Thoughts on endgame scenarios

[[*UNITY*]_ james]

There are some aspects to this game that get discussed alot by the community (e.g. sieges), but also others that are not so talked about but arguably should be.

One of those imo are the endgame scenarios. Do people actually enjoy them, or even turn them on? Do people prefer them over the Chaos invasions we had in WH I/II, or other endgame scenarios from historical titles (e.g. Realm Divide in Shogun 2)? Are they fine as they are, or do people want to see more? Besides more races, what improvements/options do you want to see added to endgames?

Curious to see what people think.

[Valthejean]

Endgame scenarios had the POTENTIAL to be something amazing. Their implementation, like most of WH3's mechanics, are sloppily implemented. They COULD have been something incredibly cool, with variations. For example you could have an endgame scenario involving the Sword of Khaine, dramatically buffing its benefits as well as its side effects, or even making it that whoever has the Sword of Khaine becomes the endgame scenario who gets a ton of bonuses, but all factions either hate or declare war on them.

Then you could have used the Realms of Chaos idea, where the Endgame scenario could be enemy spawns every X amount of turns, until someone goes into the chaos lord in question's realm to either conquer them or seal them away. You could even give a bonus to whatever player finishes them.

There's a lot you COULD have done with endgame scenarios, they COULD have been a ton of fun. Instead we just got more doomstacks.

[Green Raven]

I would like to see a proper Chaos Invasion return.

[Raider Deci]

Off. And I am suprised that I actually prefer the chaos-invasion from wh1/2, and that thing was an extremely watered down of the Hun-invasion from Attila.
The Hun-invasion was really well done. The dread & feeling that the world is going to ♥♥♥♥ was in the air, supplemented mostly with the cutscenes and those bible-quotes, the weather that got crappier and the huns themselfs were just relentless. The ending was a bit lackluster though, could have used another cutscene for that imo.

The problem is ofc that they just show up, just like that. And not just copy-pasted stacks from the main factions but the minors too (looking at you dawi...). No buildup to it at all, no new faction or anything just the oldes but with free stacks. Like Valthejean says its so bland in every way.

[chino]

all time turn on with almost all available faction , only turn off my own faction . It's a nice challenge when it come. Most campaign become borring/easy at turn 70 , when your main army autoresolve everything without casulties.
It can be better ( like skaven one for exemple ) but it's a think to spice endgame a bit.

[SpeaksTooFast]

They were pretty underwhelming for me. Would be cool to see some actual challenge introduced into the game as opposed to just more grind.

I don't expect anything great to come of it but Nagash would be the perfect opportunity to introduce and actual oh sh*t moment. You achieve long victory and all of a sudden the undead factions are revived, united under one banner, and coming for their biggest threat, so cheesy anti-player basis makes perfect sense.

[Triple G]

It´s more variety for those who like something like it. I personally think that i´m already done with the game at that point and don´t need something which drags it out a lot. In WH2 You needed, i guess, 50 settlements and 8 major faction capitals for the short victory. Here it´s comparable to the long victory, with the difference that You need 75 settlements. Which is the size at which it is clear that nothing the game could throw a You, could break You, or make it anyhow challenging. I only saw the Skaven crisis so far, and i don´t exactly know why i should conquer or beat a 30 settlement Skaven faction at the other side of the map, when i know the AI wouldn´t handle such a faction on their own, which means they will probably grow further, as i can´t surround them and secure my territory. And i probably need 15 turns just to get there. And then there´s another one with 15 settlements - at the opposite side of the map. Imho that wouldn´t be more interesting if it would "build up" either.

If i would like world conquest it could be nice, but for now i will never turn that specific one on again. When i have 50 settlements - that´s about the size at which i could beat any faction and it´s just a matter of time - and i have seen any army configuration i wanted in battle, and OP enough lords and heroes. Also in WH2 armies were more expensive for the player, here i can have enough to secure any border, but i don´t need scripted army spam for the sake of it.

They could rather do and faction / lord specific campaign goals with certain steps and missions, or perhaps negative outcomes sometimes in some quest-lines. But here it feels somehow generic, while it couldn´t be more generic than conquer 75 random settlements and destroy faction x. They don´t even have the advisor saying anything, because all the effort was put into the graphics it seems.

[A.Pot]

The first Total War Warhammer really did it right but the 2nd game version had all sorts of problems since day 1 of Mortal Empires but it got better and the Crisises of this one can be hit or miss.

[Many-Named]

too grindy at higher levels, I mean unless you just wanna doom stack everything that is, and even then

[Alan]

At a certain point after I'm far too powerful to defeat, some free extra experience magically appears and commits suicide on my armies.

Yawn.

[SomeGuy1]

It does give you a chance to fight actual elite armies with leveled Lords and Heroes (especially the mage Heroes tend to die before learning any good spells, so you never actually have to deal with them). I think the only times I have ever had spells like Curse of da Bad Moon cast against me were from endgame crisis armies.

[chickabumpbump]

Lazy and uninteresting. Never turned it on once and never will

[Soji]

If they did something more than just magically spawn like 10 full stacks of armies from a random faction they'd be way more interesting.

[Basarab Laiota]

they're boring

[Reaver79]

There's scenarios ? Felt more like a now go hit this faction kinda thing..

[PostalGibbon]

In tw2 the "end scenarios" were better. Playing order? you got Grimgor, Morathi or Malekith being strength one with 50-100 settlements and everything confederated.
Playing chaos you got your Karl, Donut elves, dinos or dawi sitting in strength one giving you helluva challenge when order tide hits.
In tw3 its benny hill show where you chase twenty tier one full stacks non stop.