Total War: Warhammer 40,000

[Jings]

3 hours ago, MoriyaSchism said:

Notice how he's wearing the same armour with the same shin plate decoration in all four shots. The only difference being the lack of a holster or loincloth in one image. It's the same 2017 Captain. This isn't a meaningful variation. Do I really have to make a collage of every single Primaris Captain and armour option to prove my point? Surely you've all seen the miniatures already by this point. Total War looks visually boring. There's nothing going on other than the most default thing you can imagine. 

 

Edit: Warhammer 40k is a vast universe of material and lore to explore. Imagine how vast that universe is, there's like a whole 3 years of the most recent edition to explore and put in your game. 

 

I strongly suspect you've never played a Total War game. 

 

For a start, you are not going to be zooming in on individual models for the vast majority of your gameplay experience. It's not how the game is played. The fact we're getting customization for characters (and Chapters) is a treat in and of itself because it's effectively a luxury feature as far as these games. 

 

Further, they are no doubt aware they are sitting on a DLC cosmetic goldmine. Look at TW:WH, for example. Tons of DLC for various factions they've been able to release and rake in cash. 40K will give them them more opportunities to do this by order of magnitude. 

 

Do you really think it is reasonable to expect CA to include customization of models to the extent of the tabletop from the outset when dressing up your dollies is not a core focus of the game, rather a nice extra touch? 

 

Wait for the inevitable Chapter DLC if it really is that much of a concern for you. 

[MoriyaSchism]

On 8/23/2026 at 3:11 PM, Jings said:

 

I strongly suspect you've never played a Total War game. 

 

For a start, you are not going to be zooming in on individual models for the vast majority of your gameplay experience. It's not how the game is played. The fact we're getting customization for characters (and Chapters) is a treat in and of itself because it's effectively a luxury feature as far as these games. 

 

Further, they are no doubt aware they are sitting on a DLC cosmetic goldmine. Look at TW:WH, for example. Tons of DLC for various factions they've been able to release and rake in cash. 40K will give them them more opportunities to do this by order of magnitude. 

 

Do you really think it is reasonable to expect CA to include customization of models to the extent of the tabletop from the outset when dressing up your dollies is not a core focus of the game, rather a nice extra touch? 

 

Wait for the inevitable Chapter DLC if it really is that much of a concern for you. 

I have played Total War, granted I haven't bought any new ones since Shogun 2. I just don't trust Creative Assembly to deliver on anything anymore from what I've seen recently of their work in recent years and all the layoffs. I knew someone was going to bring up zooming in on individual models, if that doesn't matter why is it even an option to zoom all the way in then? Of course that's not how the game is played but there's this thing called the battle replay feature that some Total War games have. Second I'm looking for a game to be set in the Warhammer universe and not a DLC treadmill or an interactive model catalog. If I wanted DLC up the wall, I'd just go play grand strategy games. I think you're not going to see any meaningful Chapter or faction DLC that doesn't represent something currently on sale being replicated one to one in the game. I'd like to be proven wrong on my assumptions, but from what I've seen of the game and GW's proud announcement that a one to one replica of the new Nazdreg model will be featured in the game makes me think it's heading down the advertisement route. 

I am not asking for a 100% accurate replica of the real life conversion system in the game. I'm asking for what they usually have for line infantry in other Total War, randomly generated infantry based on a set of pre-built parts, just how every line guy isn't entirely identical in Total War Warhammer for example. Clearly they have the mechanism to do that with the holster, helmet and loincloth toggles they have shown, I believe it's not enough. What was shown so far looks really boring and samey. GW hasn't had a good track record with games recently, they rushed Mechanicus 2 out the door early, it got bad reviews. The game was eventually patched but half the players didn't bother to return. Dawn of War IV heading in the same direction and I don't have any faith in Creative Assembly. Lastly picking Total War for Warhammer 40,000 is a mistake, Warhammer 40,000 would be better adapted as a completely battle focused game like Wargame or Steel Division by Eugen Systems but that's really not my call. That's GW's expensive mistake to make. 

