40k players

[Rhyus]

Greetings,

I'm new to these forums, but, I'm not new to 40k and the world of GW. Matter of fact, I worked for the GW HQ US for 3 years, so, I've gotten to know the world of GW behind the scenes and know a good deal about numbers and the such.

As little as has been printed about Dawn of War, it sounds like it could be a good RTS. However, there was one point that I read that stood out that could hold this game back from being a contender with Warcraft and C&C. That is the part that Relic is only limiting the single player game to just the Space Marines. In my opinion, this is a big mistake. While the Space Marines are probably the biggest selling army for 40K, only limiting this game to just that army, is only going to make this game not so great. Sure, it was mentioned that in -multiplayer- games, you can play any of the armies that are included in the game. But, not every person out there is someone that enjoys playing computer games against other real opponents. They enjoy booting up the game and playing against the computer for an hour or two after they get home from work, or before they head off to bed. I can tell you for a fact, that at the GW HQ US, that for those people that are employed by GW there and that play 40k, that maybe a quarter of those are diehard Space Marine players. Another quarter have Space Marines as one of many armies they have bought and built. The rest play Chaos, Eldar, Dark Eldar, Ork, Necrons, Tau, and so forth. Even one player, for you old time 40k players, wanted to bring back the Squats army.

So, a word of advice from someone that has worked in the 40k industry, if you want your game to be good, just limit single player campaign to just the Space Marines. But, if you want your game to be great, you will have a campaign for each army you include in the game(Space Marine, Chaos, Ork, etc). That is why games like Warcraft, Starcraft, and C&C have lasted for years and years and years, and that is why, at least in my opinion, Homeworld wasn't as fun in my opinion, because it was one sided.

Rhyus

Oh, one last thing. To make this an even better game, for the multiplayer games, either allow people to make up armies(as in mods to get Space Wolves, Nurgle, Speed Freaks, etc), or, include them or have them as a download for those that enjoy one special Chapter of their favorite armies. This would separate this game from any other RTS game out there, because it can be very customizable to multiplayer gamers.

[No Surrender]

Where does it say there will only be SMurfs in the SP game? Please point me towards the source.

Anyway. I agree. I think that the SMurfs are massivly over rated. Even though they are the most profitable and common army a number of people (like me and my friends) despise them. It is because that the SMurfs are so easy to play and every rich snot nosed 8 year old plays SMurfs (I'm not saying that all SMurf players are n00bs though). Most of the real veterans I've met play other armies and most of them stay clear of the SMurfs.

[Dyntheos]

I would think a campaign for every available army would be complete overkill.

The game would explode in the number of CD's, developement time, an balancing complexity. Starcraft had 3 races, C&C had 2 and Warcraft has 4. Your beleif that 8 races are a doable thing to me seems completely off base.

Additional armies and campaigns are the arena of expansion packs, not the core game as your previous examples only had a few races aswell, not a full complement of individual sides numbering in the half dozen or more you wish to see.

I think the most striking argument NOT to have so many armies is balance. This has proved time and time again the most important factor to online rts games. Homeworld was an extremely balanced game, good play was what won games, yet each side was nearly identical, the reason why it was so balanced.

I would plead for relic not to add anymore races, for I'd like to play this game in the next year or so, not in 3 years, and if it does well, then I'll happily fork over dollars for more armies if they are released via expansion packs.

[Russian Ninja]

Actually the way I see it the reason that all the Blizzard RTS' have sold so well and are still going so well is because of the map editor. The users can inject new material into the game, like a mod, due to the versatility of the editor. This is also the reason why Half Life is still selling, because the modders can inject new content into a tired engine.

So while addition Single Player content may kick-start the game, as most players tend to try and finish the single player campaign before they head for online warzones, it's the Multi-player and user-made content that keeps it going. I suppose if the Mod-community really gets into it, they can add all the other races like Dark Eldar, Tau, Necrons, Squats, Vaygr, Teddy Bears and so on and so forth.

I suppose the other problem is that when you have multiple campaigns unless they're in cronological order you have a paradox. Which one is the "Real" storyline for sequals. I guess though that Relic likes making campaigns with only one race, and because of that they chose the Smurfs due to the fact that they are the most popular and would applease the most people.

[dArKB*****d]

Not picking holes, but they are creating a new chapter called blood ravens... so not going to be Smurfs that’s for sure.

I personally think that if they are going to create a new chapter. It's going to have to inject some new flavours to the existing space marine armies, especially if it doesn't want to be rejected by the old school players. (Me included)

1. They can't be rebellious and die hard alla space wolves.
2. Nor be blood driven, mad men ala Blood Angles.
3. Not even dark and broody ala Dark Angels.
4. and especially not, vanilla Plain Ultra Marines.
5. Or some ity bity boring uneventful sideline chapter... well let’s hope not.

So having eliminated those options above.

Id have to say they're either some new up and coming chapter, with some primarchish leader, stamping their and his mark on the universe, hardcore styley.

Or

Some secret sect style assassin driven/orientated chapter, with deep strike, commando style tactics. Who've been dragged out of hibernation to fight some terrible threat posed against the universe?

Or maybe neither of those unlikely scenarios.

[H.B.M.C.]

Originally posted by No Surrender
Most of the real veterans I've met play other armies and most of them stay clear of the SMurfs.

That's strange. Marines were my first army, and I still play them. I've been playing since the days of Rogue Trader.

Sure, I have 'Nids, Chaos and Guard as well, but Marines are always there. I'd never "stay clear" of them. I just have too much fun playing my Ultramarines!!


I find myself agreeing with Rhyus however. I haven't seen many RTS's on the market where you can only play as one side. Even Homeworld, a game that only had one set of ships, just with different graphics for both sides, let you play as either during the single player campaign.

I'm not saying that we need 8 different races in the game, each with their own campaign with 16 unique missions and a completely new storyline. What I am saying is that 2 or three campaigns (Blood Ravens, Orks and maybe one other) would work very well and add a lot of play value to the game.

