|
Fangz posted:Year 8 of the Civil War. Lee continues to make slow progress in Mexico while Sherman launches a lightning strike to retake Washington DC from the British-Canadian alliance using his newly recruited doomstacks of Elite Colored Repeating Rifles. Four Monitor class ironclads blockade London. Due to low public order, John Brown's army reappears as a horde type faction. Grant fights his quest battle to gain +2 to Remove Confederacy Corruption. You are the first person to make an ACW Total War sound interesting to me, and I'd like to thank you for that.
|
#
?
Jul 7, 2017 20:04
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 6, 2024 17:14 |
|
|
Edgar Allen Ho posted:Med 2 blows chunks, hth  No! NO! Bad! I mean, I'll agree that the pope is annoying as a motherfucker but otherwise, nah.
|
|
#
?
Jul 7, 2017 20:20
|
|
|
It hasn't aged well in some design and mechanics but gently caress me that music is still awesome and it is the last one that could be properly modded.
|
|
|
#
?
Jul 7, 2017 20:31
|
|
|
GLORY TO ZE REICH (not the bad Reich tho, that Reich sucks).
|
|
#
?
Jul 7, 2017 20:40
|
|
|
Begone you are not mein kaiser
|
|
#
?
Jul 7, 2017 20:54
|
|
|
Ofaloaf posted:I would hope an ACW TW would cover North America. There should at least be more than 2 playable factions. I think that would be too far. Regiments were usually state-based but each brigade and division, let alone full stack army, would have a huge mix. However my dream ACW total war would have the US and CS divided up into armies/regions. One US faction centered in Washington, DC and focused on the eastern theater, one in Chicago focused on Tennessee and the Mississippi, one in Kansas City focusing on the western territories, and one in Boston focused on the Navy, the canadian border, and invading the confederate coast. Then an eastern and western CSA faction, with maybe a third for either the far west or the navy. Basically represent the CSA's desperation while keeping the game fun and balanced by giving each Union faction a clear front while forcing the confederates to defend their periphery. Then you have brits, french, at least two native, at least two mexican, and more factions as possible wildcards or DLCs. This could help vary the rosters too if you're ok with it not being PERFECT HISTORICALLY ACCURATE, IE the Washington, Army of the Potomac Union faction will be working with big, expensive, modern units with little flexibility while the Western CSA faction will have small, mediocre line infantry units but really badass cheap skirmishers and cav. Edgar Allen Ho fucked around with this message at 21:04 on Jul 7, 2017 |
|
#
?
Jul 7, 2017 21:00
|
|
|
Medieval 2 was a good Total war and is still fun to play, but it's really, really archaic in a lot of ways and frankly TW:W and S2 are better TW games in just about every way. Medieval 2's expansion had something interesting that no other TW managed to recreate: the Fantastic And Wonderful Boiling Tar on top of gates. Ain't never seen a bowl kill 1000 adult fighting men in full plate before, ain't never seen it since.
|
|
#
?
Jul 7, 2017 21:15
|
|
|
i think a big problem with an acw total war, is that about 10 people outside america care about the acw
|
|
#
?
Jul 7, 2017 21:17
|
|
|
Barbarian invasion had boiling gate pots as well.
|
|
#
?
Jul 7, 2017 21:18
|
|
|
Davincie posted:i think a big problem with an acw total war, is that about 10 people outside america care about the acw ACW is cool as heck, plenty of people outside America care about the ACW. In the UK when we talk about "The Civil War" we're not talking about the English Civil War.
|
|
#
?
Jul 7, 2017 21:27
|
|
|
Ofaloaf posted:I would hope an ACW TW would cover North America. There should at least be more than 2 playable factions. Maybe not at the beginning of the game, but it'd be cool if states could secede and become their own faction if the war is going shittily enough. Not all states, necessarily, but definitely Texas or California or New England. Hell, maybe Quebec gets fed up with this whole 'ruled by the Anglophones' thing.
|
|
#
?
Jul 7, 2017 21:27
|
|
|
A war of 1812 mini campaign. Lose half your men and boats trying to cross the Niagara. Lose a fort because your general is so terrified of Indians that he thinks 50 men are 5000 and gives a moral penalty to the garrison. Somehow forget where your opponent is and march two armies directly into each other in pitch darkness at Lundy's Lane. Get shot to pieces months after the war ended because you were stupid enough to attack new Orleans. Truly the fail war of the napoleonic era.
|
|
#
?
Jul 7, 2017 21:33
|
|
|
SeanBeansShako posted:I like it when history is used for influence or design purposes, but sometimes stuff would just be bland/unfun converted into gameplay systems. Or just horribly offensive. Well yeah that isn't a the issue of any long campaign but at least the other eras offer some variety to change things up
|
|
#
?
