[a / b / c / d / e / f / g / gif / h / hr / k / m / o / p / r / s / t / u / v / vg / vm / vmg / vr / vrpg / vst / w / wg] [i / ic] [r9k / s4s / vip / qa] [cm / hm / lgbt / y] [3 / aco / adv / an / asp / bant / biz / cgl / ck / co / diy / fa / fit / gd / hc / his / int / jp / lit / mlp / mu / n / news / out / po / pol / qst / sci / soc / sp / tg / toy / trv / tv / vp / wsg / wsr / x] [Settings] [Search] [Mobile] [Home]
Board
Settings Mobile Home
/vst/ - Video Games/Strategy

[Advertise on 4chan]


Thread archived.
You cannot reply anymore.


[Advertise on 4chan]


is this game worth it?
>>
>>345247
it was the beginning of a lot of the shitty features and design you see in total war games today. it was a massive disappointment, considering that its predecessor was one of the best games in the series (shogun 2 + fall of the samurai)
>>
>>345247
Get Attila instead

The real question is, is Thrones of Brittania worth it? Or three kingdoms?
>>
>>345906
Can you elaborate? What's wrong with the design ?
>>
>>345247
>is this game worth it?
Depends on what exactly you mean. With DeI it's a good game. But RTW1 is still better in every way.
>>
>>345247
It's garbage, even with the best of the mods it's still garbage.
>>
File: 1609401098900.png (480 KB, 590x559)
480 KB
480 KB PNG
>mfw seeing the AI suicide charge a fleet of transports into my navy for the nth time
>>345906
>it was the beginning of a lot of the shitty features and design you see in total war games today
that was empire
>>
>>346448
I think the word you seek is WARSCAPE, and yes, despite all the mutilation and renaming of this abominable engine they are in effect - a decade and more later - STILL reskinning Empire
>>
>>346448
empire added some positive things like being able to garrison buildings
its a shame that more features are removed as you play newer and newer total war games
>>
>>346459
Empire was when they made the disastrous switch to warscape, Rome 2 was when they desperately tried to bend and twist and warp warscape into something that resembled the Rome 1 engine and failed. What a joke developer.
>>
>>346453
Real shame, they knocked it out of the fucking park with Medieval 2 and then shat all over it. Epic kill moves won out over more complex/in-depth campaigns and battles. Thank god for Field of Glory and Slitherine.
>>346459
Empire added more shit and good things, such as
>Previously mentioned kill moves
>Leader traits/attributes being utterly butchered
>City building limited to a few slots (while having some resource buildings spread though the province is a fine idea, making it so Spain and France are 1 province and hobbling building variety isn't
>Mods are significantly worse
>>
>>345247
It's fine. I played a lot of M2 and R1 before this. It plays as well as you expect. Archers are stronger than they were in previous games which is nice since they didn't do much back then. Pikes are a bit strong, elephants are vulnerable to missiles but still wreck enemies if you don't let that happen. Difficulties are fucked since they're a flat +10 to melee skill instead of +10% so it makes the early game low tier units way more difficult than what you deal with later. Garrisons are pathetic which can cause a lot of frustration when a cavalry archer army is harassing your towns.

But, y'know, it plays well enough 95% of the time. I think most of peoples complaints just come out of knowledge of poor design decisions even when those design decisions didn't noticeably affect them till they were told they existed.

Also the game gets repetitive once you break out of your starting region. No mongols here.
>>
>>345247
Map is too small, Greece and the Aegean are where this really pisses me off.
>>
>>346448
I loved the village spawning in Empire.
>>
>>345247
A lot of people on this board think everything that came out after medieval 2 is terrible. while I agree CA as a studio is stagnating (they have virtually 0 competition in a market that's increasingly becoming niche) i think rome 2 is a very enjoyable game especially with mods.

give the vanilla game a try. if you get bored because the game gets too easy after a while and/or you want more realism, install DEI mod. it actually changes the game dramatically and the whole experience becomes more "hardcore."
>>
>>346772
>install DEI mod. it actually changes the game dramatically and the whole experience becomes more "hardcore."
naval battles and the AI are still complete shit
>>
>>346775
no game is perfect. DEI is as good as it gets for rome 2.
>>
>>346788
It's this kind of passive acceptance of the mediocre and the downright dreadful that allows great franchises to fall into such levels of decline. This 'it's OK really, if you ignore the terrible AI that they've had 15 years to perfect and the awful tactically devoid battles that they've also had more than a decade to work on and which they actually did better 12 years ago then it's absolutely fine with mods' attitude is why we can't have nice strategy games anymore.

Making strategy games ''''accessible''''' (code for shallow and dumb) was the greatest tragedy to befall this genre, and it's exactly those it was made accessible for that fight the hardest to defend the collapse.

Think about the depth and complexity, the intricacy of the games underlying mechanics iof games like Gary Grigsby's (insert theater here), Graviteam Tactics and Shadow Empire - all games made by either a single human being or a tiny group of part timers, and then look at the resources of a corporation like CA who spend more on marketing (lying) in a month than all three of those other devs will ever be able to scrape together over their combined lifetimes.

Yeah, if the AAA cunts had half the intelligence, imagination and drive of some of these little indie devs and poured every resource they had into making every part of everything they make great we would be looking at incredible games instead of games that can be described as OK if you ignore all the shit and don't mind modding it to the point of absurdity.
>>
>>345906

