Edit - Do they really have to have a title of "Armada"? Now that's 3 space games (star wars, firestorm, and now the Battlefleet gothic RTS adaptation) that use it!
Edit - Do they really have to have a title of "Armada"? Now that's 3 space games (star wars, firestorm, and now the Battlefleet gothic RTS adaptation) that use it!
Saying both Battlefleet Gothic and Armada does seem a bit superfluous.
But yeah, I'm interested, see how it turns out. I seem to be disappointed more often than not when a table top strategy game gets turned in to a strategy video game.
The proportions for the foreground cruiser in the 1st and 2nd picture look "off"". The bridge superstructure seems to big relative to the body of the ship and the windows of the bridge appear too big. The 2nd picture seems to show a stubby cruiser instead of a longer one. Finally the ram part of the foreground cruiser in the 1st picture looks too bulbous.
I am using the actual BFG miniatures and the BFG rulebook ship class artwork for comparison.
As for gameplay I hope it is a slower paced game more like Homeworld rather than spamming clicks or hotkeys all over the place. If nothing else, a slower paced game gives more time to zoom in and watch the ship details.
Edit - Do they really have to have a title of "Armada"? Now that's 3 space games (star wars, firestorm, and now the Battlefleet gothic RTS adaptation) that use it!
Four games, Star Trek: Armada 1 and 2 were also semi-popular RTS titles
Also worth mentioning that the developer for this game has just one published game in their catalogue, the almost unheard of MOBA Stellar Impact... which I own, and it's ok, but nothing outstanding. A fully fledged RTS is a big undertaking unless they plan to make it entirely multiplayer only, dumping the single player campaign and AI that form the bulk of work in a typical RTS title
Edit - Do they really have to have a title of "Armada"? Now that's 3 space games (star wars, firestorm, and now the Battlefleet gothic RTS adaptation) that use it!
To this day, I'm surprised nothing was done BFG-wise with Relic, given their experience with Homeworld back in the day. Besides, Dawn of War 1 came out when BFG was still a going concern, but hey, better late than never.
Make it turn based and function like actual BFG...now that would be cool.
No, it wouldn't. Battlefleet Gothic, like all tabletop games, is constrained by the fact that all its systems must be calculated manually. A computer game does not have this limitation, and there's no sane reason to use the dumbed down systems designed to allow space combat to be simuated using mental arithmetic when it can trivially handle a much stronger simulation. It's like saying that a video game should only play at 25 fps and 720x576 resolution because broadcast television wasn't capable of anything better.
H.B.M.C. wrote: Here's hoping that this isn't a freemium game chock full of microtransactions.
Yeah, I finally got around to playing WHQ on my iPhone and realized that I only got a third of the game- the other two-thirds cost twice as much as the game, so it ends up being pretty expensive to get all of the additional content for a repetitive dungeon-crawler.
In addition to that, WHQ seems to be one of the more well-liked classic-game-to-computer/device, so I'm really worried this game will be chock-full of microtransactions.
It's sad that I look at these new GW releases with such apprehension.
Iracundus wrote: The proportions for the foreground cruiser in the 1st and 2nd picture look "off"". The bridge superstructure seems to big relative to the body of the ship and the windows of the bridge appear too big. The 2nd picture seems to show a stubby cruiser instead of a longer one. Finally the ram part of the foreground cruiser in the 1st picture looks too bulbous.
Do. Not. Care. At. All.
If the biggest single issue that causes neckbeards to foam and rage is whether or not the aspect ratio of the superstructure is correct, the wailing will be completely drowned out by the primal, triumphal bellow uttered by the gamer base with its successful naval game from a beloved Sci Fi background.
Iracundus wrote: The proportions for the foreground cruiser in the 1st and 2nd picture look "off"". The bridge superstructure seems to big relative to the body of the ship and the windows of the bridge appear too big. The 2nd picture seems to show a stubby cruiser instead of a longer one. Finally the ram part of the foreground cruiser in the 1st picture looks too bulbous.
Don't know if you've noticed, but Imperium ships etc require more bodies to operate it than say, Star Trek or Star Wars. And it's not as if the bridges on the actual models are that small either lol. As for the ram- nothing wrong with it IMO.
To this day, I'm surprised nothing was done BFG-wise with Relic, given their experience with Homeworld back in the day. Besides, Dawn of War 1 came out when BFG was still a going concern, but hey, better late than never.
I hope.
100% agreed. Of all the possible GW games to be turned into video games, BFG has always been my biggest hope (it's my favorite GW game), and also my biggest fear (way too easy for a video game dev to screw it up). Make it nice and slow paced like Homeworld, and we've got something good. Make it just pew-pew action, and it will suck.
Looks good if those are actual game shots and not pre-rendered pics. I'm hoping there will be an Xbone version though.. my old-person back doesn't let me play PC games as much as I used to :(
Necros wrote: Looks good if those are actual game shots and not pre-rendered pics. I'm hoping there will be an Xbone version though.. my old-person back doesn't let me play PC games as much as I used to :(
It's an RTS. Why in God's name would you want to play it in a console?
And another game released in 2012: Stellar Impact.
http://store.steampowered.com/app/207150/ Mixed reviews on steam. 74% Metacritic. Seems decent, if anything.
Very similar in theme to BFG. One of the customer reviews even says "It plays great, reminds me a lot of Warhammer Battlefleet Gothic. " and the negative reviews just hate on it because the game is apparently not getting any attention from the developers. This is very important in a multiplayer-only game.
I have high hopes for this developer and this game.
It's definitely not the shovelware trash we've been getting.
Stellar Impact is a good platform for a game. It had very good 'feel' in what was basically a MOBA with ships. It was multiplayer only and had such a small player base that matchmaking took a very long time and would often pair 'super high ranked players' (with unlocked ships/equipment) against complete noobs with no familiarity of the system so the player base never got off the ground.
I have often wanted that game to be single-player, and it was probably only a decent campaign away from being successful.
And another game released in 2012: Stellar Impact.
http://store.steampowered.com/app/207150/ Mixed reviews on steam. 74% Metacritic. Seems decent, if anything.
Very similar in theme to BFG. One of the customer reviews even says "It plays great, reminds me a lot of Warhammer Battlefleet Gothic. " and the negative reviews just hate on it because the game is apparently not getting any attention from the developers. This is very important in a multiplayer-only game.
I have high hopes for this developer and this game.
It's definitely not the shovelware trash we've been getting.
Wow, Etherium actually looks pretty nice.
With Grey Goo and this coming out, 2015 might be the year of the RTS.
Edit - Do they really have to have a title of "Armada"? Now that's 3 space games (star wars, firestorm, and now the Battlefleet gothic RTS adaptation) that use it!
The original title - Battlefleet Gothic-A Whole Mess of Space Boats, did not test will with the sample audience.
Edit - Do they really have to have a title of "Armada"? Now that's 3 space games (star wars, firestorm, and now the Battlefleet gothic RTS adaptation) that use it!
The original title - Battlefleet Gothic-A Whole Mess of Space Boats, did not test will with the sample audience.
Edit - Do they really have to have a title of "Armada"? Now that's 3 space games (star wars, firestorm, and now the Battlefleet gothic RTS adaptation) that use it!
Don't forget Star Trek: Armada, a spaceship RTS that was an integral part of my childhood.
Iracundus wrote: The proportions for the foreground cruiser in the 1st and 2nd picture look "off"". The bridge superstructure seems to big relative to the body of the ship and the windows of the bridge appear too big. The 2nd picture seems to show a stubby cruiser instead of a longer one. Finally the ram part of the foreground cruiser in the 1st picture looks too bulbous.
Gushing praise is not the only valid response to a GW related press release. Criticism is equally valid, especially given the spotty record of games based on GW's IP, and given the choice of an apparent little known company to do this BFG release. If that preliminary artwork fails to get things like the proportions of the iconic Imperial ships right, it is a mark against them because it calls into question how faithful they will be to the underlying source material. I will watch and see, but I am not going to run around screaming like a crazed fanboy just because it is BFG.
I have an Imperial Navy fleet of 63 ships and would love to see them recreated on screen.
This could be great, but I wouldn't personally mark the probability any higher than about 30%, for many of the reasons given above, not least GWs scattergun approach to handing out IP for computer games. It absolutely certainly won't be a 'AAA' Homeworld 40K, nor will it appear on console, but a decent PCBFG simulation of any sort will still get my cash.
BFG on the PC! Ok, this has caught my attention. This gets a reserved spot at the top of my buy-in list, and will have to suck bad fro me not to buy on release.
i doubt it will be shovelware, so far GW is licencing its games to small developers to sell via steam license, and not free play. It also will likely be PC based with console port second (if at all) because this is a minor license for the 40K fanbase, and not Star Trek or Star Wars.
