Which total war?

[Raghar]

Is there any recent TW game that didn't need half year of patches?

Shogun 2 Fall of the samurai, it's excellent. Hands down the best unmodded total war game, Attila is also pretty good.

You seen Shogun 2 after years of patching. Not the stuff it was at release. When they released FotS they broken AI in original Shogun 2 installation.

 

[Steve]

Pretty sure Shogun 2 and FOTS both had the smoothest total war launches in history.

 

[spectre]

Might be just me, but I pretty much moved straight from Medieval 2 to Shogun 2 (wasn't a big fan of the musket era, nor its rendition by the CA) and the state on release was like night vs. day.

Indeed, it was fucking annoying when they "hacked" the shogun 2 launcher to display adds for fots and rome 2.
Even though I own the thing, I used to keep a spare ROM+crack around to try and go around this.

 

[kwanzabot]

idk why but i always just loved the music and graphics of medieval 2




i remember playing as the lithuanians using trash ass militia and pikemen and shitty archers trying to withstand the teutonic order with that going in the background, talk about epic


and darthmod makes napoleon and empire wayyyy better(especially napoleon)

 

[BlackAdderBG]

Pretty sure Shogun 2 and FOTS both had the smoothest total war launches in history.

Except when half of the game didn't work i.e. multiplayer.Not sure I would trust someone that says Atilla is pretty good.

Best feature that puts Medieval 2 way above all is the recruitment system and seeing how they scrapped it pretty fast it was probably a fluke or the designer that came with it is no longer with CA.

 

[Steve]

Pretty sure Shogun 2 and FOTS both had the smoothest total war launches in history.

Except when half of the game didn't work i.e. multiplayer.Not sure I would trust someone that says Atilla is pretty good.

Best feature that puts Medieval 2 way above all is the recruitment system and seeing how they scrapped it pretty fast it was probably a fluke or the designer that came with it is no longer with CA.

Can't really recall any of that. Only thing I remember about Shogun 2 launch was how well it worked, I was shocked by that as every other title excluding Napoleon was a broken mess on release. There's nothing wrong with Attila (except the DLC policy). It's a very solid total war game, have you even tried it?

 

[BlackAdderBG]

If you don't remember launch form 5 years ago with what confidence you claim it was the smoothest for series 15 years old?
Ofc I played that shit Attila,it's basically patched Rome2,polished turd(it's not polished actually as it still have huge texture pop-in and crazy bad fps) and still use warscape engine.Endless and pointless 20/20 stack battles,schizophrenic AI,machine gun efficient skirmishers(another bad design decision was to listen and balance around multiplayer). This game is doing the opposite of every half decent mod for Rome and Med2 focus on-historical accuracy,more realistic battles(mainly slower),fewer stacks with expensive units/upkeep to stop the spam,interesting world/local events,traits,meaningful trade and etc. Like the retards in CA looked what their most dedicated fans want and set a goal to do the opposite.

 

[Steve]

If you don't remember launch form 5 years ago with what confidence you claim it was the smoothest for series 15 years old?
Ofc I played that shit Attila,it's basically patched Rome2,polished turd(it's not polished actually as it still have huge texture pop-in and crazy bad fps) and still use warscape engine.Endless and pointless 20/20 stack battles,schizophrenic AI,machine gun efficient skirmishers(another bad design decision was to listen and balance around multiplayer). This game is doing the opposite of every half decent mod for Rome and Med2 focus on-historical accuracy,more realistic battles(mainly slower),fewer stacks with expensive units/upkeep to stop the spam,interesting world/local events,traits,meaningful trade and etc. Like the retards in CA looked what their most dedicated fans want and set a goal to do the opposite.

Like I said, I only remember how well it worked. You are also comparing Attila to mods for games 10-15 year old while I was talking about the vanilla condition of the game (Which is pretty good). Its also fairly obvious that strict historical accuracy has never been a big focus point for CA so I don't really see what Attila did differently there.

 

[kwanzabot]

man who is PUMPED FOR TOTAL WAR WARHAMMER

just kidding they're putting army limits in the game again so im not even gonna play that shit


and fk warhammer anyways

 

[titus]

Total war won't be total war again until they change the current shit engine they've been using.

man who is PUMPED FOR TOTAL WAR WARHAMMER

Meh, it will be shit. Not a fan of setting either.

 

[Art Vandelay]

Shogun

 

[kris]

There's nothing wrong with Attila (except the DLC policy). It's a very solid total war game, have you even tried it?

there is plenty wrong with it on many levels.

