Thanks to Italian Spartacus for joining me again for Part 2 of this huge series! You can check out his 40k Lore content here - ruclips.net/p/PLDLBnN-W_m2mkoYEZJKCrZmWM0GtPQWhh Time Stamps are as follows - 0:00 Intro, Overview, and Important Notes 8:25 Using numbers and unit sizes to differentiate factions 12:28 - 21:45 Battle Speed, Maps, Combat Resolution, Urban Warfare, and the Importance of Cover 25:48 - Unit Types 32:00 - Stratagems and how they could translate to Total War 38:36 Siege Warfare 52:46 Void Warfare 56:43 Titans and large Walkers
@@keegobricks9734 CA has already said that they want all factions to have updated mechanics and complete rosters once the trilogy is complete. They're going to keep adding content to Warhammer until there's nothing more to add. It has been one of- if not THE most successful title they have ever released with DLCs selling like butter. It's easy money for them, there is no way they would just cancel development to create a 40K game, which would be an extreme undertaking.
@@charleswinters9567 Right, well like I said I'd rather they make Total war warhammer good, instead of trying to make 40k with all the same problems. The biggest complaint right now is the BORING AF maps.
@@charleswinters9567 No the field maps. Siege maps although sucky at least aren't just an open field. I'm not asking for constant choke points, just a bit of terrain differentiation that makes you maneuver your units differently. And why the hell did they make it so whenever there's a physical object on the map like a rock or a building it has like a 100 meter radius around it so you can't even accidentally have an interesting fight around it?
I seriously hope, if they make a 40k game, that they will consider making an Army Forge tab in the main menu. One where you can view, edit the colors of your factions units. Like with the Skaven mad scientist Lab for custom battles in Warhammer 2. Only for model editing, like basic things in TableTop Simulator, color of the clothes/skin, size of the model individually. Pack File Manager makes a good middle ground for modders in Warhammer 2, but the thing about 40k is the fact that there are potentially infinite worlds with infinite cultures, leading to infinite homebrew factions, which I believe warrants a Dawn of War styled Army Painter. Like for example, I really like Genestealer Cultists, but I have my own entire backstory and models custom made for them. Because I like to play them as Renegade Mutant Pirates that work with Pirate Orkz and Drukari, rather than zealot members of a tyranid mind. I think if they allow for us homebrewers to make fun in their own in-game model design forges, faction painter, whatever you want to call it, the game will truly be catering to the consumer.
They had that kind of platform in Total War: shoun2 with online avatar conquest mode where you can create your own general, design color and banner as well as veteran units. I dont know why dont they include it in Total War: Warhammer though. I think it's a perfect fit since original Warhammer is table top where you can create your every own army.
I agree with the points you make to the naysayers who insist this wouldn’t work because it couldn’t be true to the lore... “oh for 40k to work and do it justice there would have to be a campaign map the size of the entire galaxy with thousands of planets”... which is nonsense lol. Like you were saying every video game adaptation is an approximation of what it is adopting.
Naysayers lack imagination. There's an answer for everything. Ranged and melee are still the basic shit, they've done magic and siege equipment. The only thing that's really different is the added layers of planets, solar systems and the galaxy map and working out new mechanics for space battles. They could rake the easy route there, or make playable space battles the big thing for the second game, where they make them playable instead of auto resolve.
I really like the idea of stratagems, it sounds like they could bring a lot of added specialization to army builds that focus around exploiting the advantage of your stratagems.
I think when CA introduces Ogre Kingdoms; the way those models functions would lay the foundation for Space Marines and other large infantry in 40k. Also; I suspect in 40k it wouldn't be anti-large but anti-armour since there would be different armour catergories for infantry style units incl the larger variants; and actual vehicles like titans.
@@darkomihajlovski3135 (Insanely late reply sorry) but I think they are comparing how they are both very strong, low count units (around 8 to 16 models per unit) unlike most total units which have like 60 to 100 models generally.
Sieges: Make it objective based with each objective being the target of a seperate battle so sieges become multi-battle and their scale can be concentrated into viable battle dimensions so that the game can take it.
Planetary warfare should actually be like 1-5 separate battles and capture points on different maps/missions. So you can conquer 3 and lose 1, say, then you technically control the planet, but you'll have to engage that last point. Until you do it behaves like a rebellion with significant penalties. As long as you control greater than 50% its still your planet. Same thing if there is an enemy fleet in system, it affects trade routes and causes some penalties for planets and assets in system. But, there can be planets that aren't as advanced where you can send in 5 space marines to take the entire planet. So much potential here.
So, I like the second option, being able to recruit a unit and then customize it post recruitment. I think that allows not just the persistence and attachment you mentioned, but also an ability to really make armies that are specialized for scenarios or enemies.
As long as theirs a W30K HH expansion I’ll buy it, awesome video Indy I would love to here more fantasy/science fiction total war game ideas from you and Italian!
I am glad to see you guys working together on these videos, you are doing a great job! The Total War community really seems a lot less toxic than in most other games.
Can't wait for SFO 40k, where space marines become literally unkillable without the assistance of artillery, sprint across the map in 10 seconds and fire as fast as a bolter would allow
I’d love to see them go more accurate to the lore than the tabletop. The tabletop has most armies fielding similar numbers of units, which is stupid from a lore standpoint
The Imperial Guard specifically should have lots of special abilities to reinforce buildings with sandbags, gun emplacements, etc. They should also be able to construct other fortifications virtually anywhere.
so i wanna say how much i would love seeing an actual 40k warhammer, but i don´t hink we will ever see one because of all these concepts and ideas that are just too difficult too combine or include in a total war game. Just my opinion though.
The Warhammer series are the most successful total war games so far. So I'm certain they'll at-least try to do 40k once fantasy is done, I'm just not certain it'll be good.
I think it would be a good expansion for a future engine focused on the first world war. ww1 total war would be a great template for 40k to be based on. I don't think the current Rome 2 engine is good enough honestly. I say ww1 because there you would have to simulate massed infantry and artillery efficiently, and trenches and city fighting.
For the Imperium I believe that units should be split into four groups, Imperial guard, space marines, mechanicus, and sisters of battle. The lord you pick would determine what group you could recruit, you would still be able to get units from the other groups but it wouldn't be as simple. I'm not certain how the Inquisition would work though.
They would all be separate factions like in the tabletop, with their own rosters and mechanics. I dont see CA releasing an "Imperium" race that has 4 full races in it. In terms of Campaign, they would certainly have a ton of diplomatic affinity with each other
The campaign would probably end up working like Empire At War, where you have to establish space dominance first before you invade the planet, it would also provide an interesting alternative to battle fleet Gothic armada
They would not be developing a real-time space ship combat system alongside everything else, that would be too much. Probably just be a separate "boarding" battle or something.
The Mysterious Stranger ehh idk man warhammer has a lot of broadside combat and stuff so I think reworking Napoleon and empires stuff would honestly be fine. It would have to have some mechanics to make it better but it’s good bones
This is old, I know, but two things prevent that: CA no longer does Naval Combat, no even to their new entries have them, very unlikely they'll push for Space Combat for this hypothetical title and Second; Battlefleet Gothic is on, itself, an different license altogether, similar to Man'O War for Fantasy which is one of the reasons why we never got proper naval combat and why we got the whole island thing.
I love that CP idea, it really adds another level to the strategic level of warfare, things you can do on the campaign map that give advantages in the battle map.
I think what they'll probably do as far as siege battles, is that they'll save cityscape maps for that. But they DO need to go big with it. They need to allow for at least semi destructible environments, and landscape. I wanna see weapons create craters that can be used for light cover. I wanna see buildings reduced to rubble which can them be used as cover. I wanna see buildings that can be sunk as a means of destroying enemy units taking cover within them. I think as far as flyers, you're right though. If it can't hover, then maybe it shouldn't be available. At least not as a unit. But what if you could attach flyers to an army and it would give the equivalent of like an artillery strike, except as an air strike. And it'll can just be like a 3 time usage per battle. There's so many things they need to consider and hit the mark with in order for this to work, but I'm hopeful. I honestly wasn't sure if CA had the balls to take on something 40K but I'm glad they're giving it a go.
