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

WH3s biggest issue

adjungadjung Registered Users Posts: 358
Guys, don't fool yourselves. The lack of content, the bugs, the long waiting time for IE are problems that, I am optimistic, will be solved. Yes, it will take months or longer, but CA can figure it out the way they did with Warhammer 2.

The real, permanent problem is the implementation of minor settlement battles. They are exhausting, because moving your forces through narrow streets is tedious, and pop-up towers are a dumb mechanic.

In another thread, someone came up with the idea to give the player the choice whether to play a minor settlement battle or an open field battle when besieging.

And I think that would solve so, so many problems. Everyone could enjoy the game as they like. What do you think?


Forward onto Slaughter.
«1

Comments

  • K3KevilinioK3Kevilinio Registered Users Posts: 462
    It's their newest game. Total Silence.
  • CyresdogCyresdog Registered Users Posts: 1,439
    The biggest problem not only with WH3 but CA in general is their general silence towards the community.
    That and that they never ever really take community feedback whatsoever into consideration. It is just way more obvious in wh3 than any of their other games.
    Every single tidbit of feedback while the game was in development was ignored and tossed aside.

  • SchubSchub Registered Users Posts: 1,436
    TW Warhammer Players during game 1 and 2: give us minor settlement battles!!!!

    Also TW Warhammer Players during game 3: remove minor settlement battles!!!!!
    Sigmar protect us all...


  • TimpeyoTimpeyo Registered Users Posts: 2,034
    I think they have genuinely fixed most off the issues, I just think the main rift campaign is quite frustrating and gets a bit tedious, tho I enjoyed the prologue campaign.

    I actually enjoyed vortex alot more, I'm really hoping CD have there own story like VCoast.

    I hope content and the socielnes with the fan base picks up, I liked seeing how excited there team was for the game and its content to come




  • CyresdogCyresdog Registered Users Posts: 1,439
    Schub said:

    TW Warhammer Players during game 1 and 2: give us minor settlement battles!!!!

    Also TW Warhammer Players during game 3: remove minor settlement battles!!!!!

    The difference being, The minor settlement battles in 1 & 2 were hot garbage, and CA had the chance to involve the players into the development of Game 3's rework of said mechanic.
    But they didn't. And now they are confused why we don't like em. There is hardly anything that players wanted, with mechanics like the Tower Defense minigame that anyone in their right mind ever wanted.

    So please stop express this as if its the Communities fault, its not. CA had the chance to do something great and they F'ed it up big time by once more ignoring their biggest and most important asset. The ones who buy and play their games.
    Their development routine is as unproductive as it can be.

  • Darksteel83Darksteel83 Registered Users Posts: 234
    Schub said:

    TW Warhammer Players during game 1 and 2: give us minor settlement battles!!!!

    Also TW Warhammer Players during game 3: remove minor settlement battles!!!!!

    This is correct. But the group that wants them totally removed is very small.
    The group that wants the minor settlement battles reduced is larger.
    Screenshot from a poll I made on the totalwar warhammer facebook. Screenshot is a couple of days old. But the trend is correct.



  • HondlisHondlis Junior Member Registered Users Posts: 1,550
    WH2 never had these issues. Only Norsca debacle which was still solved in like a month. WH3 is out for 2 months and the only thing we've got is one major patch (something i would expect in first 2 weeks).

    If some expected delivery would speed up with WH3, current state is hard pill to swallow.

    Sure all can change with IE but so far nothing suggest it should. Also complete lack of any meaningful info just adds to that.
  • Vanilla_GorillaVanilla_Gorilla Registered Users Posts: 37,463
    I remember people begging for settlement battles foreverrrr.

    Turns out we got them. Lol.
    "It's no fun fighting people weaker than you." - The Beast

    "There are only two people better than me, and I'm both of them" - The descendant of Guanyin

    Forum Terms & Conditions

    I am The Beast, Descendant of Guanyin, The one who beasts 25 hours a day, 8 days a week, The Vanilla Gorilla, The great bright delight, 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, Uwu Usurper, Pog Wog Warrior, Poggers Patroller, Alpha of the species, Apex protector,

  • TeNoSkillTeNoSkill Registered Users Posts: 5,096
    Cyresdog said:

    The biggest problem not only with WH3 but CA in general is their general silence towards the community.
    That and that they never ever really take community feedback whatsoever into consideration. It is just way more obvious in wh3 than any of their other games.
    Every single tidbit of feedback while the game was in development was ignored and tossed aside.

    On the other side, the guys patching things up are quite receptive.

