>A great barbarian horde besieges one of the cities on the frontier of WRE
>In response emperor assembles a great army and marches out of rome to relieve the city
>3 barbarian armies go out to intercept
>not wanting to face the overwhelming enemy armies in the open field the romans build a fort
>barbarian forces mostly consist of horse archers and infantry. most of their forces are low quality but could easily overrun the romans through sheer numbers
>the roman fort gets quickly sorrounded on all sides. Barbarians have great advantage in ranged troops and are slowly starting to whittle down the legionnaires inside the fort
>The emperor's bodyguard and sarmatian heavy cavalry are forced to sally out. The slow infantry would get quickly destroyed.
>The superior armor of roman heavy cavalry allows them to withstand the storm of arrows. Horse archers immedietly rout when faced in melee. Their only hope is to kite the romans and shoot them with arrows
>Roman cavalry kills hundreds of horse archers in the fight. unfortunately during the fighting emperor is killed in battle
>despite this sarmatians continue to fight and all the horse archers get killed or routed
>the enemy numbers are still too big to allow infantry to deploy, instead cavalry's task now is to mow down as much enemy infantry as possible
>without any cavalry barbarians are completely at the mercy of roman horses, when opportunity presents itself romans charge and destroy a unit or two
>after some time infantry can sally out to kill the rest of barbarians
>decisive roman victory with minimal casualties. Despite losing the emperor the roman army can relieve the besieged city
This happened about a year ago and I still remember this. Why modern Total War can't in any way replicate this? In nu-total war every single battle plays the same. It's almost impossible to get this kind of scenarios in the new games. I don't remember a single battle from warhammer 3 that I fought, and I fought a lot of them.
 |
 Nothing Ever Happens Shirt $21.68 |
|
god was that game great. Shame CA was shut down 10 years ago and some randos took their place.
Because somehow the morale system and the individual fighting (completely nonexistent in modern titles) was more consistent. Flanking mattered but in the melee things took more time.
I'm playing M2 right now and I thought I'd probably be annoyed by the clunkyness.
Instead I come to realise that the game is better than anything produced after by an order of magnitude.
Pic related. Crossbowmen strong. And pike and shot tactics actually work even with xbows wow!
S2>M2
>Gay as frick realm divide
>dlc clans
>multiplayer homosexuals just play fall armies
>arbitrarily high civil unrest that doesn't apply to the AI
>AI hasnt gotten any better, loves standing units on random hills away from their army and refusing to move until you've spent 5 minutes walking over to kill them
>Sieges are utterly trivial since archers just snipe anything
>Diplomacy and relations are utter garbage
>Cavalry still OP as frick
Medieval has its share of unjustifiable shite game design like the papacy, AI cloning family members, actually pointless merchants that just waste time, equally bad AI etc etc so I don't see how either game (unmodded) is better than the other
For just about all of those points, such as diplomacy, AI, and cavalry, S2 > M2
M2 AI is far worse than S2 AI, not "equally bad"
No.
well the battle AI hasn't gotten any better since S2, so apparently you think the AI is just as bad as it was in M2 and I guess you're entitled to that unusual opinion
Have you actually played any TW game?The AI in the new games is just as terrible and makes the same mistakes as the Med2 one.
>individual fighting (completely nonexistent in modern titles
Individual fighting is literally a plague tormenting TW games since Empire, you imbecile
I don't mean the animation that triggers when something dies, I mean the way individual units clash with each other and fight other units.
It becomes a lot faster and less of a melee the further you go away from M2.
Anon the ai in Rome total war is so moronic it makes modern ai total war ai look intelligent, I have hundreds of hours in Rome and medieval 2 and have never seen the ai try anything more complicated then a half assed flank or a full frontal moron charge into pike's or a choke point. The only reason you won your described battle was 1 heavy cavalry in Rome is upsurdly overpowered and 2 the old ai is incredibly passive to maneuvering.
how is AI in remaster? better?
also agree, both AI armies compositions and BAI +pathfinding was terrible
>AI army shuffle around until is so exhausted that it get easily beaten by anything
By old ai I'm referring to ai in rome and medieval 2, Shogun 2 and after the ai much better at reacting to the player. As far as Rome remaster I can't say if the AI is better I'll have to test to see if the old tricks work on it (one is luring their entire army outside the gates of a city then locking them out lol). Though Rome remaster looks good my only complaint is the god awful new ui.
>Shogun 2
i am playing shogun right now and I am not impressed with AI tbh
it either camp or full front attack(when you have arty advantage) with cavalry trying to flank and leaders doing dumb shit and getting shoot or stand like morons, well at last it knew that it should to attack when outgunned, i remember shooting roman armies to pieces with creatan archers
I didn't say the ai was perfect just better then previous, it's not like that's a high bar.
s1/m1 have decent BAI, compared to other tw games
It's some of the best in the series
?si=6Jubhm4xYvjPxmgZ
remove yourself
undo your existence
Not an argument
and posting a legendoftotalwar video is an argument?
doubt
and I bet he played modded not base one
Shogun 2 has the worst, most tedious campaign of any TW I've played
>AI brings the same shitty army and the same shitty tactics from turn 1 to endgame
>can crushing sieges barely different from open battles
>slow, awful naval battles that you have to fight manually or the autoresolve will frick you
>all diplomacy is pointless lmao
It's the sieges that really piss me off. You could pull off actual miracles in M2 holding castles or cities against ridiculous odds. Never had an edge of my seat castle defence in Shogun 2. Just pointless foregone conclusion grinds where you either dab on a moronic AI or watch your guys get overwhelmed getting every kill you can to clean up later. Fricking lame.
