Warhammer: Mark of Chaos (and Warhammer general)

[Bob the Insane]

I did a quick search and could not find anything on this so here it is...

Anyone else heard of this?

See:

http://www.namco.com/games/warhammer/

and:

http://www.gamespot.com/pc/strategy/warhammer/news.html?sid=6135652

Sounds pretty cool eh??

[King Ragnar]

I had seen a small preview of it in pc gamer some while ago, looks very cool.

[drone]

It came up in the Dawn Of War thread, which I promptly tried to send off-topic with the Gamespot article.~;) I hadn't seen the official Namco page though, hopefully they can finally get this done. Screenies look nice.

Edit-> They have a forum up already for the game, speculation and discussion abounds....
http://warhammer.namco.com/forums/

[Geoffrey S]

There's a pretty lengthy thing on it at gamespot.com. Looks neat, though I've yet to hear the local Warhammer fans commenting on it.

[drone]

Some new screenshots on Gamespot, some of these look pretty sweet. The scenery detail looks great.

http://www.gamespot.com/pc/strategy/warhammer/screenindex.html

(Please Namco, don't f this up. Make sure the gameplay is good. Please, please, please, please.....)

[BDC]

Looks good. I'm seriously tempted to buy some new models and paints... I need some sort of time consuming, relaxing hobby. That I can easily put away and do homework. Gaming is just failing in that regard totally...

[lugh]

Looks very interesting. Read the gamespot article for more, it's quite a good informative interview.

I particularly like the idea of moving from small scale skirmish/scouting/expeditionary forces to large scale full battles. When I still played we had a system for campaigns like this, and it added a lot of colour to the game.
Hopefully when seiging, you'll be able to manually send assasins in, controlling a small band, infiltrating defences, all that jazz.
I'm impressed, this is the first GW pc game that's interested me since Shadow of the Horned Rat, I'm not mad about RTS so this seems like a nice advancement.

[doc_bean]

http://www.gamespot.com/pc/strategy/warhammer/news.html?sid=6145679 (http://www.gamespot.com/pc/strategy/warhammer/news.html?sid=6145679)


The key thing to keep in mind is that Mark of Chaos isn't a traditional real-time strategy game by any means. As Namco Bandai senior producer Chris Wren explained to us, most real-time strategy games are about 75 percent resource gathering and base building and about 25 percent combat. Mark of Chaos looks to switch those numbers around, and the focus is very much on the battlefield, where you'll maneuver battalions in different formations and try to break the enemy's will to fight by killing enemy units as efficiently (and as ruthlessly) as possible.

In fact, you can't help looking at Mark of Chaos and thinking of Creative Assembly's acclaimed Total War historical battle games, and in many ways, there are similarities between the two....

[English assassin]

try to break the enemy's will to fight by killing enemy units as efficiently (and as ruthlessly) as possible.

heh heh heh heh.


The game's physics engine will ensure that bodies fly through the air in an appropriate manner once enough force is applied,

Heh heh HEH.

Ahem. Sorry. Looks promising. But, wot no dwarves?

[drone]

I like the fact that they are going for a Mature rating. It just wouldn't be Warhammer without the blood, and the gore, and the killing and the maiming. :2thumbsup: Sounds like it will have a warbands-type of feel in the campaign. Gaining units for successful missions, equiping heroes with items, etc. Not as much of a resource gathering RTS.

The multiplayer section sounds promising:

Of course, multiplayer will be a big part of Mark of Chaos. Warhammer fans who spend hours, if not weeks, painting and collecting their miniatures armies will be able to customize their own virtual armies in the game, thanks to the powerful editing tools. You can paint your units just how you'd like and even import your own sigils. The game will feature skirmish modes for one-versus-one, two-versus-two, three-versus-three, or four-versus-four gameplay, and players will be able to save the replay so that others can download and see how a battle turned out. There are also hints of some kind of online campaign, where you'll be able to play against your friends in multiplayer on the campaign map, which sounds like it could be an epic-length experience, considering that the single-player campaign is supposed to last 40 hours or more.If they really implement a multiplayer campaign mode, sweeeeeet! They will have some units from the "unplayable" races (like dwarves, EA) in the single-player campaign, I wonder if you can use these in multiplayer skirmish.

[Black Prince]

Just had a look at the screenshots on Gamesport - looks amazing, but this fall - that's ages away. Will it ever happen. Bit worried that it might go the way of Warhammer Online and not happen. Although I see that has been resurrected, but now looks a bit naff in my opinion.

[Butcher]

In fact, you can't help looking at Mark of Chaos and thinking of Creative Assembly's acclaimed Total War historical battle games, and in many ways, there are similarities between the two....

Bad A.I, screaming women etc etc :)

[drone]

New official webpage is up:
http://www.markofchaos.com/index.php

Not too much content yet. Interesting read in the "Features" section though:

* MASTER THE ART OF WAR: Warhammer®: Mark of Chaos™ is about WAR, focusing on the armies and battles while de-emphasizing the tedious aspects of base and resource management.
* EPIC, VISCERAL BATTLES ON A MASSIVE SCALE: Epic sense of both scale and detail where big demons and huge beautifully rendered battalions clash with thousands of characters battling on screens in intricate detail.
* USE ENVIRONMENTS TO YOUR ADVANTAGE: A variety of buildable features and randomized, destructible terrains such as forests, swamps, plains, and tundra change the shape of the battlefield and add a layer of strategy that provides infinite replayability.
* COMMAND HEROES AND CHAMPIONS: As armies move from battle to battle in an epic war, Heroes and Champions learn new tactics, unlock new abilities, command larger units, even challenge other Champions in a duel to the death.
* CUSTOMIZE YOUR ARMY: Warhammer®: Mark of Chaos™ takes customization to a new level by allowing for body part swaps, weapon and armor enhancements, and more powerful controls to paint units and customize banners. Additionally, players can accent armies with mercenary "Dogs of War", augmenting the look and play of their army for a unique game experience.
* VARIETY OF PLAY MODES: Dynamic cooperative campaign mode and a full assortment of multiplayer modes for both casual and competitive gamers.
Multiplay campaign, woohoo!

