Total War: Warhammer’s Greenskin Campaign Detailed

The Total War: Warhammer [official site] campaign map is lovely. Creative Assembly have released a 16 minute long “Greenskins Campaign Walkthrough” that shows the strategic side of the game in detail for the first time. Auto-resolving battles as he goes, the narrator takes us on a quick tour of the portions of the Warhammer Fantasy world that will be included in the initial release (the game is the first part in a trilogy that will combine to make one enormous map). I’m particularly taken by the mighty bridges that dwarven engineers have built to span mountain ranges, as well as the concept of ‘fightiness’.

As well as a first look at the map, the video gives an overview of the interface. Clean and legible tech and building trees are shown, and there are some brief insights into the different tech models for each of the four playable races. There’s also a quick look at the RPG style upgrade tree for Lords, who can level up across three separate skillsets. Campaign skills, battle skills and character skills. The latter improve the Lord’s personal combat abilities, while battle skills affect the troops fighting under their command.

Along with those skill trees, Lords have their own quests, which allow them to unlock unique gear and mounts, and lead to handcrafted battles, like the historical scenarios in previous Total War games. These are incorporated into the main campaign, however.

During the video, we also learn that greenskins have a “fightiness” rating. If you don’t give them any enemies to fight, their fightiness will rise and they’ll start killing one another. Fightiness is probably the orcish equivalent of diplomacy.

Over at Eurogamer, there are a couple of quotes from Creative Assembly regarding the negative response to the Chaos faction DLC/preorder reveal. There’s a more in-depth explanation CA creative director Mike Simpson on the Total War dev blog.

We thought we’d done well. Maybe there is a better solution – we’re listening to all suggestions for the future. Maybe pre-orders are becoming so toxic they will stop working altogether. You’d hope not though, as it quite simply means those incentives will end up just being paid DLC after launch.

Pre-orders create buzz, improve sales and give the whole studio confidence in what we’re doing. They genuinely let us give you something for nothing, and you can’t lose – if you aren’t happy with the final game, you should explore your refund rights. Even if you don’t pre-order, you get Chaos as an Ai opponent.

Read the full post here.

40 Comments

  1. mashkeyboardgetusername says:

    That looks really rather pretty. Very characterful with the different art for each race’s settlements and regions. Be interested to see the other factions’ videos and hear more about how they behave as greenskins were never an army for me.

    I can’t help feel people slightly overreact to the DLC thing. When the vast majority of the negative Steam reviews for Attila are basically “it’s a good game but I don’t like them doing DLC so I’m giving it a thumbs down” something has gone a bit wrong.

    • ribby says:

      There’s a difference between DLC and Day One DLC/ Pre-order bonuses which, unless it’s a really minor thing like skins that don’t divert development time and are simply something for the parts of the team that don’t have anything left to do, I don’t see why we should accept the latter . I do agree though that it’s silly how some people see all DLC as negative.

      DLC in itself isn’t negative, it’s DLC that’s content that’s been taken out of the main game before launch or DLC that isn’t worth the money it’s asking for (like the infamous horse armor DLC) that’s negative.

      • PhilBowles says:

        Except that of course it isn’t “content that’s been taken out of the main game before launch” – it’s content developed in a timeframe to ensure that it’s ready for release alongside the main game, but was never included in the product as designed. As the CA response the article quotes points out, the options are either that this will be released as a preorder bonus, or it will be made available as paid DLC on release. Having it as part of the main game is not an option they consider – and on that basis it’s plainly better for it to be available as a preorder DLC, especially as preorder prices are in any case typically discounted relative to the release price, than for it to be paid DLC only.

    • RedViv says:

      It’s an overreaction when it comes to the value DLC provides, but I still can not fathom how they would have guessed that any person who knows the tiniest bit of Warhammer would not have been at the very least profoundly puzzled by the choice to go with the Counts instead of Chaos for an initial faction.
      I mean, that is THE big plot behind WHFB. Empire vs Chaos.

      • PhilBowles says:

        People who know a bit more about Warhammer know there’s a big difference between Chaos (insidious internal threat mainly to the Empire, and also the source of the Beastmen that terrorise its forests and borders) and Chaos Warriors (mutant Vikings in spiky armour who only raid south in numbers every few centuries). Chaos Warriors aren’t a major faction in the lore in most of Warhammer’s history, only during Chaos Incursions like the ‘End Times’ storyline. This game appears to be set sometime shortly before that (for a start, according to the timeline Azhag was dead before Archaeon even came to the attention of the Empire. In real-world terms, his character was killed off before Archaeon the character was introduced).

