|
The public beta of the next patch is available now and it changes a fair bit. Big rebalance, victory condition changes (notably for the Gaels, no longer got that Have 5 Vassals condition), UI tweaks, some new stuff generally. Seems good from what I've played around with so far.
|
#
?
May 16, 2018 01:56
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 6, 2024 14:55 |
|
|
missed the most important change: Fixed icon shown on the LCD screen of the Logitech G19 keyboard
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2018 02:37
|
|
|
ZearothK posted:Where was it stated that it is in the Warhammer iteration of Warscape? I don't remember any concrete info on the game, just what was stated in the FAQ. I was hoping it would be a new iteration of it, given it's a major title and all. No idea, I more meant presumably its built off their latest engine which is the warhammer one. Rather than ToB which is built off the worst engine since Empire. No I'm not salty, what are you talking about?
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2018 13:25
|
|
|
ToB runs perfectly fine though, with frames comparable to Warhammer. I'm getting ~80 frames in 1440p on my 980 Ti, although the benchmark puts me at 55 frames for what that's worth. Yeah, the engine is that whole extended 32 bit thing so it can't detect more than 3.5 GB of VRAM but you can override that if you want. Even with everything turned up to maximum and massive battles it barely breaks 2.8GB used so it's got plenty of headroom unlike Attila. You can argue that an engine is "bad" but that's a pretty meaningless statement unless you can demonstrate a mechanism by which the engine is responsible for a certain failing. I'm not going to argue that the engine performed well in Attila, because it didn't, but it seems weird to have a problem with the engine in ToB when we have the actual product and can see that it's perfectly fine? Regardless, the beta patch changes look really good and I'm glad they are going to tweak and support the game despite it being a smaller title.
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2018 15:25
|
|
|
So has anybody had much success with the Welsh with the new changes? It feels as though the changes to food really screw you over in a campaign start that already depends so much on luck then on anything you actually do.
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2018 19:22
|
|
|
rome 2, attila and britannia perform fine on my computer. perhaps those of you having issues are holding it wrong.
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2018 00:12
|
|
|
shalcar posted:ToB runs perfectly fine though, with frames comparable to Warhammer. Overriding the amount of VRAM it can use doesn't actually do anything unless I'm thinking of a different workaround to you? ToB does run fine, it just doesn't run as well as it should. Detail is a step down from warhammer and if anything on my system it runs slightly worse. The campaign layer is hugely simplified and there is much less decision making for the AI but turn times per faction are comparitively slow, even if since there aren't many factions the overall times are okay. Given there are no agents and vastly reduced building trees its weird that the AI turns hitch at all apart from battles. Basically for me, for the simplicity of the game the turn times and loading are too long for me to really bother to play it, if they were snappy I would be cool to gently caress around more but they're in this annoying place where they are just long enough to discourage that for me. Other people have different thresholds for this stuff and thats fine, if turn times are anything longer than "fast" i just go play DeI because if I'm gonna wait for turns to end I'm gonna play that one. FWIW I have an i7 and SSD so maybe I just have high standards because I don't think its a hardware limitation? I think its a servicable engine but not a good one, definitely better than Attila though. Rome 2 and Warhams run fine for me, Attila is sloooow, ToB runs okay.
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2018 02:55
|
|
|
Question: Are the Dwarves a bad starting faction to pick if you're new to Total War: Warhammer? I tried the Dwarves since it said they had an easy start, but I picked Normal difficulty. I had to save-scum a bit to make what little progress I did, and then all my armies got wiped out by the Orkz. I know the dwarves are meant to be played defensively, and that they have no cavalry units. I've mostly tried to stick to auto-resolves if I can, though. I thought maybe that I'd be better off trying the Orkz, since I saw somewhere that they have cheap units and excel in fighting in large numbers. Disclaimer: My issues may be due to the fact that I am bad at strategy games.
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2018 11:14
|
|
|
Max Wilco posted:Question: Are the Dwarves a bad starting faction to pick if you're new to Total War: Warhammer? I tried the Dwarves since it said they had an easy start, but I picked Normal difficulty. I had to save-scum a bit to make what little progress I did, and then all my armies got wiped out by the Orkz. IMO, Empire is a better faction for teaching you the basics of tactical combat because their roster is the definition of jack-of-all-trades, and is a good one to learn combined arms tactics with. It's just that the Empire is going to be in the crosshairs of a lot of hostile factions, and is the main bulwark for the endgame threat of Chaos on top of other hostile threats that will occupy at least half your flanks. Dwarfs, in comparison, have extremely sturdy units and tough garrisons that will weather swarms of Orcs, and once you break the Greenskin's main stronghold, can effectively pin down that flank until they're all dead and your corner of the map is secure.