Naval battles are top tier in fots, and late base game when gunpowder and cannons are a thing. Capturing the back ship and using it is incredibly fun.
But yeah rise of the samurai and base shogun early-mid game is pretty boring. Just fast forward and let them shoot the shit out of each other
>Naval battles are top tier in fots
not him but do you play with mods? naval battles are absolute slog for me at last
better than any other TW game
It's way better. Still not perfect, and they make some really dumb strategical efforts every now and them. But they can at least... play the game.
I would say the biggest change is that they actually know how to expand somewhat well. The Britons tend to become a mini Egypt and actual Egypt can actually somewhat keep up with the Romans.
Med 2 with stainless steel 6.4 is peak Total war for me
the AI is still fricking garbage, morons just forgot about it because now generals have 100k hitpoints
>gaul faction leader charges at you alone in rome1
>"what a moron, this game's AI sucks"
>karl franz charges at you alone in warhammer2
>"WOWZERS LOOK AT HIM GO! SO BADASS"
tl;dr
>shitty AI and overpowered charges allowed my general unit to solo an army
>allowed my general unit to solo an army
I had about 5 units of heavy cav
It was 1 year ago. Also I played the remaster
well then, why don't you roleplay like that in warhammer?
i've won so many battles thanks to reiksguards alone charging and riflemen (when they used to fricking work and not bug out)
honestly all total war games are the same with just different settings and some new features
because warhammer doesn't allow for even a fraction of that. In warhammer:
>you can't build a fort on a campaign map
>game is extremely spreadsheeted
>field battles rarely happen. It's always siege, siege, siege
>can't even seperate unit from a general
Also I wasn't roleplaying. The game itself created a scenario that sounds like roleplaying to you. Something that's impossible in nu-total war
i don't know what to tell you man, you seem to have your mind set up
but i have had scenarios similar and even cooler in the newer total war games
and that whole
>all battles are sieges
was already fixed, on campaign hard or higher you will be swarmed with campaign battles
but it's clear your mind is already set so it's pointless to discuss this
you had a greater imagination as a kid, cuz 99% of what you posted sounds like it happened in your head
also rome barbarian invasion was a buggy mess for me as a kid so i don't remember it as fondly tho i did love the original rome, was my first total war game actually
In the older-style TW design, if you did not have money you could not defend
Settlements required an army investment to be defended/under control and upkeep costs of strong units were significant, they didn't span 6-12-18 stacks for free based on settlement level
In a scenario like OP's where the WRE is indeed bankrupt, defending is incredibly hard because of your limited resources; you don't get to wipe out 33% of the enemy horde per settlement lost just out of the free troops you spawn
Your strong generals and family members are cherished because they could die at any moment, you do not get to deploy your immortal Legendary Lord™ you purchased for $19.99 to hold out 1000 men on his own and who will respawn after 3 turns if downed; your best general could die of a single javelin volley if you are not careful
Without a general (actually an option in older TWs, physically impossible in nu ones) your army would be much more vulnerable to a mass rout, therefore you had to balance out between the benefit of using your general's elite unit to sway the battle and the risk of him getting downed almost as easily as any other soldier
Your armies were also cherished because of how hard it was to raise them
If you suffered 50% casualties you didn't get to automatically replenish everything in 1 turn with 0 cost, a pyrrhic victory actually felt like one because of you having to delay your campaign and wasn't just an in-game label
You return to a settlement, retrain the units you can and maybe also recruit from nearby settlements for a few turns, paying in gold
If the army was totally lost you didn't just restore your full archer stack in 2 turns
It is evident you are a nu-zoomie for not even being able to comprehend all these things, to you it's all about le explosions and le colors and you cannot even comprehend the idea of a memorable, iconic campaign outside of "it was your imagination" or "just RP bro"
the only game with immortal characters is warhammer and that's cuz of the setting, it's kind of hard to put the rome total war family member thing into warhammer universe, tho normal generals can die easily
having a garrison is not free, it simply cut on the micromanagement needed and i like it, you had to pay a lot for a defensive building and all the garrison did was slow the enemy at best, enemies regained their dead soldiers at the end of the turn (on harder levels they even do it faster)
>If the army was totally lost you didn't just restore your full archer stack in 2 turns
invalidates your first point
>It is evident you are a nu-zoomie for not even being able to comprehend all these things, to you it's all about le explosions and le colors and you cannot even comprehend the idea of a memorable, iconic campaign outside of "it was your imagination" or "just RP bro"
you are mentally ill bro, ive been playing total war since rome 1 released and i am fairly certain i am atleast 10 years older than you
total war has always been the spectacle, there is no tactics as the AI is braindead and 99% of the fun is you roleplaying and enjoying the setting
quit being a seething homosexual
>having a garrison is not free
it's free upkeep
>all the garrison did was slow the enemy at best
sounds like you're bad at the game
>he plays on normal or below
>he cheese the AI
>he thinks his opinion matters
i know you are desperate for (you)s but this is cringe
nta but nobody who has played old TW enjoys warhammer shit
that's called your opinion man
i played the old total war, all till rome 2 came out and i gave up on the entire series
it took a lot for me to even try warhammer, and no i wasn't even a warhammer gay i didn't even know warhammer had fantasy
i enjoyed it, the game is fun
This is delusional
It's actually better as a Warhammer game than TWW. It's atmosphere is better, it captures feel of the world better. TWW feels like AoS. It's AoS in all but name, which makes TWW fans seethe about AoS rather weird when they demand Imperial Engineers with mechanical steed or other protoAoS stuff.
>that one also has immortal characters
Which ones? Gods are represented as offmap characters but that's it. Malekith usually dies in my playthroughs, which has a nice to see and believable effect of seeing his society of sociopathic edgelord backstabbers tear itself apart. His realm explodes and shatters into various warring factions that rise in power and then shatter once more when leader gets backstabbed.
