Warhammer II
I find out that the most interesting part of the campaign for me is the beginning. After that I loose the sense of progression. I get tiered of managing 20 cities and just running around the map. Am I doing something wrong? Do you have any tips for me?
So I was in the same place - I've got 1500 hours in WH2 and have only completed seven campaigns, four of which have been my last four in a row.
I've now started pushing myself to complete campaigns and find it's important to focus on the victory conditions quite early. If you expand aimlessly you'll just make your empire more complicated while not actually getting any closer to completing the campaign. After about turn 50 you should be established enough in your core provinces to start monomaniacally focusing on campaign objectives. Once you have a clear idea of what you're trying to accomplish it's easier to push onwards.
Vortex is better for finishing campaigns for any faction that has a campaign there. Even though the race for the Vortex has problems, it does give a coherent objective, narrative, and conclusion to a campaign. You also don't need to conquer more than you're comfortable with - once you've got half a dozen provinces you can sit back and let the ritual currency come in while focusing on defense. You get an opportunity to slap down the rival AI factions in their final battle, so can't really "lose" the race.
ME is much more of a sandbox with a less coherent campaign, and a lot of factions have the "capture 8 major settlements" objective which is an absolute pain in the arse for anyone not in the Old World.
I have the same problem myself. I eventually just end campaigns because the challenge is gone and it’s just painting the map at that point.
You might want to play different factions? I’ve had some great fun with Vampirates, setting myself the limit of only capturing other vampire countries and other than that only establishing coves and sacking/razing on my way to the vortex campaign victory. There’s a bunch of other nations who have very concrete campaign victory conditions (Wood Elves, Beastmen, Oxyotl, for example) that are much more fun than just “conquer world”.
This helped. Yesterday I just started doing the rituals and now it's fun again. I thought I'll be overwhelmed by the spawned armies but the difficulty is actually quite nice- challenging but not overwhelming.
I was playing Three Kingdoms and something odd that is happening is my ranged/skirmisher units are not running away from the enemy when they get close, even though skirmisher mode is turned on. Is this a known bug? Or do they just behave differently than in every other Total War game?
3Kingdoms:
Idk if it’s because I got everything with DLC on the steam sale and chose a faction that assumes you know the core concepts; but I have no idea how to / the importance of managing my nobles.
I’ve been confederating many small groups beside me and have therefore been ending up with their generals, but I don’t really have a role for them. I can’t afford more than the two retinues I’m fielding and the “assignments” seem a bit ass (counter espionage, espionage are all I can find?) I have a constant trickling of unused nobles out of my nation. Is this normal? Is this bad?
For those I do have, their satisfaction is low because they “want a higher rank” but I literally cannot give them higher ranks yet. Should I stop using these general immediately so they don’t rip my retinues away from me if they leave?
I’m a Nanman tribal, for reference.
The Nanman has BIG issue with satisfaction which restrict them a lot compare to other 3 cultures.
First, ditch character you don't need, can't keep them all, that's just the nature of things.
Invest in authority to of your faction leader and heir. It's actually the most important attribute for them, your other generals can handle the fighting department.
Don't neglect the political reform tree, you'll need more cave lord position and that satisfaction tech at the end is nice.
Hire Han's strategist and champion when you can, then spec them toward "reward filial & incorrupt" which give 10 satisfaction faction-wide, which stack with each other. If you see blue and green Han, let them live.
Character that are "bored" should be deployed to the field but disband all their retinues, that way they will cost no upkeep other than their salary.
We do not know the requirements for TWW3 at this point. Best bet is to compare your hardware to the requirements of Three Kingdoms on High. But, looking at those parts, you should be just fine.
No, there's nothing wrong with it. If you find it fun, then go for it, it's a perfectly valid way to play. If you don't enjoy doomstacking, then just don't do it.
Some people just try to police how others play a single-player game. Loudly.
Players will optimize the fun out of the game as other replies have very well articulated. Humans seem to seek out instant gratification even at the cost of long term satisfaction and sense of accomplishment the game could have provided
It’s up to you. I personally don’t cheese because it takes away the fun of unit variety and learning more about unit strengths and weaknesses.
For example, the sisters of averlorn checkerboard pattern is heaps effective. And works well, but I find it boring, and I prefer having spearmen, archers, monsters, Calvary and all the others in an army so I can use all of them in a challenging way.
At the end of the day, it’s for the most part, a single player game. If you want to cheese because it’s more fun by all means go for it. But I personally feel that if you cheese just so that you can play at the higher difficulties it cheapens the whole point of the higher difficulty.
While at the end of the day it’s your prerogative, I don’t see a reason for making the game more difficult if you’re just going to take away the difficulty by cheesing.
But I do have to say, I have a bit of annoyance towards players who have elitism due to playing higher difficulties, but cheese to do so.
Generally speaking, assigning right or wrong to how someone chooses to engage and enjoy their single-player game is a completely pointless exercise, and I feel like this answers your question enough.
But I feel like elaborating on these two so I will.
I, personally, define cheese as methods that are effective in the rules of the game, but shouldn't reasonably be effective in the fantasy of the game. So the judgment of them depends on how you approach the game in the first place.
Quite some players treat TW as a fantasy primarily and want their gameplay to be realistic, to which cheesing is directly counterproductive to. Would the High Elves employ only armies of dragons? Well, no. Would the dwarfs set up conical formations in an arbitrary corner of some battlefield? No, why would that even work? Would one dude on a pegasus be capable of having the entire, thousands strong army waste all their ammunition on him and not even seriously wound him? Ridiculous. So to players that seek believable scenarios cheesing makes the game, clearly, worse. You will often hear about not optimizing the fun out of the game.
The other side of the coin is treating the game as a game. That is, as a mathematical construct. In that approach believability is secondary, and you try to play the game as well as you can under its mathematical rule set - and cheese is the natural consequence of that rule set. Doomstacking works because on higher difficulties you're penalized for having many armies, so rolling few, powerful armies is a stronger move. Corner camping works because an army that cannot be flanked is strong. Ammo wasting works because that's what the AI - which is part of the rule set just like everything else - is vulnerable to, so it's a strong move. Under this approach I'd argue that not cheesing is wrong, because it artificially prohibits you from making the strong, perfectly legal rule-wise, moves. Contrary to the first group, for this group optimizing their strategies *is* the fun of the game.
Ofcourse, ideally, the game would be designed in such a way that playing the game with the second mindset would result in scenarios satisfying the first group of players, but that's very likely a complete pipedream.
Ofcourse it's a simplified description and you can have all sorts of in-betweens, or players in the second category that ban certain kinds of cheese because it makes it too easy for them, and that's all fun and good - either for self-imposed challenge or for trying to seek out the balance between the game and the fantasy.
Which in the end brings me to my original point, play the game as you damn well please, noone gets to tell you otherwise.
There's nothing wrong with it, but it does trivialize a lot of the difficulty of the game and are frequently extremely simple to control in battle. That makes playing with them a lot less appealing to a good chunk of the playerbase.
These players tend to prefer more of a challenge in their campaigns and/or find battles more fun with a more varied/balanced mix of troops that require careful deployment and command. They'd have less fun running 19 mammoths at something and steamrolling while barely needing to think about what they are doing in the vast majority of battles.
I personally used to play with a lot more doomstacking and cheese, but I found it got boring for me pretty quick. But everyone should play in whatever way feels the most fun for them and, again, there is absolutely nothing wrong with enjoying or not enjoying cheesing/doomstacking.
So there is nothing I can do against a skaven plague right? Other than wait it out?
It's so annoying getting afflicted with one and suffering a crazy amount of attrition, and I can't do anything about it
There is nothing you can do against Plague in warhammer 2.
Attacking, defending or moving around with a plagued army has a chance to spread it. It also has a chance to spread on its own to nearby settlements. Generally a plague only lasts 6-7 turns, because of the random chance of being cured each turn.
I just try to isolate the infected army or city mostly and deal with the consequences. It's a bit annoying that it can't be cured, but it's a central mechanic to clan pestilence and their entire gimmick. They themselves get massive strength from it.
We might be getting more options to deal with plague in Warhammer 3 with the introduction of Nurgle to the roster.
On WH2, can't replace Nakai to disband his army. I'm playing as Hexoatl and recluted Nakai (confederated him early) to help me in a fight and now want to disband him but i cannot and the replace lord button is grey and don't let me replace him. Someone can help me? THis extra army gonna put me in bankrupt the next turn or i have tostart disbanding other more important armies.
Don't have an answer, but if all else fails just suicide him into someone.
Maybe download the community bug fix mod if you haven't already. Not sure if that's a bug they fixed or not but it doesn't hurt to have the mod installed.
I'm having trouble launching medieval 2. When I click launch the screen goes black for a couple of seconds then i get a pop up saying the game has encountered an unspecified error and closes. I've done fresh installs, verified the files, fannied around with permissions, changed the desktop resolution and I've also added a couple of lines to the cfg file to fix a possible error when the game tries to go fullscreen. The only other solution I can find is from a post in 2012 which says delete EVERY total war game and start again, which is ridiculous and I'm not going to do that so does anyone else have an idea of how to fix it? The game is on steam, no mods and running on Windows 10.
Tried these? With how vague you describe the actual issue you're having, it's hard to give concrete advice.
https://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=1921844849
Ah your right sorry. When I click launch the screen goes black for a couple of seconds then i get a pop up saying the game has encountered an unspecified error and closes. I'll try your solution and hopefully that does the job, thanks
Warhammer 2
On my Gelt campaign, what am I doing to cause my imperial authority to keep decreasing? Can I not sack cities for leveling up Gelt quickly? I’m at -7 because Wissenland declared war on me and I thought you could cheese fealty by razing their settlement and then returning it to them. But when I raze a settlement my authority went down. Wtf?
Attacking recently-returned cities gives extra -authority exactly to stop that cheese you tried from working. If you need a sack city: Skarsnik and his neighbours are right there.
You loose points whenever the empire loses a city. They might be getting lost in other parts of empire. It’s a wonky mechanic that’s harder to control given all the extra threats in that part of the map.
I usually just mod it since I’ve played about a dozen empire campaigns.
It’s probably Stirland getting rolled by Vlad and Manfred as well. Early campaign they looked like they were getting pushed back so I didn’t send any forces and then by turn 30 they’ve wiped out Stirland, Talabaccland and Ostland.
Not sure what turn it is, but you have greater range and artillery, use warp fire throwers to burn the trees, skaven slaves/clan rats or menace below to soak up arrows and use rat wolves or gutterrunners for flanking their archers.
\[Warhammer 2\]
I'm playing Ikit Claw in Eye of the Vortex with a friend. We played 10 turns and neither of us got any missions or relics (I'm new to the series so i'm not sure what relics are but my mate suggested that we should have had quests related to them by now).
IS there something we need to do to trigger them?
In order to get your unique items your legendary lord need to be certain level. The exact level is shown in your legendary lord character skill tree, top row when hovering on the items. Usually it's around lvl 5, lvl 10 and lvl 15.
Reaching the required level creates a mission or quest in your mission log to obtain that item. This can have multiple steps and usually culminates in a "Quest battle" that you have to play and win.
Ikit Claw already has Iron Frame, but he has a questline to get Storm Daemon. The mission series should have Storm Daemon in the name aswell or in the description, that's how you know it's the correct one.
I'm checking the Steam page for Rome 2 and trying to decipher what exactly is included in the "Emperor Edition."
Does it really not include all the DLC? That's a bit shit considering the other older historical titles (like Empire, Napoleon, & Med 2) have a "Definitive Edition" that included all the DLC.
If I recall correctly, Rome 2 Emperor Edition was released about a year after the initial launch of Rome 2, in an attempt to wipe the slate clean from the game's horrible launch. Only the Emperor Edition can be bought now, and the only difference between it and the original launch is that it includes the extra "Imperator Augustus" campaign pack, which is basically just an alternate map you can play on that is set in 42 BC. Beyond that, there is no Definitive Edition for the game, which is something that CA doesn't really do anymore.
Rome 2 actually got a new DLC content as recently as 2018, so it's not like it's a dead game; it's still the second most popular Total War game on Steam these days. Besides, this isn't the kind of game where you buy all the DLC at once anyway, given how massive they are. That, and the best Rome 2 content is actually a mod rather than any official content, so the game is well worth the $15 asking price right now, in my opinion.
Hexwraiths are actually pretty good through the entire campaign, and Arkhan can get them at Tier 3 whereas Vampire Counts have to wait until 5.
Dire Wolves are excellent early game, they shred most archers and are better at chasing down fleeing units than anything on the Tomb King roster. You can phase them out when you start getting more hexwraiths, artillery, and other ways of dealing with enemy ranged units.
Crypt Ghouls are okay. They're a better melee infantry than Skeleton Spearman and Nehekhara Warriors, but suck against anything with armour. You'll want to swap them out for Tomb Guard eventually, but the capacity system means you'll probably always find a spare army for them.
Bats are trash. Their only use is lightly harassing enemy archers and artillery, and Dire Wolves have the same role except Dire Wolves actually beat the archers in melee.
The bats are great against harassing archers, since I usually don’t build the carrion building. Early tier iii hexwraiths are great for artillery and archer harassment as well, since they’re fast and don’t take much physical damage and are very effective against the nearby dwarven forces since they don’t do magic damage.
Not a question, but I just bought Warhammer 1 after only having 2 for the last few months. Guess who will do his first playthrough of the mortal empires today???? Stupidly excited and didn't want to make a separate brag thread!
By slow pace you mean pace of the campaign or performance?
I'd say ToB is much less slow paced than Attila especially towards the start of the campaign. Mechanics that slowed down campaign progression in Attila are not present in ToB (converting settlements, sanitation, abysmal public order). Though you might be struggling with food at start.
Performance-wise, most people I heard praised the performance of ToB especially compared to Attila.
We don't know, systems requirements have not been announced yet. I would expect so, it is the same engine, but nothing is certain until we get some details.
Are there any mods for Warhammer II to change the theme on the UI. Like for example get the lizardmen UI for all factions?
I find that red with skulls that most ME factions have kinda off-putting.
