|
StashAugustine posted:Welp steam sale has me chasing the shiny new Attila campaign and hooly poo poo there's a lot of chrome in there they cut from Warhammer like politics, food, whatever's going on with the building trees, etc. I skipped Rome 2 and I'm super lost I just fired up Rome 2 with Divide et Impera for the first time since it was released, same boat. I really like how units actually kill routers though. Pursuit in Warhammer is a casual stroll, in Rome post-battle your cavalry will melt through shattered units.
|
#
¿
Jun 22, 2017 23:15
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 17, 2024 20:57 |
|
|
Rookersh posted:Y'all fuckers know it's going to be Alexander. Jack: We’ll announce it properly in the next few months, but I can say that it’s another spiritual follow-up to Total War: ROME II, like Total War: ATTILA, and moves the time period forward
|
|
#
¿
Jul 5, 2017 15:39
|
|
|
That dude's armor looking pop-romanesque makes me think more King Arthur/romano-britons vs saxons. Also, that'd be a good period to include "heroes" with skill trees like in Warhammer. Pseudo-mythical dudes with cool skills would be really fun, nothing as OTT as in TWW but the same system with scaled-back abilites.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 6, 2017 07:34
|
|
|
TWC chat: is anyone else here in actual academic history? Good lord, they use "HISTROICAL ACCRUACY" as the main benchmark for good/bad and idk which is worse, the crap that they tout as "accurate" or the idea that real history would make a fun video game. Back in 2010-2011 or so I was in high school but going through a college level textbook about ancient egyptian writing. Lo and behold I download this Achaemenid-era TWC mod that has proper late Egypt as a faction and prepare to geek out and subjugate the ancient Med under Pharoah's badass heel. But everything is "native language"... which for the egyptians whose language we know through vowel-less hieroglyphs and supposition we get a faction called Kmt (decent) and units called poo poo like "t3mws" and "pt'3sha" (no no no). The older I get the more irate I get about faux-accuracy in video games. Just make a fun game and gently caress off with your sperg poo poo and your poorly-hidden xenophobic agendas. That said, give me a game where we can level up Gilgamesh, Cyrus has a badass blue line, and Ramses the Great can go mano-a-mano with Moses while a firestorm of possibly-divine origin rages over the melee. Edgar Allen Ho fucked around with this message at 17:32 on Jul 6, 2017 |
|
#
¿
Jul 6, 2017 17:29
|
|
|
Unzip and Attack posted:She's right - the visual depiction of pike phalanxes in Rome 2 are a part of why I loved that game. A line of 8-9 pike blocs moving across a field is one of the coolest visuals in TW. Yeah, I know graphics are second to gameplay and blah blah blah but the visual spectacle is a huge part of the TW appeal, especially post-Empire. There's a lot of people from a lot of disciplines that'd give a crapload to see what a real phalanx or legion moved and fought like. I'd love to see a future TW with the computing power to portray intra-unit movements, like romans rotating out the front line. I worked as a british infantry 1800s re-enactor for a summer. It was really fun, but really drove home how difficult it is to move in formation- we had about 40 people in heavy jackets, with 11lb rifles, in Canada. The fact that the successor armies were based around hundreds or thousands of people moving in disciplined unison with 16-foot pikes, metal armor, and shields during a mediterranean summer is mind-blowing. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y39im-ytNEE Edgar Allen Ho fucked around with this message at 18:45 on Jul 6, 2017 |
|
#
¿
Jul 6, 2017 18:36
|
|
|
It's also a pretty cool game changer since 90% of tactical games pre-WW2 are based around units of x dudes with y weapons. Units of x dudes with BOTH y and z weapons adds a potentially very fun layer to it. The said dudes being clad in flamboyant purple and conquistador helmets is icing on the cake.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 6, 2017 19:38
|
|
|
I'd really like a Kingdoms-style Victorian game. Don't attempt a global map, just have like ACW, German Unification, Scramble for Africa, and choose one of Crimea/Triple Alliance/Opium and Taiping/India and Great Game Scramble for Africa could be a really fun total war especially if you could take Ethiopia or Zulu or Sokoto or something, modernize, and kick euro rear end, but would sadly also be a breeding ground for nazi fetish wankers. Does it seriously weird anyone else out how "historical accuracy!!" people will cry for days about female military leaders or indians conquering Europe or whatever but be totally happy to have pagan vikings reform the Roman Empire or 15th-century Byzantium convert the entire Middle East back to good honest white christians? Edgar Allen Ho fucked around with this message at 21:40 on Jul 6, 2017 |