>Best game in series
>boring as batshit japanese scenario

Pick one
>>
>>347005
Saddest thing to me is Three Kingdoms was that perfect opportunity for CA to bounce. You had your Romance mode to indulge all the Warhammer hero and not-magic while Records could have been the opportunity to go full history for a now neglected audience.
>>
>>347005
>Think about the depth and complexity, the intricacy of the games underlying mechanics iof games like Gary Grigsby's (insert theater here), Graviteam Tactics and Shadow Empire - all games made by either a single human being or a tiny group of part timers, and then look at the resources of a corporation like CA who spend more on marketing (lying) in a month than all three of those other devs will ever be able to scrape together over their combined lifetimes.
Well which games sell more? :^)
>>
>>347006
i would have rather had it in a different setting too but i take what i can get. at least it isnt the abomination known as soihammer which ruined any aspect of a community that total war had
>>
>>347008
You have to view these big studios as having a kind of racketeer mentality, they are money men who just happen to be in possession of a much loved back catalogue but no fucking clue about how you could ever create such a thing from scratch, all they know how to do is bullshit and pay people smarter than them (but not smart enough) to churn out second ratecopies of the originals.
>>
File: Teutonic_Knights.jpg (1.02 MB, 1920x2755)
1.02 MB
1.02 MB JPG
>>347008
>bounce
The thing is CA always wanted to shift more towards a hero focused game. They were already experimenting with special hero units in M2: Kingdoms Crusades campaign. Then in Shogun 2 they started implementing skill trees which allowed for really strong combat generals. Warhammer and 3K is basically the natural evolution of what CA had been trying to implements since at least Medieval 2. There is no reason for CA to bounce back to something they wanted to get away from in the first place.
>>
>>345247
>is this game worth it?
what do you mean by 'it'? your money? your time? it doesn't cost much on sale, but it sure as hell isn't worth your time.
>>
File: vbyk897o2lh51.png (466 KB, 1100x700)
466 KB
466 KB PNG
>>347035
I don't object to the idea of heroes if all that really means more character and mechanical weight to your general. It's the focused part where it's a shitty half-assed MOBA with abilities they bring that can turn the tide of battle that I disagree with. Shogun to Medieval is really what I wanted more of. Pic unrelated.
>>
File: 20200905050408_1.jpg (767 KB, 2560x1440)
767 KB
767 KB JPG
>>345247
use this DEI modpack and it wont be shitty
https://steamcommunity.com/workshop/filedetails/?id=2237412566
>>
>>345247
is combat in the original rome really better?
>>
>>347733
Oh yes, it is infinitely better in so many ways and for so many reasons, watch...

Why Rome 2 failed (pt 1)
>https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DXkWfEIALxM
Why Rome 2 failed (pt 2)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L6eaBtzqqFA
Rome 2 one year on
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dy5GRaHzFnI
>>
>>347733
the real answer to why rome 1 had better combat is because of the insanity that you can just spam dogs and instantly win every single combat you are in, even sieges
>>
>>347005
ultimately most people aren't capable of enjoying a quality strategy game because most people are of low quality. the average person is incapable of undertaking a proper strategy game so they will always appeal to a niche of the population. CA appeals to the majority because they don't care about making strategy games. just money - they even admit this themselves. total war is a brand that sells regardless of the quality of the game. https://venturebeat.com/2018/06/03/how-total-war-developer-pushes-its-games-forward-and-fans-can-push-back/
>>
>>346788
>>347717
DEI really surpassed vanilla rome 2...in how shitty the combat is
>order a unit of 200 spearmen to attack enemy unit
>10 men out of 200 actually run and attack, the rest 190 stay where they were but break into a blob instead of the formation they were in
I am seriously surprised this mod gets any praise
>phalanx is supposed to be weak when outmaneuvered
>attack a phalanx with 4 units from all directions
>phalanx keeps their ground for like 10 minutes while losing 15 men or so
>the rear of the phalanx actually kills a lot of fucking swordsmen with no fucking loses
so much for historical accuracy and actual combat tactics, yeah
oh yeah
>attacking in formation practically doesn't exist
>>
>>347035
M2 Kingdoms was so fucking good. When DLC was actually an expansion instead of locking things already in the fucking game (like the Greek states) behind a paywall
>>
https://youtu.be/EaDlihIqPws
Lmao
>>
>>348211
I get the feeling a lot of effort that goes into modern DLC, especially Warhammer, is in the art department because you need to create all these new models seeing as factions are so radically different visually. When you look at how much content was packed in Kingdoms it's absolutely mental compared to just getting one new faction.
>>
>>347957
It's amazing how much worse it's gotten over the years, I remember some of the older iterations of DeI actually being quite enjoyable
>>
Rome 2 is still my favorite for quick battles. the units are so responsive and using formations are fun as fuck. just don't spam the hilariously overpowered units and everything is fine.

>>346647
But, y'know, it plays well enough 95% of the time. I think most of peoples complaints just come out of knowledge of poor design decisions even when those design decisions didn't noticeably affect them till they were told they existed.
this, among people still parroting post-launch problems
>>
File: Carthage_army.jpg (174 KB, 836x662)
174 KB
174 KB JPG
>Rome 2 thread
Every time I see one I get the need to reinstall and try liking the game again. I'm disappointed every time.
But now I will do it again. As Carthage since I never played them in R1 or R2. See you in the mountains my elephant frens.
Just wondering, can I get away with playing historica Carthage and rely mercenaries?
>>
>>347878
>When we’re able to offer the Total War formula with dragons and giants and trolls and things like that, you might see something in that that you find more approachable or more familiar to you that gets you interested. The same goes for our free-to-play titles, our mobile titles, and some of the other things that we’ve got in mind as well.
>We’ve sold coming up to 30 million units of DLC.
>“I’m going to spend 24 hours playing the game this weekend because there’s a new update,” that kind of consumer.
>That’s probably one of the biggest dangers to our business and to anyone who has a long-running franchise. Your fan base will assume that everything you do, everything attached to the franchise, is for them, and when it doesn’t measure up to their expectations, they will treat it harshly. That can be potentially quite damaging from a marketing and PR perspective. So, we do have to be careful and considerate about what we do and when we do it.

Ultimately, we don’t want our core fan base to stop us from doing things that might generate things that other people love. We have mobile games out there that we know our core market doesn’t necessarily engage with, but they have hundreds of thousands of users.
>>
>>348847
>Just wondering, can I get away with playing historica Carthage and rely mercenaries?
Literally no.
>>
File: ERITUMEROVIVT.png (186 KB, 661x315)
186 KB
186 KB PNG
>>348850
The lack of self awareness is astonishing, and of course the denial. Imagine not realising that hype works, but if you over hype and then fail to deliver on promises you made that is going to turn people against you, or failing to grasp that making games now that are fundamentally worse than games you were making more than a decade ago is going to make your core player base view you with disdain.

