|
On February 24 2011 03:28 StorkHwaiting wrote:
Anyone else worried about how few unit choices there are in the game? I know they said they were going back to their roots, but having a lot of units was kind of the fun of it. This feels very barebones now, almost like they've got nothing but archetype troops to use. I guess the variety is in the masteries and generals? I dno :-\
P.S. Nice first post in the thread korea
Not sure what you think was fun about haveing alot units in the other games, since I always ended up just makeing the few units I thought was the best and never used alot of the others anyway.
|
Just played the demo.. kind of. Are you fucking serious CA? STILL no restrict cursor for dual monitor users? Goddamn it, it's 2011.. I thought it was bad enough that it was an issue in Napoleon. Having to change settings for monitors each time I play is enough to keep me from playing, gah, I hope some fix will be released or that there's some tweak I don't know about.
Rage.
|
On February 24 2011 03:52 TaKemE wrote:Show nested quote +On February 24 2011 03:28 StorkHwaiting wrote:
Anyone else worried about how few unit choices there are in the game? I know they said they were going back to their roots, but having a lot of units was kind of the fun of it. This feels very barebones now, almost like they've got nothing but archetype troops to use. I guess the variety is in the masteries and generals? I dno :-\
P.S. Nice first post in the thread korea Not sure what you think was fun about haveing alot units in the other games, since I always ended up just makeing the few units I thought was the best and never used alot of the others anyway.
Hmm, I don't know. I quite liked having lots of units. Like with Turkish faction, I liked how there was a big variety of archery units, some better at melee than others, and guys with bonus to armor damage, or morale dmg etc, it was just fun to look at a diverse army with lots of uniforms and colors and feel like I've got some huge sprawling empire with men from tons of different tribes fighting for me. I don't know, the pageantry and epicness of it mattered more to me than efficiency lol.
|
On February 24 2011 04:21 StorkHwaiting wrote:Show nested quote +On February 24 2011 03:52 TaKemE wrote:On February 24 2011 03:28 StorkHwaiting wrote:
Anyone else worried about how few unit choices there are in the game? I know they said they were going back to their roots, but having a lot of units was kind of the fun of it. This feels very barebones now, almost like they've got nothing but archetype troops to use. I guess the variety is in the masteries and generals? I dno :-\
P.S. Nice first post in the thread korea Not sure what you think was fun about haveing alot units in the other games, since I always ended up just makeing the few units I thought was the best and never used alot of the others anyway. Hmm, I don't know. I quite liked having lots of units. Like with Turkish faction, I liked how there was a big variety of archery units, some better at melee than others, and guys with bonus to armor damage, or morale dmg etc, it was just fun to look at a diverse army with lots of uniforms and colors and feel like I've got some huge sprawling empire with men from tons of different tribes fighting for me. I don't know, the pageantry and epicness of it mattered more to me than efficiency lol.
I definitely preferred different unit skins, despite many of them filling the same basic roles (heavy cavalry, light cavalry, line infantry, ranged infantry), but since the entire campaign takes place in Japan, it'd be more historically accurate to have less unit variety.
I'm guessing the expansion is going to cover the Imjin War though, so hopefully China and Korea will be playable.
|
On February 24 2011 04:47 chenchen wrote:Show nested quote +On February 24 2011 04:21 StorkHwaiting wrote:On February 24 2011 03:52 TaKemE wrote:On February 24 2011 03:28 StorkHwaiting wrote:
Anyone else worried about how few unit choices there are in the game? I know they said they were going back to their roots, but having a lot of units was kind of the fun of it. This feels very barebones now, almost like they've got nothing but archetype troops to use. I guess the variety is in the masteries and generals? I dno :-\
P.S. Nice first post in the thread korea Not sure what you think was fun about haveing alot units in the other games, since I always ended up just makeing the few units I thought was the best and never used alot of the others anyway. Hmm, I don't know. I quite liked having lots of units. Like with Turkish faction, I liked how there was a big variety of archery units, some better at melee than others, and guys with bonus to armor damage, or morale dmg etc, it was just fun to look at a diverse army with lots of uniforms and colors and feel like I've got some huge sprawling empire with men from tons of different tribes fighting for me. I don't know, the pageantry and epicness of it mattered more to me than efficiency lol. I definitely preferred different unit skins, despite many of them filling the same basic roles (heavy cavalry, light cavalry, line infantry, ranged infantry), but since the entire campaign takes place in Japan, it'd be more historically accurate to have less unit variety. I'm guessing the expansion is going to cover the Imjin War though, so hopefully China and Korea will be playable.
