Total War: ATTILA

[Jick Magger]

The problem I found with the AI when I played it (which was admittedly before they really started patching the shit out of it), was that the AI was utterly non-hostile, and thus would remain consisting largely of just two-city provinces that would easily get steam-rolled by the player. And I don't really play Total War games for its politics mechanics, shit like Crusader Kings exists for that.

Still cautious for Atilla at this point, even though it covers a period which's always been a point of interest of mine. No day one purchase this time, though. Got burned badly enough by Rome II to fall for that shit again.

 

[Norfleet]

Rome 2 did a pretty good job of slowing down expansion and map painting. What you did tend to see in virtually every campaign was the Selucids or another eastern faction turning into a superpower far too quickly, however. The problem is that the long-term balance of a campaign is, from CA's perspective, reliant on AI factions managing to form large power blocs quickly enough to be able to challenge the player, who is expected to be gaining territory as quickly as possible. This was always the case in the TW games, but they really pushed it home in R2 by leaving out any short campaign options.

I think this would be more of a problem in the traditional "Expansion-focused" TW gameplay than in a more static scenario where the age of expansion has wound down and power-blocs come pre-established on the map. In a game era where your goal is more to hold your ground against the Barbarian Onslaught rather than trying to paint map, this would seem like less of an issue. And if you play as the barbarians and trash Rome, at least you're not doing anything that didn't actually happen...

 

[A horse of course]

The problem I found with the AI when I played it (which was admittedly before they really started patching the shit out of it), was that the AI was utterly non-hostile, and thus would remain consisting largely of just two-city provinces that would easily get steam-rolled by the player. And I don't really play Total War games for its politics mechanics, shit like Crusader Kings exists for that.

Still cautious for Atilla at this point, even though it covers a period which's always been a point of interest of mine. No day one purchase this time, though. Got burned badly enough by Rome II to fall for that shit again.

Yeah, I only played the Imperator Edition onwards, I'm sure they made significant changes to the AI in regards to aggressiveness etc. Radious' AI/Campaign mod made them form defensive pacts and alliances much more frequently (Radious games tend to turn into massive peloponnesian gangbangs), the problem is that it quickly became very difficult to do ANYTHING without causing a bloody world war - and since wars in TW games tend to end in massive territorial changes or the destruction of several factions, this is rather annoying and ahistorical - which some people enjoy because of the careful diplomatic balancing it requires on the part of the player. I think the diplomatic debuffs from being too friendly with a faction someone doesn't like, and buffs from factions they're friends with, do help a lot in self-regulating and making conflict between certain allied units inevitable without serious changes.

As I've noted in other posts, this is partly just my own bias in terms of what kind of campaigns I enjoy playing - short, intense campaigns with memorable characters plus lots of diplomatic and agent micromanagement, as opposed to region-spanning empires and map painting. I actually loved one of the more detested elements of Rome 1 - the splitting of Rome into four factions - because it let me focus on Punic Wars, Gallic conquest or interfering in Greece as seperate campaigns rather than having to focus on securing one front for forty turns before moving onto the next one. I also miss the option of choosing an early, middle or late era from Medieval 1 - early Republican units don't particularly excite me.

 

[kris]

I really loved that map posted, but the videos showed a hunic army that was at best retarded. The "Hunnic raid" video was almost painful to watch as the hunns just charged with everyone at one well placed spearmen and let the rest of their troops lounge around while archers moved them down. If that is how you can stop the huns then the game will be painfully easy.

 

[tuluse]

I really loved that map posted, but the videos showed a hunic army that was at best retarded. The "Hunnic raid" video was almost painful to watch as the hunns just charged with everyone at one well placed spearmen and let the rest of their troops lounge around while archers moved them down. If that is how you can stop the huns then the game will be painfully easy.

I don't recall any Total War game where the battle AI was any good.

It usually takes the AI more than double my own forces to defeat me.

 

[Ovplain]

Rome: Total War > All.:S

 

[sser]

I really loved that map posted, but the videos showed a hunic army that was at best retarded. The "Hunnic raid" video was almost painful to watch as the hunns just charged with everyone at one well placed spearmen and let the rest of their troops lounge around while archers moved them down. If that is how you can stop the huns then the game will be painfully easy.