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2018 11:59
|
|
|
The easy Dwarf start is a lie. Grimgor lives just down south and he is the strongest early game leader and he will(and likely did) wreck you if you don't know what you're doing. Vampire Counts are the better start in Warhammer if you're new to the game or inexperienced with TW. VC have no real rival for the early start of the game, unlike Dwarfs, Mannfred is strong early game and top tier by the end of it, and their roster is pretty diverse and fun to play around. Just remember that you're not suppose to care much for all those zombies and skeletons, they cheap trash infantry whose job is to die and to tie up enemy units, your real power is all the flying beats and nasty monsters.
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2018 12:00
|
|
|
Max Wilco posted:Question: Are the Dwarves a bad starting faction to pick if you're new to Total War: Warhammer? I tried the Dwarves since it said they had an easy start, but I picked Normal difficulty. I had to save-scum a bit to make what little progress I did, and then all my armies got wiped out by the Orkz. Just gonna direct you to the warhams thread because gently caress if it isn't tedious in there right now. We need some new posters. Just ask this again. https://forums.somethingawful.com/showthread.php?threadid=3835548&pagenumber=397#lastpost
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2018 12:56
|
|
|
Max Wilco posted:Question: Are the Dwarves a bad starting faction to pick if you're new to Total War: Warhammer? I tried the Dwarves since it said they had an easy start, but I picked Normal difficulty. I had to save-scum a bit to make what little progress I did, and then all my armies got wiped out by the Orkz. I'm going to second Electronico6 on Vampire Counts being the easiest to get to grips with. Your units are cheap and expendable but durable which makes them quite forgiving when you make battlefield mistakes but your core units are super tough which gives you some punch. The lack of ranged units simplifies approaches as you know exactly what you need to do : get in there and fight, no worrying about skirmishing or getting caught skirmishing when you should have been charging. The hero units are easily some of the strongest in the game and their start has good access to income and limited enemies. Corruption doesn't bother the beginner player as much because you are going to be taking a bunch of time anyway, so the slow and steady creep gives you direction by limiting your options for overextending.
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2018 13:15
|
|
|
3rding the Vamps, their whole raise dead mechanic means you can get away with a lot of bullshit and oftentimes actually benefit from losing half of your army. Plus the Dorf Grudge mechanic is probably the most annoying campaign effect in the game.
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2018 15:44
|
|
|
Can anyone explain how Heroism works for the welsh? I sack settlements and it goes down, I take over settlements and it still goes down? I saw the pop up notifications in the beginning about how my people want to hold on to traditional territories and such, but then why is it going down even when I'm sacking things far away or holding onto settlements that are just in West Seaxe territory?
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2018 23:46
|
|
|
heroism is an incentive to play small and tall. if you expand too wide you’ll need to balance that with fame, victories and levelling generals.
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2018 23:48
|
|
|
BBJoey posted:heroism is an incentive to play small and tall. if you expand too wide you’ll need to balance that with fame, victories and levelling generals. Okay, but then how did I end up with a negative value under the Levelling Generals category? edit: sacking lowers the "settlements" category for heroism which is dumb, even when I just fought a battle at that settlement. I have to just catch armies out in the open I guess? DeadFatDuckFat fucked around with this message at 23:56 on May 17, 2018 |
|
#
?
May 17, 2018 23:51
|
|
|
it shouldn’t. i don’t really understand how those numbers are calculated - it might be that the previous turn you leveled up generals but nobody levelled up this turn so it’s relatively negative?
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2018 23:56
|
|
|
I think maybe that category is when Generals other than my King level up? I just won a battle with one of my generals and that category went (more) negative after the victory.
|
|
#
?
May 17, 2018 23:58
|
|
|
My heroism is now hovering around 100 and I don’t know why. Longbowmen are the business though. And welsh spearmen are surprisingly tough
|
|
#
?
May 19, 2018 03:34
|
|
|
Beefeater1980 posted:My heroism is now hovering around 100 and I don’t know why. It is always fun watching units just melt under concentrated fire from longbows.
|
|
#
?
May 19, 2018 04:17
|
|
|
nvm
alsothere fucked around with this message at 21:41 on May 19, 2018 |
|
#
?
May 19, 2018 19:13
|
|
|
I just got to defend two different settlements with the Welsh and boy were they massacres. I was able to bring down their siege towers with concentrated fire arrows, leaving the only option for the enemy was through the gate and then it was just a matter of creating a wall of men so that the oil and arrows would slowly chip away at the enemy. Also that gave me the time to see some of the death animations and watching a man full of arrows writhe in the dirt desperate to get away from it all is kind of depressing.
|
|
#
?
May 20, 2018 03:31
|
|
|
Hunt11 posted:Also that gave me the time to see some of the death animations and watching a man full of arrows writhe in the dirt desperate to get away from it all is kind of depressing. Imagine when blood gets added in. I wonder if they will charge for it again, or maybe gift it to people who have it for Attila or something.
|
|
#
?