Edited Wednesday at 06:27 PM by MoriyaSchism

[Jings]

9 minutes ago, MoriyaSchism said:

I have played Total War, granted I haven't bought any new ones since Shogun 2. I just don't trust Creative Assembly to deliver on anything anymore from what I've seen recently of their work in recent years and all the layoffs. I knew someone was going to bring up zooming in on individual models, if that doesn't matter why is it even an option to zoom all the way in then? Of course that's not how the game is played but there's this thing called the battle replay feature that some Total War games have. Second I'm looking for a game to be set in the Warhammer universe and not a DLC treadmill or an interactive model catalog. If I wanted DLC up the wall, I'd just go play grand strategy games. I think you're not going to see any meaningful Chapter or faction DLC that doesn't represent something currently on sale being replicated one to one in the game. I'd like to be proven wrong on my assumptions, but from what I've seen of the game and GW's proud announcement that a one to one replica of the new Nazdreg model will be featured in the game makes me think it's heading down the advertisement route. 

I am not asking for a 100% accurate replica of the real life conversion system in the game. I'm asking for what they usually have for line infantry in other Total War, randomly generated infantry based on a set of pre-built parts, just how every line guy isn't entirely identical in Total War Warhammer for example. Clearly they have the mechanism to do that with the holster, helmet and loincloth toggles they have shown, I believe it's not enough. What was shown so far looks really boring and samey. GW hasn't had a good track record with games recently, they rushed Mechanicus 2 out the door early, it got bad reviews. The game was eventually patched but half the players didn't bother to return. Dawn of War IV heading in the same direction and I don't have any faith in Creative Assembly. Lastly picking Total War for Warhammer 40,000 is a mistake, Warhammer 40,000 would be better adapted as a completely battle focused game like Wargame or Steel Division by Eugene Systems but that's really not my call. That's GW's expensive mistake to make. 

 

Mate the zooming in is just to watch the fights. It wasn't a problem when it was the same ten Roman legionnaires scrapping the same 10 Gauls and it won't be with Marines crumping some Boys. 

 

It's going to be a DLC treadmill because why would they not? For one, the TW series *is* a Grand Strategy series, so its part and parcel for that model to pump out DLC to expand on systems and units. For two, it wouldn't be economically viable to shunt in the myriad factions without monetising it in some fashion. What I and many others expect is for the main game, and the multiple subsequent expansion packs they'll release, to include baseline factions we expect, and then DLC to expand on those with sub-factions. It would be expensive and impractical for them to include, for example, three Imperial Guard regiments that will play the same and then assign extra budget for duplicate models, textures and animations. That's DLC territory, and it's not necessarily a bad thing provided they don't drown us in it from the get go. This is likely where you'll get your collection of gubbins to mix up your special captain from. There's no reason to expect there won't be slight variations for line infantry, it just isn't likely to be be at a granular customisable level. That's fine. It's not what the game's about. 

 

I am actually sympathetic to the view that a lot of the models are going to be ripped straight from the model range. That's an issue that has particularly irked me for a while now. Boils my urine when I see Codex art or read sections of a novel that may as well be a GW Webstore catalogue. That said, given the sheer scale that this game is trying to represent, and the extent of the design resources available, I think in this instance it's more than forgivable. What would be the point in designing everything from the ground up when there are established designs available? It's a bit like being upset about a Star Wars game having Stormtroopers. It's a mutually beneficial decision for GW and CA to do that, as it gives them a bit of vertical integration and advertising for their model range. They literally brought back the Old World after TW:WH because people saw the factions and went "I wanna buy these". 

 

Let's be real on its performance though. It's a Creative Assembly game. It's a Total War. It's going to be a buggy borderline unplayable mess on release, because it's a Total War game. And it's going to sell absolute gangbusters because it's a Total War game with 40K branding. I don't think comparing an indie game like Mechanicus to a Triple-A Creative Assemblies endeavour is a fair comparison. 

 

I'm just excited to play a multiplayer campaign with the lads. 

