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

The Chaos Problem

1468910

Comments

  • NemoTheElf101NemoTheElf101 Registered Users Posts: 2,532

    34 disagrees should tell you all you need to know about how bad is your idea for the rest of the community.

    Also, at the end of the day, this is just wishfull thinking by you, because we don't have any reason to believe that CA will do any of the things you propose, specially since CA has being implementing more factions, mechanics and a start positions, not the other way around, even giving new factions and start positions to those LL that previously didn't had one.

    Also, it's quite sad that when you are confronted with smart arguments, your first move is to attack that person for being smart, maybe take some argumentation lessons and you won't get your ass kicked in a discussion so much.

    So keep keep burying your head on the sand, but you aren't going to get what you want.

    Well, I don't give a damn if you or anyone else disagrees with me or not.

    You're being a total hypocrite because you're basically trying to tell me that my ideas and such are bad while acting like your opinions are magically more valid than mine or someone else's.


    And what "smart arguments"?

    This is exactly why I call you guys out for being hypocrites, because you guys try to label any and all things you say as smart or valid, all while trying to disregard or trash talk anything someone on the other side of the discussion says.


    And you guys are actually pretty hilarious because you guys are the ones who refuse to look at anything but from your one limited perspectives and such.

    You guys are the ones who are sticking your heads in the sand to anything that doesn't agree with your views and opinions. But it's more like you're a bunch of children who stick their fingers in their ears while yelling "La la la la, I can't hear you!", and all because you guys can't handle the fact that someone has a decent idea of how to do something differently and you didn't come up with it.
    If you genuinely feel this actively persecuted by other peoples' opinions, maybe consider not engaging with this topic every single time you try to bring it up.
  • ArneSoArneSo Hamburg, Germany Registered Users Posts: 31,542

    ArneSo said:

    Well the core LLs will be overshadowed by the LP LLs.

    Well, that's exactly what I really don't want to see dude.

    I don't want to see a later LL like Valkia or Skulltaker to completely overshadow Skarbrand and his faction.

    I just think that it'd be more interesting if CA brought in two mechaincs per LP's LL, one for the lord themselves and one for the races as a whole. Like if you pick Valkia, she has a mechanic she grants to the mono god faciton, but only if she's the starting LL.

    I just want all the factions to actually still be viable and interesting in the long run.
    It’s inevitable. LP LLs will come with fancy mechanics just like in WH2. This isn’t new at all.
    Nurgle is love, Nurgle is life
  • ChoraChora Registered Users Posts: 868
    ArneSo said:

    ArneSo said:

    There is more than enough content for 5-6 LLs for each god including 2 LPs minimum. Literally no problem at all.

    Ehh without using AoS stuff two lord packs are double but it's a stretch. Definitely not a minimum.

    But year I expect khorne and nurgle to get 2. Nuegle possibly 3.

    Slannesh and Tzeentch might only get 1.
    Tzeentchs roster is so small, it needs 2 LPs for all the missing stuff.

    And Slaanesh can use the Cult of Pleasure list for more stuff.

    I expect 2 LPs for Khorne, Tzeentch, Slaanesh and 3 LPs for Nurgle.
    I’m pretty confident that the snakemen of Khuresh will be another Slaanesh dlc
  • mecanojavi99mecanojavi99 EspañaRegistered Users Posts: 8,233

    34 disagrees should tell you all you need to know about how bad is your idea for the rest of the community.

    Also, at the end of the day, this is just wishfull thinking by you, because we don't have any reason to believe that CA will do any of the things you propose, specially since CA has being implementing more factions, mechanics and a start positions, not the other way around, even giving new factions and start positions to those LL that previously didn't had one.

    Also, it's quite sad that when you are confronted with smart arguments, your first move is to attack that person for being smart, maybe take some argumentation lessons and you won't get your ass kicked in a discussion so much.

    So keep keep burying your head on the sand, but you aren't going to get what you want.

    Well, I don't give a damn if you or anyone else disagrees with me or not.

    You're being a total hypocrite because you're basically trying to tell me that my ideas and such are bad while acting like your opinions are magically more valid than mine or someone else's.


    And what "smart arguments"?

    This is exactly why I call you guys out for being hypocrites, because you guys try to label any and all things you say as smart or valid, all while trying to disregard or trash talk anything someone on the other side of the discussion says.


    And you guys are actually pretty hilarious because you guys are the ones who refuse to look at anything but from your one limited perspectives and such.

    You guys are the ones who are sticking your heads in the sand to anything that doesn't agree with your views and opinions. But it's more like you're a bunch of children who stick their fingers in their ears while yelling "La la la la, I can't hear you!", and all because you guys can't handle the fact that someone has a decent idea of how to do something differently and you didn't come up with it.
    "and all because you guys can't handle the fact that someone has a decent idea of how to do something differently and you didn't come up with it."



    Dial down that ego chump, if you had shuch a great idea we would agree with you and you wouldn't be swimming in disagrees.

    But, and here comes the bomb, we believe that it is a BAD idea.


    "By the fires of Hashut, let them burn in the flames of eternal torment!"
    - Anonymous
  • ArneSoArneSo Hamburg, Germany Registered Users Posts: 31,542
    Chora said:

    ArneSo said:

    ArneSo said:

    There is more than enough content for 5-6 LLs for each god including 2 LPs minimum. Literally no problem at all.

    Ehh without using AoS stuff two lord packs are double but it's a stretch. Definitely not a minimum.

    But year I expect khorne and nurgle to get 2. Nuegle possibly 3.