The unit bloat is actually reduced for Primaris Marines somewhat, since they don’t have traditional tactical marines. Only Hellblasters would have plasma weapons for instance.
About to get my first 40k models, just need to do some preparations first. Tell me boyz what would be a good faction to start with? Plague Marines and Nurgle daemons interest me for sure. Tyranids and Space Marines are close behind.
As far as getting started, usually I'd recommend Space Marines. But then, that'd be hypocritical of me. I'd say that the Death Guard can definitely be a lot of fun so if you want to play them? Go ahead. After that, I'd recommend Salamanders out of the Space Marine Chapters.
As a death guard player is defo recommend them for a beginner, they are great fun to play and because they're so hard to kill they are very forgiving army when it comes to mistakes in battle, also due to them being Astartes very low model count, so less painting and prep before you can start playing. I hope you enjoy the hobby, best of luck on the battlefield! And may Papa Nurgle sustain you
As a death guard player i would defo recommend them for a beginner, they are great fun to play and because they're so hard to kill they are very forgiving army when it comes to mistakes in battle, also due to them being Astartes very low model count, so less painting and prep before you can start playing. I hope you enjoy the hobby, best of luck on the battlefield! And may Papa Nurgle sustain you
I started custodes because I love elite melee armies and my suggestion would be to make sure you get troops first. Dont fall to the allure of elite terminators and stuff if you want to field a good tt army soon
I'm so glad you two are ones who get it. A lot of people cannot wrap their minds around 40K and give such stupid reasons for it "not being possible." People said the exact same shit about Warhammer Fantasy, that it would never work as well, yet here we are soon to be 3 games in! Don't listen to these heretical smallminded naysayers
Nice video. I can't find the exact source, but I remember reading a tweet somewhere from the TW subreddit that CA would be happy to do TW: 40k. Not a confirmation, but we do have a slim chance of seeing CA tackles the 40k universe one day, no matter what form it takes.
I feel like CA has expressed that this is something they'd like to do multiple times. Here's hoping Games Workshop takes the hint, which... maybe they might?
For the transports, maybe CA won't be able to program troops going in and out of the transports. But perhaps transports can be assigned units, and deploy them like a bound summoning spell.
What you were describing italian Spartacus as far as sieges sounds very much like star wars empire at war. Taking some elements from the planet battles in that game might be pretty cool.
IT'S FINALLY HERE!(part 2) BUILD THAT HYPE! LET THEM KNOW WE WANT THIS! If we get enough going, there is no way the greedy corporate overlords over at GW wont try to profit!
Then play DOW 1 or 2 if you want that kind of combat. There hasn’t really been a game with huge total war sized battles. If TW:WH40K is ever started, it’d be amazing and I can’t wait to see if it happens.
Actually your wrong. Total war could EASILY make a warhammer 40k game! Instead of huge units filled with 120 units cut it down to 60 or 80 as max units and make them spread out, also when there close enough to shoot a enemy just make some kneel and shoot and some stand to add a difference, you could easily do 40k. We already have tanks and guns in total war warhammer fantasy
Using a phased planetary campaign system might be an idea. So each planet equals a settlement on the map, divide them between factions that way. Vary terrain depending on each planet’s circumstances and what’s trying to take it.
Think of Tom Clancy end war but on a much larger scale, it had decent urban combat and even open field combat, definitely one of my favourite rts games of the Xbox 360
I think that a good game to look at for the very base of things like map objectives and intractable environmental objects is the 2005 game Imperial Glory. Every map would have sets of objectives to control that would start ticking the clock in your favour that you had to fight for control over. Maps would also have buildings as well as things like fences that units could garrison which would give range and defence bonuses (on top of 360 fire) and the best way to clear them would be to send in a unit in melee. There was also terrain features that would directly impact the battle with hills providing range if on tor and movement speed increases or decreases depending on whether the unit is going up or down, rivers that would slow units walking through but also provided an alternative to running through the killboxes that were bridges. Some terrain was also impassable such as large trenches dug around a fort or tall cliffs.
Welp, here's my 2 cents. First, for campaign, do something like one of my other favorite games: Star Wars Empire at War, which combines both Space and Ground combat. This could be very fun, in which my wildest imaginations include combining the the best strengths of both Battlefleet Gothic: Armada 2 and the Total War formula, to create the ultimate 40k experience. Second, on the topic of campaign, I know its a bit hard to imagine, but let's talk about the subject of settlements/planets for 40k. I envision it as each planet acting as a singular place that your armies can move to, but it containing certain points of interest that need to be conquered in order for the planet to be yours (i.e. a certain military base or supply bunker), in which battles would need to be fought to conquer each "place", and therefore, the planet itself. Anyway, that's about it, and I hope the Emperor smiles on you today, and forever more!
So much potential for an a aaamazing campaign map for a TW game in the 40k setting. Being able to coordinate a campain on a sectorwide level, with the option to control individual battles all the way down on the continent level. Definitely a job for an entirely reworked system though. Looking forward to what you guys have to say about that aspect
I think that for this game to keep these lightning fast battles, there could be an option to have smaller-scale skirmishes. Like instead of agents you could recruit small squads that would roam the map performing actions such as damaging walls, but instead of just being a point and click action, you now fight a small battle (where those heavy urban settings could be used) and if you succeed you damage the walls for a future siege.
I think they would benefit from a map style more akin to Star Wars: Empire at War. That game was the pinnacle of grand strategy before Total War came along.
I hope lore is fallowed more loosely. There are a lot of characters that would make for amazing lords but wouldn't be able to lore wise as they are either dead or lost, specifically the primarchs.
I actually think that maps entirely covered by buildings could be an interesting features, some factions would be more about melee combat and building assaults, while others would be more about singing and destroying structures, while other races would be balanced between the two approaches
I had pretty much zero knowledge of Warhammer fantasy or 40k before Total War dived into the series. I ended up really enjoying the game, and I started to look into the lore a lot and just generally took an interest in Warhammer Fantasy. I haven’t looked much into 40k specifically, but I hope CA is given the chance to see if they can translate 40k into a total war game. It would be drastically different from every other total war, and that would be great alongside a steady stream of historical games keeping the traditional style intact.
Total war Warhammer 40k would be so awesome! I think its easier to do than a total war in the second world war, because in 40k is melee fight important Ideas for unit size per regiment: Imperial guard, ork boyz, tyranids, chaos cultists:150 Tau, necrons, basic infantry of eldar and dark eldar, sororitas: 100 Space marines (enpire and chaos), elite units of eldar, DE, orcs, necrons: 50 Terminators, custodes: 25
Space marine squads with only 5 units would make sense and best balance the game. An elite army with 50 - 100 guys fits the lore and would still be fun to play. Orks tyrannids and guard can provide the hoardes with 100 unit squads. Eldar necrons and tau would be somewhere in the middle. The formations would be a lot looser than the phalanxes of old, though I could still see some races implementing tight and neat formations like the necrons. Massiveness of the campaign map would be a huge (but very welcome undertaking). They could easily start with one portion of the galaxy and gradually spread out with additional DLC’s. And of course the gradual release of additional races in dlc is a marketing master stroke - like how they released the highly interesting more obscure faction of vampire coast, parallels could be drawn to genestealer cult - a race that is essentially a branch of tyranids but with a unique play style and lore
For battle control, look no further than a game called ‘Firefight WW2’ (there’s an app on iTunes and it is based on an old PC game). That game is easily the best ‘non melee focused’ strategy game I have played and it would transfer perfectly as the basis to a WH40K game mechanics
Very good points and in depth, really hope we can see a good WH40K TW game in the future, iam hyped for it. All the points you brough up regarding the sieges etc could be applied to TW WH3 (as a test bed). (going on a tangent here) I mean just imagine an epic siege of Altdorf or Skavenblight being multitiered. Hordes of skaven slaves rushing at the attackers at the bid of their Vermin masters. Having your LL getting wounded / beaten in battle having repurcusions in the economical and political landscape of your faction. Renegades or other LL's seeing opportunity in the power vacuum to further their own plans or seeing (for example Empire) Marienburg previously part of the Empire breaking off again and going solo. It would atleast make for a much more interesting game not just in campaign but in ME aswell.
