|
So you know how sometimes in more recent games of the series when some cavalry is killed you'll see the riderless horse run away? It seems that those horses apparently count for taking capture points in sieges. 
|
#
?
Dec 7, 2017 05:06
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 6, 2024 21:39 |
|
|
Gobblecoque posted:A dream feature for future historical TW titles would be a bit of cultural melding depending on where you are and what you conquer. Like if you're a Germanic tribe and conquer a bunch of the Mediterranean then maybe you adopt some Roman/Greek architecture and armor instead of just all mudhuts and naked dudes all the time or if you conquer eastwards then your regular recruitment roster expands to include cataphracts or horse archers. It's always very unsatisfying in a TW game where you can conquer half the world but your civilization is as unchanged as if you had just stayed in your homeland the whole time. I liked Attila's Ostrogoth solution, where occupying a settlement with Roman recruitment buildings lets you recruit those units, but you can't actually construct the buildings yourself. Should definitely have been expanded on, though!
|
|
#
?
Dec 7, 2017 10:58
|
|
|
Klaus88 posted:Like you need anything other then horse archers in a total war game. How do you deal with sieges? Honest question.
|
|
#
?
Dec 7, 2017 11:27
|
|
|
Bloodly posted:How do you deal with sieges? Honest question. Wait 8-14 turns. Truly unbeatable 
|
|
#
?
Dec 7, 2017 11:42
|
|
|
Bloodly posted:How do you deal with sieges? Honest question. I wouldn't go all horse archers, if only because friendly fire issues start rising exponentially once you get enough units of Horse Archers in the same area, making the level of micro you need rise as well. I did a whole Nomad campaign (don't ask me why) and you have a few tools available to try and deal with sieges. 1) Starve out/autoresolve (this sucks) 2) Create a special sieging army of mercenary infantry and siege weapons (this isn't entirely reliable, given how arcane the mercenary system is) 3) If the balance of power is close enough, the enemy will sally out and get loving ruined on the field. (this is your most effective tactic, imo) 4) The siege defense AI is noticeably bad, even compared to the rest of the AI, so dismounted horsemen are good enough infantry in a pinch. New Butt Order fucked around with this message at 21:09 on Dec 7, 2017 |
|
#
?
Dec 7, 2017 21:07
|
|
|
i miss shogun2's like 4-turn siege timers so you could actually starve out garrisons in a reasonable timeframe
|
|
#
?
Dec 7, 2017 21:11
|
|
|
https://www.totalwar.com/blog/thrones-campaign-map-reveal Big detailed post about the map for Thrones of Britannia here. It looks/sounds great, really. Large map with settlements here.
|
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2017 16:12
|
|
|
John Charity Spring posted:https://www.totalwar.com/blog/thrones-campaign-map-reveal Woah, looks freaking HUGE! I'm pretty stoked about this one. I hope they have detailed and interesting maps and that they have animations between soldiers fighting again. Or well "again", they didn't have them in Warhammer, but afaik those things were still in the last historical TW game. Edit: or actually i went and checked after posting this and it seems like warhammer units still have animations between them, they just do them a lot less than in rome 2 so i never noticed Dongattack fucked around with this message at 16:30 on Dec 11, 2017 |
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2017 16:19
|
|
|
Gobblecoque posted:A dream feature for future historical TW titles would be a bit of cultural melding depending on where you are and what you conquer. Like if you're a Germanic tribe and conquer a bunch of the Mediterranean then maybe you adopt some Roman/Greek architecture and armor instead of just all mudhuts and naked dudes all the time or if you conquer eastwards then your regular recruitment roster expands to include cataphracts or horse archers. It's always very unsatisfying in a TW game where you can conquer half the world but your civilization is as unchanged as if you had just stayed in your homeland the whole time. Check out DEI for Rome 2. I've only played enough as Rome to see how far the feature goes, but a number of the units you recruit are "Romanized _____," or "Cohorts _____." You have a unit that's basically a standard Roman cohort that you could recruit from Rome itself, but depending on if you recruit them in Gaul, Thracia or Athens they will have different appearances. It's a nice touch. StarMinstrel posted:Strategic map is the same size I believe. There will probably never be a computer than can run Rome 2 or Attila all that well simply due to engine limitations. turn off the TV fucked around with this message at 16:44 on Dec 11, 2017 |
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2017 16:40
|
|
|
The brand new viking game is going to come out before the already done viking dlc for warhams 2 
|
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2017 17:27
|
|
|
turn off the TV posted:There will probably never be a computer than can run Rome 2 or Attila all that well simply due to engine limitations. The games still run bad on current high end systems? :/
|
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2017 02:41
|
|
|
StarMinstrel posted:The games still run bad on current high end systems? :/ They're 32 bit.
