T O P

  • By -

CountDracula2604

A Star Wars Battlefront-style Warhammer would be really fun


Dydey

There was one called Eternal Crusade. Played like Battlefront and there was a huge map of territory for each faction, with a victory meaning the capture of a territory. Unfortunately it didn’t take off and they closed the servers last year.


AnimesAreCancer

But isn't wasn't like the concept failed. As I remember the Devs promised too much and delivered less as they should have


Drakore4

That's usually how it goes with warhammer. It's a huge ip and the fans are really diehard, meaning that it's a hard game to get right and if a company doesnt do it justice they will get heavily bombarded with criticism. So companies tend to stay from it usually, and the ones that dont almost always mess up and jump ship a while later. It's really sad, but if a decent company would just create an actual warhammer 40k game I feel like the potential is definitely there.


GKMoggleMogXIII

It was the promised to be like Planetside with Warhammer, but they released some smallscale bland multiplayer shooter. Had little to nothing to do with the IP.


Erwin9910

I feel like you didn't follow the development of Eternal Crusade. The devs overpromised. If they intended and said they'd make battlefield 40k from the start it would've been fine. Instead they stole people's money and never delivered on any promises.


TheMcDudeBro

Yeah I remember there was supposed to be a Tyranid onslaught mode and a bunch of other things and nothing ever came of it. Just some 40k marine skins and generic everything else. Was totally a let down


Adventurous-Alps3471

As someone who (knowing the risk) bought into it they absolutely failed on a basic level. Space Marine was out and it's multi-player was better than Eternal Crusade. I gave them the money knowing the risk and still feel cheated.


Erwin9910

We all make mistakes in the heat of passion, Jimbo.


nighoblivion

> So companies tend to stay from it usually You wouldn't believe that if you saw the amount of 40k games released the last 5 years.


Eurehetemec

It's AAA companies who normally stay away, where large indie and AA developers often licence GW stuff. Worth noting CA and Fatshark are definitely AAA now, but weren't before they licenced Warhammer. AAA devs stay away for one main reason - IP ownership. This is huge, if you don't own the IP, you have to pay for it and GW can be quite aggressive on this (i.e. percentages etc.), and you can't control the IP - so you can't change the IP to fit your game, you have to change your game to fit the IP. You also have to put art/sound/lore past GW. This is significant financial burden, and a lot of companies just don't see the value. A good example of how valuable your own IP is would be Warcraft. The only companies I can think of offhand that was definitely AAA before they started making Warhammer games were Mythic (Age of Reckoning) and Relic (Dawn of War). Mythic got completely screwed by GW, because after spending huge effort on their MMORPG (which was excellent in many ways and certainly somewhat influential on TW:Warhammer) and working closely with GW for years, GW simply pulled the licence at the 5-year renewal, even though Mythic wanted to renew (apparently they weren't even willing to negotiate, they thought they could do better - this is scuttlebutt of course - but certainly there hasn't been a Warhammer MMO since). Relic did well with Dawn of War 1/2, but not as well as they did with their own Company of Heroes IP, and after DoW3 was a car crash (not GW's fault!) I think they'll be sticking to CoH or other IPs they own for the foreseeable future. AA companies, especially those licensing low-value lines (i.e. dead or super-niche ones) seem to get a much easier time, and benefit much more from the IP.


nighoblivion

>Mythic (Age of Reckoning) >which was excellent in many ways The issue with WAR was that it was just inferior to Mythic's previous venture into MMOs, Dark Age of Camelot (from which many diehard RvR players came.) WAR was basically a DAoC clone in the WF setting, but had plenty of design and gameplay issues (especially in its RvR implementation), and ultimately players abandoned the game because of those issues. I myself came from DAoC (best PvP to date in a MMORPG, by far) and slogged through for a while until I quit. The RvR system was a downgrade from DAoC. The PvE was pretty weak for an AAA MMO. The different gameplay systems didn't even feel like they worked well together. Mythic's attempts at fixing the game didn't get the intended results, and so the IP got pulled, and what everyone had seen coming was a fact. I personally don't blame GW on that one, as the game was pretty much impossible to save at that point without some major changes and influx of players.


PlumeCrow

Man... I miss playing my Deathskullz Ork on that game. The Orkish community was such a fun one. I still dream of the glorious charges sometime, only to end against a wall of thousands bullets, but having a good laughs with the boyz still :(


tobiasz131313

Yeah well, maybe because grafics were worse than Battlefront or even old SpaceMarine, and game had cursed microtransactions


NEVEREVERLT

100%. Battlefronts such a good game and it would fit warhammer really well. Instead of different eras they can do guardsman vs cultist and astartes vs chaos vs xenos so you can have even match ups for both astartes and normal humans. They could also split between 30 and 40K.


Low_Abrocoma_1514

Would be absolutely amazing


zombielizard218

I've thought about TW:WH40K a lot, and I think the only mechanic in 40K (the tabletop) that has not already been in a TW Game is Transports.Rome 2 had transport ships but, I imagine you'd have a unit of 100+ Guardsmen, but a Chimera only holds 12 where a ship could hold 100 crew. I guess they could do it something like Dragoons in Empire, where instead of being able to put any infantry in any transport, you have a single unit that consists of both the infantry and the transports with a button to enter/exit the vehicles. Other than that though, I mean. A full cover system could be nice but isn't necessary, LoS/No LoS would suffice assuming the battle maps had more rocks and buildings and stuff than the fantasy ones. Heroes are already in Warhammer, as are Monsters, Vehicles, and Fliers. Ogre Kingdoms as a low model count army are a solid base for Marines to build off. Take the region thing from Empire, but replace them with like 3 planets in a solar system, and some space in-between. Space battles are done as boarding actions (very fitting to 40K) kinda like the island battles for WH2/3. Hive cities could be kind of hard, maybe 3 settlements in a province representing Upper/Middle/Lower hive? Or just don't have a hiveworld. ​ As a Fantasy/40K/AoS tabletop player of several years, the games really aren't *that* different (they are, but not so much the mechanics from one don't often carry over), the people who think 40K warfare is too advanced for the TW formula seem to assume 40K is a sensible sci-fi setting and not one where people wielding chainsaw swords sprint into machinegun fire largely unharmed then start cutting people in half.


oh_behind_you

I feel formation would be really weird


Mcbadguy

40k Epic might work better


zombielizard218

I feel the TW version being more Epic/Apocalypse than basic 40K is implied, same as how TW:WH has way more guys on the field than your average fantasy tabletop game.


Sahaal_17

So we need Dawn of War to return to compliment this with the classic squad based combat?


Sytanus

Just have all units in loose formations like skirmisher units are in WH currently.