    Slannesh and Tzeentch might only get 1.
    Tzeentchs roster is so small, it needs 2 LPs for all the missing stuff.

    And Slaanesh can use the Cult of Pleasure list for more stuff.

    I expect 2 LPs for Khorne, Tzeentch, Slaanesh and 3 LPs for Nurgle.
    I’m pretty confident that the snakemen of Khuresh will be another Slaanesh dlc
    Yap probably.
    Nurgle is love, Nurgle is life
  • MODIDDLY1MODIDDLY1 Registered Users Posts: 766
    ArneSo said:

    Chora said:

    ArneSo said:

    ArneSo said:

    There is more than enough content for 5-6 LLs for each god including 2 LPs minimum. Literally no problem at all.

    Ehh without using AoS stuff two lord packs are double but it's a stretch. Definitely not a minimum.

    But year I expect khorne and nurgle to get 2. Nuegle possibly 3.

    Slannesh and Tzeentch might only get 1.
    Tzeentchs roster is so small, it needs 2 LPs for all the missing stuff.

    And Slaanesh can use the Cult of Pleasure list for more stuff.

    I expect 2 LPs for Khorne, Tzeentch, Slaanesh and 3 LPs for Nurgle.
    I’m pretty confident that the snakemen of Khuresh will be another Slaanesh dlc
    Yap probably.
    I fear you might be correct. I still think Khuresh being the failed first attempt of the Old Ones is way more interesting than snake beastmen but with them not being on the campaign maps I think they may go the cheaper path
  • ArneSoArneSo Hamburg, Germany Registered Users Posts: 31,542
    edited November 2021
    MODIDDLY1 said:

    ArneSo said:

    Chora said:

    ArneSo said:

    ArneSo said:

    There is more than enough content for 5-6 LLs for each god including 2 LPs minimum. Literally no problem at all.

    Ehh without using AoS stuff two lord packs are double but it's a stretch. Definitely not a minimum.

    But year I expect khorne and nurgle to get 2. Nuegle possibly 3.

    Slannesh and Tzeentch might only get 1.
    Tzeentchs roster is so small, it needs 2 LPs for all the missing stuff.

    And Slaanesh can use the Cult of Pleasure list for more stuff.

    I expect 2 LPs for Khorne, Tzeentch, Slaanesh and 3 LPs for Nurgle.
    I’m pretty confident that the snakemen of Khuresh will be another Slaanesh dlc
    Yap probably.
    I fear you might be correct. I still think Khuresh being the failed first attempt of the Old Ones is way more interesting than snake beastmen but with them not being on the campaign maps I think they may go the cheaper path
    Naga as a race would be so absolutely amazing. But after seeing the map, it’s pretty much dead unfortunately. So Naga for Slaanesh is the best we can hope for.

    Post edited by ArneSo on
    Nurgle is love, Nurgle is life
  • Spellbound55Spellbound55 Registered Users Posts: 1,312
    ArneSo said:

    ArneSo said:

    Well the core LLs will be overshadowed by the LP LLs.

    Well, that's exactly what I really don't want to see dude.

    I don't want to see a later LL like Valkia or Skulltaker to completely overshadow Skarbrand and his faction.

    I just think that it'd be more interesting if CA brought in two mechaincs per LP's LL, one for the lord themselves and one for the races as a whole. Like if you pick Valkia, she has a mechanic she grants to the mono god faciton, but only if she's the starting LL.

    I just want all the factions to actually still be viable and interesting in the long run.
    It’s inevitable. LP LLs will come with fancy mechanics just like in WH2. This isn’t new at all.
    This is wrong. The only lords who were displaced by DLC lords were the Skaven and that's because the core Skaven mechanics sucked.

    Tyrion and Malakith are arguably still the best high and dark elf campaigns despite 4 additional lords being added with DLC and FLC. Even if you disagree with that statement both are still regularly played because they have strong start positions and interesting ways of engaging with other factions.

    Game 3 so far has avoided having bad core mechanics for every faction so a Skaven situation is impossible in game 3.

    This applies just as clearly to your points @VikingHuscal1066 and it's one of the reasons your solution doesn't resonant with most of the community. When you remove the confirmation bias it's clear you're trying to fix a problem that doesn't exist with ideas discarded after game 1.
  • MODIDDLY1MODIDDLY1 Registered Users Posts: 766
    ArneSo said:

    MODIDDLY1 said:

    ArneSo said:

    Chora said:

    ArneSo said:

    ArneSo said:

    There is more than enough content for 5-6 LLs for each god including 2 LPs minimum. Literally no problem at all.

    Ehh without using AoS stuff two lord packs are double but it's a stretch. Definitely not a minimum.

    But year I expect khorne and nurgle to get 2. Nuegle possibly 3.

    Slannesh and Tzeentch might only get 1.
    Tzeentchs roster is so small, it needs 2 LPs for all the missing stuff.

    And Slaanesh can use the Cult of Pleasure list for more stuff.

    I expect 2 LPs for Khorne, Tzeentch, Slaanesh and 3 LPs for Nurgle.
    I’m pretty confident that the snakemen of Khuresh will be another Slaanesh dlc
    Yap probably.
    I fear you might be correct. I still think Khuresh being the failed first attempt of the Old Ones is way more interesting than snake beastmen but with them not being on the campaign maps I think they may go the cheaper path
    Naga as a race would be so absolute amazing. But after seeing the map, it’s pretty much dead unfortunately. So Naga for Slaanesh is the best we can hope for.

