Shogun Total War 2

[toasty]

Namely, was anyone else able to determine how good or bad the AI is for the computer? I LOVED shogun total War and I'll buy this game if I can get half-decent AI. Not the crap that I was fed in Empire and Medieval 2. I couldn't really tell from the demo how good the AI was, but the battles seemed pretty standard fair, albeit with archers that actually seemed dangerous (!)

[Flickerdart]

I haven't been able to beat it yet, so I'd say the battle AI is pretty good (or the battle is pretty stacked). Now, campaign AI might be an entirely different story, but Napoleon's AI was pretty good in that regard (if not as aggressive as a human player might be) so there's little to fear.

[toasty]

I haven't been able to beat it yet, so I'd say the battle AI is pretty good (or the battle is pretty stacked). Now, campaign AI might be an entirely different story, but Napoleon's AI was pretty good in that regard (if not as aggressive as a human player might be) so there's little to fear.

Hmm that's good to know. The battle seems very stacked to me, so yeah... I'll just wait till the game gets released, I might not even have the money for it anyways...

[Flickerdart]

Steam will probably start doing package deals or discounts with the game a couple of months from its release. Napoleon was released around this time last year, and in the autumn months they featured a few deals with it, Empire and all the DLC for less than what I originally paid for the game.

[Gaius Marius]

Namely, was anyone else able to determine how good or bad the AI is for the computer? I LOVED shogun total War and I'll buy this game if I can get half-decent AI. Not the crap that I was fed in Empire and Medieval 2. I couldn't really tell from the demo how good the AI was, but the battles seemed pretty standard fair, albeit with archers that actually seemed dangerous (!)

I will be honest, even tho we are getting close to realistic army size, I am starting to be a little worried that too much soldiers might overclutter the battlefield.

Except if the battlefield's size expand proportionnaly, obviously.. But even then. Do you think expanding the number of troops might take something away from the strategies, and it will become a sheer number vs. number game?

[Leecros]

Namely, was anyone else able to determine how good or bad the AI is for the computer? I LOVED shogun total War and I'll buy this game if I can get half-decent AI. Not the crap that I was fed in Empire and Medieval 2. I couldn't really tell from the demo how good the AI was, but the battles seemed pretty standard fair, albeit with archers that actually seemed dangerous (!)

I have to admit that i still get hours upon hours of enjoyment out of Medieval 2 on Very Hard.

Unfortunately, in my opinion Empire and Napoleon paled in comparison to the previous Total War games. I'm going to get Shogun II probably(been saving for 6 months) because it looks like the combat will be more interesting. Something that i had in Medieval 2, but not in Empire and Napoleon....especially Empire since every strategy seemed to begin and end with Line Infantry.

It may just be too modern to me, i'm not a huge fan of non-medieval-ish strategy games. Swords and Bows and that such things.

[toasty]

I have to admit that i still get hours upon hours of enjoyment out of Medieval 2 on Very Hard.

Unfortunately, in my opinion Empire and Napoleon paled in comparison to the previous Total War games. I'm going to get Shogun II probably(been saving for 6 months) because it looks like the combat will be more interesting. Something that i had in Medieval 2, but not in Empire and Napoleon....especially Empire since every strategy seemed to begin and end with Line Infantry.

It may just be too modern to me, i'm not a huge fan of non-medieval-ish strategy games. Swords and Bows and that such things.

I agree with you, honestly. It didn't seem there was so much strategy as lining up your men and shooting the the other guy. There is so much more fun trying to flank a group of pikemen with knights or playing the running skirmish game against heavy infantry for a while. :smallbiggrin:

Having said that, I do like modern warfare games. Company of Heroes is a great game, for instance. Its just that, the Total War series seems designed for medievalish warfare.

[Gaius Marius]

I agree with you, honestly. It didn't seem there was so much strategy as lining up your men and shooting the the other guy. There is so much more fun trying to flank a group of pikemen with knights or playing the running skirmish game against heavy infantry for a while. :smallbiggrin:

That kinda worries me. I wanted to buy Empire, but, as you say, is there much tactical fun value to the game? Or it's simply sending waves of infantries to the slaughter, with the occasional artillery aimed to tilt the balance in your favor, and some cavalry meant to intercept artillery?

