|
Whatever happens, just remember that archers are balanced in TW compared to archers in some of its clones like King Arthur.
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2013 23:13
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 7, 2024 10:04 |
|
|
Shogun 2 archers are ridiculous if you're just standing still like a dunce but when you actually get your men to march around they're not so bad. Gold accuracy warrior monks notwithstanding. And I remember them being pretty poo poo in Medieval 2; even the horse archers. It takes multiple hits to kill even the spear militia. They were a bit ridiculous in Rome though.Lord Tywin posted:The new internal faction system will hopefully provide some hinder to unlimited advancement new system where you have a limited number of armies probably means that you can't send to many armies away to conquer because you probably have to use some of them to protect your borders. Tangentially, has anybody actually had to deal with the Shogun 2 loyalty system? I've never had a general defect from me before. I usually only have half a dozen or so at any time though. LonsomeSon posted:Oh man it's almost as if different human beings have different attitudes, opinions, and activities which they enjoy, and are capable of forming judgements about them independently of other human beings.  I was part of that discussion- and I've been part of a couple of other discussions on Realm Divide earlier on in this thread. I genuinely have no idea how "tedious" could be a descriptor for it- annoying, gamey, artificial, sure- but shaking up our grip seems to me objectively the less tedious option. It was a question. Not sure whether I wronged you in a past life or something but thanks for snapping I guess.SheepNameKiller posted:I'm not going to tell anyone what they should find tedious or not, but I will say that I just found the execution to be lazy. I found it ridiculous that I could pay 100,000 gold (a ridiculous amount of money) to ally with a clan after the realm divide only to have them break the alliance and our peace agreement one turn later, purposefully torpedo their own honor, and people still would rather ally with this guy than me. This was especially jarring if you didn't even take Kyoto yet and only incurred the wrath of the Shogun because you had x number of territories, because there might be computer clans with more territories than you! But nooo, they're immune to all repurcussions. And they actually shouldn't attack you if you bribe them enough. Realm divide is a negative diplomacy modifier, not a hard coded "gently caress the player over" system. Paying the AI to stay on your side is one of the few ways to get around it. You have to give multi-thousands every turn, but it's doable. Koramei fucked around with this message at 23:16 on Jun 5, 2013 |
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2013 23:13
|
|
|
e: ^^^^^ I've never had a general defect in S2 either, I'm not sure how to even kill loyalty enough that they would. I prefer an absent system to the good old fashioned M2 'Traitor to our cause!' headache you used to get because a general with one spear militia decided to challenge your vast empire. I don't know about Rome, but I've generally found it's not so much archers themselves but the weak AI that makes them so effective. Captain Diarrhoea fucked around with this message at 23:24 on Jun 5, 2013 |
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2013 23:16
|
|
|
Koramei posted:And they actually shouldn't attack you if you bribe them enough. Realm divide is a negative diplomacy modifier, not a hard coded "gently caress the player over" system. Paying the AI to stay on your side is one of the few ways to get around it. You have to give multi-thousands every turn, but it's doable. Eh, you're right but I do actually consider that to be a hard coded gently caress the player system. You can pay them off but you have to do it again every turn because their disposition just keeps dropping by a hardcoded amount. Captain Diarrhoea posted:e: ^^^^^ I've never had a general defect in S2 either, I'm not sure how to even kill loyalty enough that they would. I prefer an absent system to the good old fashioned M2 'Traitor to our cause!' headache you used to get because a general with one spear militia decided to challenge your vast empire. Really? I've had two defect, now if I have a general with low loyalty I make him an Admiral. I've never had an Admiral defect and take part of my army with them. Generals are more likely to defect if you use them to attack another army, they're not likely to defect just from sitting in a town somewhere. Davincie posted:Whatever happens, just remember that archers are balanced in TW compared to archers in some of its clones like King Arthur. King Arthur archers sort of ruined that game for me, they were absolutely ridiculous. SheepNameKiller fucked around with this message at 23:35 on Jun 5, 2013 |
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2013 23:31
|
|
|
Captain Diarrhoea posted:e: ^^^^^ I've never had a general defect in S2 either, I'm not sure how to even kill loyalty enough that they would. I prefer an absent system to the good old fashioned M2 'Traitor to our cause!' headache you used to get because a general with one spear militia decided to challenge your vast empire. I had a stupidly successful general who, because of his success, got a -3 loyalty trait. He also didn't like that other generals were getting promoted, so he had a -2 for upstart generals. Fucker took half my army with him and formed his own clan in a useless territory that was costing me money. Two turns later, he was my vassal (after realm divide) and providing me with a profit due to trade. He went on to become an excellent sea raider, taking small islands and little pockets of land all along the coast. It was glorious. Even had a couple joint battles with the man himself charging. I assume because i specialized him in personal combat, he was almost unbeatable because he would rout three or so units by himself.
