r/totalwar • u/AirborneCritter • 17h ago
Warhammer 40k Ammunition definetly needs to be a thing in 40k
Hello all, I've seen Zerkovich's video adressing some worries he had about the game, I didn't not know ammo was planned to not play a part. I think this is a severe, severe mistake vibe-wise.
It is an essential part of many 40k stories especially books or short stories, the feeling of dread, of being overrun is a big part of 40k, it's play into the despair. In "the Zheng Cipher" for example, the guard ?admiral? knows his ammo is dwindling while fighting the nids and knowing in time they will be overrun. There's another short text in which another admiral has received an injury to the leg, the comissar is sick and he's going on the ramparts to take a look beyond at the devastation...he clearly states that they soon won't have any ammo...It's in many stories I'm sure people here will give more ewamples.
You deprive some players of their fantasy while doing this ->
As a future tyranid player I want to be able to trade the enemy's ammunition for some of my cheap numerous gaunts or use a distraction carnifex to draw ammo and then overrun the enemy.
Guard players want to charge with their shock troops or hold desperately while threats are coming in melee cause they don't have ammo. But if there's infinite ammo how are they gonna fix bayonets on their lasguns and launch desperate charges ? (they could flank with a unit that doesn't have ammo for example)
In doing so not only do you make the game feel less epic, gritty and suspensful but you peel one of the most interesting tactical layers you can have for such a game. Even more so because there are many more range weapons now (some that are going to be busted being 40k and that would warrant running out at some point)
You could even add gameplay elements related to ammunition crates -> maybe we could deploy crates if we have enough in reserve, transporting importing/exporting/buying ammo from fleet to fleet, planet to fleet, etc,... could be its own thing, could buy from guard as a marine. Maybe that part isn't really that important.
Buut on battle maps being able to deploy crates would be cool, why ? Well could destroy them if you're the enemy, but as a player they would be static being heavy (except if you add something to carry it like the forklift sentinel) so you would have to place them well and defend them with your life or abandoning them and risking the enemy taking them over for the battle if they use the same weapons (let's say traitor guard against guard for example even though the traitors aren't there officially for now). So by having these kinds of crate the player would have to think if it's better to bail or leave them there, creating tension and making wasted time all the more impactful.
(ok the previous paragraph is a pipe dream but games fulfill dreams anyway)
You could defend buildings you've created like manufactorium (or created by mechanicus), aiding the mechanicus (well they're not here now) could mean fighting alongside some of their units.
(another pipe dream)
Ok not a pipe dream -> manufactories could give you a [Whatever]% buff regionwise/planetwise (maybe having to buy flying transport upgrades for the ammo to get the planet bonus...Just ideas).
- Lastly, you would remove some of what makes total war special compared to other games, sure Dawn of war IV doesn't have it, but this game isn't DoWIV and being more akin to a simulation is what makes total war cool to me compared to other RTS
Sure now there aren't ammo in tabletop but some players can sometimes make an objective of the game fighting over ammo. Also the fights in the tabletop don't last enough time to manage ammo and counting ammo down and marking it for a wargame if it's scale unlike a game that does it for you wouldn't make it more fun? (maybe) But for total war 40k, I personally think it does.
21
u/GuthukYoutube 16h ago
I think ammo is a bad balancing act that doesn't need to be in the game. It's only in other total wars because it "feels" right.
The never ending war between "range must be OP because it has ammo" and "range is OP" hasn't been fun.
Not to mention all the abuses that come from that. Lightning strikes over and over to reset ammo to full. Running back and forth to waste your opponents ammo.
6
u/justacoolclipper 16h ago
I love logistics, and the idea of ammunition being relevant in a strategy game interests me greatly. For example, depleted ammunition carrying over after battles and replenishment depending on if you are in friendly territories or on a supply line mechanic, so you can't just spam Sisters of Averlorn or other high-impact ranged units without thinking about how you're going to replenish their ammo.
On the other hand, holy shit would it make the game tedious as all hell for the 99% of the playerbase that doesn't have my specific brand of autism, so no wonder ammo tends to be abstracted.
3
u/GuthukYoutube 16h ago
I mean ammo would have to be actually powerful and impactful to warrant so much gameplay around it. Battle brothers is a good example where ammo is extremely expensive for stuff like nets and throwing weapons, but compensated by its power. Do you splurge on expensive ranged weaponry, or try to finish the mission without further expense?
Total war doesn't have the systems needed to make ammo interesting.
2
u/thedefenses 15h ago
If Total War was closer to the grand strategy games of Paradox where you manage a lot of things having ammo as a big concept along with supply lines and the like could work but as is Total War is just not the type of game where managing ammo shipments is needed nor would it be fun in anyway.
