Total War Megathread V.2: "All of Christendom Will be Awed by this Megathread!" - Games

[QUOTE=Sector 7;35690519]Huh? No it isn't. 1. There's no arbitrary population requirement for building upgrades It balances itself out with technology requirements 2. Units replenish automatically for free True. However you also have take attrition in count and plan out attacks around the seasons 3. There's only one type of settlement, meaning your troops aren't limited to retraining at either a castle or town (worst part of Med2) This makes sense considering Med2's time setting 4. No pope Hardly a problem 5. Diplomacy makes more sense Diplomacy has barely changed from Med2 > Empire > Shogun 6. AI cheats less blatantly AI is a gigantic cheater in Shogun. Med2 they just spam units, Shogun they build advanced units without the building they are trained in. 8. Map is smaller, and narrow, meaning you're not surrounded by enemies on every side 100% of the time This is based on the player, not the game. 9. Ninjas replace assassins and spies and are way better in both areas True, but they also made them far more complex with xp levels and retainers 11. Every faction gets identical unit trees It makes fights pretty boring after awhile 12. General upgrades aren't random For the most part they aren't random [/QUOTE] Shogun, atleast to me, requires more micromanaging. In med you just built the building and wala new troops/better equipment. Shogun you have to plan out what to research, which buildings to put in which settlement, make sure you have the right resources for new tech/buildings, make sure a settlement is pro-Emp/Shogun, constantly patrol trade lanes etc etc. Plus you can't retrain in Shogun, which is a motherfucker. Even with mods, Med2 is "simpler" than Shogun 2. The only micromanaging in Med2 is making sure religion, squalor, and taxes are balanced out. And if you don't wanna do that, you can check a box and let the game do it for you. Shogun is the most complex TW to date and you must not play much TW if you think otherwise

I'm interested in seeing other's opinions on the next game. So rate Winner for a Medieval 3, Agree for Rome 2, and Funny for something else.

[QUOTE=PollytheParrot;35693909]I'm interested in seeing other's opinions on the next game. So rate Winner for a Medieval 3, Agree for Rome 2, and Funny for something else.[/QUOTE] I will stubbornly stick to my hopes for a "Total War: The Great War", or something along those lines. Fuck, that title alone just sounds like it works perfectly with the Total War series. [b]The Great War[/b] [editline]24th April 2012[/editline] Or "The Great War: Total War", or "Europe In Flames" or some shit like that.

[QUOTE=PollytheParrot;35693909]I'm interested in seeing other's opinions on the next game. So rate Winner for a Medieval 3, Agree for Rome 2, and Funny for something else.[/QUOTE] oh god now were gonna have a 5+ page discussion on the next TW game will be

[QUOTE=PollytheParrot;35693909]I'm interested in seeing other's opinions on the next game. So rate Winner for a Medieval 3, Agree for Rome 2, and Funny for something else.[/QUOTE] Rome 2 man, hands down. It would be amazing with the detail they could pump into the games nowadays on the Rome scale. Hell, they could do even MORE.

Scramble for Africa might be a cool topic.

I've been reading History of the Peloponnesian war by Thucydides. It might be an interesting time period for Total war as well. You have the barbarians to the north, the city states in Greece (Athens, Sparta, Corinth, etc.), the Island nations, the Persian empire in the east, and the African countries in the South.