See now Imjin War would make me a happy person.
|
On February 24 2011 06:07 StorkHwaiting wrote:Show nested quote +On February 24 2011 04:47 chenchen wrote:On February 24 2011 04:21 StorkHwaiting wrote:On February 24 2011 03:52 TaKemE wrote:On February 24 2011 03:28 StorkHwaiting wrote:
Anyone else worried about how few unit choices there are in the game? I know they said they were going back to their roots, but having a lot of units was kind of the fun of it. This feels very barebones now, almost like they've got nothing but archetype troops to use. I guess the variety is in the masteries and generals? I dno :-\
P.S. Nice first post in the thread korea Not sure what you think was fun about haveing alot units in the other games, since I always ended up just makeing the few units I thought was the best and never used alot of the others anyway. Hmm, I don't know. I quite liked having lots of units. Like with Turkish faction, I liked how there was a big variety of archery units, some better at melee than others, and guys with bonus to armor damage, or morale dmg etc, it was just fun to look at a diverse army with lots of uniforms and colors and feel like I've got some huge sprawling empire with men from tons of different tribes fighting for me. I don't know, the pageantry and epicness of it mattered more to me than efficiency lol. I definitely preferred different unit skins, despite many of them filling the same basic roles (heavy cavalry, light cavalry, line infantry, ranged infantry), but since the entire campaign takes place in Japan, it'd be more historically accurate to have less unit variety. I'm guessing the expansion is going to cover the Imjin War though, so hopefully China and Korea will be playable. See now Imjin War would make me a happy person.
Unfortunately, CA stated they have no plans on adding Korea/China into the mix, due to possible unnecessary political issue it might stir up. Especially considering SEGA, the publisher, is japanese.
|
On February 24 2011 06:23 Nayl wrote:Show nested quote +On February 24 2011 06:07 StorkHwaiting wrote:On February 24 2011 04:47 chenchen wrote:On February 24 2011 04:21 StorkHwaiting wrote:On February 24 2011 03:52 TaKemE wrote:On February 24 2011 03:28 StorkHwaiting wrote:
Anyone else worried about how few unit choices there are in the game? I know they said they were going back to their roots, but having a lot of units was kind of the fun of it. This feels very barebones now, almost like they've got nothing but archetype troops to use. I guess the variety is in the masteries and generals? I dno :-\
P.S. Nice first post in the thread korea Not sure what you think was fun about haveing alot units in the other games, since I always ended up just makeing the few units I thought was the best and never used alot of the others anyway. Hmm, I don't know. I quite liked having lots of units. Like with Turkish faction, I liked how there was a big variety of archery units, some better at melee than others, and guys with bonus to armor damage, or morale dmg etc, it was just fun to look at a diverse army with lots of uniforms and colors and feel like I've got some huge sprawling empire with men from tons of different tribes fighting for me. I don't know, the pageantry and epicness of it mattered more to me than efficiency lol. I definitely preferred different unit skins, despite many of them filling the same basic roles (heavy cavalry, light cavalry, line infantry, ranged infantry), but since the entire campaign takes place in Japan, it'd be more historically accurate to have less unit variety. I'm guessing the expansion is going to cover the Imjin War though, so hopefully China and Korea will be playable. See now Imjin War would make me a happy person. Unfortunately, CA stated they have no plans on adding Korea/China into the mix, due to possible unnecessary political issue it might stir up. Especially considering SEGA, the publisher, is japanese.
... Unnecessary political issue? What in the? Lol? Do they not realize there are a ton of games sold in China/Japan that depict ancient Chinese/Japanese/Korean armies that fight each other? What kind of a pathetic excuse is that? I'm becoming more and more convinced that CA has some strange bias against ancient China, as if they don't want to go near it with a ten-foot pole or something. It's like anything that isn't ridiculously cliche or mainstream is just outside their ability.
Perfect example of a game with China/Japan fighting would be Warriors Orochi. I don't see any political issues getting stirred up by it.
|
|
|
I preordered it about 2 weeks ago.
