TW: Warhammer 2 'The Silence and the Fury' Jul 14 Final DLC!

Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you:

No adverts like this in the forums anymore.
Times and dates in your local timezone.
Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance.
Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely.
Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net.

If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

**Voss**

trexmeyer wrote:
I've seen people claim that CA is 'uncomfortable with the fact WH2 is receiving the lion's share of attention and want to focus more on their inhouse IPs'. I'm not sure if it is receiving the most attention...but it does seem that way on r/totalwar.

I could see Sony leaning on them for that.
Both for not liking the licensing fee to another company (when to someone with a spreadsheet it seems unnecessary) and for the extra entanglement.

Overread wrote:In the end I'd be expecting Warhammer to be getting a lions share right now because the 3rd game should be in development now.

?
Its been in development for quite a while now. If you go back far enough in their blog you can find updates on it, including motion capture for animations.

**Eumerin**

Three Kingdoms is their best selling game to date. And it included a lot of new mechanics to shake things up. Some are working. Some aren't.

I think the decisions shown in 3K show that they're willing to try new thinga. The question is whether they can find the right mix of changes as they move forward.

**H.B.M.C.**

I doubt that Creative Assembly are unhappy that one of their games is really really successful.

**trexmeyer**

H.B.M.C. wrote:
I doubt that Creative Assembly are unhappy that one of their games is really really successful.

Bioware specifically started new IPs despite the success of their Star Wars and Neverwinter Nights games for the sake of doing something inhouse. I could see them not being thrilled if SWTOR had overshadowed the ME and DA series.

**AllSeeingSkink**

Will be good to see a WE update. I just started a game with them and they really suck. The amber system... I don't hate it in essence. But in practice it sucks hairy balls, having technology, buildings, military units, and campaign advancement competing for amber is just annoying in its current incarnation. Why on earth do Glade Riders cost amber?

Overread wrote:
I think the main worry for them is that one of their biggest earners is an IP they have to pay for and which could be removed if they fell out with GW at some point in the future. Or GW might come to the table and ask for more money to continue the licence - even if the game itself was made and Warhammer 3 was out the door and done.

In the end I'd be expecting Warhammer to be getting a lions share right now because the 3rd game should be in development now.

As for their in-house - I'd wager they should work of Medieval 3.

I'm sure they have a licence for X number of games or some such, GW can't just turn around and ask for more money for games that are already released and they've agreed to in whatever way.

**Eumerin**

trexmeyer wrote:
H.B.M.C. wrote:
I doubt that Creative Assembly are unhappy that one of their games is really really successful.

Bioware specifically started new IPs despite the success of their Star Wars and Neverwinter Nights games for the sake of doing something inhouse. I could see them not being thrilled if SWTOR had overshadowed the ME and DA series.

Bioware started doing licenses. Moving away from licenses was the change for them. For Creative Assembly, it's the opposite - they've done lots and lots of games that didn't require licenses. The Warhammer games are the only games that they've released to date that had licenses.

Also -

According to SteamDB, the highest total players ever playing Total War: Warhammer on Steam was just over 113,000. The sequel's high point was 84,920. The high point for Three Kingdoms was a little over 192,000.

Note that these are not total sales. They are the total number of people logged into Steam playing the game on a day to day basis. Needless to say, the numbers for Three Kingdoms are *dramatically* higher than those of the Warhammer games. In comparison, the totals for Attila (the previous major game) were just over 26,000.

There's one curiosity that caught my attention, though. The numbers for the first Warhammer game and the Three Kingdoms game are from the game launch, with smaller spikes when the DLC are released. But the number for Warhammer 2 is from either May or June of this year. The Warden and the Paunch came out at that time, and it looks like that DLC generated a bigger surge of interest in Warhammer 2 than the initial game launch did.

**AllSeeingSkink**

Eumerin wrote:
According to SteamDB, the highest total players ever playing Total War: Warhammer on Steam was just over 113,000. The sequel's high point was 84,920. The high point for Three Kingdoms was a little over 192,000.

Look at the chart though. Three Kingdoms had a spike of 192,000 on day 1 of launch, was below 30k at the end of June and other than some small bumps has been puttering along below 15k.