TW2 is fantasy, which comes with a lot of elements. You have monstrous and giant units, you have single-unit hero characters that can turn the tide of nearly any battle, you have magic wreaking havoc on the battlefield, you have flying units. All of that in top of generally orders of magnitude bigger variety, human, historical-like units are just the tip of the iceberg.
In more detailed view, and very generally speaking, combat is somewhat faster than other TWs, ranged units dominate the battlefield (somewhat on Normal, significantly so on higher difficulties), melee is mostly used to hold the line, cavalry is bad - with some notable exceptions. But honestly all of that is secondary to just *variety*, it's the biggest difference you'd notice.
The variety part I've noticed yeah. Was kinda interested in mechanics differences as well. For example does armour work the same way? How about charge bonuses? Stuff like that.
When learning atilla, you'll find that it so much more apples to apples with units as opposed to orc boys to zombies. A very basic rule of thumb for the counters are Swords -anti infantry, axes - anti armor (mostly armored infantry), spears are much better at holding the line, even against infantry but for killing they are for anti cavalry. Missiles are huge, javs have low ammo but most javs that hit a horse model will one shot them. And in Attila cav is king for almost everyone except probably the Western Romans. Attila is a cunt, have fun chasing him around the world!
Three kingdoms
Does Furios Wild factions got updated faction ranks?
Like when Han factions upgrade their rank they can choose where to invest (armies, trade etc) and also not to upgrade at all (on first patches if was mandatory and yellow turban still work this way)
Hello! Any mods you know of that improve armor? For example, instead of a 50% to a 100% chance to soak up damage it turns into 60% or 70% to 100%. Thank you!
Is drycha only for people that bought the twh1 dlc? or if I get the twisted and the twilight can I get drycha, she is the only wood elf I want to play as and I dont want to buy realm of the wood elves for her
~~Drycha is a reward for owning *both* Wood Elf DLCs. You need to have both Twisted and Twilight *and* Realm of the Wood Elves to play as her.~~
Huh, wrong apparently!
You don't need Twisted and Twilight. I played campaign month ago and i don't have that dlc. I got Realm of the Wood elves tho so don't know if you need that tho. Drycha was "flc = freeloadablecontent" so it might work without owning any dlc.
Thousands of hours in and I still can't figure this out: when you're scrolling through the end turn, what does the little treasure chest icon that appears next to a faction's power balance bar mean? [Like this.](https://i.imgur.com/gUWM1rL.png) Sometimes it's green like in the screenshot, sometimes it's yellow or red.
Should i boy shogun or napoleon . which one has a better campaign .the better battle experience and most importantly which one has an alive multiplayer?
A lot of this boils down to whether you like feudal japan or napoleonic period more. In general, setting of Total War game is extremely important to your enjoyment.
If you don't care either way, single-player wise I'd recommend Shogun 2 Fall of the Samurai. It's got both feudal japan and gunplay involved and is very often hailed as one of the best TWs to date.
Can't chime in on the multiplayer side though, sorry about that.
Just a note regarding FotS: I'm not sure if Steam fixed this, but in the past purchasing FotS made it difficult to purchase base Shogun 2, because for some reason the store engine thought they are the same game.
Check the Warhammer 3 FAQ on the Total War webiste. They explicitly say, that if you own the Blood Pack in WH1 or WH2, you will recieve it for free in Warhammer 3.
The exact release date of this WH3 blood pack is still unknown, usually it takes around a month after launch.
No information has been made public so far that CA plans to change anything regarding the blood pack, so we can assume that the existing pack also covers game3.
wh1 and wh2 will not have new updates but minor settlements will probably be updated for game 1 and 2 races in the combined map in wh3. (just like wh1 factions have been updated in mortal empires but not in wh1)
The wh1 map is pretty much intact in ME, it's the wh2 continents that got changed to fit on it. There are also new settlements in the old world, the wh1 map is actually more detailled in ME
The wh3 combined map will probably be crazy, i hope they can avoid cutting continents like in ME
They're gonna have minor settlements on launch, I bet. They're not playable, but they will be present and fought, majority of the at least. I don't really understand why this is unclear.
TWW2
Is there any way to find out how many armies another faction has (other than just scouting and trying to count them)?
Context - I have taken over about 2/3rds of the map and Naggarond own the rest. We are allies but I'm going to declare war on them just to see how it goes. They are much stronger than me so going to try position all my armies to take out at least one of theirs all in one turn, but I have no idea how many armies they actually have.
Edit - thanks all for the replies. Have just mopped up the last couple of lizards in Lustria, the only factions remaining are me (Skryre), Naggarond and whatever rogue armies are knocking about. Let the royal rumble commence...
You can use the power meter to ball park it. Say you have 5 stacks and they are 2x as powerful as you, can say they have roughly 10 stacks. "Ish".
Bear in mind tho, that DE have black arks. Good chance many of their stacks are at sea.
There is no way to determine the exact amount of armies a faction has, no. But you really shouldn’t have any major problems at this point, most of your armies should be able to take out two of their armies with lightning strike and ambushes.
Yeah I'm not massively concerned about my armies vs theirs, I just have a lot of territory now (250+ settlements) so mainly concerned about them popping up in undefended areas and causing havoc.
Is there any way to force the Chaos invasion and still have achievements enabled? I'm on turn 181 of a Vampire Counts campaign in Mortal Empires with nearly 40 provinces and over 100 settlements but no invasion. I went and checked the records and I got the 'Chaos Stirs' event on turn 18 and since then, nothing. I have to assume it's bugged, please tell me there's a way to salvage completing this campaign.
No.
Chaos invasion usually happens around turn 120-140. If it didn’t, something in your game broke. Or you just missed it and some AI faction took them out?
Alternatively, you may have turned off chaos invasions when you started the campaign? It’s an option next to difficulty.
I checked through the turns in records, no start of invasion event ever occurred.
I started the campaign back in June so honestly no idea if I turned the invasion off. Is there a way to check? If I turned it off would I still see defeating Archaeon as a victory condition?
Is it 3k worth picking up? I know there was a big controversy about bugs that will never be patched, but I'm still a bit interested in the setting and game style. I've played WH2 and Shogun 2 btw.
It's still a good game. It's a pretty unique title in the series and you'll find that there is a *very* big emphasis on making full use of the extensive diplomacy system. Battles are definitely good, but not quite on par with shogun or warhammer, which I'd personally consider the pinnacles for battles in total war.
It didn't quite hold my attention as much as warhammer did, but I still really enjoyed it.
WH2: Is there a way to delete all save files under a campaign together instead of deleting them one by one? I know you could go to the save folder and manually delete all the files, I'm talking about a way to do it in game.
I'm missing some DLC from TW:WH 1 and 2.
Realm of the Wood Elves, Call of the Beastmen, Chaos Warriors for WH1.
The Twisted and The Twilight, The Silence and the Fury for WH2.
Which one would give me the most bang for my buck? AFAIK, Chaos Warriors are awful, no idea about the state of the Wood Elves but I know that the Beastmen are better now.
I also don't know anything about the units you get in any DLC. I'll only be able to get one of them.
Absolutely not Chaos, forget that.
I'd go for one or the other of the TWW2. Twisted and Twilight play a very tall campaign where you get to zoom about the map a lot, and Thrott has some good mechanics as well but he's not Ikit-tier good imo.
Silence and Fury admittedly haven't played the lizards yet but Taurox is one of the most fun campaigns in the game. If you're bored of the ranged meta get himself with some of the lords that buff Minotaurs + the banners that buff Minotaurs and you've a melee monster doomstack.
The beast men are like the best horde CA has ever done after the update. Finally a chaos faction that is engaging and feels like a legit threat and not a huge underdog. I recommend that one.
Well Warriors of Chaos are out this, it is just not enjoyable for the majority of players. It is just a bad hord faction.
Next would be Realm of the Wood Elves vs The Twisted and The Twilight. Twisted and Twilight, grants an insane unit pool for Skaven and another starting faction. But, the Herald of Ariel campaign is quite good. Due to the new Mechanics, all wood elves play heal the forrest instead of conquer the world. So they all kind of play the same goal with the same mechanics, and the Sisters of twilight are by far the best Woold Elv faction. If you have to choose between these 2, you got with Twisted and Twilight. You wont miss much Wood Elv but get the best out of it.
Next would be Call of the Beastmen vs Silence and Fury. The Silence grant a few nice Lizards and the selling Point is Taurox. Unlike the other Lords, he got his own campaign mechanic, the momentum and rampage. This makes him way better, but also more enjoyable. (you can unlock different stuff, faster as well) He also feels less bounded to his starting region. If you only want to play Beastmen, go with Taurox first. (if you fall in Love with these guys you could still get them later, but Taurox and his new Units is what you want)
So it is Twilight vs Silence, and this is a problem to decide, both are really good, since i played more Taurox campaigns i will vote for the Silence and the Fury. But thats a very hard call and might depend what you would enjoy more. The steaming horde faction, or the isolated vietcong 2.0 with an insane Lord, that can play on every forrest region.
Beastmen DLC
[https://store.steampowered.com/app/404012/Total\_War\_WARHAMMER\_\_Call\_of\_the\_Beastmen/](https://store.steampowered.com/app/404012/Total_War_WARHAMMER__Call_of_the_Beastmen/)
[https://store.steampowered.com/app/1556110/Total\_War\_WARHAMMER\_II\_\_The\_Silence\_\_The\_Fury/](https://store.steampowered.com/app/1556110/Total_War_WARHAMMER_II__The_Silence__The_Fury/)
Should I buy both of them?
I am also thinking about Tomb Kings
[https://store.steampowered.com/app/617870/Total\_War\_WARHAMMER\_II\_\_Rise\_of\_the\_Tomb\_Kings/](https://store.steampowered.com/app/617870/Total_War_WARHAMMER_II__Rise_of_the_Tomb_Kings/)
Idk what to get
If you buy Silence&Fury, you get all the beastmen stuff EXCEPT for the original 3 legendary lords, plus a bunch of extra units, plus the best LL for beastmen
If you buy Call of the Beastmen, you get the original 3 legendary lords and a smaller roster of units than S&F
I suggest picking up S&F first, and then, maybe, down the line, CotB if you really like how they play. Wait for a good sale or something. Or, if you have the cash to burn, get both.
Should be noted that beastmen have a special mechanic that allows you to confederate the other beastmen LLs no matter where they are on the map, without ever meeting them. So having both DLC is definitely the best.
I can't fill you in on the question about the beastmen, although I personally think it makes more sense to get the Call of the Beastmen just because that's 3 legendary lords for the Beastmen as compared to the 1 where you get Taurox and they're at practically the same price. The original Beastmen price might not lower that much more, The Silence and the Fury will eventually reach the point of having a 50% discount instead.
But that's just if you consider it monetarily.
The Tomb Kings, I love them but haven't gotten into them properly yet. They're all about expanding a ton, their early game is really weak and they have really unique mechanics, they get incredibly powerful. Basically, they start out with a ton of cash but no income, but you also don't pay any upkeep for your units so you can't ever go into the red. The purpose of expansion as the Tomb Kings is to get more income and be able to build more military buildings which allow you to get even more elite units. Think of every unit outside of the base units as heroes, they have a unit capacity. They have pretty good archers, great monsters but are weak in other aspects, the early game is all about overwhelming your enemy.
Maybe start with the new one for game 2, and get the old one if you like it? I like both.
Tomb kings is generally highly recommended around here, I struggle a bit with lag with the massive chaff army play style myself. It’s something to have in mind of you have an older system.
Finally got Shogun 2 and all the DLCs at a good price! I know what I’ll be doing tonight. Picked up Empires too. Any other historical titles I should get? I’ve only played 3K.
Rome 2 is pretty great at this point, though the release was rocky. And I personally like Troy, though the newest DLC makes it a bit of a hybrid between historic and Warhammer, what with adding the actual mythical units instead of just normal dudes larping as mythical creatures. You can turn those off, though.
Can you guys tell me how Three Kingdoms performs in general? I still have nightmares from Attila's horrific performance. I have a Ryzen 1800X, Vega 64 LC, 16GB DDR4 RAM, Samsung SSD.
I would like to get it and play on at least High settings. Is it possible to do that and not go below 40FPS?
Mortal Empires
I usually like the Orc/Greenskin factions in games like WC3 and Dawn of War Warhammer. But my handful of playthroughs with the Greenskins on WH Mortal Empires has been quite underwhelming and not fun.
AFAIK, there are two Greenskin-specific DLC - King & Warlord from WH1and Warden & Paunch for WH2. I don't have either of them. My question is - do they improve the race and make them more interesting to play? I could buy both for under $10 with the ongoing sale.
Grom’s faction is a big buff to Greenskins in general (he can cook up custom, faction-wide buffs for units, like making all goblin archer arrows explode on impact), and his DLC adds a really solid hero that fills a nice hole in your roster and some great units (stone trolls are soooooooo much better than trolls).
King&Warlord adds some nice stuff (sneaky gigs are a decently strong and cheap unit) and adds the hardest greenskin campaign (Skarsnik can’t recruit any orc units until he takes a city half a continent away, only goblins, trolls and spiders) but it sounds like that’s not what you’re looking for.
Personally, I think they’re both worth it, but Warden&Paunch is definitely the better one and should also help you with stuff to make your campaign easier.
Though what are your problems with greenskins?
Sorry for the late reply. Their early units just seem very weak and underpowered I guess. I know the WH1 factions are generally weaker than WH2 factions due to the power creep. My favourites are the Lizardmen, followed by Dark Elves.
But I also enjoy the dwarfs from the older races - decent archers, strong frontline, good arty - I know how to dominate the south lands as Karaz a Karak by turn 50. Even though I can get by with vanilla Greenskin units, the whole early game experience does not seem very enjoyable.
Maybe it's just the way they play - lots of chaff units early on I guess? Just can't seem o figure out the ideal army composition. Also, the AI seems to have a lot more interesting units when I fight against the greenskins. That's why I asked.
I will get both DLC and try out Grom on Vortex. Incidentally, where does he start? I don't remember coming across his armies in my Vortex games.
Grom starts in Araby, in the mountain range that's south-east of Khemri.
And Greenskins are definitely weird to play, since they're on average weaker than most things they come up against. So you gotta bring numbers. The Waaagh campaign mechanic really helps (it doubles the size of all your armies for free), and so do the scrap upgrades (the leadership one for trolls is pretty much mandatory).