[Marshal Reinhard]

2 hours ago, MoriyaSchism said:

I have played Total War, granted I haven't bought any new ones since Shogun 2. I just don't trust Creative Assembly to deliver on anything anymore from what I've seen recently of their work in recent years and all the layoffs. I knew someone was going to bring up zooming in on individual models, if that doesn't matter why is it even an option to zoom all the way in then? Of course that's not how the game is played but there's this thing called the battle replay feature that some Total War games have. Second I'm looking for a game to be set in the Warhammer universe and not a DLC treadmill or an interactive model catalog. If I wanted DLC up the wall, I'd just go play grand strategy games. I think you're not going to see any meaningful Chapter or faction DLC that doesn't represent something currently on sale being replicated one to one in the game. I'd like to be proven wrong on my assumptions, but from what I've seen of the game and GW's proud announcement that a one to one replica of the new Nazdreg model will be featured in the game makes me think it's heading down the advertisement route. 

I am not asking for a 100% accurate replica of the real life conversion system in the game. I'm asking for what they usually have for line infantry in other Total War, randomly generated infantry based on a set of pre-built parts, just how every line guy isn't entirely identical in Total War Warhammer for example. Clearly they have the mechanism to do that with the holster, helmet and loincloth toggles they have shown, I believe it's not enough. What was shown so far looks really boring and samey. GW hasn't had a good track record with games recently, they rushed Mechanicus 2 out the door early, it got bad reviews. The game was eventually patched but half the players didn't bother to return. Dawn of War IV heading in the same direction and I don't have any faith in Creative Assembly. Lastly picking Total War for Warhammer 40,000 is a mistake, Warhammer 40,000 would be better adapted as a completely battle focused game like Wargame or Steel Division by Eugene Systems but that's really not my call. That's GW's expensive mistake to make. 

Like, I sympathise completely with not trusting Creative Assembly. They have been on a long downward trajectory. I'd argue their last "good" (or, "problem free", perhaps?) was that shogun 2. Total Warhammer 40.000 feels like a real make or break moment for them.

 

What I don't agree with is that the one captain model is emblematic in any one way of the games potential quality. This information simply cannot be extrapolated from this one model that's showcasing the army painter function, which in itself is higher customization options than is standard for TW games.

[Mechanicus Tech-Support]

Says something that shogun 2 is considered their last good/problem free game when it still had crashes to desktop and graphical errors and glitches with some (largely amd) graphic cards . But considering the next game was rome 2..yeaa 

 

This would be the first TW game with painter options right? Unless I missed something with their newer historicals. The only time your units even changed appearance was back in medieval 2 when your troops got armor upgrades (I still lament the loss of that to this day).

Edited Sunday at 06:12 PM by Mechanicus Tech-Support

[Marshal Reinhard]

21 minutes ago, Mechanicus Tech-Support said:

Says something that shogun 2 is considered their last good/problem free game when it still had crashes to desktop and graphical errors and glitches with some (largely amd) graphic cards . But considering the next game was rome 2..yeaa 

Honestly, I was struggling with what to call it. There's always been issues. I just didn't have any with Shogun 2. And then as you say, Rome 2 came. I think its where the longward trend began. TH:WH felt like they were largely riding on the IP, and from what I hear, there's a downward trend between the three titles? 

[darkhorse0607]

4 hours ago, Marshal Reinhard said:

and from what I hear, there's a downward trend between the three titles? 

 

Eh, I think the general consensus (someone feel free to say no, but its generally what I see on the YouTube, reddit, and in my own opinion, etc) is that 2 was the best. 3 was a disaster at launch. Now its in an ok state all things considered, there's hype for Lords of the End Times but they still havent done the Siege update they've been promising for going on a year now as well as other fixes.