As it stands, GW computer games have always suffered due to having only one campaign to play:

Space Hulk - Only as the Termies.
Space Hulk: Vengeance of the Blood Angels - Only as the Termies.
Final Liberation - Only as the Imperium. Only time you could play as the Orks was in multi and skirmish.
Chaos Gate - Only as the Ultramarines. Only time you could play as Chaos was in quick battle and multi.

I haven't played Dark Omen or Shadows of the Horned Rat, but I can only assume that they were similar. I won't mention Firewarrior... that game was horrible. Oh wait... I just did mention it. Umm... forget I did, or go back in time, or something.

Games that have one campaign die off quickly unless they have a powerful multi-player component. The Mechwarrior games, specifically Mech 3 and 4, and both MechCommander 1 & 2, have very limited re-play value. They have (or some of them have) strong multiplayer components, so the games survived because of that.

If Dawn of War is going to be the same - one single player campaign to rule them all - then I fear that it'll just become a game people play once and either put in the shelf, if they don't like multiplayer games (like me) or just go off and play multi-player. It would be nice to be able to do something more than a "skirmish" mode once I've taken the Blood Ravens to victory.

BYE

[badwitchproject]

We all want the different 40k armies to appear (I'd really love a mechanised Guard army please ). But I know that the devs will do the game justice leaving the modders to customise and create the other races.

[Rhyus]

Originally posted by No Surrender
Where does it say there will only be SMurfs in the SP game? Please point me towards the source.

It was reported in the PC Gamer magazine article that only this new chapter, Blood Ravens, is going to be playable in the single player campaign.

Rhyus

[Rhyus]

Originally posted by Dyntheos
I would think a campaign for every available army would be complete overkill.

The game would explode in the number of CD's, developement time, an balancing complexity. Starcraft had 3 races, C&C had 2 and Warcraft has 4. Your beleif that 8 races are a doable thing to me seems completely off base.

Additional armies and campaigns are the arena of expansion packs, not the core game as your previous examples only had a few races aswell, not a full complement of individual sides numbering in the half dozen or more you wish to see.

I think the most striking argument NOT to have so many armies is balance. This has proved time and time again the most important factor to online rts games. Homeworld was an extremely balanced game, good play was what won games, yet each side was nearly identical, the reason why it was so balanced.

I would plead for relic not to add anymore races, for I'd like to play this game in the next year or so, not in 3 years, and if it does well, then I'll happily fork over dollars for more armies if they are released via expansion packs.

If you read my post carefully, I did not say creating a campaign for every army in the 40k universe. I said to create one for the armies they were including in this game, the Space Marines, Chaos Marines, Orks, and whatever else they have planned for this game. So, technically, you are looking at 3, maybe 4 armies to have a campaign for, which, would put them in the range of Warcraft, Starcraft and C&C(Generals has 3 armies you could play). And, each of those games, when going through to the different armies, each took place at different places, and never really ran into the other, so, Dawn of War, since it is taking place in the 40k universe, has an entire universe they can deal with.

You had mentioned that with Homeworld, both sides were nearly identical, well, if you have played 40k, you will know that the only thing similar between each army is the following, HQ units, Fast Attack units, Troop units, Elite units, and Heavy Support units. Nothing else is really the same, unless you get into the Chapters inside each individual army. So, yes, inside the Space Marine army, you have dozens and dozens of different Chapters, and, for the most part, they use the same units but, with just different paint schemes. But, just like in Warcraft, Starcraft, and C&C, each army was unique, and this is so much so in the 40k universe.

Rhyus

[Rhyus]

Originally posted by Rusian Ninja
I suppose the other problem is that when you have multiple campaigns unless they're in cronological order you have a paradox. Which one is the "Real" storyline for sequals. I guess though that Relic likes making campaigns with only one race, and because of that they chose the Smurfs due to the fact that they are the most popular and would applease the most people.

Come on, if you have played in the 40k universe, or even in the Fantasy universe, you know that with different campaigns can be brought into different areas, just like C&C, Warcraft and Starcraft all did. None of them created a 'paradox' as you stated. And since the 40k universe is dealing with space and an entire universe, and armies are spread out all over it, each campaign can take place in an entirely different part of this universe.

Rhyus

[Rhyus]

Originally posted by dArKB*****d
Not picking holes, but they are creating a new chapter called blood ravens... so not going to be Smurfs that’s for sure.

I personally think that if they are going to create a new chapter. It's going to have to inject some new flavours to the existing space marine armies, especially if it doesn't want to be rejected by the old school players. (Me included)

I hate to say it, but, just creating a new chapter for GW takes at least a year of developement and playtesting. Even when they create a new chapter for the Space Marines, it still takes just as long, because there are so many different and new rules that are introduced for this new chapter, that they have to make sure it isn't complete cheese, and, yes, GW doesn't always get it right. Why do you think GW hasn't come out with more chapters for the Space Marines, because there is a lot of work involved to make each chapter different in some way, shape or form. And, I personally think that if GW hasn't already done the work for this new chapter, Blood Ravens, that it isn't going to be done right, and there will be alot of cheese and whine going around the 40k universe community, and hen that happens, you will see the game going down the drain, as the GW communinty tells all their friends that the game sucks. With their previous games, Relic doesn't have a hardened community to deal with. But, with them attempting to do a 40k game, they have a hardened and dedicated community they have to make believers out of, and it isn't an easy community to deal with.

Rhyus

[Russian Ninja]

Originally posted by Rhyus


Come on, if you have played in the 40k universe, or even in the Fantasy universe, you know that with different campaigns can be brought into different areas, just like C&C, Warcraft and Starcraft all did. None of them created a 'paradox' as you stated. And since the 40k universe is dealing with space and an entire universe, and armies are spread out all over it, each campaign can take place in an entirely different part of this universe.

