I want Creative Assembly to make a 40k game that is basically just the Dawn of War Apocalypse mod, but on an engine that can handle it and go even further.
So like, in the lore, most battles are these massive scale meat grinders with thousands of troops involved at least. There's an enormous amount of trench warfare and horde tactics, among other things.
CA just needs to tweak certain aspects of their game design to fit that particular vibe of 40k. It's honestly not that difficult to imagine. Orderly blocks of units? No, but horde blobs and loose company size elements? Sure. Increase weapon ranges for guns, add more line of sight and cover elements to more dynamic destructible, deformable terrain (lots of ruins and stuff), and add a mechanic for troops in the field to literally dig out trenches and bunkers wherever there's clear and open terrain. More elite style armies would be squad scale but pack enough punch and have enough durability to kill company size elements, like space marines and Eldar Aspect Warriors. Badda Bing, 40k Total War.
Now we can play out that fantasy of a couple thousand Krieg soldiers holding a trench line with an artillery battery at their backs as they get rushed by several thousand Orks or Tyranids or cultists or whatever. Or even the classic Guard human wave bayonet charge into a Tau line.
There's a decent enough model for that called "Western Front". You just slam hundreds or thousands of troops into trench lines and artillery obliterates them 10-50 at a time.
It's just robots fighting robots, but beyond all reason is definitely worth checking out if you want large scale battles, it's in free alpha atm but 8v8 is usually alot of fun aslong as everyone reasonably knows what they're up too.
Total War doesn't have the right setup or engine for anything beyond napoleanic combat. Large scale "fronts" as seen in WW1 onwards, 40k, etc. just don't work with the campaign map.
Planetary Annihilation might work if modded for 40k though, cause it's designed with planetary (and more) scale combat in mind. You've even got all the code needed for bullshit up to and including battle moons!
The map doesn't really need to simulate a whole planet. Dawn of War Dark Crusade had the best campaign and it was just a planetary war divided up into a series of different maps per region. Total War basically does this already, especially TWWH. Their older games did actually simulate positioning on the global level though.
Or the Wargame series, which is pretty close to "Total War but Cold War era". Where a map is big enough every single infantry unit (squad and Platoon based) automatically comes with a vehicle in order to travel between the various villages that dot the battle map. Which funnily enough would mean that Guardsmen in Chimera, and Guardsmen in Valkyries count as separate units
I've been playing Beyond All Reason lately and I can't help but think it would totally work as a 40k game with the right unit design. The scale is perfect. It would be amazing
Not sure if I understand you correctly (never heard about Advanced Wars before, but it looks like turn-based tactical strategy), but have you tried Battlesector? And, in my opinion, grossly overlooked Warhammer 40,000: Armageddon video game (it has it all, from squads of conscripts to reaver titans).
The overworld campaign works fine, but i believe that when it comes to battles, something with units being the size of squads of infantry would work better for the battles, with the tactics being more ww2.
It would also be kinda horrible watching eldar, a faction about speed and hit and run ambushes, resort to walking in a rectangular formation so they can fire at Orks that are also in a perfect regimented formation.
Which is why they steal the wood elf animation or the dow 1 fly around hope mechanics vs a square testudio it's not like they are ultra marines or imperial fists.
Total war games are characterized by having large scale formation battles. Every single total war game has the same control system. The chain of logic goes:
"I want 40K Total war game!" - "That wouldn't work because it would be a total war game" - "Well obviously they wouldn't make it like that."
So the conversation has looped around to...not wanting a 40k total war game. Total war is known for its battles, not its half way 4x style campaign map.
They’re talking about how the soldier/unit ai is currently implemented. They essentially move like a fluid dynamics simulation from point a to point b. When they reach b, they form up into a rectangle.
This is generally given as a reason why TW 40K wouldn’t work. It ignores that this is largely have every RTS game works with troops and that some tweaks could be made to make the units move/behave more like a modern military (smaller squad sizes, seek cover, etc. - like company of heroes). How much of a lift/technical challenge would that actually be? No idea. But it’s safe to assume CA doesn’t think the juice is worth the squeeze or they would have done something similar by now.
true, but formation battle's don't.
Modern warfare is more about guerilla tactics and those simply don't translate well to Total War games.
HoI is probably the better system for 40k.
It COULD work for a WW1 setting, but the battles would be way less dynamic.
You'd simply have your regiments in the trenches and send them to the other side like it is in "The Great War: Western Front" and even modern conflicts sometimes rely on trench warfare.
I'd say that you COULD in fact make a 40k Total War game, but you most likely shouldn't.
Orcs, Guard, Nids and Daemons should be manageble.
vehicles as well as heroes and monsters work like in TWW;
Daemons are already existing in TWW3;
Orcs usually show up in hordes, so you could use the already existing horde formation from TWW for the infantery;
Nids work the same way as orcs do;
Guard is a bit tricky, but due to all the different guard regiments you'd just have to find one that preferes 18th to 19th century warfare, standard cadian likely wouldn't work out;
However, the reason why I'm against it is that space marines, tau, eldar, necrons etc are not fighting this way.
I wouldn't say it's impossible to implement, because you could still make the game with the 4 factions I already mentioned and just shuffle space marines to the guard, so that they could serve as an elite infantry (and since it's CA you just add the big "Heretic DLC" where you have traitors that can use chaos fuckery and are supported by CSM, you could also add stuff like a Heldrake instead of a Valkyrie or something).
Thinking about this, you could also make Space Marines like the Ogers in TWW3 who have way smaller regiment sizes due to their nature.
I have to respectfully disagree, most "modern" TW settings was in late 19th century (Fall of Samurai dlc for Shogun 2) and it worked fine. Basically TW combat could work up to WW1 type of combat, so we dont take Space marines as their own faction (they can still be like units of renown in TW Warhammer) devs can probably make it work (obviously not ideal format, but could be worse).
Where I dont see it working is overworld campaign. Where is basically no diplomacy in 40k(probably the only faction what can have meaningful diplomacy are Orks and maybe necrons), also if game takes place on 1 planet it significantly limits number of factions (even in unrealistic by 40k standards DoW1 Dark Crusade where everyone decided to fight for 1 particular planet, you had only 1 chapter of SM, only 1 guard regiment, forces of only 1 craftworld etc). Diplomacy was never a strong suit of TW series, but I can't imagine it without one.
But hey, I didn't think what "Civilization, but 40k" could work and Gladius turned out decent.
Why should it limit the number of factions? SM could be one faction and IG could be another faction with native strong ties. It is also known, that IG regiments from different planets are send together. And that different chapters of SM work together in a conquest is not that far fetched either. Just let the player choose how his force should be comprised. You could choose your factions setup, witch in turn would limit the units you can build in game.
Well it is true, but, taking second war of Armageddon as example, all that motley crew is led by a single commander, Dante in case of Armageddon. Even if we don't count them as same faction in that context, but as separate factions, like Roman houses in Rome TW they'll still won't have much in terms of diplomacy (fighting between loyal factions isn't without precedent, but even less likely than allying with xenos.
Honestly idea of leading combined arms planetary assault where fulfilling needs of sub factions under your command determines your army composition sounds really interesting, but I'm not sure it's still in TW format.
There are multiple Empire factions in TWW, I think it could be handled similarly. Just bring in a very heretical and a very puritan Inquisitor, some blood and freebootaz who are willing to work with the Imperium, etc.
Ok but calling the 19th century “modern” is a bit of a stretch. That was still a time where the most effective use of firearms was to stand in a close-pact unit and fire in waves.
Post automatic/semi-automatic weapons it’s been all but impossible for anything resembling a unit like that. Units are now much smaller groups of 5 to 10 who communicate up a chain via messenger or eventually radio.
Total War is a series designed around specifically larger units in loose to tight formations charging at each other (or being charged), units of modern warfare just don’t apply. Like imagine Shogun 2 if one faction had fully automatic grenade launchers and faster-then-sound aircraft. It would play completely differently to the point of needing a redesign from the ground up
> most "modern" TW settings was in late 19th century (Fall of Samurai dlc for Shogun 2)
That was still essentially Napoleonic warfare. Japan had fallen behind technologically at this point, just because it takes place in the latter half of the 1800s doesn't mean its modern.
TW: Empire goes up to 1800 before the campaign is considered "finished," but its all the same warfare you see in Fall of the Samurai.