Orks kroozers are good, but you've really gotta get them in close as quick as you can to use them to full effect. The escorts should do most of the legwork
*edit: Just seen your BFG post. Looks like you have escorts covered!
agnosto wrote: Meh, pass. RTS isn't my thing; living in Korea killed any joy of RTS that I ever had due to "all starcraft, all the time".
I'm generally not a fan of RTS games, either, but if it has a nice slow pace to it (like BFG should, essentially being Age of Sail in space), then I'm good with that. I enjoyed Homeworld a lot.
Iracundus wrote: The proportions for the foreground cruiser in the 1st and 2nd picture look "off"". The bridge superstructure seems to big relative to the body of the ship and the windows of the bridge appear too big. The 2nd picture seems to show a stubby cruiser instead of a longer one. Finally the ram part of the foreground cruiser in the 1st picture looks too bulbous.
I am using the actual BFG miniatures and the BFG rulebook ship class artwork for comparison.
As for gameplay I hope it is a slower paced game more like Homeworld rather than spamming clicks or hotkeys all over the place. If nothing else, a slower paced game gives more time to zoom in and watch the ship details.
I can't remember where I heard it (maybe the Rogue Trader RPG, or some of the old White Dwarf battle reports), but each turn in the wargame was about half an hour. It also had a very big scale--the "average" ranged gun could shoot halfway from the Earth to the Moon. Keeping that sense of scale and time will be what determines if I check it out.
You probably heard it from me as I have in the past quoted Andy Chambers on the BFG scale from the following site, which itself archived this from his posts to the old BFG mailing list:
I'm not sure if I've talked about scale before but here goes anyway. BFG works around an approximate scale of 1cm=1000KM for the planets and other tabletop features. Obviously this means the ship models are massively out of scale, an Imperial cruiser is NOT 9000KM+ long! The scale is basically there as a rule of thumb and I didn't worry about it too much when it came down to setting weapon ranges, ship speeds and so on. These were all done to create the right impression of distance on the tabletop. For example 60cm 'feels' like a long way and 30cm doesn't, the weapon ranges aren't defined by some pseudo-science calaculation of the energy dissipation rate of lasers (fairly obviously ) but to create an interaction between the (massively out of scale) models on the tabletop.
The more interesting question is perhaps how long is a turn, and that one I don't know the answer too - I'd guess somewhere between 15 minutes and an hour (quite likely telescoping so that at long range a turn is an hour but by the time you're within 15 cm its 15 minutes). This would make an attack craft capable of moving 30cm per ordnance phase capable of doing approximately 30-120,000 km/h. I've got no idea if this is realistic for starfighter speeds, or unfeasibly fast, incredibly slow or what , perhaps someone on the list could enlighten us all on this front (don't just tell us what it says it the Star Wars technical manual though!).
Any computer game will obviously have to take some liberties with the spatial and time scale else you will have specks shooting at other specks. To see all the detail on a ship, the ships will either have to represent sensor images or there will have to be some sort of firer and/or target cam mode.
The BFG rules have always been clear that the models are not to scale with the distances being moved. That is why all measurements are made to the stem of the flight base, thats where the actual ship is. its also why ships are allowed to just move over each other or even occupy the same gaming space, they don't collide unless you are deliberately trying to ram or board.
The large template is what is stated to be the size of an earth sized planet and the small template is basically earth's moon or similar in size.
Earth has an approximate diameter of 12,742 km. Which is represented by a 5" template, or 12.7cm
So 1cm = 1000km is roughly spot on(short by about 3km) given the size of celestial objects of known size in the game.
So that means that each turn, a ship is capable of moving its speed in kilometers. If we assumed a turn lasted an hour, a reasonable assumption, then that gives even the slowest ships a base speed of 20,000km/hour. Thats only a little slower than the reentry speed of the space shuttle.(28,000km/hour) Other ships are much faster.
This also isn't top speed, its normal combat speed. A ship with speed 20 can, with the All Ahead Full order, go up to 44,000km/hour.
AlexHolker wrote: Looks pretty, but being pretty isn't enough. Hopefully the gameplay is a hell of a lot more compelling than it is in Sins of a Solar Empire.
Looks like nicely rendered still frames of dubious origin. I'm all for a BFG game, even if they just reskin the old startrek armada and remove the grotload of bugs from it, but i'd love to see some ingame footage first.
Very interested, but I really wish it was turn based instead of RTS. All I really want the machine to do is keep track of the book keeping and set up for me, while looking very, very pretty.
Wehrkind wrote: Very interested, but I really wish it was turn based instead of RTS. All I really want the machine to do is keep track of the book keeping and set up for me, while looking very, very pretty.
I would be fine with RTS if you have the ability to instantly pause the action to micromanage.
That's true, but it would be awkward for multiplayer. For me there would be a great value to being able to play a turn based BFG on the computer, especially if it was asynchronous (but that would be really tricky with Brace for Impact orders.)
Automatically Appended Next Post: With friends, I mean. A turn based BFG with set up, book keeping and combat resolution taken care of by the PC would be a huge boon to actually getting to play games with friends when you have to work and take care of kids etc.
Also, these pictures look like they're from within the actual game itself just by how some of the objects are rendered. And I am noticing that the ships are not all at the same level, so maybe the game will operate within a limited three dimensional space.
Grey Templar wrote: I would be fine with RTS if you have the ability to instantly pause the action to micromanage.
It would be better to make the AI controls good enough that you don't need to pause to micromanage. It should be an option for the obsessive, it should not be compulsory. For example, if you want your lead ship to Brace For Impact when it comes under fire you should be able to toggle the Brace For Impact skill so that they will automatically use it when they come under heavy fire, or leave it to be activated manually.
I played homeworld several times just to watch the ships interact with one another. The wonderful feeling of that (that few other games captured) is the different paces of combat between the capital ships and the smaller escorts and fighters. And when a truly large battle happened it was a sight to behold.
I have wanted another one (or spiritual successor) for some time. So I'll have some hope.
The name armada suggests more than one ship is under your control that's fine so long as its not just click here move all ships here like most other games based on clash of clans mechanic.
e.earnshaw wrote: The name armada suggests more than one ship is under your control that's fine so long as its not just click here move all ships here like most other games based on clash of clans mechanic.
You mean based on the Warcraft mechanic? I believe it was one of the first to select multiple units to send to a specific point. It's been around a very long time.
Grey Templar wrote: The BFG rules have always been clear that the models are not to scale with the distances being moved. That is why all measurements are made to the stem of the flight base, thats where the actual ship is. its also why ships are allowed to just move over each other or even occupy the same gaming space, they don't collide unless you are deliberately trying to ram or board.
The large template is what is stated to be the size of an earth sized planet and the small template is basically earth's moon or similar in size.
Earth has an approximate diameter of 12,742 km. Which is represented by a 5" template, or 12.7cm
So 1cm = 1000km is roughly spot on(short by about 3km) given the size of celestial objects of known size in the game.
So that means that each turn, a ship is capable of moving its speed in kilometers. If we assumed a turn lasted an hour, a reasonable assumption, then that gives even the slowest ships a base speed of 20,000km/hour. Thats only a little slower than the reentry speed of the space shuttle.(28,000km/hour) Other ships are much faster.
This also isn't top speed, its normal combat speed. A ship with speed 20 can, with the All Ahead Full order, go up to 44,000km/hour.
It's more likely the turns take place over a minute or less given the fluff.
Wyzilla wrote: It's more likely the turns take place over a minute or less given the fluff.
Ehhhh the fluff is pretty inconsistent. In some, it's like a Star Trek episode where ship to ship battles are nailbiters with decisions made minute to minute and dramatic maneuvers that throw people across consoles or roller coaster arms-in-the-air WHOAAAAAAAAAA moments.
In others they're 'enemy sighted, six hours until engagement' affairs where every little thing evolves over the better part of an afternoon and it's all won or lost based on teams of people doing math.
The news that an adaptation of Games Workshop’s Battlefleet Gothic was in development made for happy reading last week but solid facts were thin on the ground. We knew that the game would be real-time rather than turn-based, which was cause for concern in some quarters, and that four factions would be available. Now, following a meeting with the developers yesterday, I have all of the details necessary to soothe concerns. Armada is packed with clever ideas and I’ve dissected them below.
How does a dynamic campaign including possible Exterminatus orders on planets that fall under enemy control sound? How about captains with skills that develop over time and personalities that can lead them to disobey orders? Of course, this being the grImperium, anyone showing disobedience to a superior’s commands can be executed, restoring order. The chain of events that can lead to an individual execution or a planetwide Exterminatus seem like they’re key to an understanding of the game Tindalos are hoping to make. Armada isn’t aiming to be a direct digital adaptation of the Battlefleet rules but it won’t be a linear RTS wearing borrowed insignia and uniform from a popular mythology.
The two aspects outlined above – the possible fates of planets and of captains – help to explain how campaign and combat will work, and how they’ll capture the flavour of Warhammer 40k.
