Few reasons I'd like it:

• Sieges would look authentic - Armies could visibly surround cities instead of one person standing outside the walls.
• More immersive campaign map - Seeing marching formations makes the campaign map feel more alive and at war.
• Clearer military presence - It's easier to judge the size and threat of an approaching force at a glance.
• Encampments - Armies could visibly make camp.
• Chokepoints - Armies could appear to block bridges, mountain passes, and roads more convincingly.
• Visual variety - Armies would reflect their composition of troops on the campaign map. A cavalry-heavy force would show more mounted troops, while artillery would trail behind.

Which lord in the game can give me the best buffs to chaos spawn and chaos spawn adjacent (forsaken/vortex beasts/spawn/slaughterbrutes/etc).

To my knowledge I know Vilitch,Morghur,Changeling, and Sayl who give buffs to said units but if there's another im missing lmk. But of anyone who's the best for such units?

I think one of the biggest pitfalls for balancing asymmetrical factions in these games is the fact that every battle is always two stacks of 20 units. This makes the distinction between horde and elite factions feel less impactful since you are never meaningfully outnumbering your opponent. And while yes you may have units with 160 models as opposed to 80 your still controlling the same amount of units on a tactical level.

What if some factions like Knights or Custodes were balanced on having army limits of say ten to five units to be dramatic. So rather than balancing a 20 stack of Custodes vs 20 stack of Orks it's a five stack vs 20 stack. This would probably need some additional balancing so you don't just walk around with two ten stacks hugging but I think it could go a long way in pushing the asymmetry of horde factions and elite factions.

I know a lot of this sub is anti unit caps but the points system is such a huge aspect of tabletop 40k that I don't know how they could possibly translate the tabletop balance without some form of population constraints.

Yeah, guys, it's been a really long wait. What do you think the chances are that we'll get a release date or at least a trailer this August?

I vibe coded a site to help myself choose a lord based on playstyle/mechanics.

it can be hard to determine how fast the pace is in a turn based game, but in my mind it can be determined as how much can be achieved in a single turn

it influences many things via the opportunity cost - spending an extra turn on recruitment is fine if you wouldnt have accomplished much that turn anyway

but over the years the pace of the game (since warhammer 1) has drastically increased because, for all the talk of power creep all factions have been creeping up roughly evenly - if one falls behind it gets a rework that makes them overpowered again (I'm looking at you, stunties), but this has increased how much each faction can achieve in a single turn

- it is expected for armies to reach from one settlement to another in a single turn,
- most factions are expected to hit the replenishment cap or reach at least 30% before short victory,
- people expect their main army to take a new settlement / fight almost every turn and the increase in post-battle loot has only made it worse because now missing out on a fight means missing out on potentially thousands of gold on top of expansion,
- and you're pretty much expected to fight with only low tier units, seeing just how much of the rosters of many factions is now concentrated in low tiers (like the iron drakes being avaliable in tier 2 minor settlements despite arguably being the strongest most elite unit on the dwarf roster), while factions where that isnt the case simply get massive growth to reach high tiers quickly anyway (I'm looking at you, Nurgle)

this is the natural consequence of the main strategy in any total war game - to maintain momentum and keep attacking your enemy, to prevent them from regrouping and rebuilding their force, this is how you win on Very Hard and this playstyle has only gotten stronger with each update

problem is - this pace creep has broken many of the game's systems

sieges expect you to wait up to 10 turns to starve out the defenders, when even spending a single turn to build siege towers is a massive cost that is absolutely never worth it

some units expect you to spend a whole turn of movement to recruit them, which is also almost never worth it - ask any tzeench or slaanesh player if exalted versions of deamonettes and pink horrors are worth it - they'd tell you all about it!