[Muz]

I've played Medieval, Rome, Medieval 2, and enjoyed them all. I bought Empire but could never really get into it. Didn't play Napoleon.

That said, I took a look at the Shogun 2 demo and I've mostly liked what I've seen so far. Formations seemed to rearrange rather quickly when ordered (e.g. rotate 90 degrees to the left or enter "spear wall" formation). In previous games sometimes it seemed they'd mill about, wander in separate directions, play 30 seconds of grab-a$$, talk to their neighbors, and then maybe start getting in formation midway through the point when the opposing cavalry smashes through their ranks. So that was an improvement for me.

That said, i've heard on the totalwar.org forums that the AI in the historical battle is stacked for the demo. I haven't seen this confirmed one way or the other, though, and if it is the case, I don't know if they're hiding the AI, or just had to leave it out in order to make the demo 5GB. (I seem to recall reading someone official saying things were trimmed out of the demo to get the file size managable, but I don't know where, unfortunately.)

[The_JJ]

That kinda worries me. I wanted to buy Empire, but, as you say, is there much tactical fun value to the game? Or it's simply sending waves of infantries to the slaughter, with the occasional artillery aimed to tilt the balance in your favor, and some cavalry meant to intercept artillery?

Yes and no. There's a lot of pregame positioning choices to make, and that can have a huge effect when arty really can reach out and wreck half the map. After you get your rows set up... in the real big set pieces, most of your involvement is going to be babysitting your forces, less making descisions about what to do than when, waiting for that one moment to swap to canister shot, break ranks and charge, bring your skirmisher's out of the woods, start the enveloping, or counter charge a run for your guns. Maybe a little micro around the wings with cav, or unleashing the cav on skirmishers/routers but trying to prevent them from chasing right into a volley or two.

'Course, then you get Riflemen and then just laugh at the poor doomed fools. Even without the nasty grenade spewing land mines.

Fun? Enough for me. Different? Yeah, that too.

[Gaius Marius]

Yes and no. There's a lot of pregame positioning choices to make, and that can have a huge effect when arty really can reach out and wreck half the map. After you get your rows set up... in the real big set pieces, most of your involvement is going to be babysitting your forces, less making descisions about what to do than when, waiting for that one moment to swap to canister shot, break ranks and charge, bring your skirmisher's out of the woods, start the enveloping, or counter charge a run for your guns. Maybe a little micro around the wings with cav, or unleashing the cav on skirmishers/routers but trying to prevent them from chasing right into a volley or two.

'Course, then you get Riflemen and then just laugh at the poor doomed fools. Even without the nasty grenade spewing land mines.

Fun? Enough for me. Different? Yeah, that too.

All right, you convinced me. I'll give a try at Napoleonian warfare then :smallbiggrin:

[toasty]

I've played Medieval, Rome, Medieval 2, and enjoyed them all. I bought Empire but could never really get into it. Didn't play Napoleon.

That said, I took a look at the Shogun 2 demo and I've mostly liked what I've seen so far. Formations seemed to rearrange rather quickly when ordered (e.g. rotate 90 degrees to the left or enter "spear wall" formation). In previous games sometimes it seemed they'd mill about, wander in separate directions, play 30 seconds of grab-a$$, talk to their neighbors, and then maybe start getting in formation midway through the point when the opposing cavalry smashes through their ranks. So that was an improvement for me.

That said, i've heard on the totalwar.org forums that the AI in the historical battle is stacked for the demo. I haven't seen this confirmed one way or the other, though, and if it is the case, I don't know if they're hiding the AI, or just had to leave it out in order to make the demo 5GB. (I seem to recall reading someone official saying things were trimmed out of the demo to get the file size managable, but I don't know where, unfortunately.)

Well I'm not paying full price for the game (like I did Rome Total War and Empire Total War; bought Medieval 2 with the Expansion after it had been out a few years) unless they prove they've actually done something other than switch skins and settings. :smallannoyed:

[Gwyn chan 'r Gwyll]

Somebody was tinkering in files over at the Total War Centre forums, and he said he managed to unlock the full AI, and he played against it, and he says it's the hardest AI he's faced yet. It beat him. Cavalry shifting, flanking, response, prepared assaults, yeah.

