everyone else. The Empire can instantly recruit up to 25 different units.

    Now, I prefer making it easier rather than harder to re-recruit an army, because otherwise you risk making every war decided by a single decisive battle (see Stellaris). However, they've taken it way too far in some cases and it seems to be getting worse every DLC. It also doesn't help that they made army recruitment cost for the AI half off on Normal Difficulty and negligible on higher difficulty.

    It also annoys me when their response to releasing terribly balanced mechanics is to tell players, well the AI won't do this very often so only the player can really abuse it! How about nobody can abuse it?!
  • talonntalonn Junior Member Registered Users Posts: 2,640
    Tell me which total war that doesn't have boring late game
  • BlacedBlaced Registered Users Posts: 1,565
    Last time I play Eataine, send three elite army to attack Dwarf, find there are huge Dwarf armies there wait for me,

    I think Warhammer should add some large empire penalty prevent snowballing
Sign In or Register to comment.