TWW2 never had that big spike, rather it's been sitting between 15 and 40k for three years solid, sitting about 25k for the entirety of the past year. Right now, Three Kingdoms has less than half the players of TWW2.

It suggests to me that the Warhammer series has a bigger base, but the launch of TWW2 was poor for whatever reason, even TWW1 had a higher spike at launch.

**Eumerin**

I'm not sure why you think that TWW2 didn't have spikes. It hit numbers just under 75K at launch, and then quickly dropped to 25K. It bumped up again to just over 41K not long after (probably for the release of Mortal Empires), and then came down to just under 16K. Then there are bumps ever several months up to the 40K range - probably DLC releases - before it slides back down again. The thing to remember is that TWW2 is an unusual game. It's a combination of two games - something that CA hasn't done before. So it draws attention from a different kind of crowd than Three Kingdoms does.

All three games had spikes that were most likely due to DLC. But the spikes for the other games were significantly smaller. It's only TWW2 that got the big bumps. The bumps for TWW1 were noticeably lower than the bumps for TWW2.

In any case, the "roughly 200,000 in sales" for Three Kingdoms is what probably interests CA the most. It had double the base game sales of Warhammer 2. Yes, the Three Kingdoms bumps are lower. But those likely represent people playing the new DLC. If 100K more people pay launch price retail for Three Kingdoms, but 45K fewer buy the much less expensive DLC (as suggested by the bumps when DLC are released), then Three Kingdoms still comes out ahead as a retail product. CA will likely look at that when trying to figure out what to work on next, while simultaneously trying to figure out how to ensure that the DLCs for the next game get interest levels similar to that of Warhammer 2.

**AllSeeingSkink**

Eumerin wrote:
I'm not sure why you think that TWW2 didn't have spikes.

I never said it didn't have spike, I looked at the graph to come up with my numbers so obviously I saw the spikes, what I said was it "never had that big spike", meaning it dropped from 75k to 25k (66% drop) where Three Kingdoms dropped from 192k to below 15k (92% drop).

It had double the base game sales of Warhammer 2.

Except you can't extrapolate that from the big launch spike. All we can say is that Three Kingdoms launched harder, but given TWW2 has remained consistently higher that TK for its entire 3 year life suggests that either people who bought it play more, or more people bought it but just not on launch day. I don't know as much about TK, but I think there's a good argument for the latter for TWW2. Several people I know waited a month or two to buy it, because for a Warhammer player it didn't seem like great value at launch with only a few factions and it initially didn't carry over the factions from TWW1.

I think a lot of people bought TWW2 in the few months after it launched at a price not far off the launch price, hence why it maybe didn't have that big of an initial spike but rather has remained consistently high for 3 years in a row.

I'm sure a big part of the reason Three Kingdoms had such a successful launch was people being introduced to the TW franchise via Warhmmer.

**Overread**

When Warhammer 2 came out there was some controversy around Norsca who basically were added at the end of the Warhammer 1 cycle as a faction not originally planned for. CA also did different things with how they operated. However those different things basically broke the game porting system between the two games. So CA couldn't add them to Warhammer 2.

In fact they had to go back and rebuild Norsca from the ground up to make them work in Warhammer 2. It was a mistake on their part and segments of the community got a bit hostile about it. That and this was the first time CA had done the whole idea of one game expanding into the next.

I'd also say the other big bonus for Warhammer is a total lack of competition. Whilst sci-fi RTS/strategy has the monster that is Starcraf 2, there basically isn't any other fantasy real time strategy game on the market at present and there hasn't been one for quite a long time. With RTS being basically ignored right now, Warhammer Total War has the market for that almost totally to itself.

Three Kingdoms in contrast has a big asian popularity base, but that market also has a lot of other games competing in the same bracket. Koei makes several strategy type games that have steady come to the west and I'd wager within the Asian market there's a lot more that we never see. So Three Kingdoms is impressive, but at the same time it does have competition in its biggest market area. That would likely explain the big initial sale but then the quicker fall off in active players. They've got other games they can get a Three Kingdoms fix from - whilst for fantasy strategy in real time battles you're either looking at older games or Warhammer 2/1

**Not Online!!!**

three kingdoms, whilest it inovated aswell overall also has some of the most restrictive unit to general tie in for armies that put off me atleast.

also it still has the blobbing issue due to the engine limitation.

