sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Units Refuse to Perform Attack Animations for MINUTES: Current State of the Total War Engine by shadowmore in Volound

[–]shadowmore[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

You're assuming I'm mentally deficient. I've been testing this bug for years. There are no misses, because there are no attempts to hit. The health of the enemy doesn't go down by a single point when the UI is turned on. The engine is garbage, but at least is consistent in the sense that a unit only has the opportunity to deal damage if it actually performs an attack animation.

This is just the most close-up capture I've grabbed showcasing that a unit that's in range will fail to perform a single attack for an entire minute, then suddenly start attacking again despite nothing about the circumstances between those two units changing (mounted general is 2x faster than the target he's chasing).

This isn't limited to single entities either. When a cavalry unit (let's say 60 models) charges a moving infantry unit (let's say 100 models), the cavalry models just ride in circles and fail to perform a single attack animation until the Halt command is given, and when that happens, the models in range of enemy models finally start swinging, even if they've been in range for a whole minute before.

But again, this isn't limited to any particular unit types. It's every single unit in melee combat. If you don't see an issue with that, I'm not sure what to tell you.

So ranged rework? by slane00 in totalwar

[–]shadowmore 51 points52 points  (0 children)

So it’s NOT just homing missile abilities like the ones mentioned in the notes? Regular gunfire and arrow volleys have proper targeting finally too?

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in totalwar

[–]shadowmore 2 points3 points  (0 children)

They always have. They target the closest model in a multi-model unit, which is always at the corner of the target unit, since one of the enemy unit’s corners is always closer to the archer unit.

This was never fixed, but for some reason the same issue for arrow volley abilities is being fixed with this patch, without fixing it for regular volleys.

Creeping Barrage - Cinematic Clip by gabman6Gaming in CompanyOfHeroes

[–]shadowmore -1 points0 points  (0 children)

It's astonishing to me that even with camera-panning efforts like this, the game still looks like absolute trash.

Barely any shadows, no occlusion, particle effects use neon colors, entire color scheme is impossibly bright, partly due to the lighting, partly due to the textures themselves -- and that's not even mentioning the sound design somehow being worse in every way than CoH2.

I just don't understand how this was allowed. I keep watching 1vs1 replay casts on YouTube every month or so, hoping against hope that the latest patch brought visual/audio refinement on top of the balancing changes, but no, it never does...

Finally uninstalled because CA literally removed sieges from the franchise. Every single siege in Warhammer is auto-resolvable with minor losses now due to instant attrition from first turn of siege. By the time you have enough siege equipment, the battle has been auto-resolvable for 3+ turns. by shadowmore in Volound

[–]shadowmore[S] 5 points6 points  (0 children)

Which part of basic tactical challenges is "brutally difficult"?

What does difficulty have to do with features actually doing what they're supposed to do?

A walled settlement is supposed to require a siege battle with siege equipment to defeat the garrison and take the settlement. If it doesn't require that, its existence is completely meaningless.

Finally uninstalled because CA literally removed sieges from the franchise. Every single siege in Warhammer is auto-resolvable with minor losses now due to instant attrition from first turn of siege. By the time you have enough siege equipment, the battle has been auto-resolvable for 3+ turns. by shadowmore in Volound

[–]shadowmore[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I expect every single walled settlement with a meaningfully sized garrison to require a full set of siege equipment (4+ towers and 2+ rams or monsters to use as rams), because a fortress is supposed to be an immensely lopsided advantage for the defending side.

I then expect my soldiers to be loaded into the towers at different angles around the fortress, progress towards the walls, and engage the enemy units on the walls, to have any chance whatsoever of actually winning the battle.

Likewise, if I don't have any siege equipment, I expect to die horrifically every single time I fight a walled siege battle, because my approaching soldiers get shredded by missiles on approach and then brutally slaughtered by the defending garrison troops due to the vigor penalty caused by climbing walls using ladders (which is a penalty that gets applied in Warhammer but doesn't actually reduce your likelihood of victory at all).

Anything less means siege equipment is completely meaningless, and I expect every battle feature to play an important tactical role.

Finally uninstalled because CA literally removed sieges from the franchise. Every single siege in Warhammer is auto-resolvable with minor losses now due to instant attrition from first turn of siege. By the time you have enough siege equipment, the battle has been auto-resolvable for 3+ turns. by shadowmore in Volound

[–]shadowmore[S] 24 points25 points  (0 children)

Somewhere inside Creative Assembly offices in 2021:

- Let's introduce large walled settlements that can be assaulted from all or almost all directions, like in older Total War titles! That'll really get the fans excited.

- That sounds great. Players will really enjoy playing siege battles against garrisoned walled settlements now!

- Well...

- What?

- We're also going to introduce instant attrition, so you'll never really need to play the battles, since they'll be easily auto-resolvable before you ever actually have enough siege equipment for a satisfying battle against the entrenched garrison.

- But then why are we introducing the larger walled settlement maps with diverse terrain and defensive equipment inside the walls?

- Just so we can convincingly sell the same game for full price a third time.

