|
Chumpion posted:Aha, it would be so easy as well. CA demanding that they take a communal shower in a mysteriously dark room before they enter the conference would be justified to anyone taking a look at that greasy crowd. With any luck they'll open the games to be more modable. Rome and Medieval were a bitch to mod and they went out of their way to make the next games even harder. There any no "mods" in post Empire games, they're basic gameplay changes, nothing comparable to any decent Rome or Medieval mod. They need to pull their head out of their asses and led modders do their work. With any luck this summit is a way to enter in contact with the few modders left and work something out. Maybe only letting mods come out when they're done as DLC but letting the modders be supported directly by CA.
|
#
¿
Jun 14, 2012 17:27
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 21, 2024 08:24 |
|
|
They better invite him otherwise he'll retire for the 29th time 
|
|
#
¿
Jun 14, 2012 18:14
|
|
|
SeanBeansShako posted:the fact the only modding that can be done is stats tweaking and reskins really crippled peoples opinions of Empire. This. If you bought Rome and Medieval 2 you could play in scenarios about the Persian empire, the Trojan War, Warhammer, War of the Rings, Alexander, about four different time frames of the Roman Republic, another 6 or 8 from the empire era, a million variations of medieval history, colonial warfare and made up crazy lands with roman legions fighting against orcs and pirates. By buying Empires you had a game that took almost a year of patching to allow amphibious assaults.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 14, 2012 23:48
|
|
|
I consider it like Football Manager. Like Paradox games, what you do before the season (war) and the games (battles) is more important than playing them yourself. The wins and losses are the result of your managing actions. Having the player play battles will let them cheese the AI or exploit it to make heroic victories time and time again like Total war (let's face it, even the most recent "spectacular AI!" of Total War games are dumb as poo poo and in Napoleon you can win most battles by just making a standard firing line and let the enemy come at you like Visigoths). The games are good as they are right now, you can play amazing games with mediocre pcs, they're not big on the disk and they usually have affordable prices because Paradox isn't bleeding money on newer and newer graphics.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 18, 2012 02:17
|
|
|
What's the difference about reinforcements you guys keep talking about?
|
|
#
¿
Jun 18, 2012 16:33
|
|
|
Play it safe and simply post your favorite songs via youtube. I know EB's wonderful music is open to anyone who wants it, not so sure about the official music.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 19, 2012 14:59
|
|
|
And pink-pajama wearing Parthians!
|
|
#
¿
Jun 21, 2012 21:54
|
|
|
Farecoal posted:
Alchenar posted:This. Plus, that's ignoring just how varied and rich the EB middle eastern experience was. The Ptolemy empire had light phalanxes supported by Nubians, native Egyptian assault troops and rear end kicking Galatian Gauls. Pontus was based on flexible phalanxes supported by Anatolian and Armenian light infantry and archers, with dreaded heavy cavalry supporting them. The Seleucids had everything from Macedonian classical Phalanxes to Jewish infantry to Iranian spearmen to Afgan axe wielding assault troops. Even Macedonia itself was extremely varied. It's core was phalanx based but it had the support of a massive amount of cavalry and various Thracian, Greek, Gaul, Getai and other tribes' support. It turns out that if you're not an inbreded ignorant that has gently caress all knowledge of history you could make a fascinating game based on the Classical era without resorting to Phalanx or Legionnaire only units 
|
|
#
¿
Jun 22, 2012 09:17
|
|
I love history, I play Paradox games a poo poo ton, but Total War seems, to me anyway, to be more about what's fun/cool* than historical. And about the "slightly browner phalanxes", isn't that exactly what RTW/EB did?