**AllSeeingSkink**

Overread wrote:
When Warhammer 2 came out there was some controversy around Norsca who basically were added at the end of the Warhammer 1 cycle as a faction not originally planned for. CA also did different things with how they operated. However those different things basically broke the game porting system between the two games. So CA couldn't add them to Warhammer 2.

In fact they had to go back and rebuild Norsca from the ground up to make them work in Warhammer 2. It was a mistake on their part and segments of the community got a bit hostile about it. That and this was the first time CA had done the whole idea of one game expanding into the next.

Ah yes, I remember now. I remembered there were some issues but had forgotten the specifics. Wasn't it something like they planned to import Norsca straight into TWW2, but the team working on Norsca wasn't communicating with the team working on TWW2, and too late they realised they'd done it in a way it wouldn't port straight in?

But yeah, I do remember there were reasons people weren't jumping on it immediately.

**Eumerin**

Pretty much.

I don't think the Norsca issue kept people ftom jumping in, though. Norsca was a completely new army competing with four armies that already had established fan bases. Rather, I suspect that the big issue was that Mortal Empires - one of the big draws of the game - wasn't available for the first few weeks after release.

**lord marcus**

Eumerin wrote:
Three Kingdoms is their best selling game to date. And it included a lot of new mechanics to shake things up. Some are working. Some aren't.

I think the decisions shown in 3K show that they're willing to try new thinga. The question is whether they can find the right mix of changes as they move forward.

if they do the same retinue system with small ass armies in a potential Medieval total war 3 i will be annoyed

**Eumerin**

lord marcus wrote:
Eumerin wrote:
Three Kingdoms is their best selling game to date. And it included a lot of new mechanics to shake things up. Some are working. Some aren't.

I think the decisions shown in 3K show that they're willing to try new thinga. The question is whether they can find the right mix of changes as they move forward.

if they do the same retinue system with small ass armies in a potential Medieval total war 3 i will be annoyed

It recognized a long-standing issue - namely, that you can only run around with huge super-stacks of armies. The problem is that it didn't really fix the issue. You still have huge super-stacks with 21 units (including generals). It's just that now the stack is composed of three groups of 7 instead of one large group of 21.

Despite your claim, it is slightly superior to the previous system, since it allows you to detach half a dozen units (plus their general) and stick them somewhere important. This can be useful if you need to leave someone in a spot where they can keep an eye on the border. That's not really cost-effective under the previous games since the cost increase for each additional general was a lot more dramatic (to keep the number of super-stacks low). The original solution was to merely recruit a few units (without a general), and add them to whichever garrison you wanted to fortify. Giving each individual general a smaller army is a compromise solution between the old system and the existing one before 3K was released. But it still only ends up being an imperfect solution since any army that isn't a full-size stack will likely end up getting steam-rolled.

Also, if one of your generals ends up being an enemy agent, things don't turn out as badly if he takes his army stack and joins the enemy.

**Overread**

The core issue is that having your army in one place and using that army to attack an enemy is typically the best way to win most wars. At least in computer games where we typically have a much simplified system of play and a visually smaller area of combat and objectives. Geographically most key targets are within a small travelling area so keeping your army contained to a smaller area means when they hit they hit hard.

The real counter is to have maps like the Mortal Empires map, split between perhaps only 4 or so factions. Ergo where the you then have regions that can raise armies on their own and the travelling time between regions is much greater. Then you'd have more potential to have your armies split and to hit different regions because if you pooled all in one place you would leave yourself open to attack.

With a bigger area to patrol smaller armed forces conducting strikes starts to have more impact because now they can get in - do their work and not risk being hit by a main army. You can cut an opposing faction to bits with a thousand little cuts at outlying territories.

Of course this kind of game is far more involved in terms of complexity at dealing with one opponent, let alone more. So it wouldn't work well with your standard TW game - you'd have so much visual space you'd easily get overwhelmed.

