Age of Charlemagne : Big Heart, Tiny Dollars

Right action is better than knowledge; but in order to do what is right, we must know what is right... So, I chose for it to be right to rock!

While I've recently been as vocal as I'm able to be over the whole TW: Warhammer fiasco, I've also been as positive and praising of TW: Attila's DLC and expansions as possible. While the early DLC angered many fans over the "Cut Content" debate, the later stuff was all pretty excellent, with Empires of Sand earning a special place in my heart (all hail the spice king!). The latest, and perhaps least expected move from CA in the lead up to next year's big release was the release of the Age of Charlemagne expansion a few days ago. The expansion was spotted in the code a little while back, and there had been speculation over what it would cover. While community responses have been mixed, I'm happy to say that I've really enjoyed the campaign and period so far, and it has given me a healthy dose of nostalgia for Medieval 2, which was a candidate for the greatest Total War game of all time to me, and many in the community.

Age of Charlemagne covers the reign of the legendary Frankish king, and acts as a great background to the Middle Ages. The period between the games focusing on Rome and the Middle Ages is often a bit of a grey area for most people, as the so called "Dark Ages" seem to have less glamour. What I liked so much about Attila is that it covered the fall of Rome with as much lavish detail as Rome 2 covered the rise. The dark and apocalyptic Attila still left a gap between itself and the easily recognizable era of the Medieval games. Considering the speculation that Medieval 3 may be the next game in Total War's historical game franchise, a campaign for Attila that helps tie those periods together is a welcome piece of content.

I'll get it out of the way by saying that the campaign is pretty small in scope, with its campaign map excluding North Africa, the Eastern Steppe, Greece, and upper Scandinavia. Instead, AoC focuses on the Carolingian Empire, the often forgotten empire that succeeded Rome as the great power in Europe. It also includes the Iberian Peninsula, and allows the players to try their luck at the Reconquista. I played as the Kingdom of Asturias because I remember one of my longest and most enjoyable campaigns in Medieval TW 2 was as the Spanish Kingdom, and this AoC campaign was such a wonderfully nostalgic throwback for me. It felt great, tying the end of Attila's main campaign to the beginning of Medieval's. Before I knew it, I was riding Jinetes in circles around my Cordoban rivals, engaging in full javelin warfare, only to eventually unlock and establish the knightly cohorts that would come to rule Spain for almost a thousand years. I did notice very quickly how limited the unit rosters were in comparison with Attila, though, it never really seemed to be that big of an issue. Each playable faction had its own idiosyncrasies, with the Franks dominating with their knights, the Avars being literally the only faction with horse archers, and the Danes fighting exclusively on foot. Pike and crossbow wielding units had disappeared, and virtually no professional romanesque armies or barbarian warbands remained, with the peasant levies taking over the main role, and elite knights monopolizing the role of warriors.

There seems to have been a lot of effort put into capturing the feeling of the early Middle Ages. The maps and unit icons all are done in an illuminated art style, contrasting with Attila's more literal unit cards. This raised an early spectre of Rome 2's ridiculous pottery artwork, but while that design was practically indecipherable (trying to select a unit from the lineup was like selecting from a row of stick men), the unit cards here are obvious and easy to recognize at a glance. It feels closer to Shogun 2, which also had a highly stylized art design, but was at least simple to interpret. The limited unit rosters also feel closer to Shogun, which makes the game simpler, though it won't have a great deal of replayability.

My biggest complaint about the DLC pack is that there are a number of really cool factions in the game that are completely unplayable. The Irish, Welsh, Slavs, and Sicilian Duchy all have really cool units. The Irish in particular have a really fleshed out army, with unique units such as Kerns and crossbowmen (the only army to retain crossbows), and yet, they are unplayable. I don't just mean they can't be played as a faction, they are not even playable as a custom battle faction. This is really weird, and feels limiting to the game's replayability factor. Modders have been swift to unlock these factions, but it feels like such a mistake on CA's part to not just unlock them for custom battles from the outset. For those pessimists out there, CA has confirmed that they will not be adding them as a further DLC, but will simply leave them locked... umm, yay?

