|
Fellblade posted:But he asked to make it simpler? No, I want it to be more complex. In previous TW games, every province had multiple buildings and was stand-alone. I am asking if they got rid of the "2-4 towns with 1 walled city = 1 province" thing. I want it to return to what they had going in Shogun II, Empire, etc... I hate the whole template system that you're forced into because towns effect one another arbitrarily. Also only having like 8 buildings per whole province, no unique buildings, buildings are just colored squares. Ultimately I would like them to go back to what they had in Medieval 2, but Shogun II's and Empire/Napoleon's building system is fine. And yes, by mobile gaming-esque I meant it was shallow, and something that you would find in a citybuilder mobile game. Phi230 fucked around with this message at 00:57 on Feb 12, 2016 |
#
?
Feb 12, 2016 00:53
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 7, 2024 10:53 |
|
|
madmac posted:It was far more complex than than the braindead build everything in every city system of the Pre-Empire TW games so while you could honestly say it was a failure in many respects saying it was too simplistic/shallow is kinda really loving stupid and makes you sound like you never actually played with for more than ten minutes. I'm not the guy making claim, I'm the guy able to understand the claim. quote:OTOH, AOC and now Warhammer are moving away from every building giving you massive negative penalties you have to balance and going for more of a streamlined system with clear, simple choices. This is actually a good thing and the opposite of bad. Having limited build slots is also good because it requires more thought and strategy than building every province the exact same way. Yes it turns out removing the fake choices so you can see how simplistic the system is, is in fact good. And the choices that were removed were not adding complexity, they were unnecessary, so the system was not deeper for having them. You can have a lot of gameplay options that don't actually tie into the decisions or improve the game but give the illusion of complexity without actually having it. Mobile games often fall into this trap, so I understood the point the guy was making. If you actually like Attila's province management and see it as anything other than tedious busywork, then I think we will have to agree to disagree on the strategic layer.
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2016 00:57
|
|
|
Mind you, I loved the poo poo out of Shogun 2 and Rome 2 is like one of my least favorite TW games ever. I do kinda like Atilla though. Overall I like the advantages of the province system enough that I don't think I could tolerate going back to Siegecraft TW. I can't comprehend people thinking there was anything more complex about Med 2's building system, it was the most boring cookie-cutter thing ever. madmac fucked around with this message at 01:02 on Feb 12, 2016 |
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2016 00:58
|
|
|
Rakthar posted:I'm not the guy making claim, I'm the guy able to understand the claim. Rome 2's illusion of strategy is you just managing arbitrary numbers produced by buildings. Juggling different modifiers is not complexity, its tedious. In Shogun 2/Empire etc... you could still have the specialized provinces because you had to choose what buildings went in each slot. But in the end they dumbed it down by essentially making individual cities/towns useless and instead focusing on "provinces" as a whole. It feels like a lazy way to increase the amount of towns and cities on the map, by carving up existing provinces with little settlements and then having the whole province's buildings be managed rather than individual settlements being focused on.
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2016 01:03
|
|
|
madmac posted:Mind you, I loved the poo poo out of Shogun 2 and Rome 2 is like one of my least favorite TW games ever. I do kinda like Atilla though. Except it wasn't. You had more mechanics to worry about. Squalor (in Rome), religion, town population and town growth, so that you had an empire that had different demographics in terms of religions and economics. You had poor, small towns, and you had rich large ones. Everything grew fluidly.
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2016 01:05
|
|
|
madmac posted:Mind you, I loved the poo poo out of Shogun 2 and Rome 2 is like one of my least favorite TW games ever. I do kinda like Atilla though. Remember in Rome 1 where if you played long enough your giant farms and squalor reducing buildings would create massive populations that would burst at the seams and make constant revolts that would only end if you marched your troops to the city and massacred the entire pop, only for it to grow like crazy due to the above mentioned growth and health buildings, requiring another massacre?  And then you made the dumb mistake of building a colosseum to entertain the plebs. Now every revolt is a slave revolt  Phi230 posted:Except it wasn't. You had more mechanics to worry about. Squalor (in Rome), religion, town population and town growth, so that you had an empire that had different demographics in terms of religions and economics. You had poor, small towns, and you had rich large ones. Everything grew fluidly. Corruption, dominion and control, religion, migration, food, sanitation and conflict offer a great dynamic to Atilla because you need to need to pay attention to not only global but also local needs which sometimes change dramatically by events that happen nearby like neighbouring factions going into war. Attila is really good, is what i'm saying. Mans fucked around with this message at 01:11 on Feb 12, 2016 |
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2016 01:07
|
|
|
This game looks cool as hell but knowing the hiccups they've had with Rome 2 etc. and that they aren't even releasing the full amount of races at the start, is it smart to buy early?