This is what happens when racketeers gain control of a much loved franchise. there are no autists at CA, only midwitted globohomo graduates who actually believe they are in the business of game development, as opposed to what they are really doing which is mutilating an already fucked 13 year old engine before applying crappy mods to it and selling it by the slice. But they know their market, midwits now dominate the PC gaming market : (
>>
>>347005
>Think about the depth and complexity, the intricacy of the games underlying mechanics iof games like Gary Grigsby's (insert theater here)
correct me if i'm wrong, but doesn't gary grigsby's war in the east get flak for its german ai being shit and incapable of putting up a challenge when you pick soviets? so your take of solo devs doing ai better doesn't really hold water. ai is just hard to code, period and no game has particularly impressive ai right now.

as for the budget, well, aside from marketing, total war has a whole other layer in addition to the other games you listed which takes up additional effort in manpower, coding and designing models as well as a seperate layer of gameplay. yes, sorry, personally controlling the armies you've got and seeing the actual battle unfold is more interesting than watching how numbers on a spreadsheet change. the latter might allow for deeper mechanics, but it's not as engaging and of course it'll be ten times cheaper.

i can't believe i'm being put in a position to defend total war, but your criticims are so dishonest, i had to do it. no, total war ai isn't shit because the devs aren't enthusiastic about their jobs or incompetent, good ai is just really rare and hard to do. no, total war isn't higher budget and aaa because of marketing and because it's run by a bunch of jews who want to scam money from you. total war development may well be overpriced since large companies are inefficient but nobody could have made a tw game with the budget your example games were made.
>>
>>348939
t. CA code monke
>>
>>348939
>but nobody could have made a tw game with the budget your example games were made
And CA can't do it either, even with hundreds of millions in the kitty, an army of jobbing coders and artists and literally years of experience.
That's exactly because they are shit developers, in fact they aren't developers at all in the traditional sense, point to one thing they actually coded from scratch in the past 15 years - AI? Nope! 3D Battle engine? Nope! Campaign engine? Nope! - They are in the business of sprucing up and reselling crappy old rope, rope they themselves could never actually make.
>>
>>348939
I would take more complex and in depth battles and campaigns instead of “WOAH SO COOL!!!” kill moves and fancy unit designs.
>>
>>348939
>as for the budget, well, aside from marketing, total war has a whole other layer in addition to the other games you listed which takes up additional effort in manpower, coding and designing models as well as a separate layer of gameplay.
But they don't do it well, there are scores of 4X games that do campaigns better and there are games that do real time battles better, imagine for example if you merged the campaign mechanics of something like Shadow Empire with 3D tactical battles similar to something like vid related...
>https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0PMP6t_jv0A
The combined budgets of those two developers probably wouldn't pay the salary of one manager at CA lol, and look at all the other resources they have too, but they can't make real improvements to a 20 year old game? Hahaha, fuck off retard.
>>
Why so many people recommend doing when it makes combat absolutely atrocious?
You want to play grand strategy? Go play paradox games.
>>
>>348975
Revommend dei*
>>
>>348975
>>349012
The problem is Rome 2, modders do their best but you can only do so much when the foundations themselves are so dreadful. That's why so many people are still playing Med 2 despite it being so old and clearly showing its age, the foundations for the game are solid, it's not perfect but it is good enough in all the ways that matter and modders are able to improve even on that masterpiece.

I know the term polish a turd is overused but that really is what modders are doing when they work on Rome 2, they can mask the smell with perfume and apply a bit of glitter to it, but as soon as you dig into it you can see and smell the shit because shit is in its DNA and runs through every aspect of it.
>>
>>349019
This is it. No other TW game, before or since, needs so many underlying changes to become enjoyable than Rome 2. I just don't know how it got released and that was after Shogun 2.
>>
>>349027
Shogun 2 was the swansong in terms of the last work of the remaining pre-warscape talent, realizing warscape was an utter disaster they decided to throw everything at it, and to be fair it is still the high point post Med 2, but they had to choose a tiny setting and really work hard to make it as good as it was, of course it needed line infantry because cav and melee infantry are as bad as anything else they've done during the warscape era. It was also well polished and had some nice features and lovely art and design that really gave it flavour, of course not so hard when you're only working on a single flavour but credit where it's due.

Rome 2 was the first game that came out after CA had gone full racketeer, abandoning all pretense of being interested in creating anything new or original, and instead focusing on finding a way to repackage and resell what they already had ad infinitum. Rome 2 was the birth of modern CA in the sense that they've never had nor indeed wanted any true visionaries on the staff since Shogun 2.
They had their golden goose (warscape lol) and that as they say was that.
>>
>>348975
Because they played it and find it fun retard
>>
150 hours in vanilla- got bored. Started a new campaign as the Seleucids in DEI (got roflstomped by eastern satrapies by turn 30). Then started a "Zerg Rush" tactic for a new Macedon campaign and that seems to be doing swimmingly.