The biggest question for my readers is, of course, is it worth it? Yes. In the tradition of TW DLC, Charlemagne's story is well crafted, and reasonably priced for what you get. It seems to be aimed at delivering three distinct stories, firstly the tale of the Franks, secondly the struggle for Iberia, and thirdly it includes Britain and the Danes. The story in the East is a little less fleshed out, with only the Avars and Eastern German duchies duking it out (see what I did there?). It tickles the right amount of nostalgia, and brings true knights in shining armour back to the TW franchise for the first time in a decade. For the $15 (AUD), the content is pretty solid, and gives us all a temporary fix of medieval madness while we wait on the next historical game to be announced. I enjoyed it, but it has almost slipped under the radar in all the excitement and controversy building up for the waaaaahhgg next year.

Total Fail: or The Future of CA and TW

The Future of Creative Assembly and Total War

By Tim Hunter

Earlier this year Creative Assembly announced one of the largest, and most impressive mergers in the history of popular culture. The idea was simple enough, and feels like something that should have been done years ago. Take Warhammer Fantasy Battles, still the most popular miniatures game played in the world, and merge it with Total War (TW), a video game series that has mastered the art of depicting gigantic battles on sweeping landscapes. The idea is almost as old as the Total War series, itself. Warhammer has given its players the ability to open their minds to vast battles, sieges, and other worlds entirely, all simulated through their imaginations. Total War simulates great battles in all their cinematic glory, allowing the player a birds-eye strategic view, but also the ability to zoom down and witness the full bloody minutiae. Game modders have made many Warhammer modifications for Total War games over the years, inserting the colourful Warhammer world into the Total War game engine. With an official meeting of the two brands, it would seem like the match made in heaven has finally come to earth. However, all is not well, and gamers are already outraged by the invasion of potentially anti-consumer business practices from the companies handling the title. 

I’ll begin by saying that I’m a huge fan of both franchises, and have been since childhood. While the miniatures game has lost its appeal to me, I’ve remained a staunch lover of the literature and video gaming adaptations of the franchise. The Warhammer world is grim and gritty, inventive and iconic. It has remained a unique series, while inspiring many authors of fantasy fiction with its characterful world. Its stories range from bulk fantasy schlock to some of the best-written work of the genre, especially in the hands of industry legends like Dan Abnett. Total War has also held a close place to my heart, allowing me to spend days of my time building empires, seeing history through an entertaining lens, and fighting battles in startling detail. Some of my fondest gaming memories arose from the Total War games, and even my mother encouraged me to enjoy my time with them as a teenager, since they engaged me with history and stirred my creativity. 

It is for these reasons that I, like so many fans of both series, have been shocked by the recent announcement from Total War’s publisher, Creative Assembly (CA), to launch Total War: Warhammer with a pre-order downloadable content pack (DLC) that specifically removes one of the most famous and iconic factions from the game for those who do not pre-order or pay for them post-launch, The Warriors of Chaos. People not familiar with the series might not appreciate the magnitude of this, but it might help to imagine a Star Wars game without The Empire, or Lord of the Rings without the orcs of Mordor. Putting aside the questionable practices of DLC in general, especially pre-order or day-one DLC, Warhammer fans have exploded with righteous indignation that a faction that is so iconic, so very central to the conflict of the Warhammer fictional world would be removed from the standard retail game. 

Aside from this sheer knee-jerk reaction, the problem with this announcement is that it throws into sharp contrast the questionable direction that CA and their publisher, Sega, are taking both franchises. The problem is threefold, firstly that the practice of pre-order DLC encourages consumers to purchase before the game is released, and therefore bypassing the process of reviews and consumer research. This alone should put customers on their guard. Total War: Rome 2 launched in 2013 with its own questionable pre-order bonus, and the game was plagued with bugs to the point that it was unplayable for months, leaving those who pre-ordered with a distinctly shoddy experience. Whether or not this pre-order pushing was done to bypass the unfavourable reviews, or simply to impress shareholders is unknown. 