It nicely contrasts with Ulthuan that is most of the time united and isolationist
Yeah, TWW focus on named characters is so strange in context of Warhammer. Most characters are paper thin paragraphs, because setting doesn't focus on them. They are paper thin in games too. They have few lines of dialogue and that's it, everything else is fanbase projection. I want for Franz to be able to die so a weak, fat, easily manipulated, secret Slannesh cultist can replace him as a puppet Emperor.
>it's kind of hard to put the rome total war family member thing into warhammer universe
There's a warhammer total conversion for crusader kings
that one also has immortal characters, besides that one doesn't have total war battles
most people would quit if karl franz died of old age in their game
>that one also has immortal characters
So you can have both immortal characters and a family tree system.
>most people would quit if karl franz died of old age in their game
Doubt.jpg Especially if they can breed a Karl Franz Jnr
>So you can have both immortal characters and a family tree system
kind of, but CA is a small indie company please understand
in lore, karl franz is not immortal but the game simply would not function without him
think of it as plot armor really
>Doubt.jpg Especially if they can breed a Karl Franz Jnr
maybe you and me yeah, but most people love franz and balthasar
to replace them with generic family members that have no unique dialogue or backstory items quests etc would break the game
the characters in warhammer are the story, they are the life of the entire series and without them the game would be empty, in my opinion atleast
didnt the warhammer mod for med 2 have family members iirc?
>to replace them with generic family members that have no unique dialogue or backstory items quests etc would break the game
I mean, I've played Lord of the Ring mods that run into that problem.
>to replace them with generic family members that have no unique dialogue or backstory items quests etc would break the game
It shouldn't be that hard to limit the time scale of the game so that you win in a generation or two. The iconic character you started with might die of old age or in battle(though limited plot armour for them does make sense), but I don't think most people would mind winning the campaign with his son instead. Keep the time frame limited so that you don't run into the problem of your leader being a literally who instead of someone at least closely connected to whomever you started with
one of the most popular mods for warhammer total war is called "recruit defeated legendary lords"
it makes it so that whenever a legendary lord dies cuz their faction is destroyed, they are immediately given to another faction of the same race
players clearly want the legendary lords to stay forever, otherwise the game is boring
>>your leader being a literally who
A TW general does not have to be a "literally who". In a proper Total War game he has his own personally, and by the time he take control of the faction he should have had his own career to define him. And unlike an LL general, a TW general has his personality and history defined within the game itself, not by some backstory that comes with the game.
>to replace them with generic family members that have no unique dialogue or backstory items quests etc would break the game the characters in warhammer are the story, they are the life of the entire series and without them the game would be empty,
This is so opposed to the original spirit of Warhammer of “your dudes”, “army painters” and “create your own stories in this massive sandbox universe” that it made me smile
>t. Semi-oldgay warhammer enjoyer
I've read the entire argument and can conclusively state that this anon is a flaming little homosexual that does not merit to be taken seriously
>if you did not have money you could not defend
You could because the AI was too stupid to invade.
>Your armies were also cherished because of how hard it was to raise them
Lol? Rome Total war has way, WAY less conseuences for losing troops than Warhammer. You can literally rebuild your entire army in a single turn. Medieval 2 was slighty better, but it literally fundamentally broke the game beyond repair in the process and results in 99% of the battles in the game being against town guard and artilerly.
>All this pointless larp to say "I like Rome 1 and BI wasn't as bad as people say"
Rome Total War was shit compared to Medieval Total War.
Come home gweilo
https://store.steampowered.com/app/1423330/Ancient_Warfare_The_Han_Dynasty/
I just miss the pre-battle speeches and the bants that come from it. Does anybody know on when they finally phased those out?
The last game that has them is Shogun 2. Rome 2 scrapped them.
warhammer has them now, tho due to the amount of voice actors in the game it's not as detailed as rome (where it only worked for romans anyways, everyone else recycled 2 or 3 speeches)
Shogun 2 was the last game. Though, if you want to argue, most quest battles in Warhammer have them.
They are honestly a overrated feature. Yeah, it's fun at first. But if you are seriously not skipping them fifty turns into the game you are insane.
>if you are seriously not skipping them fifty turns into the game you are insane.
in every battle i manually play i listen to what my general has to say, i must be autistic
Very.
Medieval 2 because Shogun 2 speeches were boring shit. I honestly don't get how the game that brought us the "shamefurr dispray" meme can have such souless speeches.
They're pretty good sometimes.
>Medieval 2
>Talks about soulless speeches
Going from Rome to M2 is like going from Caesar to Charles II. All of the m2 speeches have a voice actor that sounds like he's a 16 year old performing a theatre play while constipated. The speeches are so bad it makes me wonder why their soldiers even follow them, they have negative charisma.
Shogun 2 at least had generals that spoke like generals instead of poets or comedians, but Rome had the best speeches in any game. Best voice actor, best lines.
>He didn't like m2 speeches
You sir are a Goat fondling arse monkey
Your general needed one of the "low-class" traits (Rabble Rouser, Foul Mouthed etc.) in order to properly talk mad shit before battles.
The problem with Shogun 2's speeches is the general trait system is lobotomized to hell and back, so the generals have nothing to talk about. 90% of what made Medieval's speeches fun was how traits affected them.