Rhyus

But what's to link the campaigns together if they're all so seperate? There would be little focus in terms of storyline. If Reic just does one campaign with one race they can create a more in-depth story than if they try and create multiple campaigns with different races. Also, the reason that Warcraft 3 and Starcraft have no friction between the campaigns because they're all in cronological order and tightly linked together. But on the other hand with almost all the C&C games they had no real indication of which campaign (Allies & Soviets, or GDI & NOD) is the correct one. And General's has so little focus and order that it just plain sucks. The campaign is more like a collection of missions bundled togehter with almost nothing in common between each of them.

Oh, and don't triple post. Mod's don't like it.

[Maximus Decimus]

omg rhyus its a fluff chapter not a chapter with its own codex dude. hmmm strange i could of swore that homeworld got game of the yr and homeworld 2 sold a ton of copies....what! they only have one race as well?!?! dude in my opinion C&C sucks! and warcrafts "campaigns" suck, i bought the game for the story and the multiplayer. the campaign is "kill this" and "kill that" while the homeworld series campaigns had more in depth stories with objectives changing in the mission and twists occuring. that way is much better then the ol "kill this" and "kill that". u have to admit though that warcraftiii sold for its worldeditor and mostly on preorders alone. CnC(worst game ever in my opinion) was the original next gen RTS that gained loyal fans who still buy their products....clad Westwood is gone thankfully we wont be seeing CnC for a while if ever anymore lol :clap:.

relics campaigns have always been WAY better then the campaigns featured in warcraft, starcraft, and CnC which are "kill this" and "kill that" missions...well mybe "get that" and "get this".

[Shadione]

Originally posted by Rhyus
With their previous games, Relic doesn't have a hardened community to deal with. But, with them attempting to do a 40k game, they have a hardened and dedicated community they have to make believers out of, and it isn't an easy community to deal with.

Rhyus, meet the Homeworld community. :damnu:

Not as numerous as the 40k community, but just as vocal.

[Vijil]

yeah. Dont diss the homeworld community.

the problem with a game based on 40k is, as has been said, that the community will be hard to please. When people are right into something then even the slightest deviation from what they are used to makes it wrong... as such there are bound to be plenty of 40k players who hate this game for the simple reason that it is an RTS, or that it isnt quite how they'd imagined it. Twas the same with LOTR. Its like with the new mini. One guy I know said he thinks it looks too different from the old one... wtf? Its about the best redesign of a car Ive ever seen! Thats what happens with fans. If something new comes out, it has to be exactly the same as the old one.

I will appreciate this game for what it is, which Im sure will be a damned fine interpretation of a damned fine setting.

[Dyntheos]

I do apologise, Rhyus, indeed your post does state that you are looking for a 3 or 4 race campaign set.

Going on what was mentioned in the thread I do beleive that relic make great single player campaigns only based on one race or army though. Because it only has 1 doesn't mean it won't be good, and alot of people hopefully will buy the game for MP, so as to check out the other armies.

With an online rts, the SP is usually the hook to get you online if it's a big game. Lets hope in this instance the dawn of war is huge.

On a side note. This being directed to everyone in this thread, the quote function is there to highlight certain portions of a members post, not to copy paste the entire post of another member into your own reply. If you utilise the quote function only highlight that which is essential in your rebuttal. Generally the quote function is not needed at all because people reading the entire thread will have already read any quoted text you deem to place in your own reply.

In short it's redundant to quote an entire post, at most it's best to only quote the lines you are rebutting, if it's the whole post with many points, do it point form, or use the [list] function.

for further info on quoting on these forums check out this thread, and browse to the bottom.

[Maximus Decimus]

yeah, i always wished that GW would come up with a RTS and wow did it come true. thanks relic for confronting them with the idea and ill be sure to buy the game unless of course marines walk on their arms and chaos have fluffy shoulder pads...although id like the pink fluffy shoulder pads on chaos that would be funny.

[WarpGhost]

I dont see what peoples problem with only one race SP campaigns is. Relic are bound to make a Skirmish mode, which will be usable by people that dont play multiplayer; too much campaign tends to get boring after the first time, where as I find Skirmish stays quite fresh. Tho I hate the trend some games (HW2 included) of shrinking maps to a smaller size. I hope DoW wont make this mistake.

[Maximus Decimus]

well as long as they r not rediculously huge like in dark reign 2 ill like it because in DR2 ud be looking for 3 hrs for a damn random building somewhere under some bridge in a curtain portion of the map.

[Noir]

Originally posted by Shadione



Rhyus, meet the Homeworld community. :damnu:

Not as numerous as the 40k community, but just as vocal.

Yeah you tell them Shadione,they don't even have an Uberstalker like we do

[Keslov]

Originally posted by Unknown<ID>


Yeah you tell them Shadione,they don't even have an Uberstalker like we do

Prove that we dont:king:

[Rhyus]

Oh, I'm sure Homeworld has a decent online community, but, Homeworld isn't 40k. Relic is taking a game that has been around for 10 to 15 years now(I never can remember how long it has been around) on an established system, and the 40k community is very deep and involved in their game. They've read their army's codex front to back hundreds of times, and knows what options they have and how much each unit and option costs. How many people in the Homeworld community can spit out how much resources it costs to build a fighter, or a carrier, or gunship? How much can a level one collector collect?