Some of the screenies show blood, so I guess Khorne is happy.:2thumbsup:

[English assassin]

Warhammer®: Mark of Chaos™ takes customization to a new level by allowing for body part swaps

You see, this is why I want dwarves. Nothing like Dwarf heavy infantry for inflicting some involuntary body part swaps on orcish scum...

[Black Prince]

This looks fun - had a look at some of the videos but couldn't see much detail on them really - the thing I do like is that the models look like the actual metal soldiers I used to buy when I played Warhammer as a kid. As did the houses - just like the card ones Games Workshop provided for you to put together. Cool!!!

:2thumbsup:

[drone]

Some E3 previews from various sites. A few days old, but here they are:

http://www.got-next.com/previews_read.php?id=282
http://pc.gamespy.com/pc/warhammer-mark-of-chaos/707391p1.html
http://www.gamespot.com/pc/strategy/warhammer/news.html?sid=6150891
http://pc.ign.com/articles/707/707698p1.html

[Einherjer]

i am not sure if this topic belongs in this section, but i am not sure where else to post it. MTW2 is coming soon, but so is Warhammer:MOC. i have not played the previous warhammer. does anyone have an opinion on how the 2 games compare? my 2 main questions are:
1. does warhammer have a compaign map and the turn-based compaign itself on par with total war?
2. does strategy on the battlefield have the same depth as total war or is it your regular clickfest rts?

[The_Doctor]

1. does warhammer have a compaign map and the turn-based compaign itself on par with total war?

Yes, sort of. There isn't much info about that part of the game.


2. does strategy on the battlefield have the same depth as total war or is it your regular clickfest rts?

I would somewhere in the middle leaning more towards TW than clickfest.

Here are some previews:
http://uk.gamespot.com/pc/strategy/warhammer/news.html
http://uk.pc.ign.com/objects/773/773711.html

[The Spartan (Returns)]

this should be in The Arena.

[econ21]

I agree - I am moving this to the arena. I hope MOC is like Total War, but the video I saw of the gameplay suggests it will be closer to an RTS. (Move a group of units, encounter enemy, click some special attacks, move on to next enemy etc).

I play the actual tabletop Warhammer game and it is like Total War. Although I think that comparison shows how good Total War is - IMO the TW engine has much better modelling of archery, cavalry, spears, etc than the Warhammer rules and the computer brings so many advantages over the tabletop.

[The Spartan (Returns)]

warhammer is very much like RTW. i played it on PS1 and its really fun. if it was freeware id download it in a second!

[drone]

We do have a buried Arena thread on Warhammer:Mark of Chaos right here....
https://forums.totalwar.org/vb/showthread.php?t=55895

Judging from what I've read on the forums and game sites, the combat map will be similiar to TW, on a smaller scale but with better scenery. The campaigns will be similiar to Dark Omen, with a progression scale and army upgrades based on previous performance. It doesn't seem to be any resource gathering per-se, and once you are in combat you can't create new troops (although the campaign will probably have reinforcements coming at certain time), so it doesn't seem like a standard RTS click fest. There are also RPG aspects with your heroes, they gain experience and can specialize in different aspects of warfare as you progress through the campaign.

There is also supposed to be a form of multiplayer campaign, which will be nice. Overall, I get the feeling that this will be a computer version of a Warbands campaign, with larger armies.

[Einherjer]

i really hate mission based strategy games. i much prefer the games that have a campaign mode. that is one of the reasons i like the total war series. i liked what i have read so far about the warhammer but i am not entirely convinced it is going to have a campaign mode similar to the one in total war.

[x-dANGEr]

is the Warhammer you're talking about different from the 40k one?

[drone]

i really hate mission based strategy games. i much prefer the games that have a campaign mode. that is one of the reasons i like the total war series. i liked what i have read so far about the warhammer but i am not entirely convinced it is going to have a campaign mode similar to the one in total war.
I'm not a fan of them either, I'm hoping that they give you more options than a linear progression of missions. There are supposed to be campaign map tasks you can perform, I don't know if this is teching up buildings and spending cash for troops as well as picking your battles. From what I've heard there are 2 campaigns, one for the good guys and one for the bad guys, so I doubt you will be able to just pick a faction and take over the map like in TW.

@x-dANGEr: Warhammer:Mark of Chaos is based on the Warhammer Fantasy Battle game, which is sort of a Medieval-style game in the Warhammer universe. 40K was created afterwards, and uses a lot of the same ideas behind the fluff.

[Ituralde]

Another difference between Warhammer Fantasy and Warhammer 40k lies in the scale of the battles, meaning the numbers of troops involved. 40k revolves around smaller squads acting more ore less independently, while Fantasy focuses more on the aspect of a whole contigent of troops and how it acts in regards to formation and such.