Secondly, this content has been announced five months in advance of the game’s launch. This means that the content is clearly already built into the game, and there is no reason other than profit not to release the content along with the rest of the game. Among the greatest fears of the gaming public is that publishing companies will take a packaged product and then dice it up into smaller pieces, so as to charge a much greater fee in the long run. DLC has become a staple of the gaming industry, and can add longevity to a game purchase by updating and reinvigorating it, however, the idea of breaking up the content for DLC sales before the game is even available seems to defeat the original purpose. A world where game developers can simply remove parts of a game before release is kind of like one where an author can simply remove chapters of a book, and sell them later, claiming that they aren’t part of the core reading experience, but he’ll sell them to you if you want an expanded experience. 

The final problem with this practice is that it defies everything that CA had previously said about their release. When Total War: Warhammer was first announced, CA clearly stated that there would be four playable races, each with their own campaigns, and story lines. Given that there are about fifteen playable races in the Warhammer world, putting only four playable factions in the game seemed a little light. The Warriors of Chaos were perhaps the most conspicuously absent, since they play such a large role in the Warhammer franchise. CA’s response was that Total War: Warhammer was planned to be released as a trilogy of games, with each game expanding on the playable factions and world map. This alone seemed a little on the unusual side, and verging on profiteering, since the game would likely have to be purchased at standard retail pricing in three stages, though it was not an unheard of business practice (the Starcraft series also uses this model). For CA to announce this model, and then suddenly announce that one of the most popular Warhammer factions would be released as DLC seemed like a sudden backflip. How will the player be able to experience the full game? Will they have to buy three iterations of the same game to access all the content, or will this be DLC-based, with factions being released individually over time? It seems as though CA is trying to have it both ways, and the only loser here will probably be the consumer, stuck with a product delivered in expensive pieces rather than as a whole. 

Currently, fan outrage has been overflowing on forums and gaming websites, with community celebrities, such as Joe Vargas, expressing heartfelt outrage. The sheer disgust has even resulted in a Change.org petition to appeal to CA and Sega to deliver the game as a whole on release, and end this kind of practice that has already garnered over 10,000 signatures, which you can find here: https://www.change.org/p/creative-assembly-sega-make-total-warhammer-complete-on-release

 CA’s business practices are likely the result of pressure from their publisher, Sega, who likely needs the TW franchise to perform financially, and to justify the rights to the Warhammer license that they’ve paid for. However, I hope that the outrage has been heard, and that CA passes on the negative feedback and indignation of the community to Sega. With the game’s release date still months away, it will come down to community pressure and unity against the combined might of CA and Sega. If Sega does not relent, and the game is still financially successful, this could be the proving ground that Sega needs to make such practices standard for future game releases. Should the community outrage become a strong enough movement, and the community vote with their wallets by refusing to pre-order or buy the DLC (perhaps boycotting the game entirely), then this could be an unpleasant lesson for CA and Sega about how best to monetize their games without invoking community ire. Five months remain, a long time for this conflict to come to a head.

World of Warships, Cleveland Revisited

A while back I posted about the American tier 6 cruiser in WoWs, and I think I said what basically everyone already knew about it, that the ship is outstanding, and a real high-point for the tech tree. As I've now played about 50+ games in her, and unlocked the Pensacola at tier 7, I felt it was time to do a quick revisit on the Cleveland and see if there was anything I wanted to say with hindsight before moving on.To begin, the Cleveland is still a rocking boat full of excellence. Many of you will have heard rumours that you hear about the Pensacola being a pretty sad follow up from such a fantastic vessel as the Cleveland are pretty accurate. The stock Pensacola is a genuine disapointment after the Cleveland, although, it's eventual configuration is pretty awesome, and we'll chat about that next time.