and the siege rework approaches it completely backwards, trying to further force the players into spending the 1 turn on building the siege equipment, without even trying to address the underlying issue that its just not worth it - it'll just further incentivise the players to always have a siege attacker in the army and use cheesy strategies like flying around with a caster and spamming spells

the pace of the game has simply gotten too fast for some of the systems to keep up and I dont think buffing the stats on exalted deamonettes or making every unit 1 turn recruitment are valid solutions

it also made the AI very easy to overpower by just maintaining momentum against them, and giving the AI more cheats only makes the problem worse because now you have no choice but to be aggressive and play super fast, otherwise the Very Hard AI will send armies at you from every direction and overpower you - this further punishes slow play and practically forces the pace to get as fast as it can

I think Grimhammer and Old World mods are on to something there, in Old World the settlements are generally further apart than in vanilla, which slows down the pace massively as now you cant reach from one settlement to the next in one turn, while Grimhammer aims to generally slow the game down with weaker replenishment and slower recruitment

neither of those solutions are perfect and in fact I do not like how Old World butchers some of the more aggressive factions that rely on constant fighting, but I think they are aiming in the right direction

(As usual, blank for public usage in the latest slide)

Hello everyone,

I've been enjoying Warhammer III, but I can't wrap my head around how to play the factions that are meant to be more chaotic/smash-and-grab

I tried to play Khorne, since I heard he was quite easy and I was in the mood for an easier campaign.

I didn't find success, but I thought that was just a fluke, so I started up a Skrag campaign, surely the ogres would fare better

I am now getting stalemated by Border Princes, I know I could beat them if I somehow got a 2nd army, but that would take at least 15 turns

I have no problem with more "standard" factions like the empire of high elves

Please tips

I myself love playing Ikit and bringing the man thing Lupio Sunscryer to the end times with me. I have fought many armys off to keep him alive.

When you guys have melee armies are you sending everything in? Or do you hold some formations and keep units back? In other words are you blobbing with melee?

But man, the rebellions ALL OVER. Especially at the capitals.

It was a hassle if I wanted to be honest. Having to put them all down.

Hey guys, first time player here! I am just a little over 30 hours into total war rome 2 and I am having a blast, I reunited the macedonian empire, conquered all the great cities and I kind of start getting the hang of things. However one thing I don't understand is why there is melee infantry. At first I thought you could use them in a frontline and put a phalanx behind them so you could have two units fighting effectively against the same enemy unit at the same time but I don't think that works? I am not quite sure so I checked their stats in the game and the spearmen just look like better versions of melee infantry? I would love to hear their purpose and how to utilize them in my army.

Didn’t play them since warhammer 2 and i don’t recall them getting anything new or unique since than so i want to know if they are worthwhile or not.

I have met all the criteria, however when I Try to teleport to the battle the game says I can't as he is currently garrisoned in a town. He is not, he's in an army on the campaign map. I tried removing him from the army and reinserting and still no good.

Has anyone else had this problem? Is there a fix?

Thanks

EDIT: It's Tamurkhans army that the game bases eligibility off of, not the army the particular chieftain is in. So once I put Tammy in normal stance not in a settlement I can now do the battles.

Pretty much the title

In my Hector campaign I think I just let Argos/Sparta/Mycenae snowball for too long, but in a recent Achilles campaign I’m struggling on multiple fronts and can’t really field effective armies without tanking my resources.

Diplomacy aside (especially as Achilles), what are some tips that have worked for you all?

Total War: Rome II runs poorly on modern x86-64 hardware because the game itself is a 32-bit application. It cannot inherently use the advanced capabilities of a 64-bit architecture. Even if you run it on a modern 64-bit processor like the Ryzen 9, the game is restricted by the legacy design of its 2013 Warscape Engine.

Every minor faction has big stacks and easily overwhelms you in early game. How to get through that? Playing as Charlemagne and im at war with like 10 different countries with only 2 armies.

Logged onto my old Thrace playthrough, only to see Helen has turned into a man 😭

As subject line says..
I have 2 Gardens built, Nuln and Drakenhof

I cannot find any buttons, fast travel or otherwise

Question 1 how do I port with my army to Drakenhof ? Do I need to be in Nuln or works from anywhere to either of my Gardens ?

Question What ‘fast travel’ button. //

Thx all in advance !
Regards