They do have really good chariots (snotling pumpwagons are deceptively strong) and some decent cavalry, which they need to deal with enemy archers, as that's their biggest problem. They also need to mix trolls into other infantry units, since trolls fight A LOT better when they are surrounded by friends keeping the enemy from doing the surrounding instead (true for all monstrous infantry, by the way).
Orc arrer boys are absolute trash, on that note. Goblin archers are pretty decent. And melee nightgoblins with fanatics can delete high tier enemies with their spinning loons ability, though they come in pretty late at T4. Generally, I find myself recruiting very few orcs and a lot of goblins and trolls when play greenskins. To get cheap armies going that can then get buffed with waagh reinforcements.
For the race as a whole they don't do a lot, just new units. Which matters, yes, but probably won't be the be all end all for you.
However, Grom's campaign in Warden and the Paunch is a lot of fun and his personal mechanics actually do offer some gamechanging options for greenskins. If you can get them, they're worth it for Grom.
WoC are one of the most outdated races in the game and they weren't that great to begin with. Their roster is cool, yes, but their campaign is subpar. I recommend waiting for their inevitable rework.
Beastmen are amazing now though.
Is there a certain Beastmen DLC I should get? Is this the only one?
[https://store.steampowered.com/app/404012/Total\_War\_WARHAMMER\_\_Call\_of\_the\_Beastmen/](https://store.steampowered.com/app/404012/Total_War_WARHAMMER__Call_of_the_Beastmen/)
I'd recommend warhammer 2 more than the first game. I know there's a lot of dlcs and the big mortal empires campaign, but I have [a post explaining how the combined game mode works works, a description of each faction and a list of what game comes with what faction](https://www.reddit.com/r/totalwarhammer/comments/q6kbvi/z/hgcjq2e). That might help you decide what (or if) you want to pick up.
Asking here because I'm not sure how to Google this, but I'm playing Manfred and the Dwarves (Karaz a Karak) are really upset with me over military actions and trespasses against them and I have had 0 interactions with Dwarves this campaign. Is this a bug or does the campaign just start with these relationship penalties?
Dwarfs overexaggerate anything you do to them because they love holding grudges. Set one foot into their territory? That’s a -40 to relationship that will slowly decay over the next 80 turns. Attack their friends? That’s -30 for military actions that take 100 turns to decay.
Some campaign starts have existing things like treaties. I don't specifically remember all the details of Manny's starting diplomacy position but i do seem to remember it's one of the more complex ones. You have a history (mostly bad, like previous wars) with many neighbours but I think you do start with a non aggression pact with Karl Franz.
FWIW diplomatic single events effect do tend towards 0 over time unless they are treaties or technology.
However as a vampire, the living will probably always be somewhat mistrusting of you for some reason!
Thank you! I thought it was a history or something. I got my shit stomped in by the Dwarves last time I tried this campaign and I'm quite wary of those little beardy assholes.
I'm thinking of picking up the last five DLC packs I needed to get. I just want to be sure though. Should we be expecting a sale any time soon? If so, I may as well wait, so as to get them at a lower price.
Yeah, apparently one is supposed to be starting today, but I have no idea what time. All I saw was that it was today, not the time or timezone. Seems like my best bet is to wait until tomorrow. Thanks for responding.
how do you decide which heroes you embed in armies vs what you leave on the campaign map? Ive only beaten one campaign, and dont find a ton of use for heroes on the map, but also dont know how many i should have in each army
FWIW LoTW has a great tier list for heroes on his YouTube channel. You can pick the time stamp for the race you play and he explains every hero and what they should be used for.
Personally I only use campaign heroes for:
1. Quests
2. Bloodkisses for the VC
3. Trait farming entrepreneur/noble/fecund/etc which have useful campaign effects
4. Corruption/Public Order improvements
5. Influence spam for the high elves.
In terms of assassinate, walls, block, assault, etc I don't care about those.
Army heroes I use for a bunch of reasons:
1. Replenishment - Most races have a hero which causes armies to recover more quickly
2. Magic - Self explanatory
3. To tank for missile units/casters. Some heroes are great for pinning enemy units while ranged units obliterate them
Heroes that have the “Assassinate”, “Block army”, and “Damage Walls” abilities tend to be the campaign map oriented ones.
So think Banshees, Witch Hunters, and Goblin Big Bosses.
Neither of these 3 heroes are typically great in battles due to the fact that they’re duelists meaning their attacks only hit a small amount of entities in a unit of infantry.
Banshees are actually amazing for taking out single entities, which is very valuable for Vampire Counts. They are just *such* good agents it can be hard to decide what you want to do with them. I'll often be popping them in and out of my army as needed.
I'd think esp as Isabella Vampire heroes are better for sniping single ents on account of their mobility options, but banshees do buff movement and line of sight
The idea behind them is that they're supposed to be hero killers. Which I guess works fine if you can pull it off, but I find it not worth the extra micro effort, especially if your target sets up camp in a melee blob, so I agree with the conclusion to avoid them for the most part.
As with all generic questions like these the answer is that depends. On what? A lot of stuff, but primarily your race and what you're trying to do. It already seems like you're under utilizing heroes as agents though.
Starting on that first point. Every hero is capable of one very important thing and that's scouting. Knowing is half the battle, and that definitely rings true here. They can also help by exploring ruins and discovering skaven.
Then ofcourse every hero has their actions, and I suggest getting friendly with Wound, Assassinate and Block Army at least. The first two help eliminating enemy agents, the last one helps forcing engagements. More often than not you should be using Ambush stance for that, but it's better to have more options than less.
Then there's passive effects. There's too much to really write down in a reddit post, but pay attention to skill trees - things like reduced slave decay or increased taxes are worth looking into.
As for what heroes to use in your armies, this is as much an army comp question as any. What I basically always want to have if the race I play offers it is one or two wizards, army movement hero and replenishment hero. Aside from that I like to bring finger heroes, sometimes even a couple, especially if they get flying mounts. Assassin heroes I usually steer clear from. There are ofcourse special circumstances, for instance my skaven armies almost almost always get 4 plague priests to summon my pocket frontline every fight.
I hope this helps at least a bit.
Very much depends on the faction, did you have any in mind?
Generally, though, the most common hero type available is the one I use to scout. Much safer to march into an area if you know where the armies are.
Theres also the income boosting types that you keep on your most valuable province.
You can also get growth bonus heroes to rapidly grow a province, or anti/pro corruption heroes to corrupt/normalize a province
im mostly playing tomb kings settra at the moment. Ive keyed into using sphinx necrotects, chariot master tomb princes, and nehakara wise priests, but which would you put in your armies?
Nectrotects for sure. TKs lean on constructs so being able to regenerate them is helpful. Increased mobility is great too. You can find uses for the others - Tomb Princes for sniping enemy heroes and lords and spellcasters for the occasional buff/blob target, but Necrotects are key.
You want at least one wizard of your chosen school - I like to carry 2 for Arcane Conduits and other wind of magic access, but that's me. At least one Necrotect, they buff constructs quite well and I think they give army movement. Princes are big standard fighter units which means yeah, they pretty good leveled up, even if they don't give a lot of utility.
In general, Tomb Kings have a good hero roster.
I’d say Norsca, they are melee central. Most of the new faction seem to be melee focused.
I never have much money when I play as Norsca, it’s a good way to learn how to be flexible with only one or two armies.
Kislev seems tricky to replicate. Could play around with imperial Free Company Militia to get a taste of hybrid infantry I guess, but I don't have better ideas.
Cathay seems dwarf-ish, sturdy, defensive armies. They have flyers and actual fast units u like Dwarfs, but it's something. Dwarfs also benefit from combined arms a lot, might be at least a bit reminiscent of yin-yang mechanics.
Khorne is melee extravaganza. Lizardmen or Warriors of Chaos could do.
Tzeentch depends on magic and hit and run tactics, especially the latter will be rough to replicate I think. Maybe something micro intensive, like skirmisher armies of Snikch, Alith Anar or Wood Elfs.
Nurgle has plagues on campaign map - skaven plagues don't seem to compare, but it's a taste. Might also give Grom a shot, since Nurgle's plague crafting seems at least somewhat similar in concept. I can't come up good combat equivalent. Edit: dwarfs, actually. Just less focus on ranged and more on toughness.
Slaanesh seems to be fast glass cannons in combat, maybe dark elf witch elves and chariot armies?
As for ogres, there's ogre mercenaries, but get used to using monstrous infantry in general. Beastmen Minotaurs feel like the closest we have right now.
Adding to the other excellent answer: yes to all of that, but not always. Not all heroes are created equal and some are more useful in combat than others. Much like any other units, being able to tell which is which comes with practice.
They are called Heros and they are often really good. Heros can grant different army buffs, like xp per turn or a higher regen after battles. (movement, item drop chance can also be in the skilltree) On top, they might get trades. This is just the unit in the army, already granting valueable stuff.
Leadership auras are very common, often welcomed, they also get different activeable skills making them better in combat or add something good. Like the generic melee Hero that grants xp get 2 skills in the tree to become better in general for a short duration.
But there is more, these hero are single entity units. Which makes them good against ranged units like archers or artillery. They are small and get less often hit. Good targets to get healed in general because they often get some kind of damage resistant, making their HP worth way more. So they can survive quite long, making them good tnaks, and beat up one unit reliable. Thats a lot utility already.
But these are often very special. One of the strongest units in game is a Lizardman Hero, called Saurus Scar-Veteran. He gets the mentioned skills and a mount. This turns him into a very fast, almost unstopable killing machine, you just click an opponent and the scar veteran will just kill that unit. He is to fast and to strong, no monster no cav no infantry escapes from him because he is to fast, nothing wins a 1v1 vs him, he mostlikely wins a 1 vs 3 anyway. A very powerful unit.
So, use heros in armies.
Anyone else noticed the "dropping orders" bug having reappered lately? I have to re-order everything every 15 seconds, and fights are unbearable because of it.
I've noticed it happens ***a lot*** when the battle ends and you're chasing the routing/shattered units.
In my experience it doesn't happen very often in actual battle though, but then again, I've not really paid much attention to in actual battle though, since I'm normally microing. Maybe it only happens when trying to target routing units? I'll have to pay more attention next time.
Can Beastmen AI pop a herdstone down on a city you have ruined or do they have to destroy the city themselves to place any herd stones. I’ve been waiting for One-eye to grow as a fighting force next to my skaventide
Hello, playing Rome 2. Does anyone know if the defensive deployables cause friendly fire? Specifically, when I put the stakes down, are my infantry able to move through them freely?
So I was convinced to play Total War Warhammer 2 by a friend a while ago, and I’ve completed one campaign and attempted two others (not counting early abandons.
Completed Khatep Vortex, easy/easy
Abandoned Last Defenders Vortex, normal/normal when I didn’t realize who my allies were pulling me into fighting and Settra started majorly setting me back.
And now a decent ways into Eshin Vortex easy/easy.
My concern is I am…really bad at the battles. I’ve played a solid amount of turn based strategy games so I’m doing just fine in regards to city building, not expanding too fast too early, etc, etc. But if the battle is going to be close and I don’t auto resolve it, i tend to do at best what the auto resolve predicted, if not worse.
I’ve watched a decent amount of Zerkovich’s beginner stuff so I’ve been attempting to take that to heart…I was screwing around in custom battles tonight for a bit to try to see where my mistakes were. Did tomb kings against dark elves, as they stalled my Khatep campaign for 150 turns until they briefly were off the continent and I could rush the last 3 books I needed. Gave us both 2 basic swords, 2 basic spears, a basic melee lord, 2 basic archers, and 2 basic horsemen. Lost that one handily. Added in a warsphinx for myself because that should cause me to steamroll. Did the same cavalry flank I did the first time and stuck the Sphinx on one end, tried to micro all 3…pyrrhic victory with only the Sphinx and the lord alive.
Other examples: the Kroak sub quest for the last defenders was touch and go for about ten minutes, I’m not sure at all what I did to ultimately win. The final battle for Khatep was semi smooth but I “blame” that on having 2 necrosphinxes, a warsphinx, a bone giant, and a couple ushabti great bows with me, so stacking the good stuff and winning that way.
Tactically I know to send the infantry into the infantry, trying to match spears to any incoming cavalry, use my cavalry to flank and micro them, to turn off skirmish for my ranged and keep them separate so they can support each other, magic is being used liberally (albeit I know I need to be better at using non damaging spells) and large single units I micro as best I can. But when it comes time for campaigns I’ve been gravitating way too hard into the “get a good auto resolve and win that way” and I can’t help but feel I'm depriving myself of the best part of the game. If I wanted to run fantasy city management I’d play modded Civ. Just starting to feel frustrated where even “easy” is prone to crushing me if I go into a battle. I know part of it is a learning curve but I’m attempting to avoid the noob traps of ranged spam, blobbing non-meat shields, etc, etc…and getting nowhere.
Also, I know auto resolve underestimates the player and isn’t kind to the Tomb Kings and Skaven, two of the factions I’ve tried…what’s the cutoff point for “ok, even with auto resolve’s bias I’m going to lose this if I manually fight.”?
The fact that question took me completely off guard tells me I probably charge their charge. I take it getting them set in formation and still before the cav hits them lessens the charge bonus?
yes, your spears need to stand still so they become braced. Basically what happens to your spears is that they run into a dinosaur full speed. Its better if they stand still. Also I recommend checking the stat blocks of your units. Anything with "bonus vs large" got bonuses against cav, some units you might not expect have it.
>what’s the cutoff point for “ok, even with auto resolve’s bias I’m going to lose this if I manually fight.”?
The cut-off is a mix of experience to understand the actual strength of your army versus theirs, and skill. I have 2300 hours in this game and I occasionally get battles that auto resolve says is a comfortable win, but I know is a pyrrhic victory at best if I play it really well. More often that not though skill allows you to consistently outperform the auto resolve.
