A Better Early Game, More Dynamic Campaign, Mods - Total War: Warhammer 3 Immortal Empires

Since the best period of any campaign is the early game I've switched to using mods that make it a lot better by increasing variety through faster growth, more background income, more recruitment.
What it all means is that you will encounter more variety and have more of it yourself in the enemies you face early on.
Mods Used:
MCT: steamcommunity.com/sharedfile...
Campaign Config Mod: steamcommunity.com/workshop/f...
Warbrand Upgrade: steamcommunity.com/workshop/f...
Other Mods I"d recommend:
Faster Build Times
Ultra Aggressive & Smart AI
No Climate Penalties
➜ Join the Discord: / discord
Donate to Support the Channel!
➜ TH-cam Membership: / @costin_gaming
➜ Paypal: www.paypal.com/cgi-bin/webscr...
➜ Patreon: / costingaming
Special Thanks to:
Alain of Deathwatch
Alexander
Yolosapien
Fred
JKPrimative
Kurtis
RatEmperor
connor
Sean
Sinnelleos
Anton
Phillip
CB
Crix
Mederic
NL
Lina
Dan
Filip
Christopher
Whale
8GREENC
Vlad
Konda
RhadigarTV
Martin
Gabriel
KJF
Lorem
#immortalempires #warhammer3 #totalwar

[@Costin_Gaming]

This will work best for veteran players that are tired of the same grind over and over again.
Yes it trivializes your early game economy and choices, but the fast build up does lead to far more interesting enemies, more of them and a lot more hero and army variety.

[@GreyWind182]

One thing i love about the late game is that once i get to that point, assuming the race economy isnt aweful, i get to experiment with different army comps some just for fun and some more strategic, im sure for you though whos most likely played a million more campaigns than myself, even that might get tiring.
Love your content by the way!

[@Krethak]

That configuration mod looks really interesting and it seems like it would really make a big difference on how you play the game and what kind of armies you can field and and face.
Sure you could argue that "building up" and "using what's available" is part of the charm and difficulty, but I personally have to agree, that a bigger variety in units early on can really spice up the gameplay.
It's not like it's impossible to do so with vanilla settings, like nothings stopping you from building Stables instead of Barracks first if you really want to and plan your expansion route in a way that your main army comes back to your starting province after 20 turns to upgrade their units, but having the option to do so quicker if one feels like it is certainly nice.
And I think you're right about the army limitations. I think I've read/heard it multiple times that the A.I. can only have ~5 armies in total and not really any more no matter how strong and wealthy they are, heck there seems to be even a forced delay in how quickly they can recruit a new Lord and build another army up when you defeated one. I have seen it a LOT of times, that a faction is down to 1-3 cities and won't rebuild their armies at all despite having much higher background income than me that would easily allow a full stack. I guess that is to preserve PC resources and not have turns take too long if you want to follow all visible armies and how they move :x
That said, I do disagree with you in several aspects of "how to play the game" though ^^' I love your content, I watch almost every video you put out, but your definition of "power" and "playability" of a faction doesn't match up with my experiences ^^' I only played 2 "unplayable" factions and 1 "unplayable campaign" Daemons of Chaos and Norsca can burn in hell and Kairos' Campaign on IE sucks a lot (I hate his starting position) ALL the other factions. Are kinda okay. Sure you struggle with some more than others in the early game, but if you play them "normally" (or at least the way I do :x) there aren't many constraints.
You always say the game is won in the first 20 turns and that you need to be hyper aggressive to deal with the threats around you. Like for example your Zhao Ming Campaign start where you start recruiting a second Army literally by turn 2 to rush Snikitch and struggle to maintain enough money to not go bankrupt (which with that newest introduced bug is a lot harder by now) Of course that's "efficient" and you "can" do it, but is it necessary? Not at all!
You can easily play until turn 10 or 15, or even turn 20 with just a single army IF you don't mind to loose a settlement or four because you get out maneuvered by enemy factions that have more armies than you. If you can keep protecting your core region and don't waste money on the nearly acquired cities you can easily play that way and not "suffer" in the long run either. You might take out the enemy faction 10 turns later, but it's not impossible, or especially hard either. And perhaps, if you don't take out 5 LL factions by turn 20 you might have a more exciting mid game :p
Of course I understand that with your vast experience with the game and thousands of hours into it you're probably unable to play the game in any different way any more, because that's just how your play style has evolved and I don't fault you for that ^^ but most of your Videos are under the assumption of "what is the maximum I am able to get out of that faction" and of course the differences between them will be glaring on "how strong" they are. But that's on a Min/Max standpoint and by no means reflect the playability of the factions even on Legendary/Very Hard settings. Like for example I just played a Khorne campaign and only had 2 Armies and NEVER used Blood Hosts. I was still able to "win" comfortably. Is that efficient? No, not at all, not even close, but it was enough to beat the game on VH/VH.
So what I wanted to say with that, not all the things you say that are "required" are actually needed, at least in my opinion, obviously I'd never say no to buffs for any faction and I DO agree that there are several factions that would benefit from buffs nicely at least with some QoL changes at the very least, but barely any faction (with those 2/3 exceptions IMHO) are unplayable or even "painful" to play with ^^

[@Iol007.]

What are your thoughts on SFO? Love the content :)

[@paulmualdeave5063]

I like the 5.0 version of SFO. The economy looks like it gives us more money each turn as compared to the past.

[@Costin_Gaming]

I like the uniqueness of SFO, though I feel it goes much further into the trap that vanilla falls into. A lot of systems are designed for long playthrough there but inherently the challenge comes from the early game, once the early game is overcome the challenge is gone.

[@Iol007.]

@@Costin_Gaming tru tru. I don't like Bretonnia in SFO so I think I'm gonna go back to vanilla. TY!

[@lolka49hot]

@@Costin_Gaming It does partly fix the same army syndrome in late game at least

[@alexanderlow919]

​@@Costin_Gaminghi there costin,great content as always.i have a question.how do you define early game,mid game and late game in terms of turn or by the point you reach tier 3 main settlement?