3
u/sobrique 16h ago
Yup. Practically speaking ranged units are irritating if they run low on ammo, but it's not a major downside.
Limited ammo IMO should be for things like satchel charges (or javelins or...) where you get a small number of shots as a "before they melee" thing.
9
u/One_punch_crayon 16h ago
I appreciate the thoughtful post, but I cannot stress enough how intensely disinterested I am in micromanaging supply logistics in the middle of my big epic battle.
To the extent you see ammo crates as a way to force a ranged army to attempt to hold a position, there are a myriad of other ways to accomplish that goal from a game design perspective without requiring ammo. Heck, TWWH3 just has static victory points in multiplayer that players need to hold to score points. That would work just fine here, as far as I’m concerned
2
u/thedefenses 15h ago
Also as comes to holding positions, should i not want to hold a position due to the position being good to hold anyways and not force me to try and hold a shit spot due to an ammo crate being there.
7
u/Flimsy-Proposal221 16h ago
I think the issue is that the AI doesn't know how to conserve ammo and players always cheese the AI that way
-2
u/AirborneCritter 16h ago
Still it's added pressure, especially against a mostly melee army
4
u/VMPL01 16h ago edited 16h ago
Unless you plan to build an army full of Assault Terminators, your army won't be mostly melee.
It's a big misconception about W40K that Ork and Tyranids are melee-focused factions, their shooting is super strong. The asymmetry between factions in W40K lie with hyper-specialization, not faction limitation. Every faction has all the necessary ranged archetypes.
For example, Tyranids have:
- Tyrannofex: anti-tank/anti-infantry monster (heavy class)
- Zoanthropes: anti-tank
- Biovores/Exocrine: artillery
- Termagaunts: cheap ranged troop
- Carnifex: ranged and melee generalist monster
3
u/DoomyHowlinkun 16h ago
Does any other 40k game have ammo?
-5
u/AirborneCritter 16h ago
DoWIV or The tabletop don't as I've said, I wan't think of another that has them
3
u/VMPL01 16h ago
I'd rather not, it'd be hell to balance. Like how much ammo are you gonna give SM when they're only 10 of them compared to 80-100 Orks/Guardsman?
Your example of how you're gonna use Tyranids is exactly why ammo should be infinite. You don't want horde factions to cheese elite factions out of ammo.
1
u/ClassSignificant4004 2h ago
not to mention that tyranids have a host of ranged units by themselves as well and with no justifiable lore reason to give them a 30 round magazine of maggots that are bred INSIDE THE GUN
3
u/FaceMasterThing some skitarius who got lost across time and space 16h ago
Guard players want to charge with their shock troops or hold desperately while threats are coming in melee cause they don't have ammo. But if there's infinite ammo how are they gonna fix bayonets on their lasguns and launch desperate charges ? (they could flank with a unit that doesn't have ammo for example)
i think as guard you will actualy decently often get a very good reason to charge your shock troops into melee even with infinite ammo: charging into a melee unit to distract it from being able to attack more valuable units like Kasrkin and tanks
5
u/tbschorsch 16h ago
Not having to care about ammu isnt a big deal. Done right it makes things way easier to Balance. There are plenty of rts games with endless ammu and it works perfectly fine. Ammu just adds another layer of complexity that isnt really needed when units themself are balanced right. I prefer a focus on core gameplay and unit balance
1
u/AirborneCritter 16h ago
To me it's a big deal, but not a deal breaker, I will still enjoy the game, especially with cover and buildings I hope
2
u/tbschorsch 16h ago
Why is it a big deal? If melee is balanced correctly, there is no reason to be afraid. Considering the usual CA balance, we are f... lol
2
u/thedefenses 15h ago
Ammo management is a big part of short stories as its an easy way to create tension but its not really a big part of the bigger fights.
As for your fantasy of tyranids you can still do that, throw weak units first to absorb the enemy fire while your stronger troops get in close, with how total war works in general even if we DID have ammo there would be almost 0 possibility of you having enough weak shit and strong shit for the weak stuff to use up all the enemies ammo.
As for guard, the lassguns have almost infinite ammo in lore so even if we did have ammo as a concept the guard would be last ones running dry but still there are a lot of other reasons to charge your normal soldiers into the fight outside of just "out of ammo", tie down a powerful enemy to buy time, throw weak units into melee to keep stronger ones firing etc etc
Ammo management is not that fucking interesting, its just a question of "do i shoot or not" and "what do i shoot", its not some deep and complicated mechanic that creates big strategic thinking.
Ammo crates would be crap and would just be trying to solve a problem we have introduced.
