>Shogun and Medieval

>Shogun and Medieval
Near tabletop experiences who were marvelous when they were released. These games were the one actual case where CA actively improved on their product and there was a solid sense of progression. Original fans were very optimistic. Leader camera was an amazing gameplay thing that became a feature that is still in the franchise to this day, per example.

>Total War Rome
Considered by some the apex of the franchise and the birth place of its modern fanbase. The jump to 3D from Medieval to Rome was actually done with very small harm to the way the game played. If anything, Rome was a visual progression but the end of the line when it came to gameplay. Although historically authentic, the game was inaccurate and those inaccuracies started the trend that forever divorced the franchise from reality. There were two type of inaccuracies: those for lack of care (like the american accent 'latin' song in the campaign) and those for 'the sake of balance and technical limitations', such as rebel estates, Greece being a form of confederacy and Rome being split in three factions of equal power.

>Medieval II
It is Rome in Medieval Europe. Besides the beautiful cutscenes, the gameplay and even the game map had little to do with historical realities. It is a great medieval videogame with TW Rome battles, but nothing more.

>Empire
First title where protests for less inacuracy over balancing concerns were heard. Also the first Total War to be unplayable on release and still unplayable by now. It was perhaps the most ambitious CA has ever been, except it failed in historical authenticity, gameplay and even the cutscenes. Only the graphs were good.

>Napoleon
Most historically accurate Total War game. It is the one title where all the gameplay is contained into a grander story with nations playing the roles as characters. It is the one true first musket Total War, since Empire was too janky and slow.

  1. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    >Shogun 2 Total War
    Masterpiece. Historically authentic and best gameplay in the franchise. Sadly, it feels mostly like a sandbox 4x and less like a historical experience like Napoleon. Only flaw was the unrealistic character and unit abilities, which would culminate later into a civil war in the franchise's fanbase.

    Itself, the game is a hors concours. It wasn't ever improved on, it is that one Total War that looks like it was made by another developer altogether.

    >Rome II Total War
    Absolute catastrophe in terms of authenticity, gameplay and spectacle. A cat could play this game and win. It is impossible that this was made after Shogun 2.

    >Attila Total War
    The true successor to Napoleon's grand story mode spectacle, Medieval II's gameplay and (introducing something new to the franchise), has brilliant atmosphere. It has the single most bold campaign in the franchise, making the game a survival-strategy rather than a 4X.

    It is the best total war if you ignore Shogun 2 Total War for being an outliner. The game still retains a very loyal fanbase and modding company, despite having been abandoned by CA.

    >Warhammer 1
    Created a new branch of Total War altogether, picking Shogun 2 as a loose foundation and bringing a bunch of shit that I'm not even going to discuss because Warhammer fans get the rope and this is my final word on the matter.

    >Warhammer 2
    Excuse to keep patching the same game.

    >Three Kingdoms
    It is Warhammer Total War but with authentic history. Best campaign of recent history, but terrible battles and spectacle. Marketing was fantastic, though.

    >Thrones of Britannia
    CA picked Attila Total War and instead of fixing the frame rate, made the worst game in the franchise's history.

    >Troy
    Only released the book version of the game years later. By then, nobody cared. So bad that it was given for free.

    >Warhammer 3
    It is a downgrade from Warhammer 2 even though they are the same game.

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      Final conclusion: CA is unable to progress as a developer. They simply cannot pick what is good in one game and make it better in the next one. This simply does not happen, and that is the franchise's weakest point.

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        Video games are unable to progress past where they were ten years ago because gamers will gladly pay for insubstantial baubles like "art-direction," "the themes" and, more and more often, because the game was "hyped" rather than any concrete improvements on titles and genres. Strategy AI is a great example of this.
        Games sell on hot air, not their contents.

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      Never realized the similarities between Attila and Napoleon before. The only total war games with a true narrative and theme.

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        Attila is roughest gem CA has ever made. Had they really invested in it, we'd have had the most interesting Total War experience ever. Thrones was an abortion.

        Meanwhile Napoleon was a dead end, only really worked on by the standalone DLC of a future title.

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      Is Troy still bad or is it okay in its own right?

