Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!


Forgot your password?

Warhammer Mark Of Chaos - How Is The RTS? 99

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."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Warhammer Mark Of Chaos - How Is The RTS?

Comments Filter:
  • by gowen ( 141411 ) <gwowen@gmail.com> on Monday July 24, 2006 @10:29AM (#15769453) Homepage Journal
    No punctuation sentence fragments very hard to underst
  • by beaverfever ( 584714 ) on Monday July 24, 2006 @10:29AM (#15769458) Homepage
    Is that the comic book guy [nohomers.net] on the bottom-left side of the photo [hexus.net]?
  • Hangups? (Score:4, Funny)

    by BlueCodeWarrior ( 638065 ) <steevk@gmail.com> on Monday July 24, 2006 @10:32AM (#15769480) Homepage
    quashing any previous hang-ups I almost certainly had about the people who played Warhammer

    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...
  • by thatguywhoiam ( 524290 ) on Monday July 24, 2006 @10:35AM (#15769501)
    For a second I thought the Warhammer series had turned into a manga, with a title like that...
    Alas, no. Just monday morning slashdot posts pre-coffee.

    Now, work am off to I do time no more waste.

  • Fluff piece (Score:2, Interesting)

    by bidule ( 173941 )

    This guy is really enthusiastic. You have to dig through the dythirambic spew to get the meat. At least you can't have the standard GW step 3 aka buy tons of figurines at high cost. Yeah I skewed against them, cry me a river ;oP
    • At least you can't have the standard GW step 3 aka buy tons of figurines at high cost. Yeah I skewed against them, cry me a river ;oP

      Are you kidding? Since I don't play in league games I don't care about having official figurines. I've thought more than once about using knockoff battletech figures for space marines, or maybe eldar :P

      The fact that GW's rules do not permit use of non-licensed figurines in tournament games is all I need to know that they're in it only for the money.

      • Exactly which other game manufacturers DO permit use of unofficial pieces in their sanctioned events? I'm not thinking of any right now. I don't know why you're so surprised about that turn of events.

        "All about staying in business" is more like it.
        • If I go play D&D it doesn't matter if I have an [official] Ral Partha figurine or a cheap knockoff. Granted, it's not a miniatures combat game, but the point still stands. Since GW doesn't allow it, you can't use those figurines in j. random league game at your local gaming shop, either, which is what I'm really complaining about. If you could buy plastic armies a lot cheaper, I'd be complaining less then, too. Not to mention that their vehicle models are really simple and cheap, yet still not all that
    • Re:Fluff piece (Score:3, Interesting)

      by Eccles ( 932 )
      At least you can't have the standard GW step 3 aka buy tons of figurines at high cost.

      Ebay is your friend here. Buy them, then sell them back on ebay when you're no longer interested for a similar price, even possibly a profit if you're a decent painter. Also, OOP figures often go for cheaper than the latest stuff.

      I bought a bunch of current model figs the other day, including $125 (list) in stuff still sealed in shrink wrap, and 50-60 other miniatures (mostly metal) for $100 including shipping. And a c
    • Like me who don't know what dythirambic [reference.com] means.
  • Skaven over Orcs? (Score:4, Interesting)

    by Sapphon ( 214287 ) on Monday July 24, 2006 @10:50AM (#15769609) Journal
    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?
    • by swv3752 ( 187722 ) <swv3752@[ ]mail.com ['hot' in gap]> on Monday July 24, 2006 @10:54AM (#15769645) Homepage Journal
      Probably just wanted to avoid those claims that Warhammer is just a clone of Warcraft.
      • since warhammer's been around a lot longer, wouldn't the claim be that Warcraft is just a knock-off of Warhammer?
        • Well yes... but this is the internet.

          I sware if I hear that the Tyranids are a copy of the Zerg one more time I am going to start kicking people in the shins.

          Listen... Blizard... Fanboys... Blizard was heavly "inspired" by Games Workshop products (That have been around since the '70s and '80s) not the other way around. That doesn't make Warcraft and Starcraft "not good" it just makes them not at all origonal.
          • by iapetus ( 24050 )
            I think this says it all... [penny-arcade.com]
          • Not original? Sir, in what other game can I play a big, hairy cow with a hypnotising dance routine [youtube.com]?

            Seriously though, I think you're weighing content too heavily. Most "originality" is pretty much just rehashed ideas from long enough ago that most people have forgotten about the work that inspired them. The entire fantasy genre is pretty much a result of Tolkien, and he drew everything from Germanic, Norse, and Celtic/British folklore. And if you're going to call GW original, well:

            • Humans: Duh
            • Dwarves:
            • I never said that GW was totaly original. (They have developed a rather complete lore for both of there Game worlds, but I understand the "anything I don't like is stupid" attitude so I will let that go.) All I am trying to get across is that no matter how you look at it when you examine the facts Games Workshop did not and could not have copied Blizzard and it is a documented fact that Blizzard was inspired by Games Workshop products.
            • With a song like that, how can you not dance? Toe-tapping, sir, abso-fucking-lutely toe tapping.
        • Warcraft is good.

