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.

How can you ***** about base building, which doesn't fit in to 40k, then in the same sentence complain about one minor nitpicky fluff point? So you care about the game staying true to the lore, but you also want the game to break from the lore?

This is kinda pathetic.

Actually, base building is reasonable for the IG. In fact in apocalypse the IG can drop in barricades from space. They prefabricate the building and drop it in.

So yeah, umm, base building actually fits the IG.

halonachos wrote:Actually, base building is reasonable for the IG. In fact in apocalypse the IG can drop in barricades from space. They prefabricate the building and drop it in.

So yeah, umm, base building actually fits the IG.

No it doesn't. While dropping in barricades is reasonable and appropriate for 40k, or even automated turrets for that matter, dropping in a prebuilt factory less than a mile away from the enemy base isn't, and is completely stupid and has no fluff basis whatsoever.

halonachos wrote:Actually, base building is reasonable for the IG. In fact in apocalypse the IG can drop in barricades from space. They prefabricate the building and drop it in.

So yeah, umm, base building actually fits the IG.

Apocalypse rules are relevant to DoW2 how?

Melissia wrote:

halonachos wrote:Actually, base building is reasonable for the IG. In fact in apocalypse the IG can drop in barricades from space. They prefabricate the building and drop it in.

So yeah, umm, base building actually fits the IG.

No it doesn't. While dropping in barricades is reasonable and appropriate for 40k, or even automated turrets for that matter, dropping in a prebuilt factory less than a mile away from the enemy base isn't, and is completely stupid and has no fluff basis whatsoever.

During WW2, Soviet russia would build a factory on a railroad. When the frontline moved forward the factory was dismantled, moved forward, and rebuilt.

So building factories near the front lines has a historical basis.


As with the other races any infantry producing building can be rationalized as rallying points for troops arriving to the battlefield.

Also, look at the factories when they are 'building' a tank. A dropship actually brings the parts in a box to the factory itself. Think of them more as a fortified workshop that assembles recently arrived vehicle modules.

All of the buildings are prefabricated and can be dropped in. The buildings can also be put in to make a battle more like a siege similar to the story of the Steel Legion fighting in a massive manufactorum that was still running while the Orks were inside. The Steel Legion were using chimeras that were fresh off the assembly line.

Factories running on the front line are fluff worthy, prefabricated buildings being dropped in are fluff worthy, and dropping in modular parts is also fluff worthy.

Someone emailed me on my PS3 calling me a spawn camper in Black Ops. people are such babies. If I kill you, and you come back and I kill you again, and you come back and I kill you again, and you come back and I kill you again, of couse I'm gonna sit there and wait so you can crank up my kill count.

I popped Killzone 2 back in today, gonna replay it to get ready for part 3 next month.. damn I forgot how much harder this was, COD is like ezmode frags.

Halonachos, your saying they got them wrong, whilst you keep hammering on only 1 type of IG army, the IG is made up of all kinds of regiments, and the things you are mentioning, is an army made up of multiple regiments. So in essence, you got it wrong.

I feel like I need to defend myself for my earlier post. Many seem to think I am a whiny noob complaining about campers when this is not the case. As I said I prefer a more mobile game when I play and think it's more fun when others do too. Does that mean I don't stop and check for targets when I come upon a good overwatch location? Of couse not. I simply don't stay forever. And "camping" obviously makes sense in objective games

Melissia wrote:

When I have choices between games in the same relative subgenre (fps war shooters, for example), a game letting me play a female avatar is better than a game that does not let me play one.

Enjoy not playing some great games without female mains

battle Brother Lucifer wrote:

Melissia wrote:

When I have choices between games in the same relative subgenre (fps war shooters, for example), a game letting me play a female avatar is better than a game that does not let me play one.

Enjoy not playing some great games without female mains

Stop, and read the post in its entirety.

I've enjoyed the entirety of the Quake series, the Duke Nukem series (even back when he wore a pink shirt and watched Oprah), the Half Life series, I've enjoyed WWII games from the MoH series and other series, as well as more modern games such as Black Ops and BC2, and a couple hundred other games which all have male leads.

But when I have a choice? I buy the ones with female leads where the female isn't just there for the sake of thirteen year old virgins, or ones where you choose between male or female. Because, I hope, I will better empathize with the characters. Certainly I empathized better with Faith from Mirror's Edge than Alex Mason of Black Ops, but that could also be because of me not taking Black Ops seriously. Certainly I empathized better with Zoey more than I did, say, Preston Marlowe from the Bad Company series. I don't see why some people seem to think this is unreasonable.

I think bbl had a logical conclusion. Personally, I don't care who you play one way or another.

Tomb raider, no objections to Lara Croft.
CoD, no objections to being a male.


I like games with a fast-paced, balanced system, not ones where I can choose to be a guy.

The Bringer wrote:I think bbl had a logical conclusion. Personally, I don't care who you play one way or another.

Tomb raider, no objections to Lara Croft.
CoD, no objections to being a male.

I really don't see why that would be a defining characteristic of whether or not you like games.

Try actually reading.

I tried, the only thing I saw was the "In the same sub-genre"


EDIT:
I read your edited post,

I guess that would make sense. Personally, I don't care much for the plot of the game. I never yell "For Gondor!!!!" while hacking away at orcs. I can see why people might value choosing their gender, but I've never seen somebody actually care that much.

Then try reading the ENTIRE post and not just part of it.