[toasty]

Somebody was tinkering in files over at the Total War Centre forums, and he said he managed to unlock the full AI, and he played against it, and he says it's the hardest AI he's faced yet. It beat him. Cavalry shifting, flanking, response, prepared assaults, yeah.

This encourages me. Still, I'll see what the actual results are.

[Dragor]

Somebody was tinkering in files over at the Total War Centre forums, and he said he managed to unlock the full AI, and he played against it, and he says it's the hardest AI he's faced yet. It beat him. Cavalry shifting, flanking, response, prepared assaults, yeah.

Gwyn, you just made my day. :smallbiggrin:

[Klose_the_Sith]

I played the demo and it seemed pretty cool buuuut ...

1) It doesn't run that well on my laptop, despite having no excuse not to (I think the old gals a little overburdened by excess files and soforth)

2) Japanese arms, armour and soldiery elicit a resounding 'meh' from me.

Seeing as I haven't even bought Napoleon yet and much prefer pretty much any other era covered by the Total War series to Shogun, I think I'll pass.

That AI does sound pretty epic, though. I'll be interested to see if there are overhaul mods that can convince me to buy ...

[Gaius Marius]

That AI does sound pretty epic, though. I'll be interested to see if there are overhaul mods that can convince me to buy ...

Like, a Legend of the Three Kingdom mod adaptation?

or a Legend of the Five Rings mod total conversion? :smalltongue:

[Leecros]

Seeing as I haven't even bought Napoleon yet and much prefer pretty much any other era covered by the Total War series to Shogun, I think I'll pass.

Stone Age: Total War


The only weapons you get are clubs and rocks.

Have fun.

[toasty]

Stone Age: Total War


The only weapons you get are clubs and rocks.

Have fun.

And spears. And stone bows. oh, you can ride dinosaurs too!:smallbiggrin:

[Gaius Marius]

And spears. And stone bows. oh, you can ride dinosaurs too!:smallbiggrin:

And the ultimate weapons would be the first Bronze weapons, eh?

hmm.. what would look like a Stone Age assassin? Stone Shurikens?

[Leecros]

And spears. And stone bows. oh, you can ride dinosaurs too!:smallbiggrin:

Of course! the Dinosaur Riders are your main cavalry force!



And the ultimate weapons would be the first Bronze weapons, eh?

hmm.. what would look like a Stone Age assassin? Stone Shurikens?

It would probably be a random guy rolling a big rock down the hill.

Splat!

No more general!

[Gaius Marius]

It would probably be a random guy rolling a big rock down the hill.

Splat!

No more general!

And with new technology, it's gonna be a random stone age scientist rolling a big rock wheel down the hill. :smallbiggrin:

[Leecros]

I approve of this line of thinking...Sega needs to make this happen.


heck if Magicka can make something as silly as this (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cCFtiO5j97M)....why can't Sega go for some amusing game for their Total War series?

[Gaius Marius]

I approve of this line of thinking...Sega needs to make this happen.


heck if Magicka can make something as silly as this (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cCFtiO5j97M)....why can't Sega go for some amusing game for their Total War series?

Is this serious?!

But yhea: Gruuu: Total War would beat great!

And then: Gruuu : Total War : Ancient Astronaut Invasion

[Muz]

Stone Age: Total War
The only weapons you get are clubs and rocks.
Have fun.

But midway through the game someone in Cave #76 invents fire, and then you get flaming clubs and...hot rocks.

[Klose_the_Sith]

I would buy ten copies of Stone Age Total War before I considered buying as much as one of Shogun 2 :smallbiggrin:


Like, a Legend of the Three Kingdom mod adaptation?

or a Legend of the Five Rings mod total conversion? :smalltongue:

If there was a mod that let me play a German Blitzkrieg into Feudal Japan / the Chinese Empire then I'd put up with Japanese arms and armour, as they went splat. But those are the only circumstances :smalltongue:

[Flickerdart]

Cavemen didn't really fight in a line of battle, though, and a single unit of Empire's line infantry quite likely has more people in it than entire tribes. I must admit that battles with a handful of units on both sides can be fun, but not if both of you only have literally five guys.