[QUOTE=-nesto-;35693847]Shogun, atleast to me, requires more micromanaging. In med you just built the building and wala new troops/better equipment. Shogun you have to plan out what to research, which buildings to put in which settlement, make sure you have the right resources for new tech/buildings, make sure a settlement is pro-Emp/Shogun, constantly patrol trade lanes etc etc. Plus you can't retrain in Shogun, which is a motherfucker. Even with mods, Med2 is "simpler" than Shogun 2. The only micromanaging in Med2 is making sure religion, squalor, and taxes are balanced out. And if you don't wanna do that, you can check a box and let the game do it for you. Shogun is the most complex TW to date and you must not play much TW if you think otherwise[/QUOTE] Actually I don't think micro-management was the word I was looking for, it's really the more-subtle things which is why I don't like Medieval 2. For example, manually replenishing units, using merchants to get assets and also having to actually send diplomats around to do diplomacy. [QUOTE=PollytheParrot;35693909]I'm interested in seeing other's opinions on the next game. So rate Winner for a Medieval 3, Agree for Rome 2, and Funny for something else.[/QUOTE] I would probably really enjoy a Medieval 3 if it shared some of the aspects of Shogun 2, such as the auto-replenishing units and not needing such a great variety of agents. I'm just in love with the time period but didn't feel right with playing Medieval 2.

[QUOTE=Antdawg;35695012]Actually I don't think micro-management was the word I was looking for, it's really the more-subtle things which is why I don't like Medieval 2. For example, manually replenishing units, using merchants to get assets and also having to actually send diplomats around to do diplomacy. I would probably really enjoy a Medieval 3 if it shared some of the aspects of Shogun 2, such as the auto-replenishing units and not needing such a great variety of agents. I'm just in love with the time period but didn't feel right with playing Medieval 2.[/QUOTE] My god I hated diplomats. I shouldn't have to wait 5 turns before I can establish any diplomatic arrangements with the pope. If diplomacy wasn't such a non-issue in M2 I would have hated the game.

[QUOTE=Antdawg;35695012]Actually I don't think micro-management was the word I was looking for, it's really the more-subtle things which is why I don't like Medieval 2. For example, manually replenishing units, using merchants to get assets and also having to actually send diplomats around to do diplomacy.[/QUOTE] Ah. Ya not having replenishment is a bitch, especially in crusades and merchants are fucking completely useless unless you get the ivory south of Cairo. Never minded having to use diplomats cause eventually foreign diplomats will come to you and really only your neighbors are good for trade.

I want to be able to have proxy-wars.

[QUOTE=-nesto-;35693847]Shogun is the most complex TW to date and you must not play much TW if you think otherwise[/QUOTE] I'm at war with every single faction in FotS and I'm still pulling in 35,000 per turn in profits. Managing sentiment is as easy as building a police station wherever it's a problem, and is far less of a hassle than religion. Planning towns out involves choosing between just six or seven buildings (less, really, because most towns are going to end up being entirely economic.) Shogun is definitely the simplest in the series. I'm not saying simple is a [i]bad[/i] thing; Medieval 2 is frustrating because of how non-intuitive it is. [QUOTE=ewitwins;35695226]I want to be able to have proxy-wars.[/QUOTE] Civ4 is good for that.

[QUOTE=Stalk;35691764]Hurray for simpicity! ... I want complexity. Damn these dumbed down games that exists in these dark days.[/QUOTE] Auto resolve naval battles and manually replenishing simply sucks. Auto replenish makes sense because units would recruit on the go anyway.

Don't mind. The rate at which replenishing goes is a bit too slow in Napoleon since they'd just forcefully draft and train some. I don't think it'd be the same in Shogun/medieval since it'd be more villages than actual cities.

In Shogun one turn is a month, in the others it's half a year. Replenishing goes slow, naturally.

[QUOTE=Bomimo;35699883]Don't mind. The rate at which replenishing goes is a bit too slow in Napoleon since they'd just forcefully draft and train some. I don't think it'd be the same in Shogun/medieval since it'd be more villages than actual cities.[/QUOTE] Oh i thought it was fine in Napoleon. Might be slow in unedeveloped provinces though.

