Total War: WARHAMMER III

Total War: WARHAMMER III

View Stats:
CA are closing threads and want feedback, here is feedback
Toggle for sandbox mode
Toggle for settlement battles
Specific timeframe for Immortal Empires release
Clear commitment to further support including DLC

The fact that the first two things have already been done by modders doesn't mean that CA shouldn't include them by default as well.

No sentences like "Things are in flux at the moment as we rebalance the work on WARHAMMER III with future projects" that can be interpreted as "we are leaving this game in the dirt and moving on to other projects".

CA say they listen to the fans, well here is one who has been with the series since the orginal Shogun and who has spent many hundreds of Euros on their products.
Last edited by RoosterX86; Mar 25 @ 3:26am
Originally posted by CA Evangelos:
Hey there. Quick clarification that threads will never be closed for offering valid criticism or feedback, but will be closed if they are created in an effort to create arguments, drag down the community, or express frustrations in a way that are more focused on attacking individuals or the team than working towards solutions to those problems.

Originally posted by RoosterX86:
No sentences like "Things are in flux at the moment as we rebalance the work on WARHAMMER III with future projects" that can be interpreted as "we are leaving this game in the dirt and moving on to other projects".

Oh! This is absolutely not the case, so let me clarify: Total War: WARHAMMER III is absolutely the priority and is not going anywhere soon. "Future Projects" are more specifically referring to the DLC and additional content being added to WHIII specifically, which is absolutely still on the schedule even if the schedule is changing—a roadmap we look forward to sharing once it cements a bit. (I'll let Marketing handle the future, separate projects!)

To the feedback points: we're absolutely looking for ideas and notes, but we're also looking for consensus from the playerbase. The more refined the concept—and the more that players have weighed in on the subject, added their ideas, and helped refine the original idea—the easier it is for us to discuss and decide how and whether it fits into the game. This is one reason why we encourage the "one thread, one topic" approach to feedback: because it helps the community focus in on a singular problem and helps us follow along with the discussion and see what it offers to the game.

All that said: Update 1.1 will provide a good deal of changes that should address many feedback points from the community, but is only the start of the game's live lifespan. So keep the feedback topics coming, work with each other to refine the ideas and include others, and we'll try to keep up with everyone's enthusiasm and passion for making the game even better!
< >
Showing 16-30 of 83 comments
Originally posted by maximum997:
Originally posted by RoosterX86:
Toggle for sandbox mode
Toggle for settlement battles
They will never do that. Becouse it is admitting of their failure. And such corporations never ever admit their failures. They will blame market, players, solar radiation, everything exept themself.
The are able to learn though. Mortal Empires eventually got a setting for the chaos invasion, including the option to turn it off.
They can do it, even if it takes them a hell of a lot of time.

How about this, CA: whenever you decide to put in a new feature in your games, include an option to turn it off. That way you won't piss anyone off and you can use your player data to see if people actually like it or not.
The author of this thread has indicated that this post answers the original topic.
CA Evangelos  [developer] Mar 25 @ 4:18am 
3
2
Hey there. Quick clarification that threads will never be closed for offering valid criticism or feedback, but will be closed if they are created in an effort to create arguments, drag down the community, or express frustrations in a way that are more focused on attacking individuals or the team than working towards solutions to those problems.

Originally posted by RoosterX86:
No sentences like "Things are in flux at the moment as we rebalance the work on WARHAMMER III with future projects" that can be interpreted as "we are leaving this game in the dirt and moving on to other projects".

Oh! This is absolutely not the case, so let me clarify: Total War: WARHAMMER III is absolutely the priority and is not going anywhere soon. "Future Projects" are more specifically referring to the DLC and additional content being added to WHIII specifically, which is absolutely still on the schedule even if the schedule is changing—a roadmap we look forward to sharing once it cements a bit. (I'll let Marketing handle the future, separate projects!)

To the feedback points: we're absolutely looking for ideas and notes, but we're also looking for consensus from the playerbase. The more refined the concept—and the more that players have weighed in on the subject, added their ideas, and helped refine the original idea—the easier it is for us to discuss and decide how and whether it fits into the game. This is one reason why we encourage the "one thread, one topic" approach to feedback: because it helps the community focus in on a singular problem and helps us follow along with the discussion and see what it offers to the game.

All that said: Update 1.1 will provide a good deal of changes that should address many feedback points from the community, but is only the start of the game's live lifespan. So keep the feedback topics coming, work with each other to refine the ideas and include others, and we'll try to keep up with everyone's enthusiasm and passion for making the game even better!
Last edited by CA Evangelos; Mar 25 @ 4:22am
Originally posted by CA Evangelos:
Hey there. Quick clarification that threads will never be closed for offering valid criticism or feedback, but will be closed if they are created in an effort to create arguments, drag down the community, or express frustrations in a way that are more focused on attacking individuals or the team than working towards solutions to those problems.

Originally posted by RoosterX86:
No sentences like "Things are in flux at the moment as we rebalance the work on WARHAMMER III with future projects" that can be interpreted as "we are leaving this game in the dirt and moving on to other projects".