      • Zakkeh says:

        I’m expecting Chaos to play the part of the Mongols, and start a large-scale invasion from the Chaos Wastes. This gives each of the 4 factions a big threat to deal with, and then players who have the DLC have a new playstyle faction to try out.

      • drewski says:

        Pshaw. It’s clearly High vs. Dark Elves.

        Empire vs. Chaos is two bunches of numpties who can’t even do magic properly squabbling over table scraps.

        Having said that, making Empire and Dwarves the “main” races and not giving them Skaven and Chaos as playable “main” enemies is obviously just DLC/expansion temptation and pretty cynical from the devs. Who gives a toss about Vampire Counts, ffs. (Apologies to any VC players, you weirdos).

    • Zakkeh says:

      I would say the comments on Attila are about Attila. It has some pretty obnoxious DLC policies, too.

  2. ribby says:

    “we really wanted Chaos Warriors in the main game, even without DLC – to give a big, bad end of game ‘boss’ enemy Race for all players. But we couldn’t do that within the resources for the main game. So we added it as the pre-order incentive that also gets sold on day one – making Chaos Warriors fully playable but also giving us the extra resources to add them as an AI race for everyone.”

    I’m not sure I understand … Are they suggesting that they didn’t have Chaos done before they were selling them as a pre-order bonus? Also I thought that when you pre-ordered something you didn’t actually pay until just before you get the game? So they wouldn’t actually be getting any resources. It seems a little dubious.

    Also “They genuinely let us give you something for nothing, ”

    Is the pre-order not more expensive than getting the game on launch?

    “You’d hope not though”

    I’d hope so actually.

    • Silvermarch says:

      The logic behind it is that with the budget they got from sega for the vanilla game they could developed 4 unique playable races with an NPC Chaos Warriors race as the big bad of the game with a smaller roster, but with some extra budget to generate preorder buzz they decided to fully flesh out CW as a playable race.

      • El_MUERkO says:

        The logic is pants though. Do I want the game> yes. Will I support this kind of nonsense? No. I’ll pick it up in a Steam sale or from an Antarctic key site at a later date.

        • Sathure says:

          The logic makes perfect sense buisness wise just not so much consumer wise. Development projects like Games are set aside a specific cost cap called a budget. The development of these games are are given timetables based on fitting these budgets. The core game development timetable/budget had room for only 4 races once complete. So a secondary project was budgeted and developed that’s what your seeing with the dlc.

          The problem is, this is all happening before the initial game is made available to the public. It’s all going into the same product in the end that the consumer finally sees. So the question they ask is why are these considered seperate? Again it’s how they were budgeted. Buisness wise these were planned and developed as seperate entities(whether that means by a seperate team or one after the other is unknown) in order to recuperate the cost of that development they are therefore sold as seperate products.

  3. raiders says:

    Oh, speaking of Talisman….!!!!!

    • PhilBowles says:

      …when did the Crown of Command given to Azhag when the character was designed for 4th Edition (as a direct Talisman homage) become the “Crown of Sorcery”?

  4. Superpat says:

    This looks pretty cool, I expect the warhammer universe will make the total war part more palatable, though I’m probably still setting myself up for disapointment. I havent really fallen in love with total war since medieval 2, though Shogun 2 was pretty close (But every faction looked the same). I’m guessing this will be a great buy a year after its out.

  5. BobbyDylan says:

    I think it’s Racist to discriminate against Orcs cos they have Green skins.

  6. Halk says:

    I know it’ll sound petty, but this is the first game I’m excited to pirate. I’ve purchased literally every game I own (believe it or not), but the day-one DLC practice and their little “sorry, not sorry” letter regarding it made me somehow feel totally justified in that. Is it wrong? Yep. Am I gonna do it anyway? Yep.

    • BobbyDylan says:

      Well, I guess you’re a Douche Bag then. Either don’t buy it if you don’t want to play it, or buy it if you do. You excuses for pirating show me nothing more than you’re weak-willed.
      I don’t pirate EA games, I just don’t buy them. Either it’s worth money and my time, or it isn’t.

      • Halk says:

        I guess so! I’m not particularly proud of the fact, but if they insist on going through with this sort of business practice, I’m going to go through with the piracy (I recognize the logical fallacy here, don’t worry!).