|
#
¿
Jul 6, 2017 21:38
|
|
|
ZearothK posted:I popped up the other day to see what was up on TWC and amongst the first news is a Classical Age Total War mod with this image at the front. I like that the dude's shield is a generic variant featured in many cultures, whereas the logo makes sure to be orientated just like the nazi one.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 6, 2017 22:04
|
|
|
jBrereton posted:Med 2 and Empire absolutely destroy Shogun 2 ~and it ain't even close~ mainly due to unit variety + globetrottingness. Med 2 blows chunks, hth
|
|
#
¿
Jul 7, 2017 16:26
|
|
|
Ofaloaf posted:I would hope an ACW TW would cover North America. There should at least be more than 2 playable factions. I think that would be too far. Regiments were usually state-based but each brigade and division, let alone full stack army, would have a huge mix. However my dream ACW total war would have the US and CS divided up into armies/regions. One US faction centered in Washington, DC and focused on the eastern theater, one in Chicago focused on Tennessee and the Mississippi, one in Kansas City focusing on the western territories, and one in Boston focused on the Navy, the canadian border, and invading the confederate coast. Then an eastern and western CSA faction, with maybe a third for either the far west or the navy. Basically represent the CSA's desperation while keeping the game fun and balanced by giving each Union faction a clear front while forcing the confederates to defend their periphery. Then you have brits, french, at least two native, at least two mexican, and more factions as possible wildcards or DLCs. This could help vary the rosters too if you're ok with it not being PERFECT HISTORICALLY ACCURATE, IE the Washington, Army of the Potomac Union faction will be working with big, expensive, modern units with little flexibility while the Western CSA faction will have small, mediocre line infantry units but really badass cheap skirmishers and cav. Edgar Allen Ho fucked around with this message at 21:04 on Jul 7, 2017 |
|
#
¿
Jul 7, 2017 21:00
|
|
|
SeanBeansShako posted:Honestly I'd rather we'd have the option to take most of a broken army prisoner rather than playing whack a mole and chasing the stack down to the last man and either parole them for diplomacy, let them go or if you can afford it bribe them to be a volunteer legion in your faction. You can capture artillery in Warhammer, so there's hope for future titles. Issue is you can only capture your own race's artillery, and the scarcity of intra-race warfare plus the fact that the AI-only factions of a given race are usually poor as poo poo and not fielding much artillery, it's extremely rare to actually see the mechanic in action.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 8, 2017 06:05
|
|
|
I would never, ever want to back to the way squalor or replenishment worked. Also, it's kinda funny seeing as how panned Med2 was on release. "I don't want to play as Scotland!!" It wasn't until well into Empire and Napoleon that I saw Med2/Rome1 start getting hailed as the One True Game and not Med1.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 13, 2017 17:17
|
|
|
What is up with TWC grogs making so many x turns per year mods? I get how the year scale is kind of annoying, you end up either having it take decades to shift armies around or you have Rome exploding into its largest extent in like 50 years and villages getting built into metropolises overnight, but like, they're both annoying. I honestly like how Warhammer just deletes the date and lets turn length be abstract like every other aspect of the campaign map. It ain't like the city-building or army-recruiting system has ever been anything like "realistic", not even in any of the giant historical mods.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 14, 2017 00:06
|
|
|
GrossMurpel posted:That sounds good, thanks for the explanations. I'll probably buy it then, and actually try the game and how it plays before thinking about which DLCs might be worth it. There's a lot of lovely steam reviews about "ONLY FOUR FACTIONS WHAT A RIP CA" but really, the whole map is populated and while there's a few areas that could use some unique units, all the four (now five) base races play very differently on both maps. It's not like playing Macedon vs Seleucids vs Ptolemies vs etc, every player faction is very, very different. And imo the base factions and the freeLC are more fun than the DLC ones. The legendary lord/lord/hero mechanic is the best it's ever been too. Especially the legendary lords. Edgar Allen Ho fucked around with this message at 20:28 on Jul 14, 2017 |
|
#
¿
Jul 14, 2017 20:23