    That actually gives me a good idea for a post
  • mw51630mw51630 Member Registered Users Posts: 2,158

    mw51630 said:

    To the OP's original questions;

    1. No. New factions is always better, as a new starting location adds more replayability to the overall game, and lets you tackle the same race but with a completely different opening game. The Grim & the Grave is the worst DLC in Warhammer because it doesn't include new starting locations.

    2. I'm sure they'll find some ways to expand the monogods, by just inventing new stuff, adding more mortal options, Beastmen... and maybe even getting inspired by End Times and AoS. No worries here from me.

    1 & 2.

    I just don't want two things to happen with the mono god races.

    I don't want the later DLC LLs for the mono god races to completely overshadow the originals in terms of mechanics and such, like what has happened with many Warhammer 2 base game LLs, and I just don't want CA to just do the same thing with them.

    I just think it'd be kind of a neat idea if CA tryied to expand and enhance a single mono god faction instead of spreading them out into seperate sub factions that's all.
    Hard disagree. Sure, new LLs are going to overshadow the OGs in mechanics. They certainly don't in performance (the OGs still perform well by the AI on the map).

    I absolutely support new factions having more interesting mechanics than the originals. I don't care if this makes the OGs worse by comparison, as by the time DLC rolls around, I won't be interested in playing with them much anymore anyway.

    Like I said before, Grim & Grave is the worst DLC for Warhammer. Any more like it, I will absolutely skip, and I suspect it is probably the worst-selling DLC... so this type of DLC will likely never show up again (thankfully!)
  • ArneSoArneSo Hamburg, Germany Registered Users Posts: 31,542

    ArneSo said:

    ArneSo said:

    Well the core LLs will be overshadowed by the LP LLs.

    Well, that's exactly what I really don't want to see dude.

    I don't want to see a later LL like Valkia or Skulltaker to completely overshadow Skarbrand and his faction.

    I just think that it'd be more interesting if CA brought in two mechaincs per LP's LL, one for the lord themselves and one for the races as a whole. Like if you pick Valkia, she has a mechanic she grants to the mono god faciton, but only if she's the starting LL.

    I just want all the factions to actually still be viable and interesting in the long run.
    It’s inevitable. LP LLs will come with fancy mechanics just like in WH2. This isn’t new at all.
    This is wrong. The only lords who were displaced by DLC lords were the Skaven and that's because the core Skaven mechanics sucked.

    Tyrion and Malakith are arguably still the best high and dark elf campaigns despite 4 additional lords being added with DLC and FLC. Even if you disagree with that statement both are still regularly played because they have strong start positions and interesting ways of engaging with other factions.

    Game 3 so far has avoided having bad core mechanics for every faction so a Skaven situation is impossible in game 3.

    This applies just as clearly to your points @VikingHuscal1066 and it's one of the reasons your solution doesn't resonant with most of the community. When you remove the confirmation bias it's clear you're trying to fix a problem that doesn't exist with ideas discarded after game 1.
    Ehh no? Tyrion, Malekith, Mazdamundi, Kroq, Teclis are all inferior to the FLC and DLC LLs.
    Nurgle is love, Nurgle is life
  • MODIDDLY1MODIDDLY1 Registered Users Posts: 766
    So...
    1. Every lord being part of the same faction not only makes replays less interesting as you will have access to all the lords, but you also don't get any unique mechanics for each sub faction like how ikit gets the lab while snikitch gets the shadowey dealings. That sounds limiting for the sake of being limiting. The solution isn't to force all the lords together to keep some from being less interesting, it's to make the less interesting ones better.

    2. Pretending that every single Khorne dlc lord has to have the same exact playstyle is pigeonholing them into that role as much as saying that every dark elf lord will just play the same so they don't need anymore after 4.

    3. While I agree that WoC need something unique, taking Norsca's mechanic hurts Norsca more than it helps WoC. Same way with adding Mono units into them. WoC needs to stand on it's own, not just get thrown pieces of other chaos races. Honestly I expect them to use a system similar to how the Ogre camps are going to work where the get to set up Chaos Fortresses in places and make camps out of other settlements. I do like the favor system of certain units being able to be upgraded into better versions.

    4. Similar to point 3. Add new things for Norsca and BM. I'm reminded of "Stop making christian rock. You aren't making Christianity better you're just making rock n' roll worse". The Norscan and WoC factions need to be able to stand alone, and flooding them with mechanics and units from the new mono factions is a lame solution to reworking them and creating new things for them. Playing Dwarves shouldn't have the Bloodline mechanic copy-pasted into it and that should stay the same with the chaos aligned factions.

    I feel too many of your ideas are "take thing from A, and give it or spread it out to B, C, or D" and falling into the same pitfall a lot of people are where the don't understand that there isn't a Chaos Faction, but 4 independent factions that should all stand on their own and do their own things.
  • YurisusukiYurisusuki Somewhere in LustriaRegistered Users Posts: 1,040
    ArneSo said:

    MODIDDLY1 said:

    ArneSo said:

    Chora said:

    ArneSo said:

    ArneSo said:

    There is more than enough content for 5-6 LLs for each god including 2 LPs minimum. Literally no problem at all.

    Ehh without using AoS stuff two lord packs are double but it's a stretch. Definitely not a minimum.

    But year I expect khorne and nurgle to get 2. Nuegle possibly 3.

    Slannesh and Tzeentch might only get 1.
    Tzeentchs roster is so small, it needs 2 LPs for all the missing stuff.

    And Slaanesh can use the Cult of Pleasure list for more stuff.

