Total War: WARHAMMER 40.000 - Announce Trailer

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.

**RustyNumber**

People, please trim your quotes before posting.....

What I think people expect is some weird smushing of hundreds of troops on screen at once dynamically rolling between cover, pushing peoples heads down, having individual sprites from a block of 30 throw a grenade around a corner whilst the rest of the squad line up ready to move and suppressive fire as they advance 2 at a time between cover. That is not and never will be total war. It's madness to expect that and no RTS on the planet will do that at that scale.

Yes, that is the kind of changes/advancement in gameplay and presentation I would expect from a large well regarded studio who are moving onto a subject different to previous ones. Again, look at Steel Division 2 footage. Do I expect units to literally be individually enacting Band of Brothers moment to moment? No of course not, but at least making the pretence of "these are firearm units utilising terrain and cover and bounding up" as opposed to "we march in formation across an empty plain firing our weapons like it's 1866" If Company of Heroes could do it 20 years ago with small units (and I'm perfectly fine with that mish mash of real world authenticity and "march your SMG unit until they stand 5m from the rifleman unit and they will blaze away at each other like zombies" gameiness) there's no reason it can't be done on a larger scale now.

I don't know why you'd point to the miniatures and artwork and say "see that's what we want and what we'll get!" the whole purpose of an adaptation is being able to break away from how it is (imperfectly) depicted elsewhere. I'll be the first to say that the scale of the tabletop looks silly and implausible, but that translates over and works fine in an RTS like DoW where your preconceptions (based on decades of games back to Dune) is that it's fine for units to engage at unrealistic distances, numbers and tactics. Total War however has always tried to wear some plausibility with its depiction of large battles, at least in comparison to something like Age of Empires.

**Moopy**

Really can't wait to see some of these maps in detail. The TW:W ones are fantastic.

**Dudeface**

RustyNumber wrote:
People, please trim your quotes before posting.....

What I think people expect is some weird smushing of hundreds of troops on screen at once dynamically rolling between cover, pushing peoples heads down, having individual sprites from a block of 30 throw a grenade around a corner whilst the rest of the squad line up ready to move and suppressive fire as they advance 2 at a time between cover. That is not and never will be total war. It's madness to expect that and no RTS on the planet will do that at that scale.

Yes, that is the kind of changes/advancement in gameplay and presentation I would expect from a large well regarded studio who are moving onto a subject different to previous ones. Again, look at Steel Division 2 footage. Do I expect units to literally be individually enacting Band of Brothers moment to moment? No of course not, but at least making the pretence of "these are firearm units utilising terrain and cover and bounding up" as opposed to "we march in formation across an empty plain firing our weapons like it's 1866" If Company of Heroes could do it 20 years ago with small units (and I'm perfectly fine with that mish mash of real world authenticity and "march your SMG unit until they stand 5m from the rifleman unit and they will blaze away at each other like zombies" gameiness) there's no reason it can't be done on a larger scale now.

I don't know why you'd point to the miniatures and artwork and say "see that's what we want and what we'll get!" the whole purpose of an adaptation is being able to break away from how it is (imperfectly) depicted elsewhere. I'll be the first to say that the scale of the tabletop looks silly and implausible, but that translates over and works fine in an RTS like DoW where your preconceptions (based on decades of games back to Dune) is that it's fine for units to engage at unrealistic distances, numbers and tactics. Total War however has always tried to wear some plausibility with its depiction of large battles, at least in comparison to something like Age of Empires.

Because I was told every depiction of the setting showed them using "modern fighting techniques" which clearly isn't the case.

Total war has used loose formation skirmish units for decades at this point which is 80% of what you're all talking about, to add to that from the tiny tiny tiny limited footage of the game seen, they make a token use of cover, such as the guardsmen behind the aegis.

Spoiler:

Which boils back down to what exactly are people moaning about.

Oddly it's fine for units to march in formation across open areas firing their weapons in dawn of war and nobody bats an eyelid, but in the mass battle game? Nooo can't have that.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

Mentlegen324 wrote:

These examples make me wonder if you're actually even entirely understanding of what this whole thing is even about, as what you've done there is look at a superficial cosmetic element as if that alone is all that this involves, with nothing more to it. What you've shown is mostly just units with members of a squad in cohesion with each other while out in the open, but they are not operating as a block formation of strict regimented infantry who maneuver and fire and behave in sync with each other as if they're one single big unit. One soldier standing behind another or if a squad vaguely resembles a loose square shape doesn't magically shift their behavior and fighting style back to the 1700s and make them operate as rank & file line infantry all of a sudden.

