|
Tirranek posted:It would be dumb but very on theme to have Bretonnian cavalry get antsy and suffer Medieval II gave some units a trait that made them attack without orders. Really annoying but very fitting considering how often it happened.
|
#
?
May 14, 2022 19:42
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 7, 2024 00:54 |
|
|
You’d think there’s be some poo poo in the background where, like, with a sufficient leader that wouldn’t happen. Or with a sufficient leader, units would move and turn more rapidly or whatever.
|
|
#
?
May 14, 2022 20:04
|
|
|
Thinking of giving SFO a go in 2 to mix things up before IE comes out, can anyone recommend it, or fun campaigns to do with it?
|
|
#
?
May 14, 2022 22:20
|
|
|
DaysBefore posted:Medieval II gave some units a trait that made them attack without orders. Really annoying but very fitting considering how often it happened. That was a pretty legit feature. I cannot count the number of history, fantasy and historical fiction books that I have read where that sort of thing is a major plot point. It was an interesting balance feature too, in games where super heavy cavalry were so overwhelmingly powerful. Having your French noble knights just decide "hold my beer" and go at it while your pikemen or whatever desperately try to catch up certainly led to more interesting fights than the Bretonnian equivalent of perfectly microing your cycle charges to defeat anyone flawlessly.
|
|
#
?
May 15, 2022 00:21
|
|
|
That was a thing on tabletop Knights Errant. Realm and onwards were controllable, but as soon as Errant saw an enemy unit they had to take a pass a leadership check or it was chargin' time.
|
|
#
?
May 15, 2022 00:46
|
|
|
Your Brain on Hugs posted:Thinking of giving SFO a go in 2 to mix things up before IE comes out, can anyone recommend it, or fun campaigns to do with it? Go pick up those survival campaign or whatever mods that double greenskin/skaven unit counts and take Belegar for a spin. Lots of grudgin' and avengin'. Maybe take Unnatural Selection too, and give Skarsnik and Queek maxed out bonuses.
|
|
#
?
May 15, 2022 01:17
|
|
|
Your Brain on Hugs posted:Thinking of giving SFO a go in 2 to mix things up before IE comes out, can anyone recommend it, or fun campaigns to do with it? I had fun with a Settra go with that mod. Just an unbelievable number of RoR style units that were a lot of fun.
|
|
#
?
May 15, 2022 02:57
|
|
|
Your Brain on Hugs posted:Thinking of giving SFO a go in 2 to mix things up before IE comes out, can anyone recommend it, or fun campaigns to do with it? Empire (Franz) is the funnest and best in SFO. You won’t gently caress with many races beyond undead, Chaos/Norsca, and greenskins. But you will have a lot of fun uniting the empire and trying to keep things together as the borders close in upon you and the elector counts all get gobbled up.
|
|
#
?
May 15, 2022 03:25
|
|
|
Captain Beans posted:I wonder if some of the overhaul mods back in 2 have done this already. It could easily be built using the current system of status effects and triggers/disable flags. I never got into SFO 2 so I'm not sure Wouldn't surprise me if CTT already did this, or something similar.
|
|
#
?
May 15, 2022 03:26
|
|
|
Reading the chat in Legends Medieval 2 stream made me realize that CA will never make a historical game involving that time period again. It just draws some of the worst kinds of people to it.
|
|
#
?
May 15, 2022 20:42
|
|
|
they won't care if trash people buy it, only that it sells. Medieval 3 will 100% be future title in the series. There simply isn't another historical time period that compares in popularity.
|
|
#
?
May 15, 2022 21:09
|
|
|
Bet if they did they'll take out 'Deus Vult', no doubt leading to a parade of the usuals review bombing it because of  technical issues
|
|
#
?
May 15, 2022 21:16
|
|
|
Captain Beans posted:they won't care if trash people buy it, only that it sells. Medieval 3 will 100% be future title in the series. Please let it have a fantasy mod so I can have Arthur invade France riding a welsh dragon
|
|
#
?
May 15, 2022 21:37
|
|
|
So you guys think the game is dead or what? Maybe continued support until the roadmap they revealed is achieved and then decide to cut losses?
|
|
#
?
May 15, 2022 22:42
|
|
|
Savy Saracen salad posted:So you guys think the game is dead or what? Maybe continued support until the roadmap they revealed is achieved and then decide to cut losses? no
|
|
#
?
May 15, 2022 22:46
|
|
|
Savy Saracen salad posted:So you guys think the game is dead or what? Maybe continued support until the roadmap they revealed is achieved and then decide to cut losses?  The only way CA will cut their losses and run is if DLC doesn't sell well by 2023 or whenever in 2023 Chorfs come out, if they're not sneaking in on one of those conspicuous blank/stupid spots on the roadmap.
|
|
#
?
May 15, 2022 23:00
|
|
|
Savy Saracen salad posted:So you guys think the game is dead or what? Maybe continued support until the roadmap they revealed is achieved and then decide to cut losses? No. Definitely not. They will release their planned DLC.
|
|
#
?
