In expanded lore apparently Kal Jericho is the child of an Inquisitor, so there's already overlap. Plenty of opportunity to add them in.
I think they could come alongside Genestealer and Chaos Cults.
Never actually read much Kal Jericho except maybe a few extracts in White Dwarf. I guess I should start though... right after I finish my backlog of 24326453242 other things that need reading!
And Genestealer/Chaos Cults are best served as campaign events IMO, I know I'm probably in the minority here, but personally I always found them boring as player-run "gangs". They work in the "planetary scale" of 40K in general, but not in the deliberately smaller scale of the Underhive - they're simply too big of a threat for that. Again, IMO.
As story-driving events and "big bad" opponents, they could really shine though.
That would be cool, but it's not something they really get final say over. It's not just technology, consoles don't want to share customers with eachother. They want all your friends to own the same system you own, their system.
True. Technologically it's entirely possible - not trivial (for a game of this magnitude) but doable: if the same game can be played on vastly different PC rigs, it can be played on consoles and PC too. Hell, I've personally created architecture that allowed iOS, Android and PC games to play together: it required some planning, but other than that - no real problem. Would probably have worked for consoles too, if that had been among our target platforms. Not doing it is a business decision, either because it's undesirable or because it's deemed not worth the effort. Usually some combination of both.
They want all your friends to own the same system you own, their system.
That just won't gonna happen, and they'll get only a bunch of dissatisfied customers in the end.
Sure, but not dissatisfied enough to force them to change their minds.
If they died, well, they were only juves, right?
What a sociopathic, empathy-less, callous, supremely monstrous attitude!
In other words, a good starting point for surviving in Necromunda
Perma-death is good (hopefully nice and graphic as befits 40K).
Agreed. It would be great if "post-game injuries" were rolled immediately and had a graphical representation (death resulting in decapitation, where appropriate, for example).
Of course it would - to some degree - impact gameplay: if you know your guy is down, but safe, you might press for a win - or conversely you might leg it, knowing there's no long-term consequences if you get out now. But that's not necessarily bad.
It wouldn't necessarily have to be apply for all injuries anyway: death and limb loss are the obvious prime candidates. Of course death and limb loss is not always immediate, so I'm not arguing any kind of realism thing, just a sort of "cool" factor.
If someone takes a lascannon full in the face, I expect them to die, albeit game rules being what they are that's not exactly a guarantee. In the tabletop I always took this as an abstraction of such things as glancing hits, (very) near misses and the like.
I recently played Port Royale 3 again (yeah old-ish, but still good) and I really liked how the campaigns were put together there: Simple, tutorial-like goals that led you through all the major functions relevant to your chosen playstyle (trader or "adventurer") while leaving it up to you how to achieve the overall goals, then at the end, converted your game into a "Free Play" game so could continue on your own.
If the game had forcibly ended at the climax of the campaign, I would've been majorly miffed, so converting to free-play is a must, IMO (assuming those terms make sense within the context of Necromunda).
Yeah, same concept.There's also Shadow of Mordor/War with tracking multiple individual foes basically in real time. It's possible, but the question is how difficult and how many numbers. I didn't end up getting Blood Bowl, how many teams did it track at a time?
Not quite sure how many teams it tracks, but I think for the maximum size league it's easily around the 100 mark (I wanna say 128, but I'm guessing here). I do have it (it's even installed) but haven't played much lately - just too many bugs and limitations, and the developer is not interested in fixing them (they'd rather sell DLC).
I would point to the recent releases of Blood Bowl (specifically BB2) as a fairly successful example of persistent "enemies", since Blood Bowl teams and Necromunda gangs from a technical point of view aren't that different: a limited number of personnel, permanent injuries, and simulation of a complex game interaction for all the AI teams between rounds.
Yeah I think persistent enemies is one of the most asked-for features (or, to frame it as per the topic): Mordheim's auto-generated enemies, while convenient, killed a lot of the immersion in single-player campaigns. The relatively small pool of enemy looks and name options didn't help, either, as you kept running into carbon copies of previous enemies. I am not sure if the intention was that this would feel a bit like persistent enemies, but in practice it didn't.
Sadly they didn't add a block function to their forums so neither he or I would have to deal with each other.
Yeah, sadly indeed, as I think it's pretty clear any interaction with you is going to be more trouble that it's worth. Sad thing us, I'm probably leaning towards agreeing with you on the matter at hand, but I don't have the time nor inclination to deal with that kind of overly hostile debating. Not that I expect you'll care, you seem to have worked yourself into some kind of righteous fury, so - good luck with that.