TW was my first ever strategy and I was used to it so much that I couldn't understand the other strategy games but soon as I discovered actual strategy games I realized how shit TW is outside battles and that you don't even need real time battles in a grand strategy game because they get repetitive over time and you autoresolve anyway
>Shit AI that doesn't even defend its key points
>Again, shit allied AI that doesn't even understand concept of an alliance and never helps its allies
>At least it doesn't backstab you 100% of time since Rome 2
>But they dumbed down the other mechanics of the game and limited building slots
The whole point of the TW is the battles. If you auto resolve play actual dedicated map painters like paradox
It's not just me though I've seen so many people autoresolve prolly like 70% of players gonna say they autoresolve a lot
It's nice to be able to fight hopeless battles yourself and make the enemy pay dearly for every inch, but hardly anyone doesn't auto resolve when the enemy is outnumbered 4:1
That's an exploit considering that AI is already fricking moronic
If you can outnumber the enemy on the campaign map it means you're wasting ressources, 1:1 is the maximum you should go for as you are meant to fight and win the RTS battles. Lesser forces is even better. With those ressources you can then snowball at light speed or fight multiple wars at once.
>tl:dr You're meant to work on your skills in RTS battles to quickly finish the campaign and bypass its mechanics.
The manual battles are the only good part of the games, but campaigns are unbearably slow if you manually fight every battle. It's lose/lose
Autoresolve is for skipping to the fun battles but yeah essentially this. TW has never pretend to offer terribly in-depth campaigns.
Too bad the battles are shit too with AI and mechanics that outright break down.
Your points may be true but that doesn't make the franchise shit when it's the best grand battle simulator on the market
All paradox "games".
Paradox>Civ>RTS games>Field of glory>TW
Paradox is beneath all of those, it's just that simple
Does it matter which way garbage is sorted?
you seem to be moronic op and think the point of the game is the over world map.
The point of the game is the RTS component of the actual battles.
Notice how TW is always advertised with the real time battles in every trailer and promotional images.
No? well thats because you are a dumbass, the turnbased map is the minor component of the. game, just there as a campaign board.
Make it fricking basebuilding game then or frick off
go play an RBT
Really big breasts?
um thats a really bulging thighs
all paradox games
>shit AI
>shitty artificial/rigid limitations everywhere
>tower-defense level of AI, will just endlessly throw troops at you no matter the context of the war or any risk/reward assessment
>enjoyment of any game inversely proportional to your IQ
>clicking buttons for bonuses or reading shitty twitter-tier events is seen as desirable gameplay by the devs
>community riddled with midwits and sycophants
>The point of the game is the RTS component of the actual battles.
TW land battles are just as garbage if not more
>shitty hp system
>archers frontally shredding armored units with shields
>shitty moss-pit battles, mass and momentum physics subpar at best or nonexistent at worst for over a decade
>special formations degenerated into rpg skill-tier bonuses, the point of a spear wall is +15 melee defense, shield wall giving missile invincibility in 3K
>all land battles becoming increasingly repetitive and unfun due to the garrison and 1general limitation/army hardcap systems
>autoresolve actually becoming meta, overperforming over manual control sometimes and allowing you to carry entire campaigns on it
>poison arrows (lol)
>catapults and other primitive artillery having heat-seeking missile accuracy
>you can micro your units to avoid said artilley shots or even archery volleys (due to how painfully slow they are) as if you were playing a asiaticclicker
>archers dealing damage completely independently of physics, angle/distance of shot does not matter,
it's extra funny because most of these things are deteriorations of things that were done correctly in previous titles
all technology gave us since 2004 was better graphics, often spoiled by shitty artistic choices, and literally nothing else lmao
/vst/ HAD FALLEN INTO SHADOW
THE BOARD GREW COLD, AND THE JANNY POSTED A THREAD
AND I BEHELD HIS SHIT POST
AND HE WHO POSTED THEREON HAD A PAIR OF DILDOS IN HIS HANDS
>ATTILA WAS BORN
>ALL KNELT BEFORE HIM
>BECAUSE THEY KNEW HE'D SWALLOW THE EARTH
>AND SET ABLAZE THE FOUNDATIONS OF THE MOUNTAINS
>ATTILA WAS BORN FROM DARKNESS AND DESPAIR
Ngl the best game of franchise but TWgays aren't even playing it
Another thread where op complains about games being easier, but then never plays a hard game in the same franchise. Why are there many such cases?
What is a hard game in the franchise? also I didn't say it's easy I'm just complaining about incompetent AI which breaks the immersion
Beat Shogun and Medieval on expert before posting again op
>shit AI as a main issue apparently rendering game irredeemably
AI doesn't exist and every single strategy game has a shit set of "if" commands for an enemy. It's a literal non-issue.
>and that you don't even need real time battles in a grand strategy game
GSGs are low effort, dumbed down garbage in comparison to any Total War. Half of the game is straight cut from them.
>>Shit AI that doesn't even defend its key points
Only an issue before Rome 2
, shit allied AI that doesn't even understand concept of an alliance and never helps its allies
Rome 2 and after literally lets you assign targets for your allies to attack
>>But they dumbed down the other mechanics of the game
Such as? If anything the later games have more deep mechanics than the earlier ones
>limited building slots
As compared to what game? Empire, Napoleon, and Shogun 2 have a pathetic number of buildings and limited slots, Medieval 2 and Rome 1 have about a dozen buildings total. Rome 2 has 4-5 building slots for the cities and 2-3 for the villages. The province system connects them all, making a minimum of 6 building slots for a province, with the average being 10. That means at worse Rome 2's building system is the same as Shogun 2's but with more options, and on average is the same as Rome 1 but with more options. Of course later games in the series expand the number further
I wouldn't say it's shit-tier but Total War is definitely overrated as frick.
The real time gameplay is great.
The campaign features LOOK great and sophisticated.
But in practice the AI cheat and will spawn armies no matter what their economy is.
All the campaign features are pointless because not-so-secret codes behind the scene railroad everything.
eat a dick, total war is a good franchise
Early total wars are an example of flawed but somehow still very fun games
All your points are valid but somehow the games are still fun
In addition to this there's no true competition, RTS as a genre is pretty fricking dead, and it feels like no one except for Relic had ever attempted to make a game with
>Massive armies, hundreds of soldiers on screen
>Squad based controls
>Overworld map to get you invested into the battles you fight
Thus the franchise trudges on even as games are less and less fun, purely because there's no true alternative.