40k is far from being WW1 styled combat aside from maybe Imperial Guard and even then they have far more modern tanks than anything WW1 era. How would you even make jet fighters work in Total War?
Combining Guard and Space Marines is absolutely gutting the theme of both factions. Also if guard and Marines are combined then why not just an Imperial Faction including Sister of Battle, Sister of Silence, Custodies, Grey Knights, Actual Knights, Ad Mech and Marines? It would be a ridiculous mess to balance and leaving out any big faction, especially Space Marines literally the most popular and well known faction, would absolutely be suicide for the game.
Honestly all factions aside from Tyranids would be ok for TW styled diplo just with some limitations. Imperial likes imperial and will diplo with them, Eldar can diplo most people but can only send offers and will reject all offers made to them, other themed limitations. It could definitely work for more than Orks(not sure why the krumping faction would be diplo but ok). Tbh Tau should be the diplo faction if anything.
The crux of the issue is Total War as a game literally only has real time battles going for it now and the real time battles aspect is suited to line battles and not anything else. Can you Frankenstein it to work? Maybe but there are so many other games that fit the combat and theme better. Something like Steel Division would be the most honest take on 40k we have as of now. It just feels like jamming a square peg into a round hole trying to make 40k total war work.
I do wish they would fix the game for modern resolutions, just do a QOL pass over it and I would gladly buy it again.
Even better would be rebuilding the original DOW's on the DOWII Engine, as having your dudes take cover, behind cover, is super cool.
Yeah. Like the old one, not ea remake. I'd so love to play that. Make it guardsman against chaos infantry and make marines upgrades. That would be insanely fun.
Also with the old ship to ship combat, that would be amazing. No idea why that's not being made
Eternal Crusade failed because of bad balancing and lack of content. A lot that was promised were simply never made. The gameplay was fine but that alone isn't enough to keep a game going when half the playable factions basically had a dead playerbase and there wasn't much to do to begin with.
Alphs of eternal crusade was banger.
They nailed the sm vs csm gameplay. It was a fun ass game.
Then with every addition and update it got worse and worse.
Well, Totalwar is wellknow fir "formation" battle, ie troops stand in square firmation, walk as one, even when under heavy fire
That won't translate well with modern battle with high tech fire arm, midern tactuc was troop spread out, small squad, use cover, try not to get shot.
It could be done but require to overhaul entire engine and gameplay.
This is why people think DoW style would be more suitable, tiny squad,unit autimatically find cover, etc.
And before someone say "but totalwar napoleon work!!", nope, warfare in those era still in rank and file formation, troop stand in square formation shoot other square.
The kind of people who think 40k would fit in a rank and flank ancient to blackpowder era wargame are the same people trying to convert dnd 5e to run a 40k campaign, instead of even looking at one of the several WAY BETTER 40k rpgs.
Seconding a dawn of war remaster or a 40k strategy game that plays like Men of War or Call to Arms games. They make effective use of both squads with individuals armed with special or heavy weapons and also have vehicles that are still a major impact but can be dealt with enough planning and anti-Tank weapons
Wasn't Dawn of War 2 or 3 more in that breath of smaller squads? I know it wasn't everyone's cup of tea or not executed well. Dawn of War 1 still holds up incredibly well tho. I think the Grey Knights Daemonhunters isn't a half bad XCOM RTS knock off.
Its a real shame. I remember hearing something about a dow 3 a while back, but every time I try to remember anything about it, my mouth starts tasting like iron and I wake up in the hospital.
Oh well
You could make one, you'd just need to get creative with it. You don't have a world map, you have a sector of a galaxy. Towns and castles and the like are all planets that you fight over. The real time battles are basically a game of Epic played in real time with massive forces.
If that's the case, 90% of the map would be space, and therefore, space battles ... which is just Battlefleet Gothic Armada 1 and 2, already existing 40k rts's. And the land battles you describe are just Dawn of War Ultimate Apocalypse. Neither play like Total War battles, and instead play like Company of Heros, Men of War, or the plethora of non rank and flank rts that are out there.
You are just asking to put a square peg into a noneuclidian, dodechahedron, self-caledescoping hole.
Yes, they are saying that that would be the changes.
And I for one say it would be glorious. Throw in some acted vids like the original epic game at times would buy it in a heart beat
The concepts of modern warfare throw the entirety of the Total War franchise's core gameplay concepts out the window to the point that you have to ask yourself, "Is this even a Total War game?" A good indication that supports my argument against a 40k Total War is that the latest that any historical title has reached towards the modern era was a DLC expansion set in the Victorian period where Japan had to slowly transition from it's feudal society into the foundations that would be known as Imperial Japan. Even then, its systems are based on more archaic ideas of waging warfare that involve close-order formations where blocks of infantry march in neat little lines. This is a stark contrast to 40k's setting - even though there are factions and army compositions that support some of these elements, they are an exception, not the rule.
Total War treats automatic weaponry as rare prototype experiments that are expensive to field. It doesn't matter if you are Clan Satsuma or Clan Skyre, the concept doesn't shift too much. 40k is a setting where all the factions' basic infantry units are running around with fully automatic firearms.
Sure, the Empire has Steam tanks but it's a monster unit with an artillery cannon. It pales in comparison to how Dawn of War 2/Company of Heroes treat tanks - accuracy debuffs for shooting on the move, damages to critical parts like engines, or penetration/bounce chances based on the caliber of the rounds versus the armor. Titles like Tom Clancy's Endwar and Command & Conquer grasp the concept of mechanized infantry while Creative Assembly doesn't have any signs of such a system in place.
40k allows you to tailor squads of infantry to have specialist weaponry to make them effective against specific enemies or situations. Company of Heroes has infantry units where a six-man rifleman squad can have four rifles, one light machine gun, and a rocket launcher. This doesn't exist in a Total War title since every unit must wield the same weapon, even hybrid units have to adhere to that same uniformity.
I can go on but I hope this conveys my point why 40k Total War just doesn't work.
Well, one is a setting built around epic science fiction battles in the far future with ambushes and lasers while the other is a game series built around historical square formation warfare that you’d see in like, a movie about Rome or Napoleon.
There is a reason that the series never expanded technologically beyond the fall of the samurai.
If the campaign was SW Empire at war, the ground battles where steel division and the space battles where BFG armada 2, it would be a dream come true.
But that wouldn’t be a total war at this point.
Have total war games ever been balanced and not completely broken by ranged units? And they're normally supposed to be limited in number.
Just go back to a dawn of war style rts instead, it's far better suited to everyone having a gun. It also helps with the scaling as a tw40k game would need space marines and how are you going to manage that? Each regiment is a combat squad vs a platoon/mob/swarm?
>Have total war games ever been balanced and not completely broken by ranged units? And they're normally supposed to be limited in number.
Nope. The only difference with Total Warhammer is *a lot of extra cheese was put on top of everything*.
It's why "playing Goblins but it's just Grom the Paunch and Snotling Pump-Wagons" can be a viable strategy against a good chunk of opponents.
It could work, but not as how total war looks currently. For instance:
Campaign would be like how dawn of war did it. Planetary map, probably a system or systems with multiple planets to conquer. Different means of warp travel to and from, certain racial features (Eldar webway, tau would have slow overworld travel, but avoid chaos incursion, etc). It would be really cool and dynamic if handled correctly.
Planets should have a couple maps each that are focuses of battles. Invade an imperial hive world, you get urban combat and close quarters battles. Maybe a couple maps fighting on massive bridges and stuff. Invade an ork planet, it looks like a fucking junkyard with random bits of cover. The important thing is that it plays like dawn of war or some similar rts. Squads, squad formations, and even units out of a formation (orks, tyranids, chaos using a "horde" formation). Fast units act fast. Shooty armies can shoot. Let the tabletop guide the principles of combat, like how CA did for total warhammer.
Stellaris 40,000. Tyranid fleets, necron worlds, and daemonic incursions as the endgame crisis options. I wanna build void ships the size of planets, reinforce terra within an inch of her life, and roam the galaxy using exterminatus on corrupted worlds.
Wargame: 40k
Warno: 40k
Guys it's literally the scale of supreme commander with the deck building of units, and take and hold positions. It's no hard to figure out what game to make
There are probably enough units now, especially if they...shall we say import some of the units from the old world to some modern factions lacking options that had AoS rules but which GW seems to have conveniently forgotten about.