How are these videos made? Do you each record a section and then cut them together? It seems like these would be better as a podcast format, where you can both speak on the topic at the same time. Maybe thats just me though. I wonder if they will ever do a total warhammer 40k. If they do I pray its not like dawn of war 3.
theres something to be said for a discussion/podcast and more conversational style format for sure, but the issue with that is that its a lot easier to ramble and get sidetracked and not touch on the important points. This is a huge setting, theres a massive amount to talk about, and recording it separately allows us to "Stick to the script" better and hit all the major points without losing our train of thought
@@milkandcookiesTW While that is definitely true, I am just saying, I think it would be amusing to listen to you guys get sidetracked. I am certainly not against a several hour podcast type episode.
Tempted to say planets need to be divided into 2 or 3 maps like a palace, field and mountain region, or maybe even a cave network 'city' to attack so that your blockade earns more CP while you're fighting, and the defendant gets to set up more fortifications to be divided over those maps. Perhaps make it so you can drop pod straight to the palace, but you can't take all your heavy equipment, or you can call it in at the risk of it getting shot down
Tac. Squads can only take a few special weapons. There are Support Squads with all Special Weapons. Though for Tacs., you could have it that you recruit a squad and then like upgrading armor and weapons in Rome 2, you can upgrade them to have whatever special weapons you prefer. Though only some of the squad would have those special weapons, and if the engine could handle it, if the member holding the lets say flamer dies another member could move over and scavenge the weapon increasing the longevity of the unit, in terms of the role you need them to fill. In multiplayer you put a tac. squad in your army then click on the unit card and like adding gear to a hero in TWWII you click on the weapon you want.
For the full on campaign maps, I'd like to see it reach the scale of a system, not an entire galactic map. Sort of like Soulstorm's campaign, but the planets aren't static. Why not make it so that the planets (and stuff like moons, asteroid, space stations, etc.) are actively orbiting the star? They could all travel at their own speed. So one turn, the Ice Planet is close to the Desert Planet. 4 turns later, it's actually closer to the Swamp Planet. Space navies going at it would have to be like the Fantasy "naval" battles on islands. When two enemies meet, one wins the initiative. Whoever lost then has to might to survive. If that initial defender wins, they get two options: press the advantage and counter-board (which starts a second battle), or just break it off so the two armies can move apart from each other. I remember when the Vampire Coast trailer first came out. The top rated comment was "CA is so desperate to avoid naval battles, they'll give the ships legs to walk on land.
the way I would handle unit types is have two or three types. for Tac squads, i'd have 'Tactical Marines' 'Tactical Marines (close)' and 'Tactical Marines(far)' close up using meltas, flamers, chainswords, close range weapons, far being rocket launchers, plasma guns, sniper rifles, and such
Because Total War and Tabletop are not the same thing. The problem isnt adding more options, its how that can affect the UI if they go the old fashioned route of new unit card and new unit type for each weapon selection. As I explained in the vid, when you get all the Devastator, Tactical, Assault, Sternguard, Vanguard, and Primaris units all with their weapon selections as separate units for each weapon, you're talking potentially dozens of units that look and sound very similar, especially for someone new to the series. This can make a factions UI look very bloated, and make it difficult for players to figure out which unit type is good for which situation. Imagine instead of 3 Chosen variants in Total War Warhammer, there were 15 Chosen variants. that starts becoming an issue
@@milkandcookiesTW I see a simple solution to the problem, in SFO certain chaos and lixardmen units can choose a "blessing" at spawn, which completely changed the behavior of the unit. That would work in 40k, by having a basic devastator squad, which can then be turned on the fly into whatever is most advantageous at the start of the battle! That way weapon selections don't become units or necessarily strict upgrade paths, although the latter still has a role. Especially since all SMs are trained in various weapons, so that much tactical flexibility is easily justifiable.
Also that's not even remotely true. Every Space Marine player complains about overly nuanced units and units that are essentially useless. The Space Marine Codex is the largest Codex in the game and possess many overlapped and useless units. Until the most recent updates, Centurions and Lightning Cannons were laughably useless. Further, the entire array of Space Marine tanks that are so useless that Games Workshop is phasing them out in place of highly specialized Primaris Tank. You might think that because you are playing say Eldar, but the Eldar have an amazing roster..... Again with useless units that overlap like Striking Scorpions and Howling Banshees. We're talking about streamlining the roster to be easier to access. In Tabletop, that deep dive, per squad, is desired. In a computer game, it becomes a little tedious. So taking the Space Marines and breaking them into units, classes, and loadouts is far easier than JAMMING the game with every single Primaris Unit that ends in an "-Or."
@@italianspartacus I would contend that the problem you're describing isn't "bloat" per se, but rather bad unit design. There's no harm in having overlapping units here, rather people are annoyed at what you rightly call overspecialized or outright ineffective ones. If there were two units, both with significant overlapping but both *effective*, I doubt there would be complaints. I just replied to indie praising the SFO system of choosing a buff for your unit at the start, which would let the unit selection screen be much more streamlined in favor of letting the player decide whether the SM squad will go vanilla, take up meltas or plasma etc, at the time of deployment, each with costs and tradeoffs. Either way, it's a minor point and I'm very happy with your work on promoting the possibility of a 40k TW! Way too many people pawn it off as insurmountable, but barring minor niggling differences in opinion I wholeheartedly agree that it's a damn solid idea 💯
I hoping for dynamic cover system on the map, My idea is that when you destroy a tank/titan or other large unit it remains would become cover on it own for either side. On another this could be applied to other "destructible" structures on the map, A tower that still standing would fall down during the battle creating a natural cover... or be a trap failing down on armies.
You were talking about maneuvering and taking cover. In terms of total war games that I've played (very small sample size by the way), I think maybe the one that fits the best is Rise of the Samurai.
If this actually happened I would be so excited to see how they'd do it. Two armies charging into battle on level ground would make no sense so I'm so intrigued
So a thought- anyone ever play Star Wars:Empire at War? They could do a battle system somewhat similar to that perhaps. Where you have a set limit of troops on the battlefield, but can bring down more from orbit or local reinforcements. Maybe start with a small command limit that can be increased with technologies and as you capture more drop zones, disable anti-air, that sort of thing. The attacker could start with no ground troops at all and have to use drops pods, and aerial assaults and try to establish a bridgehead, the defender could have certain prebuilt defences and more flexibility in where to deploy. Maybe both sides can build various entrenchments and stuff on the battlefield too. Kinda love their idea of multi stage sieges, maybe you have to begin with a planetary assualt, then a field battle for the planet at large, then break the walls, then a urban warfare map. Might feel a nice fusion between the usual total war formula and more traditional rtses. Could also mean much larger and more complex maps with a bit more of a focus on objectives and tactics rather than just killing the enemy . Although might also mean much longer battles, and might be too far from the normal formula for comfort. And oh dear, I wrote the comment halfway through and then half the stuff got suggested anyway.... Dammit
I think a very cool idea is to have 3 separate campaign stances “on the ground” or traditional where there is your general marching on the planet obviously nothing too big something like the dark crusade or even soul storm in terms of territories per planet with important places of interest enemy strongholds etc. Next would be “interplanetary” stance where you are aboard a single ship that can travel between planets in the system, maybe even have it function as the black ark for the dark elves and finally an “interstellar” stance where you can move between systems kind like in battlefleet 2. Ohh and when you are in “interplanetary” or “interstellar” stances the combat will play out like a naval battle (shogun 2 naval battle) but I highly doubt it cause ca haven’t done naval close to a decade
Before they go to something as crazy as Warhammer, I'd want CA to prove that they can balance armies where each faction has tanks and full-auto weaponry. Where most of the infantry has the option of using a gun, and not just of the single-shot powder variety. Does anyone else get excited at the idea of a WW1 total war game?