Jul 7, 2017 21:38
|
|
Davincie posted:i think a big problem with an acw total war, is that about 10 people outside america care about the acw Outside Japan and military history nerds this theory would never have prevented Fall Of The Samurai to be a thing either. CharlestheHammer posted:Well yeah that isn't a the issue of any long campaign but at least the other eras offer some variety to change things up It'd be great if they considered actually making trade, politics and a religion a lot more important in ETW instead of just stat screens and sea battles less boring jank.
|
|
|
#
?
Jul 7, 2017 21:53
|
|
|
If the history grogs really wanted to be accurate, they'd drop the casualty rates dramatically in total war games. For covering the period of the Meiji Restoration and the Satsuma Rebellion, Fall of the Samurai is hilariously more lethal than reality. Most total war campaigns end up going into genocidal territory with the amount of combat deaths, even counting recovered wounded. I think the next big step in total war is going to have to be unit pathfinding. While it is great that total war recognizes infantry fight in formation, maneuvering formations over terrain is beyond what the engine can handle. Especially if they ever decide to return to gunpowder warfare, moving through dense terrain to outflank opponents will be vital. Yes, big field battles are the series staple, but I'd love to see a version of the peninsular campaign that addressed the terrain and how it affected combat. It was the first guerrilla war on a large scale after all, so I'd like to see units that are able to move and shoot across rocky terrain or dense forests. Arc Hammer fucked around with this message at 22:04 on Jul 7, 2017 |
|
#
?
Jul 7, 2017 21:58
|
|
|
Arcsquad12 posted:Begone you are not mein kaiser If Allah is willing, you will LEAVE ME ALONE Also, do whatever you want CA as long as you do Victoria TW. BigglesSWE fucked around with this message at 22:04 on Jul 7, 2017 |
|
#
?
Jul 7, 2017 22:02
|
|
Arcsquad12 posted:If the history grogs really wanted to be accurate, they'd drop the casualty rates dramatically in total war games. For covering the period of the Meiji Restoration and the Satsuma Rebellion, Fall of the Samurai is hilariously more lethal than reality. Most total war campaigns end up going into genocidal territory with the amount of combat deaths, even counting recovered wounded. I always found it weird we could spare dudes in Med 2, but every game since them you got no choice but to war crime the enemy to the last man. I mean, it makes no sense outside sieges.
|
|
|
#
?
Jul 7, 2017 22:04
|
|
|
SeanBeansShako posted:I always found it weird we could spare dudes in Med 2, but every game since them you got no choice but to war crime the enemy to the last man. I don't think they mean it to be explicitly "you kill 'em all, hoorah!" but more of a "out of sight out of mind" sort of thing. I think the choice to release or excecute prisoners is actually a bit more harrowing, since it puts you in positions were it clearly is to your advantage to straight up murder people.
|
|
#
?
Jul 7, 2017 22:06
|
|
|
HerpicleOmnicron5 posted:ACW is cool as heck, plenty of people outside America care about the ACW. In the UK when we talk about "The Civil War" we're not talking about the English Civil War. Yeah, saying no one outside of the US cares about the American Civil War is as wrong as saying no one outside of Europe cares about the Napoleonic wars.
|
|
#
?
Jul 7, 2017 22:08
|
|
|
SeanBeansShako posted:I always found it weird we could spare dudes in Med 2, but every game since them you got no choice but to war crime the enemy to the last man. This is why Medieval 2 and Shogun 2 are my favourites, due to the Chivalry/Tyranny dichotomy or the Honour system. It was great having a chivalrous leader who was a shining beacon to his men and a great manager, or having a dread lord who would win entire wars with just his unit of cavalry. In Shogun 2, it was the honour system of either occupying or looting settlements, which in turn affected loyalty and happiness. It was a good balance between material gain and long term viability. I wish that the crazier traits will return from Med 2, because I love having half my family contract syphilis.
|
|
#
?
Jul 7, 2017 22:11
|
|
BigglesSWE posted:I don't think they mean it to be explicitly "you kill 'em all, hoorah!" but more of a "out of sight out of mind" sort of thing. I think the choice to release or excecute prisoners is actually a bit more harrowing, since it puts you in positions were it clearly is to your advantage to straight up murder people. Honestly I'd rather we'd have the option to take most of a broken army prisoner rather than playing whack a mole and chasing the stack down to the last man and either parole them for diplomacy, let them go or if you can afford it bribe them to be a volunteer legion in your faction. I'd also love it if we could capture or salvage some of the broken rear end artillery left on the field too. What do you mean I can''t use these guns again? the carriages are broken but the actual piece is fine!
|
|
|
#
?