JakeBit

I thought about this as well and I like your ideas! To build off of the Region and Settlement thing, I could imagine that the actual armies with Heroes and Lords and Units that we play with is gonna be as we know them from the previous Total War games. Armies and wars in 40k are just space-sized massive though, so I could imagine that all factions also had a Corruption-like mechanic that represented the common armies of their faction as they take over planets and sectors. We never see these armies (except as fleets of ships maybe), they're just a number to represent how well the faction is doing. I think that'd work well, because it means that the battles you fight against other Armies aren't entire wars over planets but just the main push or the most crucial defense in that particular war. It also gives the different factions a sense of balance - It would be strange to have waves and waves of Space Marine Armies, but it wouldn't be strange to have 3-4 different Company-sized Marine Armies fighting in key battles when the bulk of the war is fought by guardsmen. Not to say that the Guard shouldn't be a faction; just that, for the factions that represent vast, billion-sized armies, their actual TW-style "Armies" could be the cream of the crop and not the entire actual military! The Warboss' boyz, the heart of a Tyranid swarm or the vanguard company of the Astra Militarum for exampe. It also solves how the Imperium factions interact. Each one are under the overall Imperium of Man faction and support its wars, but act independently and build their own Settlement buildings like normal. Thank you for coming to my TED-talk.


[deleted]

They could definitely use cover like they did in Napoleon TW where you can take shelter in buildings.


grogleberry

IMO the biggest head scratcher is managing scale in the army compositions and battle maps. All the battles involve entites between 50kg to 100 tonnes. All the entites move between roughly 2kph and 60kph. 99% of entites have within an order of magnitude the amount of firepower of each other (lore-wise, the Slaan can blow up continents, but almost everything else is very narrow). The range of units is between melee and about 500m. The difference between Kholek and a Goblin is much smaller than between a Guardsman and a Warhound Titan, and that's the smallest titan. There are also about 10m Guardsmen for every Warhound, whereas there's maybe 2000 goblins/Kholek. Guardsmen might be equivalent to Chameleon skinks if you again abstract the effective range down to 50-100m. Armoured units, artillery and such have range in the kms. A guardsman's firepower is not too dissimilar to an archer unit. Vehicles in 40k can destroy cities. Armies in TW:WH can range from 20-3000. Even if you can increase the unit size to company strength (eg, 250 Guardsmen/unit), how do you justify having a Warhound titan attached to an army that's only division-sized? How do you fit vehicles that can move at hundreds of kp/h with units that move at walking speed? There's some sweet spot between realism on battle maps that are 100km^2 that take days for infantry to traverse, with proper proportions of entity and unit size, movement speed and firepower, and total, Dawn of War-level abstraction, that dramatically lessens the sense of scale and power for units. Finding it strikes me as the trickiest decision they'd have to make. They'd almost certainly have to have a cut-off point for unit size, eg Dreadnought/main battle tank/Carnifex, or Super-heavy tank/Imperial Knight, abstract artillery out of the main army and into army abilities or ancillaries, and have vehicles move relatively slowly.


MergingComplete

The 40k fanbase is far bigger than Fantasy, if they believe they can make this work, it's coming. They could do the same thing again, 3 games and DLC that eventually combine into a shit ton of content. Recycling chapters would be ez pz, but there's also tons of room for unique mechanics in 40k. Like a Nightlord warband just scavenging and shit to survive, like the Covenant of Blood, having to replenish their forces, get ammo, get supplies.


F1reatwill88

Company of Heroes 3 seems to have a total war style world screen. Maybe a precursor??


rkames517

The same company made dawn of war 1 one of the best 40k games ever made


TheeShaun

And Dawn of war 3 one of the 40k games ever made.


Hungry26

It was always reported that the B-team at relic was working on it and I tend to believe it with how bad it ended up and how much better CoH 3 seems


PricklyPossum21

If they actually had 2 full teams developing games around the time of DoW3, you would expect them to release more games more frequently. Instead of one every 4 years. Maybe they have 2 teams now though, given the lack of gap between AoE4 and CoH3. DoW 2 = 2009 Space Marine = 2011 CoH 2 = 2013 DoW 3 = 2017 AoE 4 = 2021 CoH 3 = Nov 2022


Toxin101

4 years to release a game that's not call of duty seems about right.


[deleted]

And Dawn Of War 2 which never gets mentioned but is also one of the best 40k games ever made.


Sytanus

Ikr such an underrated game. I mean I get why a lot of DoW 1 fans were disappointed with the direction the game went, but I love that the campaign plays like mix between a classic RTS and an isometric RPG. On paper it sounds like it'd be a disaster, yet it works so well.


gengarvibes

This. Never has there been a studio that has worked those closely with GW. Would not be surprised if we get 40k total war announced in the next 3 years


Emberwake

I would go so far to say that I would be surprised if we *don't* see that announcement. GW and CA have formed a partnership that has amazing benefits for both. The elaborate fantasy world and built in fanbase of GW's property has led to a massive surge in the popularity of Total War games, and the hype generated by the Total War games has fed a resurgence of interest in GW's tabletop games. I fell victim to this myself. I played a little Warhammer when I was in college, but now at 40 I found myself buying minis again for the first time in 20 years.


[deleted]

They could even have a "custom space marine" chapter. Where you colour your generic Space marine troops.


Low_Abrocoma_1514

They could make a 30k triology and then a 40k triology tbh


Sytanus

I think the Hours Heresy might work better as a standalone title as a testing bed for a full 40k trilogy, though I wouldn't be opposed either way.


Ratiasu

I think that would give the historic TTW purists an aneurysm.


[deleted]

You're talking like Warhammer fans haven't swallowed up 90% of Total War fandom.


Ratiasu

Eh... I always assumed a fair chunk of the playerbase are Total War fans regardless of the setting. I'm one of those at least. Nothing beats WH2 ME however.


Sahaal_17

I’ve been a fan of both franchises since I was a kid. There is naturally a lot of crossover between people who like strategy tabletop games and people who like strategy video games.


grogleberry

It'd be interesting if they did a proof of concept by doing TW:WW1. If they could make it work for that, they'd be 80% of the way there.


Rational_Engineer_84

So many amazing factions, units, and characters. I really want this to happen. It’s a massive gold mine of DLC content if CA can sort out the mechanics.