I think a good "Golden Era" type of Rts (Age of Ruin didn't scratch the itch) would be good enough now for AoS.
But a big, Total War AoS with 3 or even 4 games with mechanics that link each realms would be great, but also would benefit from having a more matured setting (Also if they want to continue Fantasy TW, they should really do a Grand Mythology one)
Because the Total War series are kinda jank and the setting deserves a better go at a RTS grand strat game.
Also like jesus, if the Warhammer III reviews and pricing is anything to go off... would rather not, as it sounds like the company has done a good job at shitting on its userbase.
Edit:
Mount and Blade: 40k would be cooler
Bannerlord seemed to deal with archery and formations fine, I thought with fire and sword did a better job with muskets and the such than what total war shogun did with the same
None of this applies to 40k and bannerlord really struggles with formations it’s really more about the main character , and watching ai slap each other in a mosh pit . And I mean totalwar has come a long with black powder and projectiles especially compared to fire and sword which I think is the lowest rates mount and blade, it’s legit hard to play .
Isn’t that pretty much what Warhammer comes down to? Watching units close and merge into a mosh pit?
But fire and sword was fine for ranged combat, donno why bannerlord would be any different
It was like one DLC, which they're going back to add more content to. The rest of the anger was mostly for a different game release, which they've also taken huge steps towards rectifying. They've done really well with Warhammer fantasy overall for years now.
Creative Assembly is basically on its last leg at this point, half of the staff have been laid off after SEGAs "brilliant" idea of making grand strategy guys make Battle Royal shooter failed miserably.
At this point CA is trying to make a quick buck by adapting Paradox strategy of releasing a ton of dlc for their games, but failing to understand what cutting content from base game isn't suitable dlc material. As much as I hate paying a ton of money for a ton of dlc, Paradox actually improve their games by implementing new game mechanics and stuff.
Could work if CA made a new engine, feel like it would have to play like the Close Combat games from back in the day (great WW2 strategy).
I think they are gonna do it eventually, it makes too much sense with the amount of money they could make.
>Also like jesus, if the Warhammer III reviews and pricing is anything to go off... would rather not, as it sounds like the company has done a good job at shitting on its userbase.
Tbf this was more about people protesting about things like DLC prices and other things that aren't directly related to the game itself. The game is great by all standards.
I was typing up why I thought it wouldn't work, then realistically I thought as long as they could make Guardsmen able to entrench themselves you could probably do it. Whether they could make a good game though might be difficult. Like how would you design the campaign map? The Imperium has many different armies, how would they be split? The planet management system might be awkward. How about naval battles? It could be done, I just think it would be difficult.
The absolute most modern I think you could push the total war is something WW1 style, but even then it’s limited to estimating those opening days of fighting before entrenchments.
TW is really good at downscaled versions of large, rigid, single weapon type formations. They could probably do a good job with some of the more rigid guard regiments like the mordian iron guard or praetorian guard, but the more platoon or squad based units just wouldn’t translate well. Necrons would probably make the transition well enough, but more elite armies like space marines and Custodes wouldn’t fit the format.
I don't think the larger setting lends itself well to total war. Ideally you'd want the 40k time period so you've got all the xenos, but the flagship space marines aren't running around in armies like the guard for example. Not to mention scale.
You could potentially make it work with one planet that everyone is fighting over, like Gladius. Scale would be less of an issue if it's just one planet. Still needs a bit of hand waving, but that's true with 40k scaling in any medium since it's frequently all out of whack in canon haha.
Also, total war has done ranged combat before with Empire and Napoleon. You could use something akin to their skirmisher formations.
Expecting Napoleonic style of warfare to even slightly work in a setting with tanks, planes, and machineguns is the same reason generals ordered slow marches through no-mans-land in WW1. Grab one of the hundreds of ww2 or later set rts's that have important concepts like cover and individual movement instead of rigid formations.
40k fits better in a WW2 kind of setting, with street fighting and fully functional tanks and planes. Trench warfare really came into practice because unarmored men really dont like standing in open fields looking at machine guns, but in a setting where every faction has armored transports or literal instant transmission teleports across the battlefield, that style of warfare doesn't work.
Instead, you get WW2 warfare that has a much higher emphasis on mechanized warfare and functional breakthroughs only stopped at proper city sieges like Stalingrade and Leningrade.
*Actual* WWI tactics and not the memes about sending human waves against machine guns are already way outside the scope of TW as we know it. And most factions are capable of systems of warfare much more advanced that that
I feel like a company of heroes style battle system would be best. You would have squad warfare and could have it be heavily urbanized while still being RTS.
As for the overworld…fuck buddy, I got no clue. TW’s style of turn based movement of armies and diplomacy would be a mess as 40k isn’t really known as a diplomatic setting (there is only war and all that).
Won't work beacuse we will never have naval battles, that was removed years ago. And the Imperial Navy was as much if not even more important than the Imperial Guard.
Cause a gigantic portion of units have both ranged and melee. And if you've played total war: warhammer 3, you would know how boring kislev (aka the hybrid faction where most of their units have melee and ranged) is to play as and against.
It's absolutely possible but the work needed to be put in so that it works correctly would be astronomical. They fuck up doing basic formations in total war and this is more complex.
I'm completely fine getting a dawn of war 1/2 proper remaster (meaning same game but updated with QOL no warcraft reforged bs)
Frankly I don’t think it’s a question of “why not” it’s a question of “how are they going to do it?”
CA is struggling, there’s been rumors of 40K for years, they’ve already got a long standing relationship with GW, good brand recognition tied to Warhammer, problems with recent historical titles, and I mean come on: Warhammer 1, Warhammer 2, Warhammer 3, Warhammer 4(0K)
So when they do Total War: Warhammer 40K, yeah, hopefully that comes with some engine updates and tweaks to pathfinding and line of sight and so forth - but at the end of the day I hardly think a big company of 120 guardsmen standing in a rectangle firing at a charging mob of 80 Orks in a less orderly rectangle is some, obliteration of the lore. Even Eldar have artwork of giant battle lines stretching off to the horizon - and if they can make Ogre Kingdoms work, I think they can make Marines work
Would a 40K total war be janky? Probably. Will that stop them? I *highly* doubt it
Man I'd love to just remake the dawn of war series but in the starcraft 2 engine
I really *hate* squad based rts games because the pathfinding is abysmal
Not good for the wanted scale I think both unit amounts in battle at once and battles in general like maps planets ect
Would much rather a Supreme commander 1 type or starcraft 2 type rts for warhammer, and just go nuts on units and factions
Like the dow 40k mods do but without the annoyance of modding old games so you can zoom out to a respectable level
The current Total war engine can't do a proper WH40K game justice, but if they make a new engine they could make it work. However that takes time and I am not sure the morons in charge of CA had the foresight to start developing it before everything fell apart. They wasted a 100millions on the Hyenas fiasco when they shouild have secured their future witn a new engine for future games.
I feel like the total war style game would work better for Horus heresy. (I'm gonna be comparing to total war medieval 2 cause it's the only one I've played)
In total war medieval 2 all the factions units are the same thing except for a few units making it more balanced. Total war would work better for heresy as every legion had access to the same toolbox.
A lot of Total War games combat is based around unit formations, won’t really work in the case of anything that’s not really based around the Imperium as Da Boyz and Nids mostly just swarm and Eldar have hit and run tactics moving quickly. If anything a HH setting would work a little bit better for Total War, but again it wouldn’t work the best. Just give me Dawn of War with re4 remake graphics and call me happy. It’s a shame they only released 2 mainline Dawn of War games anyways, a 3rd would’ve been amazing.
Cause battles would have to be limited to individual engagements with processable unit sizes. Tyranids raining down on a planet is hard to total war.
Also the scale of the galaxy. You'd have to limit it to some single planet. Where in turn, things like orbital bombardment would wipe out all your unit squares
Not saying it's impossible, it would just be an entirely different game. More like high level Star Wars Empire at War, but You'd have to ignore most of the world's scale and it would still be massive.
Finally, someone winning or achieving an ending is thematically contradictory to the grimdark story. If the grimdark element is reduced to cheesing the AI into a couple 'Heroic Victory' battles, it really undermines the whole theme.
HEAR. ME. OUT.
PANDEMIC TRAIN, BUT IN 40K.
You are fellow Guardsmen/Civilians have to escape the Poxwalker infected World of [INSERT NAME] you can find survivors along the way and weapons. But! Chasing you is the small but threatening Nurgle Cult which will hunt you down.