Jul 7, 2017 22:13
|
|
|
You can, I think. It doesn't tell you when it happens but I've ended battles with an extra Onager/great cannon/whatever the gently caress before.
|
|
#
?
Jul 7, 2017 22:36
|
|
jokes posted:You can, I think. It doesn't tell you when it happens but I've ended battles with an extra Onager/great cannon/whatever the gently caress before. Med 2 or Rome 1 right? long time since I played either. It should make more sense for this to happen in the games set in the later eras too.
|
|
|
#
?
Jul 7, 2017 22:38
|
|
|
Yeah, it does happen sometimes. The mechanic is not very transparent. Some say that it's totally random, others say that it only happens when you rout the artillery as the last unit and they are surviving when you hit End Battle. No idea.
|
|
#
?
Jul 7, 2017 22:49
|
|
|
HerpicleOmnicron5 posted:In the UK when we talk about "The Civil War" we're not talking about the English Civil War. Yes we are? Most people would say the English Civil War, but I definitely would assume someone meant that rather than the American one. Considering the amount of Civil Wars we've had, its a bit weird that we have one called the English Civil War really. Theswarms fucked around with this message at 23:00 on Jul 7, 2017 |
|
#
?
Jul 7, 2017 22:51
|
|
|
HerpicleOmnicron5 posted:ACW is cool as heck, plenty of people outside America care about the ACW. In the UK when we talk about "The Civil War" we're not talking about the English Civil War. If the 1640s is being brought up then the Civil War could plausibly mean any of the Wars of the Three Kingdoms although the Bishop's War is the more common way to describe the Scottish into Northern English war of the time.
|
|
#
?
Jul 7, 2017 22:58
|
|
|
Theswarms posted:Yes we are? Most people would say the English Civil War, but I definitely definitely assume someone meant that rather than the American one. Most people don't even know about the English Civil War. General populace is dumb. jBrereton posted:If the 1640s is being brought up Well yeah, but few people bring up the 1640s in casual conversation. I meant that if someone was going to say "Seen that Civil War film/documentary/game/tv show" it'll either be Marvel or the American Civil War.
|
|
#
?
Jul 7, 2017 23:02
|
|
|
Why do the barbarian tribes have Senates in Rome 2? 
|
|
#
?
Jul 8, 2017 04:03
|
|
|
Anyone who wants a fun let's play of total war games should check out Many a True Nerd on Youtube. His recent Rome campaign was fantastic and I'm having a good time watching his current Medieval 2 campaign.
|
|
#
?
Jul 8, 2017 04:23
|
|
|
Arcsquad12 posted:Anyone who wants a fun let's play of total war games should check out Many a True Nerd on Youtube. His recent Rome campaign was fantastic and I'm having a good time watching his current Medieval 2 campaign. Good to know. I scoured a bit youtube to find nice letsplays, and the only one I found that did tons of campaigns was LegendofTotalwar, who got on my nerves after two videos.
|
|
#
?
Jul 8, 2017 04:31
|
|
|
i forgot how great the combat animations in shogun 2 are. just saw one i hadn't before where a unit about to be charged threw their spear at one of the attackers and rips it out. lmao.
|
|
#
?
Jul 8, 2017 05:11
|
|
|
Roobanguy posted:i forgot how great the combat animations in shogun 2 are. just saw one i hadn't before where a unit about to be charged threw their spear at one of the attackers and rips it out. lmao. Even better when it's a rifle with a bayonet  ninjahedgehog posted:IIRC this one works by having bayoneted rifles use spear animations, resulting in this: canyoneer fucked around with this message at 05:24 on Jul 8, 2017 |
|
#
?
Jul 8, 2017 05:22
|
|
|
SeanBeansShako posted:Honestly I'd rather we'd have the option to take most of a broken army prisoner rather than playing whack a mole and chasing the stack down to the last man and either parole them for diplomacy, let them go or if you can afford it bribe them to be a volunteer legion in your faction. You can capture artillery in Warhammer, so there's hope for future titles. Issue is you can only capture your own race's artillery, and the scarcity of intra-race warfare plus the fact that the AI-only factions of a given race are usually poor as poo poo and not fielding much artillery, it's extremely rare to actually see the mechanic in action.
|
|
#
?
Jul 8, 2017 06:05
|
|
|
you could also capture artillery in Fall of the Samurai
|
|
#
?