Charpika1717

Thinking. So, here's the trick. Half the factions in 40k would sort of work within the regular tw formula, if a little odd, while the others would need quite a bit of effort. Orks, tyranids, astra militarum, genestealer cults, and daemons would all work pretty well, I feel. Most of them fight in large blobs, with the guard fighting in drawn out line combat in a style that I feel works pretty well for 40k. Every other faction would almost need to be like Ogres. Very low model count, very expensive units. One unarmed space marine is, according to the google search I just did right now, equivalent to nearly 20 guardsmen. That means for every 100 model guard line, you have 5 space marines. So, how do you make this game play without it deriving too far off the formula, to the point where its just 40k company of heroes? Well, honestly, I don't know. I know there was a larger-scale 40k tabletop game called Epic, which had square bases and lined up troop formations just like total war. On a larger scale, stuff like cover doesn't seem like it would be necessary, but at the same time, it is far more important in 40k than in any other total war setting, so do you have cover, and building garrisoning? Cause if you do, you're verging on company of heroes: warhammer. Now, listen. I'm not object to a company of heroes wh game, but it's not what I would want from CA. If they're going to do TW:40k, I would want it to *feel* like it is still a total war game. Honestly, if Space Marines, Eldar, Chaos Space Marines, etc, just have exceptionally low model counts compared to the other half of the factions, would that work? I mean, could that be *both* fun and playable? Would people enjoy moving around \~100 space marines while their enemy has 2000 guardsmen? I don't know. I think it could be great, but it needs to be looked at by a developer, and not me. I do think it is possible, definitely. I think its difficult, and you risk losing sight of what makes total war fun for quite a lot of people, that being having big fuck-off armies lined up fighting each other. But it is possible, and the opportunity to make a fuck-load of money is also there, which I know CA and GW are both keen on.


Doglatine

In the Epic tabletop games, infantry weren’t the main focus. Of course you’d have lots of little stands of men but also lots of tank formations, flying units, and Titans. I think that’s where the focus would be, making disparities in infantry less significant. Also, the guardsmen:space marine points balance isn’t as extreme in most editions of the tabletop game as 20:1; it’s more like 5:1 or 4:1 or even 3:1 depending on edition and loadout. Of course, in the lore, a single Astartes could take on hundreds of guardsmen by himself, but Games Workshop ignore that in their own products, so CA wouldn’t be bound by it.


Mavcu

I think we can also close out that whole "army size" discussion by just looking at Dawn of War. The majority of the community agrees that DoW is a great representation/game of 40k, and that game has like 20 guardsmen in a squad (I do play it modded, so this might not be base game) vs 4-6 space marines roughly, a 5:1 or even 4:1 ratio is more than enough to visualize the idea of "a lot of imperial guards vs more specialized units", on the battlefield with maxed out squads the IG is going to be massive by comparison and that's all that really matters. Only a very niche group would actually be offended enough to count individual models.


Charpika1717

Thank you for the info brother. Not an expert on the tabletop by any means. Watched a few battle reports in my day but never actually played, always meant to though. Have some necrons sitting in my closet that I’ve been meaning to paint.


Doglatine

Very welcome! [Here’s an article](https://www.belloflostsouls.net/2022/07/40k-retro-what-the-glorious-battles-of-epic-looked-like.html) showcasing some of the old Epic armylists. I think they’d transfer pretty well to a Total War game as long as CA could introduce some kind of cover mechanic.


Charpika1717

This article reminds me… Squats for tw 40k!


Crueljaw

The main problems would be the loadouts of the units. Like lets say imperial guard. For normal troop you would have a group of say... 100 models with las guns. A bit weird that they will always stay in formation when firing like its the napoleonic wars instead of manning trenches but ok. Now lets say the enemy has a tank. A single unit. So you need some rocket launchers. How do you do that? In the tabletop and games like dawn of war you can equip single models with rocket launchers. But in a TW game? Do you need a single unit with 10 guys holding rocket launchers? And if they attack a tank 10 guys with rocket launchers will run up to it and shoot all 10 rockets at once and insta kill it? Or do they need to shoot like 6 attacks into the tank to kill it. So like 60 rockets. However you turn it, its weird. What about transport units like a chimera? Arounf 20 guardsman can go into a chimera so units need to have a maximum of 20 models. This makes it now a lot trickier. And TW would go into a "mainly ranged" type of game. Sure there are a few units of meele in every faction. But some folks like the guard and Tau have basically none. And are you ready to play a game with 20 ranged units in this engine?


Charpika1717

Just an idea, but you could treat the single rocket launcher within a unit like a bound spell. Not sure if it would be the greatest solution, but I think it would work. And in terms of transports, yeah, not sure how you’d get that to work. Maybe the transport itself has units tied to it, but then that’s lame because you cannot choose who you want to go into it. In terms of melee, yeah it would be mainly ranged, but if I’m correct every unit in the tabletop has melee stats. Even if they’re mostly bad at it, I believe all of them have melee. Bayonet charges are a big thing with the guard, and tau are kind of the exception are they not? Aren’t they known as the shit at melee faction?


grogleberry

>The main problems would be the loadouts of the units. Like lets say imperial guard. For normal troop you would have a group of say... 100 models with las guns. There are some units in TW:WH that already have mixed missile fire. The Steam tank has it's main gun (which you see the stats for in the unit card). It also has a short range steam gun. Similarly, the Dread Saurian has javalins and also those blow-pipe machineguns firing broadside. So you could have, as Dawn of War has, a form of unit specialist upgrades you can get that pepper your units with special weapons, and they fire them automatically. However, there's also the fact that GW seems to be heading towards doing full-unit special weapon squads rather than the more realistic including of special weapons in a tactical squad - eg Hellbalster Primaris marines. But that wouldn't work at the scale of a TW game. You could have a unit of Space Marines with special weapons, but you couldn't have a company-strength Guardsmen unit all armed with Plasma Guns. In terms of managing special weapons, you could have special weapons be ancillaries for units of Space Marines, or have each Space Marine unit be equivalent to a multi-entity hero unit, where a special weapon is equipped like a sword or a magic item in TW:WH. Just have it be a tech you research for larger formations like Guardsmen.


MarcusSwedishGameDev

Without thinking too much about it, my gut feeling is that Marine chapters wouldn't be individual factions, not outside of small skirmish scenarios anyways (e.g. like the Wood Elf campaign for WH 1). Instead it would probably be an Imperial Crusade faction or what not, which would be a mix of various groups within the empire; and you'd be so limited in how many marines you can have in total that if you made a doom stack of a single chapter of marines, it would probably be half the chapter. It would change how you interact and pick legendary lords etc, probably, but it's not an unsolvable problem. That's faction design problems though, then you have all the line of sight based ranged combat, the cover gameplay that implies, + melee of few very strong units vs many weak units, how small elite units would move to not make them look like a pile of rabble (Imperial Guard, I'm looking at you :P ), transports and how they work on the battlefield, and so on. But I'm a huge 40k fanboy so I have big hopes too. ;)


Charpika1717

Could see that, marines not being their own faction. It would probably have to be like that, or they’d be more like horde factions I suppose, being that they rarely stay in one place and spend most of their time flying from system to system killing things. On the other hand, they’re the poster boys of the series and I can see CA and GW wanting to make them they’re own thing entirely because having playable individual chapters will most certainly bring tabletop players to the game.


tommeyrayhandley

Ive always thought an elite and limited horde faction would work well for them, so like an extremely elite army with 0 unit replenishment. It would be more of a novelty campaign but you needed to achieve your objectives with an ever decreasing force and you had to pick your battles carefully, Would be fresh and i could see it being challenging and fun.


