Sweet Jesus

[kingcomrade]

Oh noes, you've got me.

Maybe you should get a MIDI of Linkin Park to play on the front page, it would fit perfectly.

 

[Naked_Lunch]

Anyone care to give me an actual response about the Total War games? Explain why they are more than just, "Okay order your spearmen to attack the horsies, and your archers to attack their spearmen, and your horsies to attack their archers."

Have you ever played them? Or are you just being a moron? Maybe you should lay off all the Starcraft and play a real strategy game for once.

There's a fucking lot more to the game than just that, as you seem completely ignorant of the world map mode in which you can assassinate Popes, marry into a royal family and then destroy them from the inside, create a jihad, and even start a fucking inquistion.

There's different levels and variations within each country you choose to play as in terms of units i.e. an Egyptian camel archer is different than a French horse archer. Low grade spearmen can't take on higher-grade cavalary and so on. It's hard to figure all this out, I know, it means you actually have to read. Gosh, who does that nowadays, seriously?

Play the game and get back to me alright? kthnxbai

 

[kingcomrade]

So low level spearmen can't take on high level horsemen, that's the same thing, you order a different unit to attack them. kthxbai, dumbass.

 

[LlamaGod]

cavelry is good against infantry, spearmen are good against cavelry, archers are good against spearmen, infantry is good against other infantry and archers.

And you have to consider fatigue, morale and flanking and stuff like that. It's a pretty complex game if you dont play on fucking easy

 

[spacemoose]

the formations were basically non-exsistant, mounted units could route fucking phalaxes and there was a ton of misbalanced units.

There were as much formations as in Medieval. I have never seen a mounted unit rout a phalanx from the front, from the back plenty of times, just as they should. The wardogs are the only unit I can think of that was unbalanced, but the AI did not use it much, and if you were bothered by it, it could easily be removed.

They spent more time on Rome's graphics and flashy shit then the gameplay, and managed to remove things that were in Medieval too.

The mystical gameplay, when you talk about gameplay without specific examples thats just saying 'well I didn't like it so there'.

Not to mention the really really fucking annoying bugs they flat out refused to fix.

There were plenty of bugs, particularly with diplomacy, but no gamestoppers, as opposed to ToEE, Bloodlines and Daggerfall which are almost universally loved here.

They are going for prettier and more arcade based games, love holding out features for expansions, making stupid console action games and now they are only 'doing sequels to well known settings and properties' instead of actually taking a risk and trying something new and original.

This is not a console title, and the speed of the combat can be changed. So how the fuck is this a console arcade game?

Medieval Europe is the best setting for a Total War game - there is conflict between many varied cultures, constant tech advancement - from light armor/weapons to heavy armor/weapons to light armor and firearms. China is fucking boring, the factions would all be essentially the same. As for Napoleonics, the prospect of lining up my guys and waiting as they fire volleys back and forth does not sound appealing.

 

[Zufuriin]

They may have fixed this, but I stopped playing R:TW after I realized that loading up a saved game resets all seiges on cities by other civilizations. It seems to restart all AI long-term goals, effeectively stopping any and all chance for expansion. If that is not a game stopper, I don't know what is.

 

[LlamaGod]

This is not a console title, and the speed of the combat can be changed. So how the fuck is this a console arcade game?

They are going more towards lots of dudes vs. lots of dudes smashy smashy instead of needing actual strategy. Arcade style instead of realistic.

There were as much formations as in Medieval. I have never seen a mounted unit rout a phalanx from the front, from the back plenty of times, just as they should. The wardogs are the only unit I can think of that was unbalanced, but the AI did not use it much, and if you were bothered by it, it could easily be removed.

The formations didnt hold, like in Medieval, and there was no way to make your own, like in Medieval.

And so what if you can mod things out, that's the same bullshit excuse people use to say NWN and Morrowind are good.

Medieval Europe is the best setting for a Total War game - there is conflict between many varied cultures, constant tech advancement - from light armor/weapons to heavy armor/weapons to light armor and firearms. China is fucking boring, the factions would all be essentially the same. As for Napoleonics, the prospect of lining up my guys and waiting as they fire volleys back and forth does not sound appealing.

why not ancient middle east, then? And Napoleon would be fun, you retarded gimp

There were plenty of bugs, particularly with diplomacy, but no gamestoppers, as opposed to ToEE, Bloodlines and Daggerfall which are almost universally loved here.

See what Zufuriin said. They refused to fix it at all, but sure did include the fix in the expansion, and then released it to the normal game like 2 weeks later, after everyone got the expansion.

 

[spacemoose]

They are going more towards lots of dudes vs. lots of dudes smashy smashy instead of needing actual strategy. Arcade style instead of realistic.

