I'm so bad :-v

[omgilovesteak]

Man. Being new to this game and being new to this lore and universe i find this game to be kinda brutal! But i am determined to learn i suppose but i did not expect it to be this overwhelming :D

[Ale]

Originally posted by omgilovesteak:

Man. Being new to this game and being new to this lore and universe i find this game to be kinda brutal! But i am determined to learn i suppose but i did not expect it to be this overwhelming :D

Singleplayer or multiplayer?

[omgilovesteak]

I don't touch multiplayer yet. Not until i know what ships do what without having to think about it xD

[GrenadeMagnet6]

If not already you could play the campaign on Easy, then once you got the hang of the tactical battles and Sector management, you could then start a new game on Medium or Hard.

[Ale]

If you have any question feel free to ask. I'm new too and I'd like to speak with someone who playes the game.

[[VI] Skalgrim Fellaxe]

You can get my Greater Customization Submod if you want to make it even easier than the original game.

[Tr0w]

Brutal is correct, the campaign in this one is far harder and much more frustrating than what was in the first game. I've just had to scrap my IN campaign cos i can't win a battle without losing most of my ships and then getting rekt in a counter attack in the next turn. I'm always broke and there's an urgency meter there to force me to rush or it gives me a game over.

As far as i'm concerned GW should've given BFG to CA and Relic, we would've gotten a much better couple of games. CA to do the campaign map and everything involved with that and Relic to do the space battles.

[Ale]

Originally posted by Spr1ggan:

Brutal is correct, the campaign in this one is far harder and much more frustrating than what was in the first game. I've just had to scrap my IN campaign cos i can't win a battle without losing most of my ships and then getting rekt in a counter attack in the next turn. I'm always broke and there's an urgency meter there to force me to rush or it gives me a game over.

As far as i'm concerned GW should've given BFG to CA and Relic, we would've gotten a much better couple of games. CA to do the campaign map and everything involved with that and Relic to do the space battles.

You can lower the difficulty.
You can disable the Urgency Meter.
You can tweak a lot of settings and make the campaign super easy or just make it plays like you prefer.

Difficulty is hardly an argumentation point.

Also, Battlefleet Gothic Armada devs had a couple of really good Ideas about gameplay mechanics in the campaign map. I'm a great fan of Total Warhammer games, but I have to say that CA can learn something from them.

[Carnwulf]

The next campaign i play i will for sure reduce those pesky invasions by increasing the points they need to launch.

[Tr0w]

Originally posted by Sparviero:

Originally posted by Spr1ggan:

Brutal is correct, the campaign in this one is far harder and much more frustrating than what was in the first game. I've just had to scrap my IN campaign cos i can't win a battle without losing most of my ships and then getting rekt in a counter attack in the next turn. I'm always broke and there's an urgency meter there to force me to rush or it gives me a game over.

As far as i'm concerned GW should've given BFG to CA and Relic, we would've gotten a much better couple of games. CA to do the campaign map and everything involved with that and Relic to do the space battles.

You can lower the difficulty.
You can disable the Urgency Meter.
You can tweak a lot of settings and make the campaign super easy or just make it plays like you prefer.

Difficulty is hardly an argumentation point.

Also, Battlefleet Gothic Armada devs had a couple of really good Ideas about gameplay mechanics in the campaign map. I'm a great fan of Total Warhammer games, but I have to say that CA can learn something from them.

I might as well be using cheat codes at that point... Anyways i was playing on normal and i'm critiquing the game based on the devs intended version which is what normal always is.

Sorry but nah the campaign map here is a dumbed down version of what you get in Total War or other 4x type game campaign maps. And having the guys that made Homeworld do the battles would be a lot better, i'd actually be able to zoom out instead of having my face shoved into a box. And there'd be a full 3D space where the ships could go up and down as well as just forwards, backwords, left, and right. As it stands in both the first game and this it's Battlefleet Drift.

[Ale]

Originally posted by Spr1ggan:

Originally posted by Sparviero:

You can lower the difficulty.
You can disable the Urgency Meter.
You can tweak a lot of settings and make the campaign super easy or just make it plays like you prefer.

Difficulty is hardly an argumentation point.

Also, Battlefleet Gothic Armada devs had a couple of really good Ideas about gameplay mechanics in the campaign map. I'm a great fan of Total Warhammer games, but I have to say that CA can learn something from them.

I might as well be using cheat codes at that point... Anyways i was playing on normal and i'm critiquing the game based on the devs intended version which is what normal always is.

Sorry but nah the campaign map here is a dumbed down version of what you get in Total War or other 4x type game campaign maps. And having the guys that made Homeworld do the battles would be a lot better, i'd actually be able to zoom out instead of having my face shoved into a box. And there'd be a full 3D space where the ships could go up and down as well as just forwards, backwords, left, and right. As it stands in both the first game and this it's Battlefleet Drift.

About difficulty you can also get better to the game, but I didn't want to sound offensive. I'm playing normal and I'm plannig to tweak the difficulty on a higher tier...and I have no experience with the gameplay of Battlefleet Gothic Armada.