**Eumerin**

There's another issue in play, and that's the current system of bumping up your army costs for every general that you have. Having a few generals with minimal-strength armies is more expensive than running a single general with a full-size stack. Three Kingdoms got around that by putting the maximum army size for a single general at six (plus the general). That made having that extra general that you wanted to leave somewhere else more financially practical.

**Argive**

I really liked the Rome 1 system. Still play that game very often.

The downside to having stacks not led by a character is the leadership nerf which really matters when flanking and rear charges mattered.
Also, 4 unit of phalanx could hold a city street against 2 full armies

**Eumerin**

Argive wrote:
I really liked the Rome 1 system. Still play that game very often.

The downside to having stacks not led by a character is the leadership nerf which really matters when flanking and rear charges mattered.
Also, 4 unit of phalanx could hold a city street against 2 full armies

Small stacks are typically used as a mobile defense in the hinterlands of your empire against opportunistic opponents. Usually they're present to back up a local garrison. As an example, if you're running the Empire in Total War: Warhammer, you might have your army clustered against one opponent, only to have a group of orcs spawn in your rear areas (which happens often enough; random groups of beastmen often do the same), halfway across the map. There aren't that many orcs in the group. But there are enough to take out the garrisons in your settlements. If you could recruit a few units and leave them in a mini-stack in your backfield, then you could react to the orcs without having to pull a lord off of the front lines to send him back (and you'd likely lose a settlement or two before your stack arrived anyway). And the handful of units would likely be enough to bolster the defense of the local garrison, causing the orcs to reroute into a rival's territory, or maybe even wipe out the orcs outright.

**Argive**

Eumerin wrote:
Argive wrote:
I really liked the Rome 1 system. Still play that game very often.

The downside to having stacks not led by a character is the leadership nerf which really matters when flanking and rear charges mattered.
Also, 4 unit of phalanx could hold a city street against 2 full armies

Small stacks are typically used as a mobile defense in the hinterlands of your empire against opportunistic opponents. Usually they're present to back up a local garrison. As an example, if you're running the Empire in Total War: Warhammer, you might have your army clustered against one opponent, only to have a group of orcs spawn in your rear areas (which happens often enough; random groups of beastmen often do the same), halfway across the map. There aren't that many orcs in the group. But there are enough to take out the garrisons in your settlements. If you could recruit a few units and leave them in a mini-stack in your backfield, then you could react to the orcs without having to pull a lord off of the front lines to send him back (and you'd likely lose a settlement or two before your stack arrived anyway). And the handful of units would likely be enough to bolster the defense of the local garrison, causing the orcs to reroute into a rival's territory, or maybe even wipe out the orcs outright.

It depends if you have to pay supply lines % upkeep penalty.
Wish you could garrison units without generals

**Not Online!!!**

Argive wrote:
Eumerin wrote:
Argive wrote:
I really liked the Rome 1 system. Still play that game very often.

The downside to having stacks not led by a character is the leadership nerf which really matters when flanking and rear charges mattered.
Also, 4 unit of phalanx could hold a city street against 2 full armies

Small stacks are typically used as a mobile defense in the hinterlands of your empire against opportunistic opponents. Usually they're present to back up a local garrison. As an example, if you're running the Empire in Total War: Warhammer, you might have your army clustered against one opponent, only to have a group of orcs spawn in your rear areas (which happens often enough; random groups of beastmen often do the same), halfway across the map. There aren't that many orcs in the group. But there are enough to take out the garrisons in your settlements. If you could recruit a few units and leave them in a mini-stack in your backfield, then you could react to the orcs without having to pull a lord off of the front lines to send him back (and you'd likely lose a settlement or two before your stack arrived anyway). And the handful of units would likely be enough to bolster the defense of the local garrison, causing the orcs to reroute into a rival's territory, or maybe even wipe out the orcs outright.

It depends if you have to pay supply lines % upkeep penalty.
Wish you could garrison units without generals

Medieval two had that.
Personally i'd have likes a medieval 2 with province System of etw including that economy and decentral nature...

**Overread**

Part of the issue is that garrisons need bolstering with an army to survive a proper army attack. They give you an edge in combat, but if you don't have an army there they aren't going to hold it off. In fact they only really work against very small roaming mobs (which get free units every turn they are not killed off so quickly become a full army).