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2013 23:39
|
|
|
SHISHKABOB posted:Well in real life that's how you win: with overwhelming force and optimal tactics. It's like our dear buddy Machievelli says: never risk your whole fortune unless you have your entire strength backing you. Or whatever it was. Now of course every battle isn't risking everything, but I don't think it's wise to start a battle that you aren't certain you're going to win. That's always my mindset when I play M2TW. Rubbish. In real life you win with what you have, whether it's optimal or not. The problem with the level of freedom Total War gives you is that you never have to let yourself get in the position where you have to make interesting choices. You just faff about until your doomstack is ready and then move onto the next province. Que 80% of all battles being autoresolves because it just isn't fun when you don't ever have to fight a non-optimal battle.
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2013 23:43
|
|
|
WoodrowSkillson posted:Standard army composition, no matter what faction, always called for at least 5-6 archers. You could annihilate entire units of shield carrying heavy infantry before they even got to you. And if you were the Romans, the pila storm then devastated the ones that made it through the arrows. After that, any kind of flanking or rear charge routs them. Archers should not be able to halve a units strength before it reaches you lines. 2hp mods solve that by having the archers soften them up, while only killing a few. I don't think this is even remotely accurate but there really isn't anyway for us to continue this without just calling each other bad players who are wrong. We'll just have to agree to disagree.
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2013 23:47
|
|
|
Alchenar posted:Rubbish. In real life you win with what you have, whether it's optimal or not. The problem with the level of freedom Total War gives you is that you never have to let yourself get in the position where you have to make interesting choices. You just faff about until your doomstack is ready and then move onto the next province. Que 80% of all battles being autoresolves because it just isn't fun when you don't ever have to fight a non-optimal battle. Don't create doomstacks them. Its not like you don't have a choice in the matter. Koramei posted:I can understand why you guys don't like the massive ramp up in difficulty, but how on earth is it more tedious? It's tedious when you're just marching through territories unopposed and the majority of your battles are against three unit armies; realm divide makes the game less tedious. Its tedious because it literally increases the amount of fights and factions you have to fight. This isn't hard. Unless you are just saying that not instantly winning makes it tedious, but that doesn't make sense in how realm divide makes it less tedious, just about equal. CharlestheHammer fucked around with this message at 00:13 on Jun 6, 2013 |
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2013 00:11
|
|
|
Alchenar posted:Rubbish. In real life you win with what you have, whether it's optimal or not. The problem with the level of freedom Total War gives you is that you never have to let yourself get in the position where you have to make interesting choices. You just faff about until your doomstack is ready and then move onto the next province. Que 80% of all battles being autoresolves because it just isn't fun when you don't ever have to fight a non-optimal battle. This is my #1 issue with the TW games, and probably most people who play them as well(due to how many people never finish a campaign). There is a real lack of pressure on the player to be forced into decisions where you have to compromise, like you said it's pretty easy to just faff about till you are ready. I think a lot of it is the AI not providing much push but rather existing as more of a punching bag for you to beat up on. The decision to limit armies in a fashion that ramps up slower than your physical territory is a good way to have the player cope with scarce resources throughout the game. I thought the realm divide was a good attempt to address this problem, but was implemented in a pretty ham fisted fashion. Hopefully they will expand on the internal politics side of things (such as S2 generals defecting) in Rome 2.
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2013 00:24
|
|
|
CharlestheHammer posted:Its tedious because it literally increases the amount of fights and factions you have to fight. This isn't hard. Unless you are just saying that not instantly winning makes it tedious, but that doesn't make sense in how realm divide makes it less tedious, just about equal. I... think that is hard? After a certain point without realm divide you'll never face an existential threat again. With realm divide, you'll end up facing enemies on every front, you'll get overwhelmed at sea. You have you think a lot more strategically; where to place the forces you have, which provinces you'll just have to sacrifice. It also stops the AI from having depleted forces, so you'll fight tougher battles. And more meaningful ones, since you'll struggle to maintain your forces since replenishing them constantly won't be feasible. There is no resistance to the player's war machine after a certain point without realm divide. With realm divide, there is. From your post it sounds like you're complaining about there being too many battles... in which case you're not playing the right series.
