|
Archonex posted:As for the Subrosians, odds are the Labrynnians will meet them first. Which if you're playing them to type means hilarity (IE: A trench war in hell.) will ensue. I'll get into the Labrynnians later if people want. They're probably my favorite faction given how they work and what your overall goals are. For now let i'll just say that they play like some sort of schizophrenic mix of Hyrule if it was infantry based and a WW1 trench war (if WW1 had mechs) in combat. Which they can build on the battlefields. You had me at trench warfare.  I'm downloading this immediately, it seems amazing.
|
#
¿
Aug 5, 2014 23:16
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 17, 2024 15:43 |
|
|
When do the AI factions start wielding interesting army sizes? I've spent a few turns as a couple factions and wasn't amazed. I see the potential in the lategame though. The Sheikah start is dull, letting you absolutely easily bumrush the Gorons with relative ease. An interesting faction though, one of the most interesting ones. The Hyrule start is simple, and somewhat easy. Attacked a Wizrobe church guarded by only one enemy unit, got my army thoroughly annihilated by said unit but eventually killed it with Zelda. The Wizrobes then asked for a ceasefire, giving me 4900 rupees per turn for 3 turns in order to achieve this. These 3 turns are then used to search for the Wizrobe cathedral in order to wipe them out (They seem more trouble than they are worth) The Labrynna Regime start is very easy. Surrounded by small rebels and independents, it's easy to expand quickly. No real threats in the vicinity should allow time to learn how exactly one makes best use of their units. Loving the Mech Tree.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 7, 2014 18:21
|
|
|
So, it seems Fall of the Samurai is balanced against invading places at the very beginning. Loving the interface though, and the naval combat is slightly less awful. Not sure if I enjoy the early game though, it seems like a slow game.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 12, 2014 22:55
|
|
|
For its price, it is fantastic. The line of sight system is so much better for multiplayer than obvious certain positions where you can be "Hidden" by sitting in shrubbery.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 15, 2014 23:39
|
|
|
Earwicker posted:what is TWC's deal why don't they like barbarian dicks? I've never really read those forums Personally I don't like them because it then becomes awkward to show off awesome battles to family and friends. Those are the kind of situations Alt-F4 were made for.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 25, 2014 20:29
|
|
|
Doomsayer posted:What does it say about me that I've never played a Total War game longer than an hour, but now that I'm playing Hyrule: Total War I can't stop? Hyrule Total War is so incredibly boring at first, but as soon as big armies start rolling around it is the best.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 27, 2014 21:02
|
|
|
Have you ever played any games in the Wargame series? They're fantastic examples of 10v10 multiplayer RTS, and are superb.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 16, 2014 12:07
|
|
|
shalcar posted:I can't imagine Wargame 10 v 10 being much fun if you started with 3 units and could never build any more. That's pretty much how I play Wargame 10v10. I just go with airplanes and scouts, acting as a support unit for the team, and I find that to be a blast. A more focused experience is more interesting to me, and a low unit count makes it easier to stay on top of everything happening whilst also providing incentive for teamwork and coordination.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 16, 2014 12:32
|
|
|
Rabhadh posted:The Shogun battle victory music was fantastic, you can tell there's an actual party going on, drink up ashigaru you've earned this one I prefer the Shogun 2 victory music. It felt more like the general's retinue of musicians who he brought along have just started playing for the entire army. The cheering really sells it. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tg8cKGBc6dU
|
|
#
¿
Jan 6, 2015 20:11
|
|
|
supermikhail posted:Oh, yeah. Some dissonance here, I guess. Then do the ol' Warhammer strategy: Conquer Earth, destroy all places of worship, suffer a massive rebellion, die and then have the entirety of humanity worship you and your several doomstacks of Space Marines. Actually, Warhammer (Horus Heresy era) really fits with Total War's playstyle. Big doomstacks (Legions) with great commanders (primarchs) who may get pissy and rebel at the most inopportune moment with not a care for the socio-economic side of things.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 11, 2015 16:50
|
|
I'm totally for fightin and conquerin, but religious and ethnic intolerance doesn't stand with me.