In anycase a couple of thing that happen in Total Warhammer ( and it is one of my favourite game of all time, so no hate at all ) that are not happening in Battlefleet Gothic armada II:

1) IA armies keeping stay 1 cm out of the grasp of players armies. Biggest example: I spent tens of turns to corner Chaos Armies ( but this happen with every faction ). Start a battle without ambush or siege it's so rare that they should change the name of the series in "run around and try to catch the mosquito". This happen becouse IA doesn't want to fight any battle where it hasn't the advantage. Sound intelligent, but destroy the fun.
In Battlefleet Gothic Armada happen to fight battle where you outnumber the enemy, other where you are outnumbered and other when the force on the field are igual. That's perfect: some time you have a incredible hard fight untill the end, other time you feel overpower, other time the fight is very balance untill a turning point where you get the advantage.
Most important: if you want to fight a battle, you can have a battle in the same moment...without have to hope have the luck to corner your enemy or have to play a siege battle ( siege isn't much fun in total warhammer ).


2) In Total Warhammer, after the first 30/50 turns, the real fight is over. You get a solid position and start painting the map. I enjoy also that part of the game, but untill now the invasions of Battlefleet Gothic Armada are making the game much more alive: i can't just sit on my throne, I have to keep fighting and protect my territory, thinking about where to put my fleets and so on. I read a lot of people complain about Invasions and can't understand why. Also it's brilliant how Invasions mechanics is bound to threat level and how threat level is bound to urgeny bar and systems upgrade.

Total Warhammer has a lot more complessity that it's fun from a roleplaying point of view ( and I like it ), but from a gameplay point of view much of its complessity is almost useless and pointless.

Battlefleet gothic armada II is simplier but gameplay wise its mechanics work very well. I hope Devs keep improve the campaign becouse it can use more complessity...especialy if the keeping going on this intelligent way, but right now the result is very good: it's almost like playing a well made ( cooperative ) tabletop game.



I love Homeworld. Played both when they came out and buyed again the remastered versions.
It's a complete different game ( just speaking about battles ) and I'm very happy battlefleet gothic armada is different becouse I already have Homeworld.
I really love that the fleet ar so small in BFGA and you can micro the unit at the point of make them turn just to use both broadside cannons to max the damage output, get in position to lunch torpedos/ram/assoult stike/stealth...ecc....ecc....

The only thing that Homeworld has ( battle gameplay wise ) that BGA doesn't is the 3D enviroment. But I don't want it in Battlefleet gothic armada becouse really good mechanics like torpedos and ram will become insane to use...and not fun.

[Tr0w]

Originally posted by Sparviero:

Originally posted by Spr1ggan:

I might as well be using cheat codes at that point... Anyways i was playing on normal and i'm critiquing the game based on the devs intended version which is what normal always is.

Sorry but nah the campaign map here is a dumbed down version of what you get in Total War or other 4x type game campaign maps. And having the guys that made Homeworld do the battles would be a lot better, i'd actually be able to zoom out instead of having my face shoved into a box. And there'd be a full 3D space where the ships could go up and down as well as just forwards, backwords, left, and right. As it stands in both the first game and this it's Battlefleet Drift.

About difficulty you can also get better to the game, but I didn't want to sound offensive. I'm playing normal and I'm plannig to tweak the difficulty on a higher tier...and I have no experience with the gameplay of Battlefleet Gothic Armada.

In anycase a couple of thing that happen in Total Warhammer ( and it is one of my favourite game of all time, so no hate at all ) that are not happening in Battlefleet Gothic armada II:

1) IA armies keeping stay 1 cm out of the grasp of players armies. Biggest example: I spent tens of turns to corner Chaos Armies ( but this happen with every faction ). Start a battle without ambush or siege it's so rare that they should change the name of the series in "run around and try to catch the mosquito". This happen becouse IA doesn't want to fight any battle where it hasn't the advantage. Sound intelligent, but destroy the fun.
In Battlefleet Gothic Armada happen to fight battle where you outnumber the enemy, other where you are outnumbered and other when the force on the field are igual. That's perfect: some time you have a incredible hard fight untill the end, other time you feel overpower, other time the fight is very balance untill a turning point where you get the advantage.
Most important: if you want to fight a battle, you can have a battle in the same moment...without have to hope have the luck to corner your enemy or have to play a siege battle ( siege isn't much fun in total warhammer ).


2) In Total Warhammer, after the first 30/50 turns, the real fight is over. You get a solid position and start painting the map. I enjoy also that part of the game, but untill now the invasions of Battlefleet Gothic Armada are making the game much more alive: i can't just sit on my throne, I have to keep fighting and protect my territory, thinking about where to put my fleets and so on. I read a lot of people complain about Invasions and can't understand why. Also it's brilliant how Invasions mechanics is bound to threat level and how threat level is bound to urgeny bar and systems upgrade.