I think we can look back to shogun for army loss I remember watching my last samurai unit fight to the last man and managing to kill 10 other entities before going down himself and that was sick
2:05 --> 2:10 best rendering/depiction/anything Iv seen of The Despoiler Just so good. Among my gamage I have played that dirty xbox360's WRAHAMMER SPACE MARINE game repeatedly, for once in a game I ddnt giv a shxt about graphics and finery. Juts shit like the Character Dogan, glorious quotes, field's of Bomb Dogz, and being able to stay in a certain spot and trigger UNENDING WAVES OF THE GREEN TIDE!!
Could you imagine a 40K siege battle in Total War? Especially if Creative Assembly went back to giving us entire cities to battle over a la Medieval 2.
I hope some high tier from CA watch this video and say: "ok, i eill do exactly what they say!" The ideas are so great! TW Warhammer 40k is my dream game
I feel like the loadouts could could work like the abilites and equipment of the Lords and casters in Warhammer where say you pick a Space Marine squad and then a table of weapons beside the basic Bolter can be picked for an additional payment of whatever currency
Dumb question. Anyone knows what is the track playing a bit before and after 14:40? I would really love to find it for myself. Love listening to soundtracks when writing essays.
I think GW would jump on this due to the great success from total war Warhammer 1 & 2. Hopefully this comes true because it’d be so cool to have a good 40k game, let alone a good TW 40k game!
OH MY GAWD IT"S HAPPENING! This is certainly going to be interesting for CA to pull off, but I think it can be done. CA will need to draw inspiration from Star Wars: Empire at War for the grand-scale campaign maps, and StarCraft 2 for the design of the units. StarCraft has shown that in a world of lasers and heavy artillery, melee units are still a viable option, and CA could learn a thing or two from that.
"Star craft 2" I can't even.. where to begin... the Heresy!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Star craft literally started as a ripoff of Warhammer 40k in the same vain that Warcraft was originally a ripoff of Warhammer Fantasy. Furthermore Dawn of War 1/2 are way better representations of how to do combat for a Warhammer 40k game. Star Craft on the other hand is all about how fast you can click stuff (at least that was the impression I got when I tried it) Rant over.
@Drafezard You would be surprised of how much warhammer actually tock off starcraft and warcraft, look at the original tyranids and the actual ones, for example.
I feel like the unit card bloat would be simplest, just adjust them slightly. You know how each unit has a vague "type" such as sword or axe infantry? Do it like that, but make it a more prominent marker on the card, probably with color coding. Standard tactical marines have no special marker, plasma-equipped ones have a generic plasma gun type marker with a shiny blue dot, rocket launchers have a yellow dot, flamers are red, and so on. There's also that thing that SFO Grimhammer does for units like the Beastmen's Mutant Warhound, which has three abilities that can be used before (and technically during) battle that all share an effectively infinite cooldown. The ability allows you to specialize the warhound how you like, giving it a bonus vs. infantry but a debuff like lower speed, for example. That way, you have one unit card for tactical marines, but you can make them whatever you want in the deployment phase before the battle, but the ability should of course be locked once the battle is started.
Id love to see the Maps start on a galactic scale, with management of fleets as well as the armies who ride in them, zoom into a star system and then have the strategy come down to planetary control in that system. Each planet could be a small map, nothing like we see in Warhammer II, but just a few settlements or cities that need to be captured to own the planet. im thinking of Battlefleet Gothic Armada type battles (if they could get that to an X and Y axis would be cool) and then you loose ships, you loose the armies on those ships which impacts your ground game. So, you could have the tactical level start there with the importance of protecting a transport fleet, to, bringing a massive armada to destroy a huge fleet garrisoning a star system, and then stem down to, now we have to capture the cities on these planets of importance, or, the option to just annihilate everything on the planet, resulting in you loosing any tactical resources that may have been there, but maybe its worth it cause you just dont have the man power in that system to take it and you dont want the enemy to have it. but then you would have to limit the number of planet killing options so its not spammed. ive seen some 4X space games loose all the late game value because of that, so idk, maybe exclude it. whateva, lots of options.
I can get destroyed vehicles as cover, but i think due to limitations, they would have to be already in map, and not when a vehicle is destroyed from an army.
A larger scale Dawn of War with a more structured look at unit movement and cover like Dawn of War 2, but with the empire building strategy of a Total War game and the strategems and some of the mechanics of the tabletop game. What Dawn of War 3 SHOULD have been instead of what we got. sidenote: I wonder if this would include ship combat to even touch down on a planet you are sieging.
If you disregard the city scapes and planetary sieges 40k features many instances of highly advanced units lining up in a field or ruined settlement and charging at one another. Which TW does very well. More interesting is the interstellar campaign map. Battle mechanics dont need to be as nuanced as suggested and could be a very engaging experience which is still true to table top slog fests with only relatively minor tweaks. Id forget space armada battles - not needed. Agreed new engine needed and the idea of progressive sieges is appealing. I hope they at least try coz this could be amazing.
Thanks to Italian Spartacus for joining me again for Part 2 of this huge series! You can check out his 40k Lore content here - ruclips.net/p/PLDLBnN-W_m2mkoYEZJKCrZmWM0GtPQWhh
Time Stamps are as follows -
0:00 Intro, Overview, and Important Notes
8:25 Using numbers and unit sizes to differentiate factions
12:28 - 21:45 Battle Speed, Maps, Combat Resolution, Urban Warfare, and the Importance of Cover
25:48 - Unit Types
32:00 - Stratagems and how they could translate to Total War
38:36 Siege Warfare
52:46 Void Warfare
56:43 Titans and large Walkers
milkandcookiesTW why so long my men
and have a great day
@@arbiterofthehornedrat1570 cuz there's a lot to talk about!
Can I kiss Italian Spartacus?
I sincerely hope CA watches this series.
@@Yusuf-fs4fn yes.. All may kiss me
"Skyscraper in the middle of the map"
Statue of Sigmar flashbacks
“War is only won when every enemy is dead. A pacified enemy is still an enemy”
-Angron
Based
"The harder you strive to slay your enemies, the faster you'll deliver your people right into their hands."
@@dragonslair951167 cringe.
To the Basilica of Torment with you
I got so excited because I thought this was actually being developed :(
I'd rather they make warhammer total war better than make another warhammer IP with all the same problems...
@@keegobricks9734 CA has already said that they want all factions to have updated mechanics and complete rosters once the trilogy is complete. They're going to keep adding content to Warhammer until there's nothing more to add. It has been one of- if not THE most successful title they have ever released with DLCs selling like butter. It's easy money for them, there is no way they would just cancel development to create a 40K game, which would be an extreme undertaking.
@@charleswinters9567 Right, well like I said I'd rather they make Total war warhammer good, instead of trying to make 40k with all the same problems.
The biggest complaint right now is the BORING AF maps.
@@keegobricks9734 Siege maps specifically, which I'm 99.9% sure CA is aware of.
@@charleswinters9567 No the field maps. Siege maps although sucky at least aren't just an open field. I'm not asking for constant choke points, just a bit of terrain differentiation that makes you maneuver your units differently. And why the hell did they make it so whenever there's a physical object on the map like a rock or a building it has like a 100 meter radius around it so you can't even accidentally have an interesting fight around it?
I seriously hope, if they make a 40k game, that they will consider making an Army Forge tab in the main menu.
One where you can view, edit the colors of your factions units.
Like with the Skaven mad scientist Lab for custom battles in Warhammer 2. Only for model editing, like basic things in TableTop Simulator, color of the clothes/skin, size of the model individually. Pack File Manager makes a good middle ground for modders in Warhammer 2, but the thing about 40k is the fact that there are potentially infinite worlds with infinite cultures, leading to infinite homebrew factions, which I believe warrants a Dawn of War styled Army Painter.