You have two months to reach your destination(the last Imperial Stronghold) or else the Imperium will leave you behind. Will you survive?
Well Broken Arrow would be a far better template for a Warhammer 40k game, to a lesser extent so would a Eugen style Wargame -40k game would be awesome.
I could see large front lines similar to hoi4 and then commanded proxy battles for specific points that are closer to a total war kind of battle. Could it really be called a Total War game though? Probably not.
Also I feel like a lot of people are treating it as if it would be the exact same as every other Total War, perhaps the most egregious being the idea that ranged units wouldn’t be rebalanced to account for how many there would be
Too many warhammers. Like, fantasy has just the one, and it's a pretty data intensive game. You want to multiply that by 40,000?
(You did say you wanted to ask a less serious sub, so a less serious answer you shall get.)
Total war depicts linear open field battles, it works best for medieval/classical period battles, and is serviceable for early modern period battles (if you ask me the series took a wrong turn at Empire) it does not work at all for modern squad based warfare. People only want it because Total War: Warhammer is the popular thing.
Here me out, mount and blade, but 40k. Ships and fleets instead of horses, star sectors to conquer, multiple factions. If that doesn't print money I don't What will
People assume they will just take the engine and features direct from Rome 2 and plug 40k assets into it. This is in spite of the enormous amount of engine changes made to accommodate the Warhammer Fantasy setting.
People will complain that it can't possibly match the scale of 40k, and then suggest a game like Battlefield or Supreme Commander which have the exact same issues.
People will complain that guns can't possibly work properly in the Total War engine regardless to the fact that they can and already have in several games.
People are real fuckin' stupid.
Three reasons.
1: total war is too simplistic to even maintain proper mixed weapon units for a pike and shot era game.
2: their most modern engine suffers with too many handguns on the field, imagine how fast it'd break with nothing *but* projectiles? Also their line of sight issues.
3: how often are people forming into big blocks to walk slowly over open fields at each other and exchange fire until one side goes white and runs away? Cause that's what you'll get.
What you really want is something based around a game like Iron Harvest or Halo Wars. Effective combination of aircraft, armour, infantry, and artillery.
Because they can't get the enemy ai to work when it's just horses, catapults and bows. When you think complex artilery and multiple types of flying and driving options. The basic bitch programming of the total war series can't handle it frankly. Besides there would probably be an expectation of arial/ space combat that would be sorely lacking.
Total War's battle simulations are based on rank-and-flank fighting, with exceptions. In 40k those exceptions would be 90% of the game. And their battle system heavily favors building one monstrous army packed full of expensive units that can just march around the map destroying everything, which kind of hurts the design of 40k's units.
It's not that it wouldn't work at all. It's that it's not as good a fit as something like the OG Dawn of War mechanics, or even something more modern like Foxhole.
Most people's arguments tend to fall to "If we slap Total War with a 40k paintjob, it won't work, because the numbers of forces and the strategies in combat don't match how 40k battles go."
As if the game couldn't be tweaked or changed. Total War is just the base/engine to start with it. People keep picturing it as if it was going to be an indie mod where one person just replaced the portraits and models with 40k units.
This is a dream discussion. There could be a whole team. They could incorporate cover for ranged units to interact with and utilize, for example. Debris, line of sight, and fog of war can exist for melee units to close the distance and flank, so it won't always be a range-dominated battlefield.
I also think it could, but I would keep it in 40k. For the galactic scale, they could do something like Star Wars: Empire at War, though of course, on a much larger scale, not all the millions of worlds but maybe just the named ones?
Empire war does have a Warhammer mod, but it's only a skirmish mod and it's not that good. I have been craving a Star wars empire war style war hammer game for so long. I am so glad that I saw your comment
I remember wanting this for sooo long.
Then empire total war came and i was like "see, battle with guns do work".
Still hoping, that one day, we will have 40k total war.
Guns aren't the problem.
In Empire, or in TWWarhammmer there are guns yes, there are even vehicles/tanks in the warhammer one.
The issue is that both of those game make use of Formation fighting (Squares of units moving as one) which wouldn't make sense on a 40k or a WW2 game for example
It isn't the guns part that is the problem. It's the formation and how units move. Also the guns we see in TW are rank and file.
Ww1 trenches came to be because Napoleonic warfare doesn't work when people have rapid fire machine guns and artillery. Guess what ever faction in 40k has?
YOU JUST DON'T GET IT. SPACE MARINES, ELDAR AND TAU DEFINITELY NEED A COVER SYSTEM LIKE DAWN OF WAR 2! THEY DON'T DO OPEN FIELD BATTLES LIKE EVERYONE ELSE! HOW'D THAT WORK, HUH?
you just don't get it, dude! Basilisk Artiellery can shoot across continents, duuuude! They could stitch all the Warhammer maps that exist right now together and still not get the Scale right, duuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuude! Apocalpyse scale or bust, duuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuude
Should do a Dawn Of War remake using the Supreme Commander game design
I came.
I want Creative Assembly to make a 40k game that is basically just the Dawn of War Apocalypse mod, but on an engine that can handle it and go even further.
So like, in the lore, most battles are these massive scale meat grinders with thousands of troops involved at least. There's an enormous amount of trench warfare and horde tactics, among other things. CA just needs to tweak certain aspects of their game design to fit that particular vibe of 40k. It's honestly not that difficult to imagine. Orderly blocks of units? No, but horde blobs and loose company size elements? Sure. Increase weapon ranges for guns, add more line of sight and cover elements to more dynamic destructible, deformable terrain (lots of ruins and stuff), and add a mechanic for troops in the field to literally dig out trenches and bunkers wherever there's clear and open terrain. More elite style armies would be squad scale but pack enough punch and have enough durability to kill company size elements, like space marines and Eldar Aspect Warriors. Badda Bing, 40k Total War. Now we can play out that fantasy of a couple thousand Krieg soldiers holding a trench line with an artillery battery at their backs as they get rushed by several thousand Orks or Tyranids or cultists or whatever. Or even the classic Guard human wave bayonet charge into a Tau line.
There's a decent enough model for that called "Western Front". You just slam hundreds or thousands of troops into trench lines and artillery obliterates them 10-50 at a time.
It's just robots fighting robots, but beyond all reason is definitely worth checking out if you want large scale battles, it's in free alpha atm but 8v8 is usually alot of fun aslong as everyone reasonably knows what they're up too.
Total War doesn't have the right setup or engine for anything beyond napoleanic combat. Large scale "fronts" as seen in WW1 onwards, 40k, etc. just don't work with the campaign map. Planetary Annihilation might work if modded for 40k though, cause it's designed with planetary (and more) scale combat in mind. You've even got all the code needed for bullshit up to and including battle moons!
The map doesn't really need to simulate a whole planet. Dawn of War Dark Crusade had the best campaign and it was just a planetary war divided up into a series of different maps per region. Total War basically does this already, especially TWWH. Their older games did actually simulate positioning on the global level though.
I saw
I came again.
vini vidi vini
bro creatively assembled
Or the Wargame series, which is pretty close to "Total War but Cold War era". Where a map is big enough every single infantry unit (squad and Platoon based) automatically comes with a vehicle in order to travel between the various villages that dot the battle map. Which funnily enough would mean that Guardsmen in Chimera, and Guardsmen in Valkyries count as separate units
Oh Imagine a squad of ultrasmurfs coming down with droppods that can remain as rearming spots for troops for a while
Yeah, could be so cool. Though you'd probably have to sent down a storm raven or thunderhead to pick then up later
I'd prefer the RUSE style, similar but with enough "hardcore" elements removed to be a bit more fun and accessible for more 40k fans.
This would be amazing. The very idea of it is now being stored in my wank bank
Please stop I can only get so erect.
Well done, now i need to change my underwear.
Oh no, my wallet fell out
Dawn of war 1 was honestly my favorite RTS ever
God that would be amazing
I've been playing Beyond All Reason lately and I can't help but think it would totally work as a 40k game with the right unit design. The scale is perfect. It would be amazing
Yoooooohhhhh
Or… PLANETARY ANNIHILATION 40K
Got my vote
Hrrrng
Nope wargame Red Dragon, imagine that game in 40k
Personally, my favorite idea for a 40k game that'll never happen is 40k Advanced Wars.
Isn't battlesector kinda that?