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2013 00:28
|
|
|
Koramei posted:I... think that is hard? After a certain point without realm divide you'll never face an existential threat again. With realm divide, you'll end up facing enemies on every front, you'll get overwhelmed at sea. You have you think a lot more strategically; where to place the forces you have, which provinces you'll just have to sacrifice. It also stops the AI from having depleted forces, so you'll fight tougher battles. And more meaningful ones, since you'll struggle to maintain your forces since replenishing them constantly won't be feasible. There is no resistance to the player's war machine after a certain point without realm divide. With realm divide, there is. From your post it sounds like you're complaining about there being too many battles... in which case you're not playing the right series. That is exactly the problem. It just increases the battles without really increasing the difficulty, and makes diplomacy even more worthless then before. If I just wanted constant battles I would just play custom battles over and over again. I want diplomacy to actually matter. Edit: I mean I guess it makes it a little harder, but the tradeoff (its makes the game less fun) isn't worth the little spike. CharlestheHammer fucked around with this message at 00:32 on Jun 6, 2013 |
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2013 00:30
|
|
|
The only bullshit about Realm Divide that I can't accept is how heroic victories cause the divide to occur sooner. It feels like the player gets punished by winning a victory against overwhelming odds. So the counter to this is to stop winning so handily and make sure to sacrifice some troops? I think it would make a better game to decouple military victories from your renown score.
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2013 00:32
|
|
|
CharlestheHammer posted:Don't create doomstacks them. Its not like you don't have a choice in the matter. I don't understand the kind of confused mind that can respond to "The game would be better if the player wasn't always free to take the most optimal path with no drawbacks" with "Just play badly then". I don't want to play badly, I want an actual challenge. I want the game to give me a problem and limited resources to solve it. Just as in XCOM, I want the real prospect of losing if I gently caress up.
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2013 00:36
|
|
|
Fine, but can we have an actual challenge without making it boring as gently caress? I'd love it if my vassals with one province didn't immediately send a tiny army against me, because there is no way they can take on anything. They're there to trade and take up land that has lovely soil.
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2013 00:50
|
|
|
Alchenar posted:I don't understand the kind of confused mind that can respond to "The game would be better if the player wasn't always free to take the most optimal path with no drawbacks" with "Just play badly then". I know its just you aren't the only player, so its seems to be the best solution so everyone can win.Though I do find the "realism" argument hilarious considering how the thread usually treats that sort of thing. I guess the only moral realism is my realism. Edit: Maybe they could make the difficulty slider actually do things instead of just giving bonuses that could help the issue. CharlestheHammer fucked around with this message at 00:56 on Jun 6, 2013 |
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2013 00:50
|
|
|
It may be I was just really bad at it but I always felt the Viking Invasion 2 mod for Rome was very good at forcing you to fight at sub-optimal times. At least if you play as Northumbria. http://www.twcenter.net/forums/forumdisplay.php?1036-Viking-Invasion-II-%28VI2%29-%28BI%29
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2013 00:54
|
|
|
When i'm warring against similar size clans, it gets tense as all hell, even in the early days of shogun. My ally currently has two full stacks roaming about and I haven't got past four provinces yet, its going to be such a pain to backstab them.
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2013 01:31
|
|
|
Perestroika posted:
Welp, looks like I'm playing FotS instead of Vanilla S2 now.
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2013 01:37
|
|
|
Generation Internet posted:Welp, looks like I'm playing FotS instead of Vanilla S2 now. That exact animation is in Vanilla. In fact all they did was copy it from vanilla by applying the animation to a rifle instead of a spear. Vanilla S2 for life.
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2013 01:43
|
|
|
I know you posted it 3 pages back, but Hamilcar if your friend wants that coupon from Steam for Shogun 2, I'd be happy to send it to him or you. My steam id is Clementia Keep thinking I'm going to try and play as the Dacians in Rome 2 so the whole world can know the wonderful taste of mamaliga and mittitei.
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2013 01:58
|
|
|
Chomp8645 posted:That exact animation is in Vanilla. In fact all they did was copy it from vanilla by applying the animation to a rifle instead of a spear. Except throwing your spear is something I can imagine most soldiers would train to do if they used one. I can't imagine rifle soldiers training to throw their rifles at people, which instantly makes it more badass. That should be captioned "I forgot to reload" or something.
