Patch 5.2 (campaign): They pretend to work.

[Hecleas]

https://community.creative-assembly.com/total-war/total-war-warhammer/blogs/30-total-war-warhammer-iii-patch-5-2-0

Their famous rework of the campaign AI takes place on 2 database tables, one for the priority value you want for the construction of buildings and the same but for recruitment the table is called "cdir_military_generator_etc".
While we're all waiting, not a rework, but a DEBUG of the campaign AI which has been bugging since 5.0
It's really smoke and mirrors to pretend they're working.
Same for the level of difficulty, for a thousand years everyone has been saying that we are fed up with AI bonuses and instead of compensating for their shortcoming with that, correct and improve the AI.
Knowing that their bonus adjustment can be adjusted in 1 minute, 5 minutes if you are tired...

In summary, what they have planned for the AI, I do it in modding in 3-4 hours solo.
So I'll leave you to ponder the good intentions of the company. Because have no doubt, the devs they have are much more competent than me. It's just that they have other priorities.

I'll let you think about it and I wanted you to know it.
But any other modder who knows the tables that are linked knows that they "did nothing".

[Hecleas]

Originally posted by Pimpin Pippin:

Its a shame companies always go for the lowest possible effort/investment route and count on marketing and blind fans to scrape & pocket profits.

Long gone are the days of Age of Empires 2 and Warcraft 3 where a true high quality product was created and properly supported.
Its all "reforged" now...

“Evil is not able to create anything new, it can only distort and destroy what has been invented or made by the forces of good.”
― J.R.R. Tolkien

[Da_Higg]

Originally posted by Pimpin Pippin:

Long gone are the days of Age of Empires 2 and Warcraft 3 where a true high quality product was created and properly supported.
Its all "reforged" now...

Also long gone are the days when you could give every faction in a strategy game the same units with the exception of a couple of unique models and call it a day. Let's be honest AOE2 would have been a complete flop if it had been released now.

[Hecleas]

Originally posted by Da_Higg:

Originally posted by Pimpin Pippin:

Long gone are the days of Age of Empires 2 and Warcraft 3 where a true high quality product was created and properly supported.
Its all "reforged" now...

Also long gone are the days when you could give every faction in a strategy game the same units with the exception of a couple of unique models and call it a day. Let's be honest AOE2 would have been a complete flop if it had been released now.

Are you boring? Compare what can be compared.
These games were ahead of their time and a pure revolution.
The biggest evolution was the creation of World Of Warcraft. In 2003 it was incredible.

To this day games ahead of their time are very rare.
Manor Lords? Ashes Of Creation? Star Citizen?

[Alan]

Originally posted by Da_Higg:

Originally posted by Pimpin Pippin:

Long gone are the days of Age of Empires 2 and Warcraft 3 where a true high quality product was created and properly supported.
Its all "reforged" now...

Also long gone are the days when you could give every faction in a strategy game the same units with the exception of a couple of unique models and call it a day. Let's be honest AOE2 would have been a complete flop if it had been released now.

This is both objectively true and nevertheless unfair and misleading. You can't compare the content of games from 2024 and last century. (I mean you CAN...but you shouldn't) The resources (manpower, funding, technology, etc.) are just fundamentally different. Quick googling says AOE2 cost about $10M to make, which would be ludicrously low today.

What you CAN compare, but which does not lend itself to being compared easily, is the level of effort and polish that was applied then and now. Games back then were released as (at least largely) finished products. They couldn't be released with QC incomplete and full of bugs and then patched and patched and patched and patched and patched. They weren't half-finished products designed to push additional purchases, though you can argue as to the pros/cons of DLCs vs Expansions, and there genuinely ARE pros/cons for both. On the other hand, games back then were also much simpler and required fewer resources to create. To me, there also seems to have been a major cultural shift in terms of industry consolidation and focus on profit/investor satisfaction rather than "art."

[Da_Higg]

Originally posted by Alan:

Originally posted by Da_Higg:

Also long gone are the days when you could give every faction in a strategy game the same units with the exception of a couple of unique models and call it a day. Let's be honest AOE2 would have been a complete flop if it had been released now.

This is both objectively true and nevertheless unfair and misleading. You can't compare the content of games from 2024 and last century. (I mean you CAN...but you shouldn't) The resources (manpower, funding, technology, etc.) are just fundamentally different. Quick googling says AOE2 cost about $10M to make, which would be ludicrously low today.

What you CAN compare, but which does not lend itself to being compared easily, is the level of effort and polish that was applied then and now. Games back then were released as (at least largely) finished products. They couldn't be released with QC incomplete and full of bugs and then patched and patched and patched and patched and patched. They weren't half-finished products designed to push additional purchases, though you can argue as to the pros/cons of DLCs vs Expansions, and there genuinely ARE pros/cons for both. On the other hand, games back then were also much simpler and required fewer resources to create. To me, there also seems to have been a major cultural shift in terms of industry consolidation and focus on profit/investor satisfaction rather than "art."

Oh I agree that the games cannot be compared, my point was more that people always go on about how games back in the day were released more as a one and done etc, whilst at the same time wanting more and more content in modern games without an increase in cost.

Money is always going to be the big issue, these days games cost so much more to make than they used to that base games barely break even - hence why DLC gets pushed so much, the profit margin is much greater which gives you the capital to invest in the future.

Couple that with modern player bases having an insatiable demand for new stuff which encourages developers to release games before they are ready for fear of losing their impatient players.