[QUOTE=ewitwins;35695226]I want to be able to have proxy-wars.[/QUOTE] Can't you do that to a degree in Shogun 2? I know what you mean though, I reckon it would be awesome to actually finance other clans and get them to fight other factions, and go into detail by actually setting objectives for them (eg take control of these provinces). I tried to emulate that a bit with my last Shogun 2 campaign by giving the Chosokabe 1,000 a turn for at least thirty turns at one certain point of the campaign. The result was that Chosokabe had the biggest fucking navy I'd ever seen and had naval dominance over more than half of Japan's coastline. Anyways, I was thinking about how feasible a "mercenary" mechanic would work in Total War games. Factions could offer their units for hire by other factions, and if another faction decided to adopt these mercenaries then they would be given full control over them (minus disbanding them), but of course they'd also have to pay for their up-keep and also provide a regular payment to the faction that the mercenaries belong to, as well as an initial fee as well probably. I guess it would be useful if you wanted to acquire an army fast but didn't want to wait for all the units to be trained. Also offers factions the opportunity to make quick money and temporarily reduce their expenditure (as the faction the mercenaries are sold to would then have to deal with the up-keep, of course).

So I'm about to start another Grand Campaign on E:TW. I don't know which nation to pick. Any suggestions? I heard the ottoman empire is really fun because its a challenge to turn it around, but I like the placement the United Provinces get.

You should be Prussia and invade Poland as soon as possible.

[QUOTE=Antdawg;35703530]Anyways, I was thinking about how feasible a "mercenary" mechanic would work in Total War games. Factions could offer their units for hire by other factions, and if another faction decided to adopt these mercenaries then they would be given full control over them (minus disbanding them), but of course they'd also have to pay for their up-keep and also provide a regular payment to the faction that the mercenaries belong to, as well as an initial fee as well probably. I guess it would be useful if you wanted to acquire an army fast but didn't want to wait for all the units to be trained. Also offers factions the opportunity to make quick money and temporarily reduce their expenditure (as the faction the mercenaries are sold to would then have to deal with the up-keep, of course).[/QUOTE] Rome had mercenaries. They were region-determined units that a general could instantly hire. They had high upkeep and they usually sucked, though. (I think Med2 did this, too..?) It wouldn't really make sense for one faction to loan troops to another, because that's fairly rare in real life.

[QUOTE=Sector 7;35704498]Rome had mercenaries. They were region-determined units that a general could instantly hire. They had high upkeep and they usually sucked, though. (I think Med2 did this, too..?) It wouldn't really make sense for one faction to loan troops to another, because that's fairly rare in real life.[/QUOTE] Fair enough I guess.

[QUOTE=Sector 7;35704498]Rome had mercenaries. They were region-determined units that a general could instantly hire. They had high upkeep and they usually sucked, though. (I think Med2 did this, too..?) It wouldn't really make sense for one faction to loan troops to another, because that's fairly rare in real life.[/QUOTE] Med2's mercs were almost always amazing mid-late tier units but holy shit they cost a bomb. Knights usually costed 1500 on the spot.

the Great war mod for Napoleon is pretty fun, But it just crashed for me after around 2-3 hours of play. oh well Anyone know when the next update goes out? it looks awesome

[QUOTE=Antdawg;35703530]Can't you do that to a degree in Shogun 2? I know what you mean though, I reckon it would be awesome to actually finance other clans and get them to fight other factions, and go into detail by actually setting objectives for them (eg take control of these provinces). I tried to emulate that a bit with my last Shogun 2 campaign by giving the Chosokabe 1,000 a turn for at least thirty turns at one certain point of the campaign. The result was that Chosokabe had the biggest fucking navy I'd ever seen and had naval dominance over more than half of Japan's coastline. Anyways, I was thinking about how feasible a "mercenary" mechanic would work in Total War games. Factions could offer their units for hire by other factions, and if another faction decided to adopt these mercenaries then they would be given full control over them (minus disbanding them), but of course they'd also have to pay for their up-keep and also provide a regular payment to the faction that the mercenaries belong to, as well as an initial fee as well probably. I guess it would be useful if you wanted to acquire an army fast but didn't want to wait for all the units to be trained. Also offers factions the opportunity to make quick money and temporarily reduce their expenditure (as the faction the mercenaries are sold to would then have to deal with the up-keep, of course).[/QUOTE] I think it would work best if you could just offer missions to other factions either via diplomacy or perhaps with another menu so any faction could look and try to complete the mission. Once a faction completes a mission they receive an appropriate award from the mission giving faction (cash, a powerful unit or two, a province, etc.)

