Register a SA Forums Account here!
JOINING THE SA FORUMS WILL REMOVE THIS BIG AD, THE ANNOYING UNDERLINED ADS, AND STUPID INTERSTITIAL ADS!!!

You can: log in, read the tech support FAQ, or request your lost password. This dumb message (and those ads) will appear on every screen until you register! Get rid of this crap by registering your own SA Forums Account and joining roughly 150,000 Goons, for the one-time price of $9.95! We charge money because it costs us money per month for bills, and since we don't believe in showing ads to our users, we try to make the money back through forum registrations.
 
  • Post
  • Reply
jokes
Dec 20, 2012
jokes




Someone a long time ago made a post about Grimgor written like a passage from The Myth of Sisyphus by Camus that inspired me to replay a Grimgor campaign.

Greenskins loving rule

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

Cythereal
Nov 8, 2009



I asked the guy I've been talking to about a Bretonnia revamp since the thread and discord's been talking about it, this was his response:

quote:

This isn't the kind of thing I see much about, but from the sounds of it CA is looking more at reworking how the Bretonnian campaign and general battlefield stuff works rather than looking at adding new units. Carcassone shepherds are something people at CA and GW both like as part of the Bret roster, but I haven't heard of anything else getting the green light.

CA's talked about stuff like Alberic (because of Bordeloux's fluff) and Repanse (being a born peasant who's not even in Bretonnia) getting guns, or the Fay Enchantress getting angry trees, or maybe some really weird and exotic or monstrous stuff, but GW's been pretty firmly against that. GW wants Bretonnia to be the most human and down to earth faction aesthetically, and is very happy with the current look and feel of the faction.

GW sees Bretonnia as a kind of newbie faction for the franchise. If you like medieval knights and archers and trebuchets without any weird monsters or steampunk or guns, Bretonnia is here for you.

Hallucinogenic Toreador
Nov 21, 2000

Whoooooahh I'd be
Nothin' without you
Baaaaaa-by

We must imagine Grimgor to be happy, or he will krump us.

Lord_Magmar
Feb 24, 2015

"Welcome to pound town, Slifer slacker!"




jokes posted:

Someone a long time ago made a post about Grimgor written like a passage from The Myth of Sisyphus by Camus that inspired me to replay a Grimgor campaign.

Greenskins loving rule

They do, pity poor Grimgor lives only for hate at this point, instead of being able to revel in that which he already has.

Hallucinogenic Toreador posted:

We must imagine Grimgor to be happy, or he will krump us.

I'm pretty sure he will krump us anyway.

albany academy
Mar 6, 2013



Cythereal posted:

I asked the guy I've been talking to about a Bretonnia revamp since the thread and discord's been talking about it, this was his response:

im happy with that

Psycho Landlord
Oct 10, 2012

What are you gonna do, dance with me?




Changes to bret campaign mechanics are a whole different kettle of fish that I also will not argue about. The non-grail vows, for instance, all need some work.

Rework Beastmen first tho holy dang

Edit: Alberic and Repanse shouldn't get guns but alberic absolutely should get a coastal bombardment ability from his giant and highly advanced navy

Sinteres
Mar 26, 2004
Please don't be rude, it upsets me when I'm trying to be smug

If that guy isn't for real, man is he taking this gamer Deep Throat role pretty far.

Mantis42
Jul 26, 2010



Brettonian Grail Knight defeats Kislevite Bear Cavalry, but as the latter lies vanquished it's rider thinks of Katarin and cries out "Oh, my lady, I have failed you!"

The Knight is stunned. "Ze Lady! Why did you mention her?!"

Arcsquad12
Mar 4, 2013

I Love Satan


Greenskins are fun as long as they're not up against a missile heavy army. Which is lovely when several of the top tier late game factions are missile heavy.

Getting into melee with Greenskins is a bad move unless you want your head split by a Blorc, mobbed by Grom's super gobbos or stabbed to bits and poisoned by Skarsnik night gobbos.

But they really need a way to counter missile spam. So far the only option they have is artillery with the range scrap upgrade.