    I expect 2 LPs for Khorne, Tzeentch, Slaanesh and 3 LPs for Nurgle.
    I’m pretty confident that the snakemen of Khuresh will be another Slaanesh dlc
    Yap probably.
    I fear you might be correct. I still think Khuresh being the failed first attempt of the Old Ones is way more interesting than snake beastmen but with them not being on the campaign maps I think they may go the cheaper path
    Naga as a race would be so absolutely amazing. But after seeing the map, it’s pretty much dead unfortunately. So Naga for Slaanesh is the best we can hope for.

    Unless they expand the map, if CA is smart, they could make a room for expansion without telling us, than if GW allow the creation of other Easter factions they can expand the map, but I'd that never happen they just don't expand and we will never know, we only knew that Mortal Empires can be expanded because of the datamine
    We Live in a Society.



  • RalevRalev Registered Users Posts: 137
    I think there is a fair amount of material for lord packs but there is something to what OP is saying here.

    Every recent LP tbroughout WH2 brought unique units and a change in playstyle for that faction. This wasn't the case for e.g. Q&C but by the time we come to H&B/ P&W/S&B/W&P there was definitely something novel which had a new spin on both factions playstyle (exception here probably being the LM who have been totally let down in lord packs).

    There is certainly potential for new and interesting LL mechanics (although the chaos ones are already somewhat intricate) but aside from addition of mortals for some of the monos/mortal lords then I don't know of anything that would really shake up a playstyle. I'm thinking how different skaven armies looked with Eshin and making kiting armies viable, or Markus and his ambush based/resource limited armies, or Grom and his massive flexibility.

    Don't get me wrong. We're going to see a lot of Chaos DLC. But the broadening of possibilities that WH2 LPs brought seems unlikely with monos. We might get some cool new lords/units, but at the core of it the playstyle of a monogod is not going to significantly alter with DLC.
  • Spellbound55Spellbound55 Registered Users Posts: 1,312
    ArneSo said:

    ArneSo said:

    ArneSo said:

    Well the core LLs will be overshadowed by the LP LLs.

    Well, that's exactly what I really don't want to see dude.

    I don't want to see a later LL like Valkia or Skulltaker to completely overshadow Skarbrand and his faction.

    I just think that it'd be more interesting if CA brought in two mechaincs per LP's LL, one for the lord themselves and one for the races as a whole. Like if you pick Valkia, she has a mechanic she grants to the mono god faciton, but only if she's the starting LL.

    I just want all the factions to actually still be viable and interesting in the long run.
    It’s inevitable. LP LLs will come with fancy mechanics just like in WH2. This isn’t new at all.
    This is wrong. The only lords who were displaced by DLC lords were the Skaven and that's because the core Skaven mechanics sucked.

    Tyrion and Malakith are arguably still the best high and dark elf campaigns despite 4 additional lords being added with DLC and FLC. Even if you disagree with that statement both are still regularly played because they have strong start positions and interesting ways of engaging with other factions.

    Game 3 so far has avoided having bad core mechanics for every faction so a Skaven situation is impossible in game 3.

    This applies just as clearly to your points @VikingHuscal1066 and it's one of the reasons your solution doesn't resonant with most of the community. When you remove the confirmation bias it's clear you're trying to fix a problem that doesn't exist with ideas discarded after game 1.
    Ehh no? Tyrion, Malekith, Mazdamundi, Kroq, Teclis are all inferior to the FLC and DLC LLs.
    Is that your opinion or have you done a poll? Because I've seen a lot of people say otherwise. Your statement implies that Malus, Hellebron, Lokir, Rakarth, Nakai, Tehenhauin, Tiktaq'to, Gor-rok, Oxyotl, Eltharion, Alith Anar, Alarielle, Imrik and Eltharion are all just hands down better than the starting lord campaigns.

    That's ludicrous at face value since I think everyone agrees that there are a substantial number of players who view Malus and Nakai as complete failures entirely in need of reworks. But let's be generous and put aside those two.

    Dark Elves

    Hellebron's Death Night mechanics has been reworked repeatedly because it was viewed as a chore for the faction, something that inconvenienced the player and made playing the faction harder for no real gain. That hasn't really changed, though it certainly doesn't make her campaign feel toxic to play at this point. Clearly not a slam dunk for your point.

    Lokir was tied to the Black Ark mechanic which has been reworked repeatedly because it was so ineffective you couldn't do the pirate thing his campaign was ostensibly supporting. Now he's in a better stat sure, but his start position is pretty obnoxious and a lot of players prefer avoiding the lustria bowl so he's by no means ahead of Malekith. Again clearly a disputed outcome.

    Rakarth is pretty neat and works nicely, provides and interesting new start position and has the most advanced mechanic for a Dark Elf faction so far. No major bugs and a very flexible campaign. He's still not a clear winner though since some people actually like the Naggaroth start position and as a lord he's kind of boring. Malekith as a dragon riding spellcaster is mechanically more interesting to a lot of players who are happy to start as Malekith and confederate the other Dark Elf lords. Still a disputed outcome.

    High Elves

    Alarielle is the High Elf campaign I'm the least familiar with since she's just never drawn my attention. She gets boni to powerful units, gets sisters early, can recruit WE units, and gets penalized if Ulthuan gets invaded. I've seen her described as functional and powerful but the penalization mechanic doesn't really change your gameplay at all. You naturally want to control Ulthuan so kicking non high elves off is pretty standard. Otherwise her start position is about the same as Tyrion's and while she's a powerful spell caster who needs an MD nerf she's not bringing anything that makes her campaign head and shoulders above the twins.