Plaing huns on very hard is particularly strange as far as how the game is designed and AI programmed. Basically the AI is set up to hunt you down and take you out. I seen the AI from three different factions chase my weakest horde (hidden at the edge of the map) for five turns through wastelands. Clearly they dont have fog of war and is hellbend on destroying you. So I started a new game as Huns and made up a new, but well-working, tactic. I kept the hordes next to each other, but at different sides of the province borders to not get penalties. there I sit and sometimes move and raze a city. meanwhile the AI have plenty of stacks in all directions just waiting for me to show weakness, so much as such when I created a new horde (which spawned outside protection radius of two of other three hordes) the AI attacked it with double armies as soon as I pressed the end turn button.

Point being, the best tactic with the nomads is to have the hordes sit idly together and build strength for 50+ turns. Losing a city in a total war game is no problem, but losing a horde is a big serious loss of investment, because you can't just take it back. And sitting back and pressing turn button is not fun gameplay.

 

[kwanzabot]

There's nothing wrong with Attila (except the DLC policy). It's a very solid total war game, have you even tried it?

there is plenty wrong with it on many levels.

just to ADD this is what i think is wrong with attila


i beat 2 grand campaigns on attila, one as eastern roman empire one as ostrogoths btw so i think im an expert

1. the whole "scorched earth" thing all the nomad civilizations do where the entire map is destroyed by like 40 turns total war post apoc ?
2. literally the entire game is cloned, the sassanids/romans/barbarians are literally the 3 types of units and if someone brings up how the franks/saxons are different then the visigoths cos they're green instead of blue ima hit myself in the head
3. theres very little empire building which i know that wasnt what they were going for but stil
4. theres still a shitty stupid limited number of armies you can have like in rome 2

cant decide whether rome 2 or attila is the worst TW game but both were literally cancer

 

[Zboj Lamignat]

I've played Attila for a while, the latest expansion actually, not vanilla. Well, at least they did fix some things compared to Rome. UI for example, it's nothing stellar, but at least you see the skill and technology trees, while R2 UI definitely ranks among the absolute worst I've ever seen in a PC game.

In battles, the units don't flee after 15 seconds and they do regroup and come back into the fray. They've also changed the siege artillery, it now has much, much less ammo but seems way more deadly.

Strategic layer is still bad, but they've exchanged the lobotomy-inducing food vs. happiness system where constructing sanitary buildings meant faction-wide starvation for some weird fertility/food/squalor combo that I didn't manage to fully grasp in the short time I've played the game.

To my amusement, the naval combat is even more broken though. I've only experienced two naval battles, but in both the most intriguing feature was melee ships launching their whole crews in a lemming-like fashion straight into the sea in what was supposed to be a boarding attempt.

The political system in R2 was best left completely ignored while here at least you can do some things that you understand and that you know will bring you certain results.

All of the above doesn't change the fact that the biggest flaw of this game is exactly the same as with all the other TW games. Being a popamole grand strategy game is not bad in itself, but it is bad when the game lacks any sort of meaningful challenge. In my first attempt at playing the game I've picked the second highest difficulty and the Spanish faction that is geared for a struggle against (theoretically) much stronger sand people and conquering the whole Iberia was about as difficult as concealing a fart at a death metal concert. There's just no fun in that.

 

[Steve]

There's nothing wrong with Attila (except the DLC policy). It's a very solid total war game, have you even tried it?

there is plenty wrong with it on many levels.

Plaing huns on very hard is particularly strange as far as how the game is designed and AI programmed. Basically the AI is set up to hunt you down and take you out. I seen the AI from three different factions chase my weakest horde (hidden at the edge of the map) for five turns through wastelands. Clearly they dont have fog of war and is hellbend on destroying you. So I started a new game as Huns and made up a new, but well-working, tactic. I kept the hordes next to each other, but at different sides of the province borders to not get penalties. there I sit and sometimes move and raze a city. meanwhile the AI have plenty of stacks in all directions just waiting for me to show weakness, so much as such when I created a new horde (which spawned outside protection radius of two of other three hordes) the AI attacked it with double armies as soon as I pressed the end turn button.

Point being, the best tactic with the nomads is to have the hordes sit idly together and build strength for 50+ turns. Losing a city in a total war game is no problem, but losing a horde is a big serious loss of investment, because you can't just take it back. And sitting back and pressing turn button is not fun gameplay.

YOU are playing on very hard though, I haven't played a total war game where very hard / legendary hasn't felt like a grind against a blatantly cheating AI.