 

Being skeptical about how 40k is going to launch is the right approach. CA doesnt have a great track record (both at launching in a broken state and ignoring all the feedback they get until it blows up in their face) and this will be their first game on the new engine so I expect its going to be a rough launch. On the flip side, they normally dont show gameplay this far out, so maybe thats a good sign

 

The whole "This is the same model colored differently" isn't an issue imo. Theyre going to do DLCs to flesh out the factions and add others, I am not worried about that. Plus Warhammer 3 introduced the customizable demons faction, where you could change/outfit your faction leader as you wanted so I expect the SM captain is going to be an extension of that. Give him different equipment and he changes his look to support it 

Edited Sunday at 11:20 PM by darkhorse0607

[DemonGSides]

End of life WH2 was great, but they had to make WH3, and they couldn't just start from End of Wh2 to start working on 3 as that's not how game development nor the linear march of time work. This made it so that Wh3's fork off of Wh2 was not at an ideal location (Majorly, being before some huge reworks that made the game work really well) and they had to basically spend the first year and a half playing catch up to their own previous game.

 

WH3 is in a pretty solid spot now, though it did have some SERIOUS growing pains.  The upcoming DLC looks really good.

 

Total War Three Kingdoms was excellent on release and would've continued to be excellent if they had made better DLC prioritizations; a game called THree Kingdoms without a way to start a campaign as one of the historical three kingdoms is kinda silly; I understand it not being available on launch, but it seems like an easy slam dunk DLC for the future and we got... 8 Princes, which is campaign set in a different historical era.  Crazy choices behind that game.  But it worked (Mostly) and had really good systems.  Troy was fine, but suffers from being from a boring era.  Pharoah was lambasted for the same reason, but people REALLY like the combo Troy+Pharoah (Dynasties? I think?) so it's not as black and white as "They've only made bad games since Shogun 2"; Shogun 2 is a masterpiece of a game and is tough to live up to for any company.

 

"My captains might have similar shin pads" is a crazy complaint for an RTS game.

[Dezron]

 

 

[Lord Marshal]

And another one:

 

 

[Lord Marshal]

Kind of funny their posterboy faction for the tutorial aren't actually Ultramarines; they just use the exact same colours with the exception of their symbol being a wing instead of a U.

 

[sitnam]

Just want to give a shout-out to one of my main YouTubers back when I got into TWWH1

 

[Son of Rawl]

Parts are looking impressive. But when they confirmed you will not be able to use transport vehicles as transports on launch sounds so stupid. This sounds like classic CA when they give out a big corporate response on why they can't do it due to technical limitations, only for someone to mod that in within the week.

[Indy Techwisp]

6 minutes ago, Son of Rawl said:

Parts are looking impressive. But when they confirmed you will not be able to use transport vehicles as transports on launch sounds so stupid. This sounds like classic CA when they give out a big corporate response on why they can't do it due to technical limitations, only for someone to mod that in within the week.

 

Tbh it was my assumption back when this was just a rumour that Transport vehicles would be a unit spawner rather than a unit mover, mostly because a couple TWWH3 units did something similar.

[MoriyaSchism]

1 hour ago, Son of Rawl said:

Parts are looking impressive. But when they confirmed you will not be able to use transport vehicles as transports on launch sounds so stupid. This sounds like classic CA when they give out a big corporate response on why they can't do it due to technical limitations, only for someone to mod that in within the week.

It's such a shame, things like transport vehicles are a basic feature in games like Wargame and Steel Division. Those games even have a dedicated transport feature. It's such a shame no 40K equivalent exists, the army deck building system is quite intuitive and similar to the old force org chart. You can see the little truck and jeep icons on the infantry deck in this screenshot. 

Edited Wednesday at 06:07 PM by MoriyaSchism

[Matcap86]

Think people need to set expectations a bit lower. Yeah hitting all the notes for 40k out of the gate would be great, but they're starting with a new engine and a ton of new gameplay elements compared to the older games. Total War WH1 also kind of felt more like a proof of concept compared to where we're at with 3. 

 

Hopefully they won't need 3 iterations to get everything in, but I'm expecting waves of features and add ons in the years to come. (gimme my titans cowards).

[Ayatollah_of_Rock_n_Rolla]

6 hours ago, Son of Rawl said:

Parts are looking impressive. But when they confirmed you will not be able to use transport vehicles as transports on launch sounds so stupid. This sounds like classic CA when they give out a big corporate response on why they can't do it due to technical limitations, only for someone to mod that in within the week.