I uderstand what you mean.
However, If Generic Shooter 2 had a female lead, vs Generic Shooter 3: The Generic Wars (with a male lead)
You said you would get the one with a female lead, And according to you, Generic Shooter 2 would be better, because of the female lead,
even if Generic Shooter 3 was a better game

battle Brother Lucifer wrote:I uderstand what you mean.
However, If Generic Shooter 2 had a female lead, vs Generic Shooter 3: The Generic Wars (with a male lead)
You said you would get the one with a female lead, And according to you, Generic Shooter 2 would be better, because of the female lead,
even if Generic Shooter 3 was a better game

Yes. I would. This reminds me of the Deus Ex situation. I don't intend to get the new Deus Ex for this very reason-- they removed the ability to customize your character's gender and appearance, a feature which set the second Deus Ex well above most other games. Therefor, I am far less interested in it. If it goes on sale for cheap and I have the extra cash, I'll get it over Steam. Otherwise, there's other games I want first so my limited money supply is going elsewhere.

I can't afford to pay fifty bucks for every game that comes out, so I buy games that have features I want. This is one that is on the top of the list, right below "it has guns and you shoot people".

I rarely buy games when they come out, as I am not made of money as well.
For the most part, I don't mind female leads, however, I sometimes mind mains of other races. I prefer it to be unknown race, or mine, because I like to pretend I'm the main character

Although an old game, P.N. 03 for game cube was pretty fun (fem lead, if you never played it)

battle Brother Lucifer wrote: because I like to pretend I'm the main character

That pretty much sums up the reason why I prefer female leads, or at least to have female avatars in multiplayer.

Melissia wrote:

battle Brother Lucifer wrote:I uderstand what you mean.
However, If Generic Shooter 2 had a female lead, vs Generic Shooter 3: The Generic Wars (with a male lead)
You said you would get the one with a female lead, And according to you, Generic Shooter 2 would be better, because of the female lead,
even if Generic Shooter 3 was a better game

Yes. I would. This reminds me of the Deus Ex situation. I don't intend to get the new Deus Ex for this very reason-- they removed the ability to customize your character's gender and appearance, a feature which set the second Deus Ex well above most other games. Therefor, I am far less interested in it. If it goes on sale for cheap and I have the extra cash, I'll get it over Steam. Otherwise, there's other games I want first so my limited money supply is going elsewhere.

I can't afford to pay fifty bucks for every game that comes out, so I buy games that have features I want. This is one that is on the top of the list, right below "it has guns and you shoot people".

Well whatever floats your boat. I think the choice of gender in a game could be important to some people but I don't think it should be the major selling point. I like female leads more myself and usually play them when I can, but it doesn't bother me if they are male instead. I would miss out on a lot of good games if I thought that way.

Also I think Deus Ex: Human Revolution is going to be good enough to let the male lead character slip on you once. Seriously that game is going to be great.

Sure, I'm sure it will, but so will other games, which will have features I want more.

Fair enough. Just remember when you are bored with the ones you have played to death, be sure to pick up Deus Ex. I am running a Shadowrun campaign right now to hold me over until its release.

Or, more likely, when it goes on sale on Steam this summer, but only if it's a very cheap price, otherwise it'll wait until the extremely cheap post-xmas sales Steam has.

Melissia, if you always choose female characters in games (when you can choose between the two) that means you must have never gotten 'married' in Morrowind!
Except judging by what you have said from the 'people w/ tails at the mall' thread, you probably won't care (you marry a Khajiit)

I actually used a mod to make the khajiit have humanoid features (IE, a human head and limbs), and played as a khajiit nightblade.

Erm... HALO or COD? I wish people would stop either talking about Morrowind or DOW on this forum. Cod is good but very frustrating and often one feels 'robbed' of a kill rather than clearly outdone, about 80:20 in Reach it is about 25:75 IMO. Alot of reach is skill based. My favourite thing is the ridculous 'Armour Lock Duels' on Elite slayer, Please tell me you know what i mean!

Melissia wrote:I actually used a mod to make the khajiit have humanoid features (IE, a human head and limbs), and played as a khajiit nightblade.

Why?

Because I despised the visual change that Khajiit went through from Daggerfall to Morrowind.

Perkustin wrote:Erm... HALO or COD? I wish people would stop either talking about Morrowind or DOW on this forum. Cod is good but very frustrating and often one feels 'robbed' of a kill rather than clearly outdone, about 80:20 in Reach it is about 25:75 IMO. Alot of reach is skill based. My favourite thing is the ridculous 'Armour Lock Duels' on Elite slayer, Please tell me you know what i mean!

I don't cause killing someone with armor lock is piss easy, almost as easy as killing someone when you have armor lock too. :3

I feel more robbed in Reach than Black Ops when I get assists

Soladrin wrote:Halonachos, your saying they got them wrong, whilst you keep hammering on only 1 type of IG army, the IG is made up of all kinds of regiments, and the things you are mentioning, is an army made up of multiple regiments. So in essence, you got it wrong.

Actually, the IG regiments tend not to vary that much within an individual army. That is, of course, unless you look at combined 'leftover' regiments such as the mixed catachan and elysian regiments that created a regiment of airborne jungle specialists.

Like I said, the basic troops lacked the ability to get grenades in the game. There were absolutely no vox's available for upgrade as well. I also had a hard time understanding the trench part of the buildings, I could get them dropping in prefabricated buildings but not an underground trench system.


The presence of camping isn't necessarily the developer's fault though. Same thing with people spawn camping, its a dick move overall, but its not like, nevermind its a dick move.