If no one has played 40k, then, you don't know what playing each army is about. You know RTS games. Homeworld, Warcraft, Starcraft, C&C and loads of other games out there. If Relic wants to do this game justice, they are going to have very different approaches to each army. If I remember correctly, Orks aren't really going to have a barracks type of building(read the PC Gamer article). When they land on a planet, their instincts lead them to the fighting. The article also says that your tech level is based on the number or Orks in your army. Now, without going through some kind of introduction through a campaign, how easy is it going to be for someone to learn how to do these two options? It isn't going to be easy, it is going to be close to impossible. But, you can't do Orks in a single player campaign. There needs to be a learning period with each and every army included in the game. Which is where the single player campaigns come into play. Why? Well, each RTS game has a learning period in the beginning of the campaigns. They start slow, and show you how each army works, and how each building works and how to place them. That is what is going to be needed for DoW. If they don't have it, then, people are going to get frustrated when they play Orks or Chaos, and will just quit, or try to return the game to the store they bought it at. Don't even mention Skirmish mode. I've played Skirmish mode on all the RTS games I've played, and it doesn't give you a learning period, even Easy game. It isn't going to show you how to call Orks into your army.

Someone mentioned about C&C and Warcraft and Starcraft are all kill this or kill that, but, Homeworld wasn't like that for every mission. Well, you picked the wrong game to mention something like that in. 40k is everything about killing this or killing that. There is no 'peaceful' mission. If you don't believe me, then just look at the screenshots that was included in the PC Gamer article. It was an all out war happening in those shots. And, even if you wanted to play Orks or Chaos, guess what, Skirmish or MP is all about killing, even in Homeworld. That is the only possible option with those two game modes.

Rhyus

[SirRunOn]

Did someone say fire warrior sucked? Hey! At least they put out 25 megabyte patches regularly to fix issues.

How regularly do hw2 patches come? Not without a plunger pinch nosed pliers and a inordinate amount of time and suction on sierra's arse.

Funny though... ever since I installed firewarrior I can't host hw2... *shudder* UBER! eeelllppp!

While I do get tired of brats running around with vanilla marines, I get more tired of GW's tendancy to cheese/beard out each successive army list 40x more than the last. Argh, I can spend an entire army just trying to kill one damn daemon prince now before it gets to me. Previously it was krak missile... poof, there goes 80 points. Oh, and brats running around with the ubercheap list of the month gets me more than marines.

Sure kids can put up a small force group of marines. How many can boast an entire marine company, replete with rhinos, command squads, raiders, skimmers, whirlwinds, dreadnoughts, and four elite marine squads? Not many brats I'll bet.

Enemies of the Emperor fear Ira Caelestis 5th company! All hail Guilliman, all hail the Celestial Wrath!

[Maximus Decimus]

firewarrior did suck and HW didnt need to put out 25mb patches because their initial release version didnt have too many if any problems like firewarrior. i must say kuju did a horrible job because it was rushed and/or they just dont have the skill to do something right.

now one fix in ur response rhyus is that each race has a unique tech tree and thats what the article explains, each race summons units the same...ala requisition pts(call downs) while for orks to progress up the tech tree u need more orks.

"killing this" and "killing that" u fail to see the point i was makeing and did u actually read the posts or skim through them? i was talking about "twists" and "turns" not just straight forward missions dude. a mission isnt going to go one hundred percent to plan and never does therefore objectives and priorities change just like they did in HW makeing it more real to war unlike the usual "look! base! kill! done!". the campaign will be better because the missions wont be narrow and objectives will change, i DID NOT once mention and peaceful shit in mission because that just ruins pace. THERE WILL BE ONE CAMPAIGN as stated in article and u can sure as hell bet they will have maybe minor tutorial style missions for other races so u get to know the tech tree. i agree with their idea and agree that regular RTS campaigns DO NOT have the quality the HW series has and are just STRAIGHT FORWARD... mission1: kill buildings, mission2: kill buildings, etc etc etc.

when u mention 40k is kill this and that.. are u saying fluffwise the battles are straightforward and EVERYTHING goes according to plan like in all the other RTS campaigns or r there twists, turns, and criseses. if uv read any real fluff u will see that their war like and missions change with progression.

u must take the line "there is only war" quite seriouslly because what about the inquisition, eldar, etc which involve conspiricies, prophecies, etc , wouldnt that be going against "only war mindless crap" ur trying to feed us? fine lets throw away all the inquisitor books and all the other books that have "real" plots that make books good and masterpieces unlike the old there was a war, killing, war, the end. seriously u remind me of a some kid who didnt like LOTR or any of the matrix movies just because there was "too much" talking involved.

[MetalMilitia]

Marines as single player doesnt bother me, I mean the last game was tau so its not like they have done 20 marine games in a row. Also I think that although I would rather a game where I controlled the Imperial Guard, I will love playing the Emporers Finest. They were my second army and I really enjoy playing as them. Also Relic hasnt said anything about this but if they do a cpu vs player freebattle hopefully it will feature all races.(this is my favorite thing in Homeworld II) Also I am happy playing a single player marine game as long as it includes an interesting storlyine that is feasible from existing 40k fluff.

[Russian Ninja]

It doesn't really matter about the learning curve because unlike with Warhammer and other tabletop games which have extensive requirements (players, table, armies, dice, rules, more rules, WD with rules, Beer, judicators in the event there's a quarel about the rules, a lot of spare time, ect.) you can quickly learn about the mechanics through a quick game with the CPU. Often the best way to learn something is to just do it yourself and see what works and what fails miserably. Even playing with the Marines you'll learn about how other armies work.

And also Rhyus, I find that even though they've read the codex and rule book 50 times, there is not one game where the Warhammer players don't start up a debate or at least have a minor questioning of the rules, or the logic behind the opponent's interpretation of them. This is mainly due to the fact that it takes a lot of experience to really know the rules, just reading them in a WD is not enough, and there is generally a big interval between Warhammer games so players can't learn the mechanics behind the game quickly or will tend to forget if they already know.

[Rhyus]

Maximus, you fail to see things the way I have for years. Sure, people read the fluff and the novels and yes, there is plenty of behind the fighting going on there, but, that isn't a game. Those are novels or stories and you can do just about anything with those things. But, the main thing behind all that, is the game that involves killing this or killing that, or blowing up that building. When people hear about 40k or Warhammer or GW, they don't think first about the novels or the articles in WD or the little fluff in the Codexs or rule books, they think about the little 'toy soldiers' that are put together and painted and then put on a 4 x 8 board, marched across the table, rolling dice and 'killing' a tank or squad. Their smaller games, Necromunda, Mordheim or even Blood Bowl can deal with more non-combat encounters than their bigger games do.

