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.

Revealed at Game Awards




Interesting things displayed, the quick rotation of chapters seems to indicate some way to customise your troops' colors, and there seem to be ground-space interactions, perhaps space will act like seas in other TW games?

Edit: As far as faction goes, it seems Orks, Eldars, Marines and the Guard will be present at first, I assume the Eldars will be there going by the trailer's cover and we can see some Imperial Guard units as allies in the brief gameplay shots we have.

Interesting that the planet seems a bit like Planetary Annihilation, deformed and compressed, I just thought the hives were just extending up but that mounting seems oversized but maybe on an alien world it's not.

Disappointed we saw some gameplay only for it to be a few seconds which tell us nothing about how they'll handle things. Because it looks almost like DoW3 both in UI and the "floaty" nature of units. It doesn't look like they worked out how to make something like CoH at a massive scale. I hope not because it suggests the fear, that they'll make the game under pressure to have another big hit without solving the essential problems with a 40k TW game.

TW has always thrived on being immersive but this looks like they've had to sacrifice this either for technical reasons or lacking conceptual ideas to solve the problems. Even more than TK it feels very gamey and full of very gamey UI.

There is also the problem of this being a console release (In the 25th anniversary stream they revealed all games going forward will be on consoles too), handling something like a 40k TW game is difficult enough, if you have to handicap it to work on a controller...

I honestly can't say they allayed my fears and even have me feeling wary in new ways now.

I wonder if that's because it's an alpha/pre-alpha thing, you'll note the Guardsmen's lasguns don't shoot laser so it's obviously unfinished, but it's also a legit concern, something bugs me about the gameplay part and I can't quite put my finger on it.

Edit: The Steam page is up and:

CUSTOMISE YOUR WAR MACHINE

Step into battle with renowned sub-factions and warlords from the Warhammer 40,000 universe - or forge your own custom army with unparalleled set of customisation options that bring tabletop freedom to life.

● Personalise Your Army: Name your warband, choose its sacred colours, and emblazon its regiments with an array of iconography that strikes fear into the hearts of enemies.

● Modify Your Warriors: Tailor your faction’s combat philosophy for both campaign and battle, arming them with your own unique fusion of devastating tactical abilities, signature traits, and arcane wargear.

This is interesting at least, it seems that unlike TWW which was somewhat limited by the setting, you will have more freedom there, perks of 40k having a lot more space to play in, I suppose.

Final Liberation finally getting a sequel after all these years.

I'm keen.

Might actually buy it on release. Which is something I'm pretty sure I haven't done since Dow II.

 Bobthehero wrote:
I wonder if that's because it's an alpha/pre-alpha thing, you'll note the Guardsmen's lasguns don't shoot laser so it's obviously unfinished, but it's also a legit concern, something bugs me about the gameplay part and I can't quite put my finger on it.

Edit: The Steam page is up and:

CUSTOMISE YOUR WAR MACHINE

Step into battle with renowned sub-factions and warlords from the Warhammer 40,000 universe - or forge your own custom army with unparalleled set of customisation options that bring tabletop freedom to life.

● Personalise Your Army: Name your warband, choose its sacred colours, and emblazon its regiments with an array of iconography that strikes fear into the hearts of enemies.

● Modify Your Warriors: Tailor your faction’s combat philosophy for both campaign and battle, arming them with your own unique fusion of devastating tactical abilities, signature traits, and arcane wargear.

This is interesting at least, it seems that unlike TWW which was somewhat limited by the setting, you will have more freedom there, perks of 40k having a lot more space to play in, I suppose.

You mean the fact that console support inevitably neuters strategy games.

Or the fact that the units are really unresponsive and behave wierdly unanimated, bricky, nigh cartony?

Also mid map controllpoint rtw2 launch PTSD.

Or that it looks like a less responsive DoW?

I really like the focus on multi planet battles GW has been pushing lately. Really helps give the setting a sense of place that is often lost through the endlessly repeated small scale environments we usually see the galaxy through.

This one caught my attention more than DoW, but its weird they're doing both.

 Bobthehero wrote:
I wonder if that's because it's an alpha/pre-alpha thing, you'll note the Guardsmen's lasguns don't shoot laser so it's obviously unfinished, but it's also a legit concern, something bugs me about the gameplay part and I can't quite put my finger on it.

Edit: The Steam page is up and:

CUSTOMISE YOUR WAR MACHINE

Step into battle with renowned sub-factions and warlords from the Warhammer 40,000 universe - or forge your own custom army with unparalleled set of customisation options that bring tabletop freedom to life.