[13_CBS]

Cavemen: Total War's equivalent to Elephants:

Horses.

"They're riding something? OH SHI-"

[Leecros]

Cavemen didn't really fight in a line of battle, though, and a single unit of Empire's line infantry quite likely has more people in it than entire tribes. I must admit that battles with a handful of units on both sides can be fun, but not if both of you only have literally five guys.

those line infantry ruin everything though so they don't count.:smallmad:



I would buy ten copies of Stone Age Total War before I considered buying as much as one of Shogun 2 :smallbiggrin:



I would probably buy one Stone Age Total war over Shogun 2, but not because it's better or worse; Just because it would be hilarious if done right.

Too many games based on the Sengoku jidai anyways...

[Klose_the_Sith]

Cavemen didn't really fight in a line of battle, though, and a single unit of Empire's line infantry quite likely has more people in it than entire tribes. I must admit that battles with a handful of units on both sides can be fun, but not if both of you only have literally five guys.

So? Get tribal coalitions going. Every unit can be a different tribe and you can fight things out that way.

Pish to historical accuracy, keep it out of my caveman total war :smalltongue:

[Flickerdart]

Cavemen: Total War's equivalent to Elephants:

Horses.

"They're riding something? OH SHI-"
Experimental horses.

[Gaius Marius]

Experimental horses.

Thank you. Now I wanna make a Stone Age Paranoia game with experimental Horses and Sharpstones. :smallbiggrin:

[Premier]

Thank you. Now I wanna make a Stone Age Paranoia game with experimental Horses and Sharpstones. :smallbiggrin:

Citizen, aren't you clearance level Red? Then why are warming yourself by a fire with Orange and Yellow flames? Please report to the nearest Sabretooth Cave.

[Gaius Marius]

Citizen, aren't you clearance level Red? Then why are warming yourself by a fire with Orange and Yellow flames? Please report to the nearest Sabretooth Cave.

Yes, Friend-Spirit. But first, I want to denounce the dirty Neanderthal-Commie-Traitors in my team!

As I go to the Sabertooth Cave, I shall rember that Friend-Spirit is my Friend.

[Leecros]

I am amused that we would rather talk about a non-existent game(that should exist) than Shogun 2...


I tried to play the demo last night and was annoyed by the fact that you can only fight three battles on the field. I was trying to figure out why since they already cut down the territories you can travel to to...8(?) so i find that quite pointless.

Other than that...I guess it was pretty good, nothing that said OMG WOW! But it kept me entertained. It has that annoying UI that they started to use in Empire though that makes me want to just run up to a puppy and punt it. I hate that interface with a passion and will be glad when someone kills it in a fire.

Another thing that has mildly irritated me is the fact that they seemed to have attempted to balance the factions; region capitals are pretty much the same everywhere with the exception of their location. Where in Medieval 2 there were major cities which were much more valuable than others. Depending on your starting point capturing Constantinople, Jerusalem, Cairo, or London should be on your to do list. In their later games, a region is a region you can't really assess how valuable that territory will be compared to others because with good management you can make any region capital a powerhouse. That really takes some of the strategy out of it. I remember playing as the Byzantines in Vanilla Medieval 2(I use Stainless Steel now) and fighting over Venice for this small town with ~500 people in it for 20 or 30 turns. We would send full-sized armies after it and just capture it back and forth. I was lucky i didn't get attacked because i was pretty much drained of troops and that town cost me thousands and thousands of gold worth of troops for little return ~150. If i had gotten attacked by another faction then i would probably have lost.

That's not something that would necessarily happen in the later Total War games with this one not looking any different.

[Flickerdart]

Wait, there's more to the demo than just the one battle? :smallconfused:

[Leecros]

Wait, there's more to the demo than just the one battle? :smallconfused:

yeah, there's a mini-tutorial campaign

[Klose_the_Sith]

yeah, there's a mini-tutorial campaign

Maybe they just balanced out the tutorial campaign, seeing as it's meant to be for new players who probably aren't ready for asymmetric warfare just yet?