First, let’s cover combat. It’s realtime, with no turn-based option, but the pace will be slow enough to allow for careful planning, as befits the hulking great ships that are at the heart of the game. Naval battles are the inspiration, so manoeuvring into position to launch broadside attacks or ramming or boarding actions will be more important than being able to monitor and operate hundreds of weapon systems simultaneously. Apart from your Admiral’s ship, every vessel in your fleet will respond to the changing situation during a mission without waiting for commands from on high. While you can directly intervene, the fleet should be able to handle itself thanks to a set of behaviours assigned before battle commences.
You’ll choose those behaviours yourself, and can alter them mid-mission if necessary, which should provide a sense of control without the need for rapid micromanagement. As an example, Tindalos showed a set of disengagement options, instructing a captain to pull out of combat when his ship had taken a certain amount of damage. Perhaps you want him to disengage early because you’ve spent a fortune upgrading his weapons systems, or because the crew are particularly talented and should definitely live to fight another day. Whatever the case, as soon as the threshold is reached, he should activate his warp drive and scarper.
A particularly brave captain might refuse the order, however, insisting that his crew be reduced to space dust rather than retreating. At this point, you have a choice – allow him to follow his dreams of glory/death, or put your foot down and force obedience. If you choose the former course, dissent within the ranks will grow and other captains will become more likely to rebel against orders, but if you rattle the chain of command, a ‘Blame’ point will be assigned to the captain. If he accrues three, he’s for the chop, publicly executed to set an example. All glory to the Emperor.
Executing a captain means that all of his experience and skills are lost, which is a bad thing. But, on the flip side, all dissent vanishes when an execution takes place, so all other captains should be a little more obedient, at least for a while. It’s not clear how many personality types the final game will contain but the friction between player-set behaviours and occasional disobedience should make the scale of battles easier to manage while ensuring there are difficult choices to make as conflict develops.
The campaign map should offer something similar – difficult decisions, along with fleet management, rather than linear progression. It’s a dynamic simulation of the war for the Gothic system. All four factions will be in play – Eldar, Ork, Imperium and Chaos – but while all are available in multiplayer and skirmish modes (the latter not yet confirmed but likely), players will always control an Imperial fleet. There’ll be a two player cooperative option as well as the single player mode, and the campaign map is dynamic, with non-player Imperial fleets in action alongside the invading forces.
Rather than gathering territory and expanding your power, the main objective at the beginning of the game will be to defend what is already yours. The whole system is under Imperial control when the game begins and you’ll be zipping about in an attempt to protect planets from the three enemy factions. If a planet does fall under the control of the Orks, Chaos or Eldar, the Imperium might set a date for Exterminatus, destroying the entire population and removing any resources generated by the territory out of the game. Movement on the campaign map is turn-based and once an Exterminatus order is set, a turn timer will tick down next to the planet. If you don’t reclaim it before the timer hits zero, it’ll be eliminated.
Armada’s end-game concerns Abaddon the Despoiler and his Black Legion, and there will be specific missions that relate to understanding and vanquishing the Chaos fleet, but the other factions will have their own story missions as well. While they won’t be playable during the campaign, multiplayer will support all four factions and just as in single player, your fleet can be customised and will be persistent from one battle to the next. Characters gain experience and skills, and ships can have new equipment added, including weapons and other subsystems. There’ll be around sixty possible upgrades for ships and, deliciously, Chaos vessels can use any Chaos Mark to alter the appearance and abilities of their vessels.
During combat, specific systems can be damaged, disabled and targeted, and repairs will cost either money or require time out of the fray. If a ship’s warp-drive is knocked out, it’ll be unable to escape combat but if disaster does strike, the crew can be evacuated. There’s another difficult decision to be made – abandon an expensive ship to save a talented crew, or hope they can hold out until the tide of battle turns in your favour.
While boarding actions are possible, ships cannot be captured. Sending in the marines is a method of taking down overpowered ships without trading broadside blows – scuttling rather than stealing. Like everything else discussed, Tindalos backed up their decision with reference to the original tabletop game and the fiction of 40k. Whether they’ll succeed in all their ambitions is impossible to say and the game won’t be released this year, but their passion for and knowledge of the license isn’t in any doubt. Thankfully, they’re unwilling to use the license as a crutch to prop up a reskinned RTS.
It’s early days. I’ve only seen a basic prototype of two fleets in battle and mock-ups of the campaign screens, but Armada has enough good ideas and smart mechanics to be a great space strategy game, regardless of the license. Chaotic cathedral ships might well be the icing on a particularly delicious cake.
This is where GWs marketing strategy seems totally schizophrenic to me. Why release this now? Why give the rights to someone to produce this long after you have canned the physical game it is based on?
I get that there is still interest in BFG (I never played it but Ive heard good things). If they were not totally insane then they would have a big box game at the very least of BFG ready to go around the release date of this game.
Pete Melvin wrote: This is where GWs marketing strategy seems totally schizophrenic to me. Why release this now? Why give the rights to someone to produce this long after you have canned the physical game it is based on?
I get that there is still interest in BFG (I never played it but Ive heard good things). If they were not totally insane then they would have a big box game at the very least of BFG ready to go around the release date of this game.
Fools.
GW has absolutely nothing to do with any WHF or 40K game... They only get paid the licensing fee and as long as GW gets paid, they couldn't care less about what the developers produce.
Hmm... Kinda worried about the rebellious Captains. Hopefully they'll do a good job on the AI or that could be rough. A bad run of Captains could lose you a bunch of upgraded ships(if that's how they implement it).
If the above is realised this will hopefully be towards the better end of recent GW licenced games. Sounds both ambitious and promising, I hope it turns out as good as it sounds.
Pete Melvin wrote: This is where GWs marketing strategy seems totally schizophrenic to me. Why release this now? Why give the rights to someone to produce this long after you have canned the physical game it is based on?
I get that there is still interest in BFG (I never played it but Ive heard good things). If they were not totally insane then they would have a big box game at the very least of BFG ready to go around the release date of this game.
Fools.
GW has absolutely nothing to do with any WHF or 40K game... They only get paid the licensing fee and as long as GW gets paid, they couldn't care less about what the developers produce.
It's also mentioned that this game won't release this year at the least, so if GW were to take interest in what they're producing they've got time to throw something together.
This certainly sounds very promising, but also very ambitious. Hopefully the devs can deliver on all these promises. I do look forward to additional content like other races, and, hopefully, Ramilies Star Forts.
Pete Melvin wrote: This is where GWs marketing strategy seems totally schizophrenic to me. Why release this now? Why give the rights to someone to produce this long after you have canned the physical game it is based on?
I get that there is still interest in BFG (I never played it but Ive heard good things). If they were not totally insane then they would have a big box game at the very least of BFG ready to go around the release date of this game.
Fools.
You are so right. Such a wasted opportunity. You'd think that, company floundering as it is, disappearing sales, etc. that even a simple boxed game tie in would be a nice draw. Get people who're hooked on the computer game playing the tabletop game. Instead, opportunity after opportunity is missed. Well done GW, trebles all round!
Nvs wrote: Anything less than Homeworld with BFG models and I'll be supremely disappointed.
Well with the Homeworld HD Remaster coming out next month and this game down the line... a savvy modder might be able to make that happen. (Also, there is already a BFG mod for HW2, but that was ages ago so I dunno if it's still around).
In the first 10 minutes they mention Steam Workshop support (meaning modding). They also worked with people from the modding community who kept the old games going so there should be some nice tools for modders to use. I think it's going to be releases at the end of February (with an online-multiplayer beta) so go on and have fun modding it into BFG!
Gah, I won't be getting this. Not because I don't like BFG. Quite the opposite. It'll make me want to buy a new fleet and, as GW in their infinite wisdom and crack business acumen canned the miniatures, this leaves me with ebay. I refuse to pay those rather bizarre prices... Soooo, no new BFG minis for me means that playing the game is, to me, pointless.
Bravo GW, proper joined up thinking there... Still, if you don't want my money, Hawk Wargames and Andy Chambers will soon be filling that void (or causing one in my wallet, whichever way you look at it)...
Considering the guys probably just hammered together the engine to be able to take moving pictures complaining about not seeing models is a bit.. early, don't you think?
That game is in the very earliest stages I'd wager.
Admittedly I did not read through the rest of the responses to see if anyone else had pointed this out:
It's quite ironic that GW killed off specialist games and yet now those very IPs are being used in a medium that could theoretically draw people to tabletop gaming... Yet the games they're representing are gone.
Wow. Not only am I excited for the bfg game - been wanting one forever - but I also find out the games I loved and had given up hope of ever seeing again are back and better then ever. HW remaster looks just awsome. This thread made my day
jojo_monkey_boy wrote: Admittedly I did not read through the rest of the responses to see if anyone else had pointed this out:
It's quite ironic that GW killed off specialist games and yet now those very IPs are being used in a medium that could theoretically draw people to tabletop gaming... Yet the games they're representing are gone.