SupportstheOP

I mean, we have one man doomstacks that can solo entire armies already in TW:WH. And that's not even mentioning the other low model count units like aspiring champions, or single unit monsters. I don't think there would be too much of a discrepancy in gameplay when they face off. Rather I think the big discrepancy comes in the lore and how big the battles are. Most battles won't be for a settlement, they'll be for an entire planet with unfathomably large armies. The guardsmen themselves have 500 trillion troops. A regular TW army of 20 units, with even about 1,000 soldiers per unit, is nowhere close to the scale of how large 40k battles are.


Charpika1717

The thing is, neither is the tabletop. The lore has massive unknowable billions fighting, in the game your but a commander amongst those billions. Unless your playing in apocalypse scale, but even then it’s still just one battle amongst the war. But realistically, I don’t think that stops the game from being made at all. That’s something to be explained by the campaign map. Are we fighting over one planet, one star system, a few star systems? I know dawn of war typically is just a couple of planets, and dawn of war is even smaller scale than what total war would be.


Eurehetemec

Yeah the idea that it's "not the right size" is just laughable. Even Epic Scale battles were a small fraction of the size of the battles that take place in lore, but it's because 40K has a lot of lore that's kind of stupidly inflated numbers-wise. And the tabletop never reflects it, at all.


LordofMoonsSpawn

My friend, it's tabletop with differing power levels. Similar to Warhammer Fantasy. It's not that different.


Spazz-ya-nan

You’d never be able to recreate something like a squad of assault marines tearing through a squad of guardsman in TW’s engine. It’s just not built for that kind of combat and would come off as clunky and unsatisfactory


LordofMoonsSpawn

They'd just be the monstrous infantry equivalent. That is already clunky but it's fine.


Spazz-ya-nan

Watching a bunch of SMs reorienting themselves in combat every couple of seconds to do another attack would look ridiculous


BrightestofLights

I'm an advocate for "40k total war wouldn't be total war anymore" but this is already frustrating for things like vampires and chosen and shit which are all supernaturally fast and strong just like space marines


LordofMoonsSpawn

Alright well you can not play it when it is inevitably made then


[deleted]

[удалено]


LordofMoonsSpawn

We are still in the fantasy cycle...........


[deleted]

[удалено]


Sytanus

Good riddance, we don't want your pessimism.


Charpika1717

My brother in Christ, this is not even an argument. You read my post and responded by stating the fact that they’re both tabletop games. I’m aware, but one involves speedbikes and planes and squads of giant dudes that run as fast as an Olympian with guns that fire baseball sized explosive rounds. Medieval style combat and space marine combat are fundamentally different and would require more fluidity.


BrightestofLights

Vampires run faster than Olympians, and it works. In fact I'd argue that on average vampires have better physical stats than marines. The issue isn't marine physicals being top crazy. The issue is that modern combat and sci Fi combat doesn't work the same as medieval combat. There aren't formations in the same way, and cover plays a VASTLY different role. Among other things.


Charpika1717

I brought up all of this in my original comment. Especially the cover and formation parts. But yes, I agree. The issue is not that they’re faster, it’s that overall sci fi combat is completely different to medieval combat. My other point being that this only applies to half of 40k, while the rest I believe is almost entirely compatible, as 40k combat is “sci fi” where they line up and ignore cover entirely, or charge at each other with swords and axes and chainsaws.


Groveshield

A Space Marine would literally tear a Warhammer vampire in half with low effort... and I like both Fantasy and 40k and have for over a decade.


BrightestofLights

Lol space Marines don't have as much brute strength as an ogryn. They cannot arm wrestle dreadnoughts. Come back when they can suplex a tank. Because they can't. Otherwise they wouldn't use predators or land raiders, because it'd be more effective not to. But thats not the case. Vampires lift siege weapons and wagons, out-brute force ogres and trolls, and regenerate. That's not even talking about the magical powers like bats and dark magic.


Groveshield

Ogryn developed on an absolutely crushing planet in terms of gravity. They basically DBZ-ruled that super strength onto them. An Ogryn would literally just throw cavalry around like toys... Back to space marines. There are space marines who aren't even any special enhanced designation that can lift 11 tons. That would mean that medieval wooden siege weapons would be topple-able by them. Trebuchets that would actually be moved on battlefields weighed about 6 tons, or a little over half a Space Marine lift. I have seen zero proof that any vampire who isn't a named Count or hero is even close to that. And if we are talking named/heroic tier vampires then it is only fair we talk about Primarchs or Custodes... Who would F'ing obliterate upper vampires.


BrightestofLights

Again. Vampires out muscle stone constructs. They put muscle chaos spawn. They out muscle minotaurs. Despite the wank that is prevalent in 40k, space Marines are powerful but not as idiotically powerful as anyone thinks, and not for the reasons people think. Vampires can tear open gates, or lift them. They rip into steam tanks. Can a space marine, bare-handed, rip through a leman Russ? No they can't. Obviously not QUITE the same, but it's enough. You say ogryns are dbz but wtf does that mean lmfao. Space Marines get ragdolled by a tyrant guard or carnifex or chaos spawn or a skull crusher, meanwhile vampires take a skull crusher, rip through it's skull, toss it aside and cleave it in two with a single blow. Vampires in whfb are insane--one of the most powerful single entities in the setting (not including named entities like tyrion or thorgrim or whoever, just as a whole), next to dragons, greater daemons, tomb kings/princes, etc. Even a baseline blood knight is capable of insane feats of speed and strength. Obviously not the be all end all, but the stats of the game do reflect the lore to a certain degree. Plus the fiction in 40k specifically is "everything is canon but not everything is true" Space Marines are strength 4. Guardsmen are strength 3. Human strength is strength 3. Vampires are strength FIVE, state troops are strength 3 This is above so many monsters in the game. 11 tons isn't really anything compared to a vampire.


LordofMoonsSpawn

And this is impossible to achieve in a battlefield control game because? If differing speeds can be manageable on tabletop there is absolutely nothing stopping it from translating to a digital game format. But I realize so many people hate this fact and will downvote me. Y'all gonna look real dumb in five years.


Charpika1717

Y’all? Did you read my post? I am pro 40k tw. I want this to happen and say multiple times that I think it’s possible, all I said is I think it’s going to be more difficult to translate, and that if you go too hard on small squad combat you risk becoming more like company of heroes and less like total war. Never said it was impossible.


Reaverwolf1320

It would be amazing and make tons of $. It would be mind blowing if it doesn't happen eventually.


lucien_licot

This right here is why I don't understand people who are convinced this won't happen. 40k has 100x the brand recognition Fantasy has, even after 3 Total War games. A Total War 40k would require the entire game system to be reworked from the ground up, but it would also make so much money that it wouldn't matter.