May 20, 2018 05:03
|
|
|
Dramicus posted:or maybe gift it Lol
|
|
#
?
May 20, 2018 07:02
|
|
|
Koramei posted:Lol They did that for Warhammer 2.
|
|
#
?
May 20, 2018 07:49
|
|
|
Has anyone played the Ancient Empires mod for Atilla? I think it came out this last week. Wondering if I should bother with a reinstall of Attila just for it.
|
|
#
?
May 20, 2018 18:09
|
|
|
Dramicus posted:They did that for Warhammer 2.  whoah I'm genuinely surprised. Maybe you're right then.
|
|
#
?
May 20, 2018 18:15
|
|
|
Unzip and Attack posted:Has anyone played the Ancient Empires mod for Atilla? I think it came out this last week. Wondering if I should bother with a reinstall of Attila just for it. It's made by people who have particular ideas about how "realistic" ancient combat should be. So stuff like fatigue completely cripples units, and units with 300 men will break after losing 50. Stuff like that.
|
|
#
?
May 20, 2018 19:05
|
|
|
Unzip and Attack posted:Has anyone played the Ancient Empires mod for Atilla? I think it came out this last week. Wondering if I should bother with a reinstall of Attila just for it. drat now I'm wondering the same thing. It's a weird one though, if it was an overhaul of the atilla timeframe I'd be excited but I genuinely don't understand why you would want DeI but with less progress on a worse engine ... *goes to install it anyway*
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2018 11:12
|
|
|
Okay so I've played Ancient Empires for an hour or two, its actually not bad. Not really sure about the campaign layer so far, there are like a million different buildings with very detailed and confusing icons and they all cost upkeep so its hard to tell what is worth building and what isn't (for example, a main settlement upgrade gave me an extra 400 gold but cost 400 extra upkeep). I imagine there will be a lot of balancing to do here. My finances randomly fluctuated and I couldn't really tell why. Turn times about as long as Mortal Empires. Food and culture are extremely important if you don't want to haemorrage PO. Lots of stuff taken from DeI but made "harder" like there is patrol stance but instead of lowering unit upkeep it increases it... yay. The battles are pretty good though, long enough for tactics to matter but less about impenetrable hoplite blocks than DeI and more about a big dynamic scrum, it seems like most greek faction infantry don't even fight in hoplite phalanxes, though theuros and some elite infantry can form spear walls which are okay. Rosters are pretty much DeI rosters, at the moment the playable factions are Rome, Carthage, Nabataen arabs, Pergamon, Seleukia, Macedonia, Ptolemiacs, Armenians, Parthians. The roman roster is comically huge whereas the arabic and parthian rosters are very small. Battle performance is also suprisingly good, I get decent FPS even though units are similarly huge as in DeI, I assume because there is much less visual variety within units, higher than average for CA but wayyyy below DeI which has very varied units, which I love but tanks performance. Battle AI is godawful though at least makes some attempt to guard its archers with spearmen, if you play as rome/carthage it opens with Hannibal v Scipio and I absolutely annihilated Hannibal, next turn the Carthaginians attacked my huge army in a very stupid battle because autoresolve seems wonky, otoh I like when TW AI is stupidly aggressive since you get more fights and dont just have to benny hill for 5 turns like in Warhams. In terms of unit balance: Pike phalanxes are extremely strong and immediately massacre horses and do horrendous damage to even elite infantry when charged from the front. They will get chipped away at through the fight but seem to beat most infantry frontally even when massively outnumbered. Elephants are turbo killing machines, I charged into the back of a blob and killed 500 men in about 20 seconds. Javelins are the only skirmishers that do DPS, archers and slingers are okay against horses but they are insanely inaccurate and basically can't hit anything so you can even really use them to kill other skirmishers. Hammer and anvil is very much in play, even elite units will rout very fast if charged from behind by cavalry so having a decent cavalry force is basically an I-Win button. Armenia seems very strong because of this since they have psuedo legionaries, horse archers and crazy good cataphracts but I don't know what their campaign experience is like. e: in conclusion I have gone from not interested at all to fairly interested, but I think its gonna be a year or two before this is really good but may be worth playing already for people who are more hardcore than me, I like a more straightforward campaign layer than this and think they could do with removing like half the building options and making some stuff less "challenging" (aka, if you want to build/do anything you're gonna bleed PO and upkeep). I think DeI strikes a better balance between being more complex than a vanilla game but relatively easy to thrive. Communist Thoughts fucked around with this message at 17:38 on May 21, 2018 |
|
#
?
May 21, 2018 17:32
|
|
|
I opened up my Mide save after the patch and I've got public order problems loving everywhere now lol
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2018 18:48
|
|
|
I'm getting back into Shogun 2, it's so drat good. Are there any fun mods for it, or quality of life additions?