      • Which is a ridiculous claim as Warhammer Fantasy Battle and 40K have been around much longer than Warcraft.

    • Who cares about those blimey orc players, when do we get Harlequinns!?
    • It should be pointed out that they added the Imperial Guard with the expansion to Dawn of War. I'm just annoyed that they still haven't made Tyranids >:(. Perhaps they left the Orcs out because they intend to put them in an expansion pack. If they put all the good races in the main game, then there's nothing left to sell their expansion packs with.
      • Re:Skaven over Orcs? (Score:2, Interesting)

        by Firefly1 ( 251590 )

        It should be pointed out that they added the Imperial Guard with the expansion to Dawn of War. I'm just annoyed that they still haven't made Tyranids >:(.

        The upcoming second expansion (Dark Crusade) adds the Tau and Necrons. The developers have no current plans to include Tyranids because they are not convinced that their engine, as good as it is, can do them justice. Although in the interests of rounding things out, I wonder if we'll be seeing Dark Eldar at some point...

    • The Skaven were the only race which had miniatures included in Advanced Heroquest (a game that managed to combine all of the worst features of Warhammer and Heroquest), so there is some precedent for their inclusion in Warhammer spin-offs.
    • The skaven are perhaps a little more unique - GW may have really started orks as an army way back when (and they did) but since everyone and their mother has orcs in their fantasy RTS. They still have the orcs as an army (seems to me from the article they're all pretty much even, the writer was just *really* bad) but the way to pick up new players, not just hardcore fans, is to add some new flavor.
      Besides, I'm willing to bet for whatever reason the story of the game revolves more around skaven than
    • 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?

      I'd never heard of Warhammer 40K until I acquired a um, uh demo (cough, cough) of the RTS Warham
  • I used to work there (Score:5, Informative)

    by RembrandtX ( 240864 ) on Monday July 24, 2006 @10:59AM (#15769673) Homepage Journal
    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.]

    HUGE building, big spacemarine on the top. And, they have their own pub :P [seriously]

    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 .. so who knows.]
    • MMORPG licence is with Mythic ... now EA Mythic I guess. The guys who do Dark Age of Camelot.

      Here's the site [warhammeronline.com]

      • oops .. yeah .. sorry .. I meant Mythic (in virginia). Ironically .. JUST before they got the licence, I put an application in there [I know folks who work there] only to be turned down. Apparantly, working in the design studio at Games Workshop wasn't enough of a background to work on their video game ;P

        Meh .. just as well .. would have been like going back to highschool at 35.
        • Well, I think Relic is doing well with their 40K RTS license, what do you think?

          I thought it was odd that Namco got the Warhammer Fantasy Battle license while Relic has the 40K license.

  • can someone explain the difference between a real time strategy and real time tactics game for me please? Are these names just synonyms, or is there an actual difference in the gameplay (like RPG vs. Action RPG)?
    • Re:RTS vs. RTT? (Score:3, Informative)

      by Parallax48 ( 990689 )
      As I understand it, the difference is in the nature of the battle.

      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/Comma [wikipedia.org]
    • Sure. Strategy is the management of resources, buildings, troops and technologies. Tactics are the actions taken on the field of combat. Ever played Myth? [wikipedia.org] That is a hard-ass real-time tactical game. You start out with X number of troops, and that's all you get for the entire game. The army that understands how to use formations & terrain can beat a superior force that doesn't. [wikipedia.org]
    • Re:RTS vs. RTT? (Score:2, Informative)

      by skorch ( 906936 )
      Well the real time part is obvious (as in, not turn based), so the real issue is the difference between strategy and tactics.

      To oversimplify it, a military strategy includes all the logistics of war, including the acquisition and allocation of resources, management of supplies, as well as the global movement and positioning of troops.

      Tactics just refers to the specific maneuvering and commanding of troops engaged in combat.

      So basically, how you command your units at your base, and where you choose
    • Re:RTS vs. RTT? (Score:4, Informative)

      by SatanicPuppy ( 611928 ) * <Satanicpuppy.gmail@com> on Monday July 24, 2006 @11:30AM (#15769928) Journal
      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.
    • All of the above responses are correct, the problem is that RTS games have strategy elements in ADDITION to the tactics, rather than instead of the tactics.

      I have always thought "How can this be a Strategy game if I have to spend half an hour maneuvering my group to the right spot and then hand position each one in their deffensive positions?"