    Example: The last WH II patch reworked some older LL´s ( Volkmar/Isabella/Vlad with nearly exactly the changes I proposed a few months prior.

    https://forums.totalwar.com/discussion/284352/campaign-balance-volkmar-the-grim-cult-of-sigmar-suggestions#latest
    https://forums.totalwar.com/discussion/283327/campaign-balance-random-vampire-counts-things#latest
  • ChoraChora Registered Users Posts: 872
    edited April 12
    Schub said:

    TW Warhammer Players during game 1 and 2: give us minor settlement battles!!!!

    Also TW Warhammer Players during game 3: remove minor settlement battles!!!!!

    I’ll fix it for you:
    TW Warhammer Players during game 1 and 2: give us FUN minor settlement battles!!!!

    Also TW Warhammer Players during game 3: remove BORING half assed minor settlement battles!!!!!

    You act like theyre polar opposites, when they’re really not far apart. We suggest fun minor settlements, they chose to give us this

    why would you put that back at the consumer? We didn’t make the boring minor settlement. We told ca what had the potential to really improve the game, they fumbled, not us.

    What a servile perspective. Are you trying to deflect or is every companies poor implementation the fault of the consumer?

    Fans-can we have fun minor settlements? It’ll help the game a lot
    CA-no, not more fun, arguably a lot worse, but they’ll be waaaaaay more common.
    Schub-ha! You deserved that for asking to see the game improved
    Fans-ok?

  • GettoGeckoGettoGecko Registered Users Posts: 1,630

    I remember people begging for settlement battles foreverrrr.

    Turns out we got them. Lol.

    Who is "people"? A portion of the few percent that post on social media and the forum? So maybe 0,5-5%? Turns out even there the new battles aren't well received. Social media noise don't compensate for good target groupe analysis and I think thats one of the issues with decission making and design choices made in TWW3. We got lots of stuff that small portions of the player base wanted for a long time like tech and skill buffs so low most of them no longer matter, settlement battles where the layout of the map has more impact than the armies fighting there, longer campaign time because you can't finish before turn 130+ at this point we can be glad that we don't got unit caps. These are things a loud minority wanted and it turns out lots of players who aren't involved in the game like we hardcore players droped the and are unhappy with it.

    Just because some people don't get tired of expressing their wishes on how the game should be doesn't mean that the average casual gamer who just want to chill out by playing a relaxing game will also take a liking to these kind of niche wishes.
  • AJH1987AJH1987 Registered Users Posts: 216
    Honestly, I just don't understand why such a semi-complete game was released. It felt rushed at the time, and it feels really rushed with the gift of hindsight. Why did they bother with making the Ogres a pre-release bonus but then didn't make them available in Warhammer II, like Norsca were in I? They could've thrown the Ogres into II which gave some fresh content to get people playing the game again and delayed the release of III by a few months to iron out some of the issues we are seeing.

    Some of the problems people have with some of the new game modes are bad maps. That is such an easy fix and could've been ironed out with getting some people play testing. The other races not being available... again, one of the reasons people want the new game is so they can fight the new factions with their favourites from the others. That's taking too long, and again, a delay to the game release could have had this much closer to availability at launch.

    As is, i've limited interest in any of the games new factions. I only really like Kislev, Cathay feel forced and should act as a caution against throwing loads of other human races into the game at the expense of just fleshing out sub-factions of the Empire more). I've limited interest in daemons, and especially in daemons vs daemons, which just isn't interesting. I think the core forces in this game are a mistake and its leaving a lot of people feelings cold towards the game. When combined with gameplay issues, people (myself included) are actually turning back to Warhammer II.
  • KronusXKronusX Registered Users Posts: 2,464
    AJH1987 said:

    Honestly, I just don't understand why such a semi-complete game was released. It felt rushed at the time, and it feels really rushed with the gift of hindsight. Why did they bother with making the Ogres a pre-release bonus but then didn't make them available in Warhammer II, like Norsca were in I? They could've thrown the Ogres into II which gave some fresh content to get people playing the game again and delayed the release of III by a few months to iron out some of the issues we are seeing.

    Some of the problems people have with some of the new game modes are bad maps. That is such an easy fix and could've been ironed out with getting some people play testing. The other races not being available... again, one of the reasons people want the new game is so they can fight the new factions with their favourites from the others. That's taking too long, and again, a delay to the game release could have had this much closer to availability at launch.

    As is, i've limited interest in any of the games new factions. I only really like Kislev, Cathay feel forced and should act as a caution against throwing loads of other human races into the game at the expense of just fleshing out sub-factions of the Empire more). I've limited interest in daemons, and especially in daemons vs daemons, which just isn't interesting. I think the core forces in this game are a mistake and its leaving a lot of people feelings cold towards the game. When combined with gameplay issues, people (myself included) are actually turning back to Warhammer II.

