|
A modern total war game would play out closer to World in Conflict for Wargame: Red Dragon. Similar army stacks/decks setup but vastly different tactics.
|
#
?
Sep 9, 2018 22:29
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 6, 2024 22:11 |
|
|
Pretty much, with some mechanics trying to find the right balance between fun and interesting to master combat. Sadly ETW was a bridge too far and they should have played it safe and focused more on the 17th century in retrospect.
|
|
|
#
?
Sep 9, 2018 22:30
|
|
|
The only way to make a 'modern' total war is to make warhammer 40k total war.
|
|
#
?
Sep 9, 2018 22:32
|
|
|
Arcsquad12 posted:A modern total war game would play out closer to World in Conflict for Wargame: Red Dragon. Similar army stacks/decks setup but vastly different tactics. Yeah, what I mean to say is that the 'a unit is a rectangle of 80-200 guys depending on your settings and you play by mashing rectangles against each other' thing that has been the bedrock of every TW game would have to go. e: \/\/ in some ways it's a pity SEGA picked up Relic because that means CA won't get a crack at the 40k license because that would create internal competition. Alchenar fucked around with this message at 22:37 on Sep 9, 2018 |
|
#
?
Sep 9, 2018 22:33
|
|
|
It would be nice to see a game where melee and ranged are equally powerful. Giving melee jet packs to powerslam the enemy would be a step in the right direction.
|
|
#
?
Sep 9, 2018 22:35
|
|
|
Fangz posted:The only way to make a 'modern' total war is to make warhammer 40k total war. I tried WH:TW and wanted to like it. I just couldn't get into all the units having so many spells and abilities. I just wanna line my dudes up for a fight, hit the enemy from the side, and charge my calvary into their rear while occasionally going first person to manually explode dudes with artillery. Speaking of a Rome 2 DLC I'd love: impaling bolts. I want to see those bolts go thru the hoplites in front of me and pin them to a building, drat it!
|
|
#
?
Sep 9, 2018 22:35
|
|
|
Warhammer Total War has some of my favourite campaign map gameplay in the franchise because they absolutely nailed making each faction play differently on the strategic level. The actual battles were something of a letdown because they are super flashy and hard to read, and the combat isn't as hyper lethal as FOTS or Attila which is the way I've come to like battles.
|
|
#
?
Sep 9, 2018 22:49
|
|
|
My Imaginary GF posted:I tried WH:TW and wanted to like it. I just couldn't get into all the units having so many spells and abilities. I just wanna line my dudes up for a fight, hit the enemy from the side, and charge my calvary into their rear while occasionally going first person to manually explode dudes with artillery. Just use Empire then? Most of their units don't have abilities. They're just normal people.
|
|
#
?
Sep 9, 2018 23:17
|
|
|
HerpicleOmnicron5 posted:Just use Empire then? Most of their units don't have abilities. They're just normal people. I mean playing one faction is gonna get old quick.
|
|
#
?
Sep 9, 2018 23:24
|
|
|
HerpicleOmnicron5 posted:Just use Empire then? Most of their units don't have abilities. They're just normal people. The strategic ai sucks
|
|
#
?
Sep 9, 2018 23:38
|
|
|
CharlestheHammer posted:I mean playing one faction is gonna get old quick. I've got something to confess. I usually only ever play one faction in a Total War game, and also don't usually finish campaigns. It doesn't get old quick, because the campaign doesn't end quick.
|
|
#
?
Sep 9, 2018 23:56
|
|
|
If they redid Empire I'd want them to actually either redo Napoleon or do the 17th or 19th centuries. 18th is cool and all but the ones it's sandwiched between are way cooler. Also, do Total War: Civilization with warhammer style assymetry and have aztec jaguar warriors fighting legions fighting voltigeurs fighting samurai fighting T-34s and they're all equal.
|
|
#
?
Sep 10, 2018 00:12
|
|
|
HerpicleOmnicron5 posted:I've got something to confess. I usually only ever play one faction in a Total War game, and also don't usually finish campaigns. It doesn't get old quick, because the campaign doesn't end quick. Huh, well then maybe that would work for him. Is there a reason you only play one?
|
|
#
?
Sep 10, 2018 00:21
|
|
|
CharlestheHammer posted:Is there a reason you only play one? Mostly because a game of Total War can be so lengthy in itself, you get to learn a fair amount about the late-game issues they can run into (Empire handling Chaos in Warhammer, for example, or the Mongols in Medieval, Civil War in Rome) and become more familiar with the early game. I usually get enough enjoyment out of one go, and with something like DeI, the intricacies of a faction take a lot more learning.
|
|
#
?
Sep 10, 2018 00:31
|
|
|
Edgar Allen Ho posted:If they redid Empire I'd want them to actually either redo Napoleon or do the 17th or 19th centuries. That sounds like the mod for medieval 2 that was made by a madman. Planet Wars k think it was called?
|
|
#
?