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2016 01:19
|
|
|
Lunethex posted:This game looks cool as hell but knowing the hiccups they've had with Rome 2 etc. and that they aren't even releasing the full amount of races at the start, is it smart to buy early? Every TW game is buggy on release. I remember when sainted Med 2 had shields that gave negative defense values, Two-handed weapons that literally couldn't attack Cav because of animation limitations and entire armies that would stand in place as you shot them to death, among many many problems. Despite that, I always have a lot of fun with them even on release and big issues tend to get patched out pretty quickly, so it just comes down to your own tolerance level. If you're a big TW fan then sure, pre-order, you know what you're getting into. Otherwise, eh wait a bit and get the fixed version at a massive discount on steam you really can't lose either way.
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2016 01:24
|
|
|
Lunethex posted:This game looks cool as hell but knowing the hiccups they've had with Rome 2 etc. and that they aren't even releasing the full amount of races at the start, is it smart to buy early? Just get it from cdkeys.com for 30 bucks. The keys might second hand, but they always work, and Creative Assembly has stolen enough of your money if you've made the mistake of purchasing any of their other games on release anyway.
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2016 01:27
|
|
|
Lunethex posted:This game looks cool as hell but knowing the hiccups they've had with Rome 2 etc. and that they aren't even releasing the full amount of races at the start, is it smart to buy early? The races are drastically different so there's a good chance you'll have more variety even though it's only 4 races. Also I'm glad they've simplified the Rome 2 building style by removing the negatives associated with building/upgrading structures. Having to constantly balance food/order wasn't fun.
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2016 01:27
|
|
|
Mans posted:I really want you to give me a rundown of how to turn every province into a rich and prosperous wealth garden in Attila because i'm playing as the ERE and outside of Thrace, Syria and Egypt everything's just a barely functioning melting pot that's two bad seasons away from starvation, plagues and migratory crisis. Have you had a fun game of Attila yet? Even on Very Hard for me it's way too easy. This isn't some dumb humblebrag, it's that I'm spending 10 hours over the length of a campaign managing province micro while getting boring battles for my work. That's too much province clicking for not enough payoff. I don't do anywhere near as much in Shogun 2. By comparison, I find Charlemagne's system more enjoyable. I still have to make decisions, but it's more about opportunity cost and initial expense, instead of everything having awful drawbacks. So yeah I disagree with this, for me Charlemagne's removal of penalties was a net benefit from my perspective. The constraints are so dumb too. Local food production penalties vs global food vs what the gently caress how is this making the battles more fun or interesting? Oh right it's not. Ham Sandwiches fucked around with this message at 01:34 on Feb 12, 2016 |
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2016 01:29
|
|
|
madmac posted:Two-handed weapons that literally couldn't attack Cav because of animation limitations lmao
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2016 02:09
|
|
|
Rakthar posted:If you actually like Attila's province management and see it as anything other than tedious busywork, then I think we will have to agree to disagree on the strategic layer. Having the room for a province to be an utter trainwreck is pretty useful for the overall context of the Roman campaign, where a lot of the idea is trying to hold and reform a mess of an empire at the same time, and has given me some of my most interesting battles in a while with the series because I'm stuck playing with half stacks for a lot of the start. However, I think going with Charlemagne's setup will work better for Warhams. Chomp8645 posted:lmao Med 2 also applied all the maluses of Rome's sack city code to peacefully occupying a city because people can't comment their code right. xthetenth fucked around with this message at 02:15 on Feb 12, 2016 |
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2016 02:09
|
|
|
Charlemagnes provincial system is the best we've had in a total war game yet. Interesting choices without hamstringing yourself along the way. I don't love how food is no longer global but that's pretty much my only gripe.