So the Warhammer Fantasy scenario is very close to the TW style of play. I haven't made up my mind yet about MoC. The first I heard about I was amazed at the possibility of a Warhammer TW, but with every preview I read about the game I tend to place it more and more in the RTS-genre. I'm not sure how it's gonna turn out though. If it's more like Rome, it's gonna be great otherwise it could become another RTS with an excellent setting.

[The Spartan (Returns)]

the ones i played: were Horn-Tailed Rat, and Dark Omen. it has monsters (which i hate) but its very fun still.

[econ21]

I haven't made up my mind yet about MoC. The first I heard about I was amazed at the possibility of a Warhammer TW, but with every preview I read about the game I tend to place it more and more in the RTS-genre. I'm not sure how it's gonna turn out though. If it's more like Rome, it's gonna be great otherwise it could become another RTS with an excellent setting.

I agree. I don't think anyone has successfully cloned Total War yet, so I would be amazed if MoC does. I suspect it will be like Battle for Middle Earth and Warhammer 40K: Dawn of War - a good RTS, but still an RTS. However, we'll see - from the little I saw (the graphics burnt my eyes) Shadow of the Horn-Tailed Rat was close to a Total War prototype, at least the battle side.

[Watchman]

I do hope that new WHFB game is more akin to Horned Rat and Dark Omen than, say, Dawn of War. Although it had its issues Dark Omen was great fun and captured much of the kooky attitude of the tabletop game; DoW was ultimately just a Starcraft copy with a clunky interface and some rather questionable deviations from the tabletop, and not enough of the sheer cheerfully unabashed lunacy of the 40k setting.

The Warhammer Fantasy setting doesn't seem to lend itself too well for TW style strategy though unless you make the scale really small, so I'd be rather surprised if MoC included it.

[English assassin]

For reasons I can't quite put my finger on, I just think this one is going to be fun. Not fun in a "I just pulled of the most brilliant tactical manoeuver since Hannibal" sort of way, but fun in a "My dwarves just decapitated 50 Orcs in glorious technicolour and are now playing football with the heads, now lets see what the cannon can do" kind of way.

In short, I want eye candy and I want warhammer OTTness and I will be happy. Oh, and I probably want to wait until its a mid price game before buying it, sorry GW.

[lars573]

I do hope that new WHFB game is more akin to Horned Rat and Dark Omen than, say, Dawn of War. Although it had its issues Dark Omen was great fun and captured much of the kooky attitude of the tabletop game; DoW was ultimately just a Starcraft copy with a clunky interface and some rather questionable deviations from the tabletop, and not enough of the sheer cheerfully unabashed lunacy of the 40k setting.
Well the rumour is that Starcraft and Warcraft were orginally supposed to be Warhammer games. But the licencing fell through. Still DoW is one of the best RTS games out there. And for me TW=/=RTS games, ever. Totalwar is a class in and to itself. There has only been 1 clone to my knowledge, Imperial glory. And it sucked.


The Warhammer Fantasy setting doesn't seem to lend itself too well for TW style strategy though unless you make the scale really small, so I'd be rather surprised if MoC included it.
Actually it would. The TT game is just scaled down for the sanity of the players. Could you imagine 1 Orc boyz regiment being 500-1000 mini's instead of 20-30?

[drone]

For reasons I can't quite put my finger on, I just think this one is going to be fun. Not fun in a "I just pulled of the most brilliant tactical manoeuver since Hannibal" sort of way, but fun in a "My dwarves just decapitated 50 Orcs in glorious technicolour and are now playing football with the heads, now lets see what the cannon can do" kind of way.

In short, I want eye candy and I want warhammer OTTness and I will be happy. Oh, and I probably want to wait until its a mid price game before buying it, sorry GW.
I feel the same way. It's going to be bloody, and I'm sure oversized helmets and weapons will make an appearance. Supposedly weather and terrain will affect combat, as will the usual fear and flanking aspects from the TT, so there will be some tactics involved, but it would surprise me if the kill calculator is anywhere near as complex as S/MTW's. Nothing wrong with nice, mindless (or almost mindless), rated-M-for-Mature graphical carnage, and judging from the kickin' cinematic they released for E3, we will be getting just that!

As a bonus, MoC and M2TW will be coming out at about the same time, which gives me a great excuse to finally upgrade my PC.

[Ciaran]

The Warhammer Fantasy setting doesn't seem to lend itself too well for TW style strategy though unless you make the scale really small, so I'd be rather surprised if MoC included it.
Though I´ve never played the tabletop game, I agree with Lars. There are limits to what can be reasonably handled (not to mention displayed) on a tabletop, but on screen there´s no such limitation.

[Ituralde]

I just read a new review on www.gamespot.com that sheds some light on the way the battles work.

http://uk.gamespot.com/pc/strategy/warhammer/news.html?sid=6154635

They are described as being similar to TW, although they contain even more action and will probably play out faster. I wonder how that 'aggro' think is gonna turn out. At least then I can use my previous WoW experience to 'tank' the enemy's troops and other such nonsense.
Besides that, it sounds like the game will be very close to the table top original, wich I have also played. Too bad the Wood Elves didn't make it into the game though. Especially the multiplayer part sounds interesting with the (hopefully) balanced point system. Gonna have a real close look at that game for sure!

[DisruptorX]

Well, seeing as how Total War and Warhammer are both simulations of ancient warfare, they are going to have simularities. The total war series already plays pretty much exactly what a real time version of Warhammer would be like, so I wouldn't really consider it a clone. Of course, Warhammer has emphasis on heroes and generals, as well as magic. Then again, I've seen jedi generals in MTW that made the best Warhammer lords look like wimps....