 

To be fair, they kind of cornered themselves here with the size of Guard and Ork units.

 

Anyway, I wish they have shown more of the campaign mechanics and its scale in average gameplay. The necessity of navigating local governors and inquistion is an interesting idea, but sounded very bare-bones. Scrap the interfaction diplomacy and go all in there. I would also like to see how relaiant in practice marines are of allied forces in the campaign and how it differs from Guard in this regard.

[Adeptekon]

If anyone needed more proof of multiplayer appeal and with space marines all they have to do is look at SM2.

 

CA please don't screw up multiplayer.

[Mechanicus Tech-Support]

Shamelessly yoinking this from the Totalwar sub:

Meta:

• 2027 given as release year. No more specific date yet

• Next Alpha Strike "Will not be super far off", and will be covering some of the Closed Beta

• The Gamescom demo/showcase is missing a lot of stuff, particularly on customization and campaign. CA have said huge features are missing and that this is just a tiny slice of what both will look like. A lot of what I mention below comes from the devs talking, and wasn't actually present in the Gamescom demo.

• Multiplayer/Coop details will be coming at a later time

Campaign

Crusade Theaters:

• Crusade Theaters will work like massive 600+ turn mega campaigns, consisting of individual smaller campaigns which take place in single star systems, with persistence between them.

• Crusade Theaters will always start with a starter campaign, and end with a finale campaign. In-between there will be select-able nodes of campaigns leading to the finale. IE the War for Armageddon Crusade will always end with the "Battle for Armageddon" campaign where you fight on the planet itself.

• Within a Crusade Theater you play as the same faction, either a custom-made one or one of the pre-set lore ones like the Ultramarines.

• Units, tech, and other upgrades carry over from one campaign to another within the same Crusade Theater. IE if you have veteran troops in one campaign, you get them in the next one.

• Each campaign will have differing objectives. These objective types will also differ greatly based on what race you are playing. IE SM will have radically different types of objectives in a campaign compared to Aeldari.

• Crusade Theaters will each have ~10 campaigns in them.

Campaign Map:

• Each planet is its own spherical map. Planet sizes can vary, from the sound of it the largest ones will be nearly the size of some entire historical TW campaign maps.

• Campaign maps are back to Shogun 1 style, where armies can no longer "free move". Instead, the map is split into districts, and each district is essentially a "tile" you can move to. Armies have 2 AP for movement. If armies meet at bordering districts, a battle ensues. Reinforcements can come from neighboring districts.

• Multiple districts comprise a "Region", and each region seems to have a central infrastructure thing you can capture to take the region. IE a military outpost, some piece of industry, or an entire Hive City. Regions are where build slots are available.

• Infrastructure in regions have a lot of interplay with elements on the campaign map. Example in the demo was a "Voidcraft Disruptor Network" (basically anti-space fortress) that could be upgraded to buff your fleets in orbit, debuff enemy fleets, damage enemy ground armies, etc. A lot of varied upgrades with varied effects on different areas of the campaign map, all from one building.

• The goal for this change was to better represent the large scale planetary battles of 40k, solve some long-standing issues (like chasing armies all over the place), and simplify the system so the AI can be programmed for it better and make smarter moves.

• Armies no longer require characters, units can be freely recruited and split off from larger forces. The developers specifically mentioned splitting an army in half to cover 2 adjacent regions while still being able to reinforce each other.

• Big infrastructure on maps will be mostly static. IE you won't be building a Hive City from scratch. Those will instead be captured and then built up from there.

• Regions have population numbers, and those numbers can be depleted through bombardment, combat, decisions, etc. Population number directly influences the resources you get from a region. A hive city region had 17 billion population

• Maps can have "Points of Interest" where there are things that can be interacted with using armies. An example from the demo was a destroyed Land Raider

• Fleets have things called "Deployables", which function as ways for them to interact with the campaign map. Examples brought up were dropping a medical facility to heal up an army, or using a repair deployable to fix up the previously mentioned Land Raider. Will be more important for fleet-based factions like SM who can't built much locally.