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2016 02:16
|
|
|
Sharzak posted:Charlemagnes provincial system is the best we've had in a total war game yet. Interesting choices without hamstringing yourself along the way. I don't love how food is no longer global but that's pretty much my only gripe. Realism. It took a while between the third century crisis and the proper re-establishment of trade networks to that degree (I know that's silly).
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2016 03:33
|
|
|
Serious building penalties à la Rome 2 are polarizing enough that I'm fine if they go, even though I do like them personally; having a system based around having a few megacities that needed vast swathes of farmland to keep sustainable made way more sense than the systems from the older games. Medieval 2's system especially had no depth whatsoever, I don't get why people fellate that game so much. No unique buildings really sucked though. Town bonuses weren't the same.
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2016 03:59
|
|
|
Med 2 was fun because if I was lazy and didn't want to actually fight a defensive siege battle, I could send a unit of cavalry to suicide charge their siege engines and then watch as the AI then just sits there instead of picking up the siege engine again while I slowly plinked them to death with archers and the timer ran out. I'm kind of curious to see how the AI will be braindead in this game, every total war manages to have a uniquely stupid AI, and finding the holes in the AI is half the fun for me.
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2016 04:06
|
|
|
Medieval 2 still has the best cavalry charges in the franchise, imho.
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2016 04:15
|
|
|
Well I'd hope so, it's the only setting where cav charges were that gruesome. Except Warhams, now!
|
|
#
?
Feb 13, 2016 14:31
|
|
|
Demigryph knights are going to be so badass to use. 
|
|
#
?
Feb 13, 2016 18:37
|
|
|
Cavalry charges since Rome 2 where units all have mass have been really good, it's just harder to line them up than it was in Med2 with its unstoppable juggernaut horses.
|
|
#
?
Feb 13, 2016 18:41
|
|
|
med2 had badass cavalry charges, badass horse archers, badass artillery duels while pikemen stabbed each other's faces, they had archers that were also frontline troops, they had dudes who threw bees at their enemies, you could throw dead cows at your enemy. it was a really good game.
|
|
#
?
Feb 13, 2016 22:05
|
|
|
I liked how building armor and weaponsmith upgrades would have a visual effect on units and wish they would bring that back.
|
|
#
?
Feb 13, 2016 22:28
|
|
|
Mans posted:they had dudes who threw bees at their enemies, you could throw dead cows at your enemy. I don't remember these. Were they in the expansions?
|
|
#
?
Feb 13, 2016 23:02
|
|
|
Slaan posted:I don't remember these. Were they in the expansions? The trebuchets had a dead cow option. I think the expansion had Native American (I think Mayan) units that threw beehives. It also had Byzantine fire cannons and Teutonic super-heavy cav, though unfortunately not all in the same campaign. Med II also had some really great music. It remains one of my favorite games in the series.
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2016 01:47
|
|
|
Gimnbo posted:The trebuchets had a dead cow option. I think the expansion had Native American (I think Mayan) units that threw beehives. It also had Byzantine fire cannons and Teutonic super-heavy cav, though unfortunately not all in the same campaign. Always had a thing for the first Medieval Total War. Especially since it seemed like the AI actually was rather capable of making sense of stuff in that game. It actually put up a good fight, and seemed to recognize the advantages of higher ground and terrain and actually sometimes used reserves and hidden flankers to devastating effect when I underestimated it. Though my favorite battle was when I forced an AI army to retreat from a very mountaineous battlefield by constantly trying to obtain a superior position against that of the AI defending army, was pretty great. It also had really great music. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dt8X-Vtv0vQ e: Whatever happened that made CA go away from Jeff van Dyck? All the soundtracks he did for the Total War games were great. e2: I also remember playing Shogun 2 and being really happy they included many of the tracks from the original https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4IU7ia0XIGg Randarkman fucked around with this message at 02:26 on Feb 14, 2016 |
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2016 02:18
|
|
|
Randarkman posted:e: Whatever happened that made CA go away from Jeff van Dyck? All the soundtracks he did for the Total War games were great. http://jeffvandyck.com/games/alien-isolation-2014/
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2016 03:04
|
|
|
He didn't want to work with them anymore because of the time zone difference mostly, or at least thats what he's said.