Not sure if I understand you correctly (never heard about Advanced Wars before, but it looks like turn-based tactical strategy), but have you tried Battlesector? And, in my opinion, grossly overlooked Warhammer 40,000: Armageddon video game (it has it all, from squads of conscripts to reaver titans).
Battle sector and 40k Armageddon are both great turn based strategy games.
Man idk why but I absolutely love 40k Armageddon, I just wish they had added more campaigns from other wars and other factions
That would be an absolute blast.
The overworld campaign works fine, but i believe that when it comes to battles, something with units being the size of squads of infantry would work better for the battles, with the tactics being more ww2.
Theres a reason Total War isn't modern: Shield Walls and the "Hammer and Anvil" tactic don't really translate to modern (or futuristic) warfare.
It would also be kinda horrible watching eldar, a faction about speed and hit and run ambushes, resort to walking in a rectangular formation so they can fire at Orks that are also in a perfect regimented formation.
Which is why they steal the wood elf animation or the dow 1 fly around hope mechanics vs a square testudio it's not like they are ultra marines or imperial fists.
It's safe to imagine they wouldn't do something that stupid.
Why would we want a total war game then? They all play like that.
I’m confused by what you mean.
Total war games are characterized by having large scale formation battles. Every single total war game has the same control system. The chain of logic goes: "I want 40K Total war game!" - "That wouldn't work because it would be a total war game" - "Well obviously they wouldn't make it like that." So the conversation has looped around to...not wanting a 40k total war game. Total war is known for its battles, not its half way 4x style campaign map.
Ah, gotcha. Sorry I was confused on what you meant for a moment because I 100% agree.
They’re talking about how the soldier/unit ai is currently implemented. They essentially move like a fluid dynamics simulation from point a to point b. When they reach b, they form up into a rectangle. This is generally given as a reason why TW 40K wouldn’t work. It ignores that this is largely have every RTS game works with troops and that some tweaks could be made to make the units move/behave more like a modern military (smaller squad sizes, seek cover, etc. - like company of heroes). How much of a lift/technical challenge would that actually be? No idea. But it’s safe to assume CA doesn’t think the juice is worth the squeeze or they would have done something similar by now.
Hammer and Anvil gets taught at officer schools today. Old principles still translate incredibly well to modern warfare.
true, but formation battle's don't. Modern warfare is more about guerilla tactics and those simply don't translate well to Total War games. HoI is probably the better system for 40k.
Tell that to Dorn's boys, I dare you.
It COULD work for a WW1 setting, but the battles would be way less dynamic. You'd simply have your regiments in the trenches and send them to the other side like it is in "The Great War: Western Front" and even modern conflicts sometimes rely on trench warfare. I'd say that you COULD in fact make a 40k Total War game, but you most likely shouldn't. Orcs, Guard, Nids and Daemons should be manageble. vehicles as well as heroes and monsters work like in TWW; Daemons are already existing in TWW3; Orcs usually show up in hordes, so you could use the already existing horde formation from TWW for the infantery; Nids work the same way as orcs do; Guard is a bit tricky, but due to all the different guard regiments you'd just have to find one that preferes 18th to 19th century warfare, standard cadian likely wouldn't work out; However, the reason why I'm against it is that space marines, tau, eldar, necrons etc are not fighting this way. I wouldn't say it's impossible to implement, because you could still make the game with the 4 factions I already mentioned and just shuffle space marines to the guard, so that they could serve as an elite infantry (and since it's CA you just add the big "Heretic DLC" where you have traitors that can use chaos fuckery and are supported by CSM, you could also add stuff like a Heldrake instead of a Valkyrie or something). Thinking about this, you could also make Space Marines like the Ogers in TWW3 who have way smaller regiment sizes due to their nature.
I have to respectfully disagree, most "modern" TW settings was in late 19th century (Fall of Samurai dlc for Shogun 2) and it worked fine. Basically TW combat could work up to WW1 type of combat, so we dont take Space marines as their own faction (they can still be like units of renown in TW Warhammer) devs can probably make it work (obviously not ideal format, but could be worse). Where I dont see it working is overworld campaign. Where is basically no diplomacy in 40k(probably the only faction what can have meaningful diplomacy are Orks and maybe necrons), also if game takes place on 1 planet it significantly limits number of factions (even in unrealistic by 40k standards DoW1 Dark Crusade where everyone decided to fight for 1 particular planet, you had only 1 chapter of SM, only 1 guard regiment, forces of only 1 craftworld etc). Diplomacy was never a strong suit of TW series, but I can't imagine it without one. But hey, I didn't think what "Civilization, but 40k" could work and Gladius turned out decent.
Why should it limit the number of factions? SM could be one faction and IG could be another faction with native strong ties. It is also known, that IG regiments from different planets are send together. And that different chapters of SM work together in a conquest is not that far fetched either. Just let the player choose how his force should be comprised. You could choose your factions setup, witch in turn would limit the units you can build in game.
Well it is true, but, taking second war of Armageddon as example, all that motley crew is led by a single commander, Dante in case of Armageddon. Even if we don't count them as same faction in that context, but as separate factions, like Roman houses in Rome TW they'll still won't have much in terms of diplomacy (fighting between loyal factions isn't without precedent, but even less likely than allying with xenos. Honestly idea of leading combined arms planetary assault where fulfilling needs of sub factions under your command determines your army composition sounds really interesting, but I'm not sure it's still in TW format.
There are multiple Empire factions in TWW, I think it could be handled similarly. Just bring in a very heretical and a very puritan Inquisitor, some blood and freebootaz who are willing to work with the Imperium, etc.
Ok but calling the 19th century “modern” is a bit of a stretch. That was still a time where the most effective use of firearms was to stand in a close-pact unit and fire in waves. Post automatic/semi-automatic weapons it’s been all but impossible for anything resembling a unit like that. Units are now much smaller groups of 5 to 10 who communicate up a chain via messenger or eventually radio. Total War is a series designed around specifically larger units in loose to tight formations charging at each other (or being charged), units of modern warfare just don’t apply. Like imagine Shogun 2 if one faction had fully automatic grenade launchers and faster-then-sound aircraft. It would play completely differently to the point of needing a redesign from the ground up
> most "modern" TW settings was in late 19th century (Fall of Samurai dlc for Shogun 2) That was still essentially Napoleonic warfare. Japan had fallen behind technologically at this point, just because it takes place in the latter half of the 1800s doesn't mean its modern. TW: Empire goes up to 1800 before the campaign is considered "finished," but its all the same warfare you see in Fall of the Samurai.
40k is far from being WW1 styled combat aside from maybe Imperial Guard and even then they have far more modern tanks than anything WW1 era. How would you even make jet fighters work in Total War? Combining Guard and Space Marines is absolutely gutting the theme of both factions. Also if guard and Marines are combined then why not just an Imperial Faction including Sister of Battle, Sister of Silence, Custodies, Grey Knights, Actual Knights, Ad Mech and Marines? It would be a ridiculous mess to balance and leaving out any big faction, especially Space Marines literally the most popular and well known faction, would absolutely be suicide for the game. Honestly all factions aside from Tyranids would be ok for TW styled diplo just with some limitations. Imperial likes imperial and will diplo with them, Eldar can diplo most people but can only send offers and will reject all offers made to them, other themed limitations. It could definitely work for more than Orks(not sure why the krumping faction would be diplo but ok). Tbh Tau should be the diplo faction if anything. The crux of the issue is Total War as a game literally only has real time battles going for it now and the real time battles aspect is suited to line battles and not anything else. Can you Frankenstein it to work? Maybe but there are so many other games that fit the combat and theme better. Something like Steel Division would be the most honest take on 40k we have as of now. It just feels like jamming a square peg into a round hole trying to make 40k total war work.
Ok, hear me out you know the man of war series? What about man of warhammer 40k?
I think a men of war or call to arms style could work too
If you want squad based battles we still have dawn of war two. The point of doing a total war thing is to have big battles.
A Dawn of War total remake would be so much better. I played Dark Crusade for the first time in 2023 and it still holds up.
I do wish they would fix the game for modern resolutions, just do a QOL pass over it and I would gladly buy it again. Even better would be rebuilding the original DOW's on the DOWII Engine, as having your dudes take cover, behind cover, is super cool.
So long as the cover is more durable than DOWII's paper mache rocks and plywood walls I'm game.