|
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2017 02:50
|
|
|
works fine for me. you're probably holding it wrong
|
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2017 03:30
|
|
|
turn off the TV posted:They're 32 bit. lol loving wut? hahahaha What about Warhammer though?
|
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2017 04:02
|
|
|
StarMinstrel posted:lol loving wut? hahahaha Warhammer is 64, which gives me hope that their loving about with the Attila engine for ToB will include a move to 64 bit. That extra vram makes a huge difference in a Total War game.
|
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2017 04:49
|
|
|
John Charity Spring posted:https://www.totalwar.com/blog/thrones-campaign-map-reveal From now on I will always refer to Nottingham as Snotingham.
|
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2017 06:20
|
|
|
Dongattack posted:Woah, looks freaking HUGE! In Empire through R2's release, the animations were the only ways soldiers could interact. It was acceptable yet weird-looking in Shogun 2, but melee was a problem in Empire/Napoleon/R2 and to a lesser extent, Attila. It looked bad, played bad, and resulted in tons of bugs. They started cutting down on them for gameplay/stability reasons.
|
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2017 06:30
|
|
|
V for Vegas posted:From now on I will always refer to Nottingham as Snotingham. When I lived there nobody believed me when I told them that was the original name.
|
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2017 12:24
|
|
|
V for Vegas posted:From now on I will always refer to Nottingham as Snotingham. I wonder if they'll take a page from CK2's book and change province/city names depending on who's holding them. I always liked how if the Welsh conquered England they'd call it Lloegyr, for example.
|
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2017 15:41
|
|
|
Plan Z posted:In Empire through R2's release, the animations were the only ways soldiers could interact. It was acceptable yet weird-looking in Shogun 2, but melee was a problem in Empire/Napoleon/R2 and to a lesser extent, Attila. It looked bad, played bad, and resulted in tons of bugs. They started cutting down on them for gameplay/stability reasons. It was especially bad in Rome 2 because the sync kill animations meant that all of your nice and beautiful formations turned into mosh pits pretty quickly, and smaller forces would be able to hold out for at times absurd lengths because they couldn't be interacted with during animations. I think that the animations in Warhammer are better than the old system. Soldiers don't sync up into paired animations nearly as much, but the basic attack animations look way more like they're actually fighting each other.
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2017 02:40
|
|
|
i’ve been playing rome 2 (the empire divided campaign) and there’s not many synced animations and soldiers keep formation to sometimes absurd degrees. did they backport the warhammer system or are you guys crazy
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2017 04:18
|
|
|
BBJoey posted:i’ve been playing rome 2 (the empire divided campaign) and there’s not many synced animations and soldiers keep formation to sometimes absurd degrees. did they backport the warhammer system or are you guys crazy CA toned down the matched combat/sync animations significantly after release, I think they finally settled with their current numbers around the time of Emperor Edition's release. Prior to that you could have infantry fights where single soldiers could wind up five rows deep into their opponent's formations, tearing poo poo up and being generally unkillable because of the animations.