Yeah no kidding. The clunky, unwieldy main games remain tabletop while the more fluid and beginner-friendly specialist games have been phased out. Good thinking there, GW...
Uninspired teaser trailer imo. The Warp gate is just plain poor, just rip off the DoW2 one if you have to.
And it didnt show a lot for a trailer barring some ships moving through an asteroid field.
Hopefully more is shown in the coming weeks.
Pete Melvin wrote: This is where GWs marketing strategy seems totally schizophrenic to me. Why release this now? Why give the rights to someone to produce this long after you have canned the physical game it is based on?
I get that there is still interest in BFG (I never played it but Ive heard good things). If they were not totally insane then they would have a big box game at the very least of BFG ready to go around the release date of this game.
Fools.
You know, unless they had no interest in maintaining the BFG line of models and games, and were just content to license the property out for easy money.
Pete Melvin wrote: This is where GWs marketing strategy seems totally schizophrenic to me. Why release this now? Why give the rights to someone to produce this long after you have canned the physical game it is based on?
I get that there is still interest in BFG (I never played it but Ive heard good things). If they were not totally insane then they would have a big box game at the very least of BFG ready to go around the release date of this game.
Fools.
You know, unless they had no interest in maintaining the BFG line of models and games, and were just content to license the property out for easy money.
Unless that.
Even saying that, if they still wanted BFG tabletop in their range and they had it waiting in the wings, it'd make more sense to let the licensed videogame come out, then launch the revamped tabletop game later. You wouldn't want them directly competing, that'd be stupid, but letting the game come out to build mind share for the name and then giving people the tabletop version they really want would be a coup. Really have no idea what Petey's talking about there.
Trailer is great - I'm pretty excited about this game!
Pete Melvin wrote: This is where GWs marketing strategy seems totally schizophrenic to me. Why release this now? Why give the rights to someone to produce this long after you have canned the physical game it is based on?
I get that there is still interest in BFG (I never played it but Ive heard good things). If they were not totally insane then they would have a big box game at the very least of BFG ready to go around the release date of this game.
Fools.
You know, unless they had no interest in maintaining the BFG line of models and games, and were just content to license the property out for easy money.
Unless that.
Even saying that, if they still wanted BFG tabletop in their range and they had it waiting in the wings, it'd make more sense to let the licensed videogame come out, then launch the revamped tabletop game later. You wouldn't want them directly competing, that'd be stupid, but letting the game come out to build mind share for the name and then giving people the tabletop version they really want would be a coup. Really have no idea what Petey's talking about there.
Because the various 40K (and Magic, and Warmachine) games damaged sales of thetabletop games so noticeably and badly?
Elemental wrote: Because the various 40K (and Magic, and Warmachine) games damaged sales of thetabletop games so noticeably and badly?
No idea, sarcastic stranger, I just know it's basic business not to saturate your market and/or compete against yourself.
How many Duels of the Planeswalkers games have there been to date? At least five, and one of them was what got me playing Magic for a span, which certainly wouldn't have happened if I'd looked into the card game, and found it had been taken out the back and euthanised a few years previously.
On previous form, I wouldn't credit GW with any business strategy beyond "Need money now now now!".
Elemental wrote: Because the various 40K (and Magic, and Warmachine) games damaged sales of thetabletop games so noticeably and badly?
No idea, sarcastic stranger, I just know it's basic business not to saturate your market and/or compete against yourself.
How many Duels of the Planeswalkers games have there been to date? At least five, and one of them was what got me playing Magic for a span, which certainly wouldn't have happened if I'd looked into the card game, and found it had been taken out the back and euthanised a few years previously.
On previous form, I wouldn't credit GW with any business strategy beyond "Need money now now now!".
I'd say their mentality is "Need money now!" but its not their strategy, which any first year business student would know is going to accomplish the exact opposite of that.
Elemental wrote: Because the various 40K (and Magic, and Warmachine) games damaged sales of thetabletop games so noticeably and badly?
No idea, sarcastic stranger, I just know it's basic business not to saturate your market and/or compete against yourself.
How many Duels of the Planeswalkers games have there been to date? At least five, and one of them was what got me playing Magic for a span, which certainly wouldn't have happened if I'd looked into the card game, and found it had been taken out the back and euthanised a few years previously.
On previous form, I wouldn't credit GW with any business strategy beyond "Need money now now now!".
I'd say their mentality is "Need money now!" but its not their strategy, which any first year business student would know is going to accomplish the exact opposite of that.
A first year business student would know that market research is kind of important.
Elemental wrote: Because the various 40K (and Magic, and Warmachine) games damaged sales of thetabletop games so noticeably and badly?
No idea, sarcastic stranger, I just know it's basic business not to saturate your market and/or compete against yourself.
How many Duels of the Planeswalkers games have there been to date? At least five, and one of them was what got me playing Magic for a span, which certainly wouldn't have happened if I'd looked into the card game, and found it had been taken out the back and euthanised a few years previously.
On previous form, I wouldn't credit GW with any business strategy beyond "Need money now now now!".
I'd say their mentality is "Need money now!" but its not their strategy, which any first year business student would know is going to accomplish the exact opposite of that.
A first year business student would know that market research is kind of important.
A French teacher like myself would know that market research is kind of important.
I take all GW licensed video games with a grain of salt until I see reviews or more in depth footage, but I do want to know if I'm going to see something like this anywhere.
The larger version of this has been my computer desktop background for months...
At the Focus Home Interactive booth for E3 2015, we got a chance to get an early look at Battlefleet Gothic: Armada. This space RTS is based on an adaptation of Games Workshop’s famous tabletop game of the same name. French developers Tindalos Interactive are at the helm, and they hope to bring players into the world of strategic spaceship battles. As the team describes it, the game stages the mighty armada of the Imperial Navy’s Battlefleet Gothic against the galaxy threatening Chaos Black Crusade of Abaddon the Despoiler. During our time with the game at E3, we got to observe one such battle engagement.
Battlefleet Gothic: Armada
Developed on Unreal Engine 4, there will be four races in the final game that can participate. The players take command of one of these battlefleets composed of the most powerful spaceships from the Imperial, Chaos, Eldar and Ork forces. In our demo, we saw a battle from the campaign which can only be played from the Imperial perspective. In single player career mode, players will be tasked with saving the galaxy sector from certain annihilation. You'll get missions from various family dynasties in the game, and your success will influence further cooperation. These factions will also interact amongst themselves.
First up was the fleet selection and customization screen, and it looked very overwhelming. The amount of options was staggering - change your ships' colors, types (cruisers, battleships), upgrade your crew and captains; everything seems to be adjustable, which is a nod to the original tabletop game. Weaponry, defense, support sub-systems, all can be tweaked. Players get a certain number of fleet points, which they spend on their starting fleet; you won't have enough resources to roll out a full army of the best cruisers. Once you've got a balanced fleet, you can now dig deeper and start setting some behaviors. Each ship can be manually adjusted to set what it does in certain situations. When to move, when to attack, how aggressive it will be, its effective range, a preference to shoot with broadside cannons, and so forth. You can also set when to disengage (at what level of health remaining) .
It was time to begin, so we observed our fleet appear on a 2D plane in space - having previously used some of the game's settings to generate our preferred background visuals. You can choose the starting points for each ship, on your corner of the grid. We also used this time to instruct a couple of smaller ships to follow and protect one of our main battlecruisers. Slowly but surely, we pointed our fleet's noses towards the enemy and began the journey. Our smaller ships reached the enemy first, and engaged. At this point, the player is free to let the AI fight it out, using the behavior settings we made earlier. Or, players can slow down time in order to use attack abilities manually and pick their targets.
Battlefleet Gothic: Armada
The battle was playing out on a grid, but the ships and attacks were definitely very freeform. Missiles were launched, some doing very good damage, others missing completely. The combat mechanics are real-time, so you need to calculate for enemy movements when using your weapons. With the first few smaller encounters over, the larger battleships from both teams have arrived and began to engage in huge firing exchanges. One ship got unfortunately turned around and exposed its back to the enemy; it met a quick end. The demo host was using abilities such as Radio Silence to interfere in enemy communications; or Brace of Impact, to reduce the damage of incoming missiles just as they hit. We didn't get a chance to comprehend all the attacks and abilities that were being used on screen, but despite the large amount of action and explosions, the game looked very strategic and the player was always in control.
As the number of combatants dwindled, only the large ships remained on the field. It was pointed out that your ships, crews, and captains are persistent in Battlefleet Gothic: Armada, so losing them means they are gone for good. In order to avoid this, the enemy was first to utilize a warp jump ability to escape the battle with its largely busted main ship. The Imperial ships attempted to do the same, however one of the main ships could not - its engine was too damaged. Players can zoom in on ships to see the battlescars and devastation caused by the fight. The ship that could not escape looked to be barely alive, with flames in the engine bay, most of its sides destroyed (thus the cannons could no longer be used as well). Sadly, it had to be left behind, and that's also where our demo concluded.