|
They need to hire those Russians from the Warhammer mod because that thing is pretty good when it doesn't crash.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 22, 2012 11:04
|
|
|
The Kins posted:I don't think this has been posted yet... If they're going with the three family poo poo again i'm not even bothering with this.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 22, 2012 19:27
|
|
|
Coolodile posted:...It's a screenshot from the original. Oh...yes it is, i knew that 
|
|
#
¿
Jun 22, 2012 19:42
|
|
|
Spaceman Future! posted:
Pre-Classical middle eastern history is filled with great time periods to base a war game on. It's the time of chariots, of nomad tribes coming from all directions, bronze and iron weapons, the rise of cavalry and conflicts between the New Kingdom, the Neo Assyrians, the Hittites, the rise of the Greek states and the Sea Peoples who came out of nowhere and hosed poo poo up. You also have the rise of Persia not to forget how interesting a game focused on Greek city states would be. Imagine Shogun Total war but with the added abilities of exploring far flung places and establishing colonies all over the Mediterranean all the while dealing with your neighbours and facing off against Thracians, Persians, Gauls and Macedonians. It would kick rear end. And as been said before, we really need a Renaissance game. What would be truly great would be choosing the starting date. No need to go all Paradox and being able to choose the literal day of the start date, but adding a bit of variety to the game via different scenarios would own and allow a longer longetivity of the game all the while allowing CA to get extra money via the release of payed DLCs. I'd certainly pay 5 bucks to play a scenario about the first triumvirate or any of the million civil wars.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 22, 2012 22:28
|
|
|
Alchenar posted:We also don't need a Renaissance game. Medieval goes up to 1530 and at the end of the tech tree takes you to the point where filling your armies with musketmen actually starts to be a viable strategy. Not only that, but CA's naval system would do wonders for a 16th era Total War game. It would be amazing to extend the map to allow you to go on true explorations of the sea, allowing you to colonize different continents. That's whats lacking in Medieval and Empire. In one era the exploration is limited and boring, in the other the exploration is already done. There's no in-between.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 23, 2012 17:37
|
|
|
Alchenar posted:The Senate and Roman Civil War. Sure, it wasn't implemented particularly well (nor was the Pope and Crusades in Medieval), but they exist and as concepts are perfectly expandable. There is no decent sea exploration, no decent colonial contact with local tribes, no colonial competition with other European states, there aren't deep inter dinastic relationships that would make the game much more interesting and neither a late Medieval 2 or an early Empire do any of that. And i'll ask this, why do we need a Rome 2? You already have Rome in extremely varied tones thanks to vanilla and mods. Your Rome Total War game already exists. Just start a Rome campaign and if you're bored download the other 8 or 9 great mods that give you new scenarios.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 23, 2012 21:35
|
|
|
And don't forget that the Renaissance would actually validate having a merchant system 
|
|
#
¿
Jun 23, 2012 22:07
|
|
|
VanSandman posted:Also gently caress the Mummy Returns Egyptians, that poo poo was always horrible. If you can't have a good time fighting a successor state army, then perhaps Rome isn't the right era for you. The best part was unpatched Rome when Egyptian cavalry was bugged and had the same numbers as infantry. Hope you like 120 Egyptian axe wielding Pharaoh loyalists on horses!  That and archers firing in a straight line, right into your infantry's neck 
|
|
#
¿
Jun 28, 2012 13:53
|
|
|
SeanBeansShako posted:Well I was just being a little too general there. What I mean was it'd be nice if the ships were big enough and our crew was more flexible and had more options to fight out a slightly more cramped smaller version of a proper battle on the ships decks. This is stretching it, but what would really make naval combat great would be ability to recruit the marines you want to put on a ship. Cartage, Athens, Syracuse and Rome all had fame for having great marines that could do boarding missions with and fight with Excellency. Make it so you can load a unit on to a ship and use that unit as the boarding soldiers. Alchenar posted:That sounds like an utterly terrible idea. How is that a terrible idea? The Classical era was all about ramming and boarding. Only the biggest and most expensive ships had any decent amount of artillery. To not develop the boarding system would be to ignore a great portion of naval warfare. Napoleon's naval battles were good but i don't think a bunch of ships firing arrows at each other would be exciting.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 28, 2012 19:32
|
|
|
Captain Diarrhoea posted:And yes as a pop-history barbarian I was sad that the cool Lora Segmenta (?) armour Romans are famous for doesn't seem to be in the mod for accuracy purposes. I don't know if you've visited the EB forums for a decent amount of time but it's pretty funny how the EB community HATES Lorica Segmentata. People just foam at the mouth! But yeah, it wasn't used in the time period of the game. Also, be sure to change the requisites you need to make reforms, otherwise the Marian and Imperial reforms will be almost impossible to enact.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 1, 2012 20:19
|
|
|
If CA releases the Lorica Segmentata as a 15 bucks DLC i wonder how many people would bite.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 2, 2012 23:37
|
|
|
DarkCrawler posted:AI and diplomacy in general are the only faults (well, only un-moddable ones) in Total War systems. The AI only sees the nearest town. No matter if there is an continent-spanning empire behind it with a dozen armies where surviving six battles means you are a rookie pussy and a leader who has so many command stars on his stats that he can throw them at people like shurikens and every patch of enemy land he's stepped over stopped being enemy land as soon as it did so. And in Medieval they didn't even look at that lovely town, all they needed was a port to blockade and end it's 54 turn long alliance with it's super power friend