I actually rather like Knights of Honour's system whereby each regional settlement you choose how it develops and builds up and can hold a halfsize garrison/army. Meanwhile the area map has several smaller settlements which have no defences but contribute to the resources the region generates. The enemy can then attack each resource point mini settlement which eats up time as they raid it. Raiding complete its destroyed for a period of time. It's rather like Mount and Blade in that the smaller settlements basically let you attack and raid the resources of a region without taking on a castle.

So raiding armies have a threat level without having to be full armies. TW's system of just one regional site means that you sort of have to have full armies to be any threat.

**nels1031**

New DLC:

Never really into either faction, but I may give Throt a test drive.

Also, ZOATS!!!!

This Lords Pack for Total War: WARHAMMER II introduces two new Legendary lords for the Skaven and the Wood Elves. Each leads their own faction and features new characters, units, unique gameplay mechanics and narrative objectives.

The wild energies of the Great Vortex have torn a rift in the Dreaming Woods. Could this form the site of a Daemonic invasion? Sensing great peril, Queen Ariel of Athel Loren dispatches her trusted emissaries, the Sisters of Twilight, to prepare the way for a ritual of closure.

Catching wind of Ariel’s plan, Throt the Unclean scents opportunity. If he can defeat the Sisters and capture the Elven queen while she is vulnerable, perhaps he can harness her essence and cure the eternal pangs of starvation caused by his Warpstone-infused metabolism…
Legendary lords

Wood Elves: The Sisters of Twilight

Once a single being, divided into siblings by The Weave, Naestra and Arahan are two sides of the same coin. They work together in the service of queen Ariel, marshalling the woodland warriors at her command, and cannot be slain unless both fall in battle. The Twilight Sisters must prepare the glade for Ariel’s arrival and protect her as she performs the ritual.

Forge of Daith:

Daith, the master smith of Vaul’s Anvil, will forge and upgrade unique items for the Sister of Twilight. These items are crafted through incidents and dilemmas which appear through the course of a Sisters of Twilight campaign.

Units:

Ariel: The Queen of Athel Loren is recruitable as a Legendary Hero. She is a powerful spellcaster who is more than capable in melee combat too
Spellweaver: Spellcaster Lord who can be recruited to wield the Lores of Life/Beasts/Shadow/Dark/High magic
Zoats: Powerful Monstrous Beasts who have access to bound Lore of Life spells
Great Stag Knights: heavy Wood Elf cavalry used to penetrate infantry lines and decimate lighter cavalry
Bladesingers: Elite, sword-wielding Wardancers

Skaven: Throt the Unclean

An eternal hunger gnaws at Throt, the Master Mutator of Clan Moulder. A lifetime of auto-experimentation has made him powerful, but his vastly enhanced metabolism means he must feed constantly to maintain himself. He is hell-bent on reducing the Wood Elf queen to a magical pulp, which he will consume to satiate himself at long last.

The Flesh Laboratory:

Moulding muscle and bone like living clay, Throt can use his Flesh Laboratory to fashion hideous new abominations for the battlefield. Numerous augmentations can be stacked to make existing units perform in horrifying new ways, but flesh can only bear so much torment before the subject becomes unstable. Even such aberrations have a use though, as they can be rendered down for valuable materials. More Growth Juice for the vats, Yes-yes!

Units:

Ghoritch: A former general of Archaon the Everchosen, once ignored his commander’s orders and was sent to Hell Pit as punishment. There Throt transplanted his brain into the body of a Rat Ogre, creating an aberration of incredible speed, strength and intelligence. Ghoritch is recruitable as a Legendary Hero.
Packmaster: This Hero unit performs a support role with AoE and targeted buffs, summons Wolf Rats to the thick of battle, and may be mounted on a Brood Horror
Wolf Rats: Highly mobile pack-beasts which come in poisonous and armour-piercing varieties
Mutant Rat Ogre: a large single-entity monster adept at brawling.
Brood Horror: A huge, fast-moving monster adept at punching through infantry lines. Can also be chosen as a mount for Throt the Unclean and Packmaster Heroes.