    Alith Anar seems fun but his assassination mechanics are literally broken. You get quests assigned which are not reasonably completable so his unique mechanics get ignored a lot of the time. He gets a unique unit which is kind of meh, and he gets really good ambush chance which isn't nothing but directs you towards a particular playstyle that some people simply do not like. In no way is this a straight upgrade compared to the twins.

    Eltharion gets a refreshing start position outside of Ulthuan and has new enemies to fight with Greenskins being set up as his main opponents which is nice. He also has campaign mechanics which feel unfinished and his special units are powerful but somewhat boring (Knights or Tor Gaval are an exception being quite neat). The capture mechanic also provides pretty limited effects that while impactful aren't determining whether or not a playthrough is worth your time. The final battle is actually really interesting even if it can feel like the build up isn't well balanced but it's only available in the Vortex campaign. Certainly not bad but again, not a straight upgrade compared to the twins.

    Imrik gets the most interesting start position for High Elves and gets one of the most interesting and fleshed out mechanics in the dragons. He also plays with dual starts better than Eltharion to my mind and while I'd argue Eltharion tends to be a more useful combatant (Lore of High Magic on a melee lord is pretty strong) Imrik has a well designed kit which makes him very dangerous as a pure melee duelist. If I recall he briefly displaced Tyrion as the most played High Elf campaign on release but the difficulty of his start has led some people to cool on him. A very solid campaign but at least when compared to Tyrion it's still not a slam dunk improvement.

    Lizardmen

    Tehenhauin is probably the most powerful Lizardmen legendary lord if you're utilizing his pyramid to it's fullest. His campaign is also very regularly called dull since all he gets is the pyramid wasn't doesn't provide much excitement just useful buffs. He's a powerful caster with cool mounts but he's less powerful than Mazimundi and has the lore of beasts which is usually identified as one of the worse lores of magic in campaign so the draws are limited. Also he's in the Lustria bowl which a lot of people dislike. Not what I'd call superior to the starting lords.

    Tiktaq'to does flying stuff. That's it. He does it well and new DLC make his campaign have more depth and flexibility but apart from a start in the Southlands and a rite to move twice as fast he really just provides a campaign meant to focus on using a lizardmen airforce, something that isn't well supported in other armies given very few of the lizardmen lords are able to support flying armies. I actually like Tiktaq'to from a design perspective, he offers a unique way to play but it certainly isn't better. Kroq-gar has similar enemies near his spawn but provides a very different experience focused on melee infantry and monsters, something that some players will find superior. So another miss for superiority.

    Gor-rok just starts with Lord Kroak. His mechanic is skipping a quest to get a mechanic available to every other lord in the game. That's technically not nothing but it's very close. His rite makes Saurus unbreakable the utility of which varies massively based on what difficulty you're playing on. He also starts in the lustria bowl but gets one of the most powerful start positions in the game. A lot of people seem to find his campaign boring even by Lizardmen standards which I can't blame them for. Not bad to have easy campaign options certainly but I've never felt compelled to play his faction over any other lizardman.

    Oxyotl has a very unique focus on chameleon skinks which is neat, has the ability to move around the world rapidly which is neat, can settle anywhere which is neat, and has a cool narrative rivalry which culminates in a fun battle in the Vortex which again is neat. His campaign is also seen as pretty easy, with his unique campaign mechanics of receiving missions being pretty easy to ignore when you inevitably find the quests to be more of a pain than the are worth. The consequences and rewards are minimal so ignoring them and just painting the map is quite easy for his faction. Again a focus on stealth units, high ambush chance, and shooting units is neat but it isn't what a lot of people look for in a campaign, meaning Mazimundi and Kroq-gar offer alternative playstyles which many people prefer. Another example of a good addition but certainly not one that invalidates the starting lords.

    If you look at all DLC rather than just the Skaven one's where the new lords are unequivocally better (because release skaven were garbage) then you see that most of the time DLC release lords that are equally enjoyable or actually less fun than their launch counterparts. You'll also notice that FLC lords have recently been bringing in more complex and interesting mechanics overall, largely because they are designed to be fun first and foremost, not to support the narrative of the Vortex map which can be quite limiting. Rakarth and Imrik are easily the most successful additions for the High Elves and the Dark Elves and both were free.

    Game 3 clearly shows a greater focus has been put into crafting engaging core faction mechanics which means the starting lords will remain robust and engaging even when DLC arrive (something that shows through when boring but practical Malekith and Tyrion remain popular despite all of the additions to come after them).

    TLDR: The vast majority of DLC and FLC lords are about equally engaging as the launch lords. Game 3 core mechanics look to be very well designed which will make it impossible for a Skaven situation where a lack of engaging core mechanics results in superior DLC lords simply because they provide something as a core mechanic.
  • Vanilla_GorillaVanilla_Gorilla Registered Users Posts: 34,661
    Ralev said:

    I think there is a fair amount of material for lord packs but there is something to what OP is saying here.

    Every recent LP tbroughout WH2 brought unique units and a change in playstyle for that faction. This wasn't the case for e.g. Q&C but by the time we come to H&B/ P&W/S&B/W&P there was definitely something novel which had a new spin on both factions playstyle (exception here probably being the LM who have been totally let down in lord packs).

    There is certainly potential for new and interesting LL mechanics (although the chaos ones are already somewhat intricate) but aside from addition of mortals for some of the monos/mortal lords then I don't know of anything that would really shake up a playstyle. I'm thinking how different skaven armies looked with Eshin and making kiting armies viable, or Markus and his ambush based/resource limited armies, or Grom and his massive flexibility.