Oh! This is absolutely not the case, so let me clarify: Total War: WARHAMMER III is absolutely the priority and is not going anywhere soon. "Future Projects" are more specifically referring to the DLC and additional content being added to WHIII specifically, which is absolutely still on the schedule even if the schedule is changing a bit—a roadmap we look forward to sharing once it cements a bit. (I'll let Marketing handle the future, separate projects!)

To the feedback points: we're absolutely looking for ideas and notes, but we're also looking for consensus from the playerbase. The more refined the concept—and the more that players have weighed in on the subject, added their ideas, and helped refine the original idea—the easier it is for us to discuss and decide how and whether it fits into the game.

All that said: Update 1.1 will provide a good deal of changes that should address many feedback points from the community, but is only the start of the game's live lifespan. So keep the feedback topics coming, work with each other to refine the ideas and include others, and we'll try to keep up with everyone's enthusiasm and passion for making the game even better!
THANK YOU for this!!! Really, thank you. This is the kind of statement we have been missing. It is much appreciated, believe me.

Please, just add (and in the future include) toggle switches for new features such as settlement battles or specific campaign mechanics like you did for the chaos invasion in Mortal Empires, including options to turn them off.

Choices are always good and you can avoid having people freak out about something new that they don't want in their game.

Edit.: A lot of us strategy players are Dwarfs by heart, we like the old ways best and are reluctant to adapt to new things. ;-)
Last edited by RoosterX86; Mar 25 @ 4:32am
Namhaid Mar 25 @ 4:29am 
Originally posted by RoosterX86:
Toggle for sandbox mode
Toggle for settlement battles
I don't dislike the campaign, and I would really like the new minor settlement battles if it wasn't for the towers being rebuilt, but yeah, the ability to toggle or customize options to make the campaign to your liking is always good, I do wish we got a lot more of those.

As for CA droping the game, there is little more that I can say, no real reason to think it might happen anytime soon.
Originally posted by Namhaid:
Originally posted by RoosterX86:
Toggle for sandbox mode
Toggle for settlement battles
I don't dislike the campaign, and I would really like the new minor settlement battles if it wasn't for the towers being rebuilt, but yeah, the ability to toggle or customize options to make the campaign to your liking is always good, I do wish we got a lot more of those.
That's exactly what I mean, toggle switches and customization make everyone happy.
VoiD Mar 25 @ 4:36am 
I find it nice that CA is paying attention to what's worrying the playerbase, and they actually bother to reply where the real players are, steam forums, where they are publishing their own game.

Most companies prefer to retreat to their heavily moderated bubble in private forums nobody ever visits so they tend to have a skewed vision of what the actual playerbase want.

In fact, most companies seem to want to do that nowadays, and it sucks for them.

Also
Originally posted by RoosterX86:
Edit.: A lot of us strategy players are Dwarfs by heart, we like the old ways best and are reluctant to adapt to new things. ;-)

This is VERY true, I mean, just look at the forums of every RTS ever released in the last 10+ years.

But yeah, as I said before, I thought the slow patching was an issue, now we know why, the company is reorganizing internally and there's probably a lot of stuff to get done, with the integration of WH 1 and 2 for IE, the next DLC, the patches, the fixes, the tests, but I still hope the critical tech issues can be resolved quickly.
Last edited by VoiD; Mar 25 @ 4:40am
Originally posted by VoiD:
I find it nice that CA is paying attention to what's worrying the playerbase, and they actually bother to reply where the real players are, steam forums, where they are publishing their own game.

Most companies prefer to retreat to their heavily moderated bubble in private forums nobody ever visits so they tend to have a skewed vision of what the actual playerbase want.

In fact, most companies seem to want to do that nowadays, and it sucks for them.
Yep. It is good. And it is give me hope and warm my heart.
Zane87 Mar 25 @ 4:40am 
Originally posted by VoiD:
No disagreements here, more options are always welcome.

If they were going to expand into these ideas it would be interesting to see some weird modifiers too, if possible, like "corrupted world" where corruption increases and spreads faster, or "portal mode" where the rifts never close, or they keep reopening in quick sucession.

Sorta like the wtf mode in DotA, just for a wacky experience.
+1 to options.
I like the corrupted world idea, anyone ever played the Dominions series? There your influence is basically your religion that you spread to other regions. It's modeled like a riding water system, where religion produced in one province increases it there icloud until a threshold is reached, when it will "wash over" to neighboring provinces even if no religion is produced there.

It increases again until all neighboring provinces are over a threshold and then religion will "wash over" to neighboring neighboring provinces and so on.

With corruption this would be cool, where every corruption over 50% could wash over to adjacent regions and if not countered slowly rises till with 50% it washes over again. Same could go with untainted as well, praying against chaos in one bastion might prevent your other regions further away too.
----------
Not that CA will implement such a cool and complex system though but I'd love that.
Originally posted by maximum997:
Originally posted by VoiD:
I find it nice that CA is paying attention to what's worrying the playerbase, and they actually bother to reply where the real players are, steam forums, where they are publishing their own game.

Most companies prefer to retreat to their heavily moderated bubble in private forums nobody ever visits so they tend to have a skewed vision of what the actual playerbase want.