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        It was never "bad", people were mad that it was an Epic exclusive for a while and blew things out of proportion. Most people who shit on it probably never even played it.

        Of the two Saga titles (because FOTS doesn't count) it is far and away the best one. Troy's economy and trade system are a highlight and unlike anything we've had before in the franchise, and the battle maps are generally pretty interesting with multiple terrain types and chokepoints that you can play and take advantage of, making battles unexpectedly fun for a post Rome 2 game. Compare a video of a typical Rome 2 map on youtube with one from Troy, it is light and day.
        Unit visuals are also surprisingly authentic for the setting, and each faction has their own flavor and a decent number of unique units so that even factions within the same culture group will play differently from each other. The game overall just looks gorgeous, too.

        On the negative side, settlement management is pretty simple and quick to 'solve', and there's a bunch of time wasting menus you'll have to get through if you want to squeeze the most out of your faction, the gods mechanic especially looks neat at first but reminding yourself to keep high favor among all gods can get tedious, even if the perks are powerful. The AI is just the typical AI.

        Overall, it is a fine game for a playthrough or two, especially if you got it when it was free. I'll admit I played it expecting nothing and came out surprisingly satisfied, but I wouldn't say it stands among the greats, more like smack dab in the middle or slightly above the average.

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      Final conclusion: CA is unable to progress as a developer. They simply cannot pick what is good in one game and make it better in the next one. This simply does not happen, and that is the franchise's weakest point.

      we get it volound, youve been obsessed with CA since 2010
      grow up

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      >shogun 2
      >historically authentic
      moron stop watching hollywood movies
      as a samuraifag shogun 2 makes me mad like a bull

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        favourite clan of the warring period?

        • 2 months ago
          Anonymous

          Imagawa/Miyoshi pre-60s
          Arima/Ashina post-60s
          And Ikko-Ikki if we're allowed to discuss non-clans

          • 2 months ago
            Anonymous

            Imagawa is a good choice
            fuck ikko ikki haha they were vermins
            Give Clan So some love they were pirate garden gnomes
            https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/S%C5%8D_clan

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      I think you can see from your own post why playing total war for a historical experience is mostly pointless. It seems to me that the games that take the most liberties with historical accuracy like rome, med 2, empire, shogun, are the ones that have the best gameplay. The reason I dislike games post rome 2 is that the battle system is not fun like the game that came before, and if CA were to make the most historically accurate medieval 3 or empire 2 its success would be contingent on that rather than accuracy.

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        >battle system is not fun like the game that came before
        pretty much
        best gameplay have S1, M1, Rome 1 for me personally, especially battles
        the nuTW(including Warhammer) have usually better diplomacy and can have better global map but battles are not fun and some systems are badly designed

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      Yellow Turbans did nothing wrong

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      >Rome II Total War
      >Absolute catastrophe in terms of authenticity
      moron if there is one thing 2 has over 1 is that it is much closer to historical authenticity, 1's innacuracies and lack of authenticity beyond the absolute basic are well known. You can shit on Rome 2 without having to make shit up.

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        tbh if they kept old game design in place Roma 2 wouldn't be that bad but
        >regions
        >army with general only
        >army traditions and general exp
        >and of course that shitty engine

        • 2 months ago
          Anonymous

          >muh engine
          The mark of someone who doesn't know what he's talking about.

        • 2 months ago
          Anonymous

          I'd rather have the region system than dealing with shit towns that require 5+ turns to get to/out of, like in Rome 1
          >>army with general only
          This was done to fix the single unit stack spamming that the AI did between Empire and Shogun 2
          >>army traditions and general exp
          General exp was already added to Shogun 2 anon, Rome 2 just had a much better system involved. And the Army traditions just expands on it, and it adds real meaning behind the new army customization
          >>and of course that shitty engine
          The same one they used since Empire? Still better than the Total War 2 engine, that one had massive performance issues

          • 2 months ago
            Anonymous

            >This was done to fix the single unit stack spamming that the AI did between Empire and Shogun 2
            this is a shit excuse man. so instead of doing their job and fixing the AI, they resort to a shitty downgrade of a system because they are too retarded to bother fixing a fundamental system of their game.