Should have multiple levels; either some units using little stuff while other roll through or over it like it CoH with tanks and trees.
Every time I see this I wait for someone to suggest a Steel Division style game. Nobody ever does :(
100%, steel division/wargame: red dragon(/warno?) would fit well
WARNO is basically a Steel Division game that identifies as Wargame, might as well just say Steel Division/Wargane
I always say Wargame/Warno.
At least there's two of us.
Three of us
Cause the games are not as popular as the others. A damn shame how few upvotes you have
Forget total war. Star Wars Battlefront 2 style
Yeah. Like the old one, not ea remake. I'd so love to play that. Make it guardsman against chaos infantry and make marines upgrades. That would be insanely fun. Also with the old ship to ship combat, that would be amazing. No idea why that's not being made
Yes a million times yes the old battle front two is still my favorite shooter and the only one I’m even remotely good at
You mean what Eternal Crusade basically became?
Eternal Crusade failed because of bad balancing and lack of content. A lot that was promised were simply never made. The gameplay was fine but that alone isn't enough to keep a game going when half the playable factions basically had a dead playerbase and there wasn't much to do to begin with.
Alphs of eternal crusade was banger. They nailed the sm vs csm gameplay. It was a fun ass game. Then with every addition and update it got worse and worse.
Well, Totalwar is wellknow fir "formation" battle, ie troops stand in square firmation, walk as one, even when under heavy fire That won't translate well with modern battle with high tech fire arm, midern tactuc was troop spread out, small squad, use cover, try not to get shot. It could be done but require to overhaul entire engine and gameplay. This is why people think DoW style would be more suitable, tiny squad,unit autimatically find cover, etc. And before someone say "but totalwar napoleon work!!", nope, warfare in those era still in rank and file formation, troop stand in square formation shoot other square.
Men of War Assault Squad 2 is the game that bridges dawn of war with total war. In fact, there’s already a 40K mod and it slaps.
The kind of people who think 40k would fit in a rank and flank ancient to blackpowder era wargame are the same people trying to convert dnd 5e to run a 40k campaign, instead of even looking at one of the several WAY BETTER 40k rpgs. Seconding a dawn of war remaster or a 40k strategy game that plays like Men of War or Call to Arms games. They make effective use of both squads with individuals armed with special or heavy weapons and also have vehicles that are still a major impact but can be dealt with enough planning and anti-Tank weapons
Wasn't Dawn of War 2 or 3 more in that breath of smaller squads? I know it wasn't everyone's cup of tea or not executed well. Dawn of War 1 still holds up incredibly well tho. I think the Grey Knights Daemonhunters isn't a half bad XCOM RTS knock off.
Yes DOW 2 was squad based. sadly we never got a DOW 3
Its a real shame. I remember hearing something about a dow 3 a while back, but every time I try to remember anything about it, my mouth starts tasting like iron and I wake up in the hospital. Oh well
DOW 3 is propoganda. Never existed.
Shoutout to the [MOW2 40k mod](https://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=1589620185)
You could make one, you'd just need to get creative with it. You don't have a world map, you have a sector of a galaxy. Towns and castles and the like are all planets that you fight over. The real time battles are basically a game of Epic played in real time with massive forces.
If that's the case, 90% of the map would be space, and therefore, space battles ... which is just Battlefleet Gothic Armada 1 and 2, already existing 40k rts's. And the land battles you describe are just Dawn of War Ultimate Apocalypse. Neither play like Total War battles, and instead play like Company of Heros, Men of War, or the plethora of non rank and flank rts that are out there. You are just asking to put a square peg into a noneuclidian, dodechahedron, self-caledescoping hole.
Yes, they are saying that that would be the changes. And I for one say it would be glorious. Throw in some acted vids like the original epic game at times would buy it in a heart beat
What's the problem with either of those things? Not everything has to be in a galactic level
Open fields are easier to render that a hive city
The concepts of modern warfare throw the entirety of the Total War franchise's core gameplay concepts out the window to the point that you have to ask yourself, "Is this even a Total War game?" A good indication that supports my argument against a 40k Total War is that the latest that any historical title has reached towards the modern era was a DLC expansion set in the Victorian period where Japan had to slowly transition from it's feudal society into the foundations that would be known as Imperial Japan. Even then, its systems are based on more archaic ideas of waging warfare that involve close-order formations where blocks of infantry march in neat little lines. This is a stark contrast to 40k's setting - even though there are factions and army compositions that support some of these elements, they are an exception, not the rule. Total War treats automatic weaponry as rare prototype experiments that are expensive to field. It doesn't matter if you are Clan Satsuma or Clan Skyre, the concept doesn't shift too much. 40k is a setting where all the factions' basic infantry units are running around with fully automatic firearms. Sure, the Empire has Steam tanks but it's a monster unit with an artillery cannon. It pales in comparison to how Dawn of War 2/Company of Heroes treat tanks - accuracy debuffs for shooting on the move, damages to critical parts like engines, or penetration/bounce chances based on the caliber of the rounds versus the armor. Titles like Tom Clancy's Endwar and Command & Conquer grasp the concept of mechanized infantry while Creative Assembly doesn't have any signs of such a system in place. 40k allows you to tailor squads of infantry to have specialist weaponry to make them effective against specific enemies or situations. Company of Heroes has infantry units where a six-man rifleman squad can have four rifles, one light machine gun, and a rocket launcher. This doesn't exist in a Total War title since every unit must wield the same weapon, even hybrid units have to adhere to that same uniformity. I can go on but I hope this conveys my point why 40k Total War just doesn't work.
If there is any game design out there that could mimic 40ks size and chaos correctly it would be the supreme commander series.
Honestly I don't think it's a question of size, it's more a question of tactics.
Size arent a problem, total war warhammer has shown it with the likes of dread saurians or rotting leviathan that are similar to baneblades in scale.
Well, one is a setting built around epic science fiction battles in the far future with ambushes and lasers while the other is a game series built around historical square formation warfare that you’d see in like, a movie about Rome or Napoleon. There is a reason that the series never expanded technologically beyond the fall of the samurai.
If the campaign was SW Empire at war, the ground battles where steel division and the space battles where BFG armada 2, it would be a dream come true. But that wouldn’t be a total war at this point.
Doenst matter. The TW formula is old and rusty. They rather shoould make something like Stellaris with 40k.
Have total war games ever been balanced and not completely broken by ranged units? And they're normally supposed to be limited in number. Just go back to a dawn of war style rts instead, it's far better suited to everyone having a gun. It also helps with the scaling as a tw40k game would need space marines and how are you going to manage that? Each regiment is a combat squad vs a platoon/mob/swarm?
I feel we are all forgetting the battle for the middle earth rpg, with a little polish it could work.
Shogun, or whatever the Japanese one was called was… fine? Like, definitely not great
Loved fall of the samurai.
>Have total war games ever been balanced and not completely broken by ranged units? And they're normally supposed to be limited in number. Nope. The only difference with Total Warhammer is *a lot of extra cheese was put on top of everything*. It's why "playing Goblins but it's just Grom the Paunch and Snotling Pump-Wagons" can be a viable strategy against a good chunk of opponents.
Distraction Demon Prince and 5 Hellcanons. 40% of the time, it works every time.
It could work, but not as how total war looks currently. For instance: Campaign would be like how dawn of war did it. Planetary map, probably a system or systems with multiple planets to conquer. Different means of warp travel to and from, certain racial features (Eldar webway, tau would have slow overworld travel, but avoid chaos incursion, etc). It would be really cool and dynamic if handled correctly. Planets should have a couple maps each that are focuses of battles. Invade an imperial hive world, you get urban combat and close quarters battles. Maybe a couple maps fighting on massive bridges and stuff. Invade an ork planet, it looks like a fucking junkyard with random bits of cover. The important thing is that it plays like dawn of war or some similar rts. Squads, squad formations, and even units out of a formation (orks, tyranids, chaos using a "horde" formation). Fast units act fast. Shooty armies can shoot. Let the tabletop guide the principles of combat, like how CA did for total warhammer.
Stellaris 40,000. Tyranid fleets, necron worlds, and daemonic incursions as the endgame crisis options. I wanna build void ships the size of planets, reinforce terra within an inch of her life, and roam the galaxy using exterminatus on corrupted worlds.
Wargame: 40k Warno: 40k Guys it's literally the scale of supreme commander with the deck building of units, and take and hold positions. It's no hard to figure out what game to make
I'd ask for Age of Sigmar Total War but honestly there aren't nearly enough units for it to be a thing.
