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.
3 ·
Comments
- Report
2 · Disagree 2AgreeBut 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.
- Report
2 · Disagree 2AgreeBut 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!
- Report
1 · Disagree 1AgreeThe 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.
- Report
0 · Disagree AgreeThat 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.
- Report
0 · Disagree AgreeThere 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.
- Report
1 · 1Disagree 1AgreeWithout the stupid narrative, the game is amazing and super fun. Luckily this won't be an issue anymore once IE is out.
- Report
0 · 1Disagree AgreeI absolutely love Cathay's caravans system. I'll be in heaven if I could keep developing them and win just by doing that
- Report
0 · Disagree Agree- 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
- Report
0 · Disagree AgreeI 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.
- Report
2 · Disagree 2Agree