            >I'd rather have the region system than dealing with shit towns that require 5+ turns to get to/out of, like in Rome 1
            what does this mean? honestly? to get out of?
            >General exp was already added to Shogun 2 anon, Rome 2 just had a much better system involved. And the Army traditions just expands on it, and it adds real meaning behind the new army customization
            the RPG customization actually makes every general feels samey as there is a clear best path for every tree. not to mention this again comes at the cost of the previous better systems. characters all feel very samey now because of the uber RPG powerups compared to previous games where you didnt kill armies to level up admin skills. you actually sat them in cities or sometimes they just naturally made shit admins and that gave characters far more life than the later games.
            >Still better than the Total War 2 engine, that one had massive performance issues
            again, congrats the newer games perform better but also have worse battles than ever before. same with the general only armies.
            >GUYS WE FIXED AI SMALL STACK SPAM (by completely butchering this feature!)
            wow bravo CA

            • 2 months ago
              Anonymous

              >this is a shit excuse man. so instead of doing their job and fixing the AI, they resort to a shitty downgrade of a system because they are too retarded to bother fixing a fundamental system of their game.
              It also rebalanced the game and fixed some major issues
              >what does this mean? honestly? to get out of?
              There are several towns in Rome 1 that are in shit locations to where if you want to move a unit from that town to the next province on the map it would take 3-5 turns
              >the RPG customization actually makes every general feels samey as there is a clear best path for every tree. not to mention this again comes at the cost of the previous better systems. characters all feel very samey now because of the uber RPG powerups compared to previous games where you didnt kill armies to level up admin skills. you actually sat them in cities or sometimes they just naturally made shit admins and that gave characters far more life than the later games.
              There isn't a clear best way for any tree though, it all depends. And administration has gravitas now, which can be gained faster when not a general. And the old system of traits is still in Rome 2, it's just that now there is an added system to fleshing out each general/admiral
              >again, congrats the newer games perform better but also have worse battles than ever before. same with the general only armies.
              Rome 1 and Medieval 2 had shit battles anon, don't try and pretend that they didn't. Both games are far more blob like than the modern Total Wars. Medieval 2 is more buggy in it's current state than Rome 2 at launch, for example ordering a unit to move might not work because the unit gets stuck on a non-existent object. And Rome 1 is all about abusing unit jank, like how phalanxes kill everything in front of them instantly, or how chariots delete cavalry, or how berserkers will instantly kill chariots. Total War engine 2 was inferior in nearly every way

              • 2 months ago
                Anonymous

                >It also rebalanced the game
                Yes, for the worse. If I have the money, why can't I get more armies unless I bloat? Some arbritary number until you bloat some more is not fun or immersive. Allow me to purchase whatever I wish and suffer the consequences.
                >fixed some major issues
                no it didnt. its like needing to fix something in your house and your "solution" is to burn the house down. congrats, the problem isnt there, but now you have no house. same in rome 2, the issue was the AI and always has been. has that been fixed? lol no, oh and btw now you cant have armies without generals and there is a maximum because we couldnt bother fixing the AI.
                >There are several towns in Rome 1 that are in shit locations to where if you want to move a unit from that town to the next province on the map it would take 3-5 turns
                Mods, which is also a big big plus. Also the map in Rome 2 is atrocious. Leaving out crucial important cities, or leaving many cities as villages. Thats okay, we can fix it with mo- oh thats right, the new engine says fuck you to mods.
                >There isn't a clear best way for any tree though, it all depends. And administration has gravitas now, which can be gained faster when not a general. And the old system of traits is still in Rome 2,
                there really is. there are plenty of traits which are straight up superior to all of the others, even in mods like DEI. not to mention it itss not the same as you get 3 traits, a set amount of retainers and whatever superman abilities you picked out for yourself. it all leads down to characters feeling very samey with little room for immersion. its quite literally downgraded to hack in some RPG mechanic when there could have been other ways to customize armies such as weapons or armor, or eve3 colors like in rome 2 without mauling the character system from before.

