|
I actually really enjoy defending sieges in Total War games, but the AI never ever engages in them. I think it's fun to fight in tight corridors and really try to maximize everything you can out of your ragtag band of peasants and archers. That, and cavalry meat grinders at the front door. Those are the business.
|
#
?
Mar 19, 2013 03:51
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 6, 2024 12:02 |
|
|
Siets posted:I actually really enjoy defending sieges in Total War games, but the AI never ever engages in them. I think it's fun to fight in tight corridors and really try to maximize everything you can out of your ragtag band of peasants and archers. That, and cavalry meat grinders at the front door. Those are the business. Defending sieges is a bit of a love/hate subject for me. I had a hell of a time as Spain in R:TW defending a city from a 1/2 stack of Carthaginian invaders with a unit of peasants, a unit of bull warriors, and a general. It was one of my best total war moments (even though I ditched the campaign because the barbarian tech tree is garbage). On the other end of the spectrum in E:TW, I did not enjoy watching Sweden stand completely dumbfounded at the sight of my star fortress while my men on the walls manage to not fire anything but cannons at the very fortress they are trying to defend. I'm feeling optimistic about Rome 2, though. The emphasis on dynamic cities (rather than greek town, roman city, barbarian village etc.) and what we've seen of the siege of Carthage is enough to convince me that most problems have been addressed.
|
|
#
?
Mar 19, 2013 06:01
|
|
|
Breetai posted:I'm playing through my second ever game of Shogun 2 vanilla, and I was wondering if someone could answer a question about minor clans. Do they behave any differently from the major, player-selectable clans, or are they just nonselectable and without clan-specific bonuses? Are they less aggressive than the major clans, or can they build multiple-province empires? I'm trying a game as Oda and dealing with the central landmass clusterfuck, and I'm wondering if it would behoove me to take out the major clans first while leaving the minor ones alone, so that no one nearby clan is too powerful when realm divide hits. Truth be told, there's very little that's special about the major clans other than clan bonuses and units. Hell, it's not at all uncommon for at least two "major" clans to get knocked out early in the game - usually the Oda or Tokugawa, and possibly the Hattori. Holding only one province in the central Japanese cockpit isn't conducive for survival. Basically, judge clans on the basis of how large their army is and how many provinces they hold, not whether they're major clans or not.
|
|
#
?
Mar 19, 2013 06:37
|
|
|
I think there are workshop mods that makes sieges into big city battles like you see in the RoTK games.
|
|
#
?
Mar 19, 2013 06:43
|
|
|
Chomp8645 posted:You must have played these games a long time ago. Siege battles have a timer now (20 min I believe) and if it runs down the defender wins. All field battle matches have control points (it used to be that sometimes they did, sometimes they didn't) as well. I guess someone could still camp on top of one of the points, but in that situation the two sides are usually close enough and exposed enough that skirmishing (and therefore fighting) almost inevitably occurs. In any case they can't just camp their starting zone or a corner. Oh cool, I've not played sieges online since release but I might of just been unaware of the timer if it was there then and last time I played control points just gave bonuses which campers didn't really care about. I might have to give multiplayer another shot then. edit - Last few days I've actually gotten around to winning some Campaigns on Shogun 2/FoS. I don't think I've ever bothered doing one all the way through since the first medieval. hemale in pain fucked around with this message at 14:27 on Mar 19, 2013 |
|
#
?
Mar 19, 2013 12:17
|
|
|
I have a house rule for sieges in SS, you're only allowed to garrison the amount of free upkeep units in them. So usually around 3 units. Everyone else has to be in a fort somewhere else. Sieges are delaying actions until a relief army arrives, not massive battles of annihilation. Just helps to keep things more interesting personally.
|
|
#
?
Mar 19, 2013 12:36
|
|
|
I just installed Europa Barbarorum and holy poo poo what the gently caress is going on. I knew it was about realism but this looks extremely intimidating.
|
|
#
?