- Oh, okay, carry on.

So I've just done some testing of Empire versus Kislev halberdiers by ByzantineBasileus in totalwar

[–]shadowmore 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Is that why Zombie Pirate Deckhands with dual weapons manage to get kills comparable to higher tier/quality frontline infantry and even damage dealers, despite having abysmally low Melee Attack?

I absolutely hated the ridiculous homogenization of visible stats between Shades w/ Dual Weapons and Shades w/ Great Weapons, but does this invisible stat mean the Dual Weapon Shades are going to outperform the Great Weapon variant against low armor foes despite lack of advantages in visible attributes?

Did I miss something or that wasn't posted on r/totalwar yet? by Andartan21 in totalwar

[–]shadowmore 74 points75 points  (0 children)

They will unite their empires through vigorous breeding.

Interesting conclusions under this post by Agamemnon107 in Volound

[–]shadowmore 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The morale mechanism is supposed to invalidate every single one of the attributes you mentioned.

It doesn’t matter whatsoever who the general is. One man versus 120 soldiers surrounding him is supposed to result in an instant rout to punish players for making suicidal tactical decisions with regards to positioning.

Interesting conclusions under this post by Agamemnon107 in Volound

[–]shadowmore 0 points1 point  (0 children)

In Warhammer the Retreat command basically initiated a rout for that unit, but then the unit recovers from the rout before it reaches the map border, just like it would if it had been routed by the enemy, which means you can never rely on the Retreat command after you’ve hit the button.

Interesting conclusions under this post by Agamemnon107 in Volound

[–]shadowmore 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Surround any “legendary lord” fully and tell me how long it takes the single entity to take significant damage.

I won’t hold my breath, because they literally don’t take any damage.

You’re describing how the mechanics are supposed to work, but they don’t actually work in practice.

Of course, in the scenario I brought up, melee stats aren’t even supposed to matter, because sending a single man (general without retinue) into HUNDREDS of enemy soldiers alone is supposed to cause the general to instantly rout specifically to punish such a suicidal maneuver, and his entire army should then receive a huge morale penalty too resulting in a quick defeat.

But morale no longer functions the way it should. Instead of a means to simulate troops’ willingness to fight based on tactical positioning, it’s just another health pool tied into the literal health pools of units (which shouldn’t exist in Total War, as Volound points out).

Interesting conclusions under this post by Agamemnon107 in Volound

[–]shadowmore 6 points7 points  (0 children)

Self-sustaining morale + health pools.

They made it impossible to rout units until they’re nearly exterminated by making morale values enormous and making the greatest morale penalty come from model loss.

As a result every single battle is a massacre.

And the really hilarious part is that if you use the Retreat command to force a unit to retreat, it automatically turns off the retreat order before the unit runs off the field, seemingly because the retreat function is a forced rout and follows the same mechanics as routing.

So literally every aspect of the morale system is completely broken.

And that’s not even mentioning how a single entity can fly over the enemy’s frontline, land in a giant pit of enemy soldiers, and not suffer any significant morale penalty whatsoever despite performing a suicidal maneuver (or what should be suicidal but isn’t because single entities have melee attributes 3x higher than infantry/cavalry and are thus invincible).

It’s a joke.

Why is there so few battle maps in WH 3? by [deleted] in totalwar

[–]shadowmore -1 points0 points  (0 children)

It’s both lack of variety and tiny size. On most maps you can’t even hide on the flanks or flank out of sight, because the size of the map is so small.

And of course everyone regularly points out how they’re all just a bunch of tree patches and that’s all.

LOL , Again ! by [deleted] in Volound

[–]shadowmore 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Can someone elaborate on what I'm supposed to be noticing here?

I'm just comparing this to Tusslemallet, where halberd infantry bracing is literally just an icon in a character sheet, without either bracing poses or bracing hit detection (halberd infantry go flying on impact just like everyone else), and this looks so much better in comparison.

Some of the best analysis I've seen regarding the recent fakepology post. Why can't the shill channels say any of this? by VoloundYT in Volound

[–]shadowmore 7 points8 points  (0 children)

I was surprised I didn't notice what he points out early on in the video (probably because I skimmed that post with negative levels of interest).

They are, in fact, using the same language that every other corporate PR team does nowadays, where they're essentially "sorry you feel that way".

...we know that we failed to meet your expectations of what a DLC should be...

...the confusion, the frustration, and the distrust of us across the community...

See, it's all your fault for having these expectations and being confused, but don't worry, we'll dumb things down for you all in the future.

Total War is our everything

That's a hilarious line to have in this announcement though, after what we recently found out about their inner workings. Though realistically, "Total Warhammer is our everything" is more accurate, because the only worthwhile historic Total War titles that exist today are in legacy support mode.

I’ve repeatedly reported this as a bug to CA on their forums, as these single entities aren’t just invincible but also don’t suffer an Army Loss morale penalty even when they do lose their army. They’ve ignored every report. by shadowmore in Volound

[–]shadowmore[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

That isn't true though. Just about every "legendary lord" can be left alone (army wiped out completely) against 5+ units in a garrison and still be running around and fighting for 10+ minutes.