              • 2 months ago
                Anonymous

                >Rome 1 and Medieval 2 had shit battles anon, don't try and pretend that they didn't
                Medieval 2 had worse battles but not rome 1. What you complain about was unit balance fixed by mods, except chariots but its not perfect. and this a tired trope but the physics.
                >Total War engine 2 was inferior in nearly every way
                battles is in its favor, city building, army management, characters, oh and of course the most important MODDING.

                i dont hate the new games, i have hundreds of hours in them and rome 2 with DEI is fun. the biggest improvement the newer games have is the diplomacy AI, but everything else is inferior. the strategical AI is just as retarded with garrison scripts for every city because CA couldnt bother fixing the AI's prioritization, BAI is still shitty. the systems are a less immersive
                and less fun experience than the older titles.

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      Shogun 2 is the best game in the franchise, but considering it's slightly above "meh", that only means the series is not worth even talking about. It made money of mouth breathing normies wanting to watch hundreds of models on screen duke it out, rather than people wanting to play a good video game.

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        I'll bite - what's a good video game

        • 2 months ago
          Anonymous

          HoMM3, HoMM5 (5.5 mod), Civ3, 4 and 5 with Vox Populi, SoSE, GalCiv II, Victoria II, AoW3, FoG2. Recently I've had fun with Northgard campaign, but didn't and probably never will get to MP, cause it looks like P2W.

          • 2 months ago
            Anonymous

            Not him but that's a shit list anon
            >HoMM3, HoMM5 (5.5 mod)
            Tell me you're a normalfag boomer without telling me you're a normalfag boomer
            >Civ3, 4 and 5 with Vox Populi
            Good games ruined by a terrible modpack
            >SoSE
            Didn't play
            >GalCiv II, Victoria II
            Decent
            >AoW3
            Good
            >FoG2
            Slitherine shit
            Also

            Shogun 2 is the best game in the franchise, but considering it's slightly above "meh", that only means the series is not worth even talking about. It made money of mouth breathing normies wanting to watch hundreds of models on screen duke it out, rather than people wanting to play a good video game.

            >Shogun 2 is the best game in the franchise
            Anon did you hear that from a Youtuber or something? Medieval 1 is objectively the best game in the franchise, unless mods are included, then Rome 2 becomes the best due to a few modpacks/overhauls

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      Kingdoms
      >It is Warhammer Total War but with authentic history. Best campaign of recent history, but terrible battles and spectacle. Marketing was fantastic, though.

      chink rat retard

      There was never any chinese general who could single handedly kill 1000 soldiers by himself

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        average 'chink' general from RotK is 6'1''plus fighting against average chink soldiers of 4'7''

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        >authentic history
        RotK is stupidly overromanticized, whoever takes that literally is just straight-up retarded

        • 2 months ago
          Anonymous
  2. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    rome was extremely fucking historically inaccurate
    same goes for medieval 2 and shogun 2
    just because it lines up with hollywood movies doesn't mean it's true

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      Historical authenticity is what all games must seek, not historical accuracy.

      Few games are truly historically accurate (Kingdom Come Deliverance). For strategy, it is sufficient to be authentic.

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        I get what you're getting at but come on, New Kingdom Egyptians timewarped into the Hellenistic era is about as authentic as pic related. "Authentic" means fuck all when it's just objectively wrong, ten minutes reading a fucking book could have given us Galatian mercenary kino instead we got The Mummy.

        • 2 months ago
          Anonymous

          >Although historically authentic, the game was inaccurate and those inaccuracies started the trend that forever divorced the franchise from reality.

          I mentioned the Bronze Age egyptians as I stated that Total War was inacurate. It had tons of dumb mechanics and units that made no sense.

          It was the slow beginning of a trend that would culminate in unit superpowers and then full-fledged fantasy titles.

        • 2 months ago
          Anonymous

          This. Rome 2 was a shitty game but it’s undoubtedly one of the most authentic total war games ever made and needed to exist just to correct the historical travesty that was Rome 1 if nothing else.

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        >kcd
        >literally have you play as a fictional son of a real knight in bohemia
        >historically accurate

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        dude rome 1 wasn't anywhere near authentic, the historical innacuracies are well known.
        Rome 2 was objectively more accurate in almost every point.

  3. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    big wall of text just to announce your transition, histfag.

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      Warhammerfags need to go.

      'Build Ranged to win' Total War doesn't belong in this franchise.