● Personalise Your Army: Name your warband, choose its sacred colours, and emblazon its regiments with an array of iconography that strikes fear into the hearts of enemies.

● Modify Your Warriors: Tailor your faction’s combat philosophy for both campaign and battle, arming them with your own unique fusion of devastating tactical abilities, signature traits, and arcane wargear.

This is interesting at least, it seems that unlike TWW which was somewhat limited by the setting, you will have more freedom there, perks of 40k having a lot more space to play in, I suppose.

My guess is that it will work a bit like the Daemon Prince in TWW3, and indeed he is probably the crude prototype. We will still have the set in stone factions. The different canon Marine chapters, guard regiments, Ork Waaaghs, etc...

Then each faction will have the "Insert Custom Character Here" sub-faction which if the player isn't playing them will just be a minor faction in that spot.

I suppose the real question is how the factions will be broken down, or at least Space Marines. Because in TWW3 you have Empire:(insert all Empire Lords here), Warriors of Chaos(insert Chaos Lords here), Daemons:(insert Daemon Lords here), Cathay(Insert Cathay lords here).

Will Space Marines be a single faction with each legendary lord being their chapter master or will each Chapter be a grouped faction of LL. So you'd have the Ultramarine faction with X lords, Black Templars with X lords, Dark Angels with X lords, Customizable Chapter with Custom Lord etc...


Given that now they have the framework for each faction to have completely unique game mechanics it'll probably lead to some good variety. You know, the arrival and implementation of the Primarus Marines would be an interesting equivalent to the Marian Reforms in the Rome Total War games which switch from old Republic legions to Imperial Legions. You start the game as a Marine chapter with First Born only, then at some point in the game Cawl does his thing and you can now recruit Primarus marines and upgrade your old units to Primarus and keep their experience(but maybe at risk of the surgery failing). Or you could have your custom chapter eshew the new Marines and just follow the old ways


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 LunarSol wrote:
I really like the focus on multi planet battles GW has been pushing lately. Really helps give the setting a sense of place that is often lost through the endlessly repeated small scale environments we usually see the galaxy through.

This one caught my attention more than DoW, but its weird they're doing both.

I hope, and I know it probably wont happen, but it would be cool if we had actual space ship combat too. I know it will likely just be handwaived TWW3 style where you just pull a fleet out of thin air and fly between planets and there are no space battles.

But I just wish they would try. Because when TW has done Naval before it was alright. 40k space battles are just 18th century naval battles in space, just reskin Empire Total Wars naval mechanics.

I’m just super excited for this, even over dawn of war.

It also has PS5 support which is super cool!
If they somehow managed to get it on the switch 2 I would absolutely get it for both lol

Otherwise I am just keen to see how it goes, hopefully can customise the leaders a bit. It’s something I really like being able to do a bit of customisation and it is a big part of the hobby that is often missed in the games.
Curious to see if they do diplomacy or just have it super basic, they haven’t really done much with it recently in games and haven’t been anywhere advanced.

I would also like if they do special deployment options. Something missing from so many 40K games is how your army is deployed to the battlefield, this could be super cool if something like drop pods where a specific option over using dropcraft or infiltration onto the battlefield at the start.

I'm pretty sure it would melt a switch 2 trying to run it.

That said honestly I'm very concerned about the console part. Yes it means more customers, but historically every single RTS game that has tried to go console or console/pc hyrbrid - has failed.

Heck the AoS RTS game tried that and flopped hard.


The problem is controllers are just BAD at everything you need for RTS control and, unlike FPS games, you can't just put an "auto aim" feature in to mask it.
It tends to mean you have to cut down keyboard commands a lot to get them to fit into a simple controller setup; you have to cut down trigger spots and make selection and control very simplistic.

I also find you have to slow the game down a lot too cause the controller is slower.


The result is typically a game that's "clunky" in the console world and unsatisfying in the PC sector.




Now turnbased strategy 100% is alive and honestly healthy on console. And in theory TW games are a bit slower than regular RTS experiences because once units slam into each other and lock into combat they are kind of there doing their thing...


But I don't know - its a BIG risk honestly and its VERY easy to mess it up and end up with a game that isn't really satisfying either market.
At least if it fails it will fail early enough that they can abandon the idea for Medieval 3

 Overread wrote:
I'm pretty sure it would melt a switch 2 trying to run it.

That said honestly I'm very concerned about the console part. Yes it means more customers, but historically every single RTS game that has tried to go console or console/pc hyrbrid - has failed.