From the side article I read about the Orks, it says this: "Like all the races, the Ork tech tree consists of 12 buildings. But, rather than building a barracks and churning out recruits, Orks sense where a battle is." So, in my perspective, Marines and Chaos build a barracks and then start 'building' troops, or, as they call it, recuits. To me, combining this and the requisition method mentioned, I think Marines and Chaos would more 'land' near or next to the barracks.

Rusian Ninja, I don't know where you have played, but, I've watched and been a player in a game(s) where there was not one arguement or need to look up a rule. I've even watched Rogue Trader tournaments or even just a tournament where there was no arguements about rules(you have to remember, I worked at the US HQ building). But, I do agree with you that with a computer game, all the rules are built in, but, then again, it makes for more of a 'vanillla' type of game and not have any flavor to the game....'what do you mean I can't bring my Titan into the game?' But, the tabletop game allows a person to 'choose' which squad member got killed from ranged attacks, as to an RTS game, it isn't going to matter, because the game will allow the 'sniping' of a particular member of a unit, like a Sgt, or someone that is carrying a Powerfist. There are going to be a lot of old time players that isn't going to play the game because of these facts(not necessarily the Titan comment). But, maybe they are going to change that way of RTS games, since I remember reading about clicking on one Marine and the whole unit is selected, so, there could be potential for the 'killing' of 'filler' troops first and leaving the 'special' troops for last.

Rhyus

[Civik]

some people just don't seem to comprehend the collosal task of creating and balancing the game to work properly. GW hasn't quite gotten 40k right (though it's getting there! ) and there are a multitude of races.

Unless you want the game to take 7 years to complete with everything working proper and balanced right, I'd rather have a few core races to the game and have it feel right from the get-go.

Gamers are a difficult bunch to deal with no matter which genre or game you are looking at.

[Maximus Decimus]

u misunderstood the sentence, they mean like all races they have 12 buildings and thats it. the devs have stated and it says in the article that "marine reinforcements come from stations orbiting a planet and plummet to the ground in dropships. Or they simply teleport in..." PG41 US PCGAMER APRIL.

u still fail to see what i am saying. i am saying that missions should be involving and non linear as in mission changeing due to heavy resistance, unexpected forces, etc like in the HW series and not the ol "kill building A" approach which many players will concure sucks. the approach i speak of involves killing as it is a war but is more rather realistic with objectives changeing and mission "progression" like for example a mission changeing from a defencive stance battle to a aggressive stance battle where original objective was to defend location A and now that it is secure u go out and hunt down something or another etc etc etc.

ur discription of the tabletop is very bland and incorrect, if u can offord terrain which makes a game fun u will see that u strategically menouver and use terrain to advantage not just march forces, ull find that in cityfight battle reports in particular they do this as well as other games that have lots of terrain because marching straight at enemy and rolling dice gets boring real fast. many players will agree with me on the use of terrain and that 40k is a strategic game. how old r u? curious cause u sound like u dont have much understanding of the game and one of the key aspects of the game "terrain", i suppose u will say that missions arnt part of 40k either right? wha! terrain!? HERESY! lol

now again i must state that not once have i wanted a "peace" mission with say searching for crap or doing something stupid which i agree with u is stupid. u must read the text more carefully guy cause thats what i stated in my last post.

EDIT: u have to agree if ur involved in the 40k community that its a fact that 99% of the 40k gamers want more fluff in codexs' just like in the 2nd edition ones. the kind of player u describe is the player who plays the hobby for 2 yrs gets bored and finds something else as iv seen these kind of ppl.

[Russian Ninja]

Originally posted by Rhyus
Rusian Ninja, I don't know where you have played, but, I've watched and been a player in a game(s) where there was not one arguement or need to look up a rule. I've even watched Rogue Trader tournaments or even just a tournament where there was no arguements about rules(you have to remember, I worked at the US HQ building). But, I do agree with you that with a computer game, all the rules are built in, but, then again, it makes for more of a 'vanillla' type of game and not have any flavor to the game....'what do you mean I can't bring my Titan into the game?' But, the tabletop game allows a person to 'choose' which squad member got killed from ranged attacks, as to an RTS game, it isn't going to matter, because the game will allow the 'sniping' of a particular member of a unit, like a Sgt, or someone that is carrying a Powerfist. There are going to be a lot of old time players that isn't going to play the game because of these facts(not necessarily the Titan comment). But, maybe they are going to change that way of RTS games, since I remember reading about clicking on one Marine and the whole unit is selected, so, there could be potential for the 'killing' of 'filler' troops first and leaving the 'special' troops for last.

Rhyus

I suppose that's because you've worked at the source of all evil in America, where there wouldn't be as much amateurs or at least more Pro's, than a regular GW's. Because in regular GW's there's quite often a few queries into the rules, either mid-game or not. But even pro's have queeries about the rules or forget about the few minor concepts from time to time. Just look at some of the WD Battle Reports. Occasionally even they forget a few things like forgetting to roll for Daemonic Mastery, forgetting Re-rolls or some other minor thing.

Quite often games also disintergrate into generally "What Works" because something has just been destroyed when it shouldn't have been or because a rule was forgotten a while ago and is now brought into play. Or other times when you're packing up your figurines you suddenly remember some rule that you forgot about. With a computer game though everything is ordered and there is no chance of simply forgetting something because the computer does the controlling and rule-remembering for you. You've just got to tell it what to do.