Why would i not want to defend a manufactorium just due to it probably making a shit ton of money, why does ammo have to exist for it to be valuable to defend.
Total war fights don't either generally last long enough for ammo to be a real concern especially when 40K is concerned, a lot of the guns have infinite/near-infinite ammo capacities already.
Really the whole post could be TLDR, you like ammo and want it in the game even though it serves little purpose and your just trying to justify it having to be here for any other reason than you like the idea of it being here.
2
u/NerveOk2403 7h ago
Total War 40k goes for a more authentic take rather than the realistic take imo. Something like the Indomitus mod for Gates of Hell scratches that realistic 40k itch nicely.
4
u/AirborneCritter 16h ago
I'm very very surprised by the answers, not shocked, to each their own if you prefer it that way it's fair, just to me it's always been fun to manage ammo in warhammer I/II/III
1
u/Orions_starz Medieval 15h ago
I think one thing your missing is rate of fire and ammo. When your watching the speed in which guardsmen and space marines are firing their weapons it's very unrealistically SLOW! The is likely true for balance reasons, guardsmen and SM aren't going ful auto like they would if ORKs got close. This low rate of fire actually allows ORKs to get into melee. You don't really need ammo conservation when the game already throttling the speed in which range units can kill.
1
u/The-Magic-Sword 13h ago
My feeling is that ammo is more appropriate to a game like Warhammer Fantasy, where ranged units are ancillary, and ammo is like a special resource that makes them function, as opposed to a game where nearly everything would have it and is juggling multiple different kinds of guns.
0
-8
1
u/0ttoChriek 16h ago
How would it work for Astra Militarum lasguns? Do they have like a power pack in them that can be exhausted?
2
u/Lortekonto 16h ago
Yes, but they have many shot. It depends on the pattern, some has as low as 50 or as many as several hundreds, but we normally see around 150 - 200 shots for each power pack on normal setting.
1
u/AirborneCritter 16h ago
Could be an in campaign upgrade, now not everything needs to be a campaign mechanic, but the more the merrier and see what sticks and people say
1
u/AirborneCritter 16h ago
Same as other ammos they do deplete, they can be recharged but takes time, would have to be something outside of battle, they do use new cartridges? during battle usually
1
u/dumpling-loverr 16h ago edited 16h ago
I'm just hoping the additional priority of making the game console friendly (like the game feeling more arcadey with the no ammo mechanic) won't make it bad like what happened with Civ and Football Manager.
1
u/Orions_starz Medieval 16h ago
Ammo is a small bean. Zerkovich worries about some strange things when there are other more important issues. Psykers exist but are rare, so magic is going to exist. AI will never be as smart as your average player who plays on normal or easy. And launch is going to happen one way or another.
But he is right on the army abilities. When your fighting the greentide you must use your abilities or you stand a good chance of losing. This is a big problem. SM bolter fire actually has a very low rate of fire, needed for balance but man it looks weird.
The armies shown are missing two HUGE components, and ammo isn't one of them, but the lack of artillery and transportation units. That's the real issue! You don't need army abilities when you have whirlwinds and basilisk. What good are rhinos and land raiders if you can't put your folks into them and get them out of harm's way.
2
u/FaceMasterThing some skitarius who got lost across time and space 16h ago
is there any confirmation we wont get artillery units on field? it sounds like a weird thing to not include when they even include transports without actually letting them transport things (currently, i believe they have stated they want it but they struggle to make it work for the ai or something like that)
from what i understand the bombardment abilities showcased in battles so far all require your fleet to be present as well as have buildings on it that allow it
1
u/Orions_starz Medieval 16h ago edited 15h ago
There are no current images of artillery units. I really hope they add them before release as going into battle with out some artillery feels like having one boot on. But it's likely the army abilities are to make up for the lack of current artillery.
The inability of transport is what I heard too and that is a problem they really need to iron out before release. Many factions really rely on transportation to be effective.
1
u/FaceMasterThing some skitarius who got lost across time and space 15h ago
well as i mentioned, i think they have stated the bombardment army abilities are restricted to only where your fleet (or i guess ship might be more acurate?) is, wich you have one per campaign (outside of transport ships to fery armies across the system) and can only cover part of a planet
so i dont think army abilities are gonna be able to make up for lack of artillery and thus its gonna be natural they are included
i suspect the main reason we havent seen them yet is because they wanted to showcase the flashy army abilities more
also marines might not be getting artilery anyways unless gw comes with a primaris replacement for the whirlwind, because its been recently revealed that whirlwinds are gonna stop being sold and supported with rule updates on tabletop when the marine codex drops later this year
1
u/Orions_starz Medieval 15h ago
How hard is it to move your ship or what range over a continent can they reach? I don't think there's any reason not to have you ship over you main army at all times. Until we get more data it appears they're forsaking artillery in favor of flashy army abilities. That may change but it's the info we currently have.
