Should it be a new Dawn of War or something similar to Total War?
If similar to Total War how would you balance the factions?
Should the map be galaxy size,a single star system size or single plane size?
Should it have space battles or not?
If Dawn of War what changes or old mechanics would you like to see?
Most likely not, and good riddance. They'd just cock it up.
My idea was that the grand, semi-strategic nature of SupCom1 battles would be a godsend to Warhammer's various armies. Perhaps it could be less economy-focused, but the grandiose scale has to stay.
Just imagine how potent a marine force could be on a SupCom-sized map where they have access to drop pods and/or thunderhawks. Or how glorious it would be to mass up Russes as IG to face the Tyranid Horde.
And so on and so forth.
What if every battle on the map was like the special resource maps? Ie, every map is unique due to special objectives rather than just being a basic skirmish.
Also, add this: >>45015858
It should be like dow1 in game play dow2 was shit compared.
But add in all that sweet coh physics; eg tank armour as well as hp; ability to take over terrain buildings and for some factions (orks / ig) create bases from them. Plus directional cover and destructible terrain.
Hands in the air about whether you would want to have tw style army building then battles; probably would stick to dow garrison and rts approach. With maybe tw build and limited use of units in bfg style battles when you try to annex an enemies planet.
I think you use TW style base building, you choose an outpost or stronghold and upgrade it, said location now provides new, or upgraded units to deploy in battle, but you keep the DoW/CoH unit deployment instead of the TW style.
Then you can deploy lots of troops mid-battle without worrying about losing your entire army.
Have regional battles both around bases and in them for overall control of a region, said region provides either unique bonuses or general enhancement for your forces/resources.
Commanders should be kept like older TW installments, where you don't need a commander to send out armies, but having one provides useful bonuses, and they can take part in the battle, gain experience and even be killed. Then you could keep the Wargear from DoW and tie it to experience level and regions owned/resources held, so you would need a commander who has seen plenty of combat, while controlling a mechanicus facility, and then you could get artificer armor or weaponry for that commander.
Hmmm this could be an interesting way of thinking about it; but how would you decide the tech level of the attacker and the ability to build if you are linking it to campaign map buildings?
Would probably be easier to keep it as it is now with the requirement to build buildings during the rts part to then build troops.
You could easily make it so you set a stronghold to attack rather than an individual army, so that instead of building an army and marching them out, you say "x attacks y" and the technology and buildings from "x" apply to the attacker's side and the defense has closest stronghold for the opponent who controls the area for its tech level.
It provides more metagame than sitting down and building the same buildings every encounter and deploying the same troops every encounter which DoW always ended up like.
So then when you have someone who can deepstrike and they target a place in the back of your lines set up for extra resource production/war expansion and not much defence you have to rely on natural defense and garrison advantage rather than building the same stuff, to deploy the same units, all the time.
You could actually keep the armies in, just make them exclusively elite units rather than mooks.
You don't need an army of 1000000000 guardsman, they are going to be there when you set up, but they aren't going to have a dozen baneblades and an assfuckload of Russes on hand, that's the "army" you are driving around.
You can train and add generic troops to the army, but you should only do that to pad numbers or otherwise bulk up your army for a preemptive strike.
Best of both worlds?
Except not, because there was no metagame in Dark Crusade.
It was "attack region, build quickly to get to Termies with assault cannons" or whatever OP unit you had for whatever faction. The retinue was pretty much useless, the garrison was also not the most useful. And taking the regions provided nearly no tactical benefit save for two or three locations which instead just broke the game clean in half.
You didn't prepare beforehand for that, you just went into a battle, did what you always do with little to no variation, mainly because you didn't have to, there was nothing stopping you from not just building nothing but a fuckload of your best unit.
It would be kinda logical tho, your sergeants and other lower officers get hardened in battle and shit and then you got heroes.
Actually interesting, the troops you can muster during battle could also be drawn from your cities/garrisons recruitment manpower (or reserves). So if you are in your territory you got large amounts of troops to deploy fast, but if you are deep in enemy territory you have to wait for them to arrive, but that delay could be reduced by mechanizing your reserves.
I like this idea that you get the tech level of the territory you are attacking from / defending. Certain factions like orKS ig nids having a starting force already in the area at the start of the game on defense actions would be cool; while other factions able to not have to attack regions directlynext to the region is cool like marines and Eldar.
I would probably make it so that you required a Co. To attack and the rts Goal was to kill the opponents Co. To take the territory; as they are the requestor / director of forces in the area.
What about when you conquer a region what should you do with the population or there should there be some special cases? Should the imperial guard exterminate a region that was once was held before by another imperial faction, should the imperium even have diferent factions in the game?
There are different IG regiments and commanders, as well as SM chapters.
While it may complicate things, you could theoretically have an all-guardsman-party or nothing but SM duking it out.
Not all of them agree with each other or how to deal with things.
>What about when you conquer a region what should you do with the population or there should there be some special cases
Imperium factions and eldars never exterminate each others pops on capture but exterminate all the others. Other factions exterminate 50% of the pops on capture but the 50% others get converted to the faction (it represents xenos and heretic "settling in", or tyranids nomming it, or necrons enslaving them)
Base building need to go die in a fucking hole. It favors spamming units and cushions you if you lose something important.