Like for example, I really like Genestealer Cultists, but I have my own entire backstory and models custom made for them. Because I like to play them as Renegade Mutant Pirates that work with Pirate Orkz and Drukari, rather than zealot members of a tyranid mind.
I think if they allow for us homebrewers to make fun in their own in-game model design forges, faction painter, whatever you want to call it, the game will truly be catering to the consumer.
Well thought out, i enjoy the way you play your genestealer cult
The framework is sort of already there, in Ikit Claw's forbidden Workshop where units can be upgraded to have more stuff
Like what they had in Warhammer Battle March. That would be awesome.
They had that kind of platform in Total War: shoun2 with online avatar conquest mode where you can create your own general, design color and banner as well as veteran units. I dont know why dont they include it in Total War: Warhammer though. I think it's a perfect fit since original Warhammer is table top where you can create your every own army.
Every Warhammer game should have army/unit customization. It's a core part of the experience imo. It's a crime that TWW and TWW2 doesn't have that :(
I agree with the points you make to the naysayers who insist this wouldn’t work because it couldn’t be true to the lore... “oh for 40k to work and do it justice there would have to be a campaign map the size of the entire galaxy with thousands of planets”... which is nonsense lol. Like you were saying every video game adaptation is an approximation of what it is adopting.
Who is saying you need the whole Galaxy? Just any planet will work or any section of a planet
especially considering when in warhammer fantasy a sauurus warrior could easily kill 400+ skavenslaves before dying
Naysayers lack imagination. There's an answer for everything. Ranged and melee are still the basic shit, they've done magic and siege equipment. The only thing that's really different is the added layers of planets, solar systems and the galaxy map and working out new mechanics for space battles. They could rake the easy route there, or make playable space battles the big thing for the second game, where they make them playable instead of auto resolve.
How.. How did you get these clips?? How did you get in my ROOM?!
sneaakyyy skaven, yes yes he he
Commented before I even saw this well done I too have a beard.
I really like the idea of stratagems, it sounds like they could bring a lot of added specialization to army builds that focus around exploiting the advantage of your stratagems.
yeah I think they'd be an important and super flavorful way to bring 40k battles to life
I think they would work better as research for campaign
Sounds like invocations but grim dank
I think when CA introduces Ogre Kingdoms; the way those models functions would lay the foundation for Space Marines and other large infantry in 40k. Also; I suspect in 40k it wouldn't be anti-large but anti-armour since there would be different armour catergories for infantry style units incl the larger variants; and actual vehicles like titans.
How are ogers even remotely like spacemarines chaos warriors are a far better example
@@darkomihajlovski3135 (Insanely late reply sorry) but I think they are comparing how they are both very strong, low count units (around 8 to 16 models per unit) unlike most total units which have like 60 to 100 models generally.
@@judahfisher734 i think tactical and assault marines would be company size while heavy weapons like devestators would be squad sized
Sieges: Make it objective based with each objective being the target of a seperate battle so sieges become multi-battle and their scale can be concentrated into viable battle dimensions so that the game can take it.
Like how Mount & Blade does it! I remember having so much fun sieging in Warsword Conquest from the walls to the courtyard to the keep.
Planetary warfare should actually be like 1-5 separate battles and capture points on different maps/missions. So you can conquer 3 and lose 1, say, then you technically control the planet, but you'll have to engage that last point. Until you do it behaves like a rebellion with significant penalties. As long as you control greater than 50% its still your planet. Same thing if there is an enemy fleet in system, it affects trade routes and causes some penalties for planets and assets in system.
But, there can be planets that aren't as advanced where you can send in 5 space marines to take the entire planet.
So much potential here.
So, I like the second option, being able to recruit a unit and then customize it post recruitment. I think that allows not just the persistence and attachment you mentioned, but also an ability to really make armies that are specialized for scenarios or enemies.
"hope is the first step on the road to disappointment".
Shuttup :(
As long as theirs a W30K HH expansion I’ll buy it, awesome video Indy I would love to here more fantasy/science fiction total war game ideas from you and Italian!
I am glad to see you guys working together on these videos, you are doing a great job!
The Total War community really seems a lot less toxic than in most other games.
Can't wait for SFO 40k, where space marines become literally unkillable without the assistance of artillery, sprint across the map in 10 seconds and fire as fast as a bolter would allow
*And I would love it*
Stop!! I can only get so hard!!!
But if its SFO then every race should be crazy op with 150000 health basic infantry.
I mean plasma and melta can pretty consistently kill them. God forbid Xenos gear. I would be more worried about characters and custodies as well
man I was just rewatching the first video you guys did last week. I love your ideas and your enthousiam. I hope CA is taking notes. Great job guys!
Imagine playing on Cadia as the Guardsmen. That would be amazing.
I’d love to see them go more accurate to the lore than the tabletop. The tabletop has most armies fielding similar numbers of units, which is stupid from a lore standpoint
Bad for total war too. Not every fight is fair, that's war.
It’s only speculation for now people. I’d love a TW W40K though !
Yes! I’ve been waiting for this series to continue.
The Imperial Guard specifically should have lots of special abilities to reinforce buildings with sandbags, gun emplacements, etc. They should also be able to construct other fortifications virtually anywhere.
so i wanna say how much i would love seeing an actual 40k warhammer, but i don´t hink we will ever see one because of all these concepts and ideas that are just too difficult too combine or include in a total war game. Just my opinion though.
The Warhammer series are the most successful total war games so far. So I'm certain they'll at-least try to do 40k once fantasy is done, I'm just not certain it'll be good.
I think it would be a good expansion for a future engine focused on the first world war.
ww1 total war would be a great template for 40k to be based on.
I don't think the current Rome 2 engine is good enough honestly.
I say ww1 because there you would have to simulate massed infantry and artillery efficiently, and trenches and city fighting.
Mad Hatters in jeans already is one it’s based on Napoleon and i enjoy it
For the Imperium I believe that units should be split into four groups, Imperial guard, space marines, mechanicus, and sisters of battle. The lord you pick would determine what group you could recruit, you would still be able to get units from the other groups but it wouldn't be as simple. I'm not certain how the Inquisition would work though.
They would all be separate factions like in the tabletop, with their own rosters and mechanics. I dont see CA releasing an "Imperium" race that has 4 full races in it. In terms of Campaign, they would certainly have a ton of diplomatic affinity with each other
@@milkandcookiesTW If anything I could see them releasing IG & SM as part of a handful of factions for game 1.
The campaign would probably end up working like Empire At War, where you have to establish space dominance first before you invade the planet, it would also provide an interesting alternative to battle fleet Gothic armada
They would not be developing a real-time space ship combat system alongside everything else, that would be too much. Probably just be a separate "boarding" battle or something.
The Mysterious Stranger ehh idk man warhammer has a lot of broadside combat and stuff so I think reworking Napoleon and empires stuff would honestly be fine. It would have to have some mechanics to make it better but it’s good bones
This is old, I know, but two things prevent that: CA no longer does Naval Combat, no even to their new entries have them, very unlikely they'll push for Space Combat for this hypothetical title and Second; Battlefleet Gothic is on, itself, an different license altogether, similar to Man'O War for Fantasy which is one of the reasons why we never got proper naval combat and why we got the whole island thing.
I love that CP idea, it really adds another level to the strategic level of warfare, things you can do on the campaign map that give advantages in the battle map.
I think what they'll probably do as far as siege battles, is that they'll save cityscape maps for that. But they DO need to go big with it. They need to allow for at least semi destructible environments, and landscape. I wanna see weapons create craters that can be used for light cover. I wanna see buildings reduced to rubble which can them be used as cover. I wanna see buildings that can be sunk as a means of destroying enemy units taking cover within them. I think as far as flyers, you're right though. If it can't hover, then maybe it shouldn't be available. At least not as a unit. But what if you could attach flyers to an army and it would give the equivalent of like an artillery strike, except as an air strike. And it'll can just be like a 3 time usage per battle. There's so many things they need to consider and hit the mark with in order for this to work, but I'm hopeful. I honestly wasn't sure if CA had the balls to take on something 40K but I'm glad they're giving it a go.