FAQ :

The Twisted & The Twilight is the latest Legendary Lords Pack for Total War: WARHAMMER II, and introduces two rival Legendary Lords from the world of Warhammer Fantasy Battles, each with their own factions, objectives, mechanics, units and playstyle, for use in both the Eye of the Vortex and Mortal Empires campaigns as well as custom and multiplayer battles.

Throt the Unclean, Master Mutator of Clan Moulder, has grown ravenously hungry following a lifetime of mutating experiments, believing that consuming the magic of Ariel, Queen of the Wood Elves, can save him from his eternal starvation. He is opposed by the Sisters of Twilight, Elven twins who were once a single being before being split into two bodies by the Weave. Together they must complete their mission to prepare the glade for Ariel’s ritual, which will heal the rift in the world.

The Twisted & The Twilight includes:

Two unique Legendary Lords leading their own factions:
Throt the Unclean, Master Mutator of Clan Moulder and one of the nine Lords of Hell Pit
The Sisters of Twilight Naestra and Arahan, Emissaries of Queen Ariel
Powerful new units and Heroes for both the Skaven and the Wood Elves, including:
Brood Horrors, Mutant Rat Ogres, Packmasters, Wolf Rats, and the terrifying Ghoritch for the Skaven
Zoats, Great Stag Knights, Bladesingers, Spellweavers, and Queen Ariel of Athel Loren herself for the Wood Elves
An Old World Update for the Wood Elves
For full details on The Twisted & The Twilight, including the full unit rosters for both Legendary Lords, head over to the Steam page to read more as well as get 10% off the launch price if you pre-order.

FAQ
WHEN WILL THE TWISTED & THE TWILIGHT BE RELEASED?
The Twisted & The Twilight will be released on the 3rd of December 2020.

IS THERE A PRE-PURCHASE DISCOUNT?
You’ll get a 10% discount if you pre-purchase The Twisted & The Twilight on Steam before release.

DO I NEED TO START A NEW CAMPAIGN?
If you want to make the most of the recent plethora of changes then yes, we’d advise that you do start a new campaign.

CAN I KEEP MY MODS?
We advise that you remove all mods until their respective creators have updated them in alignment with the update.

STEAM IS NOT INSTALLING THE DLC OR THE FREE-LC – WHAT’S HAPPENING?
Be patient. If there’s an issue with the DLC, we will communicate this via our official social channels. If you don’t see anything there, you should clear your cache and restart Steam.

WILL THE NEW LEGENDARY LORDS BE AVAILABLE IN BOTH THE EYE OF THE VORTEX AND MORTAL EMPIRES CAMPAIGN?
Yes, The Twisted & The Twilight will be available to play in both the Eye of the Vortex and Mortal Empires Campaign, and can also be used in campaign, custom, and battle modes.

WHAT NEW UNITS WILL BE AVAILABLE IN THE TWISTED & THE TWILIGHT?
The Twisted & The Twilight introduces the following new units for the Skaven: Ghoritch (Legendary Hero), Brood Horrors, Mutant Rat Ogres, Packmasters, and Wolf Rats.

It also includes the following new units for the Wood Elves: Ariel (Legendary Hero), Zoats, Great Stag Knights, Bladesingers, and Spellweavers.

WHAT NEW MECHANICS WILL THROT THE UNCLEAN BRING TO THE TWISTED & THE TWILIGHT?
The new campaign mechanic for Throt the Unclean is The Flesh Laboratory.

When playing as Throt the Unclean, you gain access to his personal Flesh Laboratory. Here you can grow new monsters or augment existing ones to create new horrific abominations.

Shape and customise your units with augments that can be stacked to create different combinations of effects
Augmenting a unit too much can make them unstable and lead them to slowly mutate, gaining negative traits
Units can be “recycled” for raw materials, so even defective units still have a purpose
Recycled units can also be replaced by monsters grown in the Growth Vat
The more Growth Juice in the Growth Vat, the better the quality of monster that comes out
WHAT NEW MECHANICS WILL THE SISTERS OF TWILIGHT BRING TO THE TWISTED & THE TWILIGHT?
The new campaign mechanic for the Sisters of Twilight is The Forge of Daith.