Dandywalken
Feb 11, 2014

I will not shut up about the Mighty Morphin Power Rangers. I talk about them all the time and work them into every conversation. I actually named my daughter after the Pink ranger and will provide proof if challenged.


Movement speed buffs (not quite Savage orc speed but close) is a good start. Or more speed and MA for Boar Boyz because lmao 22 MA on a BB Bigun are you loving serious CA.

Dandywalken fucked around with this message at 18:42 on Feb 23, 2021

I dont know
Aug 9, 2003



Cythereal posted:

I asked the guy I've been talking to about a Bretonnia revamp since the thread and discord's been talking about it, this was his response:

Interesting. It does explain why Lost Sons of Bretonnia aren't really a consideration despite (barely) existing in previous lore and being an obvious choice for a more magic/ghostly themed cavalry with bound spells. At least anecdotally, I've heard of Bretonnia being a gateway faction for historical total war players who were unsure about the setting.

Muscle Tracer
Feb 23, 2007

Medals only weigh
one down.


Cythereal posted:

I asked the guy I've been talking to about a Bretonnia revamp since the thread and discord's been talking about it, this was his response:

quote:

GW sees Bretonnia as a kind of newbie faction for the franchise. If you like medieval knights and archers and trebuchets without any weird monsters or steampunk or guns, Bretonnia is here for you.

this take is really interesting to me, because it means GW thinks that knights with trebuchets is more culturally accessible than orks and elves. i seriously doubt that is still true since the LOTR craze. i am 100% certain that more people know what an orc is than know what a trebuchet is.

Zzulu
May 15, 2009


GW liked Brettonia so much they axed the faction completely for Age of Sigmar

Ammanas
Jul 17, 2005

Voltes V: "Laser swooooooooord!"

Arcsquad12 posted:

Greenskins are fun as long as they're not up against a missile heavy army. Which is lovely when several of the top tier late game factions are missile heavy.

Getting into melee with Greenskins is a bad move unless you want your head split by a Blorc, mobbed by Grom's super gobbos or stabbed to bits and poisoned by Skarsnik night gobbos.

But they really need a way to counter missile spam. So far the only option they have is artillery with the range scrap upgrade.

i mean spider riders and stalk-equipped melee

but that goes out the window against helves who field mass armies of lothern seaguard

I dont know
Aug 9, 2003



Zzulu posted:

GW liked Brettonia so much they axed the faction completely for Age of Sigmar

It always amazes me that Beastmen made it over Brettonia or Tomb Kings.

JT Jag
Aug 30, 2009

Fandom is misery.



I dont know posted:

It always amazes me that Beastmen made it over Brettonia or Tomb Kings.
Chaos are still a thing and Beastmen kinda just follow in their wake

toasterwarrior
Nov 11, 2011


Bretonnia is extremely no fuss, no muss. Pin with infantry, flank with cavalry, shoot whatever isn't engaged at the time. You have magic, you have lords and heroes well suited to duels. Your arty doesn't need direct fire LoS to work. And in late-mid to endgame, you can just start spamming more horses, super horses, flying horses, and literally just attack move to victory. I totally get the idea that they're like, the beginner faction for a tactical wargame playstyle.

KazigluBey
Oct 30, 2011

boner





Yeah I can get this, cool. I think that's where I stand too.


As someone posting "more is good" thanks for the direct reply to what I was asking to people on that side, but to follow-up: Isn't going by raw numbers kind of a bad way to look at it? Because not only does that ignore the fuzziness of some units being variants (as someone else posted, this actually brings the Brett (and other faction) roster down a fair few units) but also it just seems kinda'... Arbitrary? I asked "where is the line" to anyone arguing that "having more toys is always a plus" because it seems to me that since nobody is really arguing for making every faction all-rounders then additions do need some kind of justification.

This entire line of discussion seems to be dead-ending tho if it turns out CA are getting the literally cold shoulder on this one from GW; I guess with the upcoming Fantasy reboot GW wants any army in TW:WH that will have a table-top equivalent to be as close to that (in planning?) roster, all the better to synergize for future sales?

Vagabong
Mar 2, 2019


I dont know posted:

It always amazes me that Beastmen made it over Brettonia or Tomb Kings.

