|
VerdantSquire posted:Eh, I'm still happy they at least include them, it's just the seemingly arbitrary cut-off point in armor that feels weird to me. It's not just the lighter units either; literally every female unit in the roster cut-offs at leather armor, and that's assuming they even have it. Sure, you can say "So you can easily see that they're women", but why should that even matter anyway? There's really no armored bikini soldiers in Total War. There's a lack of super heavy female units but that doesn't mean their aesthethic is sexualized. Captain Beans posted:Honestly the only truly offensive part of TW:Arena is when the matchmaker takes a dump and you get a game with tier 6 through tier 10. 
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2015 18:05
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 1, 2024 19:38 |
|
|
Mans posted:They added female units to most basic warbands in Rome and Attila and they're so well meshed in that it took a while for people to even realize that some of the potato infantry were women. And the gladiatrixes have the same heavy armor of their male counter-parts. Hell, even in Rome 2 the gladiator women had the same amount of armour as their male counterparts. Honestly, if someone's first look at a female character is "good that they've included them, however..." they might be the problem, not the other way around. Then again, we've had years of this argument and I think everyone's just tired of it at this point. VVVVVVVVVVVVVV See! dogstile fucked around with this message at 18:53 on Nov 20, 2015 |
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2015 18:30
|
|
|
This discussion loving sucks, heres a better one: so whats peoples preferred strategies for dealing with infantry heavy forces? I usually keep a unit of spears around, throw them into a defensive testudo and use them to soak the initial charge, then have my swords come out of hiding to drop a heavy charge on their flanks. Its not fool proof though, since if they're smart enough not to just charge all their units into one group they can manuever to cancel the charge
|
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2015 18:38
|
|
|
dogstile posted:Then again, we've had years of this argument and I think everyone's just tired of it at this point. I think it's a valid discussion to have in the games where it's an issue still (which is most of them), it's just that saying it's a problem in TW is super dumb like here:         about the only problem is aside from the gladiators, none of the women ever get helmets
|
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2015 18:54
|
|
|
Agean90 posted:This discussion loving sucks, heres a better one: so whats peoples preferred strategies for dealing with infantry heavy forces? are you talking about Arena? if i'm also infantry based i tend to give defensive consumables to one unit and offensive to the other two and do exactly what you said. If i'm archer based i just kite the hell out of them and pray someone comes to block their charge.
|
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2015 00:29
|
|
|
Yeah im talking about arena. Going heavy on ranged seems liked itd be fun, but your pretty much relying on a melee guy deciding to defend you, and even then youd have to be pretty well coordinated to avoid the rampant friendly fire that causes
|
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2015 22:22
|
|
|
Just kill everything with Onagers from halfway across the map. Queue with a friend that does nothing but defend you. :P I'm having a lot of fun in Arena.
|
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2015 22:39
|
|
|
Posted on Total War's twitter account today: No idea what it means but my best guess is Charlemagne.
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2015 03:49
|
|
|
I'm getting a Machiavelli vibe off that dude.
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2015 04:18
|
|
|
Total War: Crusader Kings
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2015 04:21
|
|
|
Medieval 3 is the next on the rotation for a 'mainline' TW game.
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2015 04:32
|
|
|
Sick. Medieval 2 was my favorite Total War game and having one without loving MERCHANT SPAM would be godly also bring back the dude who did the soundtrack for medieval 2 and shogun 2, his poo poo owned bones
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2015 04:33
|
|
|
Medieval 3 cuts right to the chase and has an Aztec invasion scenario in the game from the start.
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2015 04:35
|
|
sarmhan posted:Medieval 3 is the next on the rotation for a 'mainline' TW game. Please please please.
|
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2015 04:51
|
|
|
Yeah, I would be Down For M3 -Merchants and +the new army system from R2/Attila. Preferably, though, with more significant upgrades than "2% pianoforte-itude" and "1% to buildings you never build."