|
|
|
In Rome 2 DeI as Rome, I got put at war with Carthage via event after conquering Syracuse. (Even though we were doing a joint assault, we even still have +relations from helping each other, lol politics). Is there any event to force peace with them after taking some more territory or is this the start of the standard TW AI foreverwar where I have to grind them into the dust? I dream of an RTW3 where there are actually 3 seperate Punic Wars, at least sometimes.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 20, 2017 00:55
|
|
|
Rookersh posted:I don't mind too like vanilla honestly. My bigger issue right now is looking at RTR videos it cuts off most of Egypt/Selucids/England, and doesn't really have as much race variety? Rome 1 has a hard limit on how many factions can exist on the map, so every mod is going to have the same number. They just have to choose who they want.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 20, 2017 17:42
|
|
|
Rome 2 DeI as Pyhrrus: Well, Rome steamrolled both my allies to the north in one turn and then an event gave them a free 20-stack of good troops in Rome. Well gently caress this then, never playing Epirus.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 21, 2017 04:39
|
|
|
Ammanas posted:iirc it adds a lot of 'realism' to the game, its been a long time tho It's not that kind of mod It's pretty fun but Rome 2 runs so slowly on campaign that I have never finished.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 1, 2017 02:56
|
|
|
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. The words of someone who does not talk to real people
|
|
#
¿
Nov 15, 2017 16:49
|
|
|
« Hmmm, I like vikings and Thor but this game, featuring bearded axemen and longships and crows in the marketing, is clearly about 9th and 10th century Britain. Pshah, pass. »-the average consumer
|
|
#
¿
Nov 15, 2017 20:46
|
|
|
CharlestheHammer posted:Vikings are insanely boring so this announcement makes me sad. Anglo-saxons are hella cool tho!
|
|
#
¿
Nov 15, 2017 20:53
|
|
|
Total War would benefit from more individual unit AI in general. It’d be nice if units wheel, charge, fall back, etc on their own without standing orders to do otherwise, especially in 40-unit battles. No more just standing and eating a rear charge or a bazillion arrow volleys when there’s nothing else going on. I played this ACW game way back with a system I liked. Individual units would do basic survival stuff on their own, like wheeling to meet a flanker if no one was in front of them. Then you could select a group and tell them to passively hold, defend but they’re allowed room to move, probe, or commit to a full attack. Microing was still optimal but the AI would act on its own if your attention was elsewhere, so it felt like your units had officers and ncos interested in winning and not dying instead of all being robots. They’d also do stuff like fall back to cover before routing completely, or advancing if they were trouncing the enemy without “hold” orders Edgar Allen Ho fucked around with this message at 01:11 on Nov 16, 2017 |
|
#
¿
Nov 16, 2017 01:07
|
|
|
“Ugh, this period had extremely small armies. Why, at the battle of Sceathacierscyr, Gunlårdr Spyrggissen fielded only 2000 men! Get real CA.”-the averag consumer
|
|
#
¿
Nov 16, 2017 15:38
|
|
|
HerpicleOmnicron5 posted:Yes because TW games have always appropriately modelled the seasons or politics of the era. Help, im playing rome but i can only recruit 10 legion units in my stack before i have to make crappy auxiliaries, my general keeps getting replaced every year and i have to dishand my stacks every winter so i cant fight outside of italy
|
|
#
¿
Nov 16, 2017 17:47
|
|
|
New Butt Order posted:On the other hand, the AI fare a lot better if it could fight like like historical Rome. Lose 20 battles in a row, raise a new massive army each time, then barely win 1 battle and take over another quarter of the Mediterranean. I just wish AI Rome wouldn't field all-triarii stacks. MY IMMERSION
|
|
#
¿
Nov 17, 2017 00:58
|
|
|
In DeI I like how the RoRs keep things more interesting. Like as Carthage I liberated a gallic faction in Ariminum who went on to take all of Latium, and when they finally turned on me, they had a lot of italian units as well as gallic ones. My armies have a lot of italians and sicilians, massalian hoplites, etc in addition to iberians and libyans because I took Italy and southern Gaul. I wish there were computers powerful enough to generate unit developments on the fly, like my gallo-italian kingdom could adopt units of gallic infantry fighting in a pseudo-polybian style.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 17, 2017 15:02
|
|
|