Mar 21, 2013 06:47
|
|
|
Hey guys, it turns out that in Rome 2, one turn is one year, and there are going to be 300 turns in total (although you can take as long as you want to finish a campaign, but it's only meant to get to 300.) So because of this, the entire total war "community" is in revolt. Go to Total War Center and you can see people just bitching and absolutely bitching. My thoughts? Honestly, I care more about total numbers of turns and what you can do in those turns than ~historical accuracy~. Every Total War since Medieval 2 has had around 250 turns, and Rome 2 will actually have the most turns since the original with 300. CA wanted to include the entire early Roman period, so I can understand why they compressed the timeline a bit. But jesus, people really hate the idea on the forums, with "unrealistic movement rates!!!" being shouted from the rooftops. I only really care about the fact that generals will die more quickly, which kinda sucks. So yeah, your guys' thoughts?
|
|
#
?
Mar 21, 2013 15:44
|
|
|
BobTheSpy posted:Hey guys, it turns out that in Rome 2, one turn is one year, and there are going to be 300 turns in total (although you can take as long as you want to finish a campaign, but it's only meant to get to 300.) So because of this, the entire total war "community" is in revolt. Go to Total War Center and you can see people just bitching and absolutely bitching. Why isn't the solution to that to just increase the movement range for troops? I'm fine with it in any case because, since when Total War games have never been about historical accuracy anyway? The gaming community in general is just full of whiny entitled children. babies havin rabies fucked around with this message at 15:50 on Mar 21, 2013 |
|
#
?
Mar 21, 2013 15:47
|
|
|
Seems completely unimportant to me, although does this mean there won't be seasons?
|
|
#
?
Mar 21, 2013 15:48
|
|
|
babies havin rabies posted:Why isn't the solution to that to just increase the movement range for troops? It is claimed this will decrease the strategic depth of maneuvering one's armies. Captain Diarrhoea posted:Seems completely unimportant to me, although does this mean there won't be seasons? They're kind of vague on whether seasons will be in or not - they basically said "We can see why seasons are really cool, and we're looking at how to implement them with one year = one turn." So it might alternate seasons per year, or seasons might be exclusively on the battle map, etc. etc.
|
|
#
?
Mar 21, 2013 15:50
|
|
|
TWC is a hellhole, also I don't understand people who want 1200 turns and poo poo like that since I think that I have only finished something like two total war games. When it comes to Generals they will be alive for quite a number of turns if you get them when they're sixteen and seeing how more of an emphasis will be on armies rather than generals I don't think it will be a problem.
Pump it up! Do it! fucked around with this message at 17:19 on Mar 21, 2013 |
|
#
?
Mar 21, 2013 15:52
|
|
|
BobTheSpy posted:It is claimed this will decrease the strategic depth of maneuvering one's armies. Make it 1.25 year per turn and voila. e: Or hell, 0.75. Or 1.5 if you just wanna have summer and winter.
|
|
#
?
Mar 21, 2013 16:00
|
|
|
Captain Diarrhoea posted:Seems completely unimportant to me, although does this mean there won't be seasons? Seasons didn't really add anything to Shogun other than to put a soft-limit on campaigning time with winter attrition - which didn't matter because you just assaulted everything anyway. (They looked nice and were great flavour, but in game mechanics terms they could essentially be dismissed).
|
|
#
?
Mar 21, 2013 16:04
|
|
|
300 turns are more than enough if you ask me. I honestly believe TWC doesn't actually believe how abstraction works, so watching them go bonkers if fun to watch. They should maybe try to show seasons at least visually if not mechanically so modders can at least 'mod it back in' or something for those who like 1200 turns or whatnot.
|
|
#
?
Mar 21, 2013 16:15
|
|
|
The only interesting things about seasons were the way they looked and a bunch of potential strategic modifiers that never really ended up actually mattering (seasonal attrition, different weather modifiers, etc.) This could be fixed by just having different seasons be in the potential map rotation and implementing campaigning attrition in a different (and hopefully meaningful) way.
|
|
#
?
Mar 21, 2013 16:15
|
|
|
BobTheSpy posted:They're kind of vague on whether seasons will be in or not - they basically said "We can see why seasons are really cool, and we're looking at how to implement them with one year = one turn." So it might alternate seasons per year, or seasons might be exclusively on the battle map, etc. etc. As long as they put all four seasons in somewhere, it will take about ten minutes' worth of effort to mod it so that one turn is one month or whatever else people want to do.
|
|
#
?
