2020. 1. 23. 07:59ㆍ카테고리 없음
Jan 25, 2018 Total War: Warhammer 2 Mortal Empires - Beastmen Campaign #1 - Duration: 39:52. MonstersAbound 32,869 views.
A developer diary has been uploaded on the Total War YouTube channel, featuring comments from the dev team about their vision for the recently-announced Total War: Warhammer II.We go through the.First, game director Ian Roxburgh and animator Elyse Gymer talk about the new races and the challenges in animating them. The Lizardmen were particularly tricky: “We tried doing mocap for them,” says Gymer, “and we found that they were pushing too far into the human side, so we went much more animalistic.” There’s some great footage of a Saurus warrior attacking on two legs and then scampering back on all fours. Communications manager Al Bickham then enthuses about the Lizardmen roster, confirming the presence of many of their exotic dinosaur-inspired monsters, such as Terradons, Carnosaurs, Stegadons and Bastiladons.Roxburgh and Bickham both suggest that we’ll see more variety in Total War: Warhammer II following the positive response to the varied faction mechanics we saw in the original.
Expect the races to be even more diverse in how they operate, and for battles to take us to “different and sometimes wilder new terrain types”.Jim Whitston, lead campaign designer, says “we’ve got very lush jungle, very beautiful but also very dangerous deserts, with all the hazards that that entails”. Expect magically floating Aztec-esque pyramids in the Lizardmen jungle of Lustria, while Naggaroth, home of the Dark Elves, will be “probably the most diverse area of the map that we’ve ever had” according to environment artist Emma Charnley, thanks to a large expanse of hardened lava.Finally, Bickham confirms that the game will have “two legendary lords per race, each with their own start position. You can play co-op multiplayer with the same race, and that creates all sorts of possibilities, and it’s something the fans have been asking for.”You can watch Ben and I chat through the game’s launch trailer in the video below, but it turns out I was wrong about one thing: the Slann in the trailer isLordMazdamundi.
Perhaps his Stegadon mount – which to be fair is the main thing that identifies him – is a quest reward.
Welcome to!A subreddit for all of those who love the Total War series. First of all - I love the new TW:W. It's fantastic. It was everything I dreamed it would be.
I, like most people, first was introduced to the series by Rome 1, which I played to death. Sadly, over the years, most of the products released after this great game didn't really live up to the high standards set by the first game, culminating in RTW2. When I heard TW:W, I was worried it wouldn't live up to expectation.
But boy I was wrong. It's amazing - not perfect by any means - but it's a really damn good game. And with the additions and expansions they are planning, it has the potential to be one of the best games ever made. Hyperbolic perhaps, but I think it's a fair assessment. If the map eventually expands to include the entire Warhammer world, with all the factions in a Grand Campaign, wow.So it's with this in mind that I have a small, but important suggestion - Could we possibly have Multiplayer campaigns in TW:W? I don't mean Co-op, I mean actual multiplayer.
I'm really happy that we can at least play co-op AND not have to simulate every battle or play head to head against each other like in Empire/Napoleon.So many people would love this feature. Anyone that has played, or even thought about playing a WHFB campagin. EU doesn't seem to have a limit in its multiplayer. The Civ games let you play 12 (I think) players multiplayer. So why not TW?But why is it only 2 players? As far as I can see, there are two or three possible reasons why not:. It's a stylistic design choice by CA.
It's technically impossibleIf it's a stylistic choice - I don't understand it personally. I've seen arguments that it would take too long for the players.
That's up to me how I spend my time. I don't mind waiting or spectating battles while people play. The unit sharing system is really great for two players - it would easily work with more players. If not, no big deal.
Total War Warhammer 2 Multiplayer Campaign More Than 2 Players
I can see how, in games with lots of randomers online, you might not want to wait for everyone to do their turn - then you can have an autoresolve only function, or a turn timer. Or don't play it with randomers. But I would love to play a campaign with several of my friends over a weekend, or over a month. It would be amazing.Secondly, I don't get why you would hinder yourself.