I don't recall any Total War game where the battle AI was any good.

It usually takes the AI more than double my own forces to defeat me.

The 2D ones were decent, in particular Medieval. I distinctly remember the AI entrenching itself on hilltops and aggressively using cavalry to flank and trees to hide in. It wasn't genius by any means, but it kept itself competitive. All of that disappeared in the 3D iterations.

 

[Disgruntled]

Ive found myself in a gaming lull craving some strategy action (not helped by catching up on game of thrones). Attila is starting to look more tempting since they did away with that god awful cryptic UI and unit cards.
I was planning to skip this iteration and wait for the Warhammer release but im not sure I can hold it out if this is even half decent.

It further drives home how bad Rome 2 turned out that I didnt get my fill of total war. Empire was a mess but I managed to squeeze a fair campaign which kept me full till a late discounted purchase of Shogun 2. I did not consider the effects of a longer absence from the genre despite access to most of the older titles. Medieval 2 doesnt cut it anymore for some sword and board.
Im not a mastermind at these games and can forgive the odd fault and imperfect AI, surely the basics will be there this time around.


Still, the bad aftertaste has not washed off and the odd looks ive had do not inspire confidence. Im going to wait for reviews with my lowered expectations and see if any more retarded shit beyond UI has been stamped out. Let me play pretend with my faction and my armies like I did in more innocent days, you cant fuck that up CA.

 

[Trash]

I really loved that map posted, but the videos showed a hunic army that was at best retarded. The "Hunnic raid" video was almost painful to watch as the hunns just charged with everyone at one well placed spearmen and let the rest of their troops lounge around while archers moved them down. If that is how you can stop the huns then the game will be painfully easy.

I don't recall any Total War game where the battle AI was any good.

It usually takes the AI more than double my own forces to defeat me.

The 2D ones were decent, in particular Medieval. I distinctly remember the AI entrenching itself on hilltops and aggressively using cavalry to flank and trees to hide in. It wasn't genius by any means, but it kept itself competitive. All of that disappeared in the 3D iterations.

BAI in Shogun and Medieval was miles better than what came afterward. Throughout CA's history they've had quite a few AI programmers who came and left, which left quite its mark on their games. They've even used the resignation of their AI team as an excuse for the crap state Empire was in.

Hope some other developer tries its hands at making a game like this. Rome 2 was the final nail in the coffin for my confidence in CA but I'd still would love to play something akin to the better Total War games in the future. Shogun, Medieval and Rome where awesome games and I'd be sad if nothing like them gets made anymore.

 

[Cyberarmy]

It seems like this is as buggy and unoptimized like Rome 2 according to reviews, also with a worse UI.
Who would've guessed...

 

[A horse of course]

http://www.pcgamer.com/total-war-attila-review/

Spread over a slightly extended map, most of these barbarian factions can also form hordes in times of need. Four of them start that way, including the comically named Alans. These four nomadic tribes get huge growth bonuses from settling and uprooting - which would be a fine tactic, if you didn’t lose all your building and camp improvements every time. The more stable Franks and Saxons, by contrast, get bonuses to converting other people’s buildings, meaning they’re excellent conquerors of collapsing Rome.

Of course, there are the three remaining ‘civilised’ Empires. The Western Roman Empire is massively wealthy at the game’s start, but with few armies or military buildings, which makes it impossible to defend. The Eastern is rich and aggressive, but surrounded on all sides by enemies. And the Sassanids are strong and really only under threat from the Huns and the Eastern Romans. And that’s it—a small number of factions for a Total War game, despite the number in-game, which makes me suspect they’ll all unlock as DLC as time goes by.

It’s worth pausing on the factional politics. Though I never had a factional event go badly wrong, the new family system (which borrows heavily from Crusader Kings) adds welcome complexity to the game, so much so that it’s hard that it’s not always been there. Though it’s much easier to manager than CKII’s equivalent, there are perhaps not enough tools to manage your powerbase—I found myself in absolute rule of the Huns almost by accident, which increased my army integrity and tax rate but heavily reduced growth in the horde. If I could have done, I would have reduced my domination, to trade money for growth.