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2017 04:35
|
|
|
EDIT: The system was lovely in Empire/Napoleon, but melee was rare enough that the worst you just kind of had to put up with your cavalry taking forever to kill a cannon crew and Shogun 2 made the kills relatively quick and soldiers lined up more easily. Rome 2 was a mess. It took forever for units to pick duel partners, animations looked really bad (most were very slow, very long, wimpy-looking, and took up a ton of space). There was no unit collision on release, so soldiers would morph into these Cronenbergian mosh pits and/or teleport and Naruto-run across large distances to get to their partners, and everybody still wiggles and rotates in place doing checks to see if it's their turn yet. And that's just to start.turn off the TV posted:It was especially bad in Rome 2 because the sync kill animations meant that all of your nice and beautiful formations turned into mosh pits pretty quickly, and smaller forces would be able to hold out for at times absurd lengths because they couldn't be interacted with during animations. Yeah, the gameplay problems were the biggest hits. Sound got hit badly, too. I don't know why, either. Every time I zoom in on those battles, they sound really muted and sounds don't really match animations. It's such a weird thing that battles from Medieval 2 or Rome 1 look and play so much better than later games. I'm glad that they settled on the version they did for Warhammer. The one feature I do miss though is when in Rome 1, if a unit was winning, they would push the others back and eventually envelope them. I miss charging cavalry into a blob and watching as they cut "fingers" through the pile of enemies. Plan Z fucked around with this message at 04:46 on Dec 13, 2017 |
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2017 04:39
|
|
|
I am glad that Warhammer changed back yo a system where soldiers have weight. As silly it is that they are sent flying when charged by anything large...god it looks so meaty.
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2017 12:50
|
|
|
BBJoey posted:i’ve been playing rome 2 (the empire divided campaign) and there’s not many synced animations and soldiers keep formation to sometimes absurd degrees. did they backport the warhammer system or are you guys crazy People complained about soldiers doing elaborate blocking animations (e.g where one guy hits the other guy's shield repeatedly while he backs away, causing both of them to physically move several metres) that displaced soldiers out of their formation so they lowered chances of those kind of animations occurring with a major patch last year. I never played with DEI so I don't care about formations and modded sync animations back in. Fast forward to now, Empire Divided changed the pool of animations. Besides rendering animation mods incompatible, it lowered the number of animations. Updated mods are currently stuck in a stopgap limbo. the one I used before ED as a side-effect reduces melee gore but retains sync kills that were removed with ED. At least for R2, turning off formation attacks allows your units to be engaged in melee across its frontage. Keeping formation is a negative unless you enjoy watching models stand centimetres out of combat while the entire unit slowly becomes exhausted. It might be good if you're using chaff or hoplites to hold superior units in place but it is essentially irrelevant when at the beginning when everything is low tier chaff and still mostly irrelevant 60 turns later when you field better stacks and pack artillery. It's not Attila or Warhammer, you can afford multiple armies with all the trimmings from the beginning.
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2017 14:23
|
|
|
I think that there isn't a reason to always have formations on versus formations off, especially there's lots of missiles around. When playing as the Romans I usually leave my infantry in formation until I'm at a stage in a fight where I think that there isn't any more risk of my troops getting hit my missile fire or getting flanked.
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2017 15:12
|
|
|
BBJoey posted:i’ve been playing rome 2 (the empire divided campaign) and there’s not many synced animations and soldiers keep formation to sometimes absurd degrees. did they backport the warhammer system or are you guys crazy Hopefully they manage to keep this for Thrones of Britannia, because the shield wall was the go-to strategy for pretty much everybody at the time.
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2017 16:23
|
|
|
It always seriously bugged me to my perfect shield wall just break formation at the slightest contact.
|
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2017 19:33
|
|
|
Plan Z posted:It always seriously bugged me to my perfect shield wall just break formation at the slightest contact. Personally i always blame Titus Pullo for such undisciplined actions. 
|
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2017 08:16
|
|
|
turn off the TV posted:CA toned down the matched combat/sync animations significantly after release, I think they finally settled with their current numbers around the time of Emperor Edition's release. Prior to that you could have infantry fights where single soldiers could wind up five rows deep into their opponent's formations, tearing poo poo up and being generally unkillable because of the animations. Anyone remembers how it was in Medieval 2, as a comparison? I seem to recall seeing a lot of interactions between individual units, sometimes to the detriment of some (like wasn't there a long standing bug that made units with two handed weapons garbage for a long while until Kingdoms fixed it or something?)
|
|
#
?