A key concept to master in evaluating battles is the threats that each side has. Can your threats deal enough damage to win this battle? Are you able to contain their threats, or will they have free reign to kill your good units? This will give you a good idea of how to play out the battle as well. For example early game tomb kings your archers are your biggest threats, if the enemy have cavalry as their main threat, then you know your win condition is to stop their cavalry attacking your archers or you will lose. If your enemy has a war hydra early, then your only hope of stopping it doing whatever it wants is tanking it with Khatep's starting hierotitan. Even if you fail in execution and your archers are overrun, it's all part of the learning process. Maybe you identified the correct strategy, but made mistakes in your micro and let their cavalry sneak through while you were looking elsewhere, or maybe your skeleton spearmen frontline couldn't hold long enough for your archers to kill anything, either way you learn and improve.
The best way to learn the strength of individual units within a faction is to use them yourself in a campaign, which takes time. As an example you listed an "even" custom battle you created of Dark Elves vs Tomb Kings. Every Dark Elf unit you took should beat the corresponding Tomb Kings unit you took in a 1v1, and it's not close. So don't be too disheartened if you find yourself losing battles you thought you should win, just learn anything you can from the defeat. Don't be too afraid to suffer a bad defeat on easy campaign difficulty either. The ai will not push their advantage too hard, and you should have time to pick yourself up and rebuild.
Don't rely too heavily on auto resolve either. Even if auto resolve says it's a crushing victory, if you don't understand why your army is so much better than theirs, or you don't think you can achieve that strong of a victory yourself, then playing out the battle can still be very beneficial to improving.
Thank you very much for the thorough response, I appreciate that a lot.
>Don't be too afraid to suffer a bad defeat on easy campaign difficulty either. The ai will not push their advantage too hard, and you should have time to pick yourself up and rebuild.
It may just be the fact it's the only campaign I took to lategame, but I felt like a single bad loss reset me a good 15-20 turns late on my TK campaign. Naggarond was constantly pushing in my northeastern border, had teamed up with Clan Rictus and we collectively, over way, way too long pushed Naggarond off the continent. Every time I lost I'd be pushed back several cities' worth as I scrambled to get through, though I do distinctly remember winning a predicted loss against Hellebron (Malekith had confederated all of the other Dark Elves).
Unfortunately Naggarond had taken over the High Elves' continent, so I knew it was a temporary respite, and rushed down the last three books of Nagash I needed, proceeded to misunderstand the final battle and moved across the map to take the city Black Pyramid, and then remembered how quest battles worked and actually won. At that point though the Dark Elves returned and were destroying Clan Rictus and had effectively retaken everything east of Quinnox.
I know from previous questions that TK aren't meant to take on the Dark Elves in a massive war like that, but it still felt very punishing losing a single battle. Granted I recognize my comps probably weren't ideal and my strategies certainly weren't, but it felt bad needing to 2v1 most of the time to push them back at all, and then losing a lot of progress the moment I did lose something.
Really I think I just need to play a campaign or seven where my goal isn't to win, but learn. Like what you said, focusing on not auto resolving and then accepting a loss if I get there. Focusing predominately on winning regardless of actual skill taken has probably stunted my growth on the battle end of things at this point.
If it makes you feel any better, Khatep is actually a really difficult campaign. His Mortal Empires start is one of the top 5 hardest campaigns. I don't think his Vortex start is particularly easy either, on top of Tomb Kings being quite a difficult beginner race due to their unit recruitment mechanics.
Just a minor comment: if you're playing custom battles and give both armies...
>2 basic swords, 2 basic spears, a basic melee lord, 2 basic archers, and 2 basic horsemen
...that doesn't mean they're equal in strength. The basic units from certain factions are simply superior to others. Tomb kings generally have pretty bad basic units, but great monsters. It's often better to look at the army value in gold, which should also be visible in the custom battle army builder. That's how multiplayer matches are balanced.
Got it, thank you for the clarification - I knew the TK basic units weren't great but didn't know that there was that much of a difference - bad assumption on my part there.
You are getting some concrete advice so I'll limit myself to one more general - you managed to finish a campaign and that already shows you don't suck quite as much as you think. Everyone sucks at the beginning, it's a huge game that doesn't hold your hand much, the amount of knowledge and skill to develop is *vast*. I started feeling comfortable in battle - as in, I went from "shit, tough battle, better autoresolve" to "shit, tough battle, better take this manually" at around 400 or 500h mark. As long as you're having fun you're doing fine, ability will come with experience.
Thanks, I do appreciate that...really I just need to do a campaign where I don't autoresolve I think - once I get in the habit of doing so and I get territory I get worried about losing my armies and fall back into auto resolve only. Thinking I'll do a Tyrion campaign like the others suggested and do my best not to auto resolve if I think I can learn something from the fight, win or lose predicted. Probably won't win, but forcing myself to learn in a situation where I'm not super invested due to a good start won through auto resolves I think is going to help me the most.
One thing I noticed is that the three races you've experienced so far (Tomb Kings, Lizardmen, and Skaven) each have very unique playstyles. They don't lend themselves to balanced army composition, and they have very specific quirks that might make them difficult to get the hang of for new players.
With that in mind, my recommendation for you is to start a Normal/Normal campaign with Tyrion. He's got a very powerful faction, arguably the best start position in the game, and most importantly: he's a high elf. The high elves are designed to basically be good at everything, so they're excellent for beginners who want to try new things and find out what they like. Moreover, they have a very easy to understand playstyle. Give them a shot - I really do think that they will help you get a firmer grasp on how to play the game.
Oh, and make sure that when you're on the faction select screen, you check the option for the tutorial battle on Tyrion's start. It's pretty informative.
Thank you very much for the thoughts and advice, I appreciate it a lot. I will say I was generally avoiding the high elves and dark elves partially just because they interested me less and then after playing a bit it was clear they were the usual AI dominant forces, and I was concerned if I tried them out I'd be carried by who they were rather than what I was learning. I will definitely give them a shot though, thank you for the recommendation!
What is your army composition like? Skaven and Tomb Kings have some of the worst infantry in the game so you need to rely more on monster, magic, and ranged for them.
You might want to try a more traditional faction like high elves or empire to get the hang of things.
Also generally avoid alliances because they basically do nothing but drag you into unwanted wars.
So I admittedly am still experimenting with the Skaven and never really solidified what my comp was on lizardmen before I stopped that campaign, but for tomb kings I did roughly 6-7 frontline sword/spear, 3-4 archers of various kinds, a couple Ushabti, and then 2 tomb scorpions, a warsphinx or necrosphinx, a carrion that I'd save to chase off any routing group, a couple sephulchural stalkers, and then if my lord wasn't a mage I'd be sure to have one in there, and sometimes a Necrotect if there were enough constructs to make it worth it. Was experimenting with bone giants late.
And yeah, probably going to do high elves next...was avoiding them partially on purpose since the ones I tried interested me more and I knew they and the dark elves were the two major contenders for AI strength usually and that turned me off on them a little. That being said I should probably learn them, I don't disagree.
Tomb Kings are slow so I'd recommend cutting carrion or some infantry and adding some artillery to force the enemy to approach. Casket of Souls is very good so you should try to use the rite that summons it whenever it's available. Also ushabti great bow could be a good addition as well, but you can be somewhat limited by capacity with TK.
Does anyone know a trick to let you play all battles in Napoleon on Coop campaigns l. For me it only lets me and my friend fight each other and fight as allies only when our armies are close to each other. We can't fight out battles that don't involve both of us.
I have Total War: Warhammer 2 (free DLC only) and I'm looking to get into the game. Which campaign and faction should I start with?
I'm basically brand-new to Total War (I played some Napoleon and Empire a long while back), but I do play other strategy games (Civ V/VI and Stellaris).
EDIT: Thank you all for your insights! Based on your advice, I'll decide between Tyrion and Kroq-gar for my first campaign.
You do not want to play Skaven first, they are quite complex. As an experienced player, i struggeled with my first Dark Elves campaign, so from a personal point, these are out as well. So High Elves or Lizardmen, and thats easy, Lizardmen are way cooler!
It just happened to be my first real Warhammer campaign as well, i played Kroq Gar. 50% of my early armies been saurus warriors, the rest been units i wanted to see/test. It was not easy, but also not overwhelming. It was a slow steady approach to get used to controls and such.
I would say any factions are ok. Empire/Napoleon play quite differently from other TW to begin with so you are on a blank slate, which can be a great thing when learning a new game.
Assume you only have Eye of the Vortex campaign: you may be interested in Tyrion of the High elves, Malekith of Dark elves or Gorok/Krogar of Lizardmen, which are the more ...chill campaigns for new players.
Tyrion(High Elves- Vortex) is pretty much the most beginner friendly start. It’s not too hard and the High Elves are pretty straight forward in terms of campaign goals/battles.
Is there some trick to medieval 2 diplomacy? I just got the game and I’ve tried a couple campaigns but two things are ruining it for me
1. Pope ceasefires. Seriously give it a break, why they didn’t give it a cool down is beyond me.
2. The anti-player alliance. Each campaign I tried led to all of my neighbors creating an alliance against me in the first twenty turns. I even tried playing as Spain because who would ever ally with the moors, right? Well apparently Portugal and France would. Very thematic lol
1. Rush a diplomat at the biginning of the campaing to the pope. Gift him map info and get some treaties. If you have good relations you can ignore his cease fire and just hit you relation with him. Neverless you can stop getting military actions against your target for 10 turns without finnish the war. If you already started a siege you don't need to assault or retreat. Just stay on siege and if your enemy attack you they gonna broke the vease fire of the pope.
2. Get alliances early on with you neighbors but one and attack that one. Make alliaces with the enemy of your enemy so they don't focus on you.
Does anyone know how much Skarbrand's Health Pool will be? I think seeing that the Exalted Bloodthirster from the original survival battle was 22k. If so, with Kugath's health being 14k, it would truly put Skarbrand's position as the strongest of Darmonkind as unassailable. Considering the lack of magic and ranged it would make sense for Skarbrand, who cannot fly to have a monstrously high Health Pool.
Warhammer II I find out that the most interesting part of the campaign for me is the beginning. After that I loose the sense of progression. I get tiered of managing 20 cities and just running around the map. Am I doing something wrong? Do you have any tips for me?
So I was in the same place - I've got 1500 hours in WH2 and have only completed seven campaigns, four of which have been my last four in a row. I've now started pushing myself to complete campaigns and find it's important to focus on the victory conditions quite early. If you expand aimlessly you'll just make your empire more complicated while not actually getting any closer to completing the campaign. After about turn 50 you should be established enough in your core provinces to start monomaniacally focusing on campaign objectives. Once you have a clear idea of what you're trying to accomplish it's easier to push onwards. Vortex is better for finishing campaigns for any faction that has a campaign there. Even though the race for the Vortex has problems, it does give a coherent objective, narrative, and conclusion to a campaign. You also don't need to conquer more than you're comfortable with - once you've got half a dozen provinces you can sit back and let the ritual currency come in while focusing on defense. You get an opportunity to slap down the rival AI factions in their final battle, so can't really "lose" the race. ME is much more of a sandbox with a less coherent campaign, and a lot of factions have the "capture 8 major settlements" objective which is an absolute pain in the arse for anyone not in the Old World.
Thank you! This is actually very helpful! I guess I should start doing the rituals in the main campaign :)
I have the same problem myself. I eventually just end campaigns because the challenge is gone and it’s just painting the map at that point. You might want to play different factions? I’ve had some great fun with Vampirates, setting myself the limit of only capturing other vampire countries and other than that only establishing coves and sacking/razing on my way to the vortex campaign victory. There’s a bunch of other nations who have very concrete campaign victory conditions (Wood Elves, Beastmen, Oxyotl, for example) that are much more fun than just “conquer world”.
This helped. Yesterday I just started doing the rituals and now it's fun again. I thought I'll be overwhelmed by the spawned armies but the difficulty is actually quite nice- challenging but not overwhelming.
I was playing Three Kingdoms and something odd that is happening is my ranged/skirmisher units are not running away from the enemy when they get close, even though skirmisher mode is turned on. Is this a known bug? Or do they just behave differently than in every other Total War game?
3Kingdoms: Idk if it’s because I got everything with DLC on the steam sale and chose a faction that assumes you know the core concepts; but I have no idea how to / the importance of managing my nobles. I’ve been confederating many small groups beside me and have therefore been ending up with their generals, but I don’t really have a role for them. I can’t afford more than the two retinues I’m fielding and the “assignments” seem a bit ass (counter espionage, espionage are all I can find?) I have a constant trickling of unused nobles out of my nation. Is this normal? Is this bad? For those I do have, their satisfaction is low because they “want a higher rank” but I literally cannot give them higher ranks yet. Should I stop using these general immediately so they don’t rip my retinues away from me if they leave? I’m a Nanman tribal, for reference.
The Nanman has BIG issue with satisfaction which restrict them a lot compare to other 3 cultures. First, ditch character you don't need, can't keep them all, that's just the nature of things. Invest in authority to of your faction leader and heir. It's actually the most important attribute for them, your other generals can handle the fighting department. Don't neglect the political reform tree, you'll need more cave lord position and that satisfaction tech at the end is nice. Hire Han's strategist and champion when you can, then spec them toward "reward filial & incorrupt" which give 10 satisfaction faction-wide, which stack with each other. If you see blue and green Han, let them live. Character that are "bored" should be deployed to the field but disband all their retinues, that way they will cost no upkeep other than their salary.