(On which note, it’s worth mentioning that Creative seem to finally have got to grips with the persistent problems with sieges, where units had trouble moving from one flat surface to another. Similarly, the disembarking problems for ships seem to have been fixed. I even had fun watching marines leaping between ships like monkeys, and though sea battles are still messy, they definitely work.)

To me, many of the horde mechanics don’t make sense. If you have a general’s unit on its own in a horde (as you always will when you create a new one at great expense) and that general gets killed or wounded, not only will his bodyguard disappear, but so will the horde. Similarly, when you finally settle your horde down somewhere, you get access to any pre-existing buildings, which you can convert—or you can settle a razed region at great expense. But you also lose all the tents and their bonuses, completely. The first time I settled my Ostrogoths, they almost went bankrupt, because we’d dispensed with of all the money making apparatus. If you go back to being a horde, your have to start from scratch again.

Here, mid-game, waiting for my horde to grow, I happened across an AI faction that had three max-level scouts/spies, who proceeded to assassinate my generals and disrupt my horde, for turn after turn, which I was impotent to prevent. Since Shogun I, Creative has been struggling to balance agents. And I wonder if that’s an AI problem, again. The campaign AI has always been the series’ weakest aspect and, while it generally behaves itself in your presence, I kept seeing strange things in the middle distance. Factions armies running around in circles for years. A collection of the most powerful armies in the world, all standing in a cluster, all with the stakes up that indicate fortification and lock down nearby movement. The armies of Eastern Rome, along with every enemy army, pursuing my Huns literally across the entire European map, whilst their home provinces burned.

Finally, I read an entire book whilst reviewing this game, because of the time it takes for the AI to act. It’s especially slow when something gets razed, and the entire amazing ‘region burning’ animation happens off-screen or when it gets to the Western Roman Empire which is so huge my framerate drops to zero. Some of these are teething problems—the sort of things that get fixed in day one patches—others may take more work, and others Creative have known all about for a while and not fixed.

Overall, Attila carries its theme well, and introduces new game mechanics that improve the core of Rome II. It’s as beautiful as Rome, has the same stunning music, animation, and sound effects, with much improved character and army management. The Total War games still need work to reach that perfection they’re aiming for, and the bugs this close to release are worrying, but Attila shows that Creative have been listening.

Score: 83

For reference they gave Rome 2 a score of 85

 

[KoolNoodles]

Factions armies running around in circles for years. A collection of the most powerful armies in the world, all standing in a cluster, all with the stakes up that indicate fortification and lock down nearby movement. The armies of Eastern Rome, along with every enemy army, pursuing my Huns literally across the entire European map, whilst their home provinces burned.

So basically nothing important is fixed and it's still shit. Because that is horrible and endemic of the series since ETW(S2's smaller map and choke points alleviated these problems a little bit). The only thing that is a silver lining is that sadly some mods(because it's always mods with this series) will be able to remedy a lot of those issues. Dive et Impera for RTW2 does a decent job of making the campaign AI aggressive.

 

[ZoddGuts]

They're going to keep on shitting out medicore TW games until tards stop buying them. Personally I'm done with this series.

 

[Alienman]

So they have not fixed a thing... Seems this series have officially died then for me. Again

 

[Disgruntled]

:patriot:

Well I bought it. For largely the same reasons that I explained in my previous post. I want to play a newer TW set in melee age Europe, and given Attila comes with most of the fixes to Rome 2, that mediocre TW experience should be enough to satisfy a 50-100 hour campaign. I could not suffer through the R2 UI so it never merited a reinstall. Warts and all, Attila looks like resembling Shogun 2, a game I found satisfying.

With that in mind, $35 for a preorder and the preload option on my slowfuck internet was a fair trade.

Im sorry bros, as long as CA has monopoly on this crack Ill be coming back every couple of years.

 

[Lyric Suite]

They're going to keep on shitting out medicore TW games until tards stop buying them. Personally I'm done with this series.