|
Anybody hear anything new about Total War Arena? It sounds cool.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 17, 2015 19:50
|
|
|
ScotchDK posted:A batch of new alpha test keys where given out today, so i expect some NDA breaks spilling out tomorrow. Oh, what's the thread's stance on NDA breaks? Maybe alpha keys have landed among us. HerpicleOmnicron5 fucked around with this message at 19:43 on Feb 18, 2015 |
|
#
¿
Feb 18, 2015 00:57
|
|
|
Mans posted:You'll get a pseudo dota and you'll be happy! Arena is actually very good, and is closer to the Wargame series in scope. 10v10!
|
|
#
¿
Mar 4, 2015 21:49
|
|
|
I liked it. Get some coordination going and it'll be great! It makes use of the line of sight system seen in Rome 2 very nicely, allowing for actual ambushes.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 4, 2015 22:36
|
|
|
Rabhadh posted:The music is hyrule mod is incredible And the battles are phenomenal. The Wizrobes are truly terrifying, which is why simply destroying them isn't necessarily the smartest idea even though they exist to gently caress over all of your stuff.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 8, 2015 00:03
|
|
|
John Charity Spring posted:I got mine a couple months ago but didn't try it until last night. I'm not sold on it at all, to be honest. I like it. It's a bit of fun.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 27, 2015 08:50
|
|
|
Mans posted:And Sword of the Stars, an absolutely awful game with a great combat system Sword of the Stars 1 was great, all round. 2 is the one that's awful with a great looking combat system.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 2, 2015 20:57
|
|
|
I mostly just want the strategic map to be a place where I build dudes and move them on a risk-like board. Screw movement cost and all that nonsense, clarity should be key. Its the battles that matter, not the strategic layer. gently caress agents.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 25, 2015 19:58
|
|
|
GrossMurpel posted:I wouldn't call Trolls, Elves, Nazgul, and loving reformed Sauron being able to gently caress poo poo up "unbalanced". It's balanced by high recruitment times. You know the big rear end elephant things? They're physically unkillable unless you have 5 units of archers.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 3, 2016 20:48
|
|
|
Plucky Brit posted:Javelins and artillery make mincemeat of them. Rohan got literally none of that. I had three places that could make archers. The mod is really badly balanced. Hyrule Total War is much better in most ways, so go play that instead of even looking at Third Age.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 7, 2016 18:16
|
|
|
drat, that actually looks really good.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 12, 2016 15:33
|
|
|
It looks like it's using the system that Ultimate General Gettysburg does for movement, in which case it'll control absolutely fine on iPad.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 13, 2016 18:20
|
|
|
If they do Three Kingdoms without a dueling mechanic on the battlefield I'll be disappointed.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 24, 2017 12:29
|
|
|
disjoe posted:Immortal Wombat? The guy that was explicitly talking about Rome 2? You didn't quote them and your post came after people started talking Rome 1. Understandable mixup.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 11, 2017 00:59
|
|
|
KazigluBey posted:So what's the deal with Total War Arena? I got an invite for the upcoming free weekend and I was wondering what it was supposed to be. Is there a specific thread for it? Free to play Total War game where you control 3 units in a 10v10 Total War battle. Was really, really quite solid when it was last open and now its a Wargaming joint I'm sure they ruined it.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 27, 2017 18:51
|
|
|
Bloodly posted:Bought it based on this and a whim. My concern with this thing right now is the economy. Many things take 30-50 turns per level to pay off, not counting research and build time. This is a problem when the default turn time is 300. And trade is worse than this thanks to the upkeep costs of trade buildings. Others say; 'but that's how it WAS, you need to be HUGE for trade to be worthwhile'. I'm not convinced. I've never seen Total War or TW-esque economies as matters of when does a thing pay off, but more a case of cash flow. Economies there are for the sake of maintaining upkeep, not creating profit IMHO, though this is especially true in Warhammer.