Thoughts so far on DeI- I think it is very in depth and adds a lot of personality to the gameplay. The new combat mechanics took some getting used to, but now that I do I have been having a blast. I personally enjoy long battles and the fact that strong units are actually STRONG. (macedon hoplites with their peltasts are great early game)
>>
>>349019
And Medieval 2 is simply easier for modding. It's why you have Westeros, Middle Earth, and whatever that mod is that has Shrek and Teletubbies.
>>
>>347957
>>order a unit of 200 spearmen to attack enemy unit
>>10 men out of 200 actually run and attack, the rest 190 stay where they were but break into a blob instead of the formation they were in
that's literally medieval 2 and rome 1 combat that gets so much praise here
>>
>>349064
>and the fact that strong units are actually STRONG
That's true for regular Rome 2 as well.
>>
>>349143
>that's literally medieval 2 and rome 1 combat that gets so much praise here
ebin shitposting lad
>>
>>349038
What exactly can you find fun in a mod with broken combat system? Not only it is not working properly, it is historically correct only in the names of the units
>>
>>349064
>the fact that strong units are actually STRONG
This is fun until it breaks all the historical accuracy and common fucking sense. Phalanx is very strong, yes, in a frontal assault. But DEI phalanx can destroy even units attacking it from behind.
>>
>>349188
>charge cavalry into the exposed rear of an enemy phalanx
>his morale doesn't flinch and my cavalry then breaks
>>
File: guess the game.png (815 KB, 1280x720)
815 KB
815 KB PNG
>>345906
>best games in the series (shogun 2 + fall of the samurai)
maybe mechanically but i have zero fun plying it
heck I prefer first Shogun over 2nd
>>
>>346471
Empire could be great if their fixed bugs and stability of teh game(and overall performance) and modding was much easier(especially map)
desu they should just stick to 2nd sprites like in 1st Mediaval and Shogun
>>
File: confused skaven_face.png (53 KB, 412x393)
53 KB
53 KB PNG
>>349226
I don't think there's any hope for Empire simply because Warscape cannot handle firearms aka ranged warfare as default. Be it units shitting themselves tying to take proper formations, locking up on reloads, etc. That's on top of shit that also persists to this day like troop collision and such. How do you fuck things up THAT badly?
>>
>>348961
>yo bro, if they just take element 1 from game x and then element 2 from game y, it would be like the best game ever
>>
>>346772
>everything that came out after medieval 2 is terrible
including medieval 2 too
it was broken mess with bugs still not fixed
>>
File: pikes in action.png (1.62 MB, 1154x640)
1.62 MB
1.62 MB PNG
>>347957
return to the Monkeyactually Medieval 1
>>
>>349216
how did you make so much money in this game? for the life of me i couldn't figure out the economics system so i reached a ceiling at some point which killed my campaign. just seemed completely arbitrary and random and relied on the harvest which alternated between good, poor and everything inbetween but always ended up with me not being able to save moneys
>>
>>349251
its starting turn 1 in MTW mod
1st Shogun had really hard economics but
>ports flat 200 koku
>alliance flat +200 koku
>mines + flat income
>invest in rice in rich provinces
>also foreign tarders
Medieval one has also sea trade adn that could fetch you thousands per turn if you control seas for trade
>>
>>346052
Three Kingdoms obviously yes.
>>
>>349246
It's a tragedy, what happens when a beautiful idea ends up in the hands of greedy soulless fucks incapable of forming, or even appreciating, beautiful ideas. The Total War franchise is clown world in game form
>>
>>349258
ah i see
so is there some sort of maintenence cost for buildings? the only thing that seems different from what i did is that i'm fairly sure i upgraded rice farms everywhere, not just rich provinces. also i don't remember if i engaged in foreign trade.
medieval 1's economy i had no problem with, although it took me quite a few campaigns before i figured out how sea trade worked.
>>
>>345247
It's better than every game that came after it, IMO.
>>
>>349294
>It’s better than Thrones!
Woah.
>>
>>349292
>so is there some sort of maintenence cost for buildings?
no
but ports and mines bring flat income and are unaffected by random conditions
poor provinces usually have poor return ratio on upgrades
>>
>>349295
Ok? Seriously though--every single game that came after Rome 2 (and Attila) has just been a decline. This game isn't nearly as bad as autists make it out to be but it's still not as good as every total war game that came before it. I'd recommend it to anyone that is bored of replaying Shogun 2 and Medieval 2 for the ten millionth time.
>>
Good thing that people are waking up to the fact that DeI is a brainlet magnet and an utter shitty mod, maybe they will try good mods for once and see rome 2 is actually a game that can play good

>mfw most people download dei, grow bored at 10 turns, and never play again
>they never realize its because dei is boring as shit and makes the game play like you are playing at the slowest time settings so forums dads can understand what is going on
>>
>>345247
It's now okay after many patches, was shit and unplayable on release.
Only buy at extreme discount (75%+) and pirate the DLC
>>
>>349524
>rome 2 is actually a game that can play good
>>
Post good mods for Rome 2
DeI is not a good mod, War of the Ancient Gods is alright
>>
>>349548
Para bellum
>>
>>349569
use:
>freddy music mod
>reb's rtw2 graphics mod
>community patch for rome 2
>better ai recruitment
>A more aggressive AI
>even more AI armies
>41 units per army (very recommended)
optional:
>nordounit pic units mods (sebidee included)
>pikemen starts battles with pikes
>andrew boyarsky reskins
>M.I.B minor faction overhauls

search in the steam workshop those
>>
>>349588
I also liked the double garrison mod to help the AI actually defend themselves but some people dont like it (mostly because they are autoresolve vanilla/dei exploiting fags)

i use a combination of those with parabellum and had a blast
>>
>>349588
>use:
>>freddy music mod
>>reb's rtw2 graphics mod
>>community patch for rome 2
>>better ai recruitment
>>A more aggressive AI
>>even more AI armies
>>41 units per army (very recommended)
>optional:
>>nordounit pic units mods (sebidee included)
>>pikemen starts battles with pikes
>>andrew boyarsky reskins
>>M.I.B minor faction overhauls
i'd rather just not play the game at this point desu
>>
>>349595

>i would rather install dei because it does the same shit but worse because i have to low iq to know what does what
>>
>>349597
no, i won't install anything, like i said
>>
>>349602
good, the sooner you stop playing "strategy" games the better, fuck this genre to be quite honest
>>
>>349606
no, but i like strategy games
installing 40 mods is for people who like strategy games in theory but in reality hate them.
>>
>>349614
i play baduk if i want to play a good strategy game, almost every singleplayer strategy video game is an adventure game in disguise, and multiplayer strategy games aren't even about strategy but tactics because they are mostly solved and revolve around some meta very quickly
>>
>>349614
The game is fine on its own if you're new to TW. Rome 2 was only terrible up until around 2015.
>>
>>349617
ah, you're arguing semantics. well fine, i concede, i like the types of video games usually referred to as strategy. i realize that isn't necessarily an accurate term for them but it doesn't bother me.
>>
>>348961
You're right. One must understand that budget has nothing to do with talent. Even more, the more people work on it, the less talent shines. That's why studios led by some prick like Kojima or some other "creative face" are better than any of this bland, degrading shit
>>
>>349235
I was simply using it as a rebuttal to the age old CA fanboy excuse that the reason their games aren't that great is because they are actually making two games in one and that means it's twice as difficult lol.