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2016 03:48
|
|
|
https://www.instagram.com/p/BBzqT20L2-G/?taken-by=totalwarofficial Gyrobomber preview vid.
|
|
#
?
Feb 15, 2016 17:21
|
|
|
Buschmaki posted:I liked how building armor and weaponsmith upgrades would have a visual effect on units and wish they would bring that back. I have been after this for a long time and i'm legitimately pissed that they haven't brought it back. I still remember pumping out unit after unit of max armour spearmen for my campaigns, watching as my glorious shining troops waded through enemy unarmoured spearmen like it was nothing. That was almost 10 years ago. Jesus christ.
|
|
#
?
Feb 15, 2016 17:55
|
|
|
madmac posted:https://www.instagram.com/p/BBzqT20L2-G/?taken-by=totalwarofficial Thwoppa thwoppa thwoppa
|
|
#
?
Feb 15, 2016 19:50
|
|
|
dogstile posted:I have been after this for a long time and i'm legitimately pissed that they haven't brought it back. I still remember pumping out unit after unit of max armour spearmen for my campaigns, watching as my glorious shining troops waded through enemy unarmoured spearmen like it was nothing. It felt really good how the early game town militias who had best had leather coats could be mainline heavy mail spearmen by the end-game. It felt so good to see the progression.
|
|
#
?
Feb 15, 2016 21:36
|
|
|
http://wiki.totalwar.com/w/Money_Management_Blog Not a lot of new information here, mostly just confirms that most economic/diplomacy options in prior TW games still exist. It does sound like they are putting a lot of emphasis on raiding/sacking to boost income though.
|
|
#
?
Feb 17, 2016 15:35
|
|
|
I look forward to smug vampire counts and dickbag greenskins turning down all my diplomatic offers 
|
|
#
?
Feb 17, 2016 16:32
|
|
|
quote:You can disband units that you no longer need. This allows you to save on upkeep costs. For example, when you unlock the ability to recruit an improved unit type, you can disband lower quality units of the same type and replace them with the better variant. So it seems that replacement upgrades are no longer a thing, going back to the old way of keeping old and new units available simultaneously. This makes sense, given the roster style they've adopted, but is still interesting.
|
|
#
?
Feb 17, 2016 16:39
|
|
|
Have they said anything about the unit's appearance upgrading like back in Medieval 2? If any game should have customizable units, it would be Warhammer.
|
|
#
?
Feb 17, 2016 16:44
|
|
|
Kaza42 posted:So it seems that replacement upgrades are no longer a thing, going back to the old way of keeping old and new units available simultaneously. This makes sense, given the roster style they've adopted, but is still interesting. Good, gently caress that system, let me cover the enemy in tides of poo poo tier units.
|
|
#
?
Feb 17, 2016 16:54
|
|
|
Arcsquad12 posted:Have they said anything about the unit's appearance upgrading like back in Medieval 2? If any game should have customizable units, it would be Warhammer. Based on the Empire overview video, there's only one weapon/armor upgrade for your troops (three if you count cavalry armor) and they're researched tech. The blacksmith building doesn't give units produced in the province better weapons/armor, it gives a recruitment slot and unlocks the armor/weapon upgrade techs. So if they do change appearance, it's just a with vs. without State Issued Weapons/Armor.
|
|
#
?
Feb 17, 2016 16:59
|
|
|
That, and ransoming enemy units seems to be a thing. I imagine that's only possible between the Humans/Dwarfs/Vampires, since no one likes Greenskins and the Greenskins don't take prisoners. Might be super extra crucial for the Counts, since they hinge on the abilities of their most powerful generals and necromancers on the field. e: What does it take to really kill a Vampire in Warhammer, anyway? If there's a ritual involved or you need a specific Agent it might be tempting to nab one just to sell it back to the Counts. Triskelli fucked around with this message at 18:22 on Feb 17, 2016 |
|
#
?
Feb 17, 2016 18:01
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 7, 2024 10:53 |
|
|
I think vampires in warhammer fantasy die like any other creature, beheading, massive trauma or being repeatedly stabbed in the face will kill them fine (unless your name is Vlad Von Carstein), they are just tougher and meaner than most beings though.
|
|
#
?
Feb 17, 2016 20:26
|
|