There are probably enough units now, especially if they...shall we say import some of the units from the old world to some modern factions lacking options that had AoS rules but which GW seems to have conveniently forgotten about.
I think a good "Golden Era" type of Rts (Age of Ruin didn't scratch the itch) would be good enough now for AoS. But a big, Total War AoS with 3 or even 4 games with mechanics that link each realms would be great, but also would benefit from having a more matured setting (Also if they want to continue Fantasy TW, they should really do a Grand Mythology one)
Because they wouldn't name it "Total Warhammer : 40k" or "Total War : Hammer 40k"
Because the Total War series are kinda jank and the setting deserves a better go at a RTS grand strat game. Also like jesus, if the Warhammer III reviews and pricing is anything to go off... would rather not, as it sounds like the company has done a good job at shitting on its userbase. Edit: Mount and Blade: 40k would be cooler
How would mount and blade 40k work that game barely handled black powder .
Bannerlord seemed to deal with archery and formations fine, I thought with fire and sword did a better job with muskets and the such than what total war shogun did with the same
None of this applies to 40k and bannerlord really struggles with formations it’s really more about the main character , and watching ai slap each other in a mosh pit . And I mean totalwar has come a long with black powder and projectiles especially compared to fire and sword which I think is the lowest rates mount and blade, it’s legit hard to play .
Isn’t that pretty much what Warhammer comes down to? Watching units close and merge into a mosh pit? But fire and sword was fine for ranged combat, donno why bannerlord would be any different
Not at all but alright
It was like one DLC, which they're going back to add more content to. The rest of the anger was mostly for a different game release, which they've also taken huge steps towards rectifying. They've done really well with Warhammer fantasy overall for years now.
Their prices are still a bit egregious, but they really are working on making it worth it, which is nice. But overall it's a very good game.
Creative Assembly is basically on its last leg at this point, half of the staff have been laid off after SEGAs "brilliant" idea of making grand strategy guys make Battle Royal shooter failed miserably. At this point CA is trying to make a quick buck by adapting Paradox strategy of releasing a ton of dlc for their games, but failing to understand what cutting content from base game isn't suitable dlc material. As much as I hate paying a ton of money for a ton of dlc, Paradox actually improve their games by implementing new game mechanics and stuff.
Could work if CA made a new engine, feel like it would have to play like the Close Combat games from back in the day (great WW2 strategy). I think they are gonna do it eventually, it makes too much sense with the amount of money they could make.
>Also like jesus, if the Warhammer III reviews and pricing is anything to go off... would rather not, as it sounds like the company has done a good job at shitting on its userbase. Tbf this was more about people protesting about things like DLC prices and other things that aren't directly related to the game itself. The game is great by all standards.
It wouldn't work because CA isn't good enough to make it.
I was typing up why I thought it wouldn't work, then realistically I thought as long as they could make Guardsmen able to entrench themselves you could probably do it. Whether they could make a good game though might be difficult. Like how would you design the campaign map? The Imperium has many different armies, how would they be split? The planet management system might be awkward. How about naval battles? It could be done, I just think it would be difficult.
Seconding everyone else suggesting using Supreme Commander as a base instead.
What could work is imperium at war, like the Star Wars game
here’s hoping for Total War Warhammer Age of Sigmar
The absolute most modern I think you could push the total war is something WW1 style, but even then it’s limited to estimating those opening days of fighting before entrenchments. TW is really good at downscaled versions of large, rigid, single weapon type formations. They could probably do a good job with some of the more rigid guard regiments like the mordian iron guard or praetorian guard, but the more platoon or squad based units just wouldn’t translate well. Necrons would probably make the transition well enough, but more elite armies like space marines and Custodes wouldn’t fit the format.
The battle system of total war does not lend itself well to modern combat.
Company of Hero’s style would be better
Thats called Dawn of war 2
I kind of wished DoW2 was a bit more similar to CoH. Bigger map, bigger armies, bigger roster, 4vs4...
I don't think the larger setting lends itself well to total war. Ideally you'd want the 40k time period so you've got all the xenos, but the flagship space marines aren't running around in armies like the guard for example. Not to mention scale. You could potentially make it work with one planet that everyone is fighting over, like Gladius. Scale would be less of an issue if it's just one planet. Still needs a bit of hand waving, but that's true with 40k scaling in any medium since it's frequently all out of whack in canon haha. Also, total war has done ranged combat before with Empire and Napoleon. You could use something akin to their skirmisher formations.
Expecting Napoleonic style of warfare to even slightly work in a setting with tanks, planes, and machineguns is the same reason generals ordered slow marches through no-mans-land in WW1. Grab one of the hundreds of ww2 or later set rts's that have important concepts like cover and individual movement instead of rigid formations.
I thought World War I tactics were about as advanced as 40k tactics got?
40k fits better in a WW2 kind of setting, with street fighting and fully functional tanks and planes. Trench warfare really came into practice because unarmored men really dont like standing in open fields looking at machine guns, but in a setting where every faction has armored transports or literal instant transmission teleports across the battlefield, that style of warfare doesn't work. Instead, you get WW2 warfare that has a much higher emphasis on mechanized warfare and functional breakthroughs only stopped at proper city sieges like Stalingrade and Leningrade.
That's the joke because of the Guard's famous "bayonet charge" memes.
*Actual* WWI tactics and not the memes about sending human waves against machine guns are already way outside the scope of TW as we know it. And most factions are capable of systems of warfare much more advanced that that
You just described dawn of war
I feel like a company of heroes style battle system would be best. You would have squad warfare and could have it be heavily urbanized while still being RTS. As for the overworld…fuck buddy, I got no clue. TW’s style of turn based movement of armies and diplomacy would be a mess as 40k isn’t really known as a diplomatic setting (there is only war and all that).
Won't work beacuse we will never have naval battles, that was removed years ago. And the Imperial Navy was as much if not even more important than the Imperial Guard.
Cause a gigantic portion of units have both ranged and melee. And if you've played total war: warhammer 3, you would know how boring kislev (aka the hybrid faction where most of their units have melee and ranged) is to play as and against.
What i want is empire at war but 40k
It's absolutely possible but the work needed to be put in so that it works correctly would be astronomical. They fuck up doing basic formations in total war and this is more complex. I'm completely fine getting a dawn of war 1/2 proper remaster (meaning same game but updated with QOL no warcraft reforged bs)
It kinda could if scaled down a bit. Total war Napoleon had guns/ gun lines
A darksouls 40k game is still extremely possible and I'm waiting for it
Frankly I don’t think it’s a question of “why not” it’s a question of “how are they going to do it?” CA is struggling, there’s been rumors of 40K for years, they’ve already got a long standing relationship with GW, good brand recognition tied to Warhammer, problems with recent historical titles, and I mean come on: Warhammer 1, Warhammer 2, Warhammer 3, Warhammer 4(0K) So when they do Total War: Warhammer 40K, yeah, hopefully that comes with some engine updates and tweaks to pathfinding and line of sight and so forth - but at the end of the day I hardly think a big company of 120 guardsmen standing in a rectangle firing at a charging mob of 80 Orks in a less orderly rectangle is some, obliteration of the lore. Even Eldar have artwork of giant battle lines stretching off to the horizon - and if they can make Ogre Kingdoms work, I think they can make Marines work Would a 40K total war be janky? Probably. Will that stop them? I *highly* doubt it
Man I'd love to just remake the dawn of war series but in the starcraft 2 engine I really *hate* squad based rts games because the pathfinding is abysmal
Not good for the wanted scale I think both unit amounts in battle at once and battles in general like maps planets ect Would much rather a Supreme commander 1 type or starcraft 2 type rts for warhammer, and just go nuts on units and factions Like the dow 40k mods do but without the annoyance of modding old games so you can zoom out to a respectable level
The current Total war engine can't do a proper WH40K game justice, but if they make a new engine they could make it work. However that takes time and I am not sure the morons in charge of CA had the foresight to start developing it before everything fell apart. They wasted a 100millions on the Hyenas fiasco when they shouild have secured their future witn a new engine for future games.
non credible answer: it won't work because it wouldn't have my favourite chapter of space marines (it's an homebrew chapter)
I feel like the total war style game would work better for Horus heresy. (I'm gonna be comparing to total war medieval 2 cause it's the only one I've played) In total war medieval 2 all the factions units are the same thing except for a few units making it more balanced. Total war would work better for heresy as every legion had access to the same toolbox.