Sep 10, 2018 00:42
|
|
|
Captain Beans posted:Have you looked at UG"Civil War? It has more simplified graphics (but the style looks great) to really expand the battles to the scope that feels right for the American Civil War. It's overworld/strategy layer is simplified, almost like a Medieval 1 style, which I wish CA would try out again. The huge maps always seem cool, but the AI can never seem to handle it. Its prequel, Gettysburg, is available on the Humble Store for about $3 right now, which I recommend getting to see if the game is your kinda thing.
|
|
#
?
Sep 10, 2018 00:45
|
|
|
Beamed posted:Its prequel, Gettysburg, is available on the Humble Store for about $3 right now, which I recommend getting to see if the game is your kinda thing. Both of those are really enjoyable. I don't think they're quite comparable to Total War- the whole game is focused on immersive civil war battles that are a lot less gamey than TW battles, but they strike a really good mix between groggy armchair general and intuitive, fun gameplay. There's not too much learning curve, the tutorials and crucially, tooltips are actually helpful, and the simple graphics and real-time style manage to give you an edge-of-your-seat spectacle compared to a classic hex-based grog game. I also like that losing just has consequences for the campaign instead of forcing you to bash your head at the same mission again and again. The civil war version lets you invent a general with certain background traits for either side and progress through the campaign, raising and upgrading your regiments and getting higher commands as you succeed. It's really fun but the downside is it's basically a "the better you do the more resources you get" system where you go through the real war- win Bull Run for the Union and you're still getting the exact same Seven Days but you have more money and influence to raise and equip dudes. The Gettysburg version has historical generals and OOBs, but a cool branching campaign where you get to choose your battle plan between missions which, combined with if and how decisively you win, takes you through a variety of historical and althistory scenarios of the battle. Edgar Allen Ho fucked around with this message at 00:56 on Sep 10, 2018 |
|
#
?
Sep 10, 2018 00:53
|
|
|
Arcsquad12 posted:That sounds like the mod for medieval 2 that was made by a madman. Planet Wars k think it was called? Planetwar had dinosaurs fighting cookie monsters fighting predators fighting Supermen fighting Godzillas. It definitely is assymetric but in a way that is absolutely on drugs. I haven't played it since version 3 but I remember it being fun for the WTF factor involved.
|
|
#
?
Sep 10, 2018 07:51
|
|
|
quote:Planetwar Total War Version 3 ReleasedApr 21 2014News 3 comments Huh. Is there much of a modding scene for Empire to fix the AI etc?
|
|
#
?
Sep 10, 2018 08:09
|
|
|
There's also that Zelda Medieval 2 mod.
|
|
#
?
Sep 10, 2018 12:23
|
|
|
Which was recently(Several months ago) abandoned. The maker's shifted over to 0.AD and is working on an RTS. Same world, same story. By his own words he's tired of fighting the Med2 engine to do what he wants.
|
|
#
?
Sep 10, 2018 12:28
|
|
|
Another unpopular opinion: I thought that naval battles in Empire/Napoleon were exceptionally well done and did not understand the hate for them at all (other than the 'inability to catch a running force' annoyance that's equally true of armies. Stacking merchant ships on the trade nodes on the edge of the map also gave you something at sea to use your navy to fight over (other than just being a vehicle for moving armies) and an attractive resource to exploit. In was an interesting and good mechanic and I was really sad to see it disappear. Particularly as Rome II's naval battles were appallingly bad.
|
|
#
?
Sep 10, 2018 13:34
|
|
|
There were two problems with the Empire/Napoleon naval battles, in my opinion. The first was that the maps were too large and it took a very long time to engage (admitely, positioning is extremely important in that in particular, but even at the fastest speed it was a while before engagement began), the second is that when playing at full stacks the whole thing kind of becomes a mess to control and visualize, at least for me, since there were so many things you could micro in your units. CA could have done with limiting naval stacks to like ten units or something like that.
|
|
#
?
Sep 10, 2018 14:16
|
|
|
I vaguely recall another Med2 mod that was like, another fantasy world with super diverse factions based on history (not Teletubbies). Like you had a Prussia-like faction with tons of musketeers and cannons vs. not-Rome legions vs. Samurai etc...
|
|
#
?
Sep 10, 2018 14:46
|
|
|
I would love an age of sail game where the campaign map took place in real time and it was about managing an entire fleet across the Atlantic and Pacific oceans and then you could zoom down to individual level to control 1v1 engagements or play grand strategy and organize huge Trafalgar engagements using AI order queues like in CRPGs. No land war, make the map entirely ocean and coastlines. I was watching Master and Commander last night.
|
|
#
?
Sep 10, 2018 14:58
|
|
|
By "real time" do you just mean rts vs. tbs or do you mean "months of real life time to send your boats places"?
|
|
#
?
