Medieval II: Total War - Great Turn based/Real time tactics game! - Games

[QUOTE=spike12]But that wouldn't make any sense with the period. The reason why it's just Europe, some of west Asia and north Africa was because that was the known world at that time. And we [i]know[/i] that we'll have the American Colonies and on the official Empires page it says there are three continents to fight on.[/QUOTE] There was trade from China in the Roman times. Granted that they fell apart, but the Arab rulers virtually always had contact with asia. And the North Africans had contact with the South Africans. I really don't get why you think it doesn't "make sense" with the period. Do you think that every Arab thought that the spice lines came from magic lands away from earth? A few might have seen thought that, but the known world at that point isn't as small as you might thing. I'll grant you that the world beyond the borders of Western Asia (the middle east) weren't well known to Europeans, but the Arabs were in contact with Asia. Wouldn't it be more than three though? North America/ Americas as a whole, Africa, Europe and Asia. Assuming that they just count the Americas as one that's still four continents. [quote=the page]The game will cover much of the planet, including the New World and India.[/quote] Notice how it doesn't say "all of asia". It says it stretches to India and the new world. Doing all of Asia would be an ungodly task for the game Empires is trying to be. Fuck, even just going to India will need a lot of work.

[QUOTE=*Dr Chippay]There was trade from China in the Roman times. Granted that they fell apart, but the Arab rulers virtually always had contact with asia. And the North Africans had contact with the South Africans. I really don't get why you think it doesn't "make sense" with the period. Do you think that every Arab thought that the spice lines came from magic lands away from earth? A few might have seen thought that, but the known world at that point isn't as small as you might thing. I'll grant you that the world beyond the borders of Western Asia (the middle east) weren't well known to Europeans, but the Arabs were in contact with Asia. Wouldn't it be more than three though? North America/ Americas as a whole, Africa, Europe and Asia. Assuming that they just count the Americas as one that's still four continents. Notice how it doesn't say "all of asia". It says it stretches to India and the new world. Doing all of Asia would be an ungodly task for the game Empires is trying to be. Fuck, even just going to India will need a lot of work.[/QUOTE] But it does say "much of the planet", and since Spain, England and France had settlements in the new world, and the Caribbean was a major part of that, it would more than likely be a part of the map. It would "make sense" with the period because that was the known world at the time. I guess they took out going all the way to western Asia in Rome, for reasons I don't know. But not having the map cover Africa and most of the Americas for that time period would be ridiculous. And we know for a fact that America is in already.

France sucks so much! :v: They attack a city I conquered from them with an army of 1081 agaisnt 485... I won :downs: Portugal, fuck yeah! Also, the Mongols have appeared! They showed up 2 turns ago and they are already in a war in the Turks... :tinfoil:

Lol i change the files so England has 99999999 coins at the start and bombard everyone that i see and i'm now the enemy of the pope.

Why the fuck didn't they add one of the largest empires in Europe in Medieval? I am talking about the Swedish FUCKING Empire! Anyway, I am usually Russia and I took control over whole Europe, but I never won, so I wondered if it was a bug. But somehow Poland had a fucking ship onto America and made a large empire :(

[QUOTE=Kentz]Why the fuck didn't they add one of the largest empires in Europe in Medieval? I am talking about the Swedish FUCKING Empire! Anyway, I am usually Russia and I took control over whole Europe, but I never won, so I wondered if it was a bug. But somehow Poland had a fucking ship onto America and made a large empire :([/QUOTE] Maybe because Sweden didn't have an "empire" or anything even remotely close to a country capable of defending itself in the time period. [b]Edit:[/b] [QUOTE=spike12]But it does say "much of the planet", and since Spain, England and France had settlements in the new world, and the Caribbean was a major part of that, it would more than likely be a part of the map. It would "make sense" with the period because that was the known world at the time. I guess they took out going all the way to western Asia in Rome, for reasons I don't know. But not having the map cover Africa and most of the Americas for that time period would be ridiculous. And we know for a fact that America is in already.[/QUOTE] Much of the world isn't all of the world. It would take an incredibly large amount of time to make any of the eastern Asian factions have any justice to them, India will be hard enough. They will probably have Africa in it however.

I used to have the original Medieval: Total War, and it was an epic game. I just may have to pick this up.

Yeah, um. I played the thing where it was Mayans vs. Conquistadors and in reality only 25 Spaniards died, and most from disease. On my screen, all of them died, because I have no idea how to play the game.

[QUOTE=POPOPOPOPO]Yeah, um. I played the thing where it was Mayans vs. Conquistadors and in reality only 25 Spaniards died, and most from disease. On my screen, all of them died, because I have no idea how to play the game.[/QUOTE] Aztecs not Mayans. :v:

I don't know why but I can't get to America! :argh: Damn walls that I can't see... [b]Edit:[/b] How do I get to America? :downs:

You wait until someone discovers it.

Did I read in that article that Empires will employ cover? Nioce.

[QUOTE=Sudsmcgee]Did I read in that article that Empires will employ cover? Nioce.[/QUOTE] You did.

