Warhammer Warhammer 40,000: Rogue Trader Pre-Release Thread [GAME RELEASED, GO TO NEW THREAD]

[Shaki]

I suppose I shouldn’t be surprised. “I like bad ambitious things more than good restrained things” might as well be the Codex’ tagline

Obviously. Ambitions lead to progress. Taking the easiest "restrained" way just leads to 50th same Assassin Creed game in a row. Any sane person should always support ambitious projects, over goyslop.

 

[Grunker]

I don’t give a fuck how ambitious crusade management is on paper, in implementation it’s worse than a mobile game.

It’s also interesting you claim it leads to progress, since after Rogue Trader, Owlcat will have proved they can make threee games in a row with these systems and still have them all be terrible, making progression less than 0

 

[Orud]

Kingdom management in Kingmaker was a brilliant idea, and while not executed perfectly, it still added a lot of value to the game. And they added the option for game journos to make the minigame play itself, letting you ignore it completely, so idk why all the crying. Y'all feel like zoomers whining about inclusion of harder difficulty options, because unless the game bends over backwards to make you feel like you're a very smart, very special boy, you won't be satisfied. Just git gud or use journo difficulty and play for "muh story", applies both to main game and minigames.

Because if you actually played the game, you'd know that certain quests and artisan rewards are locked behind kingdom management. If you turn it off, you also lose out on obtaining them despite the game having different means to present them to you. I've played the game 3 times now; once with the 'normal' kingdom difficulty, once on 'hard' and once on 'effortless'. No difficulty changes that its a badly designed minigame that offers no challenge, complexity and snowballs like crazy (in both directions).

But since you really love to crawl on your god damn high seat every damn time I see a post of you; do you know what actually is optional? Romances in BG3. You know who bitched and moaned whole books worth of posts about it? You.

 

[Jaedar]

I don’t give a fuck how ambitious crusade management is on paper, in implementation it’s worse than a mobile game. And it’s interesting you think it leads to progress, since after Rogue Trader, Owlcat will have proved they can make threee games in a row with these systems and still have them all be terrible

I'd say "wanna bet" but if you think crusade management is utterly atrocious and I think it's interestingly bad then I don't see how we could have a good resolution criteria, since odds are we'll just have different opinions about ship combat and dynasty management as well.

Because if you actually played the game, you'd know that certain quests and artisan rewards are locked behind kingdom management and are not offered to you on 'auto' difficulty. If you turn it off, you also lose out on obtaining them. I've played the game 3 times now; once with the 'normal' kingdom difficulty, once on 'hard' and once on 'effortless'. No difficulty changes that its a badly designed minigame that offers no challenge, complexity and snowballs like crazy (in both directions).

I'm pretty happy that when faced with all the criticism about their minigames owlcat went "fine, you can have an automode, but you won't get any of the cool stuff".

But why insist on the kingdom management minigame? There are other ways already in the game that portray that aspect of your kingdom:

• Judging over criminals
• Receive and aid special guests
• Kingdom issues that lead to quests and whole subplots

Those are just standard adventurer things with different flavor. Can't fool me that easily. You don't strictly need a minigame, see for example the keep in nwn2 oc, but I like seeing the borders expanding on the map and prefer the immediacy of game mechanics over the mostly narrative based keep style.

 

[Owlcat_Eyler]

Lemme jump into this conversation.
Obviously, the implementation of so to say "unusual" mechanics carries certain risks. And it's easy to guess that the kingdom in the first Pathfinder was obviously more successful than the crusade in the second one.
We have even more unusual mechanics in Rogue Trader - a space battle, colony management, as well as a peculiar cargo-trading system.
And here the alpha/beta came in handy. We got feedback after the alpha and then changed some things. We also had a beta survey. The rating of the space battle has increased there. But there were still some good remarks on which the team is still working.
I think all in all it looks optimistic at the moment. But sure thing, everyone can have their own opinion on this matter.

 

[Grunker]

I don’t give a fuck how ambitious crusade management is on paper, in implementation it’s worse than a mobile game. And it’s interesting you think it leads to progress, since after Rogue Trader, Owlcat will have proved they can make threee games in a row with these systems and still have them all be terrible

I'd say "wanna bet" but if you think crusade management is utterly atrocious and I think it's interestingly bad

I think it is easily worse than kingdom management in Kingmaker, and that's saying something

 

[Grunker]

I'm pretty happy that when faced with all the criticism about their minigames owlcat went "fine, you can have an automode, but you won't get any of the cool stuff".