    Realistically human races are not the issue, it is when they are shoe-horned in. For instance we have DOW, a part human race that has a lot of stuff. The issue is not with Cathay but with the fact WH3 is a pretty big debacle by itself. I personally like Cathay, but I do hate that their tech is absolute garbage and that 0 sense was put into it (also they don't seem to have any melee lord and the caravan guy bonuses are garbage along with the LL lord traits) but that's a whole another set of issues.
  • ManpersalManpersal Registered Users Posts: 2,924
    So, every problem will be eventually solved but minor settlements... just because you say so?

    Then, the community should just accept the truth: Sieges have never been fun in Total War and CA couldn't get it right, no matter what.

    Personally, the easiest and better solution would be if the AI was a lot more inclined to sally out rather to sit taking attrition. In Wh3 I've besieged cities unsure if I'd be able to beat the garrison if they sallied but they stayed inside their walls. Just make the AI more prone to engage in field battles and the game will improve in this side.
  • ManpersalManpersal Registered Users Posts: 2,924
    KronusX said:

    AJH1987 said:

    Honestly, I just don't understand why such a semi-complete game was released. It felt rushed at the time, and it feels really rushed with the gift of hindsight. Why did they bother with making the Ogres a pre-release bonus but then didn't make them available in Warhammer II, like Norsca were in I? They could've thrown the Ogres into II which gave some fresh content to get people playing the game again and delayed the release of III by a few months to iron out some of the issues we are seeing.

    Some of the problems people have with some of the new game modes are bad maps. That is such an easy fix and could've been ironed out with getting some people play testing. The other races not being available... again, one of the reasons people want the new game is so they can fight the new factions with their favourites from the others. That's taking too long, and again, a delay to the game release could have had this much closer to availability at launch.

    As is, i've limited interest in any of the games new factions. I only really like Kislev, Cathay feel forced and should act as a caution against throwing loads of other human races into the game at the expense of just fleshing out sub-factions of the Empire more). I've limited interest in daemons, and especially in daemons vs daemons, which just isn't interesting. I think the core forces in this game are a mistake and its leaving a lot of people feelings cold towards the game. When combined with gameplay issues, people (myself included) are actually turning back to Warhammer II.

    Realistically human races are not the issue, it is when they are shoe-horned in. For instance we have DOW, a part human race that has a lot of stuff. The issue is not with Cathay but with the fact WH3 is a pretty big debacle by itself. I personally like Cathay, but I do hate that their tech is absolute garbage and that 0 sense was put into it (also they don't seem to have any melee lord and the caravan guy bonuses are garbage along with the LL lord traits) but that's a whole another set of issues.
    Not to mention that their 2 heroes are just regular casters with some extra skills, yet they're considered different hero types, they're not much mroe different than an Amber wizard and a bright wizard.
  • ChoraChora Registered Users Posts: 872
    Total tangent but I think minor settlement defences would be more fun if the opponent mostly lined up on one or two sides. Always Being surrounded drains some of the fun imo
  • BlaeysBlaeys Junior Member Registered Users Posts: 1,328
    I like the minor settlement battles in WH3. I still have plenty of open field battles, so it creates a nice mix.

    Always disliked having an open field battle when attacking a settlement.

    The only change I would like to see is minor - increase the cooldown on being able to rebuild things after they have been knocked down (or make it impossible to rebuild them in the same spot after they are destroyed). Currently, it usually makes more sense to just ignore towers, no matter how strong they are.

  • Surge_2Surge_2 Registered Users Posts: 10,488
    I believe mods can just make them open field battles.

    Problem removed with prejudice.
    Glory matters not.

  • ChoraChora Registered Users Posts: 872
    Surge_2 said:

    I believe mods can just make them open field battles.

    Problem removed with prejudice.

    Unless you consider it a problem that ca is fine with all of these half baked features. I want lots of dlc but I want good dlc; if the level of quality continues, I think we’re going to have big problems
  • awkwardgamer05awkwardgamer05 Registered Users Posts: 3
    I personally think the main issue is the ai, I've played WH2 alot on very hard/hard and I expect anti player bias on those difficulties, WH3 however even on normal I've seen armies go through undefended enemy lands just to attack me. They've also upped the ai's cowardice, they'll happily raid you for the remainder of the game if they can't attack one of your settlements, never being punished for it mind.