I remember in Rome: Total War, I would totally re-inact 300. It was epic beyond words. :downs: But anyways, I've been wanting this game for so long, but I doubt my computer can run it without un-godly lag. :(

[QUOTE=Galtman]France sucks so much! :v: They attack a city I conquered from them with an army of 1081 agaisnt 485... I won :downs: Portugal, fuck yeah! Also, the Mongols have appeared! They showed up 2 turns ago and they are already in a war in the Turks... :tinfoil:[/QUOTE] No kidding. They just took Angers from me, and attacked what troops I had left. I fell back until I had no more turns left for my two armies in the area, then had a head on battle with 2 French armies. Largely outnumbered, but I won by the skin of my teeth. That was a pretty fuckin' sweet battle. Here are the figures :v:. [img]http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v625/spike1233/mtw2.jpg[/img] And about 100 or so of those guys were reinforcements who never even entered the battle. I started it with 3 generals and they were all killed. [b]Edit:[/b] [QUOTE=*Dr Chippay]Maybe because Sweden didn't have an "empire" or anything even remotely close to a country capable of defending itself in the time period. [b]Edit:[/b] Much of the world isn't all of the world. It would take an incredibly large amount of time to make any of the eastern Asian factions have any justice to them, India will be hard enough. They will probably have Africa in it however.[/QUOTE] Well, whatever new continents there will be, America will be one.

I like the game, rome and medieval, overall, but there are some things that are just relaly annoying. 1. The cavalry never obeys orders. They basically charge in the general direction you click, and somethings they go in the opposite direction. Or they might do nothing at all. 2. Muskets are useless. I don't even bother making them anymore. Some such an important invention in history, you'd think they'd be better. 3. It takes so long to put an army together. What emperor actually commissions his troops, down to which province they come from? In Empires, supposedly all you have to do is choose what units you want and the towns automatically churn them out and make an army for you. 4. Diplomacy is useless. Don't get me started. For fun, I once had 4 full armies stocked outside the last city of a faction, and demanded that they become my vassal. They refused. They wouldn't even ceasefire. So I obviously destroyed them the next turn. There is no real point in having allies, they will attack you just as much as any neutral nation. I hope Empires really fixes this stuff, because faulty unit response, tedious unit creation, and terrible campaign diplomacy are pretty major detractors.

[QUOTE=R3conmaster] 2. Muskets are useless. I don't even bother making them anymore. Some such an important invention in history, you'd think they'd be better. [/QUOTE] Early gunpowder was worse than arrows. However it had the "holy fuck" effect on troops and it was a lot easier to train men to fire a gun than to fire an arrow.

[QUOTE=spike12]No kidding. They just took Angers from me, and attacked what troops I had left. I fell back until I had no more turns left for my two armies in the area, then had a head on battle with 2 French armies. Largely outnumbered, but I won by the skin of my teeth. That was a pretty fuckin' sweet battle. Here are the figures :v:. [/QUOTE] Heck, that's nothing. I once routed a Native American army of 250 with one spanish General. Charges were just devastating. Repeated ad infinatum of course. Outnumbered 8.33333333333333333333333333333 to 1!

[QUOTE=R3conmaster]I like the game, rome and medieval, overall, but there are some things that are just relaly annoying. 1. The cavalry never obeys orders. They basically charge in the general direction you click, and somethings they go in the opposite direction. Or they might do nothing at all. 2. Muskets are useless. I don't even bother making them anymore. Some such an important invention in history, you'd think they'd be better. 3. It takes so long to put an army together. What emperor actually commissions his troops, down to which province they come from? In Empires, supposedly all you have to do is choose what units you want and the towns automatically churn them out and make an army for you. 4. Diplomacy is useless. Don't get me started. For fun, I once had 4 full armies stocked outside the last city of a faction, and demanded that they become my vassal. They refused. They wouldn't even ceasefire. So I obviously destroyed them the next turn. There is no real point in having allies, they will attack you just as much as any neutral nation. I hope Empires really fixes this stuff, because faulty unit response, tedious unit creation, and terrible campaign diplomacy are pretty major detractors.[/QUOTE] 1.I don't know what you're talking about, my cavalry always does what I order them to you. Try patching it up. 2.Muskets of that age were incredibly crude and took a long time to load. They aren't meant to be very good. 3. It takes a long time to put a large army together in real life. You aren't going to have several thousand troops garrisoned in each city. Most battles in Europe during the middle ages weren't between two armies of 100,000 soldiers. 4. I'll agree there. The nation AI does pretty much suck.

[QUOTE=R3conmaster]Heck, that's nothing. I once routed a Native American army of 250 with one spanish General. Charges were just devastating. Repeated ad infinatum of course. Outnumbered 8.33333333333333333333333333333 to 1 for the win![/QUOTE] Fuckin nice :v:. Why didn't this edit in to my other post?