They need to redo Americas with a mechanic like in FotS where you can ally with one of the european powers and modernize as a native state. Be the Aztecs, convert to protestantism, and laugh your way to Sevilla with english ships and muskets.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 22, 2017 20:13
|
|
|
alex314 posted:Unmodded Warhammer is the only one to have meaningful buildings progression in a way that higher tiers are worthy upgrades. Even DEI has this "let's expand this mine/market/fishery/whatever for extra 30% output, but it'll use 100% more food and/or make everyone in the province miserable. They’re still worth building, imo it’s way more interesting that way than in warhammer where by mid game I’m rolling in dough and just monotously waiting for growth and then clicking “build” over and over. You just make 1-2 recruiting provinces and then every other province is an identical money factory.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 23, 2017 17:01
|
|
|
The warhammer map has a lot of movement-blocking obstacles (and ways for some races to bypass them), which adds some flavour. IMO that's the way to go. Except limit the special movement more, ie no dwarfs underwaying outside of mountains or wood elves using their special forest paths through the desert. Obviously that doesn't translate to historicals, but for example you could: -have northern european forests free roam for its owner, slow for enemy barbarians, and attrition + slow for outsiders -deserts impassable but free roam for factions like arabs -building/destroying bridges plus more and more noticeable rivers -generally more hills/forests/mountains that affect movement It would definitely be cool and flavourful to give historically weak but resilient factions, like arabs, numidians, barbarians, steppe tribes, etc big roster weaknesses but balance that by letting them gently caress with terrain. They should also get more holes filled in their roster by abandoning traditional ways, like arabs can conquer the levant to adopt greek and persian style armies but lose their desert bonuses.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 5, 2017 01:05
|
|
|
Am I the only one that doesn't like FotS? The gimmick was fun but overall it was pretty uninteresting, good for one playthrough. People complain about Dark Elves being boring, in FotS campaign every faction ended up being "mow down hapless AI with superweapons" and the unavoidable naval game was atrocious.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 14, 2018 15:48
|
|
|
Not really related, but I've crewed an armstrong gun irl for a summer student job, at a tourist attraction fort in Ontario. poo poo is cool yo. We also had a mortar and some 24lbers on the wall that would get fired. It's pretty terrifying to imagine crewing a muzzle loader in the face of a force fielding armstrongs.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 14, 2018 22:22
|
|
|
Catsplosion posted:Good choice TWW2 is one of the best total war games to date and the tomb kings have some interesting mechanics making them a nice change of pace to the other races. I really hope the new race mechanics and different recruitment styles show up in future historical games, obviously with changes because no one can summon zombies or whatever. But make raising a roman or greek citizen army vs a punic merc army vs a gallic tribal army feel different. As it is, last time I played Carthage it was far better to just churn out my own troops + some regional units just like Rome would rather than try to rely on mercs. Also, hoo boy, TWC has a thread called "Since when is deportation a type of "ethnic cleansing"?" Edgar Allen Ho fucked around with this message at 22:55 on Jan 31, 2018 |
|
#
¿
Jan 31, 2018 22:49
|
|
|
PureRok posted:Being one of my favorite times/places historically I can't wait. Can I mass longbowmen? I want to mass longbowmen, but I don't know if the 9th century is a bit early for that or not. I mean, given it’s the series where you can mass roman ninjas
|
|
#
¿
Feb 2, 2018 11:35
|
|
|
Reinforcements seriously need to just start on the map. Or at the very least, make them present in deployment so you can properly group and stance them and give them marching orders so that they show up and move to where you want them instead of waddling on, clogging up the UI, in a random order. Reinforcement mechanics are seriously the worst, by far, game-ruiningest, feature since 40-unit battles became a thing. Posted this in Hams thread but it belongs here too. The reinforcement feature in every TW since AI generals were a thing is so hilariously bad that I avoid reinforcing myself unless it's a clear autoresolve victory.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 2, 2018 16:41
|
|
|
Gadzuko posted:removing agents entirely, I doubt those will carry over for non-saga TW games in the future. NOOOOOOOOOOOO
|
|
#
¿
Feb 2, 2018 21:52
|
|
|