May 15, 2022 23:03
|
|
|
There's no reason to believe they'll "abandon" TWW3. There is specifically already precedent in this very franchise for them putting all of their DLC plans on hold for half a year to unfuck their game. They did it with Norsca in TWW2, and they'll do it with TWW3, because even if you believe that they don't give a poo poo about making the game good, they do give a poo poo about being able to sell DLCs for the next half a decade, especially since there's no guaranteed fourth game in the pipe.
|
|
#
?
May 15, 2022 23:20
|
|
|
I mean so long as IE comes out and isn't busted it'll pretty much render TW2 redundant as the giant sandbox game, since the thing people don't like about 3 is the campaign.
|
|
#
?
May 15, 2022 23:57
|
|
|
if they abandoned tww3 it's because they went bankrupt and shuttered which is also what would happen if they abandoned tww3 in any other circumstance
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2022 00:36
|
|
|
Iirc they also didnt really abandon 3k either; it got a typical amount of DLC from CA. It just didn't compare to WH2, which had an abnormally long tail for a TW game.
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2022 00:57
|
|
|
Edgar Allen Ho posted:Atilla's newish 1212 AD mod is a very good Medieval III if y'all are wanting a TW fix while waiting for Hams III to get better. They definitely borked Attila's engine and performance. It's a shame because I love how Attila looks and plays.
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2022 01:18
|
|
|
Troy got four DLCs, 3K got 7 DLC + three FLCs. The only reason why nobody's saying Troy was abandoned is because they never hinted at a possible expansion that never ended up coming. Rome 2 was a massive gently caress-up (just the misleading advertising was much worse than anything in WH3) and it had enough broad appeal that CA stuck with it and released 12 DLC for it, not including the free relaunch campaign, over five years. CA was a smaller studio back then: when asked about the Jabberslythe back during WH1, a dev said its animations would beas expensive as the entirety of the Charlemagne DLC. Warhammer is even more popular than Rome 2. It'll be fine. That said, there's a slight chance the DLC doesn't sell as well as WH2's and that could lead to more expensive plans (a hypothetical Ind / Khuresh DLC, for example) getting shelved for safer, cheaper Lord Packs.
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2022 01:30
|
|
|
Eh the problem is they released TW3 in basically alpha and depending on how bad IE is when they release it the beta phase might not start until then. Current TW3 is basically the frame work for IE with some half assed races with very bare bones rosters--it was never going to be a complete game. The problem is they should have included some generic TW2 races in non narrative campaign as place holders. The wait for IE would be far more palatable if you could play TW2 factions but that could lead to some problems and the limited rosters for game 3 races would become really obvious. It all boils down to the fact that they should have released beta IE first THEN the realms of chaos campaign so you coulda played the new campaign while waiting for IE to get patched up. You got how many playable working races from TW2, throw those on a functional map(which you should have already loving had by now) with some modding tools while you put the bells and whistles in the game. poo poo launch realms of chaos campaigns were supposed to end around turn 115--even CA knew that you weren't gonna get a lot of replay ability from it.
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2022 01:37
|
|
|
Arghy posted:Eh the problem is they released TW3 in basically alpha no lol not even top five for worst TW launches. people are right to expect better but this is some ridiculous exaggeration
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2022 01:40
|
|
|
it's interesting that TWW3 had to compete with TWW2 and all its DLC more than anything, though. that's kinda accidentally revealing
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2022 01:44
|
|
|
You see i didn't purchase any of those other TW titles because i knew they were going to be garbage from the onset. I expected some early development stuff from TW3 and some waiting but not a year to get to very early ME levels. I wouldn't be complaining if it was advertised as early access. It's funny how people talk about the lack of DLC sales killing other games because i bought every TW2 DLC but i'm sure as hell not buying a single TW3 DLC until IE is launched and fully functional. You want me to wait for you to finish a game you sold for full price then i can not pay you a dime more until it's loving out the door haha--i'll buy those DLC's if/when IE is finished.
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2022 01:48
|
|
|
i'm gonna buy you chorfs arghy
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2022 01:55
|
|
|
I'm buying chorfs day one, and still jamming to the ogres song.
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2022 02:00
|
|
|
Arghy posted:I wouldn't be complaining if it was advertised as early access. a game you simply do not like is not definitionally incomplete. anyway, if you had to have ME to be happy, why'd you buy it before ME was added? people seem to get themselves tied up all in knots trying to explain why a game they just didn't enjoy is objectively deficient.
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2022 02:09
|
|
|
Arghy I hope you're just really dedicated to the funny troll man posting but I assume you and anyone Arghy adjacent has Total War as 90%+ of the only video games they've ever played in their lives and they've never actually seen a game series or dev team that does serious game crimes poo poo. Hell, we just got Overwatch 2 this month if you wanna go gawk at some actual game abandonment. "some half assed races with very bare bones rosters" lmao my brother in Sigmar go look up the WH2 release rosters
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2022 02:15
|
|
|
WH3 stumbled at launch, but, I mean... Empire's launch was legendary for how bad it was. Rome 2 was another terrible launch, and it is now regarded as one of the best entries in the series. WH3 will, eventually, end up getting righted. They definitely released it too early, but they're very much interested in fixing it up, because it will have a hugely profitable tail of DLC for years to come.