    Don't get me wrong. We're going to see a lot of Chaos DLC. But the broadening of possibilities that WH2 LPs brought seems unlikely with monos. We might get some cool new lords/units, but at the core of it the playstyle of a monogod is not going to significantly alter with DLC.

    And the problem is the more they make now the more similar Monogods get.

    Chaos Warriors are ultimately Chaos Warriors and will behave like it even if some minor buffs/nerfs are applied. Giving every Monogod Chaos Warriors will unquestionably bring them closer together.

    Getting to 2 LPs for each Monogod would at minimum take the same amount of Lord Packs as game 1 and 2 combined. It's a bit stretch to think we'll get more than that.
    "There's no fun in picking on the weak. If you must, go for the mountain high, the language most foreign, target the strong." - Kenny Florian

    #JusticeForCathay

    "I like small words" - Winsy C

    Forum Terms & Conditions

    I am The Beast, Son of Guanyin, The one who beasts 25 hours a day, 8 days a week, The Vanilla Gorilla, Conqueror of Mountains, purveyor of wisdom, Official forum historian, Master Tamer of energy, the one they fear to name, Beastradamus, The Teacher, Master Unbiased Pollster, The Avatar of Tuesday, Chief hype Train Conductor

  • Vanilla_GorillaVanilla_Gorilla Registered Users Posts: 34,661

    34 disagrees should tell you all you need to know about how bad is your idea for the rest of the community.

    Also, at the end of the day, this is just wishfull thinking by you, because we don't have any reason to believe that CA will do any of the things you propose, specially since CA has being implementing more factions, mechanics and a start positions, not the other way around, even giving new factions and start positions to those LL that previously didn't had one.

    Also, it's quite sad that when you are confronted with smart arguments, your first move is to attack that person for being smart, maybe take some argumentation lessons and you won't get your ass kicked in a discussion so much.

    So keep keep burying your head on the sand, but you aren't going to get what you want.

    Well, I don't give a damn if you or anyone else disagrees with me or not.

    You're being a total hypocrite because you're basically trying to tell me that my ideas and such are bad while acting like your opinions are magically more valid than mine or someone else's.


    And what "smart arguments"?

    This is exactly why I call you guys out for being hypocrites, because you guys try to label any and all things you say as smart or valid, all while trying to disregard or trash talk anything someone on the other side of the discussion says.


    And you guys are actually pretty hilarious because you guys are the ones who refuse to look at anything but from your one limited perspectives and such.

    You guys are the ones who are sticking your heads in the sand to anything that doesn't agree with your views and opinions. But it's more like you're a bunch of children who stick their fingers in their ears while yelling "La la la la, I can't hear you!", and all because you guys can't handle the fact that someone has a decent idea of how to do something differently and you didn't come up with it.
    If you genuinely feel this actively persecuted by other peoples' opinions, maybe consider not engaging with this topic every single time you try to bring it up.
    Fair point.
    "There's no fun in picking on the weak. If you must, go for the mountain high, the language most foreign, target the strong." - Kenny Florian

    #JusticeForCathay

    "I like small words" - Winsy C

    Forum Terms & Conditions

    I am The Beast, Son of Guanyin, The one who beasts 25 hours a day, 8 days a week, The Vanilla Gorilla, Conqueror of Mountains, purveyor of wisdom, Official forum historian, Master Tamer of energy, the one they fear to name, Beastradamus, The Teacher, Master Unbiased Pollster, The Avatar of Tuesday, Chief hype Train Conductor

  • VikingHuscal1066VikingHuscal1066 Registered Users Posts: 3,089

    If you genuinely feel this actively persecuted by other peoples' opinions, maybe consider not engaging with this topic every single time you try to bring it up.

    Or maybe you guys should learn to try to look at things from a different angle or perspective, instead of trying to gang up on someone for thinking outside of the box a little.

    And again, I don't care if you guys disagree with me, I care when you start being total hypocrites.

    Because yet again, you guys are the ones who are trying to act like all the opinions or argument points someone else comes up with are all automatically wrong, all while trying to treat anything you and people who agree with you as if it's all automatically correct.

    Because that's what's happening.

    I post thread about Chaos in this case.

    Several of you disagree, or maybe even ask why I suggest X.

    I explain a way or two in which they could make X work within the game.

    You guys blatantly try to ignore any and all of what I've explained, yet try to say I'm the one not listening to anyone else.


    If anyone's sticking their head in the sand, it's folks like you dude.
  • VikingHuscal1066VikingHuscal1066 Registered Users Posts: 3,089
    ArneSo said:

    It’s inevitable. LP LLs will come with fancy mechanics just like in WH2. This isn’t new at all.

    Yeah, it's inevitable that we'll get LPs and all, but it's not inevitable that the base factions need to be overshadowed.

    Like I said, I just think that there's ways to make all the factions remain viable without too much sacrifice to other factions.
  • VikingHuscal1066VikingHuscal1066 Registered Users Posts: 3,089

    It has nothing to do with ego dude, it has to do with people like you not bothering to look a topic from a different angel or another perspective and getting all mad because someone calls you out on it.

    I mean it's hilarious how even when I do explain how some things could be made to work, you guys outright disregard any of that because you guys are snowflakes could can't just be adults about anything and admit that someone other than you might just be able to make a valid point.

    Like when I've explained how they could make a single mono god faction work, with the idea of using a "chaos portal" to basically choose your starting position, you naysayers just ignore that argument and try to pretend it simply doesn't exist.

