Warhammer: Mark of Chaos

[Mattc0m]

That screenshot gave me the sudden urge to reinstall and play one of my Total War games.

[Kunikos]

Saw the PC Gamer article on this one. Looks awesome. I can’t wait to see it in motion and play with it, but I’m sure I will be terrible at the game.

[Igor_Muravyev]

It’ll be a Rome clone once you can get 1000-2000 units per army and 9 armies in one battle. Heh.

With that being said, I’m definitely looking forward to this game, :).

[Kalle]

@Igor Murashkin

It’ll be a Rome clone once you can get 1000-2000 units per army and 9 armies in one battle. Heh.

With that being said, I’m definitely looking forward to this game, :).

Seriously, when do you ever play out battles this big in Rome? In the new expansion it’s possible if you attack a horde, or attack with a horde, but just because it is possible doesn’t mean that it is a good idea.

[Ben_Sones]

There’s a short interview with a Namco guy on Gamecloud. Not a lot of new info, but they do talk a bit more about the campaign system.

@Chris Wren

The objective-based regions are fairly unique to the genre. The idea here is that you enter a region and there are several objectives. One might be to sack an Empire foresting operation and destroy the mill they are using. Another might be as simple as destroying all of the enemy units in a region. We have some smaller scale missions to retrieve artifacts within regions as well, this might involve taking a tight squad into a forest and fighting more guerrilla style warfare. Taking, holding, reinforcing and sabotaging existing objectives on maps is something we think will keep the frenetic pace of RTS going without forcing the player to mine gold or harvest wheat. We are not requiring that the player complete all of the objectives to control a region, but the more you complete, the more resources your army will have for the war ahead.

[Mark_Asher]

@Ben_Sones

There’s a short interview with a Namco guy on Gamecloud. Not a lot of new info, but they do talk a bit more about the campaign system.

[quote=Chris Wren]The objective-based regions are fairly unique to the genre. The idea here is that you enter a region and there are several objectives. One might be to sack an Empire foresting operation and destroy the mill they are using. Another might be as simple as destroying all of the enemy units in a region. We have some smaller scale missions to retrieve artifacts within regions as well, this might involve taking a tight squad into a forest and fighting more guerrilla style warfare. Taking, holding, reinforcing and sabotaging existing objectives on maps is something we think will keep the frenetic pace of RTS going without forcing the player to mine gold or harvest wheat. We are not requiring that the player complete all of the objectives to control a region, but the more you complete, the more resources your army will have for the war ahead.

[/quote]

That’s interesting. Does that mean that during the course of completing objectives you don’t have a way of creating new troops? There’s RTS like the Total War series and then RTS like Warcraft. Which one is this game closer to?

[JM1]

The previous Warhammer games were more Total War than Warcraft, so I hope it carries on in that vein.

[Incendiary_Lemon]

Asher try the first interview that Sones linked to. It doesn’t appear they’ll follow many of the Warcraft conventions.

[Ben_Sones]

Indeed. I don’t know if you build units during battles or not–they haven’t specifically said (and none of the interviewers have asked them in any of these Q&As), but it sounds sort of contrary to what they have said about their design philosophy for the game. It may work like Dark Omen (but that’s just a wild guess).

[Moore]

wow! this is much more interesting to me than DoW.
looks freaking sweet.

[William_Abner]

I still can’t believe this is Namco.

Finally, the Skaven get some ‘love’ – Plaguebearers–attack! :)

[Incendiary_Lemon]

Latest set of Previews

Gamespy

Gamespot

IGN

@Andrew Park for Gamespot

The focus of the game will apparently be on fighting and winning battles, so real-time strategy fans who are sick of sending peon units to chop wood and mine gold in the faint hope of building a barracks someday will be relieved to hear that there will be no mining and no wood chopping. You’ll instead gain resources by capturing strategic locations, like farms and gold mines, and rather than always starting from scratch with a new base in each mission, you’ll instead develop a static capital city in one of the four corners of the world map. The capital city can be outfitted with improvements and technologies to strengthen your armies, but your primary activity in the single-player game will be marshaling your forces to whichever territory you feel like conquering next. Unless, of course, some rival general has designs on your capital city, which will also lie in a contestable area. In this case, you’ll be able to garrison your units inside your buildings for a defensive bonus, as well as to conceal them, possibly for an ambush against a careless marauder.

[Ben_Sones]

It would be cool if I could access the screenshots and/or the videos page for the Gamespy article, but I can’t. When I click on the links for those pages, I just get an ever-refreshing interstitial ad that just pops back up again when I try to click through it.

[Chris_Woods]

I’m so paying my gamer tax on this one. It just looks and sounds too cool.

Chris Woods

[olaf]

There are not enough RTS games, this will help.

olaf

[Ben_Sones]

Yeah, I love everything I’ve heard about the concept. I’m really looking forward to this game.

And now I can’t get to Gamespy at all. I just get that damn Comedy Central interstitial, and can’t get past it.

[Incendiary_Lemon]

Namco released just a few screenshots, if you’ve seen the IGN Gallery then thats all of them.

@olaf

There are not enough RTS games, this will help.

olaf

Tactical RTS are less common. Myth was released in 1997 and I can’t think of a title that has surpassed it.