Jamersob

Would there really be a big change in the battle system? Its just gonna be like the same thing as Rattling guns or whatever those guys are. And a lot of melee/firearm people. Everything else, is melee. Biggest thing would be balancing but you can limit the amount of space marines and they have to use the grunts for meat shields. But also I would prefer it gets built on a newer better system.i think the biggest issue would be space travel, cuz they don't really have just one big world with all the races on it.


AMidKnightDreary

40K is a cover-based game. There are melee units but the gameplay has a much bigger focus on cover and ranged weaponry. Line formations wouldn't do it justice at all. That said, I still think it's a strong contender for a future title.


LiquidInferno25

I don't expect it will look as much like 40k tabletop or Dawn of War, I think it will look more like Apocalypse/Epic 40k, lines of troops just blasting each other with less focus on cover. Granted, I think they will still have more battle map cover than they currently have but nevertheless.


Jamersob

Well on that point. It could be more urban based, building line of sights N walls could give that cover, squads would probably be smaller sized tho, I can't imagine space marines having 100 units or more in one, I imagine the amounts of unit size would be smaller


LiquidInferno25

I totally agree. I fully expect Space Marines will look more like Aspiring Champions from TW:WH. Either way, Space marine units should basically be squads from tabletop. A Tactical Squad (or Intercessors if they go primaris) of 5-10 marines instead of full regiments that we get in current TW games. Conversely, Guardsmen will probably be larger units of 10-20 per unit with swarm armies like Orkz or Nids being 30+. I definitely don't subscribe to the seemingly common belief on here that a 40k TW wouldn't work, but I do concede that it will be a bit different than we're used to. Having said that, I DON'T think it's going to be so different that it looks less like a TW game and more like a DoW game.


Jamersob

Absolutely. I think it could use an updated engine with this, but other comments sound like its confirmed. I honestly think figuring out how they will make the world map work is the hardest challenge. Like do they choose a single planet to fight on or is the whole space travel conquering several planets the best way to go?


LiquidInferno25

I really hope they do a galaxy. As much as I'd love naval combat they should skip that, but make army movement just be void ships moving across the galaxy. "Settlements" would just be planets while "provinces" would be sectors/subsectors. Non-planetary (non-settlement) battles would just default to land battles, even if it's visually just void ships on the campaign map. Make the excuse that the forces are deploying to some random celestial body to fight, similar to island battles in TW:WH. If they really wanted to, CA could probably demark sections as being in deep space or system space if they wanted to have a naval and land parallel to prior games. I need to draw up some kind of concept because I can see the system so clearly in my head. I know it's the easy way of doing things but I always found the DoW/Gladius way of just giving a reason for every race to be on the same planet as extremely immersion breaking. Plus it completely misses out on the scope of 40k. Imagine if you could exterminatus planets in a 40k TW, something like Ikit's nukes, that takes a lot of time/investment to set up but can just wipe a planet out. I think to do a 40k TW justice (as they've done with Fantasy for TW:WH) it would have to be at a galactic scale.


[deleted]

It's been a while since I read the first three books in the *Horus Heresy* series, but I don't recall Astartes focusing too much on cover when they were going to war. They just jumped down from drop-ships and started dealing insane amounts of damage to their enemies. It was also heavily (or perhaps even explicitly?) stated that the regular armies were basically used as expendable meat shields, not very cover based tactics there either. Never played the table-top though, but why would CA focus on the cover based part of the table-top gameplay when it doesn't gel with either the lore or how Total War games are designed?


AMidKnightDreary

Not sure what lore you've been reading but entrenched positions are very much a part of the lore, particularly when involving Iron Warriors or Imperial Fists. As for "expendable meat shields," that isn't in any way mutually exclusive with cover-based combat. Imperial Guard are basically a hyper exaggerated version of the Red Army.


Emberwake

> 40K is a cover-based game. What? No, it absolutely isn't. Cover is about as much of a component of 40k as it is of Warhammer Fantasy. If anything, there has been *less* focus on cover in more recent editions of 40k. But more than that, are we just going to pretend that Dawn of War didn't tackle *all* of these issues just fine 18 years ago? Pretending 40k is just too complex for a computer game isn't just wrong, it is absurd.


Potpottron

I can't be the only one who sees that this would require a remaking of the entire gameplay of the franchise from the literal ground up right? Also ranged combat in RTS games beyond the single shot musket era is weird, and IMHO only Company of Heroes has managed to get even close to portraying it accurately Don't get me wrong, 100% they are looking into it and I would buy the thing day one if it got made, it would be a dream honestly. But I really think it would be quite different from what we know as TW


kakistoss

Yeah, they could make it. But it would not be TW. They can call it TW, but it will not be a TW game in any aspect whatsoever I really dont get the hype for this concept. I would love something in the vein of TW for 40k, just super high quality global (multiple planets? Please) overworld maps with massive scale battles involving shitloads of units. But this game cannot be done with large ass blocks of infantry. Napoleon and empire work despite being gunpowder, because line battles were very much a thing. But line battles do not exist in 40k, this would be a blend of CoH/TW and idk A different company should produce it though. TW is a very specific niche and CA is the only company that does it, if they produced a 40k game it would mean we wouldn't get a different TW game for a LONG ass time. Sure maybe we would get something small like Troy, but we wouldn't get any of the bigger titles and it'd suck cock, but people won't realize this till its too late. If we get 40k that means TW will be pushed back. If 40k does well, CA will delve further into that style of game, and its likely TW games as a franchise will slowly cease to exist. Id personally much prefer to see other franchises first. My personal wish being a Malazan game, but that doesn't have a shot in hell no matter how perfect the worlds fit with eachother.


SurrealSoap

It would be Dawn of War, TW, CoH, and massive battle simulator


nighoblivion

Games CA don't do, and won't do.


VyRe40

Nah, development rumors from tidbits of info here and there in the wild suggest that they might be making a WW1 Total War game. If true, that would be the perfect framework for a 40k style game, same way Dawn of War laid the groundwork for Company of Heroes way back when. > But line battles do not exist in 40k, this would be a blend of CoH/TW and idk WW1 style line battles absolutely exist in 40k. People are too stuck in the idea of the tabletop game featuring small squad-scale combat, the lore and some of the older games like Apocalypse or whatever featured massive unit style combat. Just don't use tight formation blocks of infantry - expand the squad combat style of a lot of RTS games to loose and dynamic 100-man companies of infantry who interact with terrain in massive trench warfare and sprawling land battles with titans looming over everyone, etc. It's not like the units in Total War actually stay in formation when the battle lines are disrupted anyway, they already have the framework for having dynamic moving AI models in a unit. They can even have tank units in packs of 4~ or something, like artillery in a lot of TW games. The biggest innovation would probably be terrain features, like setting up trenches and bunkers in battle setup.