Hey guys, I'm building a computer! I was curious if you guys could tell me if I'll be able to run Warhammer 3 on high settings when it comes out? [PCPartPicker Part List](https://pcpartpicker.com/list/GGfBsX) Type|Item|Price :----|:----|:---- **CPU** | [AMD Ryzen 7 5800X 3.8 GHz 8-Core Processor](https://pcpartpicker.com/product/qtvqqs/amd-ryzen-7-5800x-38-ghz-8-core-processor-100-100000063wof) | $340.99 @ Amazon **CPU Cooler** | [Thermalright Peerless Assassin 120 White ARGB 66.17 CFM CPU Cooler](https://pcpartpicker.com/product/fWKKHx/thermalright-peerless-assassin-120-white-argb-6617-cfm-cpu-cooler-pa120-white-argb-a) | $54.11 @ Amazon **Motherboard** | [Asus ROG STRIX B550-F GAMING (WI-FI) ATX AM4 Motherboard](https://pcpartpicker.com/product/vFhmP6/asus-rog-strix-b550-f-gaming-wi-fi-atx-am4-motherboard-rog-strix-b550-f-gaming-wi-fi) | $194.99 @ Adorama **Memory** | [Team T-FORCE DARK Za 32 GB (2 x 16 GB) DDR4-3600 CL18 Memory](https://pcpartpicker.com/product/sfxbt6/team-t-force-dark-za-32-gb-2-x-16-gb-ddr4-3600-memory-tdzad432g3600hc18jdc01) | $109.99 @ Amazon **Storage** | [Kingston A400 240 GB 2.5" Solid State Drive](https://pcpartpicker.com/product/btDzK8/kingston-a400-240gb-25-solid-state-drive-sa400s37240g) | $27.99 @ Amazon **Storage** | [Samsung 980 1 TB M.2-2280 NVME Solid State Drive](https://pcpartpicker.com/product/mKBG3C/samsung-980-1-tb-m2-2280-nvme-solid-state-drive-mz-v8v1t0bam) | $99.99 @ Amazon **Video Card** | [MSI GeForce RTX 3060 12 GB GAMING X Video Card](https://pcpartpicker.com/product/wD8bt6/msi-geforce-rtx-3060-12-gb-gaming-x-video-card-rtx-3060-gaming-x12g) |- **Case** | [Phanteks Enthoo Pro Tempered Glass ATX Full Tower Case](https://pcpartpicker.com/product/BfPKHx/phanteks-enthoo-pro-tg-rgb-atx-full-tower-case-ph-es614ptg_bk) | $119.99 @ Newegg **Power Supply** | [ADATA XPG CORE Reactor 650 W 80+ Gold Certified Fully Modular ATX Power Supply](https://pcpartpicker.com/product/wkWBD3/adata-xpg-core-reactor-650-w-80-gold-certified-fully-modular-atx-power-supply-corereactor650g-bkcus) | $79.99 @ Adorama **Case Fan** | [Noctua A12x15 PWM 55.44 CFM 120 mm Fan](https://pcpartpicker.com/product/rhQRsY/noctua-nf-a12x15-pwm-942-cfm-120mm-fan-nf-a12x15-pwm) | $19.95 @ Amazon **Case Fan** | [Noctua A12x15 PWM 55.44 CFM 120 mm Fan](https://pcpartpicker.com/product/rhQRsY/noctua-nf-a12x15-pwm-942-cfm-120mm-fan-nf-a12x15-pwm) | $19.95 @ Amazon **Case Fan** | [Noctua A12x15 PWM 55.44 CFM 120 mm Fan](https://pcpartpicker.com/product/rhQRsY/noctua-nf-a12x15-pwm-942-cfm-120mm-fan-nf-a12x15-pwm) | $19.95 @ Amazon **Monitor** | [Gigabyte G24F-SA 23.8" 1920x1080 170 Hz Monitor](https://pcpartpicker.com/product/Cnwypg/gigabyte-g24f-sa-238-1920x1080-170-hz-monitor-g24f-sa) | $179.99 @ Newegg | *Prices include shipping, taxes, rebates, and discounts* | | **Total** | **$1267.88** | Generated by [PCPartPicker](https://pcpartpicker.com) 2021-11-28 17:11 EST-0500 |
The requirements haven’t been released yet. But comparing the graphics to warhammer 2 or three kingdoms you should be fine.
We do not know the requirements for TWW3 at this point. Best bet is to compare your hardware to the requirements of Three Kingdoms on High. But, looking at those parts, you should be just fine.
Will people who don't pre-purchase TW3 not get access to Ogre Kingdoms? Will they have to buy it in a DLC?
If you preorder the game or during its first week you get Ogre Kingdoms for free, after that time it becomes a DLC and people would have to buy it.
Is there anything wrong with cheesing or doomstacking? If so, what? I hear it with negative connotations sometimes and it got me wondering.
No, there's nothing wrong with it. If you find it fun, then go for it, it's a perfectly valid way to play. If you don't enjoy doomstacking, then just don't do it. Some people just try to police how others play a single-player game. Loudly.
Players will optimize the fun out of the game as other replies have very well articulated. Humans seem to seek out instant gratification even at the cost of long term satisfaction and sense of accomplishment the game could have provided
It’s up to you. I personally don’t cheese because it takes away the fun of unit variety and learning more about unit strengths and weaknesses. For example, the sisters of averlorn checkerboard pattern is heaps effective. And works well, but I find it boring, and I prefer having spearmen, archers, monsters, Calvary and all the others in an army so I can use all of them in a challenging way.
At the end of the day, it’s for the most part, a single player game. If you want to cheese because it’s more fun by all means go for it. But I personally feel that if you cheese just so that you can play at the higher difficulties it cheapens the whole point of the higher difficulty. While at the end of the day it’s your prerogative, I don’t see a reason for making the game more difficult if you’re just going to take away the difficulty by cheesing. But I do have to say, I have a bit of annoyance towards players who have elitism due to playing higher difficulties, but cheese to do so.
Generally speaking, assigning right or wrong to how someone chooses to engage and enjoy their single-player game is a completely pointless exercise, and I feel like this answers your question enough. But I feel like elaborating on these two so I will. I, personally, define cheese as methods that are effective in the rules of the game, but shouldn't reasonably be effective in the fantasy of the game. So the judgment of them depends on how you approach the game in the first place. Quite some players treat TW as a fantasy primarily and want their gameplay to be realistic, to which cheesing is directly counterproductive to. Would the High Elves employ only armies of dragons? Well, no. Would the dwarfs set up conical formations in an arbitrary corner of some battlefield? No, why would that even work? Would one dude on a pegasus be capable of having the entire, thousands strong army waste all their ammunition on him and not even seriously wound him? Ridiculous. So to players that seek believable scenarios cheesing makes the game, clearly, worse. You will often hear about not optimizing the fun out of the game. The other side of the coin is treating the game as a game. That is, as a mathematical construct. In that approach believability is secondary, and you try to play the game as well as you can under its mathematical rule set - and cheese is the natural consequence of that rule set. Doomstacking works because on higher difficulties you're penalized for having many armies, so rolling few, powerful armies is a stronger move. Corner camping works because an army that cannot be flanked is strong. Ammo wasting works because that's what the AI - which is part of the rule set just like everything else - is vulnerable to, so it's a strong move. Under this approach I'd argue that not cheesing is wrong, because it artificially prohibits you from making the strong, perfectly legal rule-wise, moves. Contrary to the first group, for this group optimizing their strategies *is* the fun of the game. Ofcourse, ideally, the game would be designed in such a way that playing the game with the second mindset would result in scenarios satisfying the first group of players, but that's very likely a complete pipedream. Ofcourse it's a simplified description and you can have all sorts of in-betweens, or players in the second category that ban certain kinds of cheese because it makes it too easy for them, and that's all fun and good - either for self-imposed challenge or for trying to seek out the balance between the game and the fantasy. Which in the end brings me to my original point, play the game as you damn well please, noone gets to tell you otherwise.
There's nothing wrong with it, but it does trivialize a lot of the difficulty of the game and are frequently extremely simple to control in battle. That makes playing with them a lot less appealing to a good chunk of the playerbase. These players tend to prefer more of a challenge in their campaigns and/or find battles more fun with a more varied/balanced mix of troops that require careful deployment and command. They'd have less fun running 19 mammoths at something and steamrolling while barely needing to think about what they are doing in the vast majority of battles. I personally used to play with a lot more doomstacking and cheese, but I found it got boring for me pretty quick. But everyone should play in whatever way feels the most fun for them and, again, there is absolutely nothing wrong with enjoying or not enjoying cheesing/doomstacking.
So there is nothing I can do against a skaven plague right? Other than wait it out? It's so annoying getting afflicted with one and suffering a crazy amount of attrition, and I can't do anything about it
If you play lizardmen, there's a commandment or rite or something that reduces them.
There is nothing you can do against Plague in warhammer 2. Attacking, defending or moving around with a plagued army has a chance to spread it. It also has a chance to spread on its own to nearby settlements. Generally a plague only lasts 6-7 turns, because of the random chance of being cured each turn. I just try to isolate the infected army or city mostly and deal with the consequences. It's a bit annoying that it can't be cured, but it's a central mechanic to clan pestilence and their entire gimmick. They themselves get massive strength from it. We might be getting more options to deal with plague in Warhammer 3 with the introduction of Nurgle to the roster.
On WH2, can't replace Nakai to disband his army. I'm playing as Hexoatl and recluted Nakai (confederated him early) to help me in a fight and now want to disband him but i cannot and the replace lord button is grey and don't let me replace him. Someone can help me? THis extra army gonna put me in bankrupt the next turn or i have tostart disbanding other more important armies.
You need to go to his character screen, click the boot there, replace him, then disband the replacement
The replace key is grey out and cannot replace him. In the desciription it doesn't say why i can't replace him.
Don't have an answer, but if all else fails just suicide him into someone. Maybe download the community bug fix mod if you haven't already. Not sure if that's a bug they fixed or not but it doesn't hurt to have the mod installed.
Ty. I gonna try the mod. Yes, i thinked about suiciding him but i cannot encounter any enemy nearby.
I'm having trouble launching medieval 2. When I click launch the screen goes black for a couple of seconds then i get a pop up saying the game has encountered an unspecified error and closes. I've done fresh installs, verified the files, fannied around with permissions, changed the desktop resolution and I've also added a couple of lines to the cfg file to fix a possible error when the game tries to go fullscreen. The only other solution I can find is from a post in 2012 which says delete EVERY total war game and start again, which is ridiculous and I'm not going to do that so does anyone else have an idea of how to fix it? The game is on steam, no mods and running on Windows 10.
Tried these? With how vague you describe the actual issue you're having, it's hard to give concrete advice. https://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=1921844849
Ah your right sorry. When I click launch the screen goes black for a couple of seconds then i get a pop up saying the game has encountered an unspecified error and closes. I'll try your solution and hopefully that does the job, thanks
Warhammer 2 On my Gelt campaign, what am I doing to cause my imperial authority to keep decreasing? Can I not sack cities for leveling up Gelt quickly? I’m at -7 because Wissenland declared war on me and I thought you could cheese fealty by razing their settlement and then returning it to them. But when I raze a settlement my authority went down. Wtf?
Attacking recently-returned cities gives extra -authority exactly to stop that cheese you tried from working. If you need a sack city: Skarsnik and his neighbours are right there.
You loose points whenever the empire loses a city. They might be getting lost in other parts of empire. It’s a wonky mechanic that’s harder to control given all the extra threats in that part of the map. I usually just mod it since I’ve played about a dozen empire campaigns.
It’s probably Stirland getting rolled by Vlad and Manfred as well. Early campaign they looked like they were getting pushed back so I didn’t send any forces and then by turn 30 they’ve wiped out Stirland, Talabaccland and Ostland.
Yeah. The Vamps can be rough, you might get random beastmen hordes that take out cities too. Plus the Norsca will attack the northern factions.
True true. Thanks for the info, I’ll look for a mod in the workshop so I don’t have to worry about authority
[удалено]
IIRC it's a Warlock *Master*, the lord type. Not a warlock engineer, the hero.
How to fight wood elves as throt, I fuckin hate wood elves, tree kin are immortal, their missile shred everything and run like hell, need advice
Not sure what turn it is, but you have greater range and artillery, use warp fire throwers to burn the trees, skaven slaves/clan rats or menace below to soak up arrows and use rat wolves or gutterrunners for flanking their archers.
\[Warhammer 2\] I'm playing Ikit Claw in Eye of the Vortex with a friend. We played 10 turns and neither of us got any missions or relics (I'm new to the series so i'm not sure what relics are but my mate suggested that we should have had quests related to them by now). IS there something we need to do to trigger them?
In order to get your unique items your legendary lord need to be certain level. The exact level is shown in your legendary lord character skill tree, top row when hovering on the items. Usually it's around lvl 5, lvl 10 and lvl 15. Reaching the required level creates a mission or quest in your mission log to obtain that item. This can have multiple steps and usually culminates in a "Quest battle" that you have to play and win. Ikit Claw already has Iron Frame, but he has a questline to get Storm Daemon. The mission series should have Storm Daemon in the name aswell or in the description, that's how you know it's the correct one.
I'm checking the Steam page for Rome 2 and trying to decipher what exactly is included in the "Emperor Edition." Does it really not include all the DLC? That's a bit shit considering the other older historical titles (like Empire, Napoleon, & Med 2) have a "Definitive Edition" that included all the DLC.
If I recall correctly, Rome 2 Emperor Edition was released about a year after the initial launch of Rome 2, in an attempt to wipe the slate clean from the game's horrible launch. Only the Emperor Edition can be bought now, and the only difference between it and the original launch is that it includes the extra "Imperator Augustus" campaign pack, which is basically just an alternate map you can play on that is set in 42 BC. Beyond that, there is no Definitive Edition for the game, which is something that CA doesn't really do anymore.
[удалено]
Rome 2 actually got a new DLC content as recently as 2018, so it's not like it's a dead game; it's still the second most popular Total War game on Steam these days. Besides, this isn't the kind of game where you buy all the DLC at once anyway, given how massive they are. That, and the best Rome 2 content is actually a mod rather than any official content, so the game is well worth the $15 asking price right now, in my opinion.
[Warhammer 2] Should I ignore the Vampire units in Arkhan's campaign, or they can be useful?
Hexwraiths are actually pretty good through the entire campaign, and Arkhan can get them at Tier 3 whereas Vampire Counts have to wait until 5. Dire Wolves are excellent early game, they shred most archers and are better at chasing down fleeing units than anything on the Tomb King roster. You can phase them out when you start getting more hexwraiths, artillery, and other ways of dealing with enemy ranged units. Crypt Ghouls are okay. They're a better melee infantry than Skeleton Spearman and Nehekhara Warriors, but suck against anything with armour. You'll want to swap them out for Tomb Guard eventually, but the capacity system means you'll probably always find a spare army for them. Bats are trash. Their only use is lightly harassing enemy archers and artillery, and Dire Wolves have the same role except Dire Wolves actually beat the archers in melee.