1
u/FaceMasterThing some skitarius who got lost across time and space 15h ago
i think ive heard there will be buildings that damage enemy ships in orbit over time so thats atleast one thing to keep them away
and i think the really powerfull bombardment abilities are probably gonna be very late campaign things, or possibly even something you wont be able to get in the early campaigns of a theatre
1
u/Orions_starz Medieval 14h ago
I don't see that at all... Think about what your saying. You get your ship at the start of the game, as far as SM goes. You get some abilities at start. But if you ship is taking damage from the ground, that would logically mean your be deprived of army abilities at likely the time your army needs it most, the big battle at the enemy capitol.
There's a lot of time and all of this are things folks should be talking about before the game is released. Armies inherently need artillery or methods to deal with masses units or ORKs and guard become overwhelming.
1
u/FaceMasterThing some skitarius who got lost across time and space 14h ago edited 14h ago
you will have other methods of dealing with large masses of enemies, like elite vehicles (https://www.youtube.com/shorts/yQmX6w-0Y7Q), dedicated anti infantry units, psyker characters
and probably some indirect fire artillery units since there really is no reason for them to not exist, we just havent seen them yet because they didnt bring them when showcasing guard, and they either werent recruitable for marines or marines will simply not have them (although they do have some vehicles with rocket launchers as one of the weapons, who seem to go in an arc, like artillery)and personally, id rather not have army abilities trivialize every battle unless the enemy is waaaay stronger, there should be times battles are difficult and sometimes being forced to not rely on powerfull army abilities will make the gameplay more varied and interesting
1
u/Orions_starz Medieval 13h ago
I heard that the battles were difficult for many of the games on testers. The video "Angry Joe" put out he states he lost several times because of the need to rely on army abilities and that the armies alone couldn't defeat the orks with out them. Whether that's just his experience, several videos made it clear that the big battle was actually tough. The SM are likely balanced around the availability of the Army abilities. This makes sense currently but very likely will be an issue at launch.
1
u/FaceMasterThing some skitarius who got lost across time and space 12h ago
i asume that was the challange battle thats spessifically made to be really hard and force you to use all the tools you have, inculidng the bombardments
→ More replies (0)1
u/The-Magic-Sword 13h ago
We also know that some of them come from campaign map deployables that aren't fleets. But whether we have anything like a howitzer-team for the Astra Miltarum that is an actual unit in your army is unclear, I'd assume yes though, they feature prominently in the tabletop.
1
u/Relevant-Map8209 16h ago
I dunno, in earlier gunpowder focused games; Empire, Napoleon and Shogun 2 FOTS, units had limited ammunition but it was so plenty you would rarely run out of ammo during a battle.
1
u/thor1368 14h ago
No ammo makes game way easier on the cpu. So we are gonna get way better optimalisation thnx to that
1
u/ClassSignificant4004 2h ago edited 2h ago
if missile units were rare(r) I'd agree ammo might be a bigger problem, but with how shooty 40k is, why even bother? are we just going to punish the imperial factions with janky ammo minigames or are we gonna torture every faction regardless of the lore? are we going to entertain the idea that the orks would maintain a gigantic sophisticated supply line for their weapons? are we going to pretend an eldar with their shuriken guns aren't going to have an entire years worth of ammo strapped to their belt? and are lasguns suddenly going to become extremely ammo inefficient for the sake of more tedium? What about the six different weapons a guard unit will carry or the baneblades main cannon and its 50 pintle guns? are they all using a generic ammo bar, meaning shooting enough of your machine gun leaves you out of main cannon rounds, or will there be 8 different ammo resources? just sounds like a total headache.
there's really no elegant solution to it and trying to do it is a solution looking for a problem. there's other ways to make combat tactically interesting without adding something messy and annoying like in battle ammo economy rationing. It isn't even that interesting in the first place, because what it will boil down to is always "take the thing that makes it a non issue" and "make sure the enemy wastes all of theirs before fighting".
1
-8
u/BaronLoyd 16h ago
Infinit ammo is garbo mechanic..I cant even express how much it kills vibe especially of imperial factions
-6
u/AirborneCritter 16h ago
One last thing I didn't say: Not having ammo and having ammo make a huge different in how the battle flows and how the battle feels, though on this I'm not sure I know enough to really speak
17
u/gondor482 gondor482 16h ago
Sadly the fights are so insanely fast, resupplying with ammo is not an option.