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2015 05:11
|
|
|
Funky Valentine posted:Total War: Crusader Kings my ideal Medieval 3 is Crusader Kings 2 except you go into the actual battles
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2015 05:17
|
|
|
Yeah Medieval is overdue for a revamp with the new engine and poo poo. Can't wait for TWC to hate the living gently caress out of it with every fibre of their being.
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2015 05:20
|
|
|
Agean90 posted:Sick. Medieval 2 was my favorite Total War game and having one without loving MERCHANT SPAM would be godly A new Medieval with all of the new features that have been developed since 2 would be fantastic, especially having more than just a handful of main factions with a sea of "rebels."
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2015 05:21
|
|
|
Sober posted:Yeah Medieval is overdue for a revamp with the new engine and poo poo. "How loving DARE CA not make my random obscure East European ethnic group the medieval superpower that it was, you German-loving bigots."
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2015 05:24
|
|
|
Didn't CA claim they didn't want to make a third iteration of any of their games? I mean, being a AAA company I imagine that pledge will go by the wayside the moment they find they need more money, but still. Actually, this sounds more plausible. All of Total War: Arena's factions were in the Ancient era so far, right? Wouldn't announcing a new medieval era of factions count as the "dawn of a new age"?
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2015 05:27
|
|
|
The picture is a feint and we're actually getting Total War: Sumeria.
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2015 05:44
|
|
|
Earwicker posted:my ideal Medieval 3 is Crusader Kings 2 except you go into the actual battles Yeah, this is basically what I'm hoping for too. Maybe we'll also get a revamp of the way factions are done too because the way factions exist in the current total war games would absolutely not represent the feudal system at all.
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2015 07:05
|
|
|
Perhaps the shadows are hiding some poofy clothing and we're finally going to get a renaissance total war. Landsknechts vs Swiss Pikes for best dressed ponce!
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2015 07:31
|
|
|
CA don't exactly have a great track record of making the political/diplomatic side of their game interesting at all, I wouldn't expect them to attempt let alone pull off CK2: TW
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2015 07:51
|
|
|
CA has made statements in the past indicating they're not doing any "3" game for a while. Also some guys at TWC have found evidence towards a Charlemagne-based expansion. Although they also made a followup post about "feeling enlightened", which would indicate the Early Modern game people have talked about. Seems unlikely, given that they can't really fit a full game in before Total War War Hammer Hammer.
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2015 07:57
|
|
|
are there any good mods for Attila? mostly I'm looking for better campaign AI so that for example the ERE doesn't immediately collapse because all of its armies are sitting in a clump in the Aegean. e: then again maybe that has been fixed in patches, I haven't played since release
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2015 08:05
|
|
|
Posting in here to get on the Renaissance / Empire 2 hype train. I guess I wouldn't be too mad if it's a Charlemagne expansion, but for all of its faults, Empire and Napoleon are still my favorite games in this series. Who else wants to wear fancy hats, travel the world in wooden tubs, meet new cultures, and then brutally
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2015 10:27
|
|
|
Krazyface posted:CA has made statements in the past indicating they're not doing any "3" game for a while. Also some guys at TWC have found evidence towards a Charlemagne-based expansion. I'd love an early modern game, but it almost feels unnecessary given that they've got Total Warhammer working up. Though I guess they can reuse a fair amount of assets and save themselves some effort that way. Still feel like an upgrade to Arena seems more likely, though.
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2015 11:17
|
|
|
I hope it's early modern/renaissance, although I'm not sure TW's engine can handle a Tercio square. Medieval always felt a bit too spread out for my liking, so I hope this one's a lot more tightly focused. The (British) War of the Three Kingdoms would be a loving awesome setting, though it's still enough of a thing over here that CA might not want to touch it.