As for scale, Warhammer uses a representational, heroic scale. Meaning that units represent much larger units and individuals have oversized weapons, helms, etc to make them show up better from normal viewing distance. GW released "Warmaster", which uses a much smaller scale and allows for fielding much bigger armies.

The tabletop game uses morale, charge bonuses, spears, shields, flanking, and pretty much of the features that are found in the total war games. It also is extremely dependant on outmanoevering your opponent, albeit in a turn based rather than real time fashion. If Mark of Chaos at all attempts to reflect that, there's no way the gameplay will be faster than RTW. RTW makes starcraft seem slow paced, its absurd...

I'm looking forward to this because I'm an ex warhammer player (yet another one put off by the ridiculous, constant price hikes) and a huge skaven fan.

As for the person who asked, Warhammer is a dark, gritty fantasy world based on Earth (Empire is late middle ages/early renaissance Germany, Orcs and Beastmen are celts and other barbarian, Chaos are Viking marauders, etc.) Warhammer 40k is a spinoff that is gothic space fantasy. There are many similarities, most obviously Chaos and such. As for the gameplay, 40k is a simple game where the strategy consists of choosing the right army. Warhammer Fantasy is much more tactical, and army deployment and movement is key, reacting to your opponent, rather than rolling the most dice will win you the day. I love 40k's setting, but the game is soooo dull.

[Master_Thief]

I just watched an excellent gameplay video at pc.ign.com. It seemed to show exactly what the game would be like and it looks promisingly like total war. Only concerns are the small scale and the long distance views which seem reminiscent of Half-Life 1 (i.e. 2D and slightly blurry). Apart from that the game looks pretty damn good.

[drone]

Here are 2 interviews with the lead producer with some of the game mechanics.
http://www.computerandvideogames.com/article.php?id=143867
http://www.computerandvideogames.com/article.php?id=143936
Looks like the engine will support larger battles than I expected, there is mention of 4-5 thousand troops at a time. Looks like I need a new PC for sure this fall.

PS. Lady Frog, can we get the two Mark of Chaos threads merged? :bow:
https://forums.totalwar.org/vb/showthread.php?t=67548

Edit - Thank you, although to be honest I bumped the old one when I probably should have just moved on to the newer thread. I'll keep that in mind. :bow:

[frogbeastegg]

Usually where there's a significant time gap between threads I leave be, only merging when two similar threads are about at the same time. It gets a bit obsessive otherwise, with me spending loads of time hunting down and merging.

But since the old thread just got brought back ... :skewers the topics with a merging hairpin:

[drone]

They released a beta test version today to "selected" testers. By "selected", I think every member at the official forum got a key. So the game is progressing. An unfortunate side effect of this is that now the forum will be a very boring place until release, since the beta NDA stifles discussion, and all the hard-core fans now are muzzled. :inquisitive:

Unfortunately, I'm too swamped at the moment to beta test, so I guess I will have to wait and see the final product.

[drone]

:bump:
IGN has a preview on a preliminary build. Battles apparently are similiar to TW, campaign map is more linear. No words on multiplayer or AI skirmish.

Release date is supposedly some time this month, but the general opinion from the beta testers on the forum is that they should take a little more time. Sound familiar? :inquisitive:

http://pc.ign.com/articles/736/736583p1.html

[Bob the Insane]

That all reads really good, but I have been given pause by the movies I have seen where everthing does appear to be a bit of a click-fest and more mob tactics than formations...

[Spino]

I could swear this game looks like it was made by the same developer who did Mythic and Mythic 2. The little green circles under each soldier and the way in which the formations move are practically the same as in the Mythic series.

[Watchman]

Actually it would. The TT game is just scaled down for the sanity of the players. Could you imagine 1 Orc boyz regiment being 500-1000 mini's instead of 20-30?Uh... I was talking about strategy, not tactics. The latter is where your assorted colourful psychopaths slaughter their foes to the tune of your mouse; the former is where you move armies and (at least in TW) build stuff.

And the strategic aspect is somewhat... shall we say... secondary to the WHFB world and experience, which is why I'm wondering how well it could be realized in a computer game if that is actually even planned.

Or, put this way: Archaon's vast all-conquering Chaos horde would start looking sort of pitiful as the MTW Mongol stack with its notorious income issues.

[econ21]

That all reads really good, but I have been given pause by the movies I have seen where everthing does appear to be a bit of a click-fest and more mob tactics than formations...

Indeed. The report was promising - facing and morale are key factors for a decent wargame; MoC having them is good. But I did not really pick up their effects in the movies I've seen. It was more like mobs clobbering each other and calling in special attacks.

The linear mission-based campaign is disappointing. The Dark Crusade expansion to Dawn of War is more promising in that respect, offering a TW style strategic map.

[Soulflame]

So the other day I saw a few movies about Warhammer; Mark of Chaos, and I was pleasantly surprised.

A few gaming sites (IGN included) have some video's and interviews. It seems that it has a lot of the mechanics of the TW series; deployment phase and no buildings (not common in standard RTS), battle standards that display health and fatigue, regiments of units instead of single units (except for special units and heroes).