Sep 10, 2018 16:00
|
|
|
Senor Dog posted:By "real time" do you just mean rts vs. tbs or do you mean "months of real life time to send your boats places"? Real time as in you don't take turns on the campaign map the way you do in Total War or Civ. Kind of the way that 4X space games work or Empire at War. Arc Hammer fucked around with this message at 16:57 on Sep 10, 2018 |
|
#
?
Sep 10, 2018 16:27
|
|
|
Alchenar posted:Another unpopular opinion: I thought that naval battles in Empire/Napoleon were exceptionally well done and did not understand the hate for them at all (other than the 'inability to catch a running force' annoyance that's equally true of armies. Stacking merchant ships on the trade nodes on the edge of the map also gave you something at sea to use your navy to fight over (other than just being a vehicle for moving armies) and an attractive resource to exploit. In was an interesting and good mechanic and I was really sad to see it disappear. Particularly as Rome II's naval battles were appallingly bad. they're neat and esp cool in mp when people control a boat or two, but it gets messy and samey in a campaign with big stacks. It's also slow, super-micro-y in a way that's unlike the land battles and you kind of have to do them all manually (esp in fots. . . ) or you'll take dumb losses/damage.
|
|
#
?
Sep 10, 2018 16:37
|
|
|
I want to believe there’s people out there they play Silent Hunter and stuff like that in real time and actually spend years finishing a campaign. Also, I’d be down for a Sid Meier’s Pirates/TW crossover set in a cartoony piratey version of the caribbean.
|
|
#
?
Sep 10, 2018 17:33
|
|
|
Edgar Allen Ho posted:I want to believe there’s people out there they play Silent Hunter and stuff like that in real time and actually spend years finishing a campaign. Yes, even in SA.
|
|
#
?
Sep 10, 2018 17:57
|
|
|
Arcsquad12 posted:Real time as in you don't take turns on the campaign map the way you do in Total War or Civ. Kind of the way that 4X space games work or Empire at War. Then I sadly must withhold my 
|
|
#
?
Sep 10, 2018 18:45
|
|
|
I can raise you That specific scenario.
|
|
#
?
Sep 10, 2018 19:58
|
|
|
Mr Luxury Yacht posted:I vaguely recall another Med2 mod that was like, another fantasy world with super diverse factions based on history (not Teletubbies). Oh, you mean Thera: Legacy of the Great Torment. It also had not-aztecs with dinosaur cavalry and the legions could get firearms.
|
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2018 01:44
|
|
|
If I remember right, the Darth who did DarthMod worked on the Ultimate General games. One thing I like about them is that the AI is smart, but not too smart. They'll pull off some devious flanks or concentrated attacks, but they don't play the game unnaturally to their advantage. I'd love it if the team would make a Napoleonic game or could work the system into using melee well. It's a really cool way of doing large-scale tactical RTS games on a budget.
|
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2018 17:40
|
|
|
Yeah, I'd love if Darth would bring his design lessons from Ultimate General to a more interesting setting, the US Civil War might be the one setting I have the least possible interest in, competing with the Viking stuff.
|
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2018 18:02
|
|
|
The AI feels a little cheaty at higher difficulties, because they know the math and stats of exactly how an engagement is going to go before they commit to it. So they won't do a melee charge if the chances of success are marginal or if they're eyeballing the odds like a human player would. Also computers are really good at micromanaging units and you really need to babysit your cavalry or else they'll get wrecked
|
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2018 18:15
|
|
|
Does UG have a full map campaign or is it just the one battle?
|
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2018 18:21
|
|
|
Billzasilver posted:Does UG have a full map campaign or is it just the one battle? UG Gettysburg is the one battle, but it plays out in a series of engagements on the three days. Each phase can branch into the next in pretty different ways. I think there are a total of like 30 different ways it can play out. It also has skirmish quick battle mode on non Gettysburg maps. UG Civil War has full campaigns for both sides.
|
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2018 18:26
|
|
|
UG Civil War will typically be that deal of "choose to fight one of several battles: One large scale historical one and a bunch of smaller side-missions." When you win the main battle, you move on to the next group of missions. When you're between battle, you spend money on building armies, recruiting officers, outfitting troops, etc. You also have skills for your main general that you can upgrade like an RPG that can give you soldier buffs, income bonuses, more space to make armies, better replenishment, and other stuff.
|
|
#
?
Sep 11, 2018 18:52
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 6, 2024 22:11 |
|
|
Arcsquad12 posted:A modern total war game would play out closer to World in Conflict for Wargame: Red Dragon. Similar army stacks/decks setup but vastly different tactics. I'd kill anyone of the developer's choosing just to get World in Conflict 2, honestly.
|
|
#
?
Sep 13, 2018 01:42
|
|