|
|
#
¿
Jul 4, 2012 02:13
|
|
|
American Folk Hero posted:The Alexandrian successors in-game (and Hellenized factions like Thrace and Pontus) have greater differences between them than the FOUR goddamn identical Roman factions, so I really don't buy that excuse at all. Don't forget the "barbarian" factions, whose difference was pant color and one or two special units. Not to forget how "varied and diverse" the barbarian factions were in Barbarian Invasion.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 4, 2012 04:46
|
|
|
NoneSuch posted:I honestly don't think anyone would mind tiny men with dicks unless it would push their age rating over 16+. EB's naked celts were anything but tiny
|
|
#
¿
Jul 4, 2012 19:08
|
|
|
NihilCredo posted:The Trojan War sounds like a decent idea for a DLC, actually. Go crazy with The Trojan War mod for RTW was extremely well done, would gladly pay 10 bucks for a professional version of it.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 6, 2012 12:33
|
|
|
Nimmy posted:It sounded like they want to do all of Roman history, at least until the sack of Rome. No point in leaving out Huns and Vandals just for an expansion pack when it would make the original game much more interesting; they could trigger kind of like the Mongols in ME2:TW. Or if the campaign map stretches as far as, say Mongolia, there could at least be random events when a great warlord unites a large horde and where they go from there (China, Persia, Europe) is anyone's guess.  You realize the time it took to go from Carthage to the Huns right? Most R:TW campaigns ended by 50B.C., that would never work like M:TW.But by now they've learned how smart it is to make multiple scenarios. If they do it right they'll get so much money from me.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 8, 2012 15:58
|
|
|
The funny thing about AI in Med2 is that even attacking Rebel towns lowers your reputation. Taking cities, even if you were attacked, is also a reputation killer. It's pretty much impossible to play Med2 unmoded with allies. Try Stainless Steel, the game is much better there. Shorter Than Some posted:Yes, it was in one of the recent interviews though I forget which.  I don't believe you.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 10, 2012 20:40
|
|
|
Alchenar posted:And that would be just fine because the game would be better with another unique army type. Might aswell make Iberian Neanderthals and Parthian Achaemenid Persians too! It makes zero sense. Screeching Germans ,bone breaking Thracians and matriarchal Scythians are good because CA used myths and fears to make these factions fearsome and more interesting, making the Macedonic Ptolemaic Empire the pride of Ramses is just stupid. And it's been said a million times and i'll say it again, the Ptolemy Empire was the most rich state in terms of unit variety that a game like this can wish for. Macedonian nobility, Galatian mercenaries, Nubian Ethiopian and Jewish soldiers and a base of Egyptians REALLY pissed off against the ruling class. Egypt tends to be overpowered in pre gunpowder games because the area is simply too rich. Turn it into a high rebelious faction were riches can be obtained but there's almost zero loyalty so you're force to use those riches to hire foreign forces or super bribes. Well, either that or mummified soldiers.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 11, 2012 01:04
|
|
|
snKestren posted:There are people that like the original Rome with all of the unique civilizations and then there are people who want historical accuracy in a video game. One of the these groups removed flaming pigs, war-dogs, and chariots from the game and added fifty different variations of spearmen. The reason why the Greeks, Seleucids, Pontus and Macedonians were identical was because of CA, the same why all the "barbarians" were identical. In EB every single faction was different, none of this spearman bullshit people keep talking about. Only the spergiest of spergiest will whine about dogs or pigs. None here are talking about that. Silly is good, historically accurancy is not mandatory. But at least make a game where units are based on the time, not 1000 years before the timeframe. Davincie posted:All dogs versus all peasants or al elephants and such were the only things I ever did with the custom battle option. One unit of Spartan Hoplites vs three entire armies of Parthian Spearmen with the Spartans holding a bridge. They always held it
|
|
#
¿
Jul 12, 2012 00:53
|
|
|
It's my favorite Med2 mod. The game is very rich and varied and all factions are fun to play with. The only problem comes from the the devs idea that buildings should be ridiculously expensive, but that can be reduced in the text files. I suggest not playing as the Khwarezmians, the reason the Mongols enter the map is explicitly to beat you up.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 13, 2012 01:40
|
|
|
EB explicitly tells you to play it on normal. Don't tempt the fates.Captain Beans posted:Is there a way to easily change some global modifier for building cost? I'm probably going to play it with 40 units per army so if you know of a way to also cut upkeep across the board too that would be good to know. I wish. I only knew how to change buildings costs, i suck at "moding" MW2.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 13, 2012 21:33
|
|
|
Spakstik posted:Awhile back I was playing as the Crusader States in M2TW/Stainless Steel and I eventually ran into a problem later in the game when I'd butt heads with the Seljuks: I can't do a loving thing about their goddamn Fari cavalry. They're deadly accurate and apparently pretty decent melee fighters because they chop my light cavalry (the only thing I have that can catch up to them) to bits, and seem pretty good at dodging my ranged troops' projectiles to boot. I guess I could go the Zapp Brannigan route and throw wave after wave of my men at them until they You either force them into sieges battles, massive crossbow stacks or muskets (can you do that as the CS?). The best part is that after the Turks you'll have a blast fending off the Mongols!