They lost me after the third.

They keep remaking the same game over and over except instead of getting better they keep fucking up in one way or another. I just don't get it.

 

[kris]

Well I bought it. For largely the same reasons that I explained in my previous post. I want to play a newer TW set in melee age Europe, and given Attila comes with most of the fixes to Rome 2, that mediocre TW experience should be enough to satisfy a 50-100 hour campaign. I could not suffer through the R2 UI so it never merited a reinstall. Warts and all, Attila looks like resembling Shogun 2, a game I found satisfying.

With that in mind, $35 for a preorder and the preload option on my slowfuck internet was a fair trade.

Im sorry bros, as long as CA has monopoly on this crack Ill be coming back every couple of years.

did you get the three viking factions?

 

[Disgruntled]

Yep.

Shame about gore pack, I hear they'll make us buy it separately again.

 

[curry]

Is Rome 2 playable btw?

 

[DeepOcean]

Is Rome 2 playable btw?

If by playable you mean that it won't blow up on your face at any minute, yes, its playable.
If by playable, you mean if its a good game, then no, its not playable.

 

[A horse of course]

:patriot:

Well I bought it. For largely the same reasons that I explained in my previous post. I want to play a newer TW set in melee age Europe, and given Attila comes with most of the fixes to Rome 2, that mediocre TW experience should be enough to satisfy a 50-100 hour campaign. I could not suffer through the R2 UI so it never merited a reinstall. Warts and all, Attila looks like resembling Shogun 2, a game I found satisfying.

With that in mind, $35 for a preorder and the preload option on my slowfuck internet was a fair trade.

Im sorry bros, as long as CA has monopoly on this crack Ill be coming back every couple of years.

Cuck tag for Disgruntled pls

I nearly bought it too, luckily I'll be away for a few weeks and have other gnomes on my backlog. The fact that the final product will be so different (extensive patching, DLC to fill in the faction cracks) also puts me off from buying a TW game at launch these days.

Is Rome 2 playable btw?

For all its faults, I think Rome 2 is a fun gnome in and of itself.

 

[Infinitron]

Released: http://store.steampowered.com/app/325610/

 

[Spectacle]

Damn, I know it's retarded to buy a TW game at launch, but I've also got a hankering for some Vandalism, and I can get a key at a keystore for chump change.

Has anyone tried it yet, is it playable?

 

[Jick Magger]

Gonna wait another week to sort through the Steam reviews and hear feedback from here before I consider anything.

 

[Infinitron]

Early Impressions: http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2015-02-17-total-war-attila-makes-you-work-hard-for-its-love

Nonetheless, series fans will appreciate the tweaks to pacing that have made battles more reactive to changes in tactics. Morale, in particular, seems to play a bigger part here than in previous games. The AI is more aware of what its comrades are doing, making routing units a more effective tactic for gaining a foothold when the odds are against you. While it's possible to auto-resolve many battles from the campaign map, the variety of troops, approaches and unique units offered by the ten playable factions makes even smaller skirmishes less of a slog and more open to experimentation.

The AI will still make some curious choices when it comes to tiny armies occasionally throwing themselves fruitlessly against impossible odds or failing to break a siege of a city when it has the chance but there are definite improvements overall. However, that may explain why there can be a lengthy wait between turns, even from an early point in the game, as the AI clicks through scores of non-playable factions and my hope is that a confirmed day one patch should iron out at least some of these creases.

There's a great deal more to delve into, with historical battle set-pieces to explore and competitive and co-operative online battles to tackle once the game is release into the wild. For now, though, Total War: Attila stands as refinement of many of the concepts that Rome 2 initially struggled to capitalise on. It's also already a more stable release than its predecessor was and with some additional optimisation of the in-development build that I've been playing on the way to the imminent release of the retail build proper I'm hopeful that some of the issues will be resolved. Even beneath this, though, is a title that feels much more for existing fans of the long-running series than one to welcome in new blood. That's a shame, because although there's a lot here to enjoy, finding that for yourself takes more time than seems necessary or constructive.