Slim Jim Pickens posted:Rome/Med 2 spies were the best agents, fight me if you disagree Best agents are warhammer ones, because you can stick them in your armies to buff dudes/kill poo poo/cast spells and ignore the campaign map agent game Which reminds me, based on a couple vids it looks like followers aren’t post battle loot anymore, your character has all the followers and your player agency is buffing the specific sort of follower you want. That is way better. Play 50 turns of any warhammer game and you're inevitably spammed with 50 copies of the same useless follower. Looks like in Thrones you can level up your bard or priest or whatever followers for your econ/public order governor and then level your shieldbearer or sergeant or whatevers for your frontline general character. Much better. Famous dude should already have a posse, he just picks who to promote. Edgar Allen Ho fucked around with this message at 23:53 on Feb 2, 2018 |
|
#
¿
Feb 2, 2018 23:48
|
|
|
I really hope there's enough feature changes to blow the lids off of TWC types. Limited building slots were already game-breaking arcade poo poo for the childish fantasy masses, so what happens when minor cities have only ONE slot? Breakdowns, hopefully.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 3, 2018 01:11
|
|
|
It seems similar to the Tomb Kings recruitment, for Warham owners. Not identical but TK definitely seem like a Thrones beta. Basically TK have no recruit or upkeep cost, they are bound purely by a cap on how many armies they can field, and those armies are bound by what specific units they can field. Tech gives you more armies, and each +army tech also unlocks a specific cool lord with a new set of stats. You don't have to choose that one though, you still can fill the slot with a random, cheaper dude with random traits. Unit wise, you have unlimited skeleton warriors and spearmen. Beyond them, you have to build buildings. So say you own one Tier 3 city, you can build a skellington barracks that gives you 4 elite warriors, two royal guard, and six bowmen, and then a workshop that gives you two chariots, two archer chariots, and one catapult, and then an ancient egyptian tank factory that gives you one unit of murderstatues. The more buildings you build, the more units you get. But your lovely levy chaff is unlimited and always available. It's a fun change, and IMO it encourages more thought about what buildings you build because you can't have one "recruitment province" and then every other province is focused on making beaucoup bucks. If you want a big, elite army, you have to keep building military buildings to increase your unit caps. Instead of being limited by upkeep, it's opportunity cost. "Do I want more chariots or do I want money/trade goods/public order/walls/etc? Edgar Allen Ho fucked around with this message at 05:16 on Feb 4, 2018 |
|
#
¿
Feb 4, 2018 04:16
|
|
|
Voyager I posted:It's been a long time, but wasn't this basically how M2 worked to begin with? It had caps but you still had to build x building to recruit y unit, after which you had unlimited y units as long as you waited around, and also said units could not afterwards replenish unless you manually walked them back to the home province. So no, not really M2 is frankly unplayable unless you're desperate for a spreadsheet with a GUI Edgar Allen Ho fucked around with this message at 07:38 on Feb 4, 2018 |
|
#
¿
Feb 4, 2018 07:34
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 17, 2024 20:57 |
|
|
Having gone back to dicking around in Rome 2 a bit after months of warhammer only, I really really hope future campaign diplomacy AI follows the WH model In warhammer their traits are relevant: a defensive isolationist will park a terrifying stack in his city but be amicable if you aren’t pushy. An imperial with imperial distrust will be contrarian and probably need murdering. A high elf that’s a diplomatic guardian will be happy to play second-fiddle to a player elf, but a wary one that hates elven politics will probably not deal with you. The AIs, while still dumb, feel like they have goals and you can reasonably predict what they might do. It makes for a world that feels “lived in” In Rome though, diplo is meaningless. If you look weak, people with multiple treaties and green relations will trip over themselves to war you and only you. Some especially stupid AIs will perpetually DoW and then offer gold for peace a few turns later. Get too strong or play as a major power though and every single faction does a total 180 and will offee their whole treasury for NAPs, evenif you are an obvious menace, mechanically murdering minors one faction at a time and blithely ignoring treaties. It feels like a world where every peasant knows exactly who the player is and acts accordingly.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 4, 2018 14:21
|
|