vs Sanctus Reach

[Gorwe]

I know, I know, what an outstandingly original question. Still, what is different? How do they stack up beyond having different factions? SR is very enjoyable, how's bSector?

[SaD-82]

Originally posted by B:

there would practically be no reason to choose SR over BS other a desire to play the SR story.

Be careful when trying to state your opinion as a fact - because it's just an opinion.
And a wrong one.

I give you some reasons why SR is better than BS:
1.
No railroad story with plot armor and plot enemy drops. Who needs this in a game based on a tabletop experience? Why need a story to follow at all? That's the problem nowadays: People need railroads because otherwise they can't focus.
2.
A more mature look in SR. No shiny colours like it was designed for mobiles and kids.
Funnily enough, some years ago there was a research on colours in rp-games in regards to what people in a different spot on earth prefer - the outcome was: Americans prefer the shiny colours and the europeans prefer the more gritty look. What this does say? Everyone has to determine this for him-/herself.
The point is: WH 40k is dark and gritty. The visuals in SR are superior.
3.
The whole army selection in SR is way closer to the tabletop experience than in BS. In BS it's just...well...bs. Arbitrary restrictions and a feel as if it was a mobile game like clash of clans or something similar stupid,

And the list goes on.
BS isn't a bad game, but in terms of WH40k and its whole vibe and roots? Way inferior to SR.

[Gorwe]

Originally posted by SaD-82:

Originally posted by B:

there would practically be no reason to choose SR over BS other a desire to play the SR story.

Be careful when trying to state your opinion as a fact - because it's just an opinion.
And a wrong one.

I give you some reasons why SR is better than BS:
1.
No railroad story with plot armor and plot enemy drops. Who needs this in a game based on a tabletop experience? Why need a story to follow at all? That's the problem nowadays: People need railroads because otherwise they can't focus.
2.
A more mature look in SR. No shiny colours like it was designed for mobiles and kids.
Funnily enough, some years ago there was a research on colours in rp-games in regards to what people in a different spot on earth prefer - the outcome was: Americans prefer the shiny colours and the europeans prefer the more gritty look. What this does say? Everyone has to determine this for him-/herself.
The point is: WH 40k is dark and gritty. The visuals in SR are superior.
3.
The whole army selection in SR is way closer to the tabletop experience than in BS. In BS it's just...well...bs. Arbitrary restrictions and a feel as if it was a mobile game like clash of clans or something similar stupid,

And the list goes on.
BS isn't a bad game, but in terms of WH40k and its whole vibe and roots? Way inferior to SR.

Got a link to that research? Also, how's bSector's balance? SR is all over the place lol.

[EngineerKenny 123]

I love Sanctus Reach. Have all the DLC and play the campaigns of each - over and over.

[Gorwe]

Originally posted by EngineerKenny 123:

I love Sanctus Reach. Have all the DLC and play the campaigns of each - over and over.

Which campaign is your favorite?

[EngineerKenny 123]

by FAR - Sons of Cadia. SO challenging, fun, and interesting. But Challenging! Hardest mission for me is (again, by far) the first one. So great of a DLC.

[Gorwe]

Originally posted by EngineerKenny 123:

by FAR - Sons of Cadia. SO challenging, fun, and interesting. But Challenging! Hardest mission for me is (again, by far) the first one. So great of a DLC.

Yeah, it could be the first one. How about dem Morkanauts though? The campaign is awesome and have no doubt! Now, Stormclaw is like ... meh, Legacy is just random SM pwnage(short and sweet!), haven't played Hour. Should be badass with Logan AND Ragnar!

Oh I also quite like Orks. Even if their Army List is different only to be different(I don't like it). I'd prefer more Warbikers, a Warboss etc. Without such high pressure, you are playing make believe SMs or something. :p

[EngineerKenny 123]

Yup! The whole campaign is great, and the Morkanauts are awesome - even if they are the enemy.

[Gorwe]

Originally posted by EngineerKenny 123:

Yup! The whole campaign is great, and the Morkanauts are awesome - even if they are the enemy.