Hah! It's always been that way, whatever tactics you used in the previous games were still just as valid in Rome. The only thing that changed is the speed of the combat, if you can't keep up, slow it down yourself.

The formations didnt hold, like in Medieval, and there was no way to make your own, like in Medieval.

The formations not holding is realistic and is an improvement. If you are referring to arranging several squads/units in a certain pattern w/respect to each other, it was certainly possible.

why not ancient middle east, then? And Napoleon would be fun, you retarded gimp

Because the ancient middle east would have no tech progression, it would be like medieval with only one 'age'. And napoleonics would be lining up your riflemen so they can get a full 'broadside' at the enemy while he does the same, sounds like rip-roaring fun, you utter cunt.

See what Zufuriin said. They refused to fix it at all, but sure did include the fix in the expansion, and then released it to the normal game like 2 weeks later, after everyone got the expansion.

The point stands that they did patch that issue, which was not game breaking in any case, while other companies much loved here did not patch their games worth shit.

 

[Bluebottle]

My personal issues with Rome, after having played MTW and STW pretty much consistantly for years (mainly Campaign with a bit of MP)

Campaign
The easiest way to describe it would be that playing Medieval felt like I was playing the role of a general, Rome was like playing the governor of 20 cities.
Almost all of my time playing Medieval was spent training and manouvering men on the strategic map.
Almost all of my time playing Rome was spend building fucking sewers (which seem to have no affect of fucking squalor anyway), quelling revolts and sallying battles (which are the most annoying form of battle in the game). Way too much time devoted to babysitting and social micromanagment, which is personally something that I have zero interest in.
While playing Medieval I'd often develop real hatreds for certain factions that opposed my people. In Rome the only people I hated were my own citizens (whinging bastards), and the fucking senate.

Multiplayer
Units too generic and uninteresting (Chosen Spearmen in Rome Vs. Pronoiai Allagion in Medieval)
Maps way too small
Infantry move too fast
Fights don't last long enough, especially between 2 Inf. units

 

[Trash]

Rome total war was both a step forward and one back. The game had a lot of great improvements on it's predecessors. Sieges, graphics, worldmap, ai and others were defenitely improved. However the game also seemed to miss that special bit that made the tw games that good. It lacked the pollish of medieval, the feeling of desperation you often had when cornered cause of the allied roman factions, victory goals that seemed
rather shallow and the city building got a bit over the top.

Nowadays most bugs are ironed out, and the expansion makes the game a lot more fun. Great battles against barbarian hordes, a nasty ai on the battlefield and victory goals that make sense and are interesting to achieve.

All I hope is that medieval 2 will expand on medieval 1, but still keep what made the original so much fun.



BTW how could marrying into an enemy faction let you wreak havoc from the inside in medieval? That whole marrying thing never made much sense to me, other than to get rid of the princesses and create some goodwill with others

 

[Levski 1912]

Original Rome- meh. RTR mod- strategy heaven. I always thought that MTW had the best gameplay but RTW the best graphics. Now if they combine it without removing any of the gameplay features from MTW, that would make me happy. Still bummed they didn't do Napoleonic though. And fix the damn AI!

 

[Kaiden]

I wanted to try Total War: Medival, but it just won't work on my PC.

I got through the Tutorial and that was it. Tried to start a game and it never loads the map. Posted on their forums and got nothing. So I just gave up and on a shelf it sits.

 

[Nutcracker]

Rome Total War was an example of a potentially superb game that was hamstrung by a buggy/unpolished release and crap support (only 2 patches), neither of which addressed a lot of the bugs and gameplay/balance issues. I havent played the X-pack but might be tempted if i get back into the game. There are also little things like the ABSOLUTELY SHIT ending to the campaign. For an interesting take on the game though,check out the Rome:Total Realism mod (www.rometotalrealism.com). It contains a bucketload of bug fixes, new units, rebalancing, reskinning, revoicing etc. I do think they may have gone too far though in the later versions of the Mod, sacrificing gameplay for excessively pedantic realism.

 

[Astromarine]

yer, but let's face it. Patrick's overblown "j00 sold out!!!1" histrionics aside, I've always considered CA to be a pretty shitty developer in terms of patching and customer support, ever since Shogun.

 

[Human Shield]

I prefer stategy games where I can customize my fraction and ruler.

A mix of M:TW (graphics, interface, steamline) with Dominions 2, and customizable fractions/races and more advanced terrian, would be a god-like game.

Amphibious attacks with Atlantis race from underwater cities, having your immortal character (even be a big monolith) changing climates of the area to desert or snow with your power.

 

[fizzelopeguss]

I hope they go back to the 2d map, the 3d one in rome looked like shit.

 

[Levski 1912]

I hope they go back to the 2d map, the 3d one in rome looked like shit.

I thought the 3D map was a good improvement, but AI needs a fix desperately.