It actually looks like a real fantasy setting TW game, except maybe one generation back (Rome style; nice 3d graphics, but clones and not polished).
Although it does have hero units that are special and have a more RPG like feeling (they can have special abilties based on special talent trees like Diablo and WoW).
There isn't any talk of moddability, and not all races of Warhammer Fantasy are present (expansion?), so it could be better, but it's still pretty interesting

My personal feelings are; great! finally a fantasy setting grandscale wargame. There were actually a few barriers in the TW engine (not able to create single unit regiments for heroes, or flying units) that prevented a real fantasy setting, so this game might fill that hole nicely.
Now the choice actually becomes; do you want to play with fantasy creatures and heroes, or with historical units and historic battles.
I might get both games, but I want to know your opinion on this (probably first real competitor ever) to the TW series.

[econ21]

We'll see. Real tabletop Warhammer is rather like Total War - a genuine wargame. But my hunch is that Mark of Chaos will turn out to play like a "tactical" RTS like Battle for Middle Earth and Dawn of War. It looked to me a little like "group a bunch of units", order "attack", then "click special attack", rinse and repeat. Hope I am wrong.

But this topic belongs in the arena, where it will probably be merged with the existing thread on MoC.

[Beelzebub]

Competition in the TW genre is good regardless. It will force CA to put out top notch stuff, cuz if they slip again (like the mediocre release that RTW was) they might pay for it next time if someone releases a better game of similar style.

[Monarch]

Multiplay campaign, woohoo!


Battle For Middle Earth 2 had one of those, was more a reason for playing battles than anything else. Not very interesting.

Anyway, I'm not into Warhammer at all, but recently I bought DOW and my hatred for stupid click fest RTS has faded, I expected resources, and loads of micromangement. The micromangements still there, alot, but I'm not too bothered because its interesting stuff like upgrading soldiers, not making sure your farms havn't run out (aoe...).

I've already reserved my copy of Dark Crusade, looks great. So I might be a little interested in this now (even though I originally didnt buy dow because I don't like warhammer, but dow could be any fantasy game really, not so much emphasis on warhammer so im happy lol), but tbh I don't like games that try to copy other games, so if it obviously tries to be TW, and fails. Then I'll hate it.

[Bob the Insane]

Battle For Middle Earth 2 had one of those, was more a reason for playing battles than anything else. Not very interesting.

Anyway, I'm not into Warhammer at all, but recently I bought DOW and my hatred for stupid click fest RTS has faded, I expected resources, and loads of micromangement. The micromangements still there, alot, but I'm not too bothered because its interesting stuff like upgrading soldiers, not making sure your farms havn't run out (aoe...).

I've already reserved my copy of Dark Crusade, looks great. So I might be a little interested in this now (even though I originally didnt buy dow because I don't like warhammer, but dow could be any fantasy game really, not so much emphasis on warhammer so im happy lol), but tbh I don't like games that try to copy other games, so if it obviously tries to be TW, and fails. Then I'll hate it.

If you like DoW and have a decent machine and a liking for WWII then you own yourself "Company of Heroes"...

[Kalle]

I've already reserved my copy of Dark Crusade, looks great. So I might be a little interested in this now (even though I originally didnt buy dow because I don't like warhammer, but dow could be any fantasy game really, not so much emphasis on warhammer so im happy lol), but tbh I don't like games that try to copy other games, so if it obviously tries to be TW, and fails. Then I'll hate it.


If anyone copied anything it sure is not the warhammer computergame series. I never played Shadow of the horned rat but I played Dark Omen a lot and that game is years older then any totalwar game and has all the elements of morale, charges, flanking and so on. Of course there are lots of diffrences aswell.

It would not surprise me if some peoplo from the shogun team were involved in the making of dark omen or at least draw inspiration from it.

Hopefully the new game coming is made in the same spirit as dark omen but even better.

Kalle

[doc_bean]

Demo is out !

Only played the first tutorial and about a minute of the campaign game. Visually it's a *little* less impressive than M2TW so far (not as much grass, trees not quite as pretty so far, models a little bit smaller and smaller unit sizes, shasows not quite a snice, this is with everything turned on, on a pretty high end machine), though zoomed out I think it looks better zoomed out, there is more diverse terain present and there have been some things I didn't quite expect:

-individual soldiers: no clone armies !
-individual combat animations !
-units of 50 soldiers definatly exist, small compared to TW, but reasonable for this kind of game imo.

The interface and controls will seem VERY familiar to anyone who has played a TW game. I'll have to play with it some more, but it looks like a very promising clone at least. I might actually have more fun with it than with M2TW (I'm a bit burned out on TW games).

[Bob the Insane]

Yikes, 1GB demo... Downloading now...

[The_Doctor]

I got the demo yesterday, its very good.

[Bob the Insane]

That is pretty sweet... Plays kind of half way between TW style and regular RTS style... No building units on the battlefield...

[Ciaran]

[...]that game is years older then any totalwar game and has all the elements of morale, charges, flanking and so on. Of course there are lots of diffrences aswell.


That´s because this is also crucial in the tabletop, which in turn is a somewhat more streamlined modification of the "Kriegsspiel", originally designed to train officers and to test scenarios. It has all the crucial elements of "real" warfare, maybe short of the logistics. So, an RTS-style adaption of Warhammer could almost be seen as a betrayal of its very concept.

[lars573]

I tried the demo. This game is TW battle system combined with WC3 hero system, and DOW campagin elements. The linerarity of the campagin is a huge turn off. I hate the standard model of RTS campagin. And I'm abivilant about TW battles. Still leveling up your units as to increase it's man power is a nice element. Eg. Chaos warriors undivided start with 16 men at lvl. 1 and by lvl. 4 are 48 men. The hero system draws a lot from WC3. But the large number of skills for the hero give you more options to customize them to your liking. Also as you attach them to your units their is less of a focus on them. Outside the duels (which I like).