>overwhelming enemy armies in
Whoa there buddy, your stack of 20 bound to a general will fight their stack of 20 bound to a general; we can't be having any asynchronicity now can we. You will have a field battle and then a siege and then a field battle and then a siege and then a field battle and then a siege, 20 vs 20, as God intended. Didn't you just HATE the bad old days when your enemies would split into small groups and start raiding your unprotected provinces, forcing YOU to split your nice tidy legion in to practical groups to deal with them, thus denying you a a large army in defence should anything untoward happens? Didn't you just HATE having to think? It's so much more fun to look at your cool digital toy soldiers in their nice tidy army 'build' TM, isn't it?
are you moronic? you better be pretending
A population mechanic could do wonders for newer historical TWs, with it you tend to use your troops more sparingly.
Manpower is not population. Rome and Medieval 2 has population being decreased from recruitment and it's never going to matter.
1: Yeah? Having mechanics that make the game easier to play for the AI is a good thing. See also: the way armies work. 2: The ai is still way, WAY worse in Rome and Medieval 2. They literally cannot play the game. It's hillarious how castle recruitment fundamentally breaks the AI in such a extreme manner that no amount of mods can fix it.
>mechanics that make the game easier to play for the AI is a good thing
Damage sponges are not a "mechanic" moron
Because the game is piss easy and the ai is awful, and can't play the game. It's much harder to have amazing comeback stories in later Total War games because the AI is actually somewhat competent.
I mean, for frick sake, Barbarian Invasion is literally the biggest "AI can't play this game" in the entire franchise. It fundamentally does not understand the horde mechanic.
These games were perfectly set up to create memorable scenarios. Commanders dying in their first charge or surviving dozens of battles and becoming hardened warriors and leaders. Being able to win when outnumbered by using proven strategies and getting attached to the surviving units. Zooming in and watching individual soldiers fight on a micro level.
I like to create meaning behind all of these little things, and the resulting stories stick with me for a long time.
New Total War by comparison does nothing for me. But soulless spreadsheet players can't appreciate these aspects of immersion and presentation and simply want to click number blobs on each other and feel like they have a big dick for it.
>But soulless spreadsheet players can't appreciate these aspects of immersion and presentation and simply want to click number blobs on each other and feel like they have a big dick for it.
Just look at all the low-IQ arcade homosexuals ITT posting "the AI is bad, that happened in your head, game sux"
You're completely missing what the OP is even talking about. No one's bragging about an epic victory.
The point is that it happened a year ago and he still remembers it
He's recounting the events of a memorable battle, which is what Total War is good at naturally creating. No one's playing Total War for hardcore battles against difficult humanlike AI.
I think you are intensely misreading the situation.
>Why modern Total War can't in any way replicate this?
Because they fail on keeping it nice and simple, that's why.
It happens with 99% of franchises out there. They keep adding stupid useless features to the point it became unrecogniseable to former players.
this and also game looks like vomit right now and you hardly can see your units on the map, there is too much visual noise around
Zoomers need to convert or be genocided, WH does not belong in total war!
I think a Warcraft total war would be really cool. Do a technology exchange with blizzard so we get Warcraft 4 out of it too
i played warcraft 3, i read a book based on the lore and it's cool, undeniably cool
but by god those armors and weapons are vomit inducing, literally too much.
at least warhammer has the excuse that they were designed to withstand being actual miniatures without bending or breaking.
though there are mods about it for med2 i think.
but i would prefer a random fantasy rather than warcraft total war.
older total wars could be won even without cheesing the AI.
in warhammer total war you need to cheese the ai otherwise your reasonable balanced army just gets curbstomped by a single lord with 99% physical resistance
nevermind that you can't get a balanced army because you can either get good infantry, cavalry or siege equipment but not all three even if you own three whole provinces otherwise your economy flags or you have no garrisons.
speaking of garrison in new TW titles it's always trash that can't ever hope to stop an army unless the settlement is max level while in med2 or rome i could shift the garrisons with the frontline where it was actually needed or even bring them out to aid my army beyond the range of reinforcement of the settlement.
So you don't like PAULDRONS is that what I hear? 40k has them, too.
Maybe it's the engravings and overdesign in general? What is it?
40k has them on literal supersoldiers on power armor and nowhere else.
Warcraft has them even on fricking goblins and shit.
the whole setting looks like swimsuit wearing people wearing inflatables and whacking each other with pool noodles.
the movie that came out had an actual good story but tanked hard because the design is too cringeworthy for anything that isn't a game.
I remember them saying the PAULDRONS meme was for unit identification in noisy environments, you could tell footmen from rifles from grunts from shamans using their shoulders and head alone.
But I agree the design doesn’t look as good now, it’s aged, I think, it wasn’t always bad.
you act like it's zoomers vs boomers but then you homosexuals excommunicate anyone from being over 20 the moment they say they like the new warhammer
so what? mandalore is a fricking zoomer? i'm a zoomer despite playing total war since 2004?
get a grip you fricking homosexuals
>games I like are RPGs
>games I don’t like aren’t RPGs
Sorry, wrong board
>anons who agree me me aren’t zoomers
>anons who disagree with me are zoomers
In real life losing that emperor would be way worse than a shitty frontier city. Your troops would probably less excited over victory in battle and more thinking “oh frick we gotta fight a civil war now”
It's a sign of getting old when you read OP's post and you couldn't even comprehend the emperor himself would be bothered to personally march on the Barbarians.
I thought the AI ordered his faction into battle or something.
I had to reread when not only did emperor deploy, but number of troops accompanying the Roman emperor himself into battle would be FAR less than the enemy? Absurd.