There's a reason people think Chaos is GW's pet faction.

On Brettonia being a sop to historical players, it makes sense, although I'd be surprised if there's many who haven't made the jump over. After Three Kingdoms and Troy even the hardiest grognards on TWC must see which way the wind is blowing.

Sinteres
Mar 26, 2004
Please don't be rude, it upsets me when I'm trying to be smug

KazigluBey posted:

This entire line of discussion seems to be dead-ending tho if it turns out CA are getting the literally cold shoulder on this one from GW; I guess with the upcoming Fantasy reboot GW wants any army in TW:WH that will have a table-top equivalent to be as close to that (in planning?) roster, all the better to synergize for future sales?

The line of discussion is definitely a dead end to some extent just because I doubt CA is making design decisions based on our posts in this dead forum, but it's still probably best to take those leaks with a grain of salt until we see if reality lines up with some of their predictions. It's fun to speculate, and maybe they're real, but going straight from hearsay to assuming that's what's going on seems premature.

jokes
Dec 20, 2012
jokes




Lmfao this is the time line:

GW asserts control over the WHFB franchise
GW fucks up, prompting people to lose interest
GW thinks WHFB is trash and bad so they literally blow it all up
GW licenses what they believe to be old garbage to a bunch of studios, including CA, who make a bunch of video games based on them-- some of which are VERY good
The video games spark interest in WHFB and it becomes way, way more popular
GW decides to bring back WHFB
GW asserts control over the WHFB franchise <------ we are here
GW fucks up, prompting people to lose interest
GW thinks WHFB is trash and blows it all up

Omnicarus
Jan 16, 2006



Wouldn't an army unit mounted on bears be called Ursalry instead of Bear Cavalry?

Fellatio del Toro
Mar 21, 2009




Bearback Riders

Sinteres
Mar 26, 2004
Please don't be rude, it upsets me when I'm trying to be smug

jokes posted:

GW asserts control over the WHFB franchise <------ we are here

Seems like a weird take when GW is working with CA to expand Kislev and Cathay for game 3. There's no reason to believe GW is suddenly going to start pulling stupid poo poo here--involvement doesn't have to be a bad thing.

toasterwarrior
Nov 11, 2011


Nah, let me just pepe silvia my way into more internet cynicism points

Cythereal
Nov 8, 2009



Vagabong posted:

On Brettonia being a sop to historical players, it makes sense,

This is my stance, personally. I have no idea if this guy is just bullshitting or not, and Bretonnia is not my cup of tea personally, but I think it's completely reasonable and fine if GW is consciously trying to make Bretonnia a faction to appeal to historical wargame fans. Warhammer Fantasy does a pretty good job of offering a wide variety of aesthetics and playstyles, and I think there's nothing at all wrong with offering a faction that's historical knights in shining armor and peasant archers (with a few mages and pegasi).

albany academy
Mar 6, 2013



i don't really care what gets added or changed so long as its fun and interesting and the game itself remains fun and interesting. truffle hounds included.

Foul Fowl
Sep 12, 2008

Like a snail that melteth away into slime, they shall be taken away; like a dead-born child, they shall not see the sun.

There's no Brets, you gotta be kidding me, I got boxes full of Brets

Comrade Blyatlov
Aug 4, 2007


should have picked four fingers


Sinteres posted:

There's no reason to believe GW is suddenly going to start pulling stupid poo poo here

I mean, aside from everything they've ever done

albany academy
Mar 6, 2013



Foul Fowl posted:

There's no Brets, you gotta be kidding me, I got boxes full of Brets

you collect hitman merch too?

jokes
Dec 20, 2012
jokes




Sinteres posted:

There's no reason to believe GW is suddenly going to start pulling stupid poo poo here--involvement doesn't have to be a bad thing.

And yet it's GW

Arcsquad12
Mar 4, 2013

I Love Satan


Foul Fowl posted:

There's no Brets, you gotta be kidding me, I got boxes full of Brets

Breton Crackers will stand up longer than a peasant frontline.