There's nothing wrong with Attila (except the DLC policy). It's a very solid total war game, have you even tried it?

there is plenty wrong with it on many levels.

just to ADD this is what i think is wrong with attila


i beat 2 grand campaigns on attila, one as eastern roman empire one as ostrogoths btw so i think im an expert

1. the whole "scorched earth" thing all the nomad civilizations do where the entire map is destroyed by like 40 turns total war post apoc ?
2. literally the entire game is cloned, the sassanids/romans/barbarians are literally the 3 types of units and if someone brings up how the franks/saxons are different then the visigoths cos they're green instead of blue ima hit myself in the head
3. theres very little empire building which i know that wasnt what they were going for but stil
4. theres still a shitty stupid limited number of armies you can have like in rome 2

cant decide whether rome 2 or attila is the worst TW game but both were literally cancer

Literally: the post. Don't understand your points about unit variety and empire building, can only scratch my head and wonder what the fuck are you babbling about.

 

[kwanzabot]

There's nothing wrong with Attila (except the DLC policy). It's a very solid total war game, have you even tried it?

there is plenty wrong with it on many levels.

Plaing huns on very hard is particularly strange as far as how the game is designed and AI programmed. Basically the AI is set up to hunt you down and take you out. I seen the AI from three different factions chase my weakest horde (hidden at the edge of the map) for five turns through wastelands. Clearly they dont have fog of war and is hellbend on destroying you. So I started a new game as Huns and made up a new, but well-working, tactic. I kept the hordes next to each other, but at different sides of the province borders to not get penalties. there I sit and sometimes move and raze a city. meanwhile the AI have plenty of stacks in all directions just waiting for me to show weakness, so much as such when I created a new horde (which spawned outside protection radius of two of other three hordes) the AI attacked it with double armies as soon as I pressed the end turn button.

Point being, the best tactic with the nomads is to have the hordes sit idly together and build strength for 50+ turns. Losing a city in a total war game is no problem, but losing a horde is a big serious loss of investment, because you can't just take it back. And sitting back and pressing turn button is not fun gameplay.

YOU are playing on very hard though, I haven't played a total war game where very hard / legendary hasn't felt like a grind against a blatantly cheating AI.

There's nothing wrong with Attila (except the DLC policy). It's a very solid total war game, have you even tried it?

there is plenty wrong with it on many levels.

just to ADD this is what i think is wrong with attila


i beat 2 grand campaigns on attila, one as eastern roman empire one as ostrogoths btw so i think im an expert

1. the whole "scorched earth" thing all the nomad civilizations do where the entire map is destroyed by like 40 turns total war post apoc ?
2. literally the entire game is cloned, the sassanids/romans/barbarians are literally the 3 types of units and if someone brings up how the franks/saxons are different then the visigoths cos they're green instead of blue ima hit myself in the head
3. theres very little empire building which i know that wasnt what they were going for but stil
4. theres still a shitty stupid limited number of armies you can have like in rome 2

cant decide whether rome 2 or attila is the worst TW game but both were literally cancer

Literally: the post. Don't understand your points about unit variety and empire building, can only scratch my head and wonder what the fuck are you babbling about.

ya u get mad that u like a shit game kid

 

[Endemic]

If I could get Shogun 1 or Medieval 1 working on Windows 7, I'd say those. Depending on your historical interest I'd say Rome 1 or Shogun 2 are both pretty solid games out of the box.

 

[Quatlo]

Best mods? Medieval 2
Best base game? Rome
Best "modern" total war? Shogun 2: Fall of the samurai

 

[Steve]

There's nothing wrong with Attila (except the DLC policy). It's a very solid total war game, have you even tried it?

there is plenty wrong with it on many levels.

Plaing huns on very hard is particularly strange as far as how the game is designed and AI programmed. Basically the AI is set up to hunt you down and take you out. I seen the AI from three different factions chase my weakest horde (hidden at the edge of the map) for five turns through wastelands. Clearly they dont have fog of war and is hellbend on destroying you. So I started a new game as Huns and made up a new, but well-working, tactic. I kept the hordes next to each other, but at different sides of the province borders to not get penalties. there I sit and sometimes move and raze a city. meanwhile the AI have plenty of stacks in all directions just waiting for me to show weakness, so much as such when I created a new horde (which spawned outside protection radius of two of other three hordes) the AI attacked it with double armies as soon as I pressed the end turn button.

Point being, the best tactic with the nomads is to have the hordes sit idly together and build strength for 50+ turns. Losing a city in a total war game is no problem, but losing a horde is a big serious loss of investment, because you can't just take it back. And sitting back and pressing turn button is not fun gameplay.