Now that i played the demo i'd say that was a good decision.
Well, the beginners campaign is heavily scripted, but i've got a good feeling for the final game. About the AI it's a lot of hoping.
The Battle seemed pretty hard, but i can not really comment too much about the AI here either. I am used to grouping my units together to move forward in a strong formation, but in the historical battle the units are witespread, so i tried to make my samurai death ball and got attacked from the front pretty quickly and then the stuff happened i don't want to spoler.
I had pretty poor computer performace to the end of the battle, but i am pretty sure that will be solved in the vanilla version.
Last weeks of wating will be almost as tough as waiting for SC2
|
On February 24 2011 07:18 StorkHwaiting wrote:Show nested quote +On February 24 2011 06:23 Nayl wrote:On February 24 2011 06:07 StorkHwaiting wrote:On February 24 2011 04:47 chenchen wrote:On February 24 2011 04:21 StorkHwaiting wrote:On February 24 2011 03:52 TaKemE wrote:On February 24 2011 03:28 StorkHwaiting wrote:
Anyone else worried about how few unit choices there are in the game? I know they said they were going back to their roots, but having a lot of units was kind of the fun of it. This feels very barebones now, almost like they've got nothing but archetype troops to use. I guess the variety is in the masteries and generals? I dno :-\
P.S. Nice first post in the thread korea Not sure what you think was fun about haveing alot units in the other games, since I always ended up just makeing the few units I thought was the best and never used alot of the others anyway. Hmm, I don't know. I quite liked having lots of units. Like with Turkish faction, I liked how there was a big variety of archery units, some better at melee than others, and guys with bonus to armor damage, or morale dmg etc, it was just fun to look at a diverse army with lots of uniforms and colors and feel like I've got some huge sprawling empire with men from tons of different tribes fighting for me. I don't know, the pageantry and epicness of it mattered more to me than efficiency lol. I definitely preferred different unit skins, despite many of them filling the same basic roles (heavy cavalry, light cavalry, line infantry, ranged infantry), but since the entire campaign takes place in Japan, it'd be more historically accurate to have less unit variety. I'm guessing the expansion is going to cover the Imjin War though, so hopefully China and Korea will be playable. See now Imjin War would make me a happy person. Unfortunately, CA stated they have no plans on adding Korea/China into the mix, due to possible unnecessary political issue it might stir up. Especially considering SEGA, the publisher, is japanese. ... Unnecessary political issue? What in the? Lol? Do they not realize there are a ton of games sold in China/Japan that depict ancient Chinese/Japanese/Korean armies that fight each other? What kind of a pathetic excuse is that? I'm becoming more and more convinced that CA has some strange bias against ancient China, as if they don't want to go near it with a ten-foot pole or something. It's like anything that isn't ridiculously cliche or mainstream is just outside their ability. Perfect example of a game with China/Japan fighting would be Warriors Orochi. I don't see any political issues getting stirred up by it.
Just wait for someone to make that mod or wait until All Under Heaven of MIITW. ^_^
|
On February 24 2011 09:21 Antisocialmunky wrote:Show nested quote +On February 24 2011 07:18 StorkHwaiting wrote:On February 24 2011 06:23 Nayl wrote:On February 24 2011 06:07 StorkHwaiting wrote:On February 24 2011 04:47 chenchen wrote:On February 24 2011 04:21 StorkHwaiting wrote:On February 24 2011 03:52 TaKemE wrote:On February 24 2011 03:28 StorkHwaiting wrote:
Anyone else worried about how few unit choices there are in the game? I know they said they were going back to their roots, but having a lot of units was kind of the fun of it. This feels very barebones now, almost like they've got nothing but archetype troops to use. I guess the variety is in the masteries and generals? I dno :-\