|
|
#
¿
May 10, 2017 15:17
|
|
|
Ofaloaf posted:I would hope an ACW TW would cover North America. There should at least be more than 2 playable factions. That'd be the obvious way to do it, just like FOTS.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 7, 2017 16:10
|
|
|
Davincie posted:i think a big problem with an acw total war, is that about 10 people outside america care about the acw ACW is cool as heck, plenty of people outside America care about the ACW. In the UK when we talk about "The Civil War" we're not talking about the English Civil War.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 7, 2017 21:27
|
|
|
Theswarms posted:Yes we are? Most people would say the English Civil War, but I definitely definitely assume someone meant that rather than the American one. Most people don't even know about the English Civil War. General populace is dumb. jBrereton posted:If the 1640s is being brought up Well yeah, but few people bring up the 1640s in casual conversation. I meant that if someone was going to say "Seen that Civil War film/documentary/game/tv show" it'll either be Marvel or the American Civil War.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 7, 2017 23:02
|
|
|
Warhammer, Attila and Empire had lopsided battles be somewhat interesting due to tech disparities, though not when you're the one who has overwhelming odds usually.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 9, 2017 14:14
|
|
|
That's exactly why Warhammer is so good: If you're say the Empire, other Empire nations confederate to protect from you and they'll confederate with you to protect from Chaos, Vampire Counts, etc. It's genius and it works perfectly. Literally just porting that same exact system in how it works to Rome 2 would make it 10x better.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 13, 2017 00:35
|
|
|
Yes to all of those.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 14, 2017 12:53
|
|
|
StashAugustine posted:Speaking of M2, how big a garrison do people usually run? I was trying out Venice because their militia spam looks neat, but both the ERE and Sicily want pieces of me so I have to defend everywhere Slim Jim Pickens posted:What the gently caress tw game are you playing? Medieval 2 Total War, the game that features mods such as Third Age Total War and also has forts and watchtowers.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 29, 2017 18:32
|
|
|
Kinda wish they went whole hog and had Tier 7-8 be Napoleonic era stuff and 9-10 being crazy Warhammer bullshit. That'd just be the best. I'd also love occasional 2-3 Napolenic era players up against 7-10 tier 3-5 players. Those 'boss battle' matchups kinda suck in most free to play games, but would be really drat cool with the historical leanings.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 12, 2017 00:55
|
|
|
StashAugustine posted:Out of curiosity: what units do other people consider bad in Shogun 2? Personally never really got a use out of: most siege engines (rockets and cannons are kinda okay), ninja (lose to everything, stealth doesn't seem terribly useful), and katana cav (lose hard to other cav and aren't that much better against infantry). Yari samurai aren't great but are okay for aggressive players because they're way faster than naginatas. Haven't really messed around with the special units as much, but Oda, Otomo, and Chosokabe seem to have good ones Only ninja kinda suck to me. Katana cav are best for sieges. Dismount them and infiltrate at speed from an unguarded flank, capture the gates with strong infantry and then re-mount and enter the fort with great anti-infantry cav.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 27, 2017 23:51
|
|
|
Download a submod that changes the names to English ones? I actually like the defaults because then I can pretend I'm learning something.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 10, 2017 19:23
|
|
|
Mans posted:It's gotta be one of the gooniest complaints to cry that an historical game doesn't have dragons or giants jfc. Actually it sounds like the very opposite of goony.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 11, 2017 21:11
|
|
|
ninjahedgehog posted:Great Heathen Army would be sweet (and is probably the most likely) but I'd kill for a low-fantasy King Arthur game. Heck, I'd like CA to just do the King Arthur series of games but actually good.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 13, 2017 21:34
|
|
|
GrossMurpel posted:King Arthur: The Roleplaying Wargame is better than any TW. Better campaign game, but the battle engine was eh.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 14, 2017 00:16
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 17, 2024 15:43 |
|
|
nessin posted:This isn't Vikings, it's 9th/10th Century Britain, if you're going to compare themes then I think you could find a pretty solid argument in Vikings versus Samurai. So yes, my contention is more will people recognize Sengoku Era Japan than 9th and 10th Century Britain. If CA was going to legitimately build a game around the Viking theme then they'd have to branch out. Everything that made the "Viking Age" notable in history is what they did everywhere but Britain. we found a crazy person
|
|
#
¿
Nov 15, 2017 01:34
|
|