A large portion of strategy games has been about the multiplayer segment. You just have to see the amount of TW youtube channels dedicated to multiplayer battles and replays to see how popular they are - without it being the focus or even with good support. The demand IS there. People ask about it, in every thread posted or every AMA by CA, who I've noticed do a great job of avoiding the question - I suspect they don't want to do it and want to avoid any further potential PR issues.
I don't really expect them to reply to this post either.Concerning point 2 - I don't really believe it, frankly. The number of TW competitor products (many of which I mentioned above) which include these multiplayer options as standard is ridiculous. I'm sure it's some work for CA to do - but it would be amazing and truly worth the effort. Especially with the planned expansions to the game - this becomes more and more pertinent.Hell, I wouldn't even mind paying for it as a DLC in some way, if the issue is monetary/division of resources. Perhaps a host/server client, or something.
I get it, it's a business, and this is something that is perhaps hard to quantify in pure sales. Or if you don't want to do it yourself, open it up to the modders somehow. But please follow CDProjectRed's example and listen to your fans.It would be worth it. It really would.
Total War: Warhammer would be the defining multiplayer strategy game.tl;dr - Please add multiplayer (4p+) support for campaigns for TW:W, or let the modders do it. Or even release it as DLC.
It would be awesome. It wouldn't change. I have nothing against 4/6/8/12/16 player MP campaigns, the more the merrier!However, CA does not have an infinite amount of resources. Allocation of said resources often means features are excluded not because they don't make sense or wouldn't be an entertaining experience but, because of time (I suspect this is what happened to naval combat - shelved until a later date).In the case of the 4/6/8/12 player campaign experience, I feel that time invested in developing a STABLE platform could be better invested in developing something like naval combat, Avatar Conquest, improved siege battles, so on. I want CA to spend their resources in areas where they see the greatest return. I don't feel that a larger MP campaign would be it. So basically your argument could be summarised as at some point, but first fix/improve the game?i mean, i don't disagree with you, but i'm just concerned this will be overlooked (again).
People have been wanting this for SO LONG. There are posts upon posts of people asking for it, or asking for someone to mod it from the days of the first Rome game. People have even modded Rome 1 and Medieval to play it hotseat with autoresolve battles.Again, if it has to be DLC in this day and age, fine.
I would pay for it.(and just as an aside concerning the popularity/demand)I mean if you check steam stats for games by active player base, nearly all of the top games have an online multiplayer component. And those that are strategy games / CA competitors have true multiplayer options.' Hell, Europa Universalis IV has been out for three years and it has a bigger player base on Steam than TW:W.
It's one of CA's biggest competitors, and has had multiplayer for ages. IV allows 256 players in its multiplayer?!?!People who buy and play strategy other strategy games play multiplayer campaigns, and it seems to contribute to both the popularity and the staying power of their game. I think the demand for such a feature is definitely there, but it's no where near enough for CA to consider it I think. You might think it's as simple as changing the '2p' option to '4p' but on the development side they have to figure out netcode, desync issues, cross-region connection issues, and possibly even dedicated servers. It's time and resources CA could put into developing new factions and content for the core mass of people who just want to play 10 turns a day before they go to work or try to beat the game on Legendary alone.I'm not saying what you suggest is impossible, I'd love to see it. Me and my siblings have always wanted this.
But whether the real demand for this sort of feature to become feasible is questionable. Yeah you're right, they're all multiplayer games, but most are competitive mulitplayer or have no multiplayer to speak of (Football manager + Skyrim). The two Strategy games up there are both Civ, and that's because it's civ. It's relatively simple, can play twenty to thirty turns rather quickly, and the multiplayer turn system is simultaneous. The reason it can be simultaneous is because there's no strategy outside of the tile you're stood on.
Even then multiplayer games on civ take up a whole day to complete and that's IF all players don't desync every turn/disconnect.CA would need to think of something clever to incorporate the RTS element of their game with a turn system which can be very lengthy as is. Pit Boss Co-operative perhaps? The other argument is just have every battle auto-resolve. Which in my personal opinion would have less strategy involved than civ does as it will simply be the more expensive stack wins.I personally can't see a feasible way for it to be implemented outside of Pitboss multiplayer or at the most 3-4 player co-op.