Battlefleet Gothic: Armada
Battlefleet Gothic: Armada is not usually my sort of game. But by the end of the presentation, I must say I was intrigued and wanted to see more, and play it for myself. That's as good of a compliment as I can give to a game so early in development and without any time to go hands-on. Hopefully, when the final product is out in early 2016 on PC, Battlefleet Gothic: Armada will live up to its early potential.
Automatically Appended Next Post: I am also a little surprised I didn't see more explosions/debris fields floating around after each volley, the game representation of the blast markers from BFG.
Looks very pretty though! Hopefully the game looks good zoomed out so you can see all your ships, or is slow paced enough to let you move in closer and really appreciate things.
Don't know where you're getting that from, it's clearly an RTS. Looks a bit like the naval battles from the Total War series, in spaaaaace. I'm down with that. The presentation is a notch above average for GW licensed indie games, too.
The gameplay looks about as fast as the stuff you see in RTS's like Sins of a Solar Empire, Homeworld etc; which makes sense considering these are massive, lumbering space whales and you get only a small handful of them. I can't imagine the game functioning if the action happened as a quickly as it does in DOW2 or StarCraft.
rather 'How chained mine stays aloft in space while hooking with a surface of a planet or asteroids?' doesn't gravity due to that object works against the mine chain?
Elemental wrote: Because the various 40K (and Magic, and Warmachine) games damaged sales of thetabletop games so noticeably and badly?
No idea, sarcastic stranger, I just know it's basic business not to saturate your market and/or compete against yourself.
How many Duels of the Planeswalkers games have there been to date? At least five, and one of them was what got me playing Magic for a span, which certainly wouldn't have happened if I'd looked into the card game, and found it had been taken out the back and euthanised a few years previously.
video games are a pretty typical way to get into gaming yeah. among the btech community you could actually note distinct generations of players tied to the release of mechwarrior games
So far the game is looking pretty great. I'm still interested anyway.
As to slow speed: It should play slowly. The space battles described in BFG take place over long periods of time, supposedly because even the fastest ships are huge and require a lot of time to turn and get into firing position.
As for the mines, each mine has its own propulsion system; I think the chains are to keep them relatively close to the asteroids as they move. It's of course very silly, but also a fairly faithful recreation of the image for minefields in the original BFG rulebook.
I was about to say, these aren't Star Wars/Star Trek ships. Unless you're Eldar,large ships like that won't be able to turn particularly quickly else they risk breaking apart.
Plus-
Space is BIG-really really BIG. The ships will be covering vast distances even if it doesn't look like it.
@Malika: The mines could be tethered to something- maybe an asteroid or chunk of ship debris.
My main worry is them not including all the races (I want my tau dammit!).
I was thinking about this the other day, when I was having a discussion about tau space-warfare, and they would play much differently than other races. They have no battleships, and would rely on mainly cruisers, escorts, and attack craft. Their biggest ship (about equal to a battlecruiser) is a carrier, that dispenses waves of escorts and attack ships. And they have dermiug and nissicar ships as well. They would swarm their enemies with smaller ships, and their missiles, which , unlike other races', are guided.
Co'tor Shas wrote: My main worry is them not including all the races (I want my tau dammit!).
I was thinking about this the other day, when I was having a discussion about tau space-warfare, and they would play much differently than other races. They have no battleships, and would rely on mainly cruisers, escorts, and attack craft. Their biggest ship (about equal to a battlecruiser) is a carrier, that dispenses waves of escorts and attack ships. And they have dermiug and nissicar ships as well.
They would swarm their enemies with smaller ships, and their missiles, which , unlike other races', are guided.
Depending on how successful this is, I think we should expect to see more races after initial release. I hope to god though that they do the Forge World range of the Tau Fleet. GW Studio stuff was dreadful.
Wolf wrote: Looks like a pretty decent game so far ! Though I am thinking the gaps between the ships need increasing a little.
At the moment it's all a bit too close and personal with the other ships, after all the fluff says they fight battle over huge distances and what not.
Truth be told, I'd rather see close engagements onscreen more often than not. Watching two ships trading broadsides is far more visually entertaining than my ship firing off shots into the distance where I can't see what they do, and the enemy firing back with shots that appear to come out of nowhere. Sure, the distances are supposed to be vast, but there is a reason why the models were far bigger than such a scale would have used.
Battlefleet Gothic was a fun little tabletop game released by Games Workshop in the days of yore which featured city sized ships (drastically scaled down) engaging in combat which was an interesting combination of modern day submarine tactics and 18th century ship warfare. Earlier this year, Tindalos Interactive announced that they would be developing a digital adaption of the game. So after catching a hands-off demo of Battlefleet Gothic: Armada, I was able to sit down with two devs from Tindalos Interactive, Aurelien and Maxime Josse, and have a chat about their game.
So what has been the hardest part of adapting the tabletop version into a video game format? What have you chosen to take away and what have you chosen to keep?
The hardest part so far has been adapting the turn-based strategy of the tabletop game into a real-time video game. I think this is the most difficult thing when working with these kinds of adaptions.
In terms of the range of ships which will be present in the game, how much in terms of ship classes and designs have you put in the game?
For Battlefield Gothic: Armada, all the ships that were in the tabletop (of the factions that are present in the game) will be present.
In regards to the customisation of the captain characters and ships, how far does it go?
You can change the names ships and captains and you can choose from a number of avatars for your captain. Orks are able to customise their ship weapons but other factions cannot in respect to the IP. For other factions specific ships have specific weapons… except for the Orks.
I imagine they just bolt on anything which they think makes the loudest noise… in the vacuum of space. Speaking of the other factions, I believe you mentioned that they would not be playable in this title. Do you have plans to release expansions with the other factions playable if this one is successful?
Of course. We would love to have tyranids and necrons and the rest… but we’ll have to see. This is definitely something we want though.
It didn’t quite appear in the demo which you guys showcased but will ramming as a mechanic be present in the game proper?
Yeah, of course. The things I love in the ramming system is that when you destroy a ship with ramming vessel, it will explode into multiple parts as your ship continues through it.
Similarly, will boarding also be present in the game?
Yes, you won’t be able to capture enemy ships but you will score more critical hits. You will be able to score critical hits on various ship systems like its weapons and engines and with boarding actions you will score more critical hits.
Will the wrecks of vessels remain on the map after they’re destroyed?
Yes, and a cool thing with that is that the wreckage can stop shots. So there is gameplay around positioning your ships behind wrecks to hide.
So you can use your dead comrades for cover?
Exactly.
That sounds very 40k. So in terms of chronology, the campaign takes place during the 12th Black Crusade, correct?
Correct.
Will ‘Blackstone Fortresses’ (Editor’s note: Pretty much the 40k version of a ‘death star’) feature in the game?
*Consults with each other in French* Yes, of course. You will see them.
In regards to the campaign; how in-depth is in terms of strategy? Will there be much for players to strategise over or will the gameplay focus upon the ship engagements?
In the game, we’ll have several missions for the players to take on like ‘convoy’, ‘space station attack’, ‘cruiser clash’… I think about ten missions. In the campaign, you’ll have a main scenario arc and several secondary objectives.
Alright, so the campaign will be scripted as opposed to something more open like a Total War game?
Not exactly. A better comparison would be to the Dawn of War II campaign but in reverse.
Reverse?
Yes. You start will all the sub-sectors at the beginning and as the game progresses you will be attacked by enemy forces- orks, chaos, or eldar- and you will have to keep all those sub-sectors.
Ah, now I see. It’s like ‘losing slowly’…
Exactly!
Alright, so is there anything else you’d like to add before we wrap up?
Wolf wrote: Looks like a pretty decent game so far ! Though I am thinking the gaps between the ships need increasing a little.
At the moment it's all a bit too close and personal with the other ships, after all the fluff says they fight battle over huge distances and what not.
Yeah, although they would have to make some sacrifices so the game actually looks nice. otherwise we'd be just directing points on a map that represent the ship since the actual battles take place with ships having hundreds of thousands of kilometers between them.
But even at the distances they were showing, they're still orders of magnitude larger than Star Wars or Star Trek battles. Given that each of those ships are multiple kilometers long. Even the smallest escort is about ~1 kilometer in length. So even the "close" shots of those cruisers going at it had 2-3 kilometers between them.
It looks like it might be just the original armies judging from the interview (i.e. imperium, chaos, eldar, orks) which is too bad, but it looks like they want to add more later, so there is still hope.
Tannhauser42 wrote: I would be curious to see which version of Tau they will go with. Please let them use the Forgeworld designs, please...
This. I love the FW Tau ships. Brilliant stuff. GW Main was god awful with the exception of the Messenger which still fits the aesthetic of the FW stuff.