Medieval 2 in my opinion is the best. It's so detailed. Your generals can become alcoholics if they are in a town with a tavern, how they fight affects how their units are around them, stuff like that makes it the best in my opinion, in addition to the ENORMOUS faction and unique unit list.

[QUOTE=Broguts;35706099]Medieval 2 in my opinion is the best. It's so detailed. Your generals can become alcoholics if they are in a town with a tavern, how they fight affects how their units are around them, stuff like that makes it the best in my opinion, in addition to the ENORMOUS faction and unique unit list.[/QUOTE] It'd probably be my favorite in the series if the AI wasn't broken

[QUOTE=Sector 7;35706171]It'd probably be my favorite in the series if the AI wasn't broken[/QUOTE] It's not that bad. I mean it's pretty bad, but it's not awful.

Does NTW run better than ETW? Is it better optimized? I can run ETW battles smoothly with the lowest settings. The campaign turns are way too long though. Since NTW has a smaller campaign map, the delay between turns would be shorter I believe. But I'm worried about the improved graphics and stuff, my laptop might not be able to run battles smoothly then. Also, there aren't any mods in M2TW based in Asia except the terribad Eras Total War mod. I guess I'll have to get a decent gaming computer if I really want to play S2TW. :<

[QUOTE=Antdawg;35703530]Can't you do that to a degree in Shogun 2? I know what you mean though, I reckon it would be awesome to actually finance other clans and get them to fight other factions, and go into detail by actually setting objectives for them (eg take control of these provinces). I tried to emulate that a bit with my last Shogun 2 campaign by giving the Chosokabe 1,000 a turn for at least thirty turns at one certain point of the campaign. The result was that Chosokabe had the biggest fucking navy I'd ever seen and had naval dominance over more than half of Japan's coastline. Anyways, I was thinking about how feasible a "mercenary" mechanic would work in Total War games. Factions could offer their units for hire by other factions, and if another faction decided to adopt these mercenaries then they would be given full control over them (minus disbanding them), but of course they'd also have to pay for their up-keep and also provide a regular payment to the faction that the mercenaries belong to, as well as an initial fee as well probably. I guess it would be useful if you wanted to acquire an army fast but didn't want to wait for all the units to be trained. Also offers factions the opportunity to make quick money and temporarily reduce their expenditure (as the faction the mercenaries are sold to would then have to deal with the up-keep, of course).[/QUOTE] What if I wanted to hire all the units from a certain faction and then invade them with all those units? That means you have to make it so whenever the two factions go to war the units are returned to their respective faction. But then I could lease my units out to a different faction, then while they are occupied in a war, backstab them and watch as their entire military crumbles down and I take all their shit. Or you could make it so that you simply can't declare war while having units leased, then I could just hire a single unit from nations I don't want to attack me and have a secure flank that isn't able to be hurt by someone backstabbing me. No matter how you implement it, you could game the system so many ways. Not to mention it doesn't make sense in a historical context, but neither does France or Spain in M2:TW since those nations didn't exist in that time period, so that's sort of a moot point.

[QUOTE=yawmwen;35707039]What if I wanted to hire all the units from a certain faction and then invade them with all those units? That means you have to make it so whenever the two factions go to war the units are returned to their respective faction. But then I could lease my units out to a different faction, then while they are occupied in a war, backstab them and watch as their entire military crumbles down and I take all their shit. Or you could make it so that you simply can't declare war while having units leased, then I could just hire a single unit from nations I don't want to attack me and have a secure flank that isn't able to be hurt by someone backstabbing me. No matter how you implement it, you could game the system so many ways. Not to mention it doesn't make sense in a historical context, but neither does France or Spain in M2:TW since those nations didn't exist in that time period, so that's sort of a moot point.[/QUOTE] That was what I was worried about pretty much.