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2013 02:05
|
|
|
You need to install the Yari animation mod to get those line infantry throwing rifles. Otherwise, they do the dumb ashigaru thing and draw out their swords. For the Realm Divide guys, any vassals you create after Realm Divide will stay buddies with you. They'll also be technologically impotent, but they'll sometimes send armies out to help you! Always reinforce these battles because they are hilarious to watch. Your buds in FotS do this too!
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2013 02:35
|
|
|
Slim Jim Pickens posted:For the Realm Divide guys, any vassals you create after Realm Divide will stay buddies with you. They'll also be technologically impotent, but they'll sometimes send armies out to help you! Always reinforce these battles because they are hilarious to watch. Your buds in FotS do this too! Not really. They can still declare war on you. I've had it happen a few times.
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2013 03:11
|
|
|
Azran posted:Not really. They can still declare war on you. I've had it happen a few times. Give them Military Access and they won't. The issue is that the AI has only one option to attack if you don't. You.
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2013 03:24
|
|
|
dogstile posted:Except throwing your spear is something I can imagine most soldiers would train to do if they used one. I can't imagine rifle soldiers training to throw their rifles at people, which instantly makes it more badass. Its a british joke, i forgot exactly where from but it was something about running out of ammo so they make do with using their rifles as javelins or something like that, plus the animation fits. Speaking about ramping up difficulty, i like the idea of the game auto generating a competent army for you to fight, that and the siege of capital cities are supposedly scripted so you'll be up against really serious resistance.
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2013 03:30
|
|
|
shalcar posted:Give them Military Access and they won't. The issue is that the AI has only one option to attack if you don't. You. But keep all your provinces well-garrisoned. I've had vassals attack my least-defended province because I gave 'em military access. edit:Holy crap, wish I'd known. 
Grand Prize Winner fucked around with this message at 06:09 on Jun 6, 2013 |
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2013 04:04
|
|
|
Grand Prize Winner posted:But keep all your provinces well-garrisoned. I've had vassals attack my least-defended province because I gave 'em military access. War declarations teleport troops back to the nearest friendly territory if they are in friendly territory that turned hostile, so you only need to worry about your ones adjacent to the vassal.
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2013 04:07
|
|
|
So after beating a short Roman campaign in Rome I decided to pick up a long campaign with Germany. So uh, how exactly do diplomats work in this game again? I figured out that spies level up their spy skill by spying on stuff, same as S2 but the actual experience levels seem obfuscated. But when I tried to just bust through and diplomize with everyone to do the same with my diplomats I found that successive failures were lowering their Influence and now it's never coming back up.
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2013 04:31
|
|
|
dogydemoc posted:I just got Empire for my birthday, and having never really played any Total War games I'd be grateful for some tips, especially for the campaign side of things. I know it's not regarded as the best in the series but I really like the look of Rome II so I thought I'd try one out before it's released. Trade with everyone you can, 100% of the time. Before you start a campaign, you should mess around with custom battles for a while, to get an idea of how valuable units are and what you can do with them. High taxes get you more money, but low taxes will cause your populations to expand quickly and unlock new building slots, which you can them turn towards revenue.
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2013 04:35
|
|
|
Alchenar posted:Rubbish. In real life you win with what you have, whether it's optimal or not. The problem with the level of freedom Total War gives you is that you never have to let yourself get in the position where you have to make interesting choices. You just faff about until your doomstack is ready and then move onto the next province. Que 80% of all battles being autoresolves because it just isn't fun when you don't ever have to fight a non-optimal battle. Yeah and in M2TW you have the ability to make doomstacks. I agree that it's not challenging after doing it a million times. I guess I misunderstood you before, it seemed like you were harping on "doing the optimal thing". But now I understand that what you meant was that it would be a better game experience if they could find a way to force you to make hard decisions.
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2013 05:15
|
|
|
SHISHKABOB posted:Yeah and in M2TW you have the ability to make doomstacks. I agree that it's not challenging after doing it a million times. The time limit in Shogun 2 works fairly well for this, which is part of the reason people have a problem with Realm Divide. Stalling you long enough loses you the game and puts you under increasing pressure. Obviously, this isn't to everyone's taste, but the fundamental concept is sound. While the earlier TW games had time limits, Shogun 2's is significantly tighter, to the point where it's possible to not meet it if you spend too much time getting "optimal" forces.