And so my point stands - there are tiny indy studios out there making equivalents of one or the other 'layers' that make up Total War games and they're doing it much much better.
Who knows, maybe if CA focused on hiring real talent instead of worrying about correct political alignment and ethnicity quotas and pretended they were making two separate games they might actually produce something decent.
>>
>>349725
what exactly did you rebutt? the statement that total war games are the best at either combat or grand startegy campaign maps? yes, you definitely did rebutt that, except nobody has said it. everyone knows that there are games who do campaign maps better than total war and games that do battles batter than total war. if there's one that does both better, i'd like to play it same as anyone
>>
>>347957
The "DeI is great" hivemind has become ever more ridiculous over time
>>
>>349743
That's exactly my point, who has had decades and god only knows how many hundreds of millions of dollars to do it? Who has the brand that is almost guaranteed to top the Steam charts weeks before release and the resources to take the risks? CA.

Of course, as others have already pointed out elsewhere in this and in other threads, CA isn't remotely interested in making the best campaigns or tactical battles, they have their golden goose and they're going to keep on laying second rate shit flavored eggs until someone else eventually puts some real quality up as competition.

Nobody is saying that a great grand scale campaign game with equally great tactical battles is an easy thing to make, but by now CA should be making it and I think it's clear for all to see that they never will.
>>
>>349143
Oh no now you'll make the nostalgic idiots with rose-tinted glasses angry
>>
>>349756
I hope Manor Lords just fucks them all up but I don't think it is possible
>>
>>349294
With the tonnes of DLCs and patches I thoroughly enjoyed my pirated copy of Rome II
>>
>>349756
>Nobody is saying that a great grand scale campaign game with equally great tactical battles is an easy thing to make
...or a product people will buy.
>>
>>349778
That's all it really boils down to
>>
>>349778
...or a product people will buy.
Yeah, because nobody would buy Medieval 3 with great battles (like R1/M2 but better), a great campaign mode (like Vic 2 but better) and great AI.

And don't make out like none of those things are possible, when you have the time and resources anything is possible - as long as you also have the imagination, the ability and the desire, sadly it's these key ingredients that CA sorely lacks.
>>
>>349786
The thing is CA isn’t an artist who’s just doing it for the sake of creating something great. CA is a company making a product first and foremost. Sure they can invest into better battles, sure they can make a better campaign gameplay and yes they could afford proper AI. But at the end of the day the question is if those investments will significantly improve sales. Most likely not. TW titles have been selling like hot cakes for years now despite their mediocrity. Unless there is some kind of competition which’ll force them to make those changes they don’t have a reason to bother.
>>
>>346467
No one cares about your complaints boomer, the best TW games are all on the Warscape engine
>>
>>347035
An elite army core fucking up an enemy several times their size is totally fine.
A single hero is not.
I don’t see how that is complicated.
>>
>>349786
>Yeah, because nobody would buy Medieval 3 with great battles (like R1/M2 but better), a great campaign mode (like Vic 2 but better) and great AI.
The trend in the industry for years now has been to dumb down games. At this point making a complex AAA is impossible. You might scare off customers by being too difficult and not accessible enough.
>>
>>348909
>>348847
Doesn’t Carthage have “mercenaries” as part of their core unit tree
>>
>>349832
>A single hero is not.
Depends on whom you ask.
>>
>>349840
Yeah, those that prefer the former are based and the latter cringe
>>
>>349832
>King of France and his twenty mates rout 500 militias is totally fine
>Lu Bu routs 500 militias somehow isn’t
>>
>>349858
Yes.
>>
>>349858
king of france would probably need to kite the militias and try to get flanking attacks or good charges into exhausted units
lu bu can just run into them and fight in the center of their giant blob. but he's free to run out of it or through it at any point by effortlessly pushing everyone away with his unique horse red hare which adds +30 charge bonus and +10 instinct
>>
The only Rome II is EB2
>>
>>348850
CA deserve to crash and burn, fucking hell
WH really saved their asses, I wonder how long it will keep them afloat, they make full retard decisions even with it, but the brand name is too strong for them to fail
it's going to be interesting seeing what they do after they exhaust WH
>>
>>350344
>the brand name is too strong for them to fail
WHFB really isn't that strong of a brand and I would have said that long before Age of Sigmar was a thing. It was just a perfect formula to make a Total War title for it outside of historicals largely due to being a setting based entirely around war.
>>
>>350358
it's still the Warhammer name, do you think most normalfags care if it's the fantasy or sci fi version?
>>
Boycott all TW games until Empire 2 or 17th century pike'n shot.
>>
>>350374
I just wish it never existed
>>
>>349832
Yesterday I checked out Warhammer 2 total war. The guy playing had an army full of 1 unit squads of some retarded OP huge lizard centaurs. He just right clicked any enemy army and insta-won with 0 loses.
Such a fucking stupid concept. Just make a moba at this point.
>>
>>349834
You are not getting the point.
They could reskin rome 2 and release it as Medieval 3. Production costs would be minimal and the game would sell like hot cakes.
Or they could redo the whole engine, reimagine campaign mode and spend years on perfecting combat. Production costs would be 10x what it could have been in the first case, the development would take 2 years more. And the sales would be...about the same.
I wonder why do they keep making the same game, hmmmm.
>>
>>349858
>40 heavily armed dudes, covered in heavy armor from head to toes, riding large armored horses, charge and route 500 peasants in their underwear and shovels as weapons
vs
>one fucking dude in armor that could be pierced by any arrow or shitty knife routes 500 peasants who could literally crush him
>>
>>350344
If they get license for LOTR total war, they would be set for a decade or so.
>>
>>350487
Yeah exactly we should never forget that for companies the ultimate goal is maximum profit,not creating a great game
>>
>>349858
King of France is protected by 70 robocops in full armor mounted on equally armored warhorses.
Lu Bu is just a dude that knows how to swing an halberd.
>>
>>350572
>king of france face well armed and trained city militia or professional soldiers
>Lu Bu face bunch of conscripted 4'5'' starved chink peasants and he and his horse are the only 6'1'' guy in the range of 100 miles
>>
File: Kinght vs barbs.jpg (246 KB, 1020x750)
246 KB
246 KB JPG
>>349765
>city builder
>battles
Not too optimistic. I don't recall a single city-builder ever having good combat. It always feels tagged on and even annoying in some cases.
>>
>>349569
>>349593
Para bellum battles feel really good
Thanks for the suggestion
>>
>>347005
5 star post
>>
Graviteam AI is absurdly bad, only a dad handhold player would think its a good game, its basically a game that is won before the battle is launched
>>
So I picked up Total War Three Kingdoms the other day and I'm enjoying it decently enough. /vst/ told me that the end game is less pants shittingly retarded than Warhammer 2's, so that's cool. Then I beat Cao Cao as Liu Bei, it's a highly pitched battle and I lose a lot of my troops, one turn passes and both of Cao Cao's boys come back full power from one city away and mop the floor with me. What the fuck is with this game? People have been telling me the dumb WH2 bullshit isn't present but then this happens. Like I have to fight the same two jackasses twice?
>>
>>350374
yes?