Co'tor Shas wrote: I'd love it if they expanded on them too, the tau have a very small number of classes. Maybe they could make an actual battleship for them too?
Interesting as that would be, I'm not sure they could do that without GW spitting their dodo out about it. The Custodian is a pretty massive ship (certainly one of the biggest in BFG) in fairness and it carries 3 Warden class escorts too.
One quibble: The interface is massive and clunky. With the stuff on the left, the stuff on the right and fully 1/4th the screen with the control panel at the bottom there isn't really much space left over to see the game. That has to change.
H.B.M.C. wrote: One quibble: The interface is massive and clunky. With the stuff on the left, the stuff on the right and fully 1/4th the screen with the control panel at the bottom there isn't really much space left over to see the game. That has to change.
But that aside, wow that looks amazing.
I would bet the interface will get a lot of streamlining between now and release. Thats one of the things you can leave till later on in the development process.
also making the bit of the screen needing intensive animation processing smaller helps make things look better as you can run more polys/textures/effects etc at a better frame rate
Bit disappointed with the ramming action. Two billion ton warships collide and they bounce off other like tin cans? I want to see crumpling of hulls while the losing ship gets ripped a new one.
Bit disappointed with the ramming action. Two billion ton warships collide and they bounce off other like tin cans? I want to see crumpling of hulls while the losing ship gets ripped a new one.
Again, alpha stage footage. I'm sure they'll give it some polish as release time draws nearer.
Game looks really awesome. Sign me up! I'll admit, though, I cringed super hard when he said "Sluhneesh". I do hope they include the other races' fleets in the future. Tyranid ships would be especially cool.
Highly cool, but I'm confused as to the sudden influx of PC games based in abandoned GW tabletop franchises.
There's a Total War set in Warhammer.
There's a Blood Bowl 2 coming.
Now there's Battlefleet Gothic.
It's like you play these games and realise, "wow, I'd love to play the actual game these PC games are based on", only to find they've been axed. Sort of weird since these games could have served as fantastic advertisements for GW's primary product sector. This is classic GW backwardness though I suppose, never really understood all the GW hate but this is starting to put the picture together. It's some silly stuff.
legio_ultra wrote: Highly cool, but I'm confused as to the sudden influx of PC games based in abandoned GW tabletop franchises.
There's a Total War set in Warhammer.
There's a Blood Bowl 2 coming.
Now there's Battlefleet Gothic.
It's like you play these games and realise, "wow, I'd love to play the actual game these PC games are based on", only to find they've been axed. Sort of weird since these games could have served as fantastic advertisements for GW's primary product sector. This is classic GW backwardness though I suppose, never really understood all the GW hate but this is starting to put the picture together. It's some silly stuff.
Well, to play against AI, it doesn't require another person. To play against another person, it doesn't require you to be in the same room, to name but a few.
Whilst the games are great, they were niche, and niche means a small(er) fan base. This makes it even harder to find player to play against. Battlefield gothic in my opinion was always going to be perfect as a computer game rather than an actual model game, for the reasons stated above. As great as the models and the game was, it was just never going to be a he and lingering success, not to mention that playing a video game version of the game saves the player considerable time (assembling and painting models) and money.
The only fundamental reason a game of 40k where you can custom anything and everything as you would a normal army has never been on the table is due to the amount of money GW would lose off of it. As much as I like my models, I'd love to not have to buy multiple tactical squads and rhinos and what not, I'd be more than happy just buying the models I like as I'd do all my gaming online then.
Thing is, though, even if the BFG game is a perfect and faithful recreation of the tabletop game, and while I would devote many hours to it, I would still want to play the real thing. Generally speaking, most of us don't play tabletop wargames because they don't already exist as computer games. We play them because they are tabletop wargames. There's just something completely different about physically moving our little soldiers/tanks/spaceships around the table, rolling the dice, taking measurements, and chatting with our friends that no computer can (yet) recreate.
There is also the fact that the computer version may never represent all of the tabletop options. Will I get to recreate my Grey Knights fleet, complete with Inquisitorial Blackship? Will I get to field my AdMech fleet? What about my Ramilies Starfort?
Besides, even when it isn't a "niche" game, GW has utterly failed to capitalize on these things before. When Dawn of War came out, did GW do even one thing to try to lure those players in? Nope. One issue of White Dwarf had some pics of some scratchbuilt terrain based on the game and a converted character, but never any real rules or models were ever released, nothing with a big "Dawn of War Players Buy This Now" tag on it.
The reason there are so many games based on old licenses supposedly has something to do with British copyright/IP law, I dont fully understand it, but it was something along the lines of they would lose the rights to the IP (or rather the IP would become public domain) if its out of print/production for more than 10 years at a time.
There's no danger of them losing any of the IP for BFG in that way, at least. There are constant references to BFG ships and pics of them scattered throughout the 40K books (and the FWHH books).
Tannhauser42 wrote: There's no danger of them losing any of the IP for BFG in that way, at least. There are constant references to BFG ships and pics of them scattered throughout the 40K books (and the FWHH books).
Yes and no. While the names are mentioned, a lot of the art is new. And the actual name Battlefleet Gothic hasn't been mentioned since IA 11. (My names in the FAQ credits, and I don't even get a call from these guys...)
Darth Bob wrote: Game looks really awesome. Sign me up! I'll admit, though, I cringed super hard when he said "Sluhneesh". I do hope they include the other races' fleets in the future. Tyranid ships would be especially cool.
I think the "Sluhneesh" cringe spread to everyone who's watched that video lol.
Bit disappointed with the ramming action. Two billion ton warships collide and they bounce off other like tin cans? I want to see crumpling of hulls while the losing ship gets ripped a new one.
Again, alpha stage footage. I'm sure they'll give it some polish as release time draws nearer.
Yes, I would point out that both graphically and in terms of model physics, that that's probably going to be one of the most complex interactions in the game, so is not something that we're going to be seeing complete this early on.
Of course the fact that we've seen it's got ramming included has got me pretty chuffed. *Dreams of Ork Ramships* Sigh.
chaos0xomega wrote: Did they say we would be getting bridge views? Considering its an RTS I wouldnt expect to see that included, but it would be nifty if they did.
No they didn't mention it, I was just being hopeful!
All glory to the Emperor!
We are about to launch an alpha test and are looking for highly motivated players to play and give their feedback.
All the info on the official forums
We are thrilled to see your enthusiasm for Battlefleet Gothic: Armada.
We are about to launch an alpha test and are looking for highly motivated players to play and give their feedback. This is a private alpha and all alpha testers will be under NDA. No screenshots, streaming, or video capture of any kind is permitted, and players must not talk about their experience outside of the official alpha forum threads.
To apply for this alpha participation, you must subscribe for the alpha HERE.
Then we'll select some of you according to your profile. The alpha will last 2 weeks and we count on you to report cogent and cohesive feedback: this is a step of the game development process, and not the release of the game. Players should expect an unstable environment, subject to changes.
Every trailer gets me more pumped for this. The quick glimpse we got of the Eldar ship was cool as well. At the very least they have nailed the graphics and aesthetics of each faction but I see great promise in the gameplay as well if the trailers are anything to go by.
Why couldn't they have made this turn-based like the board game. Cyanide made a port of Blood Bowl that was faithful to the minis game. Why not BFG?
I hate RTS games. Hate them with a passion. I tried DoW, REALLY hoping to like it. Nope. Hated it. I suck at them, so they are completely not enjoyable. Even a turn-based option would be fine.
I'm the reverse and absolutely can't stand turn based games. They just aren't engaging enough imo. I was worried this game was going to be turn based given the first videos and bits of information that came out.
Super stoked to see this releasing soon. Glad to see (so far anyway) that it's not just some shovelware mobile game.
While I'm not 100% sold on the "micro-warp jump" bit (since that's not really represented in classic BFG), I think I can forgive it for the sake of mechanically adapting the game to the digital format.
Looks pretty awesome. Will need to check the specs when it releases to see if I can run it on my aging PC.
I’m hit or miss on RTS games. I tend just to play the solo campaign and one-off scenerios, as I’m old, decrepit, and don’t have the twitch reflexes of a 13 year old anymore. Turn based would have been my preference, but it not a total deal-breaker. I hope this has a pause -> set orders -> resume mechanic. Or the ability to slow play down a lot. I want to be able to play this, but can’t really do high intensity micro management games.
Pretty sold on it at this point as the whole thing does look genuinely lovely although to me, it looks a bit 'empty' without fighters and bombers whizzing about.
There's Homeworld for that, though I suppose.
By comparison this looks almost Napoleonic in it's scope, which is no bad thing!
A good mix of Cinematics and actual gameplay makes it a good one, the gameplay is looking to be not too shabby and the visuals are stunning.
Though I'll second the view that the Nova cannon was rather underwhelming, I was expecting a very impressive explosion, something like the Thermal imploder on Star War Battlefront actually !