It's the relationship version of telling your partner she should stop using teeth when giving blowjobs and her response being: "FINE, NO SEX THEN!"

Jaedar's reply? "I'm pretty happy!"

 

[Jaedar]

And here the early access came in handy.

No offense friend, but you had that for the pathfinders as well.

I don’t give a fuck how ambitious crusade management is on paper, in implementation it’s worse than a mobile game. And it’s interesting you think it leads to progress, since after Rogue Trader, Owlcat will have proved they can make threee games in a row with these systems and still have them all be terrible

I'd say "wanna bet" but if you think crusade management is utterly atrocious and I think it's interestingly bad

I think it is easily worse than kingdom management in Kingmaker, and that's saying something

I see why you quit the game without finishing it then.

 

[Grunker]

And here the early access came in handy

funny that it didn't for the other games no

 

[Grunker]

And here the early access came in handy.

No offense friend, but you had that for the pathfinders as well.

I don’t give a fuck how ambitious crusade management is on paper, in implementation it’s worse than a mobile game. And it’s interesting you think it leads to progress, since after Rogue Trader, Owlcat will have proved they can make threee games in a row with these systems and still have them all be terrible

I'd say "wanna bet" but if you think crusade management is utterly atrocious and I think it's interestingly bad

I think it is easily worse than kingdom management in Kingmaker, and that's saying something

I see why you quit the game without finishing it then.

I’ve finished both Kingmaker and Wrath and completed the management of both

 

[Jaedar]

I’ve finished both Kingmaker and Wrath and completed the management of both

Oh, I thought you quit wrath. Good on you.

 

[Grunker]

I’ve finished both Kingmaker and Wrath and completed the management of both

Oh, I thought you quit wrath. Good on you.

It's the reverse. I quit on Kingmaker due to hating House of Time, but came back and replayed it when it got turn-based. Wrath I took a short break because of Nenio's dungeon which frankly just made me bored, but I finished it shortly thereafter.

Unlike Kingmaker, I could see myself replaying Wrath at some point.

 

[Irxy]

I’ve finished both Kingmaker and Wrath and completed the management of both

Care to elaborate then on what specifically you don't like about these systems?
I understand people who don't want to bother with management in general and that's okay.
But you say it's terrible which implies you might like it if it is improved/changed somehow?

 

[Orud]

Those are just standard adventurer things with different flavor. Can't fool me that easily. You don't strictly need a minigame, see for example the keep in nwn2 oc, but I like seeing the borders expanding on the map and prefer the immediacy of game mechanics over the mostly narrative based keep style.

Now you're letting your preference show, by stating that you don't like specific quests/judgements/etc... as 'kingdom management'. Keep in mind that kingdom management minigame has little to do with in-game borders, you'll still see them grow and you still need to travel across your kingdom when receiving the 'other' quests.

I'm pretty happy that when faced with all the criticism about their minigames owlcat went "fine, you can have an automode, but you won't get any of the cool stuff".

It's not that you're simply cut off from isolated quests and items, but some resolutions to events that happened outside of that system are only concluded (or detailed) by the mini-game.

 

[Jaedar]

Unlike Kingmaker, I could see myself replaying Wrath at some point.

I would probably have replayed it once for every mythic path if the game was 10-20 hours per campaign instead of 100+ hours.

 

[Grauken]

We have even more unusual mechanics in Rogue Trader - a space battle, colony management, as well as a peculiar cargo-trading system.

Sounds like you didn't learn from your first two games

At least space battles could be interesting but I bet it turns out to be like ship battles in PoE2

 

[Grunker]

I’ve finished both Kingmaker and Wrath and completed the management of both

Care to elaborate then on what specifically you don't like about these systems?

Pointing out the entirety of their flaws would take a review-length post, but suffice it to say I struggle to see anything redeemable in either of them - they are both simpler than phonegames and just as easy. Who wants to play a worse and more simplistic version of HoMM's least interesting element - its combat? What about "buildings" that have no tangible effect (in fact, playing in Hard-mode, you should probably build as few as possible) and shuffling around cards with no effect on the game world makes you feel like you're managing a kingdom - and more poignantly: what on earth about it is fun? Just compare both systems with the rest of these game's gameplay; actually fun and incredibly deep system interaction vs. pure, uninspired busywork with obvios design limitations.

Wrath is way worse though, because whereas Kingmaker has unique throneroom scenes which can be excellent and can have impact in the actual game world (though all too rarely), Wrath's throneroom scenes are all cut from identical, cookie-cutter cloth and can't even fool you into believing your choices have impact beyond the minigame itself. In other words, the only part of the management that actually makes you feel like you have fun managing, they systemized into death.