Jul 8, 2017 06:05
|
|
|
Is Warhammer any good in comparison to the greats of Rome, Medieval 2, and Rome 2 DEI mod?
|
|
#
?
Jul 8, 2017 06:10
|
|
|
Warhammer is easily the most "game-ified" title in the series but it is also the most playable. It eschews a lot of the deeper elements of the campaign map for easy access, so it isn't as deep as say Attila, but you also don't have to juggle food or government as much. What it excels at beyond any other total war game is differentiating the factions. The Empire and dwarf campaigns are the closest to classic total war, while Greenskins are a heavy combat focused stripped down faction with little in the way of diplomacy or elections. Horde based factions like the beastmen have a really unique and neat mechanic where their entire nation is affected by lunar cycles, which confer massive bonuses as well as major penalties depending on which option you choose. It certainly isn't perfect however. The base game warriors of chaos faction sucks to play as and the beastmen are essentially them done right. It is also easily the hardest game to run down routing units and expect to rack up any kills. And the AI abuses the hell out of the forced March army stance on the campaign map to flee from you, leading to more sieges than field battles unless you try to ambush them, which is really difficult to do in the desert regions of the map. Several of the initial factions have crappy starting positions especially if you want to play as Orcs or dwarfs, who are stuck in the badlands beating each other apart for 200 turns while the rest of the world gets cool battles. Unless you blitz one faction, half the map will be destroyed before you can turn your attention north. Grab the King and the Warlord DLC to get two new starting points for Orcs and dwarfs which are in a much better spot to get into various scraps
|
|
#
?
Jul 8, 2017 06:23
|
|
|
KyloWinter posted:Is Warhammer any good in comparison to the greats of Rome, Medieval 2, and Rome 2 DEI mod? It is better than Rome 2, it's as good as if not better than I remember ME2 was (and I haven't played ME2 in years, so I got some rose-tinted glasses), and I don't know about that mod. I'll be real, I have no qualms with stating it's the best Total War in the series and I've played and beat every single one of them since Rome. It's easier to pick up and play and you'll spend a lot less time in any given campaign. You accomplish the long victory conditions in about 150-200 turns when you first play a game for most races. Of note, when you complete a campaign as, say, the Empire then playing as the Dwarfs, or the Beastmen, or the vampires is vastly different. The armies are much, much more varied with some armies completely eschewing unit types (vamps don't get ranged units for example. Dwarfs get no cavalry). So you'll happily play the game as a different race and it'll be a different, but familiar experience and it keeps it fresh. And you get to literally burn down the home forest of the elfs. It's wonderful. It's not as "deep" as Rome 2 or Attila but honestly, you won't miss having to deal with or micromanage something like Sanitation or food. It's still plenty deep and intuitive, but playing a Total War game that isn't Warhammer after playing TW:W is hard to do, brother man, and really not in a good way. jokes fucked around with this message at 07:17 on Jul 8, 2017 |
|
#
?
Jul 8, 2017 07:14
|
|
|
canyoneer posted:Even better when it's a rifle with a bayonet fuckin rad.
|
|
#
?
Jul 8, 2017 09:16
|
|
|
Arcsquad12 posted:Warhammer is easily the most "game-ified" title in the series but it is also the most playable. It eschews a lot of the deeper elements of the campaign map for easy access, so it isn't as deep as say Attila, but you also don't have to juggle food or government as much. To be honest, I've found Attilla's campaign/building aspect mostly added annoyance rather than depth. There were a number of largely redundant buildings having largely the same purpose through different means. In the end you'd usually settle for one optimal combination in most places anyway, you'd just have to jump through extra hoops to find it first. To that end I appreciate that Warhams has structured it in a more purpose-focused manner: Build this for recruitment, build this for money, build this for [unique effect]. Though while we're bitching, one continuing weak point of Warhams is the campaign map agent game. It's simply not particularly interesting to see a swarm of enemy agents converging on your armies to stall the hell out of them each turn. The whole thing just boils down to which side manages to get lucky with the ~30% roll to assassinate the other side's agents first. I usually just install a mod to disable agent actions altogether and use them in my armies on the battlefield instead, where they are way more fun and interesting. Still probably the best Total War game as far as I'm concerned, though. Perestroika fucked around with this message at 12:10 on Jul 8, 2017 |
|
#
?
Jul 8, 2017 10:43
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 6, 2024 17:14 |
|
|
I guess I'll stick my head above the parapet and say I love Empire, and have poured probably the most hours into that than any other game in the series. However, it was a loving disgrace that it was released in the state it was in, and yet somehow still managed to get good reviews in the press too
|
|
#
?
Jul 8, 2017 11:40
|
|