Also, the UI is from Napoleon and not Empire >.>

[Flickerdart]

Dangit, the tutorial froze up (opening the negotiation page resulted in two X buttons slightly overlayed, neither working) and I haven't saved. Frankly, if not for the hand-holding, I'd have swept through the island in a few turns, considering the nice little army you start off with.

Still, the ninjas are pretty cool, even if you have to pay them every time they do something. I like that there are animations for it now, like duels had. The encyclopedia pages, however, are strikingly ugly.

[Leecros]

Also, the UI is from Napoleon and not Empire >.>

it's pretty much the same UI from Empire. Napoleon may have built off of it, but Empire has it too



Still, the ninjas are pretty cool, even if you have to pay them every time they do something. I like that there are animations for it now, like duels had. The encyclopedia pages, however, are strikingly ugly.

The ninjas on the battlefields are kind of cheap though. The one tutorial siege you get a unit of them(i don't know if they're the ninja agent that you recruit or a completely different unit it did not say) and i won the battle in about 10 minutes by doing a forward assault and sneaking the ninjas up behind and capturing the main building.

[Klose_the_Sith]

it's pretty much the same UI from Empire. Napoleon may have built off of it, but Empire has it too

Not the unit cards system (long line at the bottom of the screen :smallyuk:), which is the bit that I don't personally care for.

[Muz]

So the game came out yesterday. Has anyone played it? I require impressions! :smallsmile:

[Gwyn chan 'r Gwyll]

This video alone makes me want to upgrade my computer so I can play this.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mQ872cTYj44&feature=related

[Leecros]

So the game came out yesterday. Has anyone played it? I require impressions! :smallsmile:

I have played it, it also kept me entertained for several hours.


I'm playing the Hojo family, mainly because i like my Tri-Force Flag and fancy blue armor. :smallbiggrin:

First impressions was quite similar to my impression of Empire and Napoleon, that is:
"Bleh, i hate this Interface"
I still do by the way....

However after playing a few battles i found myself entertained by them a bit more than in previous games. The AI actually uses some means of strategy, even on normal.In fact the only reason i haven't been doing as well as i could have been is because i had totally underestimated the AI. I'm only playing on normal difficulty right now, but the AI still uses some basic tactics. They don't go all charging in blindly and die pathetically, i've seen them more cautious, hiding troops in the woods, flanking a lot. they don't even charge their generals suicidally usually.

The combat is fun, Total War has always been best in these types of scenes. Swords, bows, wooden siege engines, etc... Castle sieges are fairly painful for both sides. When attacking scaling the walls are just bothersome, like using ladders in Medieval 2...Which is slow and bothersome it makes sieges somewhat more formidable. When defending the AI actually attacks from several directions which means you have to pay attention to what's going on or you may have a dead general as their spearmen attack your rear. I like the ability to dismount cavalry, but i find it disadvantageous in most situations. The general's influence circles don't really bother me much as i always have my generals right in the action.

On the overland map, there's not really much to say. The situations evolve rapidly, I was witness to a three-way war to the north of me and i think i saw every territory involved taken at least once. Other than that nothing really huge to report...

Although it doesn't seem like every faction is unlockable with really irritates me. I understand that Clan JoeSchmoe was not very powerful and may have been defeated rather easily during the real Sengoku Period, but part of the allure of the series, imo, is taking an underdog faction and forging them into a world power. I've had that complaint in every Total War game that did not have every faction unlockable. I liked playing as Scotland in Medieval 2 and pummeling England and France into a mushy goo that can drain into the cracks of the floorboard, at the same time.


Bottom Line: I have some complaints, but it's nice to see Total War going back to a wartime period that the game was actually designed for.

Next Stop: Three-Kingdoms period, China





Joking!:smallcool:
Although to be honest i wouldn't be surprised if they did do that at some point...


Addendum: Oda lost in the first turn....I don't think that's supposed to happen:smallyuk:

[Klose_the_Sith]

First impressions was quite similar to my impression of Empire and Napoleon, that is:
"Bleh, i hate this Interface"
I still do by the way....