[Ciaran]

I´ve also tried the demo, and to be honest, it´s not what it´s cracked up to be. Yes, the units do consist of numerous men, but those rather seem a visual representation of the hitpoints of traditional RTS, morale, stamina and unit direction seem to have very little impact, I´ve sent my troops running over the whole map in the first mission and they never really seemed to get exhausted and units didn´t break and run until they were almost completely beaten anyways.
The duels are a nice idea, I agree with that, though I didn´t have the opportunity to extensively test them. With the heroes and Wizards, however, it seems more like a graphically up-to-date Warcraft.

[Meneldil]

Hornet Rat and Dark Omen were by no mean a clone of TW games, since both were released way before Shogun TW. I'd rather say that STW was a clone of Warhammer games. When I first played STW, I thought "oh cool, this is just Warhammer Dark Omen with samurai and a campaign map".

[econ21]

When I first played STW, I thought "oh cool, this is just Warhammer Dark Omen with samurai and a campaign map".

I can see that, but of course both games really owe their debt to classic tabletop minatures wargames. Warhammer is such a beast. And I gather the core CA designers were wargamers who, in their youth, when they were not pushing counters over hexes, were pushing minatures over tablecloths.

Playing both Warhammer tabletop and TW, I can testify to how much better the computer is than the tabletop for such a game. For the rather anti-social, like myself, it gives you an opponent in the AI. And for everyone, it gets rid of the big fat rule book and, even better, the rules lawyers.

Aside from the rules, etc, I gather TW really started off as a demonstration that CA could animate hundreds of little men in battle on a computer. That delivered the initial "wow!" factor that led the game to be greenlighted and to pick up such good sales. Even now, with M2TW, it is that spectacle that gives TW its PC Gamer front cover status. Warhammer Dark Omen did nothing comparable to that - graphically, it was mundane and unexciting.

However, nowadays, games like Mark of Chaos, BFME, DoW etc are pressing hard on the heels of TW in terms of the visuals and spectacle. But TW still is much closer to my heart, because it is closer to its origins in historical wargaming. I suspect that may be why CA have not gone for a "Fantasy Total War" - without the historical depth, the brand will lose much of its distinctiveness.

[econ21]

I tried the demo. This game is TW battle system combined with WC3 hero system, and DOW campagin elements. The linerarity of the campagin is a huge turn off. I hate the standard model of RTS campagin. And I'm abivilant about TW battles.

I tried the full game - not got very far with it, yet, of course. So far, I am not enamoured of it - for a start, I can't find a "pause" button, which is a biggie for me. Also can't find how to slow down the scroll speeds, so the battles all feel rather out of control. Maybe I'll get use to it (M2TW also took a while).

Right now, the battles feel more like Battle for Middle Earth than Total War. It's true, they are slower and also you have bigger units. But it feels RTS like - there's none of the deliberation of TW. It's not about terrain, flanking or morale. It's about piling your units onto the closest enemy units, killing them, rinse and repeat.

The campaign also feels like Battle for Middle Earth. A lame campaign map with virtually no freedom to wander off your pre-ordained path.

The hero levelling up system reminds me of Guild Wars - you can put points in lots of different spells, special attacks or passive abilities. But it feels like variety for variety's sake - they are not the kind of choices you would pour over in order to pick the most powerful (unlike, say, feats, spells and fighting styles in DnD).

One redeeming feature is that there is no farming-type resource gathering or base building. You have gold to spend on units, replacements, upgrades and magical items. You can pick the units you want to go into battle with. However, again the choices don't feel very strategic or interesting (as Empire in the first few battles, you probably want 2 melee units with maximum upgrades and 2 missiles to go with your 2 heroes).

Visually and in sound etc it's ok, but it does not have the sharpness or character of Dawn of War. Nor are the gameplay or choices as challenging or potentially interesting. Overall, the presentation is inferior to BFME and DoW.

My son and I had a chance to try out both Mark of Chaos and DoW: Dark Crusade today. He chose DoW:DC, I chose MoC (I really like the Warhammer fantasy fluff - he's into the 40k stuff). I think he made the best call.

But I doubt either can compete with M2TW or NWN2 for my gaming time right now.

[lars573]

I might yet get it. Just not until it gets a price drop or two. While not the greatest it wasn't bad either. I haven't finished my Dark Crusade IG campagin yet. Which while miles better than any other RTS campagin feels like 6 campaginesque missions interceded by ramdom map games. Still the Commander upgrading is nice.


But I doubt either can compete with M2TW or NWN2 for my gaming time right now.
Ain't that the truth. I'm not even going to bother with the expansion for Star Wars: empire at war (Forces of corruption) until post christmas cash spending.

[Ciaran]

I can see that, but of course both games really owe their debt to classic tabletop minatures wargames. Warhammer is such a beast. And I gather the core CA designers were wargamers who, in their youth, when they were not pushing counters over hexes, were pushing minatures over tablecloths.

Playing both Warhammer tabletop and TW, I can testify to how much better the computer is than the tabletop for such a game. For the rather anti-social, like myself, it gives you an opponent in the AI. And for everyone, it gets rid of the big fat rule book and, even better, the rules lawyers.