The Cleveland performs brilliantly, though, not as brilliantly as I remember from the closed beta version of the game. The original Cleveland was pretty much broken. It had a super high rate of fire with its multitude of 6 inch guns, it was fairly tough, and it was a fast, high-impact anti-aircraft ship. Nothing about that has really changed, though, with the benefit of a few dozen games, I have started to notice some of the blemishes. Something that will start to get on your nerves fairly quickly is the slow shell velocity of the Cleveland's guns. The shells of the Cleveland exit the barrels of your guns, and then seems to take the most relaxed and scenic possible route to the target. At ranges of over 7km, the shells start taking a very high, lobbing arc, which makes it more difficult to predict the fall of your shots. Over 10km, you will find that if you enemy makes even minor course corrections during the flight of your shells, you'll basically miss with at leas half your shots. Most players also like to say that the Cleveland's under par gun calibre (the tier 5 Japanese cruiser has 8 inch guns) completely make up for their lower calibre with superior rate of fire, and decent chance to set fires. This is definitely the case, and I will miss that rate of fire as I play the Pensacola, but one thing I won't miss is the 6 inch gun's tendency to bounce AP rounds off of the hulls of Omahas and Kumas. I cannot begin to tell you how annoying it is to watch an AP round ricochet from the hull of a tier 4 cruiser, simply because it has taken on the slightest angle to your fire. By comparison, the Pensacola's guns will consistently punch holes through the armour of tier 7 and 8 cruisers, except when the most extreme angle is presented.

Another oddity of the Cleveland for me was that I found myself actively not taking the AA defense barrage ability. I don't know if it was sheer dumb luck, but in 4/5ths of my Cleveland games the teams just didn't have carriers. Not sure it this was just an eccentricity of tier 6, or the nature of the SEA server, but I could not seem to buy my way into a game with aircraft, and so I found myself using the hydro acoustic search option instead, since destroyers were at least guaranteed to be on the enemy team. The catapult fighter that replaced the spotter aircraft from the closed game kind of unnecessarily doubles your AA countermeasures, so I ended up changing the AA barrage to acoustic sweep. It seemed sacrilege to remove the AA barrage from a Cleveland, but you can't replace the fighter, and you might as well be more flexible. If carriers had simply been more common, I would probably have stuck with the dedicated AA role, so on your server, it may be a different story.

Wrapping up, the Cleveland is still a totally badass ship, and you will feel a touch of joy when you get it, and sadness when you get to the Pensacola. I have found cracks in the makeup of the Cleveland, and am starting to appreciate the Pensacola more and more as I play it. However, I still can't recommend the Cleveland enough. If you are looking for that first tech tree to farm out while learning the game, make the the US cruiser line. No torpedoes to screw up your team with, and simple, good clean HE spamming fun. She's still got it.

Total War: Warhammer, and the future of CA

The Future of Creative Assembly and Total War

By Tim Hunter

Earlier this year Creative Assembly announced one of the largest, and most impressive mergers in the history of popular culture. The idea was simple enough, and feels like something that should have been done years ago. Take Warhammer Fantasy Battles, still the most popular miniatures game played in the world, and merge it with Total War (TW), a video game series that has mastered the art of depicting gigantic battles on sweeping landscapes. The idea is almost as old as the Total War series, itself. Warhammer has given its players the ability to open their minds to vast battles, sieges, and other worlds entirely, all simulated through their imaginations. Total War simulates great battles in all their cinematic glory, allowing the player a birds-eye strategic view, but also the ability to zoom down and witness the full bloody minutiae. Game modders have made dozens of Warhammer modifications for Total War games over the years, inserting the colourful Warhammer world into the Total War game engine. With an official meeting of the two brands, it would seem like the match made in heaven has finally come to earth. However, all is not well, and gamers are already outraged by the invasion of potentially anti-consumer business practices from the companies handling the title.

I’ll begin by saying that I’m a huge fan of both franchises, and have been since childhood. While the miniatures game has lost its appeal to me, I’ve remained a staunch lover of the literature and video gaming adaptations of the franchise. The Warhammer world is grim and gritty, inventive and iconic. It has remained a unique series, while inspiring many authors of fantasy fiction with its characterful world. Its stories range from bulk fantasy schlock to some of the best-written work of the genre, especially in the hands of industry legends like Dan Abnett. Total War has also held a close place to my heart, allowing me to spend days of my time building empires, seeing history through an entertaining lens, and fighting battles in startling detail. Some of my fondest gaming memories arose from the Total War games, and even my mother encouraged me to enjoy my time with them as a teenager, since they engaged me with history and stirred my creativity. 