Heck the AoS RTS game tried that and flopped hard.


The problem is controllers are just BAD at everything you need for RTS control and, unlike FPS games, you can't just put an "auto aim" feature in to mask it.
It tends to mean you have to cut down keyboard commands a lot to get them to fit into a simple controller setup; you have to cut down trigger spots and make selection and control very simplistic.

I also find you have to slow the game down a lot too cause the controller is slower.


The result is typically a game that's "clunky" in the console world and unsatisfying in the PC sector.




Now turnbased strategy 100% is alive and honestly healthy on console. And in theory TW games are a bit slower than regular RTS experiences because once units slam into each other and lock into combat they are kind of there doing their thing...


But I don't know - its a BIG risk honestly and its VERY easy to mess it up and end up with a game that isn't really satisfying either market.
At least if it fails it will fail early enough that they can abandon the idea for Medieval 3

They have been putting more strategy games on the PS5/PS4 without any modifications, I play both Stellaris and crusader kings. And every console on the market now has mouse and keyboard as an option, so they can put down that it plays best on those controls.
To make it work on console it really just needs good key binding, which is where so many fail at.

I use a controller to play StarCraft 2 as modern controllers actually have a lot of key binding options. More than most players will use on a keyboard. Doesn’t mean the devs will do it will, maybe they won’t. But they should be competent enough now too.

And total war games not really ever been fast enough to require a mouse, they Slow, and easy to get around for any competent player I find with even basic controls.

Also PS5 has both a Touch pad and Gyro control. There is plenty of options for controlling the game. Gyro once you used to it can be used just as fast as a mouse.


Edit- seriously auto correct hates me today.

There were console mice in the 90s for the PS1 and 2. Thing was no one ever ever bought nor used them for the most part.

Now granted with home PC ownership on a decline and consoles still going strong if they can push mouse and keyboard to be as standard as controllers then RTS has a good chance on console cause then its just another PC.

Crusader Kings and Stellaris are kind of hybrids between RTS and TBS - in that both on pc or console often expect you to slow/speed up time or pause to go through things. So yeah I can see both those working.

I think in the end it really depends on if they are building a console RTS game and porting it to PC or if they are building a PC RTS game and porting it to console.

OR heck if they REALLY go to town and build two different interfaces properly built for each one. Time will tell and honestly I really wish they break the trend and do well - cause more RTS is always good in the market and cracking the bridge between console and PC would mean more potential customers and more investment in RTS.

Stellaris and Crusader Kings III have a very solid purpose-built console GUI designed to map to a controller.

I would hope that CA are smart enough to go down that route, too.

I have wanted Total Warhammer 40,000 since the original Shogun game, but I am cautious about this gam.

I have no clue how Total War game can work with no mouse and keyboard.
RTS on console is a bad thing, unless the game is build around a Gimmick (like tooth and tail)
Which I hope this game is not

SnotlingPimpWagon wrote:
I have no clue how Total War game can work with no mouse and keyboard.
RTS on console is a bad thing, unless the game is build around a Gimmick (like tooth and tail)
Which I hope this game is not

Gyro is accurate and able to be very fast moving over the screen, keybinds gives easy access to units and you can still have lots left for other buttons on the Ui.
The biggest issue is the Xbox controller doesn’t have gyro or a touchpad. Not really a big issue if the Ui design doesn’t suck. But thy are big enough to look at that.

Hopefully they don't dumb the PC controls down just so it works on Console. They just need to allow for keybind choices for the consumer, which for some reason many Console games still do not allow when ported to PC(RDR2 didn't allow for changing your keybinds for example when I last played).

I want this to be good. I really do. I'm a bit confused why we're getting DoW 4 and total war warhammer 40k. I imagine total war might have a level of battlefleet gothic for space battles but i'm not sure.

I'm also interested if different factions will get different galaxy-wide buffs like how in Total War: Warhammer vampire counts could raise undead armies at the sites of big battles or how skaven had hidden settlements, under-cities, underway tunnels and more. Maybe necrons will have a similar re-assemble after battles somewhat. Space Marines might get some super fast drop pod reinforcements but their population rate might be slow and they'll be expensive. Orks can loot some vehicles or maybe add armor to what they have after looting as well as re-grow in spores when some die (maybe the more orks the more waaagh! power). Eldar will get insanely fast transport with webways and maybe soul stone collection is pretty big for wraith units and hard to replace units due to eldar near extinction. I'm not sure what imperial guard will get (probably artillery barrages and a large logistics nightmare the bigger it gets but maybe they can conscript from populations for cheap and have a better planet development on the galaxy map than other factions.