The unit bloat is actually reduced for Primaris Marines somewhat, since they don’t have traditional tactical marines. Only Hellblasters would have plasma weapons for instance.
About to get my first 40k models, just need to do some preparations first. Tell me boyz what would be a good faction to start with? Plague Marines and Nurgle daemons interest me for sure. Tyranids and Space Marines are close behind.
As far as getting started, usually I'd recommend Space Marines. But then, that'd be hypocritical of me. I'd say that the Death Guard can definitely be a lot of fun so if you want to play them? Go ahead. After that, I'd recommend Salamanders out of the Space Marine Chapters.
As a death guard player is defo recommend them for a beginner, they are great fun to play and because they're so hard to kill they are very forgiving army when it comes to mistakes in battle, also due to them being Astartes very low model count, so less painting and prep before you can start playing. I hope you enjoy the hobby, best of luck on the battlefield! And may Papa Nurgle sustain you
As a death guard player i would defo recommend them for a beginner, they are great fun to play and because they're so hard to kill they are very forgiving army when it comes to mistakes in battle, also due to them being Astartes very low model count, so less painting and prep before you can start playing. I hope you enjoy the hobby, best of luck on the battlefield! And may Papa Nurgle sustain you
I started custodes because I love elite melee armies and my suggestion would be to make sure you get troops first. Dont fall to the allure of elite terminators and stuff if you want to field a good tt army soon
I'm so glad you two are ones who get it. A lot of people cannot wrap their minds around 40K and give such stupid reasons for it "not being possible." People said the exact same shit about Warhammer Fantasy, that it would never work as well, yet here we are soon to be 3 games in! Don't listen to these heretical smallminded naysayers
Nice video. I can't find the exact source, but I remember reading a tweet somewhere from the TW subreddit that CA would be happy to do TW: 40k. Not a confirmation, but we do have a slim chance of seeing CA tackles the 40k universe one day, no matter what form it takes.
yeah their game director Ian Roxburgh stated on record in an interview they would like to do it a year or two back
I feel like CA has expressed that this is something they'd like to do multiple times. Here's hoping Games Workshop takes the hint, which... maybe they might?
My best guess is that it would be Empire at War with Total War ground battles.
For the transports, maybe CA won't be able to program troops going in and out of the transports. But perhaps transports can be assigned units, and deploy them like a bound summoning spell.
What you were describing italian Spartacus as far as sieges sounds very much like star wars empire at war. Taking some elements from the planet battles in that game might be pretty cool.
IT'S FINALLY HERE!(part 2) BUILD THAT HYPE! LET THEM KNOW WE WANT THIS! If we get enough going, there is no way the greedy corporate overlords over at GW wont try to profit!
I feel like something along the lines of company of heroes is a better setup for 40k battles. Would love to see any big new 40k strategy game though
Then play DOW 1 or 2 if you want that kind of combat. There hasn’t really been a game with huge total war sized battles. If TW:WH40K is ever started, it’d be amazing and I can’t wait to see if it happens.
Actually your wrong. Total war could EASILY make a warhammer 40k game! Instead of huge units filled with 120 units cut it down to 60 or 80 as max units and make them spread out, also when there close enough to shoot a enemy just make some kneel and shoot and some stand to add a difference, you could easily do 40k. We already have tanks and guns in total war warhammer fantasy
@@Hello-cv3wg The biggest problem problem for a 40k game of such scale would be balancing the scale of 40k. I.E dealing with giant units like titans.
They’ve figured out most of the balancing with TW:WH so I don’t think it would be as big as a challenge as some think it would be
April’s Fools videos aren’t cool.
It’s not April
In February? Lol
@@Guaguadeath That's when they are least suspected.
@@SuperEndiku The ultimate April fools joke
Using a phased planetary campaign system might be an idea. So each planet equals a settlement on the map, divide them between factions that way. Vary terrain depending on each planet’s circumstances and what’s trying to take it.
Think of Tom Clancy end war but on a much larger scale, it had decent urban combat and even open field combat, definitely one of my favourite rts games of the Xbox 360
Of course you upload this the day I promised not to touch myself.
You win this time, Slaanesh!
I think that a good game to look at for the very base of things like map objectives and intractable environmental objects is the 2005 game Imperial Glory. Every map would have sets of objectives to control that would start ticking the clock in your favour that you had to fight for control over. Maps would also have buildings as well as things like fences that units could garrison which would give range and defence bonuses (on top of 360 fire) and the best way to clear them would be to send in a unit in melee. There was also terrain features that would directly impact the battle with hills providing range if on tor and movement speed increases or decreases depending on whether the unit is going up or down, rivers that would slow units walking through but also provided an alternative to running through the killboxes that were bridges. Some terrain was also impassable such as large trenches dug around a fort or tall cliffs.
Welp, here's my 2 cents.
First, for campaign, do something like one of my other favorite games: Star Wars Empire at War, which combines both Space and Ground combat. This could be very fun, in which my wildest imaginations include combining the the best strengths of both Battlefleet Gothic: Armada 2 and the Total War formula, to create the ultimate 40k experience.
Second, on the topic of campaign, I know its a bit hard to imagine, but let's talk about the subject of settlements/planets for 40k. I envision it as each planet acting as a singular place that your armies can move to, but it containing certain points of interest that need to be conquered in order for the planet to be yours (i.e. a certain military base or supply bunker), in which battles would need to be fought to conquer each "place", and therefore, the planet itself.
Anyway, that's about it, and I hope the Emperor smiles on you today, and forever more!
Stop teasing me with all these beautiful harlequins pictures, Indy. That's evil.
So much potential for an a aaamazing campaign map for a TW game in the 40k setting. Being able to coordinate a campain on a sectorwide level, with the option to control individual battles all the way down on the continent level. Definitely a job for an entirely reworked system though.
Looking forward to what you guys have to say about that aspect
I think that for this game to keep these lightning fast battles, there could be an option to have smaller-scale skirmishes. Like instead of agents you could recruit small squads that would roam the map performing actions such as damaging walls, but instead of just being a point and click action, you now fight a small battle (where those heavy urban settings could be used) and if you succeed you damage the walls for a future siege.
I basically want it to utilize a Stellaris-ish type map.
I think they would benefit from a map style more akin to Star Wars: Empire at War. That game was the pinnacle of grand strategy before Total War came along.
Antonio Sonntag I’m sorry, but total war is BARELY a grand strategy game
Holy hell that intro xD you are the best
Good Presentation Guy's. Well Done Thanks.
This is what's so great about this lore
I hope lore is fallowed more loosely. There are a lot of characters that would make for amazing lords but wouldn't be able to lore wise as they are either dead or lost, specifically the primarchs.
Command and Conquer managed to include APCs in 1995, I'm sure transports are not an issue.
I actually think that maps entirely covered by buildings could be an interesting features, some factions would be more about melee combat and building assaults, while others would be more about singing and destroying structures, while other races would be balanced between the two approaches
Sweet sigmar I hope that CA eventually tackles the 40k universe. I think my social life would cease to exist all together if they did lol
I've dreamed of a total war 40k game since total war warhammer.
It would take years of development but it could definitely be done. This would be one of the most epic games of all time
I had pretty much zero knowledge of Warhammer fantasy or 40k before Total War dived into the series. I ended up really enjoying the game, and I started to look into the lore a lot and just generally took an interest in Warhammer Fantasy. I haven’t looked much into 40k specifically, but I hope CA is given the chance to see if they can translate 40k into a total war game. It would be drastically different from every other total war, and that would be great alongside a steady stream of historical games keeping the traditional style intact.
Total war Warhammer 40k would be so awesome!