Oh, and generally many Veterans or Fanboys of any kind of thing, be it Warhammer, Final Fantasy, Magic or whatever generally want thing to stay exactly the same as before. They are generally against any form of extensive changeit. It's why many of this forum have been screaming heresy because it's only got 5 races in it instead of all of them. They want it to be just a Computer version of the tabletop game, exactly the same as the tabletop game they know and probably love. So you are right in the fact that a few fanboys or veterans won't buy DoW.

[Maximus Decimus]

yeah iv talked to ppl on this forum who wanted it to be a "virtual tabletop 40k" which i completely disagree with, yeah basically there r greedy ppl who wont buy DoW just cause of stupid reasons. i bet rhyus might not buy this and others cause it has one campaign but im getting it cause i understand what kind of work goes into a game therefore im a reasonable person and iv seen how HW has turned out with one campaign, it was great. hey in the end it doesnt matter about the select few since 40k fans and the mass public will be buying this game unless something goes horribly wrong, its like politics minority doesnt matter.

[DarthFelth]

i myself will buy it, and i dont want a virtual 40k game based on 3rd ed rules, 2nd maybe

[Rhyus]

First off, I will probably buy it, if I got money. I've bought or borrowed every GW computer game that has been made. I might not have understood the game(Blood Bowl) when I played it, but, I seem to have gotten or played all that has come out....well, maybe for that second Space Hulk game, as I never heard of it before now.

Second, I've never wanted to have every army in this game in the beginning. I understand what is involved, because, not only have I worked for GW, but, at one point, I worked for MicroProse Software. And since I'm 35, or will be shortly, I've played computer games since Pong. I know good games, and DoW is starting to look and sound like a good game, but, I feel that having missions for at least 3 of the races will make it a better game, one that not only fans of GW will pick up and play, but, people that have never heard of GW or Space Marines will play, get into the game and will want to check out what GW is all about(which is world domination).

I didn't say that we don't have arguements or have to look up the rules or anything like that. I said that I've seen games go without a hitch, to where no one was screaming foul, or was arguing over a rule or had to go ask someone else a rule. I can remember one time with me while playing in the annual Blood Bowl league, there was a rule that we couldn't remember, and, only after the game and the next day did we find out about it, which would have helped me in the long run in that match. So, even Pros will need to look up a rule or two at different times.

Maximus, I've see the kind of mission you are talking about in other RTS games, and no, it wasn't HW. It was either in C&C or Warcraft, maybe even both. Your first mission was to move a small group onto the board and take over an abandoned base. Then, once that was accomplished, your next mission was to defend it until you built something. Then, once that was done, your final mission was the wipe out your opponent. I've also seen missions where you are to hold out for 15 minutes. Some of them have finished the mission once the 15 minute timer has run out, other times, reinforcements arrive and you go out and kick some butt.

As for terrain for a tabletop battle, I'm well aware of it. I was just giving a very, very rought description of a tabletop game. But, you do have to admit, that whether you use cityscape terrain or jungle terrain or just the plain ole two hill and two forrest terrain, that, if you break the game down into its basics, you put together and paint up your miniatures, place them on the table, move them, whether using the terrain or not, and you roll dice and you remove your miniatures because them have been 'killed'. Now, of course, if you are playing against the Nids, you will probably just want to stay in one spot and unload into the Nids as they approach, unless of cours you are playing Nids as well. And speaking of the Nids, if they are included in this game, how is someone that doesn't know about them to know that they will have to have some kind of hive brain creature on the board at all times to be able to control those that don't have hive brains? You really can't, because there wasn't a mission to teach them this aspect or the Nids.

And yes, there are 'missions' in the 40k game. However, the ones included in the rule book are very basic(cleanse, hold more corners than your opponent, etc), ones that are made up for Rogue Trader tournies and other tournies are a little more complicated. They, more than terrain, can make the game more fun than just a basic game.

Rhyus

[Maximus Decimus]

yeah your right, ur previous description just sounded like place guys on table and move in a straight line but when every game is broken down to its core its about killing. i do have to disagree with the warcraft missions etc because i own all the warcrafts and although maybe the few missions are like that but most of them are "build men and destroy base A". in homeworld there r missions where u r to link with a module but when u arrive it is destroyed and then u find out that there r enemy forces here with a carrier, go destroy the carrier and then etc etc etc, i want depth in the missions where objectives change and where i get surprised not the usual and predictable kill building A and ur done. maybe something like recapture a spaceport from the orks then once that is done u find that orks have amassed elsewhere and now u must defend the spaceport while sending forces out to say destroy the anti air batteries they have set up to stop u from getting rienforcements, this would be a much better mission then say "capture spaceport" mission complete. anything along those lines is fine

have a good day.

[Dimension]

erm, rhyus, you ARE aware that the universe can be explained in mission briefings, cut-scenes and in-game dialogue, right? check out star craft for reference, which was a completely unknown universe at first, but it was all nicely fleshed out during mission briefings, cut scenes and the intro. while HW2 didn't excel at that as much as HW did, I'm still positive that relic will manage to convey the universe to people who have never heard of WH40K. its one of the things relic is gunning for, if you've read the ign interview.

[SoheilsX]

Originally posted by No Surrender
Where does it say there will only be SMurfs in the SP game? Please point me towards the source.

Anyway. I agree. I think that the SMurfs are massivly over rated. Even though they are the most profitable and common army a number of people (like me and my friends) despise them. It is because that the SMurfs are so easy to play and every rich snot nosed 8 year old plays SMurfs (I'm not saying that all SMurf players are n00bs though). Most of the real veterans I've met play other armies and most of them stay clear of the SMurfs.

No, its people like you who ruin the gamingg community of WH40k.
Lets say that the universe was based around the eldar, then people would bitch about them being overrated.
How about before going ahead and badmouthing the Space Marines you look into their fluff a bit, you will see they are not that vanilla, not to mention the backgrounds of all the chapters.
I can understand people disliking the Ultramarines, but i play Dark Angels and Daemonhunters and they both have very rich backgrounds and units.