Not to mention the collecting and painting issue. But you´re right, I think that, in principle, the TW games are tabletops come to life. That is why I am so very sad that the Warhammer mod never got beyond beta stage. Maybe it wouldn´t have been able to simulate all of Warhammers bells and whistles, with the impossibility to simulate flying units or heroes, but still...

[econ21]

Not to mention the collecting and painting issue... That is why I am so very sad that the Warhammer mod never got beyond beta stage.

Ironically, the collecting and painting issue is the one area where Warhammer scores with me. I have a young son and those aspects are really fun to share with him. It's a common interest and there is a certain pride almost in having a full, nicely painted warhammer army. It's absurdly expensive, of course, but he's got to spend his pocket/birthday/Christmas money on something - and quite frankly most kids toys are boring by comparison. We may get more into the gaming side as he enters his teens.

BTW, what happened with the Warhammer mod - was it just another mod team collapsing or did GW stop it because of copyright issues?

[CountArach]

was it just another mod team collapsing or did GW stop it because of copyright issues?

The team just collapsed due to a lot of them not being active at allf or an extended period of time. I was really looking forward to it as well, because I am a huge Warhammer Fantasy fanatic.

[Meneldil]

Not to mention the collecting and painting issue.

Well, I spent much more time collecting and painting my W40K Eldars or WAB Wood Elves than actually playing with them, and although that may seem odd, I don't regret it.

Most of the time, playing Warhammer TT ends up in being a real frustration, either because you play against a real 15 year old lawyer (No, you *can't* do that if you don't roll a 18, as explained on the page 458 of the Warhammer rules compendium for 3rd edition), or against someone who use loopholes or exploits to just wtfpwn everyone else (Yeah, I can field an army composed of a huge dragon and 10 ogres that will kill half your army in one turn, there's *nothing* in the rules against it). I'm not even speaking about people who get crazy mad when they lose a game.

So, when I saw that tournaments with random people were crappy as hell, I ended up playing from times to times with the same 2 friends.

[Watchman]

"The biggest problem in playing Vampire: The Masquerade is that you'll have to interact with the kinds of people who play it."
- Penny-Arcade

[econ21]

"The biggest problem in playing Vampire: The Masquerade is that you'll have to interact with the kinds of people who play it."
- Penny-Arcade

Totally off-topic, but I just have to plug the Vampire Bloodlines computer game. I can imagine playing a pen and paper version would be excruciating for the reason Watchman indicates. But on the computer, it was one of most immersive gaming experiences I've ever had. Only System Shock 2 has rivalled it. It's kind of what you might imagine good pen and paper role-playing should be, without the embarassment.

[drone]

I tried the full game - not got very far with it, yet, of course. So far, I am not enamoured of it - for a start, I can't find a "pause" button, which is a biggie for me. Also can't find how to slow down the scroll speeds, so the battles all feel rather out of control. Maybe I'll get use to it (M2TW also took a while).
I haven't played yet, but the lack of a tactical pause was a big issue on the forums. The Pause/Break key supposedly pauses the game, but you cannot issue orders while paused (yet).

I can see that, but of course both games really owe their debt to classic tabletop minatures wargames. Warhammer is such a beast. And I gather the core CA designers were wargamers who, in their youth, when they were not pushing counters over hexes, were pushing minatures over tablecloths.
In a thread a while back, Captain Fishpants mentioned that he was part of the team that wrote Rogue Trader, the 40K first edition rules.

I haven't installed the game yet. I need to get a new PC to cope with the graphics for MoC, M2TW, NWN2, and all the other goodness getting ready to come out. I am also going to wait a few months until they patch the game up properly. The game was definitely rushed for Christmas, and I don't feel like going through a beta-test cycle for a couple of months. Dark Omen was a pretty good game at the time, maybe I'll just re-install that to get my fix for a while.

[Ciaran]

"The biggest problem in playing Vampire: The Masquerade is that you'll have to interact with the kinds of people who play it."
- Penny-Arcade

Quoted for the truth of it. Much the same applies for me as far as Multiplayer is concerned. The until-recently lack of a decent I-Net connection aside, that is.

Back to the topic of Warhammer, browsing the net a bit in the last few days, I´ve stumbled over Warhammers little (or big :inquisitive: ) brother Warmaster, which I find to hold a lot more appeal to me. The rules seem to me a lot more streamlined, it´s mostly about deployment and command, and less about actually fighting. Oh, and the rulebook is free on the net: http://www.specialist-games.com/warmaster/default.asp

[monkian]

Totally off-topic, but I just have to plug the Vampire Bloodlines computer game. I can imagine playing a pen and paper version would be excruciating for the reason Watchman indicates. But on the computer, it was one of most immersive gaming experiences I've ever had. Only System Shock 2 has rivalled it. It's kind of what you might imagine good pen and paper role-playing should be, without the embarassment.

I really liked Bloodlines but it was bugy as hell and there was very little after sale support for it :wall:

And System Shock 2 still 0wnz j00 :2thumbsup:

[JFC]

BTW, what happened with the Warhammer mod - was it just another mod team collapsing or did GW stop it because of copyright issues?

Hiya econ, From what I have read here, Which you have probably read : https://forums.totalwar.org/vb/showthread.php?t=71698
Originally Posted by Games Workshop
MODIFICATIONS, TOTAL CONVERSIONS, AND GAMES

We want people to express their enjoyment of our games with as little interference from us as possible, as long as they behave reasonably with our IP and follow any reasonable requests that we may make. We are not inherently opposed to hobbyists creating games or mods using our IP, in fact we are flattered that people want to spend so much time creating games and mods in the GW universes.