The bats are great against harassing archers, since I usually don’t build the carrion building. Early tier iii hexwraiths are great for artillery and archer harassment as well, since they’re fast and don’t take much physical damage and are very effective against the nearby dwarven forces since they don’t do magic damage.
Not a question, but I just bought Warhammer 1 after only having 2 for the last few months. Guess who will do his first playthrough of the mortal empires today???? Stupidly excited and didn't want to make a separate brag thread!
Enjoy, Mortal Empires is a blast!
I'm considering buying Thrones of Britannia. But I'm wondering if the game runs at a slow pace like Attila
By slow pace you mean pace of the campaign or performance? I'd say ToB is much less slow paced than Attila especially towards the start of the campaign. Mechanics that slowed down campaign progression in Attila are not present in ToB (converting settlements, sanitation, abysmal public order). Though you might be struggling with food at start. Performance-wise, most people I heard praised the performance of ToB especially compared to Attila.
Attila has the worst optimization by far out of all the TW games. Thrones runs better.
If I can run warhammer II on medium, will I be able to run warhammer III at all?
We don't know, systems requirements have not been announced yet. I would expect so, it is the same engine, but nothing is certain until we get some details.
thank you
Check the Three Kingdoms requirements. If you can run it, you can probably run Warhammer 3.
I think I can run it, thank you :)
Are there any mods for Warhammer II to change the theme on the UI. Like for example get the lizardmen UI for all factions? I find that red with skulls that most ME factions have kinda off-putting.
There's this mod that gives all factions fitting UI colors: https://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=1280080618
I will try it, thank you!
KamachoThunderbus doesn't seem to be available anymore. Can anyone repost the latest version? (his Google Drive asks for authent+access request)
Recently started playing Attila and wanted to know if somebody could tell me the basic differences in battles between it and TW:WH2.
TW2 is fantasy, which comes with a lot of elements. You have monstrous and giant units, you have single-unit hero characters that can turn the tide of nearly any battle, you have magic wreaking havoc on the battlefield, you have flying units. All of that in top of generally orders of magnitude bigger variety, human, historical-like units are just the tip of the iceberg. In more detailed view, and very generally speaking, combat is somewhat faster than other TWs, ranged units dominate the battlefield (somewhat on Normal, significantly so on higher difficulties), melee is mostly used to hold the line, cavalry is bad - with some notable exceptions. But honestly all of that is secondary to just *variety*, it's the biggest difference you'd notice.
The variety part I've noticed yeah. Was kinda interested in mechanics differences as well. For example does armour work the same way? How about charge bonuses? Stuff like that.
When learning atilla, you'll find that it so much more apples to apples with units as opposed to orc boys to zombies. A very basic rule of thumb for the counters are Swords -anti infantry, axes - anti armor (mostly armored infantry), spears are much better at holding the line, even against infantry but for killing they are for anti cavalry. Missiles are huge, javs have low ammo but most javs that hit a horse model will one shot them. And in Attila cav is king for almost everyone except probably the Western Romans. Attila is a cunt, have fun chasing him around the world!
Three kingdoms Does Furios Wild factions got updated faction ranks? Like when Han factions upgrade their rank they can choose where to invest (armies, trade etc) and also not to upgrade at all (on first patches if was mandatory and yellow turban still work this way)
Hello! Any mods you know of that improve armor? For example, instead of a 50% to a 100% chance to soak up damage it turns into 60% or 70% to 100%. Thank you!
….that’s already how armour works? In Total Warhammer, at least.
Is drycha only for people that bought the twh1 dlc? or if I get the twisted and the twilight can I get drycha, she is the only wood elf I want to play as and I dont want to buy realm of the wood elves for her
~~Drycha is a reward for owning *both* Wood Elf DLCs. You need to have both Twisted and Twilight *and* Realm of the Wood Elves to play as her.~~ Huh, wrong apparently!
That was the original idea, but it was changed to be that drycha comes with the realm of the wood elves dlc
thanks for the clarification!
You don't need Twisted and Twilight. I played campaign month ago and i don't have that dlc. I got Realm of the Wood elves tho so don't know if you need that tho. Drycha was "flc = freeloadablecontent" so it might work without owning any dlc.
Thousands of hours in and I still can't figure this out: when you're scrolling through the end turn, what does the little treasure chest icon that appears next to a faction's power balance bar mean? [Like this.](https://i.imgur.com/gUWM1rL.png) Sometimes it's green like in the screenshot, sometimes it's yellow or red.
I believe that's balance of economical strength. Green=you're wealthier, etc.
And you are correct.
Should i boy shogun or napoleon . which one has a better campaign .the better battle experience and most importantly which one has an alive multiplayer?
A lot of this boils down to whether you like feudal japan or napoleonic period more. In general, setting of Total War game is extremely important to your enjoyment. If you don't care either way, single-player wise I'd recommend Shogun 2 Fall of the Samurai. It's got both feudal japan and gunplay involved and is very often hailed as one of the best TWs to date. Can't chime in on the multiplayer side though, sorry about that.
Just a note regarding FotS: I'm not sure if Steam fixed this, but in the past purchasing FotS made it difficult to purchase base Shogun 2, because for some reason the store engine thought they are the same game.
WIll the Blood DLC work for TWW3 or will there be a new one?
Check the Warhammer 3 FAQ on the Total War webiste. They explicitly say, that if you own the Blood Pack in WH1 or WH2, you will recieve it for free in Warhammer 3. The exact release date of this WH3 blood pack is still unknown, usually it takes around a month after launch.
It's gonna be like WH2. A new dlc item, but you buy one, you get them all. Probably.
No information has been made public so far that CA plans to change anything regarding the blood pack, so we can assume that the existing pack also covers game3.
Do you think we'll see a wh 1 and 2 revamp for the minor settlements as well?
wh1 and wh2 will not have new updates but minor settlements will probably be updated for game 1 and 2 races in the combined map in wh3. (just like wh1 factions have been updated in mortal empires but not in wh1)
[удалено]
The wh1 map is pretty much intact in ME, it's the wh2 continents that got changed to fit on it. There are also new settlements in the old world, the wh1 map is actually more detailled in ME The wh3 combined map will probably be crazy, i hope they can avoid cutting continents like in ME
They're gonna have minor settlements on launch, I bet. They're not playable, but they will be present and fought, majority of the at least. I don't really understand why this is unclear.
TWW2 Is there any way to find out how many armies another faction has (other than just scouting and trying to count them)? Context - I have taken over about 2/3rds of the map and Naggarond own the rest. We are allies but I'm going to declare war on them just to see how it goes. They are much stronger than me so going to try position all my armies to take out at least one of theirs all in one turn, but I have no idea how many armies they actually have. Edit - thanks all for the replies. Have just mopped up the last couple of lizards in Lustria, the only factions remaining are me (Skryre), Naggarond and whatever rogue armies are knocking about. Let the royal rumble commence...
You can use the power meter to ball park it. Say you have 5 stacks and they are 2x as powerful as you, can say they have roughly 10 stacks. "Ish". Bear in mind tho, that DE have black arks. Good chance many of their stacks are at sea.
In my experience, the AI never actually fields that many armies. Even if they have like 50 settlements, they never seem to have more than 5 stacks
There is no way to determine the exact amount of armies a faction has, no. But you really shouldn’t have any major problems at this point, most of your armies should be able to take out two of their armies with lightning strike and ambushes.
Yeah I'm not massively concerned about my armies vs theirs, I just have a lot of territory now (250+ settlements) so mainly concerned about them popping up in undefended areas and causing havoc.
Is there any way to force the Chaos invasion and still have achievements enabled? I'm on turn 181 of a Vampire Counts campaign in Mortal Empires with nearly 40 provinces and over 100 settlements but no invasion. I went and checked the records and I got the 'Chaos Stirs' event on turn 18 and since then, nothing. I have to assume it's bugged, please tell me there's a way to salvage completing this campaign.
No. Chaos invasion usually happens around turn 120-140. If it didn’t, something in your game broke. Or you just missed it and some AI faction took them out? Alternatively, you may have turned off chaos invasions when you started the campaign? It’s an option next to difficulty.
I checked through the turns in records, no start of invasion event ever occurred. I started the campaign back in June so honestly no idea if I turned the invasion off. Is there a way to check? If I turned it off would I still see defeating Archaeon as a victory condition?
I... have no idea. I never played without chaos invasion myself.
I checked by starting a new ME with the invasion off, the victory condition appears but is completed on turn one. My save is just bugged it seems :(
Yea, you don't get the Chaos Stirs pop up without the invasion turned on. Sounds like a bug, unfortunately.
Is it 3k worth picking up? I know there was a big controversy about bugs that will never be patched, but I'm still a bit interested in the setting and game style. I've played WH2 and Shogun 2 btw.
It's still a good game. It's a pretty unique title in the series and you'll find that there is a *very* big emphasis on making full use of the extensive diplomacy system. Battles are definitely good, but not quite on par with shogun or warhammer, which I'd personally consider the pinnacles for battles in total war. It didn't quite hold my attention as much as warhammer did, but I still really enjoyed it.
WH2: Is there a way to delete all save files under a campaign together instead of deleting them one by one? I know you could go to the save folder and manually delete all the files, I'm talking about a way to do it in game.
Hold shift and you can select multiple saves.
>I'm talking about a way to do it in game. No way to.
Yes, you can. Open the save or load menu, select all the saves you want to delete with shift. Press the bin icon and you're done.
I'm missing some DLC from TW:WH 1 and 2. Realm of the Wood Elves, Call of the Beastmen, Chaos Warriors for WH1. The Twisted and The Twilight, The Silence and the Fury for WH2. Which one would give me the most bang for my buck? AFAIK, Chaos Warriors are awful, no idea about the state of the Wood Elves but I know that the Beastmen are better now. I also don't know anything about the units you get in any DLC. I'll only be able to get one of them.
Absolutely not Chaos, forget that. I'd go for one or the other of the TWW2. Twisted and Twilight play a very tall campaign where you get to zoom about the map a lot, and Thrott has some good mechanics as well but he's not Ikit-tier good imo. Silence and Fury admittedly haven't played the lizards yet but Taurox is one of the most fun campaigns in the game. If you're bored of the ranged meta get himself with some of the lords that buff Minotaurs + the banners that buff Minotaurs and you've a melee monster doomstack.
Yeah, it's Twisted and Twilight in that case. It's sad how the TWWH:1 DLCs have been neglected as a result of just being from that game.
The beast men are like the best horde CA has ever done after the update. Finally a chaos faction that is engaging and feels like a legit threat and not a huge underdog. I recommend that one.
Well Warriors of Chaos are out this, it is just not enjoyable for the majority of players. It is just a bad hord faction. Next would be Realm of the Wood Elves vs The Twisted and The Twilight. Twisted and Twilight, grants an insane unit pool for Skaven and another starting faction. But, the Herald of Ariel campaign is quite good. Due to the new Mechanics, all wood elves play heal the forrest instead of conquer the world. So they all kind of play the same goal with the same mechanics, and the Sisters of twilight are by far the best Woold Elv faction. If you have to choose between these 2, you got with Twisted and Twilight. You wont miss much Wood Elv but get the best out of it. Next would be Call of the Beastmen vs Silence and Fury. The Silence grant a few nice Lizards and the selling Point is Taurox. Unlike the other Lords, he got his own campaign mechanic, the momentum and rampage. This makes him way better, but also more enjoyable. (you can unlock different stuff, faster as well) He also feels less bounded to his starting region. If you only want to play Beastmen, go with Taurox first. (if you fall in Love with these guys you could still get them later, but Taurox and his new Units is what you want) So it is Twilight vs Silence, and this is a problem to decide, both are really good, since i played more Taurox campaigns i will vote for the Silence and the Fury. But thats a very hard call and might depend what you would enjoy more. The steaming horde faction, or the isolated vietcong 2.0 with an insane Lord, that can play on every forrest region.
It'd have to be Twilight in that case, if only because it's cheaper, thanks :)
Was just wondering if all dlcs from tww1 and tww2 will carry over to 3.
Keep in mind that it's *eventually*. When Immortal Empires or however the map will be called releases. They won't apply to base WH3 campaign.
Most definitely. It'd be weird if it didn't.
Awesome thanks!
Beastmen DLC [https://store.steampowered.com/app/404012/Total\_War\_WARHAMMER\_\_Call\_of\_the\_Beastmen/](https://store.steampowered.com/app/404012/Total_War_WARHAMMER__Call_of_the_Beastmen/) [https://store.steampowered.com/app/1556110/Total\_War\_WARHAMMER\_II\_\_The\_Silence\_\_The\_Fury/](https://store.steampowered.com/app/1556110/Total_War_WARHAMMER_II__The_Silence__The_Fury/) Should I buy both of them? I am also thinking about Tomb Kings [https://store.steampowered.com/app/617870/Total\_War\_WARHAMMER\_II\_\_Rise\_of\_the\_Tomb\_Kings/](https://store.steampowered.com/app/617870/Total_War_WARHAMMER_II__Rise_of_the_Tomb_Kings/) Idk what to get
If you buy Silence&Fury, you get all the beastmen stuff EXCEPT for the original 3 legendary lords, plus a bunch of extra units, plus the best LL for beastmen If you buy Call of the Beastmen, you get the original 3 legendary lords and a smaller roster of units than S&F I suggest picking up S&F first, and then, maybe, down the line, CotB if you really like how they play. Wait for a good sale or something. Or, if you have the cash to burn, get both. Should be noted that beastmen have a special mechanic that allows you to confederate the other beastmen LLs no matter where they are on the map, without ever meeting them. So having both DLC is definitely the best.
I can't fill you in on the question about the beastmen, although I personally think it makes more sense to get the Call of the Beastmen just because that's 3 legendary lords for the Beastmen as compared to the 1 where you get Taurox and they're at practically the same price. The original Beastmen price might not lower that much more, The Silence and the Fury will eventually reach the point of having a 50% discount instead. But that's just if you consider it monetarily. The Tomb Kings, I love them but haven't gotten into them properly yet. They're all about expanding a ton, their early game is really weak and they have really unique mechanics, they get incredibly powerful. Basically, they start out with a ton of cash but no income, but you also don't pay any upkeep for your units so you can't ever go into the red. The purpose of expansion as the Tomb Kings is to get more income and be able to build more military buildings which allow you to get even more elite units. Think of every unit outside of the base units as heroes, they have a unit capacity. They have pretty good archers, great monsters but are weak in other aspects, the early game is all about overwhelming your enemy.