It's odd to me that you think people don't see 40K and WHFB as 2 very different things. Now AoS on the other hand...
>>
>>345247
I played it for Cleopatra campaign when they added family trees, to marry Antony, breed kids and take over Rome.
It was ok, but it's a nu total war game at its core, sometimes I got more fun in the campaign map than in battles, and that's a bad sign.
>>
>>353746
what difficulty are you playing on? the ai does not have the same recruitment rules as you where in they don't need specific buildings etc. to recruit units and have a higher recruitment capacity than the player. money is irrelevant for the ai - they don't pay upkeep / just get more money on higher difficulties. this is basically how all total war games behave, particularly from rome 2 onwards. this cheating behaviour becomes. more and more obvious the higher the difficulty.
>>
>>354357
>he plays the battles
Worst part of Rome 2 is how they kicked auto-resolve in the nuts.
>>
>>345247
>is this game worth it?
Lol no
>>
File: 20210107143533_1.jpg (856 KB, 2560x1440)
856 KB
856 KB JPG
>>347957
thats why the modpack i linked has extra mods that litterally fix those specific things. look at the modlist.
im having a blast in it personally
>>
Not really. I play the original rome total war a lot more then one 2 total war. Here's why.

1. Constant civil wars are really annoying. It's very difficult to fight your self in a middle of a civil war especially when your nigh krs take advantage and in case you when it happens.

2. Your enemies are a lot smaller then you yet raise bigger armies then you can. You can have 10 provinces but the enemies with 4 provinces can match your troop numbers. Which is highly annoying.

3. Egypt and bacteria always turn into super powers that can kick your ass and throw army after army at you. Highly annoying and really hard to beat.
>>
>>345247
yes
ignore other posters.
>>
>>345247
No
Ignore the poster above me
>>
>>345247
No, ignore everyone and buy it anyway.
>>
File: goedendag.jpg (186 KB, 960x1024)
186 KB
186 KB JPG
>>350779
A good day to you too knigit.
>>
>>357321
>crushes uprising
When will zhese peasantz learn? Hon hon hon hon
>>
>>345906
funny because it's shogun that actually started the trend of shitty features and design and it's great success with mainstream audience (quite easy after napoleon and empire that are pretty niche) led to Rome II total war which is the exact logical increment of the shogun 2 formula.
>>
>>356406
>complaining about difficulty in what is probably the easiest game in the franchise
oof anon
>>
>>357321
So how exactly does a short pointy stick end a knight's career?
>>
>>357436
Never understood the communities love for Shogun 2, I will concede that it was a very well polished turd, perhaps the best polished turd of them all, in terms of presentation etc they did a good job, but the tiny monocultural setting, no naval battles, the ever present warscape problems, the terrible AI, Shogun 2 was a shitty game in decent games clothing.
>>
>>357499
When you stand with a bunch of people on the other end of a ditch, backed up by crossbows and a few knights of your own.

>>357406
France was the biggest and most powerful kingdom in western europe. The won eventually after a they went on a new campaign but the first campaign was a disaster. There was no way Flanders could not have won without any outside help from either the pope or another european king. It was more the clash between the new power dynamic of cities and an emerging class of city dwellers with the old power of monarchy backed by law. It was also the clash between the old notion of high nobility and the king vs the new notion of centralization and a monarch grasping more control over his subjects via law and armies of lawyers.
>>
>>348840
I do think its funny when people complain about op units making the game easy. Especially campaigns and quick battles. Thats a problem they put on themselves.

I can use 5 artillery in Empire playing as Russia and win every battle every time easy. Especially early game with grapeshot. So instead, I just use 1 for more challenge. Its like people dont know they can limit themselves. I think they just have no self control so they chimp out over it.

Not saying op units arent a problem. Just that you dont need to take advantage of game breaking strategies. Thats completely your choice. Like, you can skip half of Mario 1 or 99% of Zelda Ocarina of Time but you can also just you know....not.
>>
>>349143
Careful. Wouldn't want to remind people of obvious things they ignore kek
>>
>>357510
>Shogun 2
>No naval battles
You sure about that one?
>>
>>349835
They should, at least historically.

Then again, Rome 1 and M2 had alot of historical inaccuracies but hey, didn't bother me. I just find it funny if you bring this up you get reeeeeeing for days from the crowd who choose to bitch about anything released after they turned 20.
>>
>>357828
What the anon you replied to says is that they literally do have mercenaries as a part of their core unit tree in Rome 2.
>>
>>357510
>tiny monocultural setting
greatly exaggerated, but I will concede that it's one of the least diverse regardless, and some of the variety is from DLC so I don't blame people for being pissed
>no naval battles
just not true, did you play the game?
>warscape problems
won't deny it, still not nearly as bad as pretty much every game after it
>terrible AI
yeah I can't even remotely defend this, it's so braindead it doesn't even use gates
>Shogun 2 was a shitty game in decent games clothing
Basic gameplay "loop" is extremely tight and fun, sound and visual design is easily top three in the entire franchise, it's flawed but I would never call it a shitty game.
>>
>>357510
>>358877
It brought about Fall of the Samurai, so it has that going.
>>
>>346471
>med 2
>depth
>battles
Come on, son
>>
>>348847
>Every time I see one I get the need to reinstall and try liking the game again. I'm disappointed every time.
same my elephant fren, i do it with empire divided and for some reason its just disappointing
but i do not remember why so i will try it again