    But no no, I'm the one who's being immature and hostile or whatever.
  • VikingHuscal1066VikingHuscal1066 Registered Users Posts: 3,089

    This applies just as clearly to your points @VikingHuscal1066 and it's one of the reasons your solution doesn't resonant with most of the community. When you remove the confirmation bias it's clear you're trying to fix a problem that doesn't exist with ideas discarded after game 1.

    Well, at least I'm trying to think of things they could do with the chaos factions in different ways than just the same old things over and over again.

    I've literally explained a number of times that one of the major ways they could make keeping the mono god races as a single faction could work is by offering the "chaos portal" mechanic that allows you to basically choose a starting position for your starting LL's army.

    That would give a tremendous amount of options for how you could play a faction within the game.

    I just annoyed when some people try to pretend that such a point isn't valid or reasonable.
  • NemoTheElf101NemoTheElf101 Registered Users Posts: 2,532

    If you genuinely feel this actively persecuted by other peoples' opinions, maybe consider not engaging with this topic every single time you try to bring it up.

    Or maybe you guys should learn to try to look at things from a different angle or perspective, instead of trying to gang up on someone for thinking outside of the box a little.

    And again, I don't care if you guys disagree with me, I care when you start being total hypocrites.

    Because yet again, you guys are the ones who are trying to act like all the opinions or argument points someone else comes up with are all automatically wrong, all while trying to treat anything you and people who agree with you as if it's all automatically correct.

    Because that's what's happening.

    I post thread about Chaos in this case.

    Several of you disagree, or maybe even ask why I suggest X.

    I explain a way or two in which they could make X work within the game.

    You guys blatantly try to ignore any and all of what I've explained, yet try to say I'm the one not listening to anyone else.


    If anyone's sticking their head in the sand, it's folks like you dude.
    I literally have no stake in the monogods debate; I've made this abundantly clear to you multiple times before. That is not really what I care about here.

    You've stated and continue to state opinions, not facts, but personal takes that are demonstrably unpopular. Not true, not untrue, but not liked or agreed with, consistently.

    People pointing out holes in your logic and making counterpoints aren't people ignoring you or your arguments, they're just not good arguments. Plain and simple.
  • mecanojavi99mecanojavi99 EspañaRegistered Users Posts: 8,233

    It has nothing to do with ego dude, it has to do with people like you not bothering to look a topic from a different angel or another perspective and getting all mad because someone calls you out on it.

    I mean it's hilarious how even when I do explain how some things could be made to work, you guys outright disregard any of that because you guys are snowflakes could can't just be adults about anything and admit that someone other than you might just be able to make a valid point.

    Like when I've explained how they could make a single mono god faction work, with the idea of using a "chaos portal" to basically choose your starting position, you naysayers just ignore that argument and try to pretend it simply doesn't exist.

    But no no, I'm the one who's being immature and hostile or whatever.
    So, everyone is wrong except you? Is it so difficult to believe that most people simply don't like what you are proposing?


    "By the fires of Hashut, let them burn in the flames of eternal torment!"
    - Anonymous
  • VikingHuscal1066VikingHuscal1066 Registered Users Posts: 3,089
    mw51630 said:

    Hard disagree. Sure, new LLs are going to overshadow the OGs in mechanics. They certainly don't in performance (the OGs still perform well by the AI on the map).

    I absolutely support new factions having more interesting mechanics than the originals. I don't care if this makes the OGs worse by comparison, as by the time DLC rolls around, I won't be interested in playing with them much anymore anyway.

    Like I said before, Grim & Grave is the worst DLC for Warhammer. Any more like it, I will absolutely skip, and I suspect it is probably the worst-selling DLC... so this type of DLC will likely never show up again (thankfully!)

    I think that that's being a tad overdramatic.

    I'm sure CA could make the mono god races function as a single faction.

    I think that one thing they could do with bringing in a LL with the DLC is to give each LL a specific mechanic that only really functions when they're the leading LL of the faction, as well as bring a new mechanic that benefits the factions regardless of which LLs the player picks.

    Another thing they could do with a single mono god faction would be to give them a "chaos portal" mechanic that allows you to basically choose starting position of your starting LL. You could choose to stay up the chaos wastes, or you could pick from 4 different areas to teleport to.

    Though I would think such a mechanic should only last for like 5 or 6 turns tops, as any longer might allow you to build up too strong of an army and have a free teleport to 4 main areas of the world.
  • Spellbound55Spellbound55 Registered Users Posts: 1,312
    .

    This applies just as clearly to your points @VikingHuscal1066 and it's one of the reasons your solution doesn't resonant with most of the community. When you remove the confirmation bias it's clear you're trying to fix a problem that doesn't exist with ideas discarded after game 1.

    Well, at least I'm trying to think of things they could do with the chaos factions in different ways than just the same old things over and over again.

    I've literally explained a number of times that one of the major ways they could make keeping the mono god races as a single faction could work is by offering the "chaos portal" mechanic that allows you to basically choose a starting position for your starting LL's army.

    That would give a tremendous amount of options for how you could play a faction within the game.

    I just annoyed when some people try to pretend that such a point isn't valid or reasonable.
    But why should they? You are trying to fix a problem that doesn't exist. Individual subfactions provide a range of start positions and campaigns with unique playstyles and mechanics that are equally viable currently. There is no reason to try and balance one campaign around 4 separate start positions each of which needs to remain functional if a player picks one of the other options.

    It does not matter that you can provide a theoretical explanation for how a one monogod faction system could work if you fail to justify the switch from the subfaction system.