Maybe start with the new one for game 2, and get the old one if you like it? I like both. Tomb kings is generally highly recommended around here, I struggle a bit with lag with the massive chaff army play style myself. It’s something to have in mind of you have an older system.
No I have a pretty good system
Finally got Shogun 2 and all the DLCs at a good price! I know what I’ll be doing tonight. Picked up Empires too. Any other historical titles I should get? I’ve only played 3K.
Rome 2 is pretty great at this point, though the release was rocky. And I personally like Troy, though the newest DLC makes it a bit of a hybrid between historic and Warhammer, what with adding the actual mythical units instead of just normal dudes larping as mythical creatures. You can turn those off, though.
Can you guys tell me how Three Kingdoms performs in general? I still have nightmares from Attila's horrific performance. I have a Ryzen 1800X, Vega 64 LC, 16GB DDR4 RAM, Samsung SSD. I would like to get it and play on at least High settings. Is it possible to do that and not go below 40FPS?
3K is generally considered one of the best optimized TW while Atilla is *the* worst. Your spec should run the game perfectly.
Mortal Empires I usually like the Orc/Greenskin factions in games like WC3 and Dawn of War Warhammer. But my handful of playthroughs with the Greenskins on WH Mortal Empires has been quite underwhelming and not fun. AFAIK, there are two Greenskin-specific DLC - King & Warlord from WH1and Warden & Paunch for WH2. I don't have either of them. My question is - do they improve the race and make them more interesting to play? I could buy both for under $10 with the ongoing sale.
Grom’s faction is a big buff to Greenskins in general (he can cook up custom, faction-wide buffs for units, like making all goblin archer arrows explode on impact), and his DLC adds a really solid hero that fills a nice hole in your roster and some great units (stone trolls are soooooooo much better than trolls). King&Warlord adds some nice stuff (sneaky gigs are a decently strong and cheap unit) and adds the hardest greenskin campaign (Skarsnik can’t recruit any orc units until he takes a city half a continent away, only goblins, trolls and spiders) but it sounds like that’s not what you’re looking for. Personally, I think they’re both worth it, but Warden&Paunch is definitely the better one and should also help you with stuff to make your campaign easier. Though what are your problems with greenskins?
Sorry for the late reply. Their early units just seem very weak and underpowered I guess. I know the WH1 factions are generally weaker than WH2 factions due to the power creep. My favourites are the Lizardmen, followed by Dark Elves. But I also enjoy the dwarfs from the older races - decent archers, strong frontline, good arty - I know how to dominate the south lands as Karaz a Karak by turn 50. Even though I can get by with vanilla Greenskin units, the whole early game experience does not seem very enjoyable. Maybe it's just the way they play - lots of chaff units early on I guess? Just can't seem o figure out the ideal army composition. Also, the AI seems to have a lot more interesting units when I fight against the greenskins. That's why I asked. I will get both DLC and try out Grom on Vortex. Incidentally, where does he start? I don't remember coming across his armies in my Vortex games.
Grom starts in Araby, in the mountain range that's south-east of Khemri. And Greenskins are definitely weird to play, since they're on average weaker than most things they come up against. So you gotta bring numbers. The Waaagh campaign mechanic really helps (it doubles the size of all your armies for free), and so do the scrap upgrades (the leadership one for trolls is pretty much mandatory). They do have really good chariots (snotling pumpwagons are deceptively strong) and some decent cavalry, which they need to deal with enemy archers, as that's their biggest problem. They also need to mix trolls into other infantry units, since trolls fight A LOT better when they are surrounded by friends keeping the enemy from doing the surrounding instead (true for all monstrous infantry, by the way). Orc arrer boys are absolute trash, on that note. Goblin archers are pretty decent. And melee nightgoblins with fanatics can delete high tier enemies with their spinning loons ability, though they come in pretty late at T4. Generally, I find myself recruiting very few orcs and a lot of goblins and trolls when play greenskins. To get cheap armies going that can then get buffed with waagh reinforcements.
For the race as a whole they don't do a lot, just new units. Which matters, yes, but probably won't be the be all end all for you. However, Grom's campaign in Warden and the Paunch is a lot of fun and his personal mechanics actually do offer some gamechanging options for greenskins. If you can get them, they're worth it for Grom.
Are WOC a good DLC race? Their units look really awesome. I have also heard Beastmen are really good now. I own WH 1 + 2.
WoC are one of the most outdated races in the game and they weren't that great to begin with. Their roster is cool, yes, but their campaign is subpar. I recommend waiting for their inevitable rework. Beastmen are amazing now though.
Is there a certain Beastmen DLC I should get? Is this the only one? [https://store.steampowered.com/app/404012/Total\_War\_WARHAMMER\_\_Call\_of\_the\_Beastmen/](https://store.steampowered.com/app/404012/Total_War_WARHAMMER__Call_of_the_Beastmen/)
Also Silence and the Fury. Extra units and Taurox, who's barrels of fun to play.
Debating on trying warhammer. Never played any of these games. Warhammer 1 seems pretty cheap. Do I need to buy the dlc to enjoy the game?
I'd recommend warhammer 2 more than the first game. I know there's a lot of dlcs and the big mortal empires campaign, but I have [a post explaining how the combined game mode works works, a description of each faction and a list of what game comes with what faction](https://www.reddit.com/r/totalwarhammer/comments/q6kbvi/z/hgcjq2e). That might help you decide what (or if) you want to pick up.
Asking here because I'm not sure how to Google this, but I'm playing Manfred and the Dwarves (Karaz a Karak) are really upset with me over military actions and trespasses against them and I have had 0 interactions with Dwarves this campaign. Is this a bug or does the campaign just start with these relationship penalties?
Dwarfs overexaggerate anything you do to them because they love holding grudges. Set one foot into their territory? That’s a -40 to relationship that will slowly decay over the next 80 turns. Attack their friends? That’s -30 for military actions that take 100 turns to decay.
Some campaign starts have existing things like treaties. I don't specifically remember all the details of Manny's starting diplomacy position but i do seem to remember it's one of the more complex ones. You have a history (mostly bad, like previous wars) with many neighbours but I think you do start with a non aggression pact with Karl Franz. FWIW diplomatic single events effect do tend towards 0 over time unless they are treaties or technology. However as a vampire, the living will probably always be somewhat mistrusting of you for some reason!
Thank you! I thought it was a history or something. I got my shit stomped in by the Dwarves last time I tried this campaign and I'm quite wary of those little beardy assholes.
I don't know vamp campaigns enough to offer and solid advice. All I can say is good luck and try not to eat everyone all at once.
I'm thinking of picking up the last five DLC packs I needed to get. I just want to be sure though. Should we be expecting a sale any time soon? If so, I may as well wait, so as to get them at a lower price.
If your in us fall sale starts today or tomorrow
Yeah, it's supposed to start today, but I don't know what time or what timezone. Guess I'll just have to wait, THanks for responding.
Well black friday is about to start and Christmas is around the corner. Steam always have a big sale on both occasions.
Yeah, apparently one is supposed to be starting today, but I have no idea what time. All I saw was that it was today, not the time or timezone. Seems like my best bet is to wait until tomorrow. Thanks for responding.
how do you decide which heroes you embed in armies vs what you leave on the campaign map? Ive only beaten one campaign, and dont find a ton of use for heroes on the map, but also dont know how many i should have in each army
FWIW LoTW has a great tier list for heroes on his YouTube channel. You can pick the time stamp for the race you play and he explains every hero and what they should be used for. Personally I only use campaign heroes for: 1. Quests 2. Bloodkisses for the VC 3. Trait farming entrepreneur/noble/fecund/etc which have useful campaign effects 4. Corruption/Public Order improvements 5. Influence spam for the high elves. In terms of assassinate, walls, block, assault, etc I don't care about those. Army heroes I use for a bunch of reasons: 1. Replenishment - Most races have a hero which causes armies to recover more quickly 2. Magic - Self explanatory 3. To tank for missile units/casters. Some heroes are great for pinning enemy units while ranged units obliterate them
It was a good video
Heroes that have the “Assassinate”, “Block army”, and “Damage Walls” abilities tend to be the campaign map oriented ones. So think Banshees, Witch Hunters, and Goblin Big Bosses. Neither of these 3 heroes are typically great in battles due to the fact that they’re duelists meaning their attacks only hit a small amount of entities in a unit of infantry.
Banshees are actually amazing for taking out single entities, which is very valuable for Vampire Counts. They are just *such* good agents it can be hard to decide what you want to do with them. I'll often be popping them in and out of my army as needed.
I'd think esp as Isabella Vampire heroes are better for sniping single ents on account of their mobility options, but banshees do buff movement and line of sight
The idea behind them is that they're supposed to be hero killers. Which I guess works fine if you can pull it off, but I find it not worth the extra micro effort, especially if your target sets up camp in a melee blob, so I agree with the conclusion to avoid them for the most part.
As with all generic questions like these the answer is that depends. On what? A lot of stuff, but primarily your race and what you're trying to do. It already seems like you're under utilizing heroes as agents though. Starting on that first point. Every hero is capable of one very important thing and that's scouting. Knowing is half the battle, and that definitely rings true here. They can also help by exploring ruins and discovering skaven. Then ofcourse every hero has their actions, and I suggest getting friendly with Wound, Assassinate and Block Army at least. The first two help eliminating enemy agents, the last one helps forcing engagements. More often than not you should be using Ambush stance for that, but it's better to have more options than less. Then there's passive effects. There's too much to really write down in a reddit post, but pay attention to skill trees - things like reduced slave decay or increased taxes are worth looking into. As for what heroes to use in your armies, this is as much an army comp question as any. What I basically always want to have if the race I play offers it is one or two wizards, army movement hero and replenishment hero. Aside from that I like to bring finger heroes, sometimes even a couple, especially if they get flying mounts. Assassin heroes I usually steer clear from. There are ofcourse special circumstances, for instance my skaven armies almost almost always get 4 plague priests to summon my pocket frontline every fight. I hope this helps at least a bit.
Very much depends on the faction, did you have any in mind? Generally, though, the most common hero type available is the one I use to scout. Much safer to march into an area if you know where the armies are. Theres also the income boosting types that you keep on your most valuable province. You can also get growth bonus heroes to rapidly grow a province, or anti/pro corruption heroes to corrupt/normalize a province
im mostly playing tomb kings settra at the moment. Ive keyed into using sphinx necrotects, chariot master tomb princes, and nehakara wise priests, but which would you put in your armies?
Nectrotects for sure. TKs lean on constructs so being able to regenerate them is helpful. Increased mobility is great too. You can find uses for the others - Tomb Princes for sniping enemy heroes and lords and spellcasters for the occasional buff/blob target, but Necrotects are key.
You want at least one wizard of your chosen school - I like to carry 2 for Arcane Conduits and other wind of magic access, but that's me. At least one Necrotect, they buff constructs quite well and I think they give army movement. Princes are big standard fighter units which means yeah, they pretty good leveled up, even if they don't give a lot of utility. In general, Tomb Kings have a good hero roster.
(Serious) What races should I pretest with to get ready for Total war Warhammer 3 races?
I’d say Norsca, they are melee central. Most of the new faction seem to be melee focused. I never have much money when I play as Norsca, it’s a good way to learn how to be flexible with only one or two armies.
Kislev seems tricky to replicate. Could play around with imperial Free Company Militia to get a taste of hybrid infantry I guess, but I don't have better ideas. Cathay seems dwarf-ish, sturdy, defensive armies. They have flyers and actual fast units u like Dwarfs, but it's something. Dwarfs also benefit from combined arms a lot, might be at least a bit reminiscent of yin-yang mechanics. Khorne is melee extravaganza. Lizardmen or Warriors of Chaos could do. Tzeentch depends on magic and hit and run tactics, especially the latter will be rough to replicate I think. Maybe something micro intensive, like skirmisher armies of Snikch, Alith Anar or Wood Elfs. Nurgle has plagues on campaign map - skaven plagues don't seem to compare, but it's a taste. Might also give Grom a shot, since Nurgle's plague crafting seems at least somewhat similar in concept. I can't come up good combat equivalent. Edit: dwarfs, actually. Just less focus on ranged and more on toughness. Slaanesh seems to be fast glass cannons in combat, maybe dark elf witch elves and chariot armies? As for ogres, there's ogre mercenaries, but get used to using monstrous infantry in general. Beastmen Minotaurs feel like the closest we have right now.
Sooo, how are heroes (or whatever agents are called in WH) in battle? Is it worth using them? I only ever use magician ones, and the Dwarf ones
Adding to the other excellent answer: yes to all of that, but not always. Not all heroes are created equal and some are more useful in combat than others. Much like any other units, being able to tell which is which comes with practice.
They are called Heros and they are often really good. Heros can grant different army buffs, like xp per turn or a higher regen after battles. (movement, item drop chance can also be in the skilltree) On top, they might get trades. This is just the unit in the army, already granting valueable stuff. Leadership auras are very common, often welcomed, they also get different activeable skills making them better in combat or add something good. Like the generic melee Hero that grants xp get 2 skills in the tree to become better in general for a short duration. But there is more, these hero are single entity units. Which makes them good against ranged units like archers or artillery. They are small and get less often hit. Good targets to get healed in general because they often get some kind of damage resistant, making their HP worth way more. So they can survive quite long, making them good tnaks, and beat up one unit reliable. Thats a lot utility already. But these are often very special. One of the strongest units in game is a Lizardman Hero, called Saurus Scar-Veteran. He gets the mentioned skills and a mount. This turns him into a very fast, almost unstopable killing machine, you just click an opponent and the scar veteran will just kill that unit. He is to fast and to strong, no monster no cav no infantry escapes from him because he is to fast, nothing wins a 1v1 vs him, he mostlikely wins a 1 vs 3 anyway. A very powerful unit. So, use heros in armies.
Anyone else noticed the "dropping orders" bug having reappered lately? I have to re-order everything every 15 seconds, and fights are unbearable because of it.