anyone tried rise of the republic?
>>
File: 20210109194923_1.jpg (614 KB, 1920x1080)
614 KB
614 KB JPG
Look at this fucking retarded army composition. This is WITH DEI and realism mods.
>>
>>362041
4 more melee units than a vanilla stack desu
>>
>>362059
It’s still shit.
>>
>province wide public order
>only province capitals have walls
What idiot made these decisions?
>>
>>346772
I’m hoping Manor Lords wakes up CA and it becomes a major hit. CA really need a competitor to wake it the fuck up, people will buy whatever trash they sell (unless it has “Saga” in title because Thrones of Britannia was trash). I still think they make good games but they’ve seriously regressed to the point where everything after Shogun 2 just seems painfully unpolished. After Warhammer 3 they should take a break and make a new engine that’s better suited for melee combat. Start from a small scale, polish and refine the mechanics and AI, and then scale up with future titles.
>>
File: 20210110013109_1.jpg (329 KB, 2560x1440)
329 KB
329 KB JPG
>>362062
works on my machine, just got attacked by 12000 macedonians with most of their army being infantry with some really strong cav during the battle that came in later
>>
>>346448
Was playing Rhodes on DEI and captured Pella because the retarded AI sent an army of eight units in transports to kill my blockading fleet. How do you stop it from doing this shit?
>>
>>362111
Why Manor Lords? I really don't see that game taking away sales from Total War since they're too different. I'll just buy both.
>>
>>362386
Naval battles in general are so fucking broken it isn’t even funny. Oats are magic, sinking ships are non-entities, ships themselves have all the weight of beach balls, ramming is hilariously overpowered, and boarding and capturing ships is completely useless because you can’t add captured ships to your fleet, making it just a waste of men to fight in melee
>>
>>362111
CA is preparing to abandon TW all together since they're focused on making that shitty FPS and card game
pretty sure most of the people that worked on titles such as R2 and Attila have left all together and it's mostly zoomer hires now
they doubled their employee numbers since they released WH1
the only TW games they'll release from now on is yearly Saga titles which cost nothing to make since they're essentially reskins of existing games
>>
File: 20210107150346_1.jpg (719 KB, 2560x1440)
719 KB
719 KB JPG
>>362386
i use a mod that increases max army size to 41 it seems to make the ai prefer to fill a full stack army and invade with it. gives you alot more big pitched battles
https://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=318420643
>>
>>363205
are the map sizes increased so it isn't just a blob fest?
>>
>>363669
no but ive never really needed more space
>>
>>363669
rome 2 battle maps are actually a pretty good size, compared to troy which especially fighting around settlements with 40 units is like squeezing into a postage stamp
>>
>>357510
>no naval battles
HES LYING ON 4CHAN
>>
>>348918
>>347878
>because most people are of low quality
>midwits

god you sound like the biggest fedora tipper in the world. I don't even give a shit about tw but you really need to go back to whatever subreddit you post on
>>
>>345906
Shogun 2 sucks cock, and so do you.
>>
>>362456
They’d be stupid to not try to make a Med 3, Shogun 3, or Rome 3 in a few years. Even if it’s shit it would print money. Especially Med 3, that would be the title to match Warhammer sales since TW fans have been begging for it for ages.
>>
>>363856
t. mouthbreather
>>
>>366330
I wonder about them making medieval 3 and am concerned with how many models they'd have to make from early to late medieval, from Europe to whatever the general Islam regions are called. How much time would it take them to make it all and if whoever is in charge thinks that's a fine investment.

For Warhammer TW1 they only made 5 factions to begin with and presumably if the game didn't sell well they were just going to drop it but if they ever make Medieval 3 I'd really want all the major factions in day 1 so I can launch a crusade into the holy lands all the way from Britain. But it's not like I need everything from the Teutonic Knights to Jaguar Warriors straight away.
>>
>>366617
>But it's not like I need everything from the Teutonic Knights to Jaguar Warriors straight away.
you are a massive faggot
>>
>>366617
they'll just make M3 a 3 part game like WH since it apparently sells
>base game with pope and crusades endgame
>standalone expansion #1 with mongol invasion
>standalone expansion that adds guns, cannons and new world exploration like kingdoms
and they'll also try to make it all in 1 combined map and fail of course
CA's fanboys will just lap this up and not complain
and this will of course be on the same engine as they'll never make a new one
>>
>>363205
>Literally piling more shitty junk food on your plate in the hope of getting more nutrients
>>
File: screnshart.jpg (38 KB, 680x315)
38 KB
38 KB JPG
>>363205
>>
Maybe my taste is shit, but I’ve just last week enjoyed two campaign victories in Rome2, one as Rome and another as Egypt. Egypt in particular was fun because they get access to such a huge variety of unit types almost from the start.

I didn’t use any mods and I didn’t see any particularly annoying bugs like shit AI and 20 stack armies of slingers etc, and I particularly like the beefy feeling of battles between heavily armored infantry lines.

In Rome 2, it’s worth noting that charge stats on units and their limited projectile weapons like pilum etc are much more important than other TW titles. I’m currently doing a Chosokabe campaign in shogun 2, after just finishing a Hattori victory, and am really liking it as well. Maybe they’re not the best TW titles but I don’t see why they get so much flak.

Tr(S)oy is for faggots.
>>
File: 20201124190906_1.jpg (534 KB, 2560x1440)
534 KB
534 KB JPG
>>366796
>>366800
cope, im having tons of fun wheras you're here posting basedjacks
>>
>>366800
Kill yourself back to /v/
>>
>>348975
not everyone has autism
>>
>>367719
What other mods are you running along side?
>>
>>367851
here
https://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=2237412566
>>
>>345247
Only with DeI then its one of the best TW games
>>346052
I like both due to the way recruitment is done. Pick which ever time period or location you prefer more.
>>
>>347957
make use of submods then you fucking retard
>>
>>350487
This is why I always give up on indie game studios after they make a big hit. They get taken over by corporatist fags and ruin the franchise.
>>
>>362386
Easy shit, dont use DeI, DeI devs force certain factions to use shitty units for the DeI meta and force the AI to use shitty compositions like 12 slingers, 4 skirmishers, 5 spears and 1 cav because muh realism

in your case, DeI forces greek factions to send stupid navy fleets and use all their money on that because its historically accurate, problem is that the AI doesnt even know how to use the fleets in the first place making the AI even easier to steamroll than in fucking vanilla
>>
>>345247
yes, especially with mods there's no excuse
>>
>>350779
dev seems to actually be putting in proper effort into battles and is actually listenting to feedback so there is some hope
>>
>>349548
>DEI is not a good mod
just cus you dont liike it isnt a bad mod
>>
>>356395
I honestly just might start a campaign for the scale. 41 unit armies w/ reinforcements will actually feel like an ancient battle, because no matter what, eb battles always feel too small.