Mar 21, 2013 16:47
|
|
|
There are literally people on TWC that want 300 years at 2 months per turn. Yes that's 1800 turns. Those people are crazy. I think one turn per year is offset somewhat by the 'force march' option, which increases (doubles?) your unit range but you aren't allowed to attack on that turn. At the end of the day 300 turns, no matter how they get there is plenty, and TWC is a good place to see aggregated information but holy poo poo it's a cesspool.
|
|
#
?
Mar 21, 2013 17:15
|
|
|
Realism junkies have nothing better to whine about than movement and seasons in a Total War title?
|
|
#
?
Mar 21, 2013 17:31
|
|
|
BobTheSpy posted:They're kind of vague on whether seasons will be in or not - they basically said "We can see why seasons are really cool, and we're looking at how to implement them with one year = one turn." So it might alternate seasons per year, or seasons might be exclusively on the battle map, etc. etc. Changing seasons every turn or two would work for me. I think people really put far too much emphasis on turns being realistic, who really cares? They're just a representation of time passing and there's no way to not make them gamey. The larger time period they cover the more interesting units we'll get anyway so it's a win-win. Lord Tywin posted:TWC is a hellhole, also I don't understand people who want 1200 turns and poo poo like that since I think that I have only finished something like two total war games. When it comes to Generals they will be alive for quite a number of turns if you get them when they're sixteen and seeing how more of an emphasis will be on armies rather than generals I don't think it will be a problem. The max number of turns I've ever needed in a Shogun campaign is like 130 so I really don't know how you could stretch out a game past that unless you just sat about for a few hundred turns doing nothing.
|
|
#
?
Mar 21, 2013 17:38
|
|
|
Kalos posted:The only interesting things about seasons were the way they looked and a bunch of potential strategic modifiers that never really ended up actually mattering (seasonal attrition, different weather modifiers, etc.) Yeah, I'd say the easiest thing would be to have one season be the 'dominating' one each year, with the respective visual and maybe some minor mechanical effects. You could pretty much flavour it as "most of the important stuff this year happens to take place during this season", and either choose them randomly each year or just cyclical.
|
|
#
?
Mar 21, 2013 17:42
|
|
|
Ray and Shirley posted:Realism junkies have nothing better to whine about than movement and seasons in a Total War title? Seasons if anything should only show up on the battle portion at this point, possibly waiting out might change the season instead. But I'm sure that wouldn't sit well with TWC either.
|
|
#
?
Mar 21, 2013 17:45
|
|
|
Ray and Shirley posted:Realism junkies have nothing better to whine about than movement and seasons in a Total War title? When it comes to grand strategy game arguments, it's probably one of the more benign and reasonable things they whine about. Start a thread about whether or not any specific political or cultural group should be their own defined faction, no matter how small or short-lived they were, and watch the bitter and bizarrely specific jingoism fly.
|
|
#
?
Mar 21, 2013 17:49
|
|
|
Ray and Shirley posted:Realism junkies have nothing better to whine about than movement and seasons in a Total War title? Seasons are nice aesthetically, that's all. Don't get a stick up your rear end about it. They've been in for quite a while so it'd be a weird step back graphically for them to cut them, although I guess it would reduce their workload somewhat. And I suppose 'realism junkies' might complain about naked war mens fighting in snow or something.
|
|
#
?
Mar 21, 2013 17:51
|
|
|
I'd be disappointed if there weren't at least some Summer and Winter seasons somehow. It adds to the game graphically I think. I wouldn't throw a fit if they didn't make it in though.
|
|
#
?
Mar 21, 2013 17:54
|
|
|
I don't think it is the realism junkies who are complaining about the seasons since in reality soldiers went into quarters during the winter didn't really fight in the winter, the realism junkies complain about sandals being wrong and throws hissy fits when factions aren't described in a way that they agree with.
|
|
#
?
Mar 21, 2013 17:55
|
|
|
Any news on that final faction yet? It's like this one is taking longer to get revealed. Come on Egypt!
|
|
#
?