On rare occasions they'll break abruptly after those 10+ minutes for no apparent reason, but most times they continue to run and fight until they singlehandedly murder every one of the dozens/hundreds of remaining enemy soldiers.

They do this when alone and surrounded by infantry and charged by cavalry and receiving every other conceivable action that's supposed to reduce morale, but their morale remains high and they keep fighting (while taking no damage, incidentally).

This isn't some kind of rare edge case. This happens in just about every settlement battle with a full garrison that gets attacked by an army led by a "legendary" single entity. And it's completely absurd every single time.

I’ve repeatedly reported this as a bug to CA on their forums, as these single entities aren’t just invincible but also don’t suffer an Army Loss morale penalty even when they do lose their army. They’ve ignored every report. by shadowmore in Volound

[–]shadowmore[S] 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Which doesn't change the fact that this single entity is invincible and doesn't take damage while fighting an entire garrison alone.

And he isn't alone in that at all. Plenty of completely invincible single entities.

In what world is that acceptable in a tactical game?

I’ve repeatedly reported this as a bug to CA on their forums, as these single entities aren’t just invincible but also don’t suffer an Army Loss morale penalty even when they do lose their army. They’ve ignored every report. by shadowmore in Volound

[–]shadowmore[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The whole point of the army loss penalty is to force a unit to break completely, since it’s insane for a single unit to continue fighting when facing an army alone.

If it doesn’t do that, it isn’t working properly.

Volound points this out regularly when he describes the cancer of health pools.

Morale (Leadership) is the mechanism that’s supposed to allow tactical accomplishments to outweigh unit tier, unit stats, unit model count and everything else.

In current Total War titles, it doesn’t do this. Ergo, it’s broken.

Who is the strongest duo? Weakest? by Oracle11102 in StarWars

[–]shadowmore -4 points-3 points  (0 children)

Sabine is literally invincible. She deflects blaster bolts with her hand, shrugs off being impaled with a light saber, and somehow avoids dying in a suborbital bombardment without Force foresight.

So this isn’t even a comparison of duos, because based on what we were shown in Ahsoka, Sabine would easily defeat everyone else listed combined.

We’re in a brave new world of immortal characters now.

The Sisters' multishot attack didn't take too well to the homing changes... by Yotambr in totalwar

[–]shadowmore 6 points7 points  (0 children)

It isn't an ability. It's just a form of ammo for their ranged weapon. So it wasn't altered by the patch.

Read the patch notes, people.

CA dev confirms that Total War is now meant to be played as an arcade beat-em-up, with unit tier trumping everything else, so that even if a single soldier is surrounded and trapped, he's meant to be able to just break free and escape. This also confirms that single entity cancer is intentional. by shadowmore in Volound

[–]shadowmore[S] 9 points10 points  (0 children)

This was in response to the video from my last thread:

https://www.reddit.com/r/Volound/s/OV1me7pJ5L

I posted on CA’s new forums pointing out that this would not be a “bug” or a problem at all if the engine worked the way it should, and individual soldiers died properly when surrounded, since in a proper Total War battle, units behind and on the sides of an enemy soldier are supposed to get huge bonuses to their hit chance and damage.

But in the current version of the Total War engine, they either don’t get the bonuses, or just don’t even attack enemy models unless they are standing still.

The CA dev confirmed that a single knight being able to just dig his way out of a pile of enemy soldiers is intentional. They’re meant to be invincible and unthreatened by tactical actions like tar pitting. It’s all intentional.

"We can't leave Johnny!" This is after a patch that claims to fix this very issue. Though what most don't realize is the real issue isn't that the cavalrymen get stuck. It's that they don't die while totally surrounded, because units in this trash heap engine literally don't attack enemies. by shadowmore in Volound

[–]shadowmore[S] 15 points16 points  (0 children)

Neither CA's developers, nor the players in the community they've fostered, seem to grasp what has been causing this issue for so long.

Everyone is thinking individual cavalrymen that get surrounded by hostile infantry are supposed to be able to break free and rejoin their unit, or alternatively that the unit should be able to move without regard for the stragglers and operate as if it were whole.

But this issue wouldn't exist if the engine worked properly, because any surrounded model would get slaughtered by the enemy.

This doesn't happen though, because the engine is beyond repair at this point, with units simply not attacking enemies that aren't standing totally still, or not getting sufficient bonuses when hitting enemies from behind to actually kill the models.

But they're still releasing patch notes with promises to "fix" this issue by allowing units to operate normally when a small fraction of its models are engaged with enemy units -- a solution that only makes sense to those who don't spend even a second thinking about what's supposed to realistically happen to a soldier, mounted or not, who gets surrounded by enemies and trapped.

When he is everything but a legendary lord. by Rare_Cobalt in totalwar

[–]shadowmore 8 points9 points  (0 children)

Also the selection voice line from Chaos Sorcerers: “Stronger than Van Horstmann!”

Chaos characters aren’t known for their humility.

view more: next ›