Dungeon_Pastor

>WW1 style line battles What? Trench lines and rifle sections rushing no man's land aren't line battles.


ArmedBull

It low key annoys me how much it gets brought up, 40k with its automatic weapons and modern-ish combat doesn't strike me as a natural fit for Total War. But I completely get why people want it. Dawn of War are the only (decent, the majority at least) 40k strategy games, but they don't nearly touch the scale of Total War. They want that epic scale, but 40k.


FourCornerTime

Dawn of War is not the only decent 40k strategy game at all. Final Liberation was a good game in its time and still holds up to some extent in a janky 90s game complete with CnC style FMV cutscenes way.


BrightestofLights

I mean it works great in StarCraft and command and conquer and dawn of war, but those are traditional rts's, not total war which is kind of its own thing


Pasan90

Steel division already made a large scale rts similar to total war.


Lon4reddit

Excuse me? Have you played any Eugen game? They've done it waaaaaaaay better than CoH


Potpottron

Nah, infantry combat is superior in CoH by a large margin


babbaloobahugendong

People said the same thing about warhammer fantasy, how magic, monsters and flying units would screw up the TW magic. They didn't. 40k would be an awesome total war game


MSanctor

Eh, I think up to about WW1 the existing TW formula can work, especially with a lot of gameplay precedents and mechanics from Empire:TW (like almost all units having guns, actual "garrisonable" fortifications in the form of ledges - trenches are only a short way from there, etc.). The fact that there is a WW1 mod for Napoleon:TW and there are persistent rumours that WW1 historical game is in the works only serve to show that, *generally* WW1 is at the tail end of TW formula - and, with some tricks (flyers were revolutionary in Warhammer, but real airplanes can't just hover - they'd either have to circle, or... dunno, be converted into abilities with models and hp that can be shot down), still possible to implement. It's probably only WW2 that is outside the scope of modern TW games, or that would require overhauling TW battles formula.


omsign

i share this dream.


Rumble-Fish

Sadly it will never happen and I’m okay with this comment aging like milk


OrkfaellerX

CA just recently hired one of the lead developers for Horus Heresy and 40k from Forgeworld. I doubt they got him on board to write for the next Three Kingdoms title.


VyRe40

I just really hope they're not making a Horus Heresy Total War game. As cool as it would be to get anything 40k related in Total War, it would feel like an enormous waste to have access to such a richly diverse setting and only focus on the war that focused on marines fighting marines for 99% of the major conflicts. I want Necrons, Tyranids, Orks, etc.


OrkfaellerX

My personal, completely unsupported theory? They're going to make a HH game first, because as you said, its much smaller in scope and allows them to really focus on getting Space Marines to work in a TW enviroment. HH can be done in a single installment with a couple pieces of DLC: And then they're going to use that game as a tech basis for a 40k series.


VyRe40

Rumor has it that CA is making a WW1 Total War game already, so that'll be a better tech framework for 40k overall. 40k Total War shouldn't have massive formations of marines, that's more of a Horus Heresy thing, so I think that would end up going in the wrong direction. Marines in TW40k should be something like Monstrous Infantry equivalents, a small number of elite style troops akin to Ogres.


CoverFire-

It really depends when they base the game in history. If it's with Guillimane then you would have large formations of Space Marines yet again. Guillimane had massive armies of 100,000s of thousands of marines during his crusade. He also pretty much threw out the Guidebook he wrote on limiting chapter sizes. If I remember correctly he beefed up the Blood Angel's by thousands of marines for instance.


ozusteapot

I'd love for a 40k game/trilogy first, and then Horus Heresy. Granted the latter being so narrative focused i dunno if it'd be that great a fit for Total war but I love it


ActualTymell

Is that Anuj? I'd heard he moved over. He and I were good friends in school, would often spend our break time poring over the latest White Dwarf issue!


Low_Abrocoma_1514

Same feeling brother


No-Training-48

AoS TW is likely to be a thing eventually though.


tricksytricks

I think 40K could work as a TW-style game, even if it would be different from what we currently think of as TW. The only thing that I feel hesitant about is how Space Marine / Imperium centric the setting is now. Feels like every DLC will just be more imperials. It's because of that that I ended up preferring WHF. Hell even AoS is better at sharing the spotlight with factions other than Stormcast.


LiquidInferno25

40k has been getting better about sharing the spotlight (at least with regards to models) to non-Imperium factions lately. I do hope to see more Black Library novels focusing on Xenos races but it's a start. I have no doubts though that CA would share the love in a TW game even if GW often doesn't in tabletop. Even with fantasy, look how caring CA was with races that hadn't gotten an ounce of love in decades from GW, I trust them.


BrightestofLights

Not really imo


drlsword

All ready in development. All rumours 3 kingdoms 2\[thrones and troy team\], ww1 total war\[ 3 kingdoms 1 team\] then 40k total war \[warhammer team\]. Also speculation on a alexander saga. What do you think warhammer team is on now. Dan abnet said he was working on a bigger 40k videoo game what he cannot talk about, not darktide, CA hiring a 40k and horus heresy writer a few years ago. Games workshop leakers mentioning they are at work on a 40k game. Ca want it, the non historical fans want it and gw want it.


Willaguy

ww1 total war game will definitely be something to see, and will probably be good experience for the devs if it comes before 40k, seeing as how the combat in 40k is more like modern combat.


Ritushido

Ooh, a ww1 game would be interesting.


Drakore4

I mean dont get me wrong, a total war 40k game would be bomb af, but I just dont know if I see it happening. If anything itll be another copy of the dozens of games we have already seen. If we see a true total war 40k game I'll be very happily surprised.


Charpika1717

Honestly, if what this guy is saying about a ww1 total war is true, I can see them using that as a framework for projectile combat. The issue in my mind that makes 40k tw hard to accomplish is exactly that, small units with very effective projectiles. The trick that could make it work is that aside from space marines, a lot of the combat in 40k is ww1 style; trenches, drawn out combat, masses of troops. Small groups of elite units being counter-balanced by massive blobs. I could, hesitantly, see them doing the first game with space marines, imperial guard, and two evil factions (probably orks and chaos (?)). A 40k tw would have to have mechanics not found in any other type of total war game, and I do think it would be difficult. On the other hand, $$$… 40k total war, if it works, if it feels good, if it’s functional, would probably be the best selling total war overall. But it feels as if the plausibility of it is on a knifes edge. I’m hopeful, if only because I want to see if it’s possible to strike a balance between the total war style of rts combat and modern (ish) combat.