    I just hope with Immortal Empires, they somehow tweak the ai in that regard. Towers could do with a slight nerf, or the ai not being able to build them instantly
  • Surge_2Surge_2 Registered Users Posts: 10,488
    Chora said:

    Surge_2 said:

    I believe mods can just make them open field battles.

    Problem removed with prejudice.

    Unless you consider it a problem that ca is fine with all of these half baked features. I want lots of dlc but I want good dlc; if the level of quality continues, I think we’re going to have big problems
    I've already lowered my expectations as far as I will accept. If that low bar isn't reached, Game 2 exists.
    Glory matters not.

  • drogarito92drogarito92 Registered Users Posts: 1,185
    The biggest problem of WH3 is that it's an unfinished, pre-alfa game that still does not have chat 2 months after the release.
  • DragantisDragantis PolandRegistered Users Posts: 765


    Schub said:

    TW Warhammer Players during game 1 and 2: give us minor settlement battles!!!!

    Also TW Warhammer Players during game 3: remove minor settlement battles!!!!!

    This is correct. But the group that wants them totally removed is very small.
    The group that wants the minor settlement battles reduced is larger.
    Screenshot from a poll I made on the totalwar warhammer facebook. Screenshot is a couple of days old. But the trend is correct.



    A poll that only a 300 people took part off, it not a reasonable source of knowledge. IMO only towers need to be nerfed (it should have longer cool down and easier to destroy by artillery but less like to be destroyed by missiles unit) and minor siege would be good.
    Blood for the Bloo... Blood DLC in Q3?! Khorne hate CA!
  • SillybillySillybilly Registered Users Posts: 287
    Schub said:

    TW Warhammer Players during game 1 and 2: give us minor settlement battles!!!!

    Also TW Warhammer Players during game 3: remove minor settlement battles!!!!!

    You know what would have been just great? Some terrain or small amount of buildings that gave an advantage to the defenders. Maybe even some small walls. That’s what I had in mind for minor settlement battles. What I didn’t ask for was 80% of a siege with OP towers and an AI that can’t deal with any of it.

    It’s just like how people wanted a real siege rework instead of adding buildables inside the walls and calling it a day. You know what would have been better all by itself? A roof over the walls.
  • SchubSchub Registered Users Posts: 1,436

    Schub said:

    TW Warhammer Players during game 1 and 2: give us minor settlement battles!!!!

    Also TW Warhammer Players during game 3: remove minor settlement battles!!!!!

    You know what would have been just great? Some terrain or small amount of buildings that gave an advantage to the defenders. Maybe even some small walls. That’s what I had in mind for minor settlement battles. What I didn’t ask for was 80% of a siege with OP towers and an AI that can’t deal with any of it.

    It’s just like how people wanted a real siege rework instead of adding buildables inside the walls and calling it a day. You know what would have been better all by itself? A roof over the walls.
    Serious question have you ever played other total war games? Minor settlement battles never had "some small walls". The maps we have now are like Troy or Rome 2 but with buildable defense equipment
    Sigmar protect us all...


  • Vanilla_GorillaVanilla_Gorilla Registered Users Posts: 37,463
    edited April 12

    I remember people begging for settlement battles foreverrrr.

    Turns out we got them. Lol.

    Who is "people"?
    People on this forum.
    "It's no fun fighting people weaker than you." - The Beast

    "There are only two people better than me, and I'm both of them" - The descendant of Guanyin

    Forum Terms & Conditions

    I am The Beast, Descendant of Guanyin, The one who beasts 25 hours a day, 8 days a week, The Vanilla Gorilla, The great bright delight, 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, Uwu Usurper, Pog Wog Warrior, Poggers Patroller, Alpha of the species, Apex protector,

  • Vanilla_GorillaVanilla_Gorilla Registered Users Posts: 37,463
    I actually quite like them now.

    I don't like building towers mid battle, but it's quite fun for the early game fights and if nothing else a change of pace.
    "It's no fun fighting people weaker than you." - The Beast

    "There are only two people better than me, and I'm both of them" - The descendant of Guanyin

    Forum Terms & Conditions

    I am The Beast, Descendant of Guanyin, The one who beasts 25 hours a day, 8 days a week, The Vanilla Gorilla, The great bright delight, 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, Uwu Usurper, Pog Wog Warrior, Poggers Patroller, Alpha of the species, Apex protector,

  • brobrowbrobrow Registered Users Posts: 3
    adjung said:


    In another thread, someone came up with the idea to give the player the choice whether to play a minor settlement battle or an open field battle when besieging.

    Yeah me lol! And I had a bunch of other solutions too. Your thread got WAY more traction tho
Sign In or Register to comment.