If CA released the source code for M2, or at least allowed .exe editing, the mods would make it among the best games of all time.
>>
>>346185
>need a general to lead an army at all times
why the fuck is this still a thing
>>
>>364736
absolute abhorrent taste, apply yourself.
>>
>>357510
imagine trying to trash talk a game and getting one of it's most fundamental features wrong while simultaneously acting like an expert on the subject. I'm honestly impressed by your sheer stupidity.
>>
>>366772
>CA's fanboys will just lap this up and not complain
oh hey, that's me

really, as long as infantry still works on normal mode (and it will) then I can't really see M3 being so bad I wouldn't buy it.

The only things that make drop a total war game are poor melee infantry (empire) and lack of variety between factions (shogun, empire, 3K). Weak garrisons are also a minus (Britannia, Rome 2) but not enough to drop a game on it's own.
>>
>>357510
>no naval battles
I too enjoy talking shit about games I’ve never played.
>>
>>346052
Britannia is cool for as long as the honeymoon lasts with the period and setting, plus a few features that keep it fresh longer.

Eventually, after your 50th hammer anvil AI stomp tho, you just feel like you're playing any other total war game, campaign snowball, shitty shitty AI, so forth.
>>
>>361605
Rise of the republic is as good as vanilla rome 2 gets
>>
>>375332
Why's that?
>>
>>370994
generals are cheap and are generally good units anyway
>>
>>345247
Yeah. The game was a hot mess on release but over the years they fixed most of the issues.
>>
>>370099
And just because you like it doesn't mean it's good. DEI is a shitty mess.
>>
>>362388
It seems like the only relevant competitor at the moment that's getting good press.
>>
>>375332
it's not
it's literally thrones of italia with multiple siege/settlement battles every turn due to how close each settlement is and the only improvement they have is rites from warhammer
>>
>>345247
yea, if you're a faggot
>>
What do you DEI players think of the new beta 1.2.7 patch?
I think it ironed out a lot of the battle issues (cavalry weight effecting flanks, phalanx not being invulnerable, minor factions not being sidelined, etc).
Just want to hear your thoughts without getting meme'd on
>>
File: 20210117034708_1.jpg (477 KB, 1920x1080)
477 KB
477 KB JPG
>>357510
>Never understood the communities love for Shogun 2
its like Med 2 for younger players
they know no better
>>
>try playing rome 2
>battles are a slugfest where it takes five in real life minutes for four heavy sword troops to route some pikemen
are any of the TW games not as horribly slow?
>>
File: knights charge.png (841 KB, 1443x649)
841 KB
841 KB PNG
>>378479
Try Medieval 1 or Shogun 1
best games
they lack some later added features but are the best in mechanical and fun sense
>>
>>378544
>pic
that's just how every total war game works
>>
File: spear tactics.png (763 KB, 967x651)
763 KB
763 KB PNG
>>378723
but do every total war game figured of how formations work?
>>
>>378726
that feature definitely started to degrade with M2, buggy piece of shit, and the series never recovered only tried new (bad) ways to fix it.
>>
>>348939
I think his point is more that Gary Grigsby achieved more with limited resources, but lots of enthusiasm, than a big company with shitloads of money. Yeah Gary did achieve a lot but that doesn't necessarily translate into the penultimate game as some people seem to thin.

I bought his War in the East and after a few games felt totally ripped off. The AI was indeed a joke. First time was great, still learning the game mechanics and make rookie mistakes, but then once I had got over the learning curve it turned to shite.
>2nd play through. Play Russia. Stop the German blitzkrieg just two months later around Smolensk. Encircle lots of Panzers. Be in Berlin and Vienna by mid 1942. The AI didn't even bother defending Berlin, although it still had some battle-worthy divisions left. No climatic last ditch battle in the streets, just game over.
>3rd play through. Play Germany. Be past Leningrad, Moscow and Rostov by late September, Russian army virtually non existence by this point. Grind out VP's, win early 1942. Chopping Yew trees in Runescape would have been more exciting.

Never played it again. Hugely time consuming for what was virtually a Middle Earth fantasy game. Seriously. It was that bad. One railway can supply the whole front? Not my idea of realistic. Head Quarters build up supply mechanic? Giant Panzerball leap frogs from Minsk to cut off Leningrad in one week. Cant be unseen. Pissed off I dumped $100 on that game. For an Eastern front experience HOI3 on very hard with a 1941 start is better.
>>
>>378479
>rome 2
>battles are a slugfest
Seriously? My average battle time in Rome 2 is probably around 13m. Is Shogun 2 the only other game in the series that you played?
>>
The Romans, they are the masters of falsehood.
>>
>>350588
>implying one dirt poor peasant is different from the other because muh ethnicity
>>
>>378941
do multiplayer
>>
>>384567
>implying there is no difference between 4'2 chink conscript and 5'3 European one
>>
>>384856
>implying a peasant manlet can easily kill a trained turbo manlet
>>
>>384567
most troops on European medieval battlefield were actually professional or semi professional soldiers when chinks relied in some periods on mass conscription
in pitched battles I can imagine Lu BU and his trained soldiers with their horses, weapons and skills cutting through enemy troops like hot knife through butter



Delete Post: [File Only] Style:
[Disable Mobile View / Use Desktop Site]

[Enable Mobile View / Use Mobile Site]

All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective parties. Images uploaded are the responsibility of the Poster. Comments are owned by the Poster.