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2022 02:24
|
|
|
lmao arghy spent more on wh2 than i did
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2022 02:27
|
|
|
Cease to Hope posted:a game you simply do not like is not definitionally incomplete. anyway, if you had to have ME to be happy, why'd you buy it before ME was added? I enjoyed TW3, it was fun! I'm not playing any Total Wars right now. I might come back when they release more content.
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2022 02:34
|
|
|
Looking forward to new content like the RoRs.
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2022 02:38
|
|
|
The reason reddit/forums etc are convinced WH3 is going to be 'abandoned just like 3K!' is that a streamer melted down on air because the campaign gets repetitive after literally thousands of hours. That flipped a switch in nerd heads and now there's a desperate insistence that they're obliged to stop further development and leave all that money on the table for....some reason.
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2022 07:48
|
|
|
ZeusJupitar posted:The reason reddit/forums etc are convinced WH3 is going to be 'abandoned just like 3K!' is that a streamer melted down on air because the campaign gets repetitive after literally thousands of hours. That flipped a switch in nerd heads and now there's a desperate insistence that they're obliged to stop further development and leave all that money on the table for....some reason. Did Legend have another meltdown or is it someone else?
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2022 08:29
|
|
|
kanonvandekempen posted:Did Legend have another meltdown or is it someone else? Legend is who I'm referring to.
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2022 08:30
|
|
|
DOCTOR ZIMBARDO posted:this is simply not true imo. for example, if grimgrog is giving you a hard time and you raze black crag, where he has his high priority blorc building, then you likely just shut down his entire ability to spam blorcs at you, for possibly a very long time. figuring out where your enemy is spawning his nasty high-tier units and shutting down those settlements is key to fighting efficiently on the campaign map. So, the first problem is that the AI primarily uses global recruitment so you'd have to have a situation where its the only building that does this. So this would be some kind of early / early mid game kind of strategy. The biggest pain in the arse would be just having a complete picture of enemy recruitment - early game its not really a problem to see all the enemy territory but early game you're not going to likely have some spare army that is strong enough to take black crag while being expendable enough that such a high risk option is plausible. They could also happen to build new buildings or confederate in the meanwhile. In my own experience, the AI also loving loves building redundant recruitment buildings everywhere in all their territories so this is unlikely to ever be a plan that can get past stage 0. And you're also taking an army, a considerable investment that also eats up upkeep costs, and putting them in a high risk situation in a plan with a lot of moving parts to acquire, well, nothing. Razing is utterly useless so you'd really just want to occupy it and hold it which will lock down that army for a period of time but can also then draw enemy armies to that area rather than the front, which is probably more valuable than whatever gains you get knocking out production of one unit, maybe, for some time, maybe, while still having to deal with their already existing armies with said unit. If you raze, that army is going to probably die in any situation where occupying would have gotten it killed, and even if it lives it's having to run back home having earned you no territory and having drawn a big fat paycheck all the while, when they instead could have been taking territories, earning you more money, more territory to replenish in, denying more resources from the enemy. So, time, effort, money, gone into a niche benefit of "fighting less annoying units, later, maybe". Or you could just suck in your gut and, just be annoyed more in fights and win the war cheaper, faster, with far less cognitive effort, and more reliably by not doing any of the above. Now, there are times a similar 'leapfrog' sort of attack can be justified - you're attacking over a body of water so you have greater movement and have to attack some unconnected territory anyways so you may as well pick the enemy heartland to deny them their best territory, or when you have some specific objective such as K8P or if you're fighting wood elves who really only get a few territories that actually produce anything for them which is a much more decisive crippling than you'd get in other cases. These help you by letting you, in the end, take enemy territory faster than you otherwise would have, without being really situational or overly risky. By and large, wars in total war are always about obliteration - you take enemy territories as fast as possible. Every single stratagem, then, can be compared to the metric of, does this reduce the enemy territory count to zero faster, or not. And, there's nearly always a straightforward, optimum approach - you take your stacks, you dip them in paint, and you drag them over the enemy territory until its your color. And no matter who you face (outside hordes!), or who you play, or where you are on the map, or what the situation is, you will approach this same problem, and apply the same exact solution. The strategy layer in total war, for all its gimmicks and mechanics, is just Risk. Just having the choice to do something different and 'clever' - trying to deny the enemy production of a specific unit - means really nothing if the choice is just a worse way to achieve the same ends.
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2022 09:48
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 7, 2024 00:54 |
|
|
Pretty sure the whole 'it should have been released as early access' argument is why IE is being put out as a beta.
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2022 09:57
|
|