YOU are playing on very hard though, I haven't played a total war game where very hard / legendary hasn't felt like a grind against a blatantly cheating AI.

There's nothing wrong with Attila (except the DLC policy). It's a very solid total war game, have you even tried it?

there is plenty wrong with it on many levels.

just to ADD this is what i think is wrong with attila


i beat 2 grand campaigns on attila, one as eastern roman empire one as ostrogoths btw so i think im an expert

1. the whole "scorched earth" thing all the nomad civilizations do where the entire map is destroyed by like 40 turns total war post apoc ?
2. literally the entire game is cloned, the sassanids/romans/barbarians are literally the 3 types of units and if someone brings up how the franks/saxons are different then the visigoths cos they're green instead of blue ima hit myself in the head
3. theres very little empire building which i know that wasnt what they were going for but stil
4. theres still a shitty stupid limited number of armies you can have like in rome 2

cant decide whether rome 2 or attila is the worst TW game but both were literally cancer

Literally: the post. Don't understand your points about unit variety and empire building, can only scratch my head and wonder what the fuck are you babbling about.

ya u get mad that u like a shit game kid

Couldn't care less, but when most of your points why Attila sucks don't make any sense or apply much more to games that you ranked higher on your TW ranking list makes me think I'm talking with a crazy person.

 

[kwanzabot]

There's nothing wrong with Attila (except the DLC policy). It's a very solid total war game, have you even tried it?

there is plenty wrong with it on many levels.

Plaing huns on very hard is particularly strange as far as how the game is designed and AI programmed. Basically the AI is set up to hunt you down and take you out. I seen the AI from three different factions chase my weakest horde (hidden at the edge of the map) for five turns through wastelands. Clearly they dont have fog of war and is hellbend on destroying you. So I started a new game as Huns and made up a new, but well-working, tactic. I kept the hordes next to each other, but at different sides of the province borders to not get penalties. there I sit and sometimes move and raze a city. meanwhile the AI have plenty of stacks in all directions just waiting for me to show weakness, so much as such when I created a new horde (which spawned outside protection radius of two of other three hordes) the AI attacked it with double armies as soon as I pressed the end turn button.

Point being, the best tactic with the nomads is to have the hordes sit idly together and build strength for 50+ turns. Losing a city in a total war game is no problem, but losing a horde is a big serious loss of investment, because you can't just take it back. And sitting back and pressing turn button is not fun gameplay.

YOU are playing on very hard though, I haven't played a total war game where very hard / legendary hasn't felt like a grind against a blatantly cheating AI.

There's nothing wrong with Attila (except the DLC policy). It's a very solid total war game, have you even tried it?

there is plenty wrong with it on many levels.

just to ADD this is what i think is wrong with attila


i beat 2 grand campaigns on attila, one as eastern roman empire one as ostrogoths btw so i think im an expert

1. the whole "scorched earth" thing all the nomad civilizations do where the entire map is destroyed by like 40 turns total war post apoc ?
2. literally the entire game is cloned, the sassanids/romans/barbarians are literally the 3 types of units and if someone brings up how the franks/saxons are different then the visigoths cos they're green instead of blue ima hit myself in the head
3. theres very little empire building which i know that wasnt what they were going for but stil
4. theres still a shitty stupid limited number of armies you can have like in rome 2

cant decide whether rome 2 or attila is the worst TW game but both were literally cancer

Literally: the post. Don't understand your points about unit variety and empire building, can only scratch my head and wonder what the fuck are you babbling about.

ya u get mad that u like a shit game kid

Couldn't care less, but when most of your points why Attila sucks don't make any sense or apply much more to games that you ranked higher on your TW ranking list makes me think I'm talking with a crazy person.

shame nearly the whole TW fan base agrees with me you only like attila best because it was the first TW you've ever played....jog on boy before you trip


..i.. ..i..

 

[OndrejSc]

Rome 2, hands down.

 

[Androv]

Attila is also pretty good.

 

[Zboj Lamignat]

shame nearly the whole TW fan base agrees with me

I'm not really into TW, but I'm still pretty sure that "nearly the whole TW fanbase" would smack you in the face after hearing that

empire > shogun 2 > shogun 1

 

[kwanzabot]

shame nearly the whole TW fan base agrees with me

I'm not really into TW, but I'm still pretty sure that "nearly the whole TW fanbase" would smack you in the face after hearing that

empire > shogun 2 > shogun 1

im talking about attila retard

and empire is better then shogun because fuck gooks ?

 

[Zboj Lamignat]

Yeah, yeah, just stop making a complete ass of yourself, Attila's reviews are majorly positive.