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2013 05:31
|
|
|
shalcar posted:The time limit in Shogun 2 works fairly well for this, which is part of the reason people have a problem with Realm Divide. Stalling you long enough loses you the game and puts you under increasing pressure. Obviously, this isn't to everyone's taste, but the fundamental concept is sound. While the earlier TW games had time limits, Shogun 2's is significantly tighter, to the point where it's possible to not meet it if you spend too much time getting "optimal" forces. Yeah but you can still pick the "gently caress it, keep playing" option anyways, right?
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2013 05:32
|
|
|
SHISHKABOB posted:Yeah but you can still pick the "gently caress it, keep playing" option anyways, right? You can, but the game doesn't record it as a win and it just becomes a sandbox or you can accept the loss. I'm still not sure why that matters though, in order to win you need to meet the time limit and that usually involves making hard decisions.
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2013 05:36
|
|
|
shalcar posted:You can, but the game doesn't record it as a win and it just becomes a sandbox or you can accept the loss. Probably because there's no real difference between "losing" and just doing whatever you want in a Total War game. That's how I've always played them: as sandbox games. The only way to actually lose a total war game (in my opinion) is if you get annihilated (or think you're going to get blown away). Or if you just plain quit. History doesn't stop after 100 turns.
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2013 05:40
|
|
|
So I decided to give Empire a shot. First impressions: Holy gently caress, what is anything? Wait, there's a parliament? That's pretty rad. Elections too? Oh gently caress, there' just so much loving stuff, everywhere. So many boats, so many dudes, what do I do? What's a gentleman? Is that like a governor? Wait, do I have a royal family? It looks like I don't. Motherfucking Moose Factory is in the game but Toronto isn't? gently caress the map is big, three whole theatres- HOLY poo poo, I can go to the Ivory Coast, the coast of Brazil, and the East Indies TOO? What  is this? Oh god, I have no idea what to do! Why didn't I do a tutorial? WHY DIDN'T I DO THE TUTORIAL? 
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2013 06:05
|
|
|
shalcar posted:The time limit in Shogun 2 works fairly well for this, which is part of the reason people have a problem with Realm Divide. Stalling you long enough loses you the game and puts you under increasing pressure. Obviously, this isn't to everyone's taste, but the fundamental concept is sound. While the earlier TW games had time limits, Shogun 2's is significantly tighter, to the point where it's possible to not meet it if you spend too much time getting "optimal" forces. Nah, the problem with realm divide was that it was a really immersion breaking 'everyone not-you becomes an anti-you blob' mechanic. It was fine in Rome when the Senate started telling you to kill yourself and kick off the Civil war, it was also fine in FOTS because it happens earlier and your allies remain your allies. In Rome the way I guess I'd fix this is to supercharge the other two Roman Factions so that they're expanding aggressively all the time and you have to keep up otherwise they'll make a play for Rome and you'll be on the back-foot.
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2013 09:26
|
|
Not sure if it is regional or not but on GamersGate they are doing a Shogun 2 sale. DStecks posted:So I decided to give Empire a shot. First impressions: Do the tutorial, It does help a lot despite being a little silly. I still need to try alternate history playthrough focused with Austria.
|
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2013 12:36
|
|
|
Empire is by far my favorite game in the TW franchise, but I don't think I've ever managed to complete a game. Once I get to turn 150 or so, I inevitably hit a bug that prevents AI turns from ever completing. I'm pretty certain it has to do with the AI's inability to handle multiple theatres, since I don't think it has ever happened when I haven't had an overseas colony somewhere. Has anybody here found a way to fix or prevent this bug?
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2013 16:03
|
|
|
I started a STW2 vanilla campaign as the Chokosabe. Goddamn I forgot how much fun this game was. Even on normal the game can be a challenge at some points. I already almost went bankrupt because enemy clans were blocking all my trade routes and blockading my ports, which led to several provinces rebelling. One of those provinces managed to totally annihilate a garrison filled with expensive units and set back the campaign I had planned for the next 12 turns or so. Now, what would really be a challenge is if the AI I'm fighting noticed that I've completely forsaken defending my big home island in favor of extremely rapid, but risky expansion to my West. The AI in this game is really improved over other games in the series that I've played, but I've yet to see an AI stage an overseas invasion and I'm pretty much abusing this notion. Does this change in higher campaign map difficulties?
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2013 16:14
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 7, 2024 10:04 |
|
|
Cleopatra trailer! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AimVebWhvso I assume the map view at 0:20 is the campaign map, it's pretty!
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2013 16:35
|
|