Total War meanwhile would just be an RTS version of the tabletop, and far more brutal.
>Total War-style gameplay but with buildable bases and reinforcements. Can start out with either entire armies deployed as a quick battle or build/collect resources
>Total War "naval battle" mode replaced by space combat
>Army 1: Space Marines with Ultras, Fists, Iron Hands, White Scars, Dark Angels, Blood Angels, Space Wolves, GK, Raven Guard, Black Templars, and Crimson Fists skins and special units.
>Army 2: Imperial Guard with Cadian, Catachan, Krieg, Vostroyan, Valhallan, Mordian, Armageddon, Elysian, Tanith, and Praetorian skins and special units
>Army 3: Mechanicus/Skitarii
>Army 4: Sisters of Battle
>Army 5: CSM with Black Legion, Emp's Children, World Eaters, Word Bearers, Night Lords, Iron Warriors, Death Guard, Thousand Sons, and Red Corsairs skins and sub-units
>Army 6: Chaos Daemons
>Army 7: Chaos Renegades (Traitor Guard/Cultists/Mutants/Beastmen/Dark Skitarii/etc..)
>Army 8: Orks
>Army 9: Eldar with Harlequin, Corsair, and Exodite allied units that can be recruited
>Army 10: Dark Eldar with Harlequin and Corsair allied units that can be recruited
>Army 11: Necrons
>Army 12: Tau
>Army 13: Tyranids
>Titans available for all sides
>Expansion is the Horus Heresy, with Crusade-era skins and units and Primarchs as characters
My wet dream
Then after a while the nids show up and eat hallf of the ork territory.
Here comes a new challenger.
What do people have against DoW2? I think the base-building in 1 was pretty overrated. It was such a simple, minor feature that i don't get why everyone thinks the 2nd was dogshit without it.
As for the combat, what's the big difference?
Its because you can only ever have four squads on the field in the main game, barring scripted mssions. This goes against the grain of 40k where the fleets of some armies will block out the sun. By dropping the management aspect of an RTS they took away an integral game mechanic that adds to the scale of a match. Building your base, amassing an army and kitting them out with the best gear is all part of the fun. Not only that, DoWII focused greatly on characters but they chose to focus on Space Marines, which are probably one of the most boring factions in the game.
Besides that, the missions were very bland and unoriginal, heavily relying on the uniqueness of the setting to get by. It mostly consisted of land on the opposite edge of a map with your chosen squads, fight your way through a map of enemies and fight the boss. Thats it.
I hated the way thw campaign worked; and multi player wasn't as much fun. I know they updated dow2 with similar mechanics but at the same time they ripped out the heart of the original game.
Still played them but wasn't nearly as much fun as dow or coh.
I would prefer this:
No bases or anything during rts; you call I'm troops from you orbiting ships, during the overview turns you can spend resource points dependent on how much land / what land you control to upgrade you flagship / fleet to increase troop a replenishment rate during battle and/or variety. Plus research upgrades excetra for hero's and units.
During the rts you land on the map and have to regenicide the enemies commandeer or hold points that are critical to the area.
Building creation is limited to bunkers etc.
Like in coh with the branch abilities each hero has a tree of special moves to call upon be it air strikes etc.
Each faction has its troops materialism differently; marines drop pods and thunderhawks; ig in transports, eldar gates, nids spores; orks crash landing etc.
Would have every faction in the campaign; with diplomacy having modifiers based on the factions eg ig almost no chance of being allies with nids; but easier with marines sisters etc.
Remove the way flyers worked in dow and have them as in dow where there are called in super sonic across the map drop bombs troops what evs and leave, can. Still be shot down on the way, if they are the cool down is increased / activity doesn't happen.
I just want something similar to Red Alert 2 and Generals Zero Hour campaign and skirmish.
>turtle in your base
>slowly upgrade your tech while resisting minor attacks
>counter attack with mid tier to establish a few forward minor outposts for extra resources
>when you have a massive army just start steamrolling shit
Massive armies, varied factions and several playstyles for each faction (at least something like Zero Hour) and really detailed customization in the campaign.
I just want to turtle as IG until I've got a massive army of super heavy tanks supported by artillery. Or distracting the enemy with Marine flyers, drop podding shit behind enemy lines and then converging everything into a giant blob of destruction.
I would like something close to Wargame, massive maps with objective zones and bringing in assembled forces.
Is there a gameplay reason why people wouldn't be okay with just having the tabletop rules for the computer?
I mean, I understand from a business perspective why they'd never do this (3/4 people would never buy models again), but hypothetically, why not just do this?
I dunno, possibly because for a computer game they would not be particularly suitable; they are not especially interesting, unlike say bloodbowls, and neither are they so complex that they would benefit being handled by a computer. In that way, it would probably be better to generate a different system that was better suited with more inherent complexity.
What about asymmetric factions: IG or orks can build bases and recruit troops, while SM or SMC have a fixed (or almost fixed) amount of troops for the campaign and can just place automatic weapons at best.