P.S. Nice first post in the thread korea Not sure what you think was fun about haveing alot units in the other games, since I always ended up just makeing the few units I thought was the best and never used alot of the others anyway. Hmm, I don't know. I quite liked having lots of units. Like with Turkish faction, I liked how there was a big variety of archery units, some better at melee than others, and guys with bonus to armor damage, or morale dmg etc, it was just fun to look at a diverse army with lots of uniforms and colors and feel like I've got some huge sprawling empire with men from tons of different tribes fighting for me. I don't know, the pageantry and epicness of it mattered more to me than efficiency lol. I definitely preferred different unit skins, despite many of them filling the same basic roles (heavy cavalry, light cavalry, line infantry, ranged infantry), but since the entire campaign takes place in Japan, it'd be more historically accurate to have less unit variety. I'm guessing the expansion is going to cover the Imjin War though, so hopefully China and Korea will be playable. See now Imjin War would make me a happy person. Unfortunately, CA stated they have no plans on adding Korea/China into the mix, due to possible unnecessary political issue it might stir up. Especially considering SEGA, the publisher, is japanese. ... Unnecessary political issue? What in the? Lol? Do they not realize there are a ton of games sold in China/Japan that depict ancient Chinese/Japanese/Korean armies that fight each other? What kind of a pathetic excuse is that? I'm becoming more and more convinced that CA has some strange bias against ancient China, as if they don't want to go near it with a ten-foot pole or something. It's like anything that isn't ridiculously cliche or mainstream is just outside their ability. Perfect example of a game with China/Japan fighting would be Warriors Orochi. I don't see any political issues getting stirred up by it. Just wait for someone to make that mod or wait until All Under Heaven of MIITW. ^_^
Yeah I'm really pulling for All Under Heaven. It's been a while with them though 
|
... Unnecessary political issue? What in the? Lol? Do they not realize there are a ton of games sold in China/Japan that depict ancient Chinese/Japanese/Korean armies that fight each other? What kind of a pathetic excuse is that? I'm becoming more and more convinced that CA has some strange bias against ancient China, as if they don't want to go near it with a ten-foot pole or something. It's like anything that isn't ridiculously cliche or mainstream is just outside their ability.
Perfect example of a game with China/Japan fighting would be Warriors Orochi. I don't see any political issues getting stirred up by it.
So many games are banned in China because of that, its not even funny... But you are also right in the sense that mainland China only play pirated games anyways, so its not really a big factor.
According to history, that time period Japan did try to invade Korea, but they failed; after that the mongol came but they also fail to invade Japan. That should be possible in the expansion like the 1st game they did?
|
On February 24 2011 01:35 StorkHwaiting wrote:Show nested quote +On February 23 2011 15:34 stalking.d00m wrote:On February 23 2011 09:04 StorkHwaiting wrote:On February 23 2011 04:41 Sm3agol wrote:On February 20 2011 14:38 StorkHwaiting wrote:On February 19 2011 11:19 StorkHwaiting wrote:
Thank god they're going back to the roots. I was fucking disgusted with all the gunpowder garbage they were putting out. The entire point of Total War was medieval combat. MELEE and arrows. Not fucking muskets and crap. I hate that era of military history. Glad to know a lot of other people felt the same way and CA started crying when their sales went way down. Bastards.
Too bad they don't have the balls to do a Three Kingdoms: Total War, which is long past due. They've already rehashed Europe and the Middle East a million times over, and now they're rehashing Japan too, yet they've completely ignored the Asian mainland which is such an obvious, obvious hole with so much history, different kingdoms, and military units, it's just embarrassing in my opinion. Where is my Three Kingdoms: Total War!? And wth did they pick a fob ass voice to narrate? Romans supposedly speak with an English accent, but I guess Asians get a fob. The racist stereotyping of CA disgusts me for how much they claim to study history and try to get things accurate. Spit in their faces!