But I think your kidding yourself if you think that people back in the day did it for "the art". It's always been about the money

[madison]

Originally posted by Hecleas:

Originally posted by Pimpin Pippin:

Its a shame companies always go for the lowest possible effort/investment route and count on marketing and blind fans to scrape & pocket profits.

Long gone are the days of Age of Empires 2 and Warcraft 3 where a true high quality product was created and properly supported.
Its all "reforged" now...

“Evil is not able to create anything new, it can only distort and destroy what has been invented or made by the forces of good.”
― J.R.R. Tolkien

A platitude, as I point out every single time that man and his foolish quotes and cognitive dissonance ridden philosophy come up in the wild.

[Eldyra]

Originally posted by Mazisky:

Originally posted by Eldyra:

Please stop constantly trying to censor valid and honest criticism. It's a really bad look for you.

I don't know what that mean and what it has to do with my comment.

I have no power to censor anything anyway and I agree however that honest criticisms should not be censored, regardless how many alt accounts rage about it.

I'm just encouraging you to not disparage other people's comments with hostility as invalid simply because you disagree with them. Your alt account has done this too in the past so I'm hoping you will begin practicing what you preach at some point rather than contradicting yourself at every turn is all!

[Alan]

Originally posted by Da_Higg:

Originally posted by Alan:

This is both objectively true and nevertheless unfair and misleading. You can't compare the content of games from 2024 and last century. (I mean you CAN...but you shouldn't) The resources (manpower, funding, technology, etc.) are just fundamentally different. Quick googling says AOE2 cost about $10M to make, which would be ludicrously low today.

What you CAN compare, but which does not lend itself to being compared easily, is the level of effort and polish that was applied then and now. Games back then were released as (at least largely) finished products. They couldn't be released with QC incomplete and full of bugs and then patched and patched and patched and patched and patched. They weren't half-finished products designed to push additional purchases, though you can argue as to the pros/cons of DLCs vs Expansions, and there genuinely ARE pros/cons for both. On the other hand, games back then were also much simpler and required fewer resources to create. To me, there also seems to have been a major cultural shift in terms of industry consolidation and focus on profit/investor satisfaction rather than "art."

Oh I agree that the games cannot be compared, my point was more that people always go on about how games back in the day were released more as a one and done etc, whilst at the same time wanting more and more content in modern games without an increase in cost.

Money is always going to be the big issue, these days games cost so much more to make than they used to that base games barely break even - hence why DLC gets pushed so much, the profit margin is much greater which gives you the capital to invest in the future.

Couple that with modern player bases having an insatiable demand for new stuff which encourages developers to release games before they are ready for fear of losing their impatient players.

But I think your kidding yourself if you think that people back in the day did it for "the art". It's always been about the money

Maybe, but even now you see stories about certain games being delayed long, LONG past planned launch to fix issues...and also stories about games that launched before they were ready under huge pressure from the C-Suite. I think there was less of that pressure back when fewer developers were these massive gajillion dollar publicly traded companies full of non-dev executives, but you don't have to agree with me. I do agree that pressure from players has increased as well, which I'd probably attribute to the rise of platforms like Steam and social media, which allow players to comment on/interact with games under development which they (mostly) likely wouldn't have even known about prior to release in decades past.

[Backler]

Originally posted by Da_Higg:

Originally posted by Backler:

I just wish the AI wouldn't initiate fights that they will lose in auto-resolve.

That's a measure to stop the AI endlessly running away if it's army is slightly weaker than yours.

...huh? AI faction declares war on me and individually suicides all of their armies... all to prevent having to chase them down later? That's nice of them, I guess.

[Mazisky]

Originally posted by Eldyra:

Originally posted by Mazisky:

I don't know what that mean and what it has to do with my comment.

I have no power to censor anything anyway and I agree however that honest criticisms should not be censored, regardless how many alt accounts rage about it.

I'm just encouraging you to not disparage other people's comments with hostility as invalid simply because you disagree with them. Your alt account has done this too in the past so I'm hoping you will begin practicing what you preach at some point rather than contradicting yourself at every turn is all!

I am sorry but these are false accusations with no evidence, made by a user who don't even own the game.

I kindly ask to stop making up stuff about my person, would be appreciated.

[Chris]

Originally posted by KeiranG19:

If it's an easy fix then why complain? It's free.

The base game being better for free is always a good thing no matter what your opinion of the devs.

If it turns out to be worse than before then sure complain, but it's not out yet you can't know if it's bad.

You just come across as a whiny modder who's worried their mod might be obsolete.

lol, lmao even

[Eldyra]

Originally posted by Mazisky:

Originally posted by Eldyra:

I'm just encouraging you to not disparage other people's comments with hostility as invalid simply because you disagree with them. Your alt account has done this too in the past so I'm hoping you will begin practicing what you preach at some point rather than contradicting yourself at every turn is all!

I am sorry but these are false accusations with no evidence, made by a user who don't even own the game.

I kindly ask to stop making up stuff about my person, would be appreciated.

Well if proof truly mattered to you, you would have provided it for the dozens upon dozens of claims you've made recently. But that's neither here nor there. I'm simply offering advice on some present issues we both (and many others) know you are enduring currently. I'm sure if you make some behavioral adjustments, things will improve for you! I'm sure you have it in you to be the change you want to see!

[Amphibian Artillery]

If CA does a real rework on the AI will that save my marriage?

[Amphibian Artillery]

Can modders save my marriage? Or is it damaged beyond editing tables

[Zeek]

Originally posted by Amphibian Artillery:

Can modders save my marriage? Or is it damaged beyond editing tables

They'll say they can, fail, and then dismiss it as fake news when the developers actually save it.