|
|
#
¿
Jul 14, 2012 19:01
|
|
|
Siets posted:Thanks for the advice. Tomorrow I'll see if I can chip away at the ridiculous 6-army Egyptian horde that is currently sitting outside of Ascalon right now in my game. Ugh. Do you want to game it? Grab nine units, surround the priest with your units and when you've made a full square around him send a unit to the middle. The priest will have nowhere to go and will die a confusing death. This works with any non military unit in the game. And there's a reason why CA made it so that you could only buy the same unit three times in multiplayer*. Spamming a full stack of cheap Turkish horse archers with silver chevrons was hilarious. Stick to walls, the AI tends to be dumb and will always try an assault if they have superior numbers even if the majority of their army are horse archers. If you're in the open you can try to spread your units out with a few light(poo poo) troops in the front to soak up arrows. I honestly think that if the Ottoman Empire had the roster it has on Medieval 2 they'd be the best faction on Napoleon\Empire Total War. *I think you can buy it more than three times but it becomes extremely expensive.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 17, 2012 07:53
|
|
|
I think you can only "defeat" heretics. For some reason your priest can battle against a Calvinist or a Lollard but encountering an Orthodox or a Pagan priest is like fighting a brick wall.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 17, 2012 15:25
|
|
|
The AI is literally too dumb to be competitive even when the tactics amount to "make a firing line, fire". How the hell does anyone expect CA to develop an AI that can understand covering fire, suppression, artillery support, tank breakthroughs and individual unit AI. A ww2:total war would make the beginning of Enemy at the Gates look like tactical brilliance.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 20, 2012 12:44
|
|
|
Youtube has the weirdest videos. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M9EQsCjqiMk
|
|
#
¿
Jul 20, 2012 23:08
|
|
|
It's probably not real game footage, if that is actual footage then the game will be awful (look at the way both formations are positioned, all scrambled and chaotic).
|
|
#
¿
Jul 22, 2012 13:36
|
|
|
Alchenar posted:What I won't get but would actually like is if they took this opportunity to really distance themselves from the freeform risk-strategy that's what's preventing any kind of interesting diplomacy or storytelling from taking place. They've already hinted at how entering certain areas on the map will trigger event/plot chains etc.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 23, 2012 14:55
|
|
|
I guess the roster would be boring but Alchemar's idea would be great for a Mongol:Total War mod.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 23, 2012 18:46
|
|
|
SeanBeansShako posted:I don't know, the revival of it just looks like they've thrown in a few Portugal related bells and whistles to me. That's good enough for me 
|
|
#
¿
Jul 28, 2012 09:25
|
|
|
UberJumper posted:So apparently Darth Vader the author of Darth Mod just quit the modding scene forever: He'll be back 2 weeks after release. And gently caress i'm getting so excited for a videogame, i haven't been like this since Red Orchestra 2. ...Don't break my heart again vidja games!
|
|
#
¿
Sep 20, 2012 23:42
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 21, 2024 08:24 |
|
|
V for Vegas posted:I thought 'unit bloat' was a terrible thing and Shogun's 'more types of trees than units' was the best TW game because it cut the number of units drastically. It's a game about the whole of Europe, North Africa and the Middle East, possibly with the Arabian peninsula and the Iranian plains showing up too. A game of this size should never, ever, EVER, have the same homogenization as a game about loving Japan.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 21, 2012 00:05
|
|