The other big worry is that Total War generally only does rank and file battles. Even going beyond the tech level of Shogun 2: Fall of the Samurai was a big maybe. Then we had Total War: Warhammer which Total War never did fantasy or fictional battles before but it was nice. 40k seems like another huge jump.

It's all just so early to know for both this game and dawn of war 4.

If we follow TWW1-2-3 changes, the starter 4 factions will be radically different a few years in, I assume the factions will have more basic mechanics to distinguish them now, and later on, will have more complicated features. I also assume the Guard will be like the Empire, who at first distinguished itself by having no mechanics.

 Bobthehero wrote:
If we follow TWW1-2-3 changes, the starter 4 factions will be radically different a few years in, I assume the factions will have more basic mechanics to distinguish them now, and later on, will have more complicated features. I also assume the Guard will be like the Empire, who at first distinguished itself by having no mechanics.

Yes, but I assume it will be further along than TWW3 was on release. I think every faction having unique mechanics was very much a later choice to add to the game to draw people back to the beginning factions.

I have to expect that everybody will have unique mechanics out the gate, though those will probably change as time goes on.

I noticed that in the trailer its just Imperium vs Orks. Will those be the only two playable races in the base game and the other races get bought in DLC? Hopefully they'll at least have 4 races in the base game.

And yeah, doing RTS on consoles is dumb. It was dumb all the way back when Shadow of the Horned Rat was ported on the PS1 so why do they keep attempting it now?

There's 4 factions at launch; Marines, Guard, Eldar and Orks.

As for console there's probably more reason now than in the past - home PC ownership for video games appears to be in a bit of a tricky spot as the gear is getting more and more expensive and a lot of homes don't "need" a pc any more. They use their phone and game on a console with the big TV.

So I can see them wanting to chase where the market is going to maximise revenue.


I can see why they want to go there even if historically its always been a bad choice

 Grey Templar wrote:

 Bobthehero wrote:
If we follow TWW1-2-3 changes, the starter 4 factions will be radically different a few years in, I assume the factions will have more basic mechanics to distinguish them now, and later on, will have more complicated features. I also assume the Guard will be like the Empire, who at first distinguished itself by having no mechanics.

Yes, but I assume it will be further along than TWW3 was on release. I think every faction having unique mechanics was very much a later choice to add to the game to draw people back to the beginning factions.

I have to expect that everybody will have unique mechanics out the gate, though those will probably change as time goes on.

We'll, from what we have seen the SM will have something similar to the DE's Black Arks, it's a good choice for them

 Overread wrote:
There's 4 factions at launch; Marines, Guard, Eldar and Orks.

As for console there's probably more reason now than in the past - home PC ownership for video games appears to be in a bit of a tricky spot as the gear is getting more and more expensive and a lot of homes don't "need" a pc any more. They use their phone and game on a console with the big TV.

So I can see them wanting to chase where the market is going to maximise revenue.


I can see why they want to go there even if historically its always been a bad choice

Probably a topic for another thread but i thought console gaming was generally considered to be trash nowadays esp. with increased costs across the board in gaming and the fact aside from Steam/Valve maybe dipping into console gaming with their own console system the whole form of gaming just seems to be garbage. I don't think any one of the Big 3: Nintendo, Sony or Microsoft are doing well with console gaming and seem hated by all.

As for the factions at launch yeah it's Marines, Guard, Eldar and Orks. There's a steam page available already. If it's even remotely as good as Total War Warhammer 1 and 2 i'll be buying and considering they have a load of factions to work with it should happen.

However now that we've got warhammer and warhammer 40k i wonder if Total War will tackle other series like Lord of the Rings. GW already sells Lord of the Rings stuff. I guess we'll just have to see but one thing at a time.

Lord of the Rings isn't an IP GW owns, its one they licence. The video game licence for Lord of the Rings is already out there in the world and held by other teams; so chances are whilst GW might have a foot in the door, it would be difficult.

Also the Lord of the Rings rights holders are not above giving limited ones - such as the Amazon deal which allowed them to make a film but not to use content from the book (or something similar to that effect).

So CA could end up with a limited licence - eg they might only get a licence but not to use the film characters/designs; or restrict them to specific periods that might not be covered by the films etc...

It could get very complicated and messy.


They could also just do a standard Arthurian fantasy of their own that they'd fully own.