[DarthFelth]

the only reason i hate Ultramarines was because when i started playing everyone had them and painted nothing else, if space wolves were like that in my local store i guess i would hate them to
MR no_surrender, im a marine player i have other armies, i used to play eldar, orks and all, however i perfer my marine armies and every guard player i have played i have wounderd how they have enjoyed their games just sitting back with like max heavy support in tanks, cos of these players i actualy hate using tanks after being on the recieving end of them, i myself use fast armies that actualy use tactics and against the right people i enjoy my games, i have never enjoyed a game against a IG player (so far)

Anyways on a the starcraft stuff, i never played it so i have no idea so cant comment, but i see what rhyus is saying, however his view tainted and evil, dragging more people in to the expensive world of GW, back in the day of rougue trader, atleast i could afford a army

[MetalMilitia]

I will definatly buy this game. 4 races realistically fits my idea of a good 40k game, the models look great the environments look great the game will be good. A virtual 40k game would be boring without all the interaction with other people.

[Maximus Decimus]

i agree 100%. back to how many campaigns.. relic is rlly good at what they do and they r 40k players just like us and so abviouslly if relics team has decided to go down that path then it must be good. theyv never let us down before and i doubt they will with this. i have to say the HW series campaigns r better then ur usual 3 campaign stuff in warcraft, CnC, and starcraft.

[DarthFelth]

yeah well C&C i did 2 campaigns then i sold the game cos i got bored of it

[corkill]

Rhyus, I don't see what your problem is. Sure one race for the campaign isn't the best but who really cares. I mean everyone plays a few hours of campaigns in RTS games but the majority is playing online versus real people (it's so much more rewarding than defeating dumb ass AI).

If you really care don't despair, because think about it, what do you get when your cross 15 year old fan base with awesome graphics engine.....Yes you guessed it fan MODS galore.

[Rhyus]

corkill, sure, there will be mods upon mods upon mods(if they include a map editor/unit editor or let the source code out). But, lets take a look at what mods are. Well, according to FPS and RTS games, they are maps that allow you to play multiplayer against others that have that mod. This doesn't do anything for a campaign. Tell me, those that have played 40k, has -anybody- picked up an army and not read the rules for their army or even for 40k? Well, since the 40k tabletop game is pretty complex, I would hope not. Because the world itself is complex, the game will follow suit. It is already not like your normal fair of RTS games, in the fact that you don't 'build' units. That is already going to change the learning curve for this game. And, from the sound of it, each race will have a different way of bringing in the troops. I have a feeling that your statement about the majority of the players will go online. I think there is a fair amount of people that will play against the AI that go and play it online. I rarely play RTS or even FPS online because when I want to play them, I just want to quickly play the game, as I want something to just be fast and quick and kill everything out there and not have to worry about connecting to a gaming server, trying to find someone that isn't an expert at the online game, setting up the game and then playing it. Sometimes that can take an hour. And that could be an hour into a game against the AI that I just wasted.

Maximus, have you played the 40k card game? How did you like it? Well, if you hated it, guess what? The people that made that game are also 40k players. Being 40k players doesn't make a difference at how a game will turn out. Computer games for GW have been hard on the company. They have been very leery when it comes to computer games. Hell, they are pretty leery when it comes to a company outside of GW that makes a product for them, because they feel that it wont be done right.

Dimension, sure, the -universe- can be explained in cut scenes and so forth, but, game mechanics would not be explained. You are taking a complex tabletop game and turning it into probably a complex computer game. Go on, I dare you to take up an army that you have never played and never read about, and just have a friend that plays them tell you one of the fluff stories and then go play that army. How much fun was that? I bet not very fun at all. That is my point about this whole thing. You are taking armies that many people will know nothing about and Relic is assuming that everybody will know how to play them. If they are assuming that, then, they are only expecting people that have played the 40k tabletop game to buy it. And that is just wrong to assume something like that.

And, from my experiences at GW, Marines are pretty well hated. Why you ask? Because every kid will usually starts with a Marine army and they just do them injustice. And also for the fact that the Marine armies tend to have more cheese than the other armies do, especially those Blood Angels.

Rhyus

[dArKB*****d]

Rhyus
Dimension, sure, the -universe- can be explained in cut scenes and so forth, but, game mechanics would not be explained. You are taking a complex tabletop game and turning it into probably a complex computer game. Go on, I dare you to take up an army that you have never played and never read about, and just have a friend that plays them tell you one of the fluff stories and then go play that army. How much fun was that? I bet not very fun at all. That is my point about this whole thing. You are taking armies that many people will know nothing about and Relic is assuming that everybody will know how to play them. If they are assuming that, then, they are only expecting people that have played the 40k tabletop game to buy it. And that is just wrong to assume something like that.

And, from my experiences at GW, Marines are pretty well hated. Why you ask? Because every kid will usually starts with a Marine army and they just do them injustice. And also for the fact that the Marine armies tend to have more cheese than the other armies do, especially those Blood Angels.

Rhyus, have you played homeworld?

Had you heard of either of the races before the game was released?

Does it matter no!

If relic does anywhere near a good a job on DoW as on their other titles it won't make the blindest bit of difference if we know the armies inside and out, or not.

Trust me with their know how, I'm almost certain all the game mechanics chapter info will be explained.

( Fluff & history will be pile driven into our skulls and guess what we'll be begging for more )

It'll be spoon fed in the first couple of missions, trainer missions you could call them. That they'll have cunningly incorporated into the game, easing us into the control and feel just like homeworld was, for me and many others.

As for hating space marines, I personally think they are badass, and I've never wanted to have a space marine army. (Tyrnaids for me) Who cares if a kid wants to play a space marine army makes it all the more fun to rip them to shreds with my stealers.