Empire's interface is pretty much identical to Romes :smalltongue:


Bottom Line: I have some complaints, but it's nice to see Total War going back to a wartime period that the game was actually designed for.

Urgh, you've got to be kidding me :smallsigh:

Empire / Napoleon was an excellent setting for Total War games, just as reasonable as Rome, or the Medieval era, or even the Shogun.

[Leecros]

Empire's interface is pretty much identical to Romes :smalltongue:

Okay? That doesn't make me like it any more.




Urgh, you've got to be kidding me :smallsigh:

Empire / Napoleon was an excellent setting for Total War games, just as reasonable as Rome, or the Medieval era, or even the Shogun.

I disagree and i am not kidding you...:smallmad:
For reasons that have already been stated in this thread.

[Klose_the_Sith]

Okay? That doesn't make me like it any more.

My point is that it's not exactly a new interface. Napoleon and Shogun 2 look completely different to Empire, regardless ...


I disagree and i am not kidding you...:smallmad:
For reasons that have already been stated in this thread.

I dislike the Shogun setting, but that doesn't justify me complaining about it as a bad choice for Total War.

The only reasons you've provided for disliking Empire were it not being primitive and the spammability of Line Infantry.

Which of course is personal preference for the first point, no different to my dislike of Feudal Japan and a poor overview of the game for the second. There are factions (Austria in particular stands out as an example that's European) who can't survive on line infantry tactics except on low difficulty.

The idea of the 18th and 19th century being bad for wargames is preposterous, although it's perfectly understandable to have a personal dislike.

[Flickerdart]

You want primitive? Play Ottomans, build unled stacks of Bashi Bazouks, charge them at the enemy.

[Gaius Marius]

However after playing a few battles i found myself entertained by them a bit more than in previous games. The AI actually uses some means of strategy, even on normal.In fact the only reason i haven't been doing as well as i could have been is because i had totally underestimated the AI. I'm only playing on normal difficulty right now, but the AI still uses some basic tactics. They don't go all charging in blindly and die pathetically, i've seen them more cautious, hiding troops in the woods, flanking a lot. they don't even charge their generals suicidally usually.


:smalleek:

But... but... here goes in smoke about 3/4th of the players' Heroic Victory war doctrine!

How can we win impossible battles if the computer doesn't do the worst thing imaginable?!

NOOOOOO

(Hey, have you tried using Ninjas to rush the ennemy's general? You know.. rather than waiting for him to suicide, you actually go and headhunt him?)

[Gwyn chan 'r Gwyll]

I consider Rome and Shogun the only eras that actually make sense in the game-play style. Because what always happens, is that the player conquers the world, right? And those are the only games where that's what happened historically.
In Rome, the Romans ended up conquering practically the whole game map, so it's not a stretch of the imagination to have, say, Macedon conquer practically the whole world.
Same with Shogun.
With Medieval, there's no way one kingdom could conquer the world.
Same with Empire, that was even more ridiculous, with the whole Balance of Power idea that first started then.

Napoleon made more sense, but only because it was more limited in scope, so you couldn't ACTUALLY conquer the world as Saxony or something stupidly ahistorical and impossible.

[Eldan]

Going from that perspective, Khan: Total War would be next?

Not a bad idea, perhaps. The Golden Horde has shown up in one way or another before.

Or, of course, more limited settings again. Cuzco: Total War?

[Leecros]

My point is that it's not exactly a new interface. Napoleon and Shogun 2 look completely different to Empire, regardless ...
and my point is that i still don't like the interface.:smalltongue:





The idea of the 18th and 19th century being bad for wargames is preposterous, although it's perfectly understandable to have a personal dislike.
I didn't say that it was bad for wargames, i never said that. What i said was that it was not a good choice for the Total War engine.


Regardless, this argument isn't going to go anywhere, we both have played the games. It boils down to us both having slightly different personal preferences in video games and neither of us are likely to change our minds.



(Hey, have you tried using Ninjas to rush the ennemy's general? You know.. rather than waiting for him to suicide, you actually go and headhunt him?)

Not yet, but I have