Which worries the gak out of me since we only had a very short alpha with a lot of problems. There was supposed to be a second stage of it.... but that is apparently not happening....
BrookM wrote: It's now up for pre-order in the Steam store. €39,99 is the normal price, but until the 29th it's 10% off, so €35,99 right now.
The release date is listed as March 2016.
edit.
Pre-order bonus: access to the multiplayer beta and the Space Marine fleet DLC for free.
The existing specialist based GW games were on sale on Steam recently too.. not sure if they still are but I was thinking about picking up Mordheim and Armageddon or whatever they're calling Epic.
As pumped as I am for this game I'll still probably hold off buying it till the reviews are out. As of yet there is very little info concerning the game other than fight mechanics. I'd like to know if we have a sweet campaign as well!
The story mode trailer at least confirmed there's a story mode (thank god) so there's that. Although you play a random admiral that reports to an inquisitor...which seems sort of lame.
But on the whole I'm really excited. Haven't had a decent 40k game since Space Marine - here's hoping this one doesn't suck.
Excuse my ignorance but are steam games played only online? I'm on a metered internet connection and am reluctant to play online games. Can you just download and play off line?
lord_blackfang wrote: Plenty of games won't run without a live internet connection ,tho.
Only if you are playing the game online. If its a single player game primarily, and this game most certainly will be, then it will only need an internet connection when downloading it or you are playing multi-player.
Only if you are playing the game online. If its a single player game primarily, and this game most certainly will be, then it will only need an internet connection when downloading it or you are playing multi-player.
Or offline mode breaks for no discernible reason, if that happens none of the games in your Steam library will launch even if you try to run them directly from the .exe file. I found this out the hard way when I was in Afghanistan which filled me with deepest joy.
Steam's offline mode was utterly terrible, supposedly its better now but I have had some really bad experiences with it in the past. Steam games are pretty easy to crack though so its not a huge issue if you know about it in advance.
Is there ANY updated info on release date? I confess I haven't searched too deeply beyond just checking Steam newsfeeds and waiting for the 'install' option to pop up, but it seems pretty silent for being in month-of-release?
Every time I see dev stuff about this game, I'm thoroughly impressed. What's most important to me is that they clearly care about the tabletop version and seem to have done their best to accurately portray that experience while still making it mechanically sound as a real-time video game. Makes me think that even if there are some issues at release, they will actually care about fixing it.
Managed to get the beta downloaded last night, just had a bash at the tutorial, looks really good and plays well, Not had a go at a skirmish or multiplayer yet.
Only the SM and chaos fleets are available at the moment too.
I finally watched the Angry Joe preview (I despise that man) and it looks great!
Of course, it's odd that they didn't bother to introduce actual 3d space (Filthy Homeworld fan here), but with how they explained that the game was meant to be an almost literal translation of the board game to digital, I get why it is the way it is.
Either way, the team seems excited about the project and given how they were hinting at things left and right, I can only imagine that the future will hold some awesome gak for this franchise.
Now, I need to keep resisting the urge to pre-order it, heh.
There is very little that is 'revolutionary new gameplay', except for the fact that it's floating space cathedrals in a reasonably entertaining game format.
I like that you can select what part of an enemy capital ship your ships will focus upon, so you can intentionally cripple engines, strip weapon arrays, or set decks on fire with greater frequency.
The campaign looks like it could be pretty immersive, with players really agonizing over a bad turn or which system to defend/attack. Sort of like the various DoW campaign maps, but even moreso, if that makes sense.
I rate it a winner, although there are already things that bother me like being locked into a cruiser configuration on purchase, not selection (never being able to swap out lances for macro cannons, or reset your upgrades for example), or a completely BS convoy defense mode against Orks where if the massed enemy fleet is able to destroy 2 out of 3 less-than-escort class ships you lose the mission.
Destructible hard points also adds an element of RNG where a couple lucky of broadsides can strip 50% of a ship's firepower.
Damn I haven't been this excited for anything 40k related since... well I can't remember.
I really appreciate the voiced cutscenes, even if it is mostly manipped artwork. It's got that great gothicky feel and the actors do a good job of sounding the part.
The care with which the devs have translated the tabletop game really shows through in their work.
I agree. It definitely hits all the right buttons for me. I like the "living" artwork cutscenes.
I am impressed how they handled ship movement. It definitely feels a lot like how I imagine the movement of the table top would feel in real time. Though I do not like how you can't adjust your ships actual speed outside of "fire thrusters". Faster ships end up overshooting their slower targets all the time, I'd like at least the option to slow to the same speed and duke it out instead of running laps.
As for damage its definitely a little more grindy than the table top. Table top a broadside at close range would devastate any ship, here it requires multiple passes to even begin damaging stuff.
I think larger battles would become quite impossible to manage without "Tactical Cogitator" mode. But the difference between that and normal speed is quite large. I'd like there to be a scalable option. IMO Tactical Cogitator mode is too slow and normal is too fast, something right in between would be just right IMO. Haven't done multiplayer yet either so i'm not sure how that would even work there, if they even put it in that mode.
Interface still needs some work of course, lack of a "rotate camera" button irritates me. They have the standard AWSD movement, make Q and E rotate the camera. I want to see the glorious carnage from different angles!
Well it doesn't work on my mouse for some reason. It is a button, but it doesn't work with this game it seems. That's a stupidly inconvenient way to do it anyway.
Basically I want the Total War style camera controls. That's the best config I know.
Xca|iber wrote: Damn I haven't been this excited for anything 40k related since... well I can't remember.
I really appreciate the voiced cutscenes, even if it is mostly manipped artwork. It's got that great gothicky feel and the actors do a good job of sounding the part.
The care with which the devs have translated the tabletop game really shows through in their work.
Yep, this looks like a winner for me as well. I especially appreciate that the "preorder" bonus remains part of the game purchase until a couple of weeks after it launches, seems like a good balance between the desire of the devs to sell through as many copies as possible while the game is still fresh in people's minds with the interests of their customers, many of whom will not want to put down money until they've seen a couple of independent reviews.
And I love the style of "moving art" storytelling; unless your game is super-duper-AAA-expensive-graphics or you spend a fortune on CGI cutscenes, this style is actually superior for my money as there's no awkward Uncanny Valley moments with badly-lipsynced rubber-faced mannequin-men totally failing to match the emotion of the voice actor. On which point, am I going mad or do the voices doing the storyline in this game sound like some of the same guys who do the BL audiodramas?
Grey Templar wrote: I agree. It definitely hits all the right buttons for me. I like the "living" artwork cutscenes.
I am impressed how they handled ship movement. It definitely feels a lot like how I imagine the movement of the table top would feel in real time. Though I do not like how you can't adjust your ships actual speed outside of "fire thrusters". Faster ships end up overshooting their slower targets all the time, I'd like at least the option to slow to the same speed and duke it out instead of running laps.
As for damage its definitely a little more grindy than the table top. Table top a broadside at close range would devastate any ship, here it requires multiple passes to even begin damaging stuff.
I think larger battles would become quite impossible to manage without "Tactical Cogitator" mode. But the difference between that and normal speed is quite large. I'd like there to be a scalable option. IMO Tactical Cogitator mode is too slow and normal is too fast, something right in between would be just right IMO. Haven't done multiplayer yet either so i'm not sure how that would even work there, if they even put it in that mode.
Interface still needs some work of course, lack of a "rotate camera" button irritates me. They have the standard AWSD movement, make Q and E rotate the camera. I want to see the glorious carnage from different angles!
Agree with all of this. I like this game a lot but I suck at it, even 3 escorts and 1 cruiser v. 1 enemy cruiser couldn't get the kill... I am obviously not playing well but I am wondering if I am missing a beat because of no experience with the tabletop version. Damage seems really, really grindy. Abilities are not super obvious as of yet either how to use optimally.
That being said, I really want to like this game, and will put in some time to get there!
Grey Templar wrote: I agree. It definitely hits all the right buttons for me. I like the "living" artwork cutscenes.
I am impressed how they handled ship movement. It definitely feels a lot like how I imagine the movement of the table top would feel in real time. Though I do not like how you can't adjust your ships actual speed outside of "fire thrusters". Faster ships end up overshooting their slower targets all the time, I'd like at least the option to slow to the same speed and duke it out instead of running laps.
As for damage its definitely a little more grindy than the table top. Table top a broadside at close range would devastate any ship, here it requires multiple passes to even begin damaging stuff.
I think larger battles would become quite impossible to manage without "Tactical Cogitator" mode. But the difference between that and normal speed is quite large. I'd like there to be a scalable option. IMO Tactical Cogitator mode is too slow and normal is too fast, something right in between would be just right IMO. Haven't done multiplayer yet either so i'm not sure how that would even work there, if they even put it in that mode.
Interface still needs some work of course, lack of a "rotate camera" button irritates me. They have the standard AWSD movement, make Q and E rotate the camera. I want to see the glorious carnage from different angles!