In fact, most companies seem to want to do that nowadays, and it sucks for them.
Yep. It is good. And it is give me hope and warm my heart.
Same here, I feel much better now.
Originally posted by RoosterX86:
Originally posted by Namhaid:
I don't dislike the campaign, and I would really like the new minor settlement battles if it wasn't for the towers being rebuilt, but yeah, the ability to toggle or customize options to make the campaign to your liking is always good, I do wish we got a lot more of those.
That's exactly what I mean, toggle switches and customization make everyone happy.
Yes that was awesome when they did that for mortal empires in 2.
I cranked chaos invasion right up :)
Originally posted by Captain T1:
Originally posted by RoosterX86:
That's exactly what I mean, toggle switches and customization make everyone happy.
Yes that was awesome when they did that for mortal empires in 2.
I cranked chaos invasion right up :)
And I turned it off, and we are both happy and can play the way we want. :-)

Edit: Options, CA, options. That is the consensus from players that you are looking for. ;-)
Last edited by RoosterX86; Mar 25 @ 4:48am
Originally posted by RoosterX86:
Originally posted by Captain T1:
Yes that was awesome when they did that for mortal empires in 2.
I cranked chaos invasion right up :)
And I turned it off, and we are both happy and can play the way we want. :-)
I have turned it off too before. Only turned it up for the ordertide.
Reaver79 Mar 25 @ 4:54am 
Options is always good.
matlajs Mar 25 @ 4:56am 
Originally posted by CA Evangelos:
Hey there. Quick clarification that threads will never be closed for offering valid criticism or feedback, but will be closed if they are created in an effort to create arguments, drag down the community, or express frustrations in a way that are more focused on attacking individuals or the team than working towards solutions to those problems.

You legitimized harsh criticism against you by not listening fans before release and rather release your own ideas without leaking piece of that to get an opinion. You wanted it, you have it, no science.
Bengis Mar 25 @ 5:09am 
Originally posted by CA Evangelos:
Hey there. Quick clarification that threads will never be closed for offering valid criticism or feedback, but will be closed if they are created in an effort to create arguments, drag down the community, or express frustrations in a way that are more focused on attacking individuals or the team than working towards solutions to those problems.

Originally posted by RoosterX86:
No sentences like "Things are in flux at the moment as we rebalance the work on WARHAMMER III with future projects" that can be interpreted as "we are leaving this game in the dirt and moving on to other projects".

Oh! This is absolutely not the case, so let me clarify: Total War: WARHAMMER III is absolutely the priority and is not going anywhere soon. "Future Projects" are more specifically referring to the DLC and additional content being added to WHIII specifically, which is absolutely still on the schedule even if the schedule is changing—a roadmap we look forward to sharing once it cements a bit. (I'll let Marketing handle the future, separate projects!)

To the feedback points: we're absolutely looking for ideas and notes, but we're also looking for consensus from the playerbase. The more refined the concept—and the more that players have weighed in on the subject, added their ideas, and helped refine the original idea—the easier it is for us to discuss and decide how and whether it fits into the game. This is one reason why we encourage the "one thread, one topic" approach to feedback: because it helps the community focus in on a singular problem and helps us follow along with the discussion and see what it offers to the game.

All that said: Update 1.1 will provide a good deal of changes that should address many feedback points from the community, but is only the start of the game's live lifespan. So keep the feedback topics coming, work with each other to refine the ideas and include others, and we'll try to keep up with everyone's enthusiasm and passion for making the game even better!

This is frankly untrue.

Threads intended to antagonise will not be closed if their purpose is to antagonise those disappointed in CA. Threads made specifically to praise CA, which CA as a company does not need and offers no basis for constructive discussion or feedback, are not subject to the same standards as those that are critical.

This is as true here as it is on the hell-sites that are the subreddit and the official TW forums.

Edit: Also regarding feedback and how CA handles it, which is poorly:

CA do not help themselves when they make changes and then claim it was 'listening to feedback'. The 'consensus' is whatever CA picks as the winner, as we know from almost nine years of dumbed-down gameplay design being criticised and CA simply doubling-down on it with every single new game since Rome 2.

For this to be the result of 'listening to feedback' then a great deal of other feedback must be disregarded. This means 'feedback' is not actually a reason for why CA does anything: they 'listen' to some but ignore the rest, and give no reason why. I have had several people say in response to this 'CA doesn't have to give a reason'.

That's true, but CA offered a reason anyway and it's a destructive PR narrative with no explanatory power, only the power to start and encourage flame-wars.

If past behaviour predicts current decisions, then CA will 'listen' to feedback and cherry-pick from it whatever they were going to decide to do regardless. It's why the WH3 main campaign exists as it does to begin with. It's why the DLC for 3K was so bad(and didn't sell enough even finish the last planned/announced one) and Thrones of Britannia wasn't even viable because it had 'modern Total War' design all the way through it, but without the marketing-hooks.
Last edited by Bengis; Mar 25 @ 5:16am
< >
Showing 16-30 of 83 comments
Per page: 1530 50

Date Posted: Mar 25 @ 3:26am
Posts: 83