User was warned for this post I really don't understand why in the hell I was warned for this post concerning ad hominem attacks. What exactly is ad hominem about my opinion of Creative Assembly? And what was the debate? There was no civility lost in the debate seeing as there was no debate to be had. I'm merely stating my opinion of CA's recent forays into gunpowder warfare. At no point in time did I insult another member of TL. Sorry but it's kind of ridiculous to warn me for flaming when I'm talking about a game company. As a purchaser of their games, I have a right to complain when I think they've gone in a wrong direction, much like other TL members have used harsh invectives towards certain Blizzard decisions. It's completely different from flaming another member of TL and using ad hominem attacks on them for the sake of debate. If your post wasn't inflammatory flaming, then I don't know what is. And guess what? The video game playing world is the west for the most part, not mainland Asia. So get off your high horse and quit your moaning. It wouldn't sell well, end of story. You're right, there is no debate. You're just inflammatory AND wrong. I'm an avid history buff, and even I don't know that much about the period/area your talking about. I certainly would not be pumped for a TW game based on that. If your post isn't inflammatory flaming, then I don't know what is. And guess what? You're on a SC site, a video game which is dominated by S. Korea, which happens to be in... guess where? Mainland Asia! So get off your high horse and quit your moaning. You don't know shit about what would sell, end of story. You're right, there is no debate. You're just ignorant AND wrong. You don't know anything about history, if you don't even know about the entire ancient period of Asia (which constituted over half the population of the ancient world). I certainly would not be pumped to read another post about Asian history based on your absolute ignorance of the subject. Sorry to drop in your 'conversation' but why are you annoying others about which country or timeline CA uses for its franchise? It is their product, their money and their years worth of hardwork and not to mention decades worth of experience. If you think you can do better then go ahead and make your own game. We will all happily buy that if it will be even half as awesome as any CA game. And please don't pretend to speak on behalf of all Asians. I am an asian and I love the Japanese setting 10x more than 3 kingdoms. Has it occurred to you that we all have our own opinions and likings? CA isn't a volunteer mod community, they're a business. I don't understand why the hell you would talk about hard work and their money, etc. It's not their money. It's my money that keeps them afloat. You think a business runs without customers? In essence, you don't have a point at all here, other than it takes you 5 sentences to say a very trite and retarded argument, AKA "Make your own game if you don't like theirs." And I don't care if you're Asian. Nor did I ever say I spoke for all Asians, which is a pretty ridiculous assumption for you to make. Btw, there's no such thing as a "Japanese setting." You mean Sengoku Era? Or you mean Akihabara Electronics District? God, I'll just stop now. Your whole post is a mishmash of nonsense.
You don't like it then don't buy it simple as that, why the hell do you keep disrupting this thread despite being warned? And seriously chill out.
|
On February 24 2011 04:21 StorkHwaiting wrote:Show nested quote +On February 24 2011 03:52 TaKemE wrote:On February 24 2011 03:28 StorkHwaiting wrote:
Anyone else worried about how few unit choices there are in the game? I know they said they were going back to their roots, but having a lot of units was kind of the fun of it. This feels very barebones now, almost like they've got nothing but archetype troops to use. I guess the variety is in the masteries and generals? I dno :-\
P.S. Nice first post in the thread korea Not sure what you think was fun about haveing alot units in the other games, since I always ended up just makeing the few units I thought was the best and never used alot of the others anyway. Hmm, I don't know. I quite liked having lots of units. Like with Turkish faction, I liked how there was a big variety of archery units, some better at melee than others, and guys with bonus to armor damage, or morale dmg etc, it was just fun to look at a diverse army with lots of uniforms and colors and feel like I've got some huge sprawling empire with men from tons of different tribes fighting for me. I don't know, the pageantry and epicness of it mattered more to me than efficiency lol.
I actually like a limited number of units. It makes the battles much more intense, and really makes good tacticians and strategists stand out. I loved fighting Roman factions with Roman factions in R:TW, and raping equal size and composition armies through good flanking, and having much more experienced troops and upgrades.
I like the feeling of building up a war-hardened army and slaughtering all the technically equal armies of my enemies, because they keep throwing together armies with one star generals and no chevron units.
Getting pumped for S:TW2
|
Loved every TW game. When Shogun first came out, I was telling all my friends 'just you fucking wait, this is the next big thing'. Then Med came out, everyone was like woah awesoem. THEN Rome came out...and it exploded :D
can't wait for S:TW2 :D
|
On February 24 2011 04:12 vyyye wrote:
Just played the demo.. kind of. Are you fucking serious CA? STILL no restrict cursor for dual monitor users? Goddamn it, it's 2011.. I thought it was bad enough that it was an issue in Napoleon. Having to change settings for monitors each time I play is enough to keep me from playing, gah, I hope some fix will be released or that there's some tweak I don't know about.
Rage.
Agreed, so ridiculous.
|
On February 24 2011 22:05 Sm3agol wrote:Show nested quote +On February 24 2011 04:21 StorkHwaiting wrote:On February 24 2011 03:52 TaKemE wrote:On February 24 2011 03:28 StorkHwaiting wrote:
Anyone else worried about how few unit choices there are in the game? I know they said they were going back to their roots, but having a lot of units was kind of the fun of it. This feels very barebones now, almost like they've got nothing but archetype troops to use. I guess the variety is in the masteries and generals? I dno :-\
P.S. Nice first post in the thread korea Not sure what you think was fun about haveing alot units in the other games, since I always ended up just makeing the few units I thought was the best and never used alot of the others anyway. Hmm, I don't know. I quite liked having lots of units. Like with Turkish faction, I liked how there was a big variety of archery units, some better at melee than others, and guys with bonus to armor damage, or morale dmg etc, it was just fun to look at a diverse army with lots of uniforms and colors and feel like I've got some huge sprawling empire with men from tons of different tribes fighting for me. I don't know, the pageantry and epicness of it mattered more to me than efficiency lol. I actually like a limited number of units. It makes the battles much more intense, and really makes good tacticians and strategists stand out. I loved fighting Roman factions with Roman factions in R:TW, and raping equal size and composition armies through good flanking, and having much more experienced troops and upgrades. I like the feeling of building up a war-hardened army and slaughtering all the technically equal armies of my enemies, because they keep throwing together armies with one star generals and no chevron units. Getting pumped for S:TW2
How exactly does it make the battles more intense when all you have to do is slap mirrored units against each other and then watch your guys win because they have higher command bonus and xp stat boosts? Good flanking consists of clicking to the side, then behind your opponent, then into them.
I would think it's much more fun to maneuver around a large map, trying to get spearmen on cavalry, horse archers on heavy infantry, axemen on spearmen, etc, while there are diverse patchworks of shit going on everywhere with whose going to win up in the air, and your troops push through because of superior positioning, movement, rather than superior stats due to no-brainer play on the campaign map and a passive general boost, which was again derived from fighting against no brainer AI.
|
Is there a list of all the units anywhere? I haven't really looked at the details of Shogun 2 yet although I'm definitely buying it. I also like a bigger variety of units but they have to be actually different (like in TW/Rome and somewhat TW2). From what I remember from Empire you just had "Random-Name-Rifleman-#1", "Random-Name-Rifleman-#2", "Random-Name-Rifleman-#3", etc. with just slightly different stats.
|
On February 25 2011 02:37 StorkHwaiting wrote:Show nested quote +On February 24 2011 22:05 Sm3agol wrote:On February 24 2011 04:21 StorkHwaiting wrote:On February 24 2011 03:52 TaKemE wrote:On February 24 2011 03:28 StorkHwaiting wrote:
Anyone else worried about how few unit choices there are in the game? I know they said they were going back to their roots, but having a lot of units was kind of the fun of it. This feels very barebones now, almost like they've got nothing but archetype troops to use. I guess the variety is in the masteries and generals? I dno :-\
P.S. Nice first post in the thread korea Not sure what you think was fun about haveing alot units in the other games, since I always ended up just makeing the few units I thought was the best and never used alot of the others anyway. Hmm, I don't know. I quite liked having lots of units. Like with Turkish faction, I liked how there was a big variety of archery units, some better at melee than others, and guys with bonus to armor damage, or morale dmg etc, it was just fun to look at a diverse army with lots of uniforms and colors and feel like I've got some huge sprawling empire with men from tons of different tribes fighting for me. I don't know, the pageantry and epicness of it mattered more to me than efficiency lol. I actually like a limited number of units. It makes the battles much more intense, and really makes good tacticians and strategists stand out. I loved fighting Roman factions with Roman factions in R:TW, and raping equal size and composition armies through good flanking, and having much more experienced troops and upgrades. I like the feeling of building up a war-hardened army and slaughtering all the technically equal armies of my enemies, because they keep throwing together armies with one star generals and no chevron units. Getting pumped for S:TW2 How exactly does it make the battles more intense when all you have to do is slap mirrored units against each other and then watch your guys win because they have higher command bonus and xp stat boosts? Good flanking consists of clicking to the side, then behind your opponent, then into them. I would think it's much more fun to maneuver around a large map, trying to get spearmen on cavalry, horse archers on heavy infantry, axemen on spearmen, etc, while there are diverse patchworks of shit going on everywhere with whose going to win up in the air, and your troops push through because of superior positioning, movement, rather than superior stats due to no-brainer play on the campaign map and a passive general boost, which was again derived from fighting against no brainer AI.
Ok, you completely misjudged and misrepresented everything I said.
The fun with mirrored armies is getting the most out of the rock /paper/scissors matchups, and maximizing the damage your "equal" units do to their opponents due to careful strategy and planning. For instance, building up and protecting a couple of elite infantry and cavalry units, training them to max armor and attack, getting them tons of easy battle experience until they have gold chevron experience, and then using them as my shock troops vs my "equal opponents". Sure, the battles themselves aren't always the most riveting once you get the general tactics down, but it's rewarding because of all the time I put in to make them a killing machine. At the same time, you have this lasting unit through most of your campaign that you're trying to protect and make the most of, and losing a unit like that to a moment of carelessness or overconfidence in their abilities...almost feels sad, like you lost your most loyal army. Nothing like having your "Old Gaurd" to go to when the battle gets a little close, and you know when you send that gold everything heavy cavalry group into the flank of your opponent in a really close battle, and you know they're going to fark some people up.
What isn't fun is fighting barbarian infantry with Parthian horse cavalry and armored elephants. Or Phalanxes vs Roman troops. Or etc, etc. When hundreds of different units are available, then little things become SOOOO easy to abuse. So you're not winning because you pulled half his infantry off the front line into your meat grinder while you kept the other half busy with skirmishers and the threat of a flank.....you're winning because there is no chance in hell German warbands are going to ever going to touch Parthian horse archers and heavy elephants. Or just running your legions in circles around phalanxes, while you pepper them with peltasts and onagers until they're broken and ready to route. Or your phalanx is in a beastly concave with good flank protection, and you know that even if the enemy had 2000 random infantry units, you'd still be untouchable just because the're basically nothing random swordsmen can do vs good spearmen.
|
On February 25 2011 02:37 StorkHwaiting wrote:Show nested quote +On February 24 2011 22:05 Sm3agol wrote:On February 24 2011 04:21 StorkHwaiting wrote:On February 24 2011 03:52 TaKemE wrote:On February 24 2011 03:28 StorkHwaiting wrote:
Anyone else worried about how few unit choices there are in the game? I know they said they were going back to their roots, but having a lot of units was kind of the fun of it. This feels very barebones now, almost like they've got nothing but archetype troops to use. I guess the variety is in the masteries and generals? I dno :-\
P.S. Nice first post in the thread korea Not sure what you think was fun about haveing alot units in the other games, since I always ended up just makeing the few units I thought was the best and never used alot of the others anyway. Hmm, I don't know. I quite liked having lots of units. Like with Turkish faction, I liked how there was a big variety of archery units, some better at melee than others, and guys with bonus to armor damage, or morale dmg etc, it was just fun to look at a diverse army with lots of uniforms and colors and feel like I've got some huge sprawling empire with men from tons of different tribes fighting for me. I don't know, the pageantry and epicness of it mattered more to me than efficiency lol. I actually like a limited number of units. It makes the battles much more intense, and really makes good tacticians and strategists stand out. I loved fighting Roman factions with Roman factions in R:TW, and raping equal size and composition armies through good flanking, and having much more experienced troops and upgrades. I like the feeling of building up a war-hardened army and slaughtering all the technically equal armies of my enemies, because they keep throwing together armies with one star generals and no chevron units. Getting pumped for S:TW2 How exactly does it make the battles more intense when all you have to do is slap mirrored units against each other and then watch your guys win because they have higher command bonus and xp stat boosts? Good flanking consists of clicking to the side, then behind your opponent, then into them. I would think it's much more fun to maneuver around a large map, trying to get spearmen on cavalry, horse archers on heavy infantry, axemen on spearmen, etc, while there are diverse patchworks of shit going on everywhere with whose going to win up in the air, and your troops push through because of superior positioning, movement, rather than superior stats due to no-brainer play on the campaign map and a passive general boost, which was again derived from fighting against no brainer AI.
I don't know if you've browsed the encyclopedia, but there are a ton of units. The only missing thing are AP units, but I don't think the Japanese used axes and such anyway. Most of the foot unit types have ashigaru, samurai and monk versions.
The last game with a huge diversity of units where the stats mattered is M:TW 1 anyway. The last 3 games had tons of units but with mostly mirrored stats or with such slight variation that many units were just redundant.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
