Slashdot Mirror
Warhammer Mark Of Chaos - How Is The RTS?
Steven Williamson writes "HEXUS.gaming's resident wood elf, Steven W, jumped at the chance to take the eye-opening trip to the Games Workshop HQ in Nottingham, home to the unique venue that is Warhammer World.
What started out as a run-of-the-mill press event to see the latest real-time tactics videogame set in the Warhammer universe ended up capturing my imagination and quashing any previous hang-ups I almost certainly had about the people who played Warhammer and indeed the tabletop game that has spawned this latest PC game, Warhammer: MOC."
Champions have been a major feature of Warhammer Fantasy Battle long before the Warcraft authors played Dune 2...
This post is awesome.
No punctuation sentence fragments very hard to underst
Athletic Scholarships to universities make as much sense as academic scholarships to sports teams.
Is that the comic book guy on the bottom-left side of the photo?
RTFM; please, I beg you.
Hangups? What, people who play Warhammer are too nerdy for the slashdot crowd?
Yeah, I play 4 different GW games, I'm sure that they will be much better than any Warhammer computer game, at least until Age of Reckoning comes out...
Alas, no. Just monday morning slashdot posts pre-coffee.
Now, work am off to I do time no more waste.
If Jesus wants me it knows where to find me.
Well, Warhammer had unit champions way before W3 was even planned. And they're not at all like the unique Warcraft characters; each unit can have a champion. They're kinda like squad leaders.
Leveling up builds character.
What on earth prompted the inclusion of Skaven (rats, basically, for those of you playing at home) as a 'core' race over Orcs? Unless there's been a significant change since I last visited my local GW, Orcs have a far bigger following.
For the non-wargamers, this is akin to FIFA 2007 letting you play with Manchester City instead of Manchester United.
I'm not against the idea (of dropping either Orcs or Man U. *grin*), I just find it curious. Won't they have the same problem as with Warhammer 40k: Dawn of War, when all the Imperial Guard players had a sook about not getting to play their army (except as a "Dog of War" in one mission)? Or is the percentage of people buying this game who actually come from the tabletop version so low that it just doesn't matter?
Antiquis temporibus, nati tibi similes in rupibus ventosissimis exponebantur ad necem.
I used to work at GW. Both in the US, and across the pond [When they were located in Lenton, and for about 2 months after they relocated to the new building.]
:P [seriously]
.. so who knows.]
HUGE building, big spacemarine on the top. And, they have their own pub
Stuff like computer programs have ALWAYS been the bastard step child of the company. They are always Licence deals, and the company itself keeps creative control.
Little known fact, Blizzard entertainment origially wrote 'warcraft' to be a RTS of warhammer. Approached (i think it was) Steve Godber on the board, for a licencing deal, and was turned down. Instead the deal was given to Mindscape, who made 'Shadow of the Horned Rat' which was a colossal failure.
The guys at Blizzard were big Games-Workshop fans:
Warcraft = Warhammer
Starcraft = Warhammer 40k
Diablo = DungeonQuest / HeroQuest
I think the guys at Relic finally got it right, and that the Studio(At GW) finally got someone with a clue to make video game decisions. [although the MMORPG that they had going, died, but it seems that they moved the licence over to Relic
--Ne auderis delere orbem rigidum meum, non erravi pernicose!
Warhammer Mark Of Chaos How Is The RTS Homer no function beer well without.
"You will pay for your lack of vision..." - Emperor Palpatine to Ray Charles
As I understand it, the difference is in the nature of the battle.
_ Red_Alert
RTT games are those where you start with a certian set of troops and have to guide those troops through an engagement. You don't normally get any more, and the game is usually over when that one battle is won or lost.
RTS games are larger, or longer - they are made up of many battles. You build a base, create armies and have several battles.
A good example of a RTS is Red alert, A good example of a RTT is Myth.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Command_%26_Conquer:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Myth_(computer_game)
http://www.penny-arcade.com/comic/2006/04/10
Someone is wrong on the Internet!
Tactics is units, movement, and positioning.
Strategy is which units, resource management, and larger scale goals.
It's the macro/micro thing. Strategy is the macro, the big picture. Tactics is the micro, where the rubber meets the road.
ad logicam Claiming a proposition is false because it was presented as the conclusion of a fallacious argument.
GW definitely has done (and is still doing) a lot to try to keep a stranglehold on the mini-gaming market. Privateer Press has put out an incredibly fun game in Warmachine, and now Hordes. Their models are at least equal, and in many cases (IMHO) better, than GW's stuff. But the real glory shines in the game play and setting.
I think that back in the late 90's, GW was definitely in position to completely kill the mini-gaming market right there after the fall of Ral Partha (yeah, Reaper's always been around, but has *never* managed to produce a half-way decent set of rules, so they're stuck in the "supporting other games" market for the most part). However, a couple of companies rose up to challenge them, mainly Rackham with their Confrontation game and Privateer Press with Warmachine. In some ways, GW has set the stage for their own overthrow by their abusive tactics (just try to find a place other than their own website that you can view and purchase their models online--you can't, because they don't allow it). I, for one, won't really miss them.
Your Friend,
D