Dec 17, 2017 21:38
|
|
|
there were some two man synced animations, but soldiers weren’t locked in place while playing the animation, and were easily pushed around as formations shifted, so often you’d end up with dudes stabbing air and dramatically falling down for no reason. also the two handed bug was that the two handed axe weapon type (the billhook most notably) didn’t have an animation for attacking infantry so any unit with those weapons was completely worthless unless attacking cavalry. iirc two handed swords weren’t affected so a temporary fix was to give axes the sword animation set, but it looked a bit wonky because you’d have soldiers stabbing people with an axe. BBJoey fucked around with this message at 22:37 on Dec 17, 2017 |
|
#
?
Dec 17, 2017 22:34
|
|
|
BBJoey posted:there were some two man synced animations, but soldiers weren’t locked in place while playing the animation, and were easily pushed around as formations shifted, so often you’d end up with dudes stabbing air and dramatically falling down for no reason. As late as Attila axe and mace units still pierce people's stomachs with their weapons.
|
|
#
?
Dec 18, 2017 20:20
|
|
|
Mans posted:As late as Attila axe and mace units still pierce people's stomachs with their weapons. Truly a brutal time.
|
|
#
?
Dec 18, 2017 20:26
|
|
|
Yeah, it's great when you see someone slice another guy's head off or stab his collarbone with a mace.
Plan Z fucked around with this message at 01:30 on Dec 21, 2017 |
|
#
?
Dec 21, 2017 01:25
|
|
|
Honestly the bigger problem than anything else is TW hasn't done light/medium infantry well pretty much ever and they never will. Even in the game with the best combat, shogun 2, it's not particularly well done.
|
|
#
?
Dec 21, 2017 01:45
|
|
|
Pre-Norman England. http://www.pcgamer.com/total-war-thrones-of-britannia-presents-alfred-the-great-in-new-footage-and-screens/ Unzip and Attack posted:My guess is that it will be Alfred the Great - with the popularity of shows like Vikings and The Last Kingdom, they would do well to dip into that market while the iron is hot.
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2018 17:50
|
|
|
Good call, but they announced the setting and dates almost two months ago.
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2018 18:11
|
|
|
StarMinstrel posted:Anyone remembers how it was in Medieval 2, as a comparison? I seem to recall seeing a lot of interactions between individual units, sometimes to the detriment of some (like wasn't there a long standing bug that made units with two handed weapons garbage for a long while until Kingdoms fixed it or something?) Medi 2 and all the other old-engine games didn't have direct sync animations like the modern games had. You had instead units using canned animations against each other which led to more dynamic moments like two or more units ganging up on some poor bastard or a few fools charging while the rest of the unit brings up their shields. They also didn't look very good, even by the standards of the time, and caused some units to behave poorly or strangely. Though units behaving strangely is a core part of the TW experience imo.
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2018 18:59
|
|
|
So I was recently listening to Mike Duncan’s history of Rome, and just got past the crisis of the third century. I was wondering, when he was speaking about the empire needing a more mobile force and having a full cavalry army reinforce more stationary legions, is that a valid tactic in Rome II? Do full cavalry armies move faster on the campaign map?
|
|
#
?
Jan 7, 2018 00:04
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 6, 2024 21:39 |
|
|
StarMinstrel posted:So I was recently listening to Mike Duncan’s history of Rome, and just got past the crisis of the third century. I was wondering, when he was speaking about the empire needing a more mobile force and having a full cavalry army reinforce more stationary legions, is that a valid tactic in Rome II? Do full cavalry armies move faster on the campaign map? I think that it might work like that in Rome 2, at least in the older games armies moved as quickly as the slowest unit.
|
|
#
?
Jan 7, 2018 00:19
|
|