It is for these reasons that I, like so many fans of both series, have been shocked by the recent announcement from Total War’s publisher, Creative Assembly (CA), to launch Total War: Warhammer with a pre-order downloadable content pack (DLC) that specifically removes one of the most famous and iconic factions from the game for those who do not pre-order or pay for them post-launch, The Warriors of Chaos. People not familiar with the series might not appreciate the magnitude of this, but it might help to imagine a Star Wars game without The Empire, or Lord of the Rings without the orcs of Mordor. Putting aside the questionable practices of DLC in general, especially pre-order or day-one DLC, Warhammer fans have exploded with righteous indignation that a faction that is so iconic, so very central to the conflict of the Warhammer fictional world would be removed from the standard retail game. 

Aside from this sheer knee-jerk reaction, the problem with this announcement is that it throws into sharp contrast the questionable direction that CA and their publisher, Sega, are taking both franchises. The problem is threefold, firstly that the practice of pre-order DLC encourages consumers to purchase before the game is released, and therefore bypassing the process of reviews and consumer research. This alone should put customers on their guard. Total War: Rome 2 launched in 2013 with its own questionable pre-order bonus, and the game was plagued with bugs to the point that it was unplayable for months, leaving those who pre-ordered with a distinctly shoddy experience. Whether or not this pre-order pushing was done to bypass the unfavourable reviews, or simply to impress shareholders is unknown. 

Secondly, this content has been announced five months in advance of the game’s launch. This means that the content is clearly already built into the game, and there is no reason other than profit not to release the content along with the rest of the game. Among the greatest fears of the gaming public is that publishing companies will take a packaged product and then dice it up into smaller pieces, so as to charge a much greater fee in the long run. DLC has become a staple of the gaming industry, and can add longevity to a game purchase by updating and reinvigorating it, however, the idea of breaking up the content for DLC sales before the game is even available seems to defeat the original purpose. A world where game developers can simply remove parts of a game before release is kind of like one where an author can simply remove chapters of a book, and sell them later, claiming that they aren’t part of the core reading experience, but he’ll sell them to you if you want an expanded experience. 

The final problem with this practice is that it defies everything that CA had previously said about their release. When Total War: Warhammer was first announced, CA clearly stated that there would be four playable races, each with their own campaigns, and story lines. Given that there are about fifteen playable races in the Warhammer world, putting only four playable factions in the game seemed a little light. The Warriors of Chaos were perhaps the most conspicuously absent, since they play such a large role in the Warhammer franchise. CA’s response was that Total War: Warhammer was planned to be released as a trilogy of games, with each game expanding on the playable factions and world map. This alone seemed a little on the unusual side, and verging on profiteering, since the game would likely have to be purchased at standard retail pricing in three stages, though it was not an unheard of business practice (the Starcraft series also uses this model). For CA to announce this model, and then suddenly announce that one of the most popular Warhammer factions would be released as DLC seemed like a sudden backflip. How will the player be able to experience the full game? Will they have to buy three iterations of the same game to access all the content, or will this be DLC-based, with factions being released individually over time? It seems as though CA is trying to have it both ways, and the only loser here will probably be the consumer, stuck with a product delivered in expensive pieces rather than as a whole. 

Currently, fan outrage has been overflowing on forums and gaming websites, with community celebrities, such as Joe Vargas, expressing heartfelt outrage. CA’s business practices are likely the result of pressure from their publisher, Sega, who likely needs the TW franchise to perform financially, and to justify the rights to the Warhammer licence that they’ve paid for. However, I hope that the outrage has been heard, and that CA passes on the negative feedback and indignation of the community to Sega. With the game’s release date still five months away, it will come down to community pressure, and unity against the combined might of CA and Sega. If Sega does not relent, and the game is still financially successful, this could be the proving ground that Sega needs to make such practices standard for future game releases. Should the community outrage become a strong enough movement, and the community vote with their wallets by refusing to pre-order or buy the DLC (perhaps boycotting the game entirely), then this could be an unpleasant lesson for CA and Sega about how best to monetize their games without invoking community ire. Five months remain, a long time for this conflict to come to a head.