• You can have multiple fleets and multiple armies in different places. So you can be fighting on two worlds at once in the same campaign.

• If a fleet isn't present over a battlefield/world, you won't gain the bonuses from it. Very important for factions like SM who are heavily reliant on their fleets for things like reinforcements and fire support.

Campaign Mechanics:

• Multiple resources per faction. SM were shown with a "Requisition" resource (basically gold), and an "Influence" resource that seemed much more limited.

• Suspicion vs Renown system for SM. Basically as SM, you are rewarded for going around and saving the day, which earns you Renown points. However you will also build up Suspicion, which if it overtakes Renown will have negative effects for your faction. You build up Suspicion faster by occupying territory, taking certain actions, making certain decision, and getting higher levels of Renown. An example given was having an event ordering you to slaughter civilians, if you refuse you would gain Suspicion.

• Not much diplomacy between different opposing races. It was mentioned that there may be "Subtle relationships" between opposing races, like a temporary truce or even alliance. But these would be rare.

• You're able to interact with races within your own "side" however. It was mentioned that as SM, you'll be able to go up to Imperial Guard regiments or garrisons and order them to follow your armies, for example.

• For the Imperium, Imperial Worlds each have their own Planetary Governor. Each Planetary Governor has their own traits, likes, and dislikes. You can get on their good side to gain bonuses and abilities, and getting on their bad side will result in them making things more difficult for you on their world.

• You have the option to gift territory you capture to local factions. So as SM you're heavily encouraged to not capture entire worlds, but to instead gift them to the local Guard for example.

• There will be a persistent tech tree (heard it called "Escalation Tree"?) across a Crusade Theater. These are described as "Much bigger than the Nagash Black Pyramid tree we just showed off", and will persist between campaigns in a Crusade Theater. Sounds like they will have a lot of contextual unlocks as well instead of just a flat timer, with an example being given that capturing a Forge World in one campaign would unlock bonuses on the tech tree.

• Fleets will be upgrade-able, with factions like SM having a much bigger focus on upgrading their fleet than their on-planet infrastructure. For example all of the SM units were recruit-able exclusively from their fleet, and not local infrastructure.

• Planets have an "Edict" system, which are basically the same as province commandments, but always available, with downsides to each of them, and can all be activated at once. Stuff like redirecting the planetary tithe to your faction to gain some extra income, but which drives up your suspicion as SM by a lot.

Armies, Factions, and Customization

Armies and Characters:

• Characters will still have skills and items, but skills will be toned down compared to TWWH. No "30+ node skill trees", instead more like binary choices.

• Followers are still in, and will play a role in battles now. IE you can get a Chaplain follower, and then that Chaplain will show up as part of that character's bodyguard unit.

• All characters besides faction leaders can die. However characters will have a "wounds" system, where they will need to be fall in battle multiple times to actually die.

• SM characters who die will have the option to be interred in a Dreadnaught.

• Unit equipment customization is big, and more options will become available as the unit ranks up and gains veterancy.

• Unit upgrading is back, so high veterancy units can be able to be upgraded to a different higher tier unit. IE upgrading SM Intercessors into Sternguard Veterans

• Big focus on reducing Doomstacking. Mentioned that powerful units will now have various limits and high costs. Either gated behind specific resources, unit capped, or being locked behind veterancy upgrades. For example one of the only ways to get Sternguard Vets will be to upgrade your veteran squads to them. Goal is to "stop you from easily having 20 Dreadnaughts in an army"

• Armies can get both campaign and battle bonuses based on their unit composition. Examples given were having more Gretchins in your Ork army will let you get more scrap on the campaign map. Having certain combos of units in your SM armies will unlock battle doctrines (army abilities) to activate in a battle.

Factions:

• Each race is getting 2 "lore" factions on launch. Known ones so far are Ultramarines for SM, Cadians for Guard, and Bad Moons for Orks.

• Traitor Guard are in as currently just a custom faction reskin of Guard.

• Lore factions will contain their loreful characters, effects, and unique units.