Zzulu
May 15, 2009


The Nerds are telling me that Age of Sigmar is doing very well so supposedly GW figured out a way to make fantasy stuff popular. We'll see if they can do it with The Old World as well

DeadFatDuckFat
Oct 29, 2012

This avatar brought to you by the 'save our dead gay forums' foundation.


Fellatio del Toro posted:

Bearback Riders

I think this is the one here

Sinteres
Mar 26, 2004
Please don't be rude, it upsets me when I'm trying to be smug

jokes posted:

And yet it's GW

We already have two extremely successful and good collaborations in this series to point to them being able to work well with others now, but sure I guess they could suddenly go back to incompetent leadership and gently caress everything up for 3 despite every indication so far being that everyone's still on good terms.

Muscle Tracer
Feb 23, 2007

Medals only weigh
one down.


KazigluBey posted:

Yeah I can get this, cool. I think that's where I stand too.


As someone posting "more is good" thanks for the direct reply to what I was asking to people on that side, but to follow-up: Isn't going by raw numbers kind of a bad way to look at it? Because not only does that ignore the fuzziness of some units being variants (as someone else posted, this actually brings the Brett (and other faction) roster down a fair few units) but also it just seems kinda'... Arbitrary? I asked "where is the line" to anyone arguing that "having more toys is always a plus" because it seems to me that since nobody is really arguing for making every faction all-rounders then additions do need some kind of justification.

for me, the line would be "is there any scenario that would stump any possible army comp from this faction?" like, if they were literally 100% cavalry and therefore couldn't siege walls, that would clearly be an issue. it's less about whether you have e.g. flying cavalry or not, but whether your army has tools that cover that missing unit type's functions (flank, attack backline, move over walls).

that doesn't sound like a problem brets have!

Psycho Landlord
Oct 10, 2012

What are you gonna do, dance with me?




gently caress it I'm starting another Repanse game

toasterwarrior
Nov 11, 2011


Like, gently caress, I don't even like AoS but by all accounts it's doing great for them so

orangelex44
Oct 11, 2012

Definition of orange:

Any of a group of colors that are between red and yellow in hue. Middle English, from Anglo-French, from Old Occitan, from Arabic, from Persian, from Sanskrit.

Definition of lex:

Law. Latin.

KazigluBey posted:

Yeah I can get this, cool. I think that's where I stand too.


As someone posting "more is good" thanks for the direct reply to what I was asking to people on that side, but to follow-up: Isn't going by raw numbers kind of a bad way to look at it? Because not only does that ignore the fuzziness of some units being variants (as someone else posted, this actually brings the Brett (and other faction) roster down a fair few units) but also it just seems kinda'... Arbitrary? I asked "where is the line" to anyone arguing that "having more toys is always a plus" because it seems to me that since nobody is really arguing for making every faction all-rounders then additions do need some kind of justification.

This entire line of discussion seems to be dead-ending tho if it turns out CA are getting the literally cold shoulder on this one from GW; I guess with the upcoming Fantasy reboot GW wants any army in TW:WH that will have a table-top equivalent to be as close to that (in planning?) roster, all the better to synergize for future sales?

I wasn't talking about any one specific race. I just wanted to give context that while the number of units does have a weak relationship to how "generalist" a faction is perceived, it's not the only factor. Tomb Kings are very low on the list but very flexible, while Lizardmen are quite high but have noteworthy weaknesses. I know this will sound controversial (/s), but it turns out that what the units are matters a lot more than how many units there are. There are plenty of toys that can be given out to a faction without compromising their primary strengths or weaknesses.

Ultimately I think that claiming that CA will run out of possible new units for any given faction because "it'll ruin their identity!" is absurd. Bretonnia isn't some special snowflake here; I don't see anyone claiming that a new Dwarf DLC would have to add cavalry or that the Vampire Counts would need to get archers since each those factions have run out of development space. Could it happen? I mean sure I guess if every race had 100 units. Is it likely within what's reasonable to actually occur? Not a chance.

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

Tiler Kiwi
Feb 26, 2011


Cythereal posted:

I asked the guy I've been talking to about a Bretonnia revamp since the thread and discord's been talking about it, this was his response:

very nice of GW to be policing the aesthetics of the faction they deleted

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • Post
  • Reply