Lately I've been playing Vanilla Kingdoms mod for M2 and it's been really fun. It's everything I wanted in the vanilla campaign. Adds the Kingdoms factions, more settlements, more units, fixes 2handed bug among other tweaks. There's a submod that adds more units too that really helps some factions like Wales and the Mongols. Would recommend for a new campaign
may try it actually
Is it this?
https://www.moddb.com/mods/jlmps-vanilla-kingdoms-2022
Nta but that is probably what he's referring to (tho there's tons of similar mods), i personally played the Kingdoms grand campaign mod but honestly won't recommend it cause it's lacking in some aspects
Thanks anon, appreciate the advice
Warhammer sucks because LL's are immortal
You can win the badass fight against all odds against Archaon but he'ĺl just come back with another randomly spawned army in 5 turns
Things I miss from older TW titles and wish they were expanded
>every unit have their own commander with traits like in M1(but better)
>upgradable(visually) armor from M2
>upgradable units(changing one unit into another for upgrading lower tier experienced units)
>dismounting before battle from M1 that allow having dual spec units(you could fix Macedonian Royal Peltats who was used as both mobile armored assault infantry with javelins and heavy phalanx)
>units losing exp when reinforced(retrained) and per troop experience(lost in Rome 1)
>risk style map(although 3D map also have some advantages)
>characters actually having traits and stats that wasn't some atrocious leveling
>ability to build all available shit, although i accept having special local buildings or poorer/more restricted provinces
i love these too, most of these are nice small features
tho, if they make a new medieval total war, im pretty sure they will frick it up somehow, especially gameplay. imagine highly anticipated medieval 3 with fricking troy and 3 kingdom gameplay? most people are not gonna like the half-assed fantasy gameplay being shoved into the series
Loved the physics-based ballistics of the older games
In Rome1 vertical volleys weren't even possible, in Medieval2 they were possible but dealt very little damage compared to proper volleys
Also archers used to get extra range if they had height advantage over the enemy, this was also removed with Empire and never re-introduced because I guess it filtered low IQ people
Also they made archers be able to only fire frontally as if they were musketeers, which pointlessly increased micro ("streamlining" my ass)
Why did they take away the ability for units to swim? This was the only game that ever appeared in.
>That basically never happens. Even the few "Totally broken lords" tend to have massive weaknesses in the hands of the player, let alone the AI.
the totally massive weaknesses on lords must be exploited by an ad hoc army or specialized lord which means they must be cheesed or you can't win.
>? Yeah, you easily can if you compensate with a lot of cheap fodder industry. The bigger issue is that there is no reason to do so since all elite tends to be way better.
cheap fodder is literally worthless in warhammer. it is true as you said because elites are better in any way so it's better to have a full infantry army than to bring ineffective cheap missiles and light cavalry that can't win even in flanking charges
>The way garrisons used to work seems like an wonderful feature until you actually try and think about the way it utterly plays havoc with the AI.
so it's better to throw away features than try to make a better AI?
besides it's not like it made the game unplayable, and they could have easily forced the AI to recruit fixed garrisons like in warhammer if they wanted to do a lazy fix.
>by an ad hoc army
No, not really.
Even the likes of Skarbrand can be forced down by 4 units of archers placed properly.
>cheap fodder is literally worthless in warhammer.
Blame the dumb 20 unit limit.
>so it's better to throw away features than try to make a better AI?
>Make better AI
How? By pressing the magical "improve AI" button?
>besides it's not like it made the game unplayable
I would argue the AI in Medieval 2 and Rome 1 are pretty close to "Make the game unplayable".
In many rome1/ medieval2 mods, the ai gets scripted garrisons in some cities, it works alright.
Hit points, Legendary Lords and Heroes is what ruins twwh for me, seing some random captain dude tank 500 arrows or fight of a whole regiment even of cannon fodder just because “he’s level 30” or “he’s le legendary lord” just makes it unenjoyable for me.
And the worst part is that it doesn’t even properly reflect the Warhammer tabletop, in which your übermensch vampire lord general mounted on his zombie dragon could die on turn one from a single cannonball!
Health bars and hit points are shit design. You take a bullet to the leg, you lose your leg, you take a bullet to the head, you’re out, simple as
>And the worst part is that it doesn’t even properly reflect the Warhammer tabletop, in which your übermensch vampire lord general mounted on his zombie dragon could die on turn one from a single cannonball!
That is the most funny part going from Total war to the actual tabbletop. Heroes are WAY tankier in Total WAr.
>You take a bullet to the leg, you lose your leg, you take a bullet to the head, you’re out, simple as
I mean, vampires exist.
Named characters have been a thing since forever.
Yeah? They are. You can disagree with their implementation, but it is a mechanic.
>Named characters have been a thing since forever.
I’m very aware. That doesn’t disprove anything I said in any way.
>I mean, vampires exist.
In Warhammer lore vampires can be killed by conventional weapons, Vlad was an exception because of a magic ring, he died shortly after losing it.
>Yeah? They are. You can disagree with their implementation, but it is a mechanic.
No, boosting a hero's unit's HP is not a mechanic just like changing the colors of menu buttons is not a mechanic.
>In many rome1/ medieval2 mods, the ai gets scripted garrisons in some cities, it works alright.
That's nearly universally used to prevent you from cheesing the AI, or one AI from blitzing another out of existence because they tend to not defend their cities well. It's not there to keep you from having to micromanage garrisons, or because of army limitation mechanics like they are in later games.
>playing Empire Darthmod
>get mission to take Georgia
>send small army of line infantry with one basic cav and demi cannon
>injuns come charging headlong at my massed musket formations
>easy win lmao
>they run straight through the gunfire and BTFO my line infantry
>test the scenario in custom battles and shirtless dudes running straight at line infantry win every time
What the frick is this? Why were guns even invented?