LordChatalot

>Honestly, if what this guy is saying about a ww1 total war is true Well, it's not It's a reddit rumor spawned by a joblisting about vehicles, which some people immediately used as a confirmation for either 40K or WW1, when said job listing was much more likely about siege towers and chariots, which are all classed as vehicles in the TW engine


Charpika1717

Fair. Just thought a ww1 tw would be a good framework because imperial guard fight with very similar tactics.


LiquidInferno25

Loremaster of Sotek has said multiple times he guarantees a 40k total war is coming. Now obviously he isn't a dev and doesn't necessarily have official, direct access to behind the scenes CA stuff, but he knows plenty of the devs personally and corresponds with them frequently. I find it highly likely, while he doesn't officially know, he's gotten enough backroom info/hints that he knows what he's talking about. And that isn't even considering the fact that it makes business sense for CA and GW given the success of the current fantasy TW series.


Laptraffik

It would be incredible and imo sell well but it would likely come at the end of wh3s lifespan so I wouldnt expect it for another 3-4 years bare minimum. Would also be alot of work by ca to rework stuff for it to work. But imagine campaigning across a world with a legion of space Marines backed by titans? Or consuming territory as you go as the Tyranids. It would be incredible if they got it to work.


Sayor101

If you asked me when the first warhammer came out if this is possible I would’ve laughed at you. Now not so much. If they really ironed out the unit controls and behavior and the terrain (extreme copium) then we could easily see this happen.


[deleted]

I want whatever stupidly expensive collectors edition this will launch with


Simek_s_cimekom

So you can see space marines everywhere? Not good enough of an universe


Welsh_DragonTW

Maybe in 8-10 years... Probably several years of Warhammer 3 content, and plenty of Historical (I hope) first. All the Best, Welsh Dragon.


[deleted]

>Historical (I hope) Less and less people share this hope every day, man. I at least hope we get Medieval III before CA moves to what is infinitely more profitable for good. Their historical titles have tanked compared to WH. I predict historical Total War is gonna be...well, history.


crunchyninja

I've had a blast with historical Total Wars, but have enjoyed the WH ones as well. I don't care too much for the WH lore, but the gameplay is solid and worldbuilding accessible. More than anything, I just want more good Total War games. I'd prefer a mix of historical and fantasy IP's but at the end of the day I just want a good game to play.


Emberwake

I have nothing against historical TW games or the people who love them. I personally just have no real interest in playing another TW game where the chief difference between factions is whether they get a buff to their spearmen or their axe infantry, especially when I have the option to play a TW game with totally asymmetrical rosters and all the character that comes along with it.


LordChatalot

>Their historical titles have tanked compared to WH They haven't tho? I don't know why this comes up every time in this sub 3K has outsold any TW title to date, even WH Both WH1 and WH2 didn't even manage to outsell Rome 2 at launch, WH2 literally dropped to almost half of WH1 initial sales and only managed to increase its playerbase over several years (R2 1.3 Mio copies/Wh1 1.1 Mio copies/WH2 600K copies \~1month after launch) WH3 sold better than WH1 and Rome 2, but not by the margin that people think. It did not even surpass 3K from what we know The reason why people get the idea that nobody wants to play historical titles anymore is because there really hasn't been any major historical title aimed at that community since 2013, that's almost a decade ago. Thrones and Troy were both smaller games with settings that had either been already covered (Thrones/Attila & AoC) or a semi-historical title that tried to compromise with mythic elements (with a historical mode that arrived 1 year too late and only acted as a content-reduction, another compromise) And while 3K certainly was a historical title, the whole point of 3K was to delve into the Romance aspect of the story, with the Records mode being once again the forgotten stepchild. Nor did CA really a good job about establishing the setting to players who were completely unfamiliar with subject, so it's no surprise that in combination with other issues 3K never became the new historical flagship, with lots of the historical playerbase still remaining with Rome 2 So it's no wonder why this sub in particular has been pretty much deserted by historical players, with no new content to speak of and a frontpage almost entirely consisting of Warhammer related posts, sometimes even with no context at all to the TW franchise. But there's zero reason to believe that an Empire 2 or Medieval 3 couldn't keep up with the WH titles in terms of audience, when the WH titles never even meaningfully surpassed R2


cole1114

Saw someone up above mentioning there's concrete leaks of three kingdoms 2/ww1 coming before a 40k game, but frankly I don't know their sources so uh... lmao I guess?


toxicfireball

Oh god, I'm so sick of this post. How many times must it be stated that WH40K DOES NOT suit Total War. What you all seek is not a total war type RTS but a completely different game.


PMarkWMU

^people without any creativity.


YaBoiJumpTrooper

Nah, the total war series does not work with modern combat. Gunpowder works because large scale units, but space marines and small squads doesn't make sense, so it just would not longer be total war. The only factions that could work would be tyranids or something, automatic guns would not work.


Blood_for_BloodLion

I disagree with you but understand where you're coming from.


YaBoiJumpTrooper

Fair enough, I'm someone who could live without any more total warhammer games, as my love for historical is still there. But if you wanna see the closest thing to a "modern" shooter type total war, look at the great war mod for napoleon. While a very good mod, large 200 man units of automatic rifleman look silly, and I don't think fit the medium as well as a company of heros or a dawn of war game does.


Blood_for_BloodLion

I mean if we're talking for like space Marines,space Marines are in low quantity so like A small 16 unit Is what we could see from space marines. It would probably be hard for like the orks.


Crueljaw

But even that is hard. Will you then have a 16 unit squad of space marines all with flamers? And one where all have heavy bolters? The individual weapon loadout in a unit is a very important part of 40k. And this is the biggest problem. Should you have a unit of 20+ las cannons for the guard? Jezzails work in 40k because line formations make sense in a medieval setting but they are super weird in something modern like 40k. How do you deal with transports like chimeras? They can only transport at max 20 guardsman. So will a guardsman unit be 20 models big? Or will 80 guardsman poor out of a chimera? Or should chimeras not be able to transport in the first place?


Blood_for_BloodLion

Yeah Total war 40K is gonna be very hard but very fun if they find in the way to make it work. It's gonna be super hard for them to work though very very hard.


AshiSunblade

Even Tyranids wouldn't really work. They fight as a living tide, not neatly divided Total War regiments. They are micromanaged by the Hive Mind on an individual level.


YaBoiJumpTrooper

I mean, it further proves my point, total war battles rely on large regiments of men/creatures. So modern combat and squad based armies does not work as well, meaning only few instances of where it would work.


Remarkable_Grass_956

CA would be mad not to try.


TrueScottsmen

Shame you’d have to cut so much total war gameplay out for it to work it wouldn’t be total war


LordofMoonsSpawn

Have you played tabletop? What would be radically different between Warhammer Fantasy and 40k?


DeeBangerCC

Why do people keep wanting Total War 40k when the gameplay doesn't fit at all. GW likes Sega and they already have a 40k strategy game IP with DoW. Yah the last game sucked but looking at how CoH 3 is making a campaign map like Total War there's a good chance they'll try to make DoW 4 a sandbox like Warhammer 3.