I think its easier to do than a total war in the second world war, because in 40k is melee fight important
Ideas for unit size per regiment:
Imperial guard, ork boyz, tyranids, chaos cultists:150
Tau, necrons, basic infantry of eldar and dark eldar, sororitas: 100
Space marines (enpire and chaos), elite units of eldar, DE, orcs, necrons: 50
Terminators, custodes: 25
Space marine squads with only 5 units would make sense and best balance the game. An elite army with 50 - 100 guys fits the lore and would still be fun to play. Orks tyrannids and guard can provide the hoardes with 100 unit squads. Eldar necrons and tau would be somewhere in the middle. The formations would be a lot looser than the phalanxes of old, though I could still see some races implementing tight and neat formations like the necrons. Massiveness of the campaign map would be a huge (but very welcome undertaking). They could easily start with one portion of the galaxy and gradually spread out with additional DLC’s. And of course the gradual release of additional races in dlc is a marketing master stroke - like how they released the highly interesting more obscure faction of vampire coast, parallels could be drawn to genestealer cult - a race that is essentially a branch of tyranids but with a unique play style and lore
Where is the part 3/4 ? :(
For battle control, look no further than a game called ‘Firefight WW2’ (there’s an app on iTunes and it is based on an old PC game). That game is easily the best ‘non melee focused’ strategy game I have played and it would transfer perfectly as the basis to a WH40K game mechanics
Very good points and in depth, really hope we can see a good WH40K TW game in the future, iam hyped for it. All the points you brough up regarding the sieges etc could be applied to TW WH3 (as a test bed). (going on a tangent here) I mean just imagine an epic siege of Altdorf or Skavenblight being multitiered. Hordes of skaven slaves rushing at the attackers at the bid of their Vermin masters. Having your LL getting wounded / beaten in battle having repurcusions in the economical and political landscape of your faction. Renegades or other LL's seeing opportunity in the power vacuum to further their own plans or seeing (for example Empire) Marienburg previously part of the Empire breaking off again and going solo. It would atleast make for a much more interesting game not just in campaign but in ME aswell.
How are these videos made? Do you each record a section and then cut them together? It seems like these would be better as a podcast format, where you can both speak on the topic at the same time. Maybe thats just me though. I wonder if they will ever do a total warhammer 40k. If they do I pray its not like dawn of war 3.
theres something to be said for a discussion/podcast and more conversational style format for sure, but the issue with that is that its a lot easier to ramble and get sidetracked and not touch on the important points. This is a huge setting, theres a massive amount to talk about, and recording it separately allows us to "Stick to the script" better and hit all the major points without losing our train of thought
@@milkandcookiesTW While that is definitely true, I am just saying, I think it would be amusing to listen to you guys get sidetracked. I am certainly not against a several hour podcast type episode.
Tempted to say planets need to be divided into 2 or 3 maps like a palace, field and mountain region, or maybe even a cave network 'city' to attack so that your blockade earns more CP while you're fighting, and the defendant gets to set up more fortifications to be divided over those maps. Perhaps make it so you can drop pod straight to the palace, but you can't take all your heavy equipment, or you can call it in at the risk of it getting shot down
Tac. Squads can only take a few special weapons. There are Support Squads with all Special Weapons. Though for Tacs., you could have it that you recruit a squad and then like upgrading armor and weapons in Rome 2, you can upgrade them to have whatever special weapons you prefer. Though only some of the squad would have those special weapons, and if the engine could handle it, if the member holding the lets say flamer dies another member could move over and scavenge the weapon increasing the longevity of the unit, in terms of the role you need them to fill. In multiplayer you put a tac. squad in your army then click on the unit card and like adding gear to a hero in TWWII you click on the weapon you want.
How did you know my well kept secret?! Have you made a visit to my ear?! Have you?!!!!!!!!!
For the full on campaign maps, I'd like to see it reach the scale of a system, not an entire galactic map. Sort of like Soulstorm's campaign, but the planets aren't static. Why not make it so that the planets (and stuff like moons, asteroid, space stations, etc.) are actively orbiting the star? They could all travel at their own speed. So one turn, the Ice Planet is close to the Desert Planet. 4 turns later, it's actually closer to the Swamp Planet.
Space navies going at it would have to be like the Fantasy "naval" battles on islands. When two enemies meet, one wins the initiative. Whoever lost then has to might to survive. If that initial defender wins, they get two options: press the advantage and counter-board (which starts a second battle), or just break it off so the two armies can move apart from each other.
I remember when the Vampire Coast trailer first came out. The top rated comment was "CA is so desperate to avoid naval battles, they'll give the ships legs to walk on land.
Im still sad what relic did with Dawn of War, and i rly hope CA can do something incredible with 40k like they give us TWWH
the way I would handle unit types is have two or three types. for Tac squads, i'd have 'Tactical Marines' 'Tactical Marines (close)' and 'Tactical Marines(far)' close up using meltas, flamers, chainswords, close range weapons, far being rocket launchers, plasma guns, sniper rifles, and such
I strongly disagree that "roster bloat" is remotely an issue. *Nobody* playing Tabletop ever complained about having more units to play with.
Because Total War and Tabletop are not the same thing. The problem isnt adding more options, its how that can affect the UI if they go the old fashioned route of new unit card and new unit type for each weapon selection. As I explained in the vid, when you get all the Devastator, Tactical, Assault, Sternguard, Vanguard, and Primaris units all with their weapon selections as separate units for each weapon, you're talking potentially dozens of units that look and sound very similar, especially for someone new to the series. This can make a factions UI look very bloated, and make it difficult for players to figure out which unit type is good for which situation. Imagine instead of 3 Chosen variants in Total War Warhammer, there were 15 Chosen variants. that starts becoming an issue
@@milkandcookiesTW I see a simple solution to the problem, in SFO certain chaos and lixardmen units can choose a "blessing" at spawn, which completely changed the behavior of the unit.
That would work in 40k, by having a basic devastator squad, which can then be turned on the fly into whatever is most advantageous at the start of the battle!
That way weapon selections don't become units or necessarily strict upgrade paths, although the latter still has a role. Especially since all SMs are trained in various weapons, so that much tactical flexibility is easily justifiable.
Also that's not even remotely true. Every Space Marine player complains about overly nuanced units and units that are essentially useless. The Space Marine Codex is the largest Codex in the game and possess many overlapped and useless units. Until the most recent updates, Centurions and Lightning Cannons were laughably useless. Further, the entire array of Space Marine tanks that are so useless that Games Workshop is phasing them out in place of highly specialized Primaris Tank.
You might think that because you are playing say Eldar, but the Eldar have an amazing roster..... Again with useless units that overlap like Striking Scorpions and Howling Banshees.
We're talking about streamlining the roster to be easier to access. In Tabletop, that deep dive, per squad, is desired. In a computer game, it becomes a little tedious. So taking the Space Marines and breaking them into units, classes, and loadouts is far easier than JAMMING the game with every single Primaris Unit that ends in an "-Or."
@@italianspartacus I would contend that the problem you're describing isn't "bloat" per se, but rather bad unit design.
There's no harm in having overlapping units here, rather people are annoyed at what you rightly call overspecialized or outright ineffective ones.
If there were two units, both with significant overlapping but both *effective*, I doubt there would be complaints.
I just replied to indie praising the SFO system of choosing a buff for your unit at the start, which would let the unit selection screen be much more streamlined in favor of letting the player decide whether the SM squad will go vanilla, take up meltas or plasma etc, at the time of deployment, each with costs and tradeoffs.
Either way, it's a minor point and I'm very happy with your work on promoting the possibility of a 40k TW! Way too many people pawn it off as insurmountable, but barring minor niggling differences in opinion I wholeheartedly agree that it's a damn solid idea 💯
Man I'm out of the loop. I saw this video and thought it was him discussing an already confirmed Total War 40K game.
I hoping for dynamic cover system on the map, My idea is that when you destroy a tank/titan or other large unit it remains would become cover on it own for either side. On another this could be applied to other "destructible" structures on the map, A tower that still standing would fall down during the battle creating a natural cover... or be a trap failing down on armies.
You were talking about maneuvering and taking cover. In terms of total war games that I've played (very small sample size by the way), I think maybe the one that fits the best is Rise of the Samurai.