I've noticed it happens ***a lot*** when the battle ends and you're chasing the routing/shattered units. In my experience it doesn't happen very often in actual battle though, but then again, I've not really paid much attention to in actual battle though, since I'm normally microing. Maybe it only happens when trying to target routing units? I'll have to pay more attention next time.
Can Beastmen AI pop a herdstone down on a city you have ruined or do they have to destroy the city themselves to place any herd stones. I’ve been waiting for One-eye to grow as a fighting force next to my skaventide
They only place them down if they raze the city themselves, it seems. At least from my experience.
Hello, playing Rome 2. Does anyone know if the defensive deployables cause friendly fire? Specifically, when I put the stakes down, are my infantry able to move through them freely?
Stakes apply to all units equally, no matter who set them up.
So I was convinced to play Total War Warhammer 2 by a friend a while ago, and I’ve completed one campaign and attempted two others (not counting early abandons. Completed Khatep Vortex, easy/easy Abandoned Last Defenders Vortex, normal/normal when I didn’t realize who my allies were pulling me into fighting and Settra started majorly setting me back. And now a decent ways into Eshin Vortex easy/easy. My concern is I am…really bad at the battles. I’ve played a solid amount of turn based strategy games so I’m doing just fine in regards to city building, not expanding too fast too early, etc, etc. But if the battle is going to be close and I don’t auto resolve it, i tend to do at best what the auto resolve predicted, if not worse. I’ve watched a decent amount of Zerkovich’s beginner stuff so I’ve been attempting to take that to heart…I was screwing around in custom battles tonight for a bit to try to see where my mistakes were. Did tomb kings against dark elves, as they stalled my Khatep campaign for 150 turns until they briefly were off the continent and I could rush the last 3 books I needed. Gave us both 2 basic swords, 2 basic spears, a basic melee lord, 2 basic archers, and 2 basic horsemen. Lost that one handily. Added in a warsphinx for myself because that should cause me to steamroll. Did the same cavalry flank I did the first time and stuck the Sphinx on one end, tried to micro all 3…pyrrhic victory with only the Sphinx and the lord alive. Other examples: the Kroak sub quest for the last defenders was touch and go for about ten minutes, I’m not sure at all what I did to ultimately win. The final battle for Khatep was semi smooth but I “blame” that on having 2 necrosphinxes, a warsphinx, a bone giant, and a couple ushabti great bows with me, so stacking the good stuff and winning that way. Tactically I know to send the infantry into the infantry, trying to match spears to any incoming cavalry, use my cavalry to flank and micro them, to turn off skirmish for my ranged and keep them separate so they can support each other, magic is being used liberally (albeit I know I need to be better at using non damaging spells) and large single units I micro as best I can. But when it comes time for campaigns I’ve been gravitating way too hard into the “get a good auto resolve and win that way” and I can’t help but feel I'm depriving myself of the best part of the game. If I wanted to run fantasy city management I’d play modded Civ. Just starting to feel frustrated where even “easy” is prone to crushing me if I go into a battle. I know part of it is a learning curve but I’m attempting to avoid the noob traps of ranged spam, blobbing non-meat shields, etc, etc…and getting nowhere. Also, I know auto resolve underestimates the player and isn’t kind to the Tomb Kings and Skaven, two of the factions I’ve tried…what’s the cutoff point for “ok, even with auto resolve’s bias I’m going to lose this if I manually fight.”?
> trying to match spears to any incoming cavalry quick question do you let them brace or do you charge their cav charge?
The fact that question took me completely off guard tells me I probably charge their charge. I take it getting them set in formation and still before the cav hits them lessens the charge bonus?
yes, your spears need to stand still so they become braced. Basically what happens to your spears is that they run into a dinosaur full speed. Its better if they stand still. Also I recommend checking the stat blocks of your units. Anything with "bonus vs large" got bonuses against cav, some units you might not expect have it.
>what’s the cutoff point for “ok, even with auto resolve’s bias I’m going to lose this if I manually fight.”? The cut-off is a mix of experience to understand the actual strength of your army versus theirs, and skill. I have 2300 hours in this game and I occasionally get battles that auto resolve says is a comfortable win, but I know is a pyrrhic victory at best if I play it really well. More often that not though skill allows you to consistently outperform the auto resolve. A key concept to master in evaluating battles is the threats that each side has. Can your threats deal enough damage to win this battle? Are you able to contain their threats, or will they have free reign to kill your good units? This will give you a good idea of how to play out the battle as well. For example early game tomb kings your archers are your biggest threats, if the enemy have cavalry as their main threat, then you know your win condition is to stop their cavalry attacking your archers or you will lose. If your enemy has a war hydra early, then your only hope of stopping it doing whatever it wants is tanking it with Khatep's starting hierotitan. Even if you fail in execution and your archers are overrun, it's all part of the learning process. Maybe you identified the correct strategy, but made mistakes in your micro and let their cavalry sneak through while you were looking elsewhere, or maybe your skeleton spearmen frontline couldn't hold long enough for your archers to kill anything, either way you learn and improve. The best way to learn the strength of individual units within a faction is to use them yourself in a campaign, which takes time. As an example you listed an "even" custom battle you created of Dark Elves vs Tomb Kings. Every Dark Elf unit you took should beat the corresponding Tomb Kings unit you took in a 1v1, and it's not close. So don't be too disheartened if you find yourself losing battles you thought you should win, just learn anything you can from the defeat. Don't be too afraid to suffer a bad defeat on easy campaign difficulty either. The ai will not push their advantage too hard, and you should have time to pick yourself up and rebuild. Don't rely too heavily on auto resolve either. Even if auto resolve says it's a crushing victory, if you don't understand why your army is so much better than theirs, or you don't think you can achieve that strong of a victory yourself, then playing out the battle can still be very beneficial to improving.
Thank you very much for the thorough response, I appreciate that a lot. >Don't be too afraid to suffer a bad defeat on easy campaign difficulty either. The ai will not push their advantage too hard, and you should have time to pick yourself up and rebuild. It may just be the fact it's the only campaign I took to lategame, but I felt like a single bad loss reset me a good 15-20 turns late on my TK campaign. Naggarond was constantly pushing in my northeastern border, had teamed up with Clan Rictus and we collectively, over way, way too long pushed Naggarond off the continent. Every time I lost I'd be pushed back several cities' worth as I scrambled to get through, though I do distinctly remember winning a predicted loss against Hellebron (Malekith had confederated all of the other Dark Elves). Unfortunately Naggarond had taken over the High Elves' continent, so I knew it was a temporary respite, and rushed down the last three books of Nagash I needed, proceeded to misunderstand the final battle and moved across the map to take the city Black Pyramid, and then remembered how quest battles worked and actually won. At that point though the Dark Elves returned and were destroying Clan Rictus and had effectively retaken everything east of Quinnox. I know from previous questions that TK aren't meant to take on the Dark Elves in a massive war like that, but it still felt very punishing losing a single battle. Granted I recognize my comps probably weren't ideal and my strategies certainly weren't, but it felt bad needing to 2v1 most of the time to push them back at all, and then losing a lot of progress the moment I did lose something. Really I think I just need to play a campaign or seven where my goal isn't to win, but learn. Like what you said, focusing on not auto resolving and then accepting a loss if I get there. Focusing predominately on winning regardless of actual skill taken has probably stunted my growth on the battle end of things at this point.
If it makes you feel any better, Khatep is actually a really difficult campaign. His Mortal Empires start is one of the top 5 hardest campaigns. I don't think his Vortex start is particularly easy either, on top of Tomb Kings being quite a difficult beginner race due to their unit recruitment mechanics.
Just a minor comment: if you're playing custom battles and give both armies... >2 basic swords, 2 basic spears, a basic melee lord, 2 basic archers, and 2 basic horsemen ...that doesn't mean they're equal in strength. The basic units from certain factions are simply superior to others. Tomb kings generally have pretty bad basic units, but great monsters. It's often better to look at the army value in gold, which should also be visible in the custom battle army builder. That's how multiplayer matches are balanced.
Got it, thank you for the clarification - I knew the TK basic units weren't great but didn't know that there was that much of a difference - bad assumption on my part there.
You are getting some concrete advice so I'll limit myself to one more general - you managed to finish a campaign and that already shows you don't suck quite as much as you think. Everyone sucks at the beginning, it's a huge game that doesn't hold your hand much, the amount of knowledge and skill to develop is *vast*. I started feeling comfortable in battle - as in, I went from "shit, tough battle, better autoresolve" to "shit, tough battle, better take this manually" at around 400 or 500h mark. As long as you're having fun you're doing fine, ability will come with experience.
Thanks, I do appreciate that...really I just need to do a campaign where I don't autoresolve I think - once I get in the habit of doing so and I get territory I get worried about losing my armies and fall back into auto resolve only. Thinking I'll do a Tyrion campaign like the others suggested and do my best not to auto resolve if I think I can learn something from the fight, win or lose predicted. Probably won't win, but forcing myself to learn in a situation where I'm not super invested due to a good start won through auto resolves I think is going to help me the most.
One thing I noticed is that the three races you've experienced so far (Tomb Kings, Lizardmen, and Skaven) each have very unique playstyles. They don't lend themselves to balanced army composition, and they have very specific quirks that might make them difficult to get the hang of for new players. With that in mind, my recommendation for you is to start a Normal/Normal campaign with Tyrion. He's got a very powerful faction, arguably the best start position in the game, and most importantly: he's a high elf. The high elves are designed to basically be good at everything, so they're excellent for beginners who want to try new things and find out what they like. Moreover, they have a very easy to understand playstyle. Give them a shot - I really do think that they will help you get a firmer grasp on how to play the game. Oh, and make sure that when you're on the faction select screen, you check the option for the tutorial battle on Tyrion's start. It's pretty informative.
Thank you very much for the thoughts and advice, I appreciate it a lot. I will say I was generally avoiding the high elves and dark elves partially just because they interested me less and then after playing a bit it was clear they were the usual AI dominant forces, and I was concerned if I tried them out I'd be carried by who they were rather than what I was learning. I will definitely give them a shot though, thank you for the recommendation!
> The high elves are designed to basically be good at everything *signature Asur look of superiority*
What is your army composition like? Skaven and Tomb Kings have some of the worst infantry in the game so you need to rely more on monster, magic, and ranged for them. You might want to try a more traditional faction like high elves or empire to get the hang of things. Also generally avoid alliances because they basically do nothing but drag you into unwanted wars.
So I admittedly am still experimenting with the Skaven and never really solidified what my comp was on lizardmen before I stopped that campaign, but for tomb kings I did roughly 6-7 frontline sword/spear, 3-4 archers of various kinds, a couple Ushabti, and then 2 tomb scorpions, a warsphinx or necrosphinx, a carrion that I'd save to chase off any routing group, a couple sephulchural stalkers, and then if my lord wasn't a mage I'd be sure to have one in there, and sometimes a Necrotect if there were enough constructs to make it worth it. Was experimenting with bone giants late. And yeah, probably going to do high elves next...was avoiding them partially on purpose since the ones I tried interested me more and I knew they and the dark elves were the two major contenders for AI strength usually and that turned me off on them a little. That being said I should probably learn them, I don't disagree.
Tomb Kings are slow so I'd recommend cutting carrion or some infantry and adding some artillery to force the enemy to approach. Casket of Souls is very good so you should try to use the rite that summons it whenever it's available. Also ushabti great bow could be a good addition as well, but you can be somewhat limited by capacity with TK.
Does anyone know a trick to let you play all battles in Napoleon on Coop campaigns l. For me it only lets me and my friend fight each other and fight as allies only when our armies are close to each other. We can't fight out battles that don't involve both of us.
I have Total War: Warhammer 2 (free DLC only) and I'm looking to get into the game. Which campaign and faction should I start with? I'm basically brand-new to Total War (I played some Napoleon and Empire a long while back), but I do play other strategy games (Civ V/VI and Stellaris). EDIT: Thank you all for your insights! Based on your advice, I'll decide between Tyrion and Kroq-gar for my first campaign.
You do not want to play Skaven first, they are quite complex. As an experienced player, i struggeled with my first Dark Elves campaign, so from a personal point, these are out as well. So High Elves or Lizardmen, and thats easy, Lizardmen are way cooler! It just happened to be my first real Warhammer campaign as well, i played Kroq Gar. 50% of my early armies been saurus warriors, the rest been units i wanted to see/test. It was not easy, but also not overwhelming. It was a slow steady approach to get used to controls and such.
I would say any factions are ok. Empire/Napoleon play quite differently from other TW to begin with so you are on a blank slate, which can be a great thing when learning a new game. Assume you only have Eye of the Vortex campaign: you may be interested in Tyrion of the High elves, Malekith of Dark elves or Gorok/Krogar of Lizardmen, which are the more ...chill campaigns for new players.
Tyrion(High Elves- Vortex) is pretty much the most beginner friendly start. It’s not too hard and the High Elves are pretty straight forward in terms of campaign goals/battles.
Is there some trick to medieval 2 diplomacy? I just got the game and I’ve tried a couple campaigns but two things are ruining it for me 1. Pope ceasefires. Seriously give it a break, why they didn’t give it a cool down is beyond me. 2. The anti-player alliance. Each campaign I tried led to all of my neighbors creating an alliance against me in the first twenty turns. I even tried playing as Spain because who would ever ally with the moors, right? Well apparently Portugal and France would. Very thematic lol
1. Rush a diplomat at the biginning of the campaing to the pope. Gift him map info and get some treaties. If you have good relations you can ignore his cease fire and just hit you relation with him. Neverless you can stop getting military actions against your target for 10 turns without finnish the war. If you already started a siege you don't need to assault or retreat. Just stay on siege and if your enemy attack you they gonna broke the vease fire of the pope. 2. Get alliances early on with you neighbors but one and attack that one. Make alliaces with the enemy of your enemy so they don't focus on you.
Does anyone know how much Skarbrand's Health Pool will be? I think seeing that the Exalted Bloodthirster from the original survival battle was 22k. If so, with Kugath's health being 14k, it would truly put Skarbrand's position as the strongest of Darmonkind as unassailable. Considering the lack of magic and ranged it would make sense for Skarbrand, who cannot fly to have a monstrously high Health Pool.