• Custom factions will be possible for every race with full range customization available.

Customization:

• Customization shown off in the demo was very limited compared to the real thing. They wanted to stop people from spending their entire demo time on building their custom chapter lol.

• You will be able to customize a ridiculous amount of stuff. Not only color and trim, but also details like emblems, accessories, custom helmets, what veteran units like Sergeants look like, and details down to lens color. Hard to gauge the true scale of customization here but it sounds massive.

• On-top of cosmetics, you'll be able to create custom gameplay traits and effects. So if you want to make a Salamanders-like faction that defends civilians and are general do-gooders, you can create traits and bonuses that reflect that.

• You can create custom characters and leaders with their own equipment, names, appearances, etc.

• CA is working on a system to bring custom factions that you or your friends make into your campaigns as AI factions. Not sure if it'll be in on release.

Battle

Battle Mechanics

• New KIA vs Wounded casualty system. After battles, casualties are now split into Killed and Wounded. Wounded will recover relatively quickly. KIA will take longer to recover. This will vary based on faction. IE Orks won't have much problem recovering either. SM will have massive issues replacing KIA marines, and it will be expensive/take very long to do so.

• Every battle will have a pre-battle cinematic cutscene that shows each army aura-farming their way into the battlefield.

• Sync kills are in, but they are very restrained. Most combat will be async animations. CA wanted to be careful with disrupting combat too much with constant sync kills.

• Units will have a "threat" system where they will naturally back off/avoid melee with units that they consider to be a huge threat. IE a SM with a chainsword won't try to sit there and melee a Stompa. A Gretchin will try to avoid melee with an Assault Intercessor. Etc. They will naturally back off from those units in melee.

• No transports on release, but will be added later. CA said they understand this is going to be needed for the game and that it's very important to have in, but the tech wasn't there to properly implement it for release. Said they want to make sure it feels good and the AI can use it too. Will be coming later down the line.

• If you have a custom faction, their paint scheme/customization will be featured in unit cards (although CA seemingly not yet settled on how much on the unit card will reflect that)

• AI will play different races and even different factions within a race differently in battle. No same AI every time.

• Active abilities are still in for some units. Assault Intercessors had a sprint ability, and a jump pack one if they had them. Librarians have a vortex spell (no mana cost, just an active ability), Plasma guns can be overcharged to deal big damage but also chance to explode. Vehicles have smokescreens.

• No more standard melee animation speed for everyone like in Total War Warhammer. Now units who should be attacking lightning fast will be, IE a SM will be able to put out multiple melee attacks in the time it takes an Ork Boy to put out 1

• Reinforcements can either be deployed from your fleet or from local reinforcing armies. Fleet deployment was limited (4 slots for deploying them, each on a cooldown). SM's could come in via Drop Pod or via Teleporter Beacon for Terminators.

Space Marines:

• SM's are VERY small unit size. Largest unit they get is 10-model Intercessors. Aggressors were 6 models per unit. CA said "will be very rare to see more than 200 SM models deployed"

• SM's are all unbreakable, but can still be "battle shocked" where they get reduced stats if their "morale" drops too low. But they will not break, they will all fight to the last marine.

• SM's get less debuffs for being flanked and will naturally form formations to fight 360 around them if surrounded. IE they will all go back-to-back and fire/melee in all directions.

• SM's all have an innate regen ability to represent their superhuman physiology

• SM's get in-battle "Battle Doctrine" abilities, which are big AOE buffs they can activated geared toward a specific a specific doctrine, like melee, ranged, or mobility

• SM's also get a "Only in Death Does Duty End" ability that they can pop on a unit to make their models unkillable for a full minute

[Adeptekon]

11 minutes ago, Mechanicus Tech-Support said:

 

 

• Multiplayer/Coop details will be coming at a later time

 

I stopped reading here. Just coop? Is this the scream test?

[DemonGSides]

Co op Total War is how I play it 90% of the time currently so I'm very nervous about what it might entail. If it's not 8 player co op it's going to be an issue for my play group.  We only really need like 4 but we have had a few games where we have had more than that.