Total Warhammer has a lot more complessity that it's fun from a roleplaying point of view ( and I like it ), but from a gameplay point of view much of its complessity is almost useless and pointless.

Battlefleet gothic armada II is simplier but gameplay wise its mechanics work very well. I hope Devs keep improve the campaign becouse it can use more complessity...especialy if the keeping going on this intelligent way, but right now the result is very good: it's almost like playing a well made ( cooperative ) tabletop game.



I love Homeworld. Played both when they came out and buyed again the remastered versions.
It's a complete different game ( just speaking about battles ) and I'm very happy battlefleet gothic armada is different becouse I already have Homeworld.
I really love that the fleet ar so small in BFGA and you can micro the unit at the point of make them turn just to use both broadside cannons to max the damage output, get in position to lunch torpedos/ram/assoult stike/stealth...ecc....ecc....

The only thing that Homeworld has ( battle gameplay wise ) that BGA doesn't is the 3D enviroment. But I don't want it in Battlefleet gothic armada becouse really good mechanics like torpedos and ram will become insane to use...and not fun.

>Get better at the game
Sorry but the urgency stuff is artificial difficulty in it's purest form. And having me have to tweak every aspect of how the campaign systems etc, work and disable intended features just shows lazy development. But then again that shows as well with the battle modes and it having the same mobile game/tablet game feel of the original.

As for what i said about getting the Relic the Homeworld devs to do the battles, obviosuly i'm not asking for it to be the same as Homeworld, i wouldn't want base building in real time in a Warhammer title which is why i preferred DoWII to the first game (although admittedly not initially). However i would like same zoom function, the 3D space, thr tactical map, and fleet formations.

[Ale]

Originally posted by Spr1ggan:

>Get better at the game
Sorry but the urgency stuff is artificial difficulty in it's purest form. And having me have to tweak every aspect of how the campaign systems etc, work and disable intended features just shows lazy development. But then again that shows as well with the battle modes and it having the same mobile game/tablet game feel of the original.

I really can't understand how you can think of being credible when you speak about artificial difficulty while the game isn't hard at all ( at least at normal ). if it were difficult, we could also discuss whether the difficulty is artificial or not. But in the real state of things the discussion is just nonsense.
Just let people that want to learn the game to ask freely their questio.

[Tr0w]

Originally posted by Sparviero:

Originally posted by Spr1ggan:

>Get better at the game
Sorry but the urgency stuff is artificial difficulty in it's purest form. And having me have to tweak every aspect of how the campaign systems etc, work and disable intended features just shows lazy development. But then again that shows as well with the battle modes and it having the same mobile game/tablet game feel of the original.

I really can't understand how you can think of being credible when you speak about artificial difficulty while the game isn't hard at all ( at least at normal ). if it were difficult, we could also discuss whether the difficulty is artificial or not. But in the real state of things the discussion is just nonsense.
I was too kind to answer your lack of arguments so far. Have a nice day looking for a game less mobile and easier than this one.

>i was too kind
Talk about having a high opinion of yourself

It's a valid argument, it's constantly asking you to go to "special missions" which usually feature enemies you may need to build up to. Problem is that if you decide to take your time to get access to better stuff, the game then increases the threat and you start getting invaded by fleets that can be beyond what you currently have, couple that with the lack of funds early...

[Ale]

Originally posted by Spr1ggan:

Originally posted by Sparviero:

I really can't understand how you can think of being credible when you speak about artificial difficulty while the game isn't hard at all ( at least at normal ). if it were difficult, we could also discuss whether the difficulty is artificial or not. But in the real state of things the discussion is just nonsense.
I was too kind to answer your lack of arguments so far. Have a nice day looking for a game less mobile and easier than this one.

>i was too kind
Talk about having a high opinion of yourself

It's a valid argument, it's constantly asking you to go to "special missions" which usually feature enemies you may need to build up to. Problem is that if you decide to take your time to get access to better stuff, the game then increases the threat and you start getting invaded by fleets that can be beyond what you currently have, couple that with the lack of funds early...

Yes, I thought my post wasn't polite so I edited it, but I was too slow XD

I'm just conquering the third sector, so I don't know if after the game get harder.
Untill now i use this priority order:
- Systems with resources ( in the end you will have more money )
- System with the main mission ( to be able to reset the urgency bar in any moment )
- Systems with shipyard and bonus to fleet repair ( very important to be always in a good shape )
- Systems with battleplan ( useful if you have to influence the urgency bar/invasions )

After I free the system with the main mission, I always wait all the turn I can untill the situation is under my controll, so I can upgrade without too much worry.

Also it's important to win the battles taking as little damage as you can and to do so it useful to choose exactly which ships to take on the filed. The skill that improve identification range of escort ship is almost fundamental combined with a widowaker escort always on the field ( if you don't see the enemy, you can't shoot at him ).


Untill now I lost just one ship and I'm going forward without difficulty, but still with big
satisfaction about win battle with minimal casuality.

[omgilovesteak]

Well i have messed around with the ships and stuff to be comfortable now. I shall march onward!!