Thats what you get for trying to conquer Caucasus with basic infantry
I suffered some horrendous defeats to Indians in America, you cant just mass regular line infantry and win, unless you've got fire by rank and time it perfectly, you won't break a charge, or you won't break enough of their units and once youre in melee it's over. You need more horsemen than you would think and to make your line shorter to focus firepower, a long line just gets punctured and over run. I like that they made different factions change your play style or you'll lose, same goes for the Ottomans and Marathara, large melee only units ruin your day.
Yeah. I always rushed ring bayonet tech before anything else. Still gotta mass a lot of cav to kill those bowmen before they get in range and also to flank the enemy while it’s locked in melee
the worst part about the cancer of warhammergays is that they are complete shiteating goyslop homosexuals, so you can never have any conversation with them aimed at improving their own game
ass ladders?
>who cares dude stop nitpicking
musketeers have no reload animations?
>that's a fricking detail shut up already
poor unit balance? archer spam dominating everything? shit AI
>dude look at the dragons and the explosions and the RATS, the game is just perfect
as long as their bare minimum of getting warhammer content is fulfilled, they will accept anything, any simplification, any downgrade, as long as they can have their epic dwarf vs skeleton battle
chances are CA has long lost the talent required to make a good game, instead focusing all their efforts into adapting warhammer into the TW franchise for years
but now almost all content has been introduced, there's not much left to milk out of the paypigs (who recently chimped out when an overpriced DLC was released) and all they're left with is:
>a warhammer obsessed audience that will not buy anything that is not warhammer
>a completely disillusioned history audience whose standards can no longer be met due to lack of talent in CA
>$50-$100 million wasted in an abandoned FPS reject of a game
They're all bona fide consoomers
i am fairly certain that the points you mentioned are criticisms people throw at CA for warhammer, the issue is you act like the game is ruined cuz of those issues which makes you a homosexual
>as long as their bare minimum of getting warhammer content is fulfilled
moronic cope, didnt even know warhammer had fantasy before i played warhammer total war
> so you can never have any conversation with them aimed at improving their own game
Why would you? Don't bother, let them enjoy their goyslop.
I'm realy enjoying shogun 2 at the moment,also have FOTS, empire and Napoleon.
What historical should I play next ? Modded medieval 2 ? Rome remastered ? Rome 2 ? Attila ? Maybe even 3 kingdoms ?
Atilla is very good.
DEI sucks, why does every shitty faction have the ability to have top tier units and not go bankrupt with two full armies of them, the only way to conquer is to cheese the game by fortifying your army near their city so that the ai attacks when it thinks it has the advantage with three armies if you include the garrison over you.
Its so bad that when I confederated with another tribe I inherited their armies and they brought my income from around 2k to a minus 1k. I disbanded their armies and fixed the issued but still how was that tribe with one small unwalled settlement able to field such expensive armies.
It's just an attempt to have the AI provide some semblance of challenge. Sad fact is there will never be an AI good enough to actually challenge a player that halfway knows how to play a Total War game. They need to be loaded up with a shitton of bonuses to even remotely stand a chance. It's why everyone plays Civ games on Deity, and pros who do this still regularly stomp the AI.
I love these kinds of storylines that randomly occur
>Empire
>1713
>gaping Swedussy in reprisal for raids on my merchantmen
>Swiggers counter with unexpectedly strong fleet for early game
>heavily outgun my guys
>huge battle, most of the ships from both fleets surrender, including my admiral
>just 2 ships; the Leda, a fifth rate, and a sixth rate, the Valiant, are fighting an heroic but likely futile action to save the surrendered ships, against three surviving Swedish fifth rates
>both are badly damaged
>1 Swedish ship is too, but the others are almost fresh
>leading Swede ship falls to a broadside from Leda right into its bow as Valiant hits it from behind
>swing Leda around to cut between the remaining ships following in line and open up with broadsides on both
>holy shit might actually pull this off
>nope
>two withering volleys of cannonballs pummel the already battered ship with a spray of blood and splinters
>her remaining crew finally falters
>still keeps heading as she had been perpendicularly between the two Swedish ships but routing and out of control
>Valiant on the other side keeps fighting the good fight against 2 superior ships
>just as Leda passes between the two ships, her captain manages to rally the crew and fire a brutal point blank volley with her last remaining guns, shattering the stern of the leading Swedish ship and instantly taking it out of the fight
>immediately after firing, she heels over and sinks into the icy Baltic with crewmen spilling overboard
>the sight of this finally breaks the hearts of the Valiant's crew, and they rout from the wavering final Swedish ship
>the fleet is lost
>Leda went to the bottom of the sea but every other ship was captured except the Valiant
>limps back to port for repairs and joins a new, stronger fleet for round 2
>one epic sea battle later, Valiant deals the death blow to the same Swede ship, avenging the brave sailors of the Leda against the wicked Swedes
Do archers deal extra damage up close in any game?
I think it only affects their hit probability, ie a de facto damage increase on the target but no difference in individual missile damage. Not sure, though.
This would have been a huge mechanic in Medieval 2 or Shogun 2 with their pike and shot setting.
I never listen to speeches because I always play on mods and then speech often doesn't make sense due to all factions being changed from vanilla and with new added.
The speech system was always quirky as hell. Every time you'd fight an army that had no general in S2 the guy would always say the enemies are dishonored and dishonorable because captains don't have an honor stat so it counts as zero.
>Play Rome Remastered
>"THE ENEMY SUCKS BECAUSE THEY HAVE NO ALLIES!"
>He says while fighting without allies.