[DARKMASTER]

Well it seems that a couple of tutoritals would answer your questions?
Also, wich makes a game last long isnt the SP. It's the MP! What would the HL-mod Counter-Strike be without MP? Nothing.
And the MOD needs to be REALLY addictive if its going to make the game "live" longer, so i would recommend relic to just go for some Ground-Breaking MP!
As for MP: Things that makes Warcraft/starcraft MP so populare is that they are being constantly balanced. Starcraft is perfectly balanced and is the most populare RTS game in the world(even now)! But relic has made some good RTS games in the past so i have faith in them, however balancing 4 races is extremely hard....

[Wazz]

I don't understand how a game that'll be released in mid-summer will be better if it has 3 shitty campaigns instead of 1 good...

It's one of the most stupid things i've heard, I'd much rather go to the movies and watch one good movie instead of 3 poor ones.

Also you'll probably be able to play the 3 other races in skirmish so what's the big deal? The time it takes to develop a new campaing is extreme, either it'll take atleast another year or it'll be some cheap shit like the extra missions in metal gear solid 2 substance (however entertaining, i'd rather take some kind of skirmish)

I wouldn't buy a game cus it said "3 different campaings!"
I'd be more interested if it said "one story driven plot-twisting campaing"...

[Abaddon]

i agree with dArKB*****d on the trainer missions relic does an excellent job on these all of there games have featured an indepth tutorital and the first 2-3 missions are there to train and to get to grips with the game. i just hope Relic does ground breaking SP as well as MP cos not all of us can do MP, ma folks wont let me and i can't get broadband where i live(scotland) so i have to make do with the SP and CPU skirmish. (have never played counter strike.).

i dont hate Space marines either don't know that many people who do, i have a Dark Angels army(mainly Deathwing cos there so good) as well as chaos and i did work for GW for a limited time and none of the staff i worked with hated them either.

[Rhyus]

Yes, I played Homeworld, but, you know what, both sides, the two sides, are basically the same. They have a mothership, resource gathers, fighters, scouts, carriers, gunships, and so on and so forth. From what I remember, they didn't even bother to give them different names or make them look that much different. So, for Homeworld, in my opinion, it was just one 'race' used on both sides. But, you can -NOT- get away with that in 40k. And as for the races in Homeworld, they were totally made up by Relic. With 40k, they don't have that luxury. What they are working with is a game system, after updates, that has been around for 10+ years, and the 3 races that have been mentioned(SM, Orks, and CM) they have been around since the beginning as well. You said you like playing the Nids. Ok, how would you like it if your Gaunts were just called troops? No special name, just troops? How about those Lictors? How about they just be called Elite. No special name for them, just Elite. Lets throw in some stealers and also call them troops. Now, how 'special' does the game sound to you? It sounds pretty boring to me.

You said it wont make a difference if we know the armies inside and out or not. I beg to differ there. 40k is a complex world of its own. Throw it into a computer game, and sure, the rules are taken care of, but, the varying difference in troops from one race to another, and for that fact, from one chapter to another are greatly different. Marines rely on their armor and firepower to 'win' the day. Orks rely on the ability to mass a huge force and fast speed and the color red. Chaos, well, since they are basically Space Marines, just turned/possessed by evil, they rely mostly on their armor and firepower, but, they have a few other options, like calling forth demons to fight for/with them. Eldar rely mostly on better firepower and speed. Imps, well, they rely mostly on numbers and tanks. Nids like quantity and speed. They love to swarm. So, I'm sure you are well aware that the way you play one army most likely wont work for another army, not even within the chapters of the Space Marines.

I think someone earlier said it well, look at the track record of previous GW computer games that have made it to the shelves. They -all- center on just one race and because of this fact and the stubborness of GW fans, they basically fell from grace and wasn't really heard from again. Oh, sure, some of them had MP and they did include other races/armies. But, they were all like DoW....centered on just ONE race/army and the others were included in the MP for you to figure out. Oh, look, I have the option to build either one Obliterator or a squad of 10 Chaos Marines? Hhmmm....those numbers for the Marines sounds better. I sure wish I knew what an Obliterator is or what it could do. Oh, look, I can now call forth the Bloodthirster. Should I bring him from my aspiring champion who is in the thick of battle or should I bring him into my Chaos Sorcerer who is at the back of the battlefield? Sure, that was mentioned in the article that to keep the Bloodthirster happy and on the field of battle, he needs to be at the figthing, but, how many people will have read the article or even remember what the article said 6 to 8 months down the road? These are reasons why the Relic developers should change the way their company does games and should approach this new game in a different way, by providing good, decent campaigns for each race they are including in the game, not just some new chapter they have dreamed up for the space marines, who, in my opinion, has way too many chapters to begin with.

Rhyus

[Uzgah]

Rhyus, that is perhaps the most profound thing I've read on these forums. I agree with you too btw. I would like to see campiagns for all the races, hey could even do a console type thingy where the secret races' camapign only becomes available when you have completed the other races. I always wanted to play an Ork campaign in Final Liberation, even MP Orks wasn't that fun =[
However, to include these campaigns it would delay the game. Release it as is and produce expansion packs with new campiagns etc.
But I think we all have to bare in mind, I doubt all the races will ever be available to play in the game, even with expansions. Doing so would mean that GW would remove (for some people) the need for the tabletop game. Why spend £/$X on a new model when you can download a patch?
Why buy any models at all? they exist in the game environment and you and your friend could play any race without ever having to buy a single figurine.
So I think GW would realise this and never make so that they could lose potential customers for the books/models etc. They would be producing the 'perfect product' which as anyone in marketting can tell you, "never make the perfect product, it removes the chance of getting the new contranct to replace the product you just produced."

[Dimension]

to chip in my two cents, tis more like the other way around. after seeing this game, I'm considering starting an army, despite the fact i don't really have the money for it. i really doubt the game will become a substitute for the tabletop. online risk hasn't become a substitute for tabletop risk either :P

[Uzgah]

theres an online Risk?!?
w00tage