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2015 11:25
|
|
|
Murderion posted:I hope it's early modern/renaissance, although I'm not sure TW's engine can handle a Tercio square. Medieval always felt a bit too spread out for my liking, so I hope this one's a lot more tightly focused. The (British) War of the Three Kingdoms would be a loving awesome setting, though it's still enough of a thing over here that CA might not want to touch it. I'd love to see mixed units/units working together but I don't think CA has the design chops to do it.
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2015 12:11
|
|
|
Pike and Shot pls
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2015 13:10
|
|
|
The pic is of Marco Polo, gonna be Yuan China Total War
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2015 14:17
|
|
|
 from their facebook too. apparently another on their instagram but i can't seem to find that
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2015 15:12
|
|
|
Yup Charlamagne for Attila
Koramei fucked around with this message at 16:05 on Nov 24, 2015 |
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2015 16:02
|
|
|
Oh so it's the Attila version of Fall of the Samurai.
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2015 16:06
|
|
|
quote:War Weariness The sign of a great true king is in knowing how far your people can be pushed. Wars are significant and dramatic events between kingdoms, and should not be undertaken lightly. The fewer wars you wage the better your people will respond, as frequent and drawn out conflict will rapidly damage morale and your armies’ integrity. A shrewd ruler will seek to bring peace quickly and decisively. Hey, you know what our war game needs? More mechanics to come in-between you and actually fighting wars.
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2015 16:47
|
|
|
that but unironically if the AI actually understands it at least.
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2015 17:02
|
|
|
Koramei posted:that but unironically To be honest, I have to really disagree there. It's not that I'm necessarily opposed to the idea of introducing war exhaustion, my issue is that it just feels like another mechanic built from the ground up to force you to not spend time playing the actual war part of total war games. The main attraction of total war games has always been the idea of waging a war and fighting battles and stuff, and I've never liked their attempts to try and introduce more mechanics to the peaceful side of the game. In the earlier total wars, you could start up a campaign and start fighting people in about several turns, but now you have to spend like fifty turns building up to get not-poo poo troops and a massive economy to support enough them before you can even so much get a wishful glimpse of the battle mode. The worst offender so far is Attlia, where units cost untold amounts of money, and nearly everyone else has at least one thousand more of them than you do at the start. It just feels like Creative Assembly has gotten this idea into their head that the war part of the game is just sort of a sideshow distraction and the REAL total war is about clicking the end turn button while you wait to get enough money to build some useless fishing hut while making blind decisions in events for worthless passive modifiers. Maybe lots of people really do enjoy those parts, and whatever, good on them. But nowadays? I hardly ever play the campaign; when I boot up total war 90% of the time it's to mess around and have fun in the battle mode. Sometimes I'll try to start up a campaign, but my interest ends up dying off after I've played one quarter of the campaign through and it feels like I've made absolutely no progress whatsoever. I just wish they'd cut it out with peace mechanics and just entirely move their focus to the actual waging war part of the game.
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2015 18:42
|
|
|
VerdantSquire posted:To be honest, I have to really disagree there. It's not that I'm necessarily opposed to the idea of introducing war exhaustion, my issue is that it just feels like another mechanic built from the ground up to force you to not spend time playing the actual war part of total war games.  You know you can just go to battle mode directly and make any kind of army you want and fight it against any other army you want, right? If you have no interest in the "peaceful" side of the game as you call it, that's fine, but other people enjoy it so it's good that they keep improving it, and you can just leave it alone entirely and just stick with battle mode, but you don't have to "wishfully glimpse" at it at all... it's right there in the main menu. Also, while I haven't played Attila, all of the last major TW games including Rome were set up such that you could get into battle in your first turn of a campaign, so I'm not sure what you are even talking about. Earwicker fucked around with this message at 18:49 on Nov 24, 2015 |
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2015 18:47
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 1, 2024 19:38 |
|
|
Funky Valentine posted:Oh so it's the Attila version of Fall of the Samurai. There won't be nearly enough explosions to make it the tightest loving game.
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2015 18:57
|
|