    As your main argument for this seems to be that new subfactions invalidate old ones and that argument is flawed both in it's assumptions (most release subfactions are still enjoyable and engaging even after multiple DLC and FLC) and in the proposed solution (lumping all of the factions together to avoid mechanical differences rather than just designing strong core mechanics that are enjoyable even in the absence of additional mechanics).

    I made a post in this thread exhaustively examining the subfactions added which demonstrates that most are fine and a couple are steps backwards but apart from the Skaven no faction has their initial subfactions invalidated by DLC. The Skaven problem is one of weak core mechanics not an overarching issue with subfactions. Therefore solutions aimed at fixing the existence of subfactions are a waste of time.
  • VikingHuscal1066VikingHuscal1066 Registered Users Posts: 3,089
    MODIDDLY1 said:

    Well, I'm not so much just wanting the single mono god factions to just be that and that's it.

    I've explained multiple times now how there are things which CA could do to make having the mono god races as just a single faction work.

    Like I just said to another person, they could give the mono god factions a "chaos portal" "mechanic" that allows you to basically teleport your starting LL's army to 1 of 4 places on the campaign map, giving them a total of 5 possible start positions.

    And I'm honestly kind of starting to agree with you about Norsca, the WoC/CU, and BM. Though I'm not so much wanting them to just get mono god units willy nilly, but as special rewards and such.

    I could see such reward units being limited to more basic things like Bloodletters and Flesh Hounds from Khorne, with maybe a Bloodthirster or two and or maybe a unit or two of Exalted Bloodletters being high end reward units.

    But that's mostly just for Norsca and the WoC/CU. As I think the BM could just get marked gors as special units.
  • ERICdbsERICdbs CataloniaRegistered Users Posts: 637
    The skaven are the proof that what OP is asking for has already been done. Skaven where terrible at launch, but they got a rework with the addition of undercities. Which means that factions can get better mechanics as time passes, regardless of the unique mechanics that specific LL get in DLC. Also, the fleshing out of factions provided by expanded roster also improves baseline enjoyment.

    So in reality there is no argument here, in the se need that CA can both give new mechanics to the base race and to the different factions.

    Now, this is only a potential. OP would argue that the opportunity cost should be focused on providing more mechanics to the baseline, while others might prefer more focus on the gimmicks for the DLC factions.

    My take is that in WH III, the base mechanics are already a step up, so we'll probably be fine in that regard, and CA can focus on exacerbating faction diferencies. That shouldn't preclude CA from improving what can be improved in the base mechanics if there is reason or need in doing so.

    In any case, there is a limit to how many mechanics we can stick to a faction before it starts feeling bloated, and I'd argue that resources should be better spent developing entirely new factions instead, even obscure ones. I for one welcome our Naga overlords.

    Cheers.
  • EquixEquix Registered Users Posts: 1,495
    Chaos is highly over rated, I think monogods deserve 1 FLC and 1 LP for each and will be finished, it includes norska.

    new Undead Legion:
    Nagash (unlockable for beating game with Undead Legion)
    The Nameless
    Dieter Helsnicht
    Neferata
    Dread King or Walach Harkon

    And also give a quest possibility to other mortachs to access/join some Undead Legion recruiting privileges.

    DLCs for VC BLOODLINES:
    /Necrachs:Zacharias, Melkhior, Radu the forsaken /Strigoi:Ushoran, Vorag The Ghoul King, Gashnag The Black Prince, Rametep /Blood Dragon:Red Duke, Abhorash /Lahmia:zNitocris, Ulrika, Naaima

  • VikingHuscal1066VikingHuscal1066 Registered Users Posts: 3,089

    I literally have no stake in the monogods debate; I've made this abundantly clear to you multiple times before. That is not really what I care about here.

    You've stated and continue to state opinions, not facts, but personal takes that are demonstrably unpopular. Not true, not untrue, but not liked or agreed with, consistently.

    People pointing out holes in your logic and making counterpoints aren't people ignoring you or your arguments, they're just not good arguments. Plain and simple.

    So are all of you dude.

    All of you are just speaking your own opinions, not set in stone facts.

    And my real issue is with how some of these guys think that only they can make counterpoints and trying to act like I can't, which is just ridiculous.

    My whole thing about who they could use the "chaos portal" method of giving a single mono god faction is a valid point which can't just be disregarded, but some of these guys are trying to do that anyway, and pretend that it's all a one way street where they can say whatever they want and no one can counter it.
  • mecanojavi99mecanojavi99 EspañaRegistered Users Posts: 8,233
    edited November 2021

    I literally have no stake in the monogods debate; I've made this abundantly clear to you multiple times before. That is not really what I care about here.

    You've stated and continue to state opinions, not facts, but personal takes that are demonstrably unpopular. Not true, not untrue, but not liked or agreed with, consistently.

    People pointing out holes in your logic and making counterpoints aren't people ignoring you or your arguments, they're just not good arguments. Plain and simple.

    So are all of you dude.

    All of you are just speaking your own opinions, not set in stone facts.

    And my real issue is with how some of these guys think that only they can make counterpoints and trying to act like I can't, which is just ridiculous.

    My whole thing about who they could use the "chaos portal" method of giving a single mono god faction is a valid point which can't just be disregarded, but some of these guys are trying to do that anyway, and pretend that it's all a one way street where they can say whatever they want and no one can counter it.
    Or you know, we simply don't like your idea.
    "By the fires of Hashut, let them burn in the flames of eternal torment!"
    - Anonymous
This discussion has been closed.