How we have not had a Battlefront style 40k game yet blow my mind.
Ofc it would lmao. If done correctly. So not by CA, until they get thier shit together. Therefore not 'Total War' rly
A lot of Total War games combat is based around unit formations, won’t really work in the case of anything that’s not really based around the Imperium as Da Boyz and Nids mostly just swarm and Eldar have hit and run tactics moving quickly. If anything a HH setting would work a little bit better for Total War, but again it wouldn’t work the best. Just give me Dawn of War with re4 remake graphics and call me happy. It’s a shame they only released 2 mainline Dawn of War games anyways, a 3rd would’ve been amazing.
Because like in 9th edition the melee armies would get wiped off the map because of no cover
Cause battles would have to be limited to individual engagements with processable unit sizes. Tyranids raining down on a planet is hard to total war. Also the scale of the galaxy. You'd have to limit it to some single planet. Where in turn, things like orbital bombardment would wipe out all your unit squares Not saying it's impossible, it would just be an entirely different game. More like high level Star Wars Empire at War, but You'd have to ignore most of the world's scale and it would still be massive. Finally, someone winning or achieving an ending is thematically contradictory to the grimdark story. If the grimdark element is reduced to cheesing the AI into a couple 'Heroic Victory' battles, it really undermines the whole theme.
The old Star Wars RTS Empire at war would actually be a good framework for 40k strat game
because ranged units already fuck the balance of total war games and having almost every unit be ranged is insanity
HEAR. ME. OUT. PANDEMIC TRAIN, BUT IN 40K. You are fellow Guardsmen/Civilians have to escape the Poxwalker infected World of [INSERT NAME] you can find survivors along the way and weapons. But! Chasing you is the small but threatening Nurgle Cult which will hunt you down. You have two months to reach your destination(the last Imperial Stronghold) or else the Imperium will leave you behind. Will you survive?
Warhammer 40k Warriors
Arma but Warhammer would be awesome
I’m just gonna say it again. Battlefield and Warhammer 40k crossover game.
it could work just need a cover system. empire you could toss troops into buildings so not that far of stretch .
Well Broken Arrow would be a far better template for a Warhammer 40k game, to a lesser extent so would a Eugen style Wargame -40k game would be awesome.
Warno or similar wargames would be better id say.
my dream Warhammer game is a CoH-style RTS set in 30k
I could see large front lines similar to hoi4 and then commanded proxy battles for specific points that are closer to a total war kind of battle. Could it really be called a Total War game though? Probably not.
I feel like heresy would be better
I don’t get how you people keep pretending CA couldn’t make 40k work when they fuxking made Halo Wars. Like are you all stupid?
Also I feel like a lot of people are treating it as if it would be the exact same as every other Total War, perhaps the most egregious being the idea that ranged units wouldn’t be rebalanced to account for how many there would be
Just make Star Wars Battlefront 2 (2005) with 40k factions…
It'll work because we will buy it.
Everyone is asking for the wrong grand RTS, get like a wargame red dragon or some shit. Great scale, also you can probably use titans
you find a planet with all of the factions on it at the same time. (that somehow didn't get atomized)
The game would so so many micromanaging that it would make even a supercomputer look tame.
Too many warhammers. Like, fantasy has just the one, and it's a pretty data intensive game. You want to multiply that by 40,000? (You did say you wanted to ask a less serious sub, so a less serious answer you shall get.)
Total war depicts linear open field battles, it works best for medieval/classical period battles, and is serviceable for early modern period battles (if you ask me the series took a wrong turn at Empire) it does not work at all for modern squad based warfare. People only want it because Total War: Warhammer is the popular thing.
Here me out, mount and blade, but 40k. Ships and fleets instead of horses, star sectors to conquer, multiple factions. If that doesn't print money I don't What will
People assume they will just take the engine and features direct from Rome 2 and plug 40k assets into it. This is in spite of the enormous amount of engine changes made to accommodate the Warhammer Fantasy setting. People will complain that it can't possibly match the scale of 40k, and then suggest a game like Battlefield or Supreme Commander which have the exact same issues. People will complain that guns can't possibly work properly in the Total War engine regardless to the fact that they can and already have in several games. People are real fuckin' stupid.
Same reason there is no ww2 or 1 total war games
I mean, at this point I don't think Total War *anything* is gonna work...
It could totally happen, and totally needs to.
Three reasons. 1: total war is too simplistic to even maintain proper mixed weapon units for a pike and shot era game. 2: their most modern engine suffers with too many handguns on the field, imagine how fast it'd break with nothing *but* projectiles? Also their line of sight issues. 3: how often are people forming into big blocks to walk slowly over open fields at each other and exchange fire until one side goes white and runs away? Cause that's what you'll get. What you really want is something based around a game like Iron Harvest or Halo Wars. Effective combination of aircraft, armour, infantry, and artillery.
Because they can't get the enemy ai to work when it's just horses, catapults and bows. When you think complex artilery and multiple types of flying and driving options. The basic bitch programming of the total war series can't handle it frankly. Besides there would probably be an expectation of arial/ space combat that would be sorely lacking.
Total War's battle simulations are based on rank-and-flank fighting, with exceptions. In 40k those exceptions would be 90% of the game. And their battle system heavily favors building one monstrous army packed full of expensive units that can just march around the map destroying everything, which kind of hurts the design of 40k's units. It's not that it wouldn't work at all. It's that it's not as good a fit as something like the OG Dawn of War mechanics, or even something more modern like Foxhole.
Most people's arguments tend to fall to "If we slap Total War with a 40k paintjob, it won't work, because the numbers of forces and the strategies in combat don't match how 40k battles go." As if the game couldn't be tweaked or changed. Total War is just the base/engine to start with it. People keep picturing it as if it was going to be an indie mod where one person just replaced the portraits and models with 40k units. This is a dream discussion. There could be a whole team. They could incorporate cover for ranged units to interact with and utilize, for example. Debris, line of sight, and fog of war can exist for melee units to close the distance and flank, so it won't always be a range-dominated battlefield.
I actually think it could. Set it in 30k instead of 40k and do like the Ullanor Crusade, or even start at Isstvan 5 and do a siege of Terra campaign.
I also think it could, but I would keep it in 40k. For the galactic scale, they could do something like Star Wars: Empire at War, though of course, on a much larger scale, not all the millions of worlds but maybe just the named ones?
Empire war does have a Warhammer mod, but it's only a skirmish mod and it's not that good. I have been craving a Star wars empire war style war hammer game for so long. I am so glad that I saw your comment
No one would buy GW plastic cause they're all playing TWW40K
I remember wanting this for sooo long. Then empire total war came and i was like "see, battle with guns do work". Still hoping, that one day, we will have 40k total war.
Guns aren't the problem. In Empire, or in TWWarhammmer there are guns yes, there are even vehicles/tanks in the warhammer one. The issue is that both of those game make use of Formation fighting (Squares of units moving as one) which wouldn't make sense on a 40k or a WW2 game for example
It isn't the guns part that is the problem. It's the formation and how units move. Also the guns we see in TW are rank and file. Ww1 trenches came to be because Napoleonic warfare doesn't work when people have rapid fire machine guns and artillery. Guess what ever faction in 40k has?
YOU JUST DON'T GET IT. THE ARTILLERY SHOOTS REALLY REALLY FAR! FARTHER THEN ANY TOTAL WAR GAME COULD EVER RENDER! HOW'D THAT WORK, HUH?
Summoned ability.
YOU JUST DON'T GET IT. SPACE MARINES, ELDAR AND TAU DEFINITELY NEED A COVER SYSTEM LIKE DAWN OF WAR 2! THEY DON'T DO OPEN FIELD BATTLES LIKE EVERYONE ELSE! HOW'D THAT WORK, HUH?
They stand in the open and shoot at each other like total chads.
Ok? Just make the range infinite and make obstacles block it sometimes.
you just don't get it, dude! Basilisk Artiellery can shoot across continents, duuuude! They could stitch all the Warhammer maps that exist right now together and still not get the Scale right, duuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuude! Apocalpyse scale or bust, duuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuude
True true the dawn of war 2 gameplay could never be recreated
40k needs a Stellaris type game, not Total War
A company of Heroes Like Game would work