The kingdom management I've liked has been in games that showed you the impact of your decisions and focused on them - rather than having number go up, which is always an afterbirth of an afterthought. I'm sure there's a way to include a succesful management minigame - after all, we know from Arcomage that minigames don't have to be useless - but I wouldn't know how. I'm not a game designer.

What I do know is that Arcomage is one hundred times the game any Owlcat minigame will ever be - because it's designed to be a good game first and foremost.

I understand people who don't want to bother with management in general and that's okay.

I think I have something like 300 hours in Rimworld and I'd wager twice as much in Dungeon Keeper.

I'm playing the M&M5.5 mod as we speak.

But you say it's terrible which implies you might like it if it is improved/changed somehow?

There's no way a studio like Owlcat could ever make a succesful HoMM-clone AND a massive single player RPG with the budget they have. The proof is in the pudding.

The card game had a fighting chance if they had connected it more to the game world and made it more about choices and what kind of kingdom you wanted to run than about the fairly poor stat management-like they ended up making.

For all the resources they put into these things, I think I would have felt more like a king/a crusade general if there had been four meaningful throne room scenes more replacing the entire mini games.

 

[Shaki]

Kingdom management in Kingmaker was a brilliant idea, and while not executed perfectly, it still added a lot of value to the game. And they added the option for game journos to make the minigame play itself, letting you ignore it completely, so idk why all the crying. Y'all feel like zoomers whining about inclusion of harder difficulty options, because unless the game bends over backwards to make you feel like you're a very smart, very special boy, you won't be satisfied. Just git gud or use journo difficulty and play for "muh story", applies both to main game and minigames.

Because if you actually played the game, you'd know that certain quests and artisan rewards are locked behind kingdom management. If you turn it off, you also lose out on obtaining them

Choice and consequence. Do you also want a button near the entrance to every side area, that lets you get all the xp and loot without actually doing the content, because you just don't feel like fighting enemy x? Kingdom/crusade management, is an optional activity with optional rewards, just like any other optional part of the game. Stop coping zoomer.

 

[Grunker]

Kingdom management in Kingmaker was a brilliant idea, and while not executed perfectly, it still added a lot of value to the game. And they added the option for game journos to make the minigame play itself, letting you ignore it completely, so idk why all the crying. Y'all feel like zoomers whining about inclusion of harder difficulty options, because unless the game bends over backwards to make you feel like you're a very smart, very special boy, you won't be satisfied. Just git gud or use journo difficulty and play for "muh story", applies both to main game and minigames.

Because if you actually played the game, you'd know that certain quests and artisan rewards are locked behind kingdom management. If you turn it off, you also lose out on obtaining them

Choice and consequence. Do you also want a button near the entrance to every side area, that lets you get all the xp and loot without actually doing the content, because you just don't feel like fighting enemy x?

No, and do you know why? Because fighting those enemies is actually a fun fucking game you retarded ape

 

[Shaki]

Kingdom management in Kingmaker was a brilliant idea, and while not executed perfectly, it still added a lot of value to the game. And they added the option for game journos to make the minigame play itself, letting you ignore it completely, so idk why all the crying. Y'all feel like zoomers whining about inclusion of harder difficulty options, because unless the game bends over backwards to make you feel like you're a very smart, very special boy, you won't be satisfied. Just git gud or use journo difficulty and play for "muh story", applies both to main game and minigames.

Because if you actually played the game, you'd know that certain quests and artisan rewards are locked behind kingdom management. If you turn it off, you also lose out on obtaining them

Choice and consequence. Do you also want a button near the entrance to every side area, that lets you get all the xp and loot without actually doing the content, because you just don't feel like fighting enemy x?

No, and do you know why? Because fighting those enemies is actually a fun fucking game you retarded ape

A lot of players would disagree, go to steam forum and read some comments about BG3 or Pahtfinders. Plenty of people who think combat should be pretty much removed because they think it's a slog that takes away from the "fun" parts of the games, eg. "roleplaying", dialogues and romances. You pretty much mirror their arguments, just in regard to other part of the games. I know you're heavily autistic and have trouble understanding other human beings, but generally people enjoy different things, and "mechanic x is fun and mechanic y isn't", is not an objective statement.

 

[skaraher]

I’ve finished both Kingmaker and Wrath and completed the management of both

Oh, I thought you quit wrath. Good on you.

It's the reverse. I quit on Kingmaker due to hating House of Time, but came back and replayed it when it got turn-based. Wrath I took a short break because of Nenio's dungeon which frankly just made me bored, but I finished it shortly thereafter.

