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

A lot of campaign gripes could have been avoided by adding a few victory condition options

TenraiSenshiTenraiSenshi Registered Users Posts: 26
Some of the biggest complaints I've seen for the new campaign in TWW3 relate to how players don't like being pulled out of their conquest experience by being forced to participate in the chaos realm race. Personally, I do understand some of the gripes, and although it might be novel to participate in the chaos race campaign once for the experience, I can't really see myself doing multiple play throughs of it.

But honestly speaking, I have no idea why CA didn't just give a victory condition option in the campaign settings so that we could choose what kind of campaign we want to play. Give us a conquest victory condition that disables the narrative victory, and give options for short or long campaigns that determine how many settlements you need to conquer. Hell, maybe throw in an annihilation victory condition while you're at it.

You could also add a setting that allows us to tweak whether to enable or disable the chaos portal spawn for other victory types (it might be nice to have the option to go into the chaos realms purely for their rewards or for fun, but not be forced to do so when it's not convenient).

Frankly, there shouldn't be a need to wait for Immortal Empires for people to get a sandbox campaign experience. It could have been an option right from the get-go, even for the current campaign map. I feel like this was a massive oversight.

Comments

  • ArneSoArneSo Hamburg, Germany Registered Users Posts: 32,665
    Agreed, I miss the different victory conditions from Rome 2 and ToB. There we had a military/conquest victory, an economical Victory or a Cultural Victory.
    Nurgle is love, Nurgle is life
  • GettoGeckoGettoGecko Registered Users Posts: 1,581
    While I'm with you with most of what you have written, I'm absolutly against the uninspired and stupid "get x settlements and capitals" from game 2. I hated that they added that to the themed goals which made game 1 goals so enjoyable for me and destroyed that feeling of each faction having a specific goal in mind.

    But yes, they should rethink and tweak the soul race. The mechanic could also be fun if it was tweaked diffenrently. Imagine if after 10 rounds rifts would open permanently and shuffle around every 5 turns without spawning armies and heroes and slighly lower corruption, your main army couldn't be kicked out of the warp once they are in and the souls would give buffs and enable a win condition without being a lose option. A totally optional addition to conquest which you can fit into your empire build plans. You could build up and do one soul after another, ignore them or just do them step by step you as you please. Same mechanics but they would add to the gameplay experience and not take it away.
  • Kapika96Kapika96 Registered Users Posts: 232
    Like the option to turn off the Chaos invasion in Mortal Empires? That would've been nice, definitely. Took years for us to get that option in WH2 though.

    But even that wouldn't fully fix WH3s campaign for me. I haven't liked the campaign map since they day it was revealed. It's just weird and contorted. Plus the overabundance of Chaos kind of makes all the good new diplomacy stuff much less impactful. Immortal Empires can't came soon enough! The leaked map for that looks amazing and it will be nice to fully use diplomacy, especially looking forward to trying out the High Elves and their influence mechanics with it!
  • ArneSoArneSo Hamburg, Germany Registered Users Posts: 32,665
    Kapika96 said:

    Like the option to turn off the Chaos invasion in Mortal Empires? That would've been nice, definitely. Took years for us to get that option in WH2 though.

    But even that wouldn't fully fix WH3s campaign for me. I haven't liked the campaign map since they day it was revealed. It's just weird and contorted. Plus the overabundance of Chaos kind of makes all the good new diplomacy stuff much less impactful. Immortal Empires can't came soon enough! The leaked map for that looks amazing and it will be nice to fully use diplomacy, especially looking forward to trying out the High Elves and their influence mechanics with it!

    Yeah the map really isn’t nice compared to ME, everything is warped and weirdly shaped… the Empire being just cut in the South feels wrong and the same goes for Cathay. The Empire and how it looks on the narrative map feels wrong in general.

    The map is simply to limited and the same factions always end up at the top. It’s repetitive and predictable while also lacking in diversity.
    Nurgle is love, Nurgle is life
  • Bmnoble981Bmnoble981 Senior Member Registered Users Posts: 1,283
    I would be happy if they gave us a tick box option to turn off the soul race before starting a campaign, like they do with the chaos invasion in Warhammer 2, let us have some play through's where we can focus on the domination victory instead of the boring slog the soul race is or some alternate victory conditions short/long or some faction specific ones instead of the same blanket ones across the board.

    That or an option that lets us keep playing even if we lost the soul race, give the AI winner the buffs the player would have gotten if they won let us fight against them rather than the pointless game over screen. Its not some new idea most of the older total war games let you keep playing even if you didn't achieve the victory conditions within the turn limit.
  • Pappa_FraPappa_Fra Junior Member Registered Users Posts: 288
    edited March 7
    I do think this is where the secrecy and lack of communication has cost them. If they’d been more open they might have had time to reverse some of the design decisions that people have not liked. As a result it’s going to take months to unpick.

    There is no doubt the realm of chaos campaign has been an utter failure. It’s a shame as it’s a decent game with that not in.

    I think the issue is then compounded by the fact there is no IE.

    Edit: Spelling.
  • ArneSoArneSo Hamburg, Germany Registered Users Posts: 32,665
    Pappa_Fra said:

    I do think this is where the secrecy and lack of communication has cost them. If they’d been more open they might have had time to reverse some of the design decisions that people have not liked. As a result it’s going to take months to unpick.

    There is no doubt the realm of chaos campaign has been an utter failure. It’s a shame as it’s a decent game with that not in.

    I think the issue is them compounded by the fact there is no IE.

    This. The Game is great but the Narratice campaign is simply trash and failed to keep players activer after 1-2 campaigns.

    Without the stupid narrative, the game is amazing and super fun. Luckily this won't be an issue anymore once IE is out.
    Nurgle is love, Nurgle is life
  • 6nieve66nieve6 Registered Users Posts: 550
    It's a pity, economic or cultural conditions would be awesome.

    I absolutely love Cathay's caravans system. I'll be in heaven if I could keep developing them and win just by doing that
  • ArneSoArneSo Hamburg, Germany Registered Users Posts: 32,665
    6nieve6 said:

    It's a pity, economic or cultural conditions would be awesome.

    I absolutely love Cathay's caravans system. I'll be in heaven if I could keep developing them and win just by doing that

    Lets hope for that in IE.

    - Complete X Caravans
    - Send Caravans to X of the following Locations
    - Make X amount of money with trade
    - Reach Level X with one of your Caravan Leaders
    Nurgle is love, Nurgle is life
  • TenraiSenshiTenraiSenshi Registered Users Posts: 26
    edited March 7

    While I'm with you with most of what you have written, I'm absolutly against the uninspired and stupid "get x settlements and capitals" from game 2. I hated that they added that to the themed goals which made game 1 goals so enjoyable for me and destroyed that feeling of each faction having a specific goal in mind..

    I think this is why more options would have benefited the game. Everyone has their own idea of what a perfect campaign is. Some want unique objectives for factions, some want a story focused campaign, and some just want to paint the map their colour. Ideally speaking, a conquest victory would just be one of the options available, with others besides. But the more options you give players to tweak their campaign, the more chance you have of giving players the kind of gameplay experience they will enjoy.

    I mean, just looking at the co-op campaigns, you have three different campaign options with different victory conditions, so it feels like there was some initiative there that wasn't fully committed to.
    Post edited by TenraiSenshi on
Sign In or Register to comment.