Agree with all of this. I like this game a lot but I suck at it, even 3 escorts and 1 cruiser v. 1 enemy cruiser couldn't get the kill... I am obviously not playing well but I am wondering if I am missing a beat because of no experience with the tabletop version. Damage seems really, really grindy. Abilities are not super obvious as of yet either how to use optimally.
That being said, I really want to like this game, and will put in some time to get there!
Thing you have to remember is Chaos' bag is speed and range, while the IN is about survivability and raw punch - try using your escorts to get around behind the Chaos cruiser to cripple its engines then you can sit your cruiser in their fore or rear arc and smash them with impunity. More generally, you basically have to ignore the spaceships and lasers and play it like an Age of Sail game, your goal with the IN is to use your torps, lances, nova cannons, escorts etc to force the enemy fleet into broadside-to-broadside engagements, where in almost all cases an IN ship of equal tonnage to its opponent will have the advantage.
Well I figured out how to use torpedoes effectively. They're best used at point blank range.
Another thing is its key to use boarding actions and teleportation attacks when ever you can. Those add up over time.
For imperial tactics, it seems that having a group of 3 Firestorm frigates is a good idea. You can have them gang up on large ships or hunt down other escorts. Set them to frontal engagements at 6k distance and they survive for a long time. Meanwhile have your cruisers go focus on the mission.
Got this downloaded last night. Good solid game, though the convoy mission with the Orks kicked my arse. I forgot how shooty Orks can be up close, Kill Kroozers are pretty nasty!
angelofvengeance wrote: Got this downloaded last night. Good solid game, though the convoy mission with the Orks kicked my arse. I forgot how shooty Orks can be up close, Kill Kroozers are pretty nasty!
Is that a campaign mission or just a skirmish? I was under the impression that the beta was multiplayer only...
angelofvengeance wrote: Got this downloaded last night. Good solid game, though the convoy mission with the Orks kicked my arse. I forgot how shooty Orks can be up close, Kill Kroozers are pretty nasty!
Is that a campaign mission or just a skirmish? I was under the impression that the beta was multiplayer only...
There's a tiny bit of the campaign to try out. Just to give you an idea of how the game works.
Grey Templar wrote: Another thing to keep in mind. You can ram your own ships on accident, so mind where you're ships are headed.
That sounds like a rather stupid regression from the tabletop game. Treating 3d space as a 2d plane for ease of play is reasonable, but the mechanics should still reflect the fact that you are simulating 3d space. Two ships that both want to avoid a collision should be capable of avoiding a collision close to 100% of the time without the Admiral's intervention.
The base game is going to have Imperial, Chaos, Ork, and Eldar fleets. Space Marines will be a DLC at launch, and anyone who preorders the game before March23 gets them for free.
My guess is Necrons, Dark Eldar, and Tyranids will be available as DLC later on.
Grey Templar wrote: The base game is going to have Imperial, Chaos, Ork, and Eldar fleets. Space Marines will be a DLC at launch, and anyone who preorders the game before March23 gets them for free.
My guess is Necrons, Dark Eldar, and Tyranids will be available as DLC later on.
My guess is Necrons, Dark Eldar, and Tyranids will be available as DLC later on.
Tyndalos have talked about doing other fleets (Tyranids and Tau in particular were mentioned) although as these races are outside the scope of the Gothic war they will either be for an expansion or be multiplayer only (if the game sells well enough).
OK, so after watching a few YT vids I caved and preordered so I could give the beta a go, and holy crap it's fantastic.
The performance isn't always amazing and there are still occasional bugs, but playing it is...just brilliant. I had a multiplayer game of Data Recovery, where as attacker you have to locate one of the enemy ships, knock down its shields, and use the Lightning Strike boarding action to steal the info from them, and the defender must prevent that from happening until the ship's warp drive has recharged and you can disengage - I played as defender and almost managed to stop him stealing the data, but with five second before my drive was recharged he took down my shields with a nova cannon shot and used the Dauntless attacking my cruiser at short range to teleport off the data objective...but in so doing, he also took down his Dauntless' shields(yes friendly fire is a thing, watch those torps) and I did my own Lightning Strike to steal it back and warped away to win
It's great fun, most of the modes are brilliant(Convoy and Assassination need some work IMO, too easy for the attacker), and even just within the Imperial Navy you can build your fleet multiple ways just like the tabletop version. I'm currently running with a focus on macro batteries, torps, and multiple Stasis Bomb special abilities; catching half the enemy fleet in a bubble and hitting them with torps from multiple angles at once is just so satisfying.
I also gave in and ordered the game today. I'm definitely enjoying it so far. Can't wait for some more campaign missions and the other fleets. The thing I like most about it so far is the persistence of your ships between matches, even in multiplayer - it really gives the game a sense of tension, and I'm a sucker for earning points and unlocking things.
I figured out the only way to win that is to micromanage it and ensure you hit all ahead full and brace for impact every time they recharge. And hope your opponent doesn't get lucky.
And that's against a computer, against a player its not happening.
You can get upgrades for your ships that let you taunt enemies off your transports, which is pretty helpful I find. And nova cannons. All the nova cannons.
My only problems with it are the ground scale as the maps would take up a really tiny amount of the table top as the ships would basically be in base to base contact though not sure if it'd possible to make the scale better without shrinking the ships which owuld be a waste.
Also the slaughter doesn't have the speed advantage it should have over the other cruisers.
angelofvengeance wrote: Yeah, convoy scenario is a real pain to play! Every time I've played it the transports get chomped.
All you need to do is put 1 transport on the far left flank to draw fire (it actually surives quite often) with the rest of the transports on the far right behind your fleet. I haven't lost that mission since I started using that formation. I doubt it would work in multiplayer though.
So, having played for a probably-unhealthy amount of time over the past few days, a brief addendum to my initial comment - I maintain that this is great fun to play, I've not had this much fun in a strategy game of any form for years...but I'd advise against caving in as I did and buying it pre-release, for one reason; the matchmaking is pretty borked right now.
Now, it's borked in three predictable ways(game crashes when loading the lobby, no opponent joins and you get stuck in the lobby, or the "joining game" dialog just cycles endlessly and you never join the lobby at all), which are non-computer-breaking and all get fixed by simply restarting the game, which takes seconds...but they happen pretty frequently. Like, every 2-3 games and you have to restart the client frequently.
The devs know about them and seem to be making progress, but it's annoying enough that I would wait until those issues are definitely fixed before you put down any cash.
All those caveats aside, I'm still enjoying the hell out of this. Had a game yesterday, 600pts Assassination, and I strategied the feth out of that enemy admiral Took my two cruisers and deployed them inside a nebula(which hides even the sensor "blips" you usually see until you Identify an enemy), then set up my two torpedo Dauntless and a pair of Swords normally. When the enemy fleet moved to engage those, I activated Silent Running(same effect as the nebula, but time-limited rather than location-based) on the two cruisers and moved them out of the nebula, and by the time he realised the "fleet" he was engaging was just my support element, his flagship was enjoying double-Nova Cannon-funtime followed by Microwarp Jumps to put the cruisers on either side, he didn't even manage to take down one of my ships' shields before the flagship went down and I won.
Successfully pulling off those kinds of feints and properly maneuvering your ships is just so viscerally satisfying - I really hope they do fix the matchmaking issues, because if this game gets a solid launch and can build a community before Overwatch comes out and gaks all over all the other games for a couple of months, I think BFG:A has legs.
Now, it's borked in three predictable ways(game crashes when loading the lobby, no opponent joins and you get stuck in the lobby, or the "joining game" dialog just cycles endlessly and you never join the lobby at all), which are non-computer-breaking and all get fixed by simply restarting the game, which takes seconds...but they happen pretty frequently. Like, every 2-3 games and you have to restart the client frequently.
This is only for multiplayer though, the skirmish campaign works fine (although one of the missions, where you have to destroy a starbase, always crashes on launch).
I'm slightly surprised that Ork's and Eldar aren't in the beta as apparently there need quite a heavy balance pass.
The release date has been pushed back to the 21st of April although there will now be a 6th race (as yet unannounced) available as a free DLC to early adopters (like the Marine fleet).
The patch, which is supposedly out this week, significantly changes Chaos ship loadouts as well as various bug fixes but most importantly adds Orks to skirmish/multiplayer.
Took my two cruisers and deployed them inside a nebula(which hides even the sensor "blips" you usually see until you Identify an enemy), then set up my two torpedo Dauntless and a pair of Swords normally. When the enemy fleet moved to engage those, I activated Silent Running(same effect as the nebula, but time-limited rather than location-based) on the two cruisers and moved them out of the nebula, and by the time he realised the "fleet" he was engaging was just my support element, his flagship was enjoying double-Nova Cannon-funtime followed by Microwarp Jumps to put the cruisers on either side, he didn't even manage to take down one of my ships' shields before the flagship went down and I won.