Unlike Kingmaker, I could see myself replaying Wrath at some point.

Nenio's dungeon isn't bad if you have counter against stat drain and know the puzzle's logic. I dont think anyone ever discovered it on his own, solutions extracted from datamining were all over internet from the start and frankly owlcat's puzzle are very opaque.

Judging by Reddit, more build autists played Kingmaker while WOTR as a sizable demographic of neoBiodrone who play it on Storymode. Its no wonder one the most popular moment of the game, both on youtube comment and forums, is the one where you are scripted to overpower the Act 1 boss.

 

[Shaki]

I’ve finished both Kingmaker and Wrath and completed the management of both

Oh, I thought you quit wrath. Good on you.

It's the reverse. I quit on Kingmaker due to hating House of Time, but came back and replayed it when it got turn-based. Wrath I took a short break because of Nenio's dungeon which frankly just made me bored, but I finished it shortly thereafter.

Unlike Kingmaker, I could see myself replaying Wrath at some point.

Nenio's dungeon isn't bad if you have counter against stat drain and know the puzzle's logic. I dont think anyone ever discovered it on his own, solutions extracted from datamining were all over internet from the start and frankly owlcat's puzzle are very opaque

I solved all the puzzles in the game without looking at guides and shit, it's very doable, tho they were repetitive and became boring pretty quickly. My biggest problem with the puzzles was the UI, it was absolute dogshit, and the main reason why solving them was not very fun for me.

 

[Grunker]

I’ve finished both Kingmaker and Wrath and completed the management of both

Oh, I thought you quit wrath. Good on you.

It's the reverse. I quit on Kingmaker due to hating House of Time, but came back and replayed it when it got turn-based. Wrath I took a short break because of Nenio's dungeon which frankly just made me bored, but I finished it shortly thereafter.

Unlike Kingmaker, I could see myself replaying Wrath at some point.

Nenio's dungeon isn't bad if you have counter against stat drain and know the puzzle's logic

Even my suboptimal party on Unfair with double damage turned on was literally unkillable at that point. I hated it because it took so long and had so little worthwhile content.

Owlcat's puzzles are a pretty good example of what makes their management mini games shit; they're not unique and interesting puzzles designed for the context and to be fun, they're systematized copy-pastaed variations over a single theme in order for the game's scope to be possible.

 

[Orud]

Care to elaborate then on what specifically you don't like about these systems?
I understand people who don't want to bother with management in general and that's okay.
But you say it's terrible which implies you might like it if it is improved/changed somehow?

• Simple card 'assignment' game that holds no strategic or tactical depth. Its slightly above the level of 'match the shape'.
• Snowballs very easily. You either do REAL GOOD, and the successive odds get stacked massively in your favor, or REAL BAD, and the successive odds get stacked massively against you. No in-between.
• Forces you to interrupt your adventures. Constantly. Not for kingdom ending situations, but even for events where someone gets impatient because no-one is cleaning up after he pissed himself in bed.
• It holds no immersion, doesn't make me feel like a ruler but rather the janitor. You know, what actual rulers would get advisors for.

 

[Grunker]

Kingdom management in Kingmaker was a brilliant idea, and while not executed perfectly, it still added a lot of value to the game. And they added the option for game journos to make the minigame play itself, letting you ignore it completely, so idk why all the crying. Y'all feel like zoomers whining about inclusion of harder difficulty options, because unless the game bends over backwards to make you feel like you're a very smart, very special boy, you won't be satisfied. Just git gud or use journo difficulty and play for "muh story", applies both to main game and minigames.

Because if you actually played the game, you'd know that certain quests and artisan rewards are locked behind kingdom management. If you turn it off, you also lose out on obtaining them

Choice and consequence. Do you also want a button near the entrance to every side area, that lets you get all the xp and loot without actually doing the content, because you just don't feel like fighting enemy x?

No, and do you know why? Because fighting those enemies is actually a fun fucking game you retarded ape

A lot of players would disagree, go to steam forum and read some comments about BG3 or Pahtfinders. Plenty of people who think combat should be pretty much removed because they think it's a slog that takes away from the "fun" parts of the games, eg. "roleplaying", dialogues and romances. You pretty much mirror their arguments, just in regard to other part of the games. I know you're heavily autistic and have trouble understanding other human beings, but generally people enjoy different things, and "mechanic x is fun and mechanic y isn't", is not an objective statement.

^This is what your brain looks like on relativism, folks

A particularly inept and illegible brand of relativism