>While fighting a opponent that is allied with every faction left on the map.
speaking of warhammer i think it's kind of amusing that when I was a teen I bought Barbarian Invasion and Dawn of War on the same day and because of how much I liked DoW i never really touched BI much. Should I go back and play it or am I better off playing Attila?
i haven't played attila but BI as WRE is very good if you like the original, for bonus challenge don't abandon provinces and try to convert back to paganism
Bi was buggy as shit when i played it centuries ago, i dont know if it's any better in the remaster cuz i didnt bother with that
i did enjoy it dont get me wrong, but it may not have held up to the test of time
I still remember my first Rome TW campaign, and that was back in 2004. It was a shitshow, but an entertaining one
>First TW game
>Play as Brutii
>Figuring out mechanics as I go
>Decide to push my forces north into Thrace and Gaul
>Constantly broke
>Every city I capture revolts multiple times
>Don't realize I can retrain units so i'm just using them up until they're destroyed
>Almost 20 years later a friend of mine still remembers being on the phone with me and hearing me yell "FRICKING THRACIANS!"
>Eventually push into and capture all of Greece
>Build entire army of Spartans just because
>For some reason Egypt decides to declare war on me
>They've developed into by far the largest AI faction
>I'm losing a city to them just about every turn
>End up sending the Spartan army into North Africa as it was the only thing I could spare >They cut a swath of destruction, obliterating half a dozen full armies and sacking every city they besiege until the last fifty or so are finally taken down in one last battle
>Eventually win the campaign by adopting the tactic of capturing and sacking a city so I can afford to build another army to capture and sack the next city
>This is literally the only income I have
>Hemmoraging thousands of denarii every turn
>Built an empire of ashes that would have completely collapsed two turns after I completed the campaign objectives
>TW BI
>goths campaign
>5 turns in the mongols arrive with 6 stacks or something of horde units and push my shit in every time
>can't even try to expand as they would kill me before that
>this cannot stand, what units can i get? cheap infantry, maybe archers, light cavalry
>spear infantry spam or archer defense doesn't work
>frick it go all out on gothic lancers accept all new family members
>push everything into a blob with the general at the center
>HERE COMES THE DEATHBALL
>crash into their frontline and smash army after army
>infantry losses make them rout, the general suicide against it, the mass is too big to get stopped
>their horse archers can't kill fast enough to matter either get in the way and obliterated or they flee
>kill all fleeing cowards thanks to fast horses
>breaking their armies three at a time with less than a full stack
>mongol faction destroyed less than 20 turns in.
>saving the western world because i wouldn't let genghis khan bully me out of my crappy romanian town
>immediately beeline to sack Rome to restore the timeline
to this day i still chase that rush of knightly glory
you were fighting the huns, not the mongols
aye that they were, the Huns from Mongolia
lead by Attila the Gengis Khan of his time
>>Play as Brutii
entire army of Spartans just because
either you selling BS or your memory is failing anon
There is (Or at least used to be) a way to recruit Spartan hoplites as Rome, provided you captured Sparta after the AI had built the required scructures to recruit the unit, and before you had adopted the Marian reforms. At least that is my understanding.
not him and not true, there was a way to recruit legionary first cohorts from sparta due to sparta having the rare resource that allows special infantry, but you cannot recruit spartants without modding
>I still remember my first Rome TW campaign, and that was back in 2004.
Same
>pick Brutii
>can't figure out how to play the game
>add_money 40000 (x10) every turn
>pump out Equites because 15 year old me thinks horses = most powerful
>Send full stacks of equites against every army I encounter
>lose half the army every time
It was kino
>Mfw my 20/20 army of warhounds turn to dust against 5 roman infantry
Being this moronic at 15 is not something I would have made public on the internet
Do people still play OG Rome TW or remaster? Are there any mods which fix the bugs (i ehard theres fps issue) maybe add improved map textures but leave the game pretty much intact for vanilla? i have never played it and would like to check it out first before i install bloat mods.
Original because remaster is bloated as frick. 50gb for a 19 year old game? No thanks. I have 3 originals installed with RS3, EB, and darth and it's still only 19gb combined. Maybe in 10 years when IS is at least as good as RS3.
Anyway, Darthmod is what you're looking for. It's vanilla+ for most TW games. You basically can't ever go wrong installing darthmod.
k it was hard but i found a working cracks and OG Rome TW files, the 1st thing i noticed mouse sensitivity felt janky like 4:3 rescaled to wide screen made it different for horizontal and vertical movement (atleast in menu not during battles)
2nd annoying thing was terrible fps in campaign map(tried low and high graphical options no change), i also noticed a lot of those issues were fixed in alexander DLC, so after checking some old threads i found out people actually run base game campaign in Alexanders engine which contains bug fixes and AI improvements
if you are interested heres a guide how to do this.
https://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=1530257507
Isn't this guy famous for unit bloat? Back in the Shogun II days people would joke about "Ninja Blunderbuss Cavalry" and such.
I prefer Rome Remastered for the extra features. I still hear a lot of complaining about the UI, but I don't get it.
when you played og rome last time?
i fixed my framerate issue by manually downloading the directx driver and copying to data folder
https://www.twcenter.net/forums/showthread.php?743299-The-solution-to-the-lag-low-fps-problem-in-Rome-Total-War-for-high-end-modern-computers
This is an iffy fix since it breaks fire effects. It's better to follow this which gives better performance and doesn't break anything:
"Chief?"
I swear im so angry at the fact i can't play the original anymore (have the cd)
If only there were some kind of inter-connected net containing data, by which you could obtain the game's data
You probably don't want to get it this way, but you do get the original games when you buy the Rome 1 remaster.
>https://www.totalwar.com/blog/total-war-rome-remastered-faq/
Why it doesn't say this anywhere on the Steam page for Rome remastered is beyond me, but as everyone's well aware by now CA's marketing department is staffed exclusively by people with yoghurt for brains.