[QUOTE=spike12]1.I don't know what you're talking about, my cavalry always does what I order them to you. Try patching it up. 2.Muskets of that age were incredibly crude and took a long time to load. They aren't meant to be very good. [B]The Spanish obviously thought they were good enough to rout enormous Aztec armies.[/B] 3. It takes a long time to put a large army together in real life. You aren't going to have several thousand troops garrisoned in each city. Most battles in Europe during the middle ages weren't between two armies of 100,000 soldiers. [B]My point is not how long it takes in game time, but how tedious it is to make the actual orders.[/B] 4. I'll agree there. The nation AI does pretty much suck.[/QUOTE] [B] I like to write in bold. Happy facepunch? More than 4 letters here.[/B] [b]Edit:[/b] [QUOTE=spike12]Fuckin nice :v:. Why didn't this edit in to my other post?[/QUOTE] You should have heard the guys' speech, he was talking about how they were going to die for a worthy cause. I was like, are you kidding? I don't see any spearmen, so lets go kill some AI.

[QUOTE=R3conmaster][B] I like to write in bold. Happy facepunch? More than 4 letters here.[/B][/QUOTE] Well yeah muskets were devastating towards the Aztecs, but those were later period muskets, and they had modern cannon as well. Plus I imagine it'd be a lot easier to scare the natives with something that goes boom. And what's tedious about making the army? You have to build up the proper buildings to train the proper troops, then train them.

[QUOTE=spike12]1.I don't know what you're talking about, my cavalry always does what I order them to you. Try patching it up.[/QUOTE] I have problems with cavalry too, occasionally they just sit there, sometimes they walk at a leisurely pace towards the enemy instead of charging, and sometimes they obey orders properly. It happens with all units to a degree, but cavalry especially, and all units suck balls in cities.

[QUOTE=chris0132]I have problems with cavalry too, occasionally they just sit there, sometimes they walk at a leisurely pace towards the enemy instead of charging, and sometimes they obey orders properly. It happens with all units to a degree, but cavalry especially, and all units suck balls in cities.[/QUOTE] I guess I just haven't hit any of those kind of problems yet. I did try playing as Egypt this one time, and there my units would hardly ever do anything, and I couldn't drag-select either. It was weird.

[QUOTE=spike12]And what's tedious about making the army? You have to build up the proper buildings to train the proper troops, then train them.[/QUOTE] The bit where you have to wait three turns for the money, four turns for the building, four more for the troops to be trainable, four more for the troop money, and two more to get four units produced.

[QUOTE=spike12]Well yeah muskets were devastating towards the Aztecs, but those were later period muskets, and they had modern cannon as well. Plus I imagine it'd be a lot easier to scare the natives with something that goes boom. And what's tedious about making the army? You have to build up the proper buildings to train the proper troops, then train them.[/QUOTE] Well, in the expansion, I'm fighting the Aztecs and the muskets don't do much. To build an army (quickly), I need to click on around 7-10 different towns (20 in Rome), click the units I want, wait a turn, try to remember which cities the units were from, slowly inch them toward each other, a few turns, get them together, start heading to the front. Over and over and over again. In Empires, all you have to do is choose what units you want and it does it for you.

[QUOTE=R3conmaster]Well, in the expansion, I'm fighting the Aztecs and the muskets don't do much. To build an army (quickly), I need to click on around 7-10 different towns (20 in Rome), click the units I want, wait a turn, try to remember which cities the units were from, slowly inch them toward each other, a few turns, get them together, start heading to the front. Over and over and over again. In Empires, all you have to do is choose what units you want and it does it for you.[/QUOTE] I just build my army from one or two cities usually. It doesn't take too long. Although I don't like the limit on how many troops you can build per turn.

[QUOTE=R3conmaster] 2. Muskets are useless. I don't even bother making them anymore. Some such an important invention in history, you'd think they'd be better. [/QUOTE] Bullshit, the muskets in the game kick everyones ass. They wipe out huge amounts of troops each volley, and with proper protection of pikemen can even withstand cavalry. [quote]I have problems with cavalry too, occasionally they just sit there, sometimes they walk at a leisurely pace towards the enemy instead of charging, and sometimes they obey orders properly. It happens with all units to a degree, but cavalry especially, and all units suck balls in cities.[/quote] Cavalry take a lot of skill to organize and use in real life. You have to line up everything perfectly for a cavalry charge to go well, when it works, then you see people flying everywhere, they are tanks of the medieval battlefield, horrible at prolonged fights, but use their shock value to support your front line infantry and you can do a lot of damage.

I entered into a battle with the Byzantines. Big mistake. I walked up with my hordes of archers and spearmen, and notied they had lots of cavalry, so I was like "FUCK YEAH" and charged. Only then did I notice... They were [b]ALL[/b] Horse Archers. So I was all like :hellnaw: and ran.

[QUOTE=*Dr Chippay]Maybe because Sweden didn't have an "empire" or anything even remotely close to a country capable of defending itself in the time period. [b]Edit:[/b] Much of the world isn't all of the world. It would take an incredibly large amount of time to make any of the eastern Asian factions have any justice to them, India will be hard enough. They will probably have Africa in it however.[/QUOTE] It was still bigger than Denmark...