Mar 21, 2013 17:57
|
|
|
300 turns is fine, and I expect it'll be easy to add more. TWC are just obnoxiously entitled like all other video game communities. By turn 200 you just want to end it and gear up for the final push anyways.
|
|
|
#
?
Mar 21, 2013 18:19
|
|
|
Alexander and Peninsula are the two best campaigns I can recall playing and they're that way because you are under immense time pressure.
|
|
#
?
Mar 21, 2013 18:23
|
|
|
Odobenidae posted:I just installed Europa Barbarorum and holy poo poo what the gently caress is going on. I knew it was about realism but this looks extremely intimidating. It's really not that bad. People just get intimidated by the non-English spellings and the script. Start up with one of the easier factions like the Romani so that things will be familiar. Honestly you can pretty much just play it normally, there's only a few significant changes in re city development. Just take it slow.
|
|
#
?
Mar 21, 2013 18:27
|
|
Alchenar posted:Alexander and Peninsula are the two best campaigns I can recall playing and they're that way because you are under immense time pressure. I keep getting my arse handed to me in the latter, because I get halfway through my planned route of Liberating Coastal Spain and Portugal just gets horribly crushed by the French and I have to drop everything and Liberate them AND what little territory Spain has.
|
|
|
#
?
Mar 21, 2013 18:32
|
|
|
I did like how that King Arthur game handled seasons in that there were four turns a year but you could only do certain things each season. Doing something like that would be cool in Rome 2 because the time of year did affect military activity so heavily but it is no big deal.
|
|
#
?
Mar 21, 2013 18:55
|
|
|
The best Rome mod is not EB, or RTR or any of that bullshit, it's Roma Surrectum 2, which is criminally underrated and absolutely amazing. It's a complete graphical and game overhaul with just the right dash of spergy realism, but not too much. The models and textures are incredible, and they added so many new buildings and options to the campaign map. None of it ever felt like bullshit to me and it's single handedly gave me something to do while waiting for Rome 2. Heck, I even wonder how Rome 2 might top this mod. http://www.twcenter.net/wiki/Roma_Surrectum_II A very interesting and informative Spartan campaign let's play. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2PvySp0P5Do Here's some trailers for it. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tTKMsv5Zgi4 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XmFTag95nsc The mod works pretty great even with my Steam version of Rome, which is saying something.
|
|
#
?
Mar 21, 2013 18:58
|
|
|
That is a funny way of spelling Terrae Expugnandae.
|
|
|
#
?
Mar 21, 2013 19:00
|
|
|
You mean Lusted's overrated mods that barely change anything from the base game? 
|
|
#
?
Mar 21, 2013 19:02
|
|
Athropos posted:You mean Lusted's overrated mods that barely change anything from the base game? The same Lusted who is now a developer for the Sequel to said game, so he must have done something right  .
|
|
|
#
?
Mar 21, 2013 19:07
|
|
|
SeanBeansShako posted:The same Lusted who is now a developer for the Sequel to said game, so he must have done something right If the last faction are the Seleucids I'll consider him a bro. I don't even care if it's day one DLC, I'll buy it.
|
|
#
?
Mar 21, 2013 19:10
|
|
|
Stop making me want to go find my Rome CD, I know I'll spend ages getting mods for it then never playing it as it feels so clunky now 
|
|
#
?
Mar 21, 2013 19:15
|
|
|
Athropos posted:The best Rome mod is not EB, or RTR or any of that bullshit, it's Roma Surrectum 2, which is criminally underrated and absolutely amazing. RSII is awesome if you want to play as the Romans. The other factions don't have nearly as much attention paid to them though. I plan on playing through another Roman campaign in RSII once I finished my Averni campaign in EB. Sadly you can't really install them both at the same time.
|
|
#
?
Mar 21, 2013 19:22
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 6, 2024 12:02 |
|
|
I actually think Rome 1 has aged well. I play it about as much as Medieval 2 now. I have empire and Napoleon but I like the setting better in Rome/Medieval. That mod looks good, I may try it.
|
|
#
?
Mar 21, 2013 19:23
|
|