The bikes would be just like skirmishing cav, that are also really deadly on the charge.
Great video!
Total war 40K, "where every battle's a siege battle"
If this actually happened I would be so excited to see how they'd do it.
Two armies charging into battle on level ground would make no sense so I'm so intrigued
is there a parts 3 and 4 to this series?
not yet!
@@milkandcookiesTW When will they come out haha
The battles would be so massive
So a thought- anyone ever play Star Wars:Empire at War? They could do a battle system somewhat similar to that perhaps. Where you have a set limit of troops on the battlefield, but can bring down more from orbit or local reinforcements. Maybe start with a small command limit that can be increased with technologies and as you capture more drop zones, disable anti-air, that sort of thing. The attacker could start with no ground troops at all and have to use drops pods, and aerial assaults and try to establish a bridgehead, the defender could have certain prebuilt defences and more flexibility in where to deploy. Maybe both sides can build various entrenchments and stuff on the battlefield too. Kinda love their idea of multi stage sieges, maybe you have to begin with a planetary assualt, then a field battle for the planet at large, then break the walls, then a urban warfare map. Might feel a nice fusion between the usual total war formula and more traditional rtses. Could also mean much larger and more complex maps with a bit more of a focus on objectives and tactics rather than just killing the enemy . Although might also mean much longer battles, and might be too far from the normal formula for comfort.
And oh dear, I wrote the comment halfway through and then half the stuff got suggested anyway.... Dammit
I think a very cool idea is to have 3 separate campaign stances “on the ground” or traditional where there is your general marching on the planet obviously nothing too big something like the dark crusade or even soul storm in terms of territories per planet with important places of interest enemy strongholds etc. Next would be “interplanetary” stance where you are aboard a single ship that can travel between planets in the system, maybe even have it function as the black ark for the dark elves and finally an “interstellar” stance where you can move between systems kind like in battlefleet 2. Ohh and when you are in “interplanetary” or “interstellar” stances the combat will play out like a naval battle (shogun 2 naval battle) but I highly doubt it cause ca haven’t done naval close to a decade
I think implementing the IG squad tactics properly will be pretty difficult if you want to have really large units though.
Before they go to something as crazy as Warhammer, I'd want CA to prove that they can balance armies where each faction has tanks and full-auto weaponry. Where most of the infantry has the option of using a gun, and not just of the single-shot powder variety. Does anyone else get excited at the idea of a WW1 total war game?
I think we can look back to shogun for army loss I remember watching my last samurai unit fight to the last man and managing to kill 10 other entities before going down himself and that was sick
ive been dreaming of a total war 40k game every since total war warhammer first came out
2:05 --> 2:10 best rendering/depiction/anything Iv seen of The Despoiler Just so good. Among my gamage I have played that dirty xbox360's WRAHAMMER SPACE MARINE game repeatedly, for once in a game I ddnt giv a shxt about graphics and finery. Juts shit like the Character Dogan, glorious quotes, field's of Bomb Dogz, and being able to stay in a certain spot and trigger UNENDING WAVES OF THE GREEN TIDE!!
Could you imagine a 40K siege battle in Total War? Especially if Creative Assembly went back to giving us entire cities to battle over a la Medieval 2.
I hope some high tier from CA watch this video and say: "ok, i eill do exactly what they say!"
The ideas are so great! TW Warhammer 40k is my dream game
I feel like the loadouts could could work like the abilites and equipment of the Lords and casters in Warhammer where say you pick a Space Marine squad and then a table of weapons beside the basic Bolter can be picked for an additional payment of whatever currency
Dumb question. Anyone knows what is the track playing a bit before and after 14:40? I would really love to find it for myself. Love listening to soundtracks when writing essays.
Belisarius Cawl -- _"OHHHHH FEATURE CREEP, CONFIRMED!!!"_
I think GW would jump on this due to the great success from total war Warhammer 1 & 2. Hopefully this comes true because it’d be so cool to have a good 40k game, let alone a good TW 40k game!
OH MY GAWD IT"S HAPPENING! This is certainly going to be interesting for CA to pull off, but I think it can be done. CA will need to draw inspiration from Star Wars: Empire at War for the grand-scale campaign maps, and StarCraft 2 for the design of the units. StarCraft has shown that in a world of lasers and heavy artillery, melee units are still a viable option, and CA could learn a thing or two from that.
Wow there hold your horses sparky, ain't nothing happening except 2 dudes theory crafting. There is no word that CA has even considered making a TW40k
Sorry. I get super excited for stuff like that. You should have seen me when 343 dropped the Halo Infinite trailer.
"Star craft 2" I can't even.. where to begin... the Heresy!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Star craft literally started as a ripoff of Warhammer 40k in the same vain that Warcraft was originally a ripoff of Warhammer Fantasy. Furthermore Dawn of War 1/2 are way better representations of how to do combat for a Warhammer 40k game. Star Craft on the other hand is all about how fast you can click stuff (at least that was the impression I got when I tried it) Rant over.
@Drafezard You would be surprised of how much warhammer actually tock off starcraft and warcraft, look at the original tyranids and the actual ones, for example.
I feel like the unit card bloat would be simplest, just adjust them slightly. You know how each unit has a vague "type" such as sword or axe infantry? Do it like that, but make it a more prominent marker on the card, probably with color coding. Standard tactical marines have no special marker, plasma-equipped ones have a generic plasma gun type marker with a shiny blue dot, rocket launchers have a yellow dot, flamers are red, and so on.
There's also that thing that SFO Grimhammer does for units like the Beastmen's Mutant Warhound, which has three abilities that can be used before (and technically during) battle that all share an effectively infinite cooldown. The ability allows you to specialize the warhound how you like, giving it a bonus vs. infantry but a debuff like lower speed, for example. That way, you have one unit card for tactical marines, but you can make them whatever you want in the deployment phase before the battle, but the ability should of course be locked once the battle is started.
Make settlements entire planets and the campaign map a star map. The biggest issue I see with 40k tw is it would be even more dakka intensive
Id love to see the Maps start on a galactic scale, with management of fleets as well as the armies who ride in them, zoom into a star system and then have the strategy come down to planetary control in that system. Each planet could be a small map, nothing like we see in Warhammer II, but just a few settlements or cities that need to be captured to own the planet. im thinking of Battlefleet Gothic Armada type battles (if they could get that to an X and Y axis would be cool) and then you loose ships, you loose the armies on those ships which impacts your ground game. So, you could have the tactical level start there with the importance of protecting a transport fleet, to, bringing a massive armada to destroy a huge fleet garrisoning a star system, and then stem down to, now we have to capture the cities on these planets of importance, or, the option to just annihilate everything on the planet, resulting in you loosing any tactical resources that may have been there, but maybe its worth it cause you just dont have the man power in that system to take it and you dont want the enemy to have it. but then you would have to limit the number of planet killing options so its not spammed. ive seen some 4X space games loose all the late game value because of that, so idk, maybe exclude it. whateva, lots of options.
I can get destroyed vehicles as cover, but i think due to limitations, they would have to be already in map, and not when a vehicle is destroyed from an army.
Where's part 3 mate!?
A larger scale Dawn of War with a more structured look at unit movement and cover like Dawn of War 2, but with the empire building strategy of a Total War game and the strategems and some of the mechanics of the tabletop game. What Dawn of War 3 SHOULD have been instead of what we got.
sidenote: I wonder if this would include ship combat to even touch down on a planet you are sieging.
If you disregard the city scapes and planetary sieges 40k features many instances of highly advanced units lining up in a field or ruined settlement and charging at one another. Which TW does very well. More interesting is the interstellar campaign map. Battle mechanics dont need to be as nuanced as suggested and could be a very engaging experience which is still true to table top slog fests with only relatively minor tweaks. Id forget space armada battles - not needed. Agreed new engine needed and the idea of progressive sieges is appealing. I hope they at least try coz this could be amazing.
Perhaps they could have a squad editor to make presets on unit weaponry?
For fighters/attack aircraft mechanics I’d also defer to Wargame: Red Dragon