        The prospect is slightly exciting, though…y’know? Like, “Gamer’s First Piracy”. I should have a painting or something commissioned to remember this moment.

    • raiders says:

      It doesn’t sound petty at all.

      Have you seen the rave about Rocket League? You couldn’t miss it unless you were living under a rock. Since they didn’t offer a demo, and I wanted to see what was so “great” about it, I pirated it. I played it for about 5 hours. Deleted it shortly after. Glad I didn’t listen to all the hoop-la (ESPECIALLY from this site), I would’ve been out $20!

      I’m a Rome 2 pre-order vet, so you already know I ain’t buying (or pirating) this! But I wish I had pirated TWR2 first. What I spend on that, $55 pre-ordered?

      Fool me once…

      • Basil says:

        So you played a game with 5 minute matches for 5 hours before deciding it’s not for you? It’s a $20 game (when not on sale) and you played for 5 hours. You crossed “it doesn’t have a demo” and are just plain douche pirate.

    • captainparty says:

      Pirating a game is much bigger bullshit than offering free DLC packs to pre-orders. If you don’t like it, don’t buy it and don’t play it. You’re not entitled to play the game for any reason.

      • Halk says:

        And yet, I’m gonna do it. I’d like to think that this is my way of saying “Hey, guys, if you’d just not go ahead with your bullshit DLC practices I’d purchase your game!”, but that’s a super self-important statement implying that I know what’s best, etc. As it stands, I guess I’m just gonna have to be a standard entitled asshole (who would totally pay for the game if only they didn’t pull this bullshit). I’ve learned to live with it…but I lost a solid 12 minutes of sleep over it.

    • Hanban says:

      It doesn’t just sound petty, it -is- petty.

  7. Ur-Quan says:

    Well it does look pretty good I’ll give them that, but THIS time I’m not gonna fall for that again.
    I got burned badly with Empire – which they never fixed – but decided to give them the benefit of the doubt. Then Rome 2 with its big marketing campaign came around and I couldn’t even play it for the first month and fixing sieges took half a year!
    I’m gonna wait at least until end of next year before even considering to buy this game.

  8. Fnord73 says:

    I want to believe. I truly do. But Im afraid it will become the big lords running around chasing each other and smashing weaker armies as they go along, as each faction tries to micromanage to a tech-advantage.

    • Chiron says:

      Aye, large numbers of units with lords being slightly more powerful and positioning being key was always the most fun part of Warhammer.

      Which is why I gave it up a few years ago.

      If this had mod support (which is unlikely) I could make my own perfect Warhammer game. As it is it’ll be all about the RPG style super awesome lords and the big chunky special units.

  9. Freud says:

    With CA’s track record of poor AI and taking long to fix problems, who in their right mind would pre-order. Even if they try to bribe you with content they lifted out of the game in the form of a day 0 DLC.

  10. kud13 says:

    Looks pretty. I’m excited to buy it complete with all races in the Steam holiday sale 2017.

  11. PhilBowles says:

    “fightiness”? GW’s historically been terrible with names, but even they came up with ‘animosity’ for this greenskin trait.

    • Tyrion says:

      If you watch the video animosity is the term they use when the greenskins fightiness level is too low so they’ve got it in there.

    • drewski says:

      Ironically, “fightiness” is a much Orcier word to use.

      Animosity sounds like something an elf would say.

  12. Pantalaimon says:

    Honestly all I want with this Total War game is to be able to play it in a resolution that isn’t 1280×1024 and have the fonts not look totally crappy.

  13. Rednecksith says:

    Nope! Bad enough they release buggy as shit games on a consistent basis, but now they’re withholding content from people unless they preorder their bug-infested, half-finished, poorly optimized crap? Go stick a squig where the sun don’t shine, CA. You can also shove your ridiculous justification up there with it.

  14. Unsheep says:

    People b#### about shooters recycling the same enemy types over and over, yet here is another Fantasy game using the exact same enemy types we’ve continuously had for over 20 years. This proves yet again there’s no innovation whatsoever in the Fantasy genre.

    • drewski says:

      It’s almost like all those fantasy games that use enemy archetypes were inspired by a particular game about war, and hammers, and fantasy battles.

      Or, y’know, something.

      • JimboDeany says:

        Hahahahahaha

        It’s also almost like all fantasy is based on legendary beings from well established folklore and literature….

  15. JimboDeany says:

    This may be the first game that I preorder in about four years. I know they have a poor track record and I know that the game will be cheaper in a sale down the line, but I just can’t wait to play this game.