During a Sisters of Twilight campaign, the Sisters will gain a series of incidents and dilemmas that will grant them access to unique items crafted by Daith, the master smith of Vaul’s Anvil.

These dilemmas will enable the creation of new items or the upgrade of existing items made by Daith.

WHAT’S THE FREE CONTENT THAT WILL BE RELEASED ALONGSIDE THE DLC?
The Twisted & The Twilight will be accompanied by the release of the Skaven Chieftain Hero and the malevolent Legendary Lord Drycha – more information will be released soon.

WHAT’S IN THE FREE OLD WORLD UPDATE THAT WILL BE RELEASED ALONGSIDE THE DLC?
The Twisted & The Twilight will be released alongside an update of the Wood Elves faction. This includes:

AMBER AND TECHNOLOGY REWORK

Amber is no longer required for units or buildings, and all technologies that previously cost Amber have had the cost removed and been reworked
Eight new technologies have been added – these are the only things that will now cost Amber
Amber is no longer gained from controlling territory, and is instead awarded for healing Forests
HEALING THE FORESTS

In Mortal Empires, the Wood Elves still need to heal Athel Loren and restore the Oak of Ages. However, to do so they now need to travel the world and heal special Forest regions spread around the map. Each healed Forest will provide unique bonuses
A Forest’s health can be built up over time through various actions, such by securing its borders and building certain buildings. Once sufficiently restored, a Ritual can be performed to permanently heal the Forest
Every Forest also has unique Forest Encounters – interactable markers that provide narrative choices and let the player shape how they heal the Forest
As part of this system, new regions have been added to the campaign – four to Mortal Empires, and two to Vortex – giving the Wood Elves a presence on every part of the map
TRAVELLING THE DEEPROOTS

Wood Elves can now instantly transport their armies between Forest regions using the new Travel Deeproots ability (this ability comes with a cooldown)
WHEN WILL THE FREE CONTENT BE AVAILABLE?
On the release day of The Twisted & The Twilight – the 3rd of December 2020.

WILL THE TWISTED & THE TWILIGHT BE RELEASED ON MACOS AND LINUX?
This will be coming shortly after the release of The Twisted & The Twilight – stay tuned!

**Overread**

ZOATS?!!!:!:

Bladesingers, deer cavalry, wolf rats, brood horrors - the Everqueen and the twins - and more - this pack is so very much full of awesome things!

**Voss**

Yeah. Somebody is taking cues from the studio's zoat kick. Wonder what it portends.

Legendary heroes are a surprise. I suspect we'll see more of those in WH3.

Throt is not a surprise. (though that he gets a mount is)

Drycha as the FLC lord.

Good riddance to Amber. The forest encounters sound interesting.

Curious where the new regions will go, and if hey will be a bit iffy and poorly justified insertions of WE areas in Naggaroth and Lustria.

---
Also, apparently this is not the last DLC.
Confirmed by the CA PR person (CA_Grace) here: https://www.reddit.com/r/totalwar/comments/jx58ti/sick_of_the_skaven/gcu92bt/?context=3

---
Oh, also, the Everchosen tournament is streaming the 28th/29th. They will almost certainly show off some of the new stuff, probably in an exhibition match between rounds of the tournament.

**A Town Called Malus**

Seems almost a bit backwards to me to have the Sisters as the Legendary Lords and Ariel as the Hero.

**nels1031**

A Town Called Malus wrote:
Seems almost a bit backwards to me to have the Sisters as the Legendary Lords and Ariel as the Hero.

Ya, Lizardmen have that issue with Kroak, as well. Weird design choice.

**Kanluwen**

With Wood Elves it works a bit easier, since the Sisters' power is independent of the forest.

As the forest breaks, Ariel (and Orion) break too.

**Voss**

Its also largely a benefit. A dedicated hero caster can 100% focus on being ridiculous with magic, while a pure magic lord tends to fall behind trying to get the utility and army skills.

**H.B.M.C.**

I like the idea of Ariel as a hero. Means she can go around healing the forest or whatever without having to be an army general.

And Zoats!!!