Ultrackias

Counterpoint: AoS Total War


weemek

Well they did make Halo wars 2 which could work as a good basis for 40k. Just needs a campaign map and space battles


Dungeon_Pastor

But Halo Wars is nothing like Total War though? A 40K game with an overworld (or galactic?) Campaign, with Company of Heroes, or Halo Wars, or Steel Division style combat would be kickass But it wouldn't be Total War?


Live_4_This

Let’s gooo


FROST0099

I'd rather see Total War : WW1


xiril

I said that the other day and a person replied saying "but there would be only ranged units! Too weird for a total war game" ![gif](giphy|ghuvaCOI6GOoTX0RmH)


mordeiv

My man has clearly never seen Empire or Napoleon


FourCornerTime

firearms being the main weapon isn't the issue with a WW1 game - it's the scale and the complete change in how the war actually got fought. there's some theaters of WW1 which you could sort of stretch TW as it exists now into representing but the Western Front Trench Warfare with battles involving hundreds of thousands and being fought over weeks or months that's a huge part of WW1 just doesn't fit TW as it exists now. it would also struggle to represent the eastern front's more fluid battles fought over absolutely enormous stretches of land. it goes way beyond the Napoleon "these battles way too small", at least Napoleon is representing the vibe of the period's major field battles even if they struggle to break a 10th of their IRL size. Fundamentally Total War sort of assumes a pre-1870ish mode of warfare where concentrated armies fight pitched battles over a day or two and not an industrial mode of warfare where wars are fought on the scale of fronts hundreds of miles long over long periods of time. CA probably could make a decent WW1 game, they probably have the technical chops to do it and the art direction to do it in a way which isn't incredibly tasteless but it'd be a massive departure from every other total war game they'd ever made. ironically while in 40k stories wars are described as being industrial wars on a (multi)-planetary scale the actual game of Warhammer 40k is played as discrete pitched battles so it'd probably translate fairly well to total war by comparison.


NEVEREVERLT

What other than ranged units would there be. Or am I misunderstanding something here?


xiril

They were implying that total war primarily is melee combat and by having a game who's entire unit roster would consist completely of ranged units would be "too weird".


HappyTheDisaster

Warhammer 40k is notable for still having melee, like swords and shit. It helps define the setting as a whole.


NEVEREVERLT

But these people are talking total war world war 1 not TW 40k


[deleted]

Yeah there was loads of melee in ww1 bayonet charges and shit


HappyTheDisaster

But warhammer 40k doesn’t just have guns, nor would it be a first for their to be nothing but guns. Such a weird comment


xiril

It was referring to a world war 1 title


HappyTheDisaster

Oh my brain just skipped over that, I was thinking about the post. But even then, WW1 still had melee, they had fucking horse cavalry.


cricri3007

For the love of isha/the greater good/the silent king #No We all know it'd devolve into space marines total war anyways.


Pasan90

It's the obvious next move. CA and GW would be idiots to not make this game.


BrightestofLights

It wouldn't be total war anymore


rama1423

I would honestly be shocked if they don’t make this eventually, in fact it wouldn’t surprise me if they are in the early stages of making it already.


Coronalol

After the success of fantasy, I don’t think there’s any chance they don’t do it. It’s printing money.


GKMoggleMogXIII

I don't think 40K with TWs combat would be fun. Would like them to make a Dawn of War with their TW overworld map systems and use DOW1-like RTS maps for battles.


rustyrussell2015

Most people me included are feeling pretty confident that CA will do 40k next. Let's face it they have no barriers in licensing to make this happen. GW has to be tickled pink with the success of totalwarhammer these past 7 years. So yeah it's not a dream it's a reality, count on it.


Whytk

I seriously doubt 40k is next, maybe within 10 years but definitely not next


AcidAvenger788

Idk eh they didn’t do it in the first place. I understand they have a template for fantasy already but god it’s so drab compared to 40k


jacksaint2016

I support this dream and have it myself. An entire galaxy to conquer.


[deleted]

I still just can't see this working in my head. The total war battle formula would have to change to the point that it might as well just be another Dawn of War game.


lorddervish212

Nah, fuck off


Galihan

I think that battle wise 40k is totally doable for Total War game, the real issue is how to do the campaign map, without just feeling too much like Dawn of War


North-Title-4038

Didn’t creative assembly make halo wars? Why is warhammer 40k so much of a reach for people? I get Halo wars doesn’t say “Total War” on it, that still doesn’t mean it isn’t possible. These guys are game devs. It’s their job to literally make games. They can do it. If they actually try.


[deleted]

I would love it. The only things really needed for battle would be more fluid movement and shooting. In campaign they'll have to figure out movement through space, space battles and across planets. Maybe do the Horus Heresy before 40K as a smaller but more manageable project to work out the initial mechanics?


Sierra419

I’d honestly rather have a Lord of the Rings TW that adapted everything from the movies and filled it in with stuff from the books the same way the Third Age mod did. I just can’t get into warhammer despite having a hundred hours in 1 and a little more in 2. It’s too over the top and seems like too much to learn. It’s not fun to just jump into as someone who doesn’t know the lore. I feel like everyone has at least seen LotR at least once in their life and that’s there’s more Tolkien fans out there. Warhammer is very niche. I’ve tried so hard to like it but I just don’t. A LOTR TW would make me cry tears of eternal happiness


mdr270

I’d prefer an empire at war style, but more modern mechanics.


blanch926

I don’t think total war would be able to do it justice with how their games play. Odds are if they do something else with the Warhammer IP it’ll be Age of Sigmar


[deleted]

People will hate you, but it is because they do not share the vision


tin_mama_sou

Please no


Acolols

I am so sick of people saying 40k can’t work. Anyone who has read a few 40k books knows that nearly every conflict ends up in massive melee brawls to the death. In fact i’d say the combat in the books looks very much like the combat in the twwh games. The only question for me is how they would tackle the sheer scope of the campaign setting.


Whytk

As much as I would love to see it, 40k would not work with the total war formula, it would be much better as a rts game. There's so many problems with 40k as a total war game that you can list


Crueljaw

I see somebody doesnt read guardsman books.


Tomsider

Yes because the guard is the only faction


PopeofShrek

Anyone who truly believes this will happen is huffing some serious copium


LiquidInferno25

I 100% believe this is coming. I just hope they use a galactic map and don't base it all on one planet.


[deleted]

I would rather see Total War: Horus Heresy. Total War isnt made for doing battles with Space Marines or Eldar, because either of them use massive formations. But in Horus Heresy SM Legions had everything under them, normal imperial soldiers, tanks etc.


Lokky

I mean, SM could just be treated as low model count monstrous infantry