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        >spearwall to make enemies do mass seppuku
        >men on horse to create medieval bulldozer
        lmao

  4. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    >Complaining about the music in Rome: Total War.
    I order you to commit seppuku this instant.

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      Theme song for OP's seppuku as he contemplates his shame. Let it also be the theme song of this thread.

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      music has retarded pronunciation of R that sticks out very hard if you ever heard someone speak romance language before

  5. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    >No Spartan: Total Warrior
    Filthy casual detected.

  6. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    >Most historically accurate Total War game
    I loved how Waterloo only had 2000 men on each side, really accurate.

  7. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    >Soigun2tard
    I can't take seriously gays who claim that the worst game in the series is anything but an utter garbage

  8. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    Total war is literally the pokemon of strategy games.

  9. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    Whether you enjoyed them or not is one thing, but how can you seriously call Rome 2 inauthentic while praising the authenticity of Shogun 2's wacky Hollywood ninjas in the very next paragraph.

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      Look up actual ninja history.

      It is all crazy.

  10. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    Rome 2 Dei mod wins this whole argument
    shogun 2 in close second with darthmod

  11. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    Empire had a huge potential and those cunts were to lazy to properly add a lot of features that they could have easily fit in the game. There's not even a family tree for the monarchies, disgusting.

  12. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    >3 province greece
    >winning anything

  13. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    Rome 1 is my favourite but it's not historically authentic and you can not use mods like Europa Barbarorum as an excuse for Vanilla.

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      I only play vanilla with some fixes and visual changes(was sick of naked barbarians)

  14. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    Warhammer and Total War really are a match made in heaven.

  15. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    My personal take:

    I think the smaller-scale Total War games/expansions are always better. The TW midgame steamroller has never been satisfactorily solved, with the inevitable immersion-breaking 'everyone piles in on you' realm-divide type mechanics providing some challenge, but at the cost of destroying any role-playing value and turning the game into a massive life-consuming slog. And so the games that keep you from the steamroller for as long as possible, and minimise the amount of time you have to spend on it when it does come, are the best. TW is at it's most immersive when you're forced to do battle skilfully employing underpowered armies, the results of a single battle can have an enormous impact on your progress, and a handful of elite units or gifted general can change the course of a war. The end game should really be kept as short as possible, but a lot of the TW games instead drag it out for as long as possible, allowing the AI to spam hordes at you and dragging your empire down with an interminable succession of rebellions. Also, the smaller games stop the tiny armies in TW from feeling so ridiculous.

    My personal favourite is MTW: Viking Invasion for this reason. NTW: Peninsula Campaign and MTW2: Britannia (really
    all the MTW 2 expansions) are also good for this reason.

    Anyone else feel this way?

    • 2 months ago
      Anonymous

      Oh, and the original Shogun ofc

      • 2 months ago
        Anonymous

        >Oh, and the original Shogun ofc
        kek
        I remember fondly of of m first games in Shogun 1.
        I was playing shimazu and take my time so when I finally landed close to Kyoto with my well trained but not so numerable forces I meet wall -and I mean it - a WALL of Hojo or Useagi of stacks on stacks of troops. It was really a slaughter with my forces only prevailing thanks to muskets and better quality of my troops and of course my command. Still need to hog river provinces and only slowly advances in specific points when enemy throw thousands of troops at me.
        >i think OG Shogun had some bug that didn't charge AI for troop training and they could recruit/build with negative money and so they have tons of troops.
        I replayed it recently and it wasn't the same. Still great game and have a lot of fun tho. Shogun 1 is one of the best game in TW franchise easily in best 3.

  16. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    >Ctrl+F
    >"authentic"
    >"1 of 20 matches"
    Do autismos really?

  17. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    >shogun 2 fag
    >claims rome 1 didn't casualize total war beyond recognition
    Every time you fuckers speak you show how little you play the games outside of Shogun 2. Fitting however, since Shogun 2 is the most casual Total War ever made. Not that it matters because all of the games are so easy even on very hard now, that a monkey could beat them

  18. 2 months ago
    Anonymous

    I wish total war didn't abandon the board game/war room aesthetic, it was immersive and could only be taken futher, 3D maps with 3d models walking around doesn't have the same feel

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *