|
On February 25 2011 03:31 Sm3agol wrote:Show nested quote +On February 25 2011 02:37 StorkHwaiting wrote: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.
OK, this makes a lot more sense than your last post and I can agree with your points. Would have been nice if you'd just posted this first though, lol.
To Andrew: I saw the dictionary, but there really isn't much. They're just the same archetypal unit with a minor stat boost and not really any cool lore behind it. Hence why I think the Japan only world is a bit bland.
There are spearmen, katana men, naginata, no dachi, spear cavalry, katana cavalry, archer cavalry, archers, matchlock, firebomb, and ninja. So basically 11 units, but I just think it lacks flavor. Ashigaru or Samurai only changes stat values but basically the same and the clan versions lack cool lore. I guess only thing I'd like is Uesugi warrior monks and Takeda cavalry and the women warriors. But other than that, just blah. Medieval TW had much cooler lore, which is why I think if they wanted to do Asia again, least they could have done was include China and Korea and Mongol steppes. I used to be a huge fan of Total War but it seems they are catering to a different demographic nowadays and scared to touch the Asian mainland.
I'll stop posting in this thread though, because people who like Shogun will get mad and accuse me of derailing and tell me not to buy it. Which I might not at this point, knowing that there probably is nothing to look forward to other than some bland expansion where mongols invade and you can't even play as them and they're mostly just katana cavalry and archer cavalry reskinned with some minor stat changes. I really like some of the ideas they have for changing the campaign map with specialized provinces that focus on one troop type etc and interested to see how naval battles go, but I just wish they had a more diverse campaign map. After living through 15 years of Japan fetishism, I'm just getting a tad bit tired of the setting, and wish other Asian settings got as much play.
|
It's the same thing as in other games. All the different Turkish archers can be boiled down to their monk, samurai and ashigaru counterparts as well, with a few more variations. Not to mention that the Turks have one of the best unit rosters in both M:TW and M:TW 2. Most of the other factions sucked in comparison.
The biggest complaint I have right now is that the mouse scrolling on the campaign map for me has a 1-2 second delay. It's really annoying.
|
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.
Are you serious? How have people not figured out that dual monitors are beginning to become a standard setup for a lot of gamers? How difficult could it be to just program a "Dual monitor" setting, if nothing else. x.x
|
So its only a demo and 3 days have passed, CA already released 3 pretty large updates/fixes... According to steam.
And the modding community has figured out how to unlock the campaign for freeplay but you're still limited to the 3 heavily scripted battles.
http://www.twcenter.net/forums/showthread.php?t=428223
|
Man that freeplay campaign is sick
|
I said, MAN THAT FREEPLAY CAMPAIGN IS SICK
You can now choose different factions. The rest of the factions should follow soon
|
One or two in the series has really impressed me so much and had me hooked to the point of it being ridiculous until I won the grand campaign.
In the latest additions I had a lot of issues with the macro view not really being developed in any fun way and a lack of depth in describing the units, especially artillery had me face palming and I just picked randomly.
|
Ugh, matchlocke samurai are far more powerful than the arquebusiers were in the original. The thing about the original with guns is that the troops had terribly low morale so while they did lots of damage, they were easy to break. I lost somewhere near 30-40 archers in a single volley from the matchlocke samurai on very hard. I've gotten so close to beating it so many times but Shimazu Toyohisa is fucking worthless because he throws himself and his fellow cavalry into Yari Ashigaru -__-;.
|
I remember playing the first Shogun many years ago and going into a battle with half my stack consisting of musket troops, while it was raining... I was only a little kid when I played my first Total Series game. 
|
I thought the demo was ok, but a few things about the combat kept nagging me...
First of all, all of the units look the same from a distance. At least in Empire or Medieval 2, you could kind of tell what unit was what while zoomed out. Now I have no clue.
Also, the combat seemed a little fast. Perhaps this is because I'm used to Empire, but I barely blinked and my katana samurai had chewed threw 200 yaris. The battles seem over in under 10 seconds. I hope I'm not the only one bothered by this, it was definitely bugging me.
Archers also seem overpowered. But I think I'm obliged to say that every time I play a new strategy game with archers.
|
The original Shogun was made of all kinds of win....It was damn challenging starting on quite a few different locations, never helped that I sucked at diplomacy....I always ended up with massive armies by the time i conquered 1/3rd of Japan.
So far in the Demo, I like how they've done it. It's the original with more stuff added in and few twists and turns....I will definitely buy this on release.
|
I can bet a whole line of archers were kinda overpowered "back in the day"
Anyways, ordered the limited ed. cause i've been told it contains a book(let) with all the art in it.
The art is just amazing thinking about doing some tattoo's in that kind of style.
1st post, huray.
|
Use this mod to play all clans of the demo:
http://www.twcenter.net/forums/showthread.php?t=428223
This is so much more fun than the limited and scriptet tutorial campaign. So everyone who's disappointed needs to check that out.
In that forum you'll also find mods for unscripted battles and tommorow there'll probably be a mod for playing custom battles.
|
So i've been playing the demo campaign quite a bit now. I think the AI will do ok in the vanilla game. Not brilliant, not retarded as in Empire. This game will certainly have good dynamics in the campaign like in Shogun 1 and Medieval 1. So it's going to be awesome, there'll be other clans getting really strong and expanding to be really worthy opponents, and all of that not based on stupid scripts like in Napoleon.
Furthermore it seems that withing the next few hours there will be a modification that allows players to create own custom battles in the demo.
http://www.twcenter.net/forums/showthread.php?t=429404
That's going to be huge.
|
On February 26 2011 08:09 Gryffindor_us wrote:
Ugh, matchlocke samurai are far more powerful than the arquebusiers were in the original. The thing about the original with guns is that the troops had terribly low morale so while they did lots of damage, they were easy to break. I lost somewhere near 30-40 archers in a single volley from the matchlocke samurai on very hard. I've gotten so close to beating it so many times but Shimazu Toyohisa is fucking worthless because he throws himself and his fellow cavalry into Yari Ashigaru -__-;.
They could be more powerful. Ever heard of Nagashino?
|
Every TW game so far was ruined by it's sickeningly bad (siege) AI as well as the lack of campaign map multiplayer. I liked Empire a lot, but in the end it's boring as hell to fend off an entire army with just 2 units and the town militia.
|
Agreed. I'll be happy if they deal with the appalingly bad siege and building AI that has been in every. single. game. of theirs.
Played the demo and it looks amazing, both in scale and graphics. Battle was damn hard though and had a difficult time trying to keep track of everything. Small number of different units doesn't really bother me - it's much easier to create a balanced game with a small set of units to choose between, and that is pretty close to historical fact. Let's face it, at the end of the day the basic troops would be similar no matter what prefecture they are from, and they could have one or two small bonuses depending on historical background - Takeda's horses being known for their ability in battle, for example.
Looks good and I'll probably get it, but I'll be waiting until I see reviews - every game has shipped with a tonne of bugs just to meet some arbitrary deadline, something which has given them a bit of a reputation, I'll not be giving Creative Assembly my money until I know the game actually works out of the box.
|
i was looking towards this moment since rome total war this is going to be awesome
|
On February 28 2011 15:05 chasfrank wrote:
Every TW game so far was ruined by it's sickeningly bad (siege) AI as well as the lack of campaign map multiplayer. I liked Empire a lot, but in the end it's boring as hell to fend off an entire army with just 2 units and the town militia.
Campaign map multiplayer? Like hotseat; or do you really want to sit there and wait for your opponent to play his 45 minute turn?
|
On February 26 2011 08:09 Gryffindor_us wrote:
Ugh, matchlocke samurai are far more powerful than the arquebusiers were in the original. The thing about the original with guns is that the troops had terribly low morale so while they did lots of damage, they were easy to break. I lost somewhere near 30-40 archers in a single volley from the matchlocke samurai on very hard. I've gotten so close to beating it so many times but Shimazu Toyohisa is fucking worthless because he throws himself and his fellow cavalry into Yari Ashigaru -__-;.
Ive beaten Very Hard, Shimazu Toyohisa doesnt ever move for me... ever.
The art to winning is yari wall. With it on even yari ashigaru can hold katana samurai off for ages.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