      A real strategy game (the kind Ive been waiting for) would allow you to define, create and maneuver Battalion level oragnizations, not individual units. Then the "Fact
  • Ummm.....? (Score:5, Funny)

    by Mayhem178 ( 920970 ) on Monday July 24, 2006 @11:04AM (#15769695)
    Warhammer Mark Of Chaos How Is The RTS Homer no function beer well without.
  • by crull ( 221987 )
    Slashdot effect strikes once again.
  • Seriously, what does the headline mean? How mark of chaos is RTS warhammer? Huh?
  • I find it strange that they found the RTS awe-inspiring as opposed to the amazing MMO being made by the *soon to form* EA Mythic. [warhammeronline.com] I can't imagine the guys at GW not *more* behind the up-and-comming MMO, especially with some crazy guy [thewarband.com] promoting it from his phone, and the fact that they had issues with the previous developer and could use all the confidence re-building behind this new game.
    • No, the problem with the MMO is that Warhammer has never been about one guy running around on his own, it was always about big epic battles between armies LED by individuals. Can you imagine World of Warcraft where *every single player* has some 30 troops to command? An RTS is a lot more like GW's style, especially with the competitive multiplayer that can imitate the tabletop version as closely as any game type can.
  • by ameoba ( 173803 ) on Monday July 24, 2006 @11:28AM (#15769911)
    It's about time that people stopped calling RTSes stratergy games and started refering to them as tactical.
    • It can be argued that some qualify for both... Homeworld and Rise of Nations both come to mind as games that benefit from long term strategic planning, in addition to your standard faire skirmish-level battle tactics.

      But, like it or not, "strategy" has been enshrined as a game genre, while "tactics" has not, so I think we're stuck with RTS. =|
    • That depends, the normal Warcraft-esque RTS surely deserves the name tactics more but something like Total Annihilation or Supreme Commander might not fit the term very well.
    • You're not alone in this thinking. However, Supreme Commander [supremecommander.com],the spiritual successor to Total Annihilation, is touted to focus far more on strategy as opposed to the more tactically oriented RTS games we're used to. I'll be interested to see exactly how strategic Supreme Commander is, since much has been made of its large maps and coordinated unit movement (with respect to arrival times at a destination). Also, Total Annihilation is one hell of a pedigree to claim.
  • by Anonymous Coward
    Is it just me or did they somehow manage to double post an entire _article_?

    Gee... I'm sure that doesn't help with pipe cloggage.
  • by Qbertino ( 265505 ) <moiraNO@SPAMmodparlor.com> on Monday July 24, 2006 @12:32PM (#15770415)
    Games Workshop is the Microsoft of the gaming world. Many RPG and Tabletop enthusiasts still have vivid memories of GW severly abusing their market power to push independent vendors to take minimum quantities of their stuff only to prepare and probe the market for their GW-only outlets in close proximity to these exact shops. This all started in the early to mid nineties.
    GW is a mean bunch of quasi-monopolists pushing overpriced stuff and comes at position #2 for killing of diversity in the Tabletop/Fantasy/RPG Market - right after Magic.
    As a result I don't buy stuff from them and encourage any Tabletopper to play game from other vendors. Warmachine from http://www.privateerpress.com/ [privateerpress.com] is a very neat (I'd say better) alternative to Warhammer. Check it out.
    • 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,
      • Games Workshop is worth over 2 Billion USD in sales a year.
        They have offices in 7+ countries, produce their games in 30+ languages.

        They don't have a strangle hold on the gaming market. They don't TRY to have a stranglehold on the gaming market.
        They don't even consider their product a game.

        I know .. I worked there for over 5 years, helped grow the US office from 60 to over 120 employees, and then helped start the current incarnation of Games-Workshop Japan.

        Prior to that .. I was a hobby shop owner. I sold my
        • I've known several people that have worked with GW, and for the most part they'd agree with a lot of what you've said. Especially the "hobby" part. It's true that GW may not be actively seeking to kill the mini-gaming market, it's just that their saturation of said market makes them slightly dangerous. Whenever I mention to non-gamer people that I play miniature wargames, they invariably ask, "You mean like Warhammer?" So, to the non-hardcore gamers in the real world, GW is miniature gaming.

          Not to say tha

      • There are several Swedish web shops that sell the GW range. If GW tried to stop them our consumer protection agencies would fine them so big and hard they'd never try it again.
    • Fair enough, and good points. However I spent enough time drooling over blister packs, poring over the books, and spilling pots of Blood Red and Ultramarine Blue all over my parents' carpet that GW products will always have a place in my heart. Even if their business practices are terrible, their product is appealing. Hell, I hadn't played anything in years but when Dawn of War and the Winter Assault RTS games came out, I bought them immediately. Worth every penny, too.
  • I've liked previous releases, but, as I boot 'Doze less and less, I'm wondering if they'll release GNU/Linux compatible versions.

    Granted, marketing in stores probably won't be realistic, but how about straight from the company?

Always leave room to add an explanation if it doesn't work out.