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2018 19:10
|
|
|
Fuligin posted:I'm getting back into Shogun 2, it's so drat good. Are there any fun mods for it, or quality of life additions? I would say get a mod that makes realm divide more sane so that your ally who has suck by you through thick and thin for the last 100 years doesn't suddenly have an aneurysm and turn on you. There are different approaches to fixing it, I prefer the mod that gradually scales the penalty instead of applying it instantly.
|
|
#
?
May 21, 2018 21:20
|
|
|
Fuligin posted:I'm getting back into Shogun 2, it's so drat good. Are there any fun mods for it, or quality of life additions? For big conversions, I found the Sekigahara campaign mod pretty good. Kicks the timetable forward into the late Sengoku era, and changes up the battles quite a bit as you'll see more professionalised armies and lots and lots of firearms right from the start. Magni fucked around with this message at 13:39 on May 22, 2018 |
|
#
?
May 22, 2018 04:29
|
|
|
I've only used mod that increased deadliness of towers, they aren't the issue otherwise.
|
|
#
?
May 22, 2018 12:57
|
|
|
nopantsjack posted:Ancient Empires stuff How complete is the mod for a beta version? I get the impression from your post that it's essentially done save for a few balancing issues. How is campaign AI? Do the factions build large and balanced armies? I'm really interested in giving this a go. Rome 2 in the Attila engine sounds great. I never had much of an issue with performance in Attila and my pet peeve was the Hun Horde mechanic.
|
|
#
?
May 24, 2018 05:43
|
|
|
Funky See Funky Do posted:How complete is the mod for a beta version? I get the impression from your post that it's essentially done save for a few balancing issues. How is campaign AI? Do the factions build large and balanced armies? I didn't play around with it that much, I ended up uninstalling it because i always put TW games on my teeny SSD which was like 95% full and I needed room for the Dark Souls remaster! I do plan to play more of it down the line though because I was quite impressed, going in with low expectations and coming out with "finally a reason to play attila! those crazy modders did it!". I don't think all the factions are in by a long way, but Rome and Carthage probably are done, Rome in particular has about 50-60 diff units. Armenia and Macedonia also looked pretty much there. I'm afraid I don't really know about CAI other than it was quite aggressive (to a slightly stupid extent, but I prefer that to overly skittish and defensive) for instance Carthage sallied out to fight me with an army that was really never going to win, though that might have been a autoresolve issue not an AI one. If you're interested its definitly worth a shot, I wasn't really interested and still liked what I saw. I'd also like to know your impressions if you stick around with a campaign longer than me.
|
|
#
?
May 24, 2018 11:33
|
|
|
playing age of charlemagne as asturias and holy poo poo rebellions everywhere
|
|
#
?
May 25, 2018 01:31
|
|
|
nopantsjack posted:I didn't play around with it that much, I ended up uninstalling it because i always put TW games on my teeny SSD which was like 95% full and I needed room for the Dark Souls remaster! I do plan to play more of it down the line though because I was quite impressed, going in with low expectations and coming out with "finally a reason to play attila! those crazy modders did it!". I did end up playing about 15 turns into a Roman campaign. I like it. It's definitely not done but it's complete enough to play. The building system is bloated and needs someone to sit down with a calculator to take a good look at the upkeep costs. There's about 30 different building types with many of them having branching trees but like all total war games there's about 5 that are any good when you take into consideration the upkeep cost (at least for Rome which has the most complex of all the building trees). If you just build what you think you might need or want in a province you'll end up destroying your economy. All of my regions have an identical building lay out because of it. The units are cool and they've tweaked battles so they'll actually take time. An elite unit won't chew strait through a low tier unit in a matter of seconds. Most battles have ended in me completely encircling the enemy and even when encircled the AI wont instantly route. They've done something to autoresolve too so that even with a superior army you'll have to fight all but the most lopsided battles. Siege units don't destroy walls in a few hits anymore and are far less accurate. A had a catapult doing about 2% damage per hit to a tower and it was lucky to land a hit once every ten volleys. All of that might sound really negative but the mod owns even in its incomplete state. The AI seems to make mostly smart choices and is aggressive. It fields armies that are balanced even if it's not too good at using them (but it's total war so no change from vanilla there). I really like the supply mechanic. I had an army laying siege to Arretium while I had nothing in the area which ran out of supplies on their own and had to run back to friendly territory. It's a slow burn and you'll need to pick up the 4 turns a year optional pack for it or Scipio will be an old man before he gets out of Africa.
|
|
#
?
May 25, 2018 04:07
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 6, 2024 14:55 |
|
|
ToB: worth the money? Hope so because I impulse bought it last night and am about to play
|
|
#
?
May 25, 2018 21:56
|
|