If you want to make a game, TC or a mod using our IP you must adhere to the following (in addition to the general principles as outlined above):

* Any game or mod must be a "total conversion." In other words, you must not use our intellectual property (logos, images, names etc.) in relation to the worlds, names, logos, or images of any other company. For example, you cannot place our Space Marines in a Disney total conversion using the Unreal engine, but you could make a TC solely using Space Marines with the Unreal engine. This is, of course, assuming that you have permission to use the Unreal engine.
* Please bear in mind that we may require you to remove the game or mod from any public forum at any time so that we can comply with any licenses that we may have with computer game publishers/developers. Be aware that we may even have to insist that the mod be destroyed. Please take very careful note of this statement, as we would not want you to feel unfairly treated at a later date.
* The game or mod must be strictly non-commercial – this includes any web site that the mod or game is hosted on. You also cannot pay a printing company to publilsh copies of it onto CD. It may also mean that you cannot get sponsorship.
* It must be made clear on any readme files, splash/intro screens and accompanying material that the game or mod is unofficial and the origins of the intellectual property must be made obvious (e.g., your mod might say �Battletoes � a total conversion for XXXX (insert game name) using intellectual property owned by Games Workshop. Used without permission...etc." See the relevant disclaimer on the following page.).
* The game or mod must not devalue any Games Workshop product in any way.
* Any distribution (zipped or otherwise) of the whole, or any part, of the mod or game must be accompanied with the appropriate disclaimers and must also follow these guidelines.
* The functionality, atmosphere, and parameters of any mod or game must be consistent with the relevant IP.
I think from that Gamesworkshop are pretty easy going.

I am suprised by how similar it looks to M2TW like everyone else has noted!
http://image.com.com/gamespot/images/2006/319/reviews/926670_20061116_screen001.jpg

Full Gamespot report etc: http://uk.gamespot.com/pc/strategy/warhammer/index.html?q=mark%20of%20chaos

[econ21]

Yes, Episolatory Richard pointed that out to me a while back. I am not sure I would describe it as easy going:


Please bear in mind that we may require you to remove the game or mod from any public forum at any time so that we can comply with any licenses that we may have with computer game publishers/developers. Be aware that we may even have to insist that the mod be destroyed. Please take very careful note of this statement, as we would not want you to feel unfairly treated at a later date.

Given that clause, if I was a modder working on a Warhammer themed mod, I think I would spend every day of my life living in fear. :sweatdrop:

That's why I asked about the mod, because with Mark of Chaos being released, I could see that clause being invoked. Glad to infer that it has not. :2thumbsup: Let's hope GW keep being easy going.

[Slyspy]

GW are historically anything but easy going when it comes to their intellectual property. They may be more relaxed these days due to the difficulty of policing the internet, but I doubt it. I certainly wouldn't work on a mod using GW IP. Even if their lawyers don't get you for minor infringements you might find host sites, service providers etc become less than helpful.

But that is because I'm a coward. I would love to see a Warhammer TC for any of the TW games because Mark of Chaos is absolute rubbish. Really, really bad when you consider that the game's natual competition are the table top originals and, of course, the TW series.

[lars573]

Also their mod disclaimer is worded in such a way that creating Warhammer skins for a none warhammer game is a violantion of the IP.

[Bob the Insane]

I have read over this thread a couple of times and to one thing I think it is missing is a formum member's review of the actual game... :laugh4:

Does anyone actually have it?

[econ21]

I own it and voiced some inital impressions:

https://forums.totalwar.org/vb/showpost.php?p=1318112&postcount=60

But I confess, I am not in hurry to go back to it. M2TW, EB v0.8, NNW2 and DoW:MC are all higher up my "to play" list. As are the Warhammer and 40k tabletop games, to be honest.

[drone]

I own it and voiced some inital impressions:

https://forums.totalwar.org/vb/showpost.php?p=1318112&postcount=60

But I confess, I am not in hurry to go back to it. M2TW, EB v0.8, NNW2 and DoW:MC are all higher up my "to play" list. As are the Warhammer and 40k tabletop games, to be honest.
I own it as well, but I haven't installed it yet. From what I can gather at Namco's forum, it needs a few patches, so I'm waiting for that to settle out before I play it. There are some balance issues, and it's appears to have been rushed to release.

My recommendation is wait.

[Slyspy]

The official forums are an empty wasteland, a fact which should tell you something about the game.

I confess to only having tried the demo. It was terrible. As I said, it simply cannot compete with the alternatives, which are essentially the TW series for computer gamers and the TT games for hobbyists. I certainly wouldn't waste my money on it. Even if I got it for free I wouldn't play it.

[econ21]

The official forums are an empty wasteland, a fact which should tell you something about the game.

Interesting - that's a great way to assess a game; read the official or some fan forums. I hope I remember that next time I have an impulse to buy a strange game. Finding the Org was one thing that convinced me the TW series had real depth. Similarly, reading the many GW TT sites shows there is a lot to the game even if it ultimately loses out to TW as a wargame, IMO.

[pevergreen]

Bought the game today. Very fun, the battles are better than M2TW atm.

Spec'ing your hero for one duty is so awsome.

2 bad points:

1. Set money values only
2. Limited Units

[drone]

Bought the game today. Very fun, the battles are better than M2TW atm.

Spec'ing your hero for one duty is so awsome.

2 bad points:

1. Set money values only
2. Limited Units
Did they add friendly fire to the latest patch? That was one of my biggest issues with the game as released.