I meant the mission. That's got to be the hardest mission ever. Well, maybe except the very first one.

[Gorwe]

I really, but REALLY like Sanctus Reach(...talk about super underrated!). Hope Battlesector will be able to measure up!

[Ook Oook]

Yeah I have no idea how much you would like BS if you think SR is amazing. SR is probably the worst warhammer title i've played in the sea of bad warhammer games.

[Gorwe]

Originally posted by OOK OOOK:

Yeah I have no idea how much you would like BS if you think SR is amazing. SR is probably the worst warhammer title i've played in the sea of bad warhammer games.

Explain.

[BloodHawk]

Yes, please explain - Sanctus Reach is an excellent game - as is BattleSector.

[Gorwe]

Originally posted by BloodHawk:

Yes, please explain - Sanctus Reach is an excellent game - as is BattleSector.

SR does lack budget though. It definitely has this AA feel to it. But from the gameplay side? Super satisfying ; gotta try bSector.

[Atoastydoofus]

Originally posted by SaD-82:

Originally posted by B:

there would practically be no reason to choose SR over BS other a desire to play the SR story.

Be careful when trying to state your opinion as a fact - because it's just an opinion.
And a wrong one.

I give you some reasons why SR is better than BS:
1.
No railroad story with plot armor and plot enemy drops. Who needs this in a game based on a tabletop experience? Why need a story to follow at all? That's the problem nowadays: People need railroads because otherwise they can't focus.
2.
A more mature look in SR. No shiny colours like it was designed for mobiles and kids.
Funnily enough, some years ago there was a research on colours in rp-games in regards to what people in a different spot on earth prefer - the outcome was: Americans prefer the shiny colours and the europeans prefer the more gritty look. What this does say? Everyone has to determine this for him-/herself.
The point is: WH 40k is dark and gritty. The visuals in SR are superior.
3.
The whole army selection in SR is way closer to the tabletop experience than in BS. In BS it's just...well...bs. Arbitrary restrictions and a feel as if it was a mobile game like clash of clans or something similar stupid,

And the list goes on.
BS isn't a bad game, but in terms of WH40k and its whole vibe and roots? Way inferior to SR.

None of these points are objective. And the 3rd point is flat out wrong. Primaris reflect 8th ed and up. There's no way SR could reflect the current table top closer than BS. In terms of sound design, music and execution of gameplay mechanics BS is superior and more polished.

[Gorwe]

Originally posted by Atoastydoofus:

Originally posted by SaD-82:

Be careful when trying to state your opinion as a fact - because it's just an opinion.
And a wrong one.

I give you some reasons why SR is better than BS:
1.
No railroad story with plot armor and plot enemy drops. Who needs this in a game based on a tabletop experience? Why need a story to follow at all? That's the problem nowadays: People need railroads because otherwise they can't focus.
2.
A more mature look in SR. No shiny colours like it was designed for mobiles and kids.
Funnily enough, some years ago there was a research on colours in rp-games in regards to what people in a different spot on earth prefer - the outcome was: Americans prefer the shiny colours and the europeans prefer the more gritty look. What this does say? Everyone has to determine this for him-/herself.
The point is: WH 40k is dark and gritty. The visuals in SR are superior.
3.
The whole army selection in SR is way closer to the tabletop experience than in BS. In BS it's just...well...bs. Arbitrary restrictions and a feel as if it was a mobile game like clash of clans or something similar stupid,

And the list goes on.
BS isn't a bad game, but in terms of WH40k and its whole vibe and roots? Way inferior to SR.

None of these points are objective. And the 3rd point is flat out wrong. Primaris reflect 8th ed and up. There's no way SR could reflect the current table top closer than BS. In terms of sound design, music and execution of gameplay mechanics BS is superior and more polished.

Well, SR is not based on Primaris / Indomitus era. So, yeah, it does offer a very close offering to then current army lists. And about production values, well, those are the low point of SR, everyone knows that. Should've been even more customizable imo.