 Overread wrote:
There's 4 factions at launch; Marines, Guard, Eldar and Orks.

As for console there's probably more reason now than in the past - home PC ownership for video games appears to be in a bit of a tricky spot as the gear is getting more and more expensive and a lot of homes don't "need" a pc any more. They use their phone and game on a console with the big TV.

So I can see them wanting to chase where the market is going to maximise revenue.


I can see why they want to go there even if historically its always been a bad choice

With a restriction to these 4 factions at first I wouldn't be surprised if the game starts with a single segmentum or even just a sector at first, before diving deeper and adding new regions like the Eye of Terror or the Maelstrom. It's even possible that the whole Imperium Nihilus will be reserved for a much later date (sorry Blood Angels Fans...)

Sgt. Cortez wrote:

 Overread wrote:
There's 4 factions at launch; Marines, Guard, Eldar and Orks.

As for console there's probably more reason now than in the past - home PC ownership for video games appears to be in a bit of a tricky spot as the gear is getting more and more expensive and a lot of homes don't "need" a pc any more. They use their phone and game on a console with the big TV.

So I can see them wanting to chase where the market is going to maximise revenue.


I can see why they want to go there even if historically its always been a bad choice

With a restriction to these 4 factions at first I wouldn't be surprised if the game starts with a single segmentum or even just a sector at first, before diving deeper and adding new regions like the Eye of Terror or the Maelstrom. It's even possible that the whole Imperium Nihilus will be reserved for a much later date (sorry Blood Angels Fans...)

I'm more confused how they'd eventually work Tau into this game on a galactic scale being that they're very region specfic.

 flamingkillamajig wrote:

Sgt. Cortez wrote:

 Overread wrote:
There's 4 factions at launch; Marines, Guard, Eldar and Orks.

As for console there's probably more reason now than in the past - home PC ownership for video games appears to be in a bit of a tricky spot as the gear is getting more and more expensive and a lot of homes don't "need" a pc any more. They use their phone and game on a console with the big TV.

So I can see them wanting to chase where the market is going to maximise revenue.


I can see why they want to go there even if historically its always been a bad choice

With a restriction to these 4 factions at first I wouldn't be surprised if the game starts with a single segmentum or even just a sector at first, before diving deeper and adding new regions like the Eye of Terror or the Maelstrom. It's even possible that the whole Imperium Nihilus will be reserved for a much later date (sorry Blood Angels Fans...)

I'm more confused how they'd eventually work Tau into this game on a galactic scale being that they're very region specfic.

Same way Tau fit into Battlefleet Gothic 2 and Gladius and basically almost every other game.

 Overread wrote:

As for console there's probably more reason now than in the past - home PC ownership for video games appears to be in a bit of a tricky spot as the gear is getting more and more expensive and a lot of homes don't "need" a pc any more. They use their phone and game on a console with the big TV.

Not really sure where you are getting this idea from. Console gaming is what is dying, PC is on the way up.

There is a bit of an expense jump lately for the higher end stuff, but an entry level "good enough" PC is still very affordable and the PC gaming industry is in a good spot. The AAA studios are driving consumers into the arms of the Indy developers. And the Steam Machine is coming out this next year.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 flamingkillamajig wrote:

Sgt. Cortez wrote:

 Overread wrote:
There's 4 factions at launch; Marines, Guard, Eldar and Orks.

As for console there's probably more reason now than in the past - home PC ownership for video games appears to be in a bit of a tricky spot as the gear is getting more and more expensive and a lot of homes don't "need" a pc any more. They use their phone and game on a console with the big TV.

So I can see them wanting to chase where the market is going to maximise revenue.


I can see why they want to go there even if historically its always been a bad choice

With a restriction to these 4 factions at first I wouldn't be surprised if the game starts with a single segmentum or even just a sector at first, before diving deeper and adding new regions like the Eye of Terror or the Maelstrom. It's even possible that the whole Imperium Nihilus will be reserved for a much later date (sorry Blood Angels Fans...)

I'm more confused how they'd eventually work Tau into this game on a galactic scale being that they're very region specfic.

From what it seems like, each "Grand Campaign" equivalent will be a random gen map of a sector/star system with a few different enemies spread out over 10ish planets. So you won't be fighting every foe at the same time and different enemies would be in different regions.

So very easy to drag and drop enemies into the game as they come out via DLC drops.

It might even be like the old classic RTS games where you pick what enemies you want to spawn in your campaign when you first create one.

If there's one thing which inspires absolutely no confidence, it's Creative Assembly making something.