Why would anyone want to play the original when the remastered is available
The "why" is an answer with a million potential answers from people with different motivations, and none of them really matter. It's important that the ability to do so is available to them.
I would guess that the audience who prefer to play the original over the remaster is so small as to not bother considering
There may be more playing the original than the remaster, i think CA doesnt give a shit.
Rome Remastered had one of the worst advertising campaigns for a title of that level of importance to its series that I've ever seen, possibly the actual worst.
feral fricking hacks
i understand you have a hate boner for feral because they made a shitty ui but they didnt decide on the marketing for the game that was on ca feral was contracted to port the game and ca decided on those overhead decisions
tbh I didn't have hate boner(even if I still main win7) until I actually played the game(which happened like in week ago), now I wish they get flogged and then let hanged to dry
2009 wants its OS back
i have dual boot now but still mainly use win7
so far these few games i played on it weren't really worth it and rest work better on 7
>unironically shilling for microshit botnet
good morning sir
windows 7 is also microshit botnet, that's what tech illiterate zoomers don't understand for some reason, maybe because it only really started getting reported with 10
I can see CA trying to advertise R:R just enough so it gets profit but not too much so it doesn't become too popular and bite Warhammer sales.
It literally just needs one line on the Steam page, it's not much effort.
CA is poop!
that may be one of the options that you can toggle, there's a screen somewhere in the menus where you can choose which mechanics work like the original game or remastered
yea merchants are shit
Thoughts?
?feature=shared
i think its just terrible bait to get viewers because its moronic to make a video on a game that is barely past the planning phase
It will never go anywhere, he's just trying to get youtube bux without having done any actual development.
Yeah, unreal also seems like a moronic choice too
shit idea
also 2d>3d
I don't know where to post this, so I'll just post it here. I'm trying to play Thrones of Britannia, but I can't fricking deal with the strategic map. I mean, I literally can't read the map, because the camera is so close to the ground, it's at an incredibly fricked up, low angle, settlements and armies are poorly represented, and borders often don't even show up.
I feel like I'm leaned back and peering at a map, with my eyes barely over the edge of the table.
Am I just getting too old? I refuse to believe I'm the only one who's struggling with this, because it's actually so bad I can't play the fricking game. I have no oversight or understanding of the map.
I never had a problem with this in the older games I've played in the TW franchise, which include Rome, Medieval 2, Shogun 2, Empire and Attila.
I had the same problem. Go to the steam workshop and download better camera mods for campaign and battle.
huh, i played it recently for short time and didn't like it but camera angle wasn't a problem, maybe something with the settings or no idea
I've had the same problem with Troy and Pharoah, but not ToB. We might be getting old.
Is remaster done? Will it no longer get any patches or anything
is there a fix to alexander.exe camera bug? when you double click on portrait it slowly moves cam to that unit but it resets to previous positions if you press any movement keys which normally instantly teleported you to selected unit in original game. It was essential to fast swap between multiple fronts and makes game almost unplayable through ALEX.exe.
>a fix to alexander.exe camera bug?
dunno
>It is a known bug with the "RTS camera". The "MTW camera" works correctly.
> but it's simpler if you start a battle. Just select Total War style camera and then other preferences to your liking (restrict camera, general camera, scrollrotation speed..)
i tried MTW camera but i cant stand it, it changes default camera tilt angle so you dont see much of a sky unless you manually tweak it everytime you change position, also double click on ground to move camera doesnt work for some reason.
There were also other aspects like the persistent population levels for cities which you actually recruited from, and could basically leave cities sucked dry of troops for years. Squalor and extermination was interesting in this regard too.
Plus there was the interesting feature that every single square of the map had its own map with geographical features present in the position you expect (even volcanos, etc.) you could damage and destroy temples, barracks, etc (required for retraining, for example.) Fighting over a river was a good thing to do because the attackers could drown from exhaustion.There are plenty of other things but yeah, it was an interesting series once.
Squalor could have been interesting if there was a more direct way to address it. Like what if you could remodel your cities every so often to remove squalor but take a hit to income?
Keked and checked
the point of squalor is that it comes with the territory of having large populations. I think the idea was to put a softcap on population growth, which existed irl (except for with huge metropoli. Garrisoning a full stack of town watch or whatever would allow you to get to around 50,000, the hardcap being 216,000.
>The hardcap being not even 1-4 of the historical size of Rome.
i think the population in total war is less the actual population and more the number of recruitable able bodied men of age.
otherwise you would be conscripting women, elders and children in your wars like the barbarian do.
>in your wars like the barbarian do.
They didn't.Those were usually the families that followed the armies.
I mean, the issue is barbarians literally do that and it has the same effect on population.
I get the sentiment though. You could say it's households or whatever.
>I mean, the issue is barbarians literally do that and it has the same effect on population.
Do you count roman baggage trains that were followed by traders and prostitues as combatants as well?
if you x4 the population size it becomes fairly reasonable, as though they only count adult males.
more like 5-10x including slaves and other
see, this feature could have been expanded upon and fleshed out in later titles but NOPE. CA decided to outright remove it in Med 2.
then we get a semblance of it in Empire with low class and nobility but that too is taken away in later titles.
i was thinking about on how warhammer could benefit from some of the old system mechanics and i didn't really reach any sensible conclusion - you would need rebuild whole game and AI for it
i really dislike only armies with general only but I don;t think that game or AI could manage it
>you would need rebuild whole game and AI for it
well yes, thats what we as consumers should expect from a game company, improve their product, not dumb it down because they cant fix the AI. its inexcusable that we have had the same dogshit AI for decades at this point.
I mean, fixing the AI does mean changing how the game plays. The issue is they do it half heartedly.
The easiest way to fix the AI is simply not to have it play by the same rules as the player.