Units fighting in formation would be them choosing a specific shape, forming that shape together, and staying in that positioning as they move and fight, but that isn't what 40k is about. The way combat in 40k is primarily depicted is where they're operating together as a squad near each other, but they aren't all locked into a specific rigid formation carrying out specific timed behaviour patterns all doing the very same thing at once. It isn't rank & file formation warfare. Look at those Eldar Guardians in that last piece of art for example, that's how things are most commonly shown - acting on their own initiative, choosing their own targets, firing on their decision, having more fluid movement than being stuck together in a pattern, using cover when available etc like you'd expect modern-day soldiers to operate too. That's how the vast majority of books, stories, novels, animations etc have depicted things being done, not with a formation warfare style. The few times I can recall something that actually did outright involve a formation, is Krieg troopers marching in some of the Vraks art, and regiments like Praetorian or Mordian Guard forming firing lines because they're specifically based on more historical-styled regiments.

I don't think anyone is really suggesting that the way the game does things is something like every single unit member can behave on their own and would all wait cover with them moving up one at a time like it's the Men of War series where you get that level of granularity, for me it's just wanting a bit more suitable depiction of 40k than it being shoved into the rank & file block warfare format. It's a relatively small change but what I was hoping for something a bit closer to what epic 40k, Apocalypse 40k or Legionnes Imperialis does for their units - a unit being a combination of several squads together.

I agree that a few unit operating together is a good idea but even then, at this scale theyre going to move in a rough formation of units. As noted they'll likely look like skirmishing units and conform to terrain where they can

But this is an rts, once they're in the place you put the unit, the unit will fire at the target unit all at once from whatever position you put them in.

Too much is being complained and worried about when theres a total of 5 seconds of gameplay from up high on a bridge. There will have to be an element of them moving in some form of formation and firing simultaneously and so on, because that's simply a sensible implementation of mechanics at that scale.

**Gimgamgoo**

Dudeface wrote:
There is no formal explanation for how 40k troops fight? ....

Push them all to the middle of the table in a clump and roll lots of dice?

**Dudeface**

Gimgamgoo wrote:
Dudeface wrote:
There is no formal explanation for how 40k troops fight? ....

Push them all to the middle of the table in a clump and roll lots of dice?

Damn straight!

**1984Phantom**

Gimgamgoo wrote:
Dudeface wrote:
There is no formal explanation for how 40k troops fight? ....

Push them all to the middle of the table in a clump and roll lots of dice?

The true fact is that WH40K in most cases depicts in the wrong way the strategy and tactics on the battlefield. The table is too small, is very very small, and is too full of troops. Troops don't have space to manouevre, to fire from the distance. I hope Total War doesn't copy from the tabletop game.

**Ahtman**

An early cutscene from the game has been released

Spoiler:

**Flinty**

30 years pre-alpha… some kind of record?

**Dudeface**

1984Phantom wrote:
Gimgamgoo wrote:
Dudeface wrote:
There is no formal explanation for how 40k troops fight? ....

Push them all to the middle of the table in a clump and roll lots of dice?

The true fact is that WH40K in most cases depicts in the wrong way the strategy and tactics on the battlefield. The table is too small, is very very small, and is too full of troops. Troops don't have space to manouevre, to fire from the distance. I hope Total War doesn't copy from the tabletop game.

Heaven forbid total war 40k learns it's setting from actual warhammer 40k rather than the NATO play book right?

**Gert**

It might just be me that thinks this, but I don't feel this is going to work as a Total War game.

Sure, it'll have the label, but TW is pretty well defined by its large block units (exceptions, of course, existing with the likes of artillery and monsters for TWWH and TW: Troy) and unless we're suddenly pivoting to Space Marines coming in blocks of 30 or Tyranids marching in square, then I don't see how its going to keep the vibe of TW and not just end up as "Slightly Differrent Dawn of War".

**Dudeface**

Gert wrote:
It might just be me that thinks this, but I don't feel this is going to work as a Total War game.

Sure, it'll have the label, but TW is pretty well defined by its large block units (exceptions, of course, existing with the likes of artillery and monsters for TWWH and TW: Troy) and unless we're suddenly pivoting to Space Marines coming in blocks of 30 or Tyranids marching in square, then I don't see how its going to keep the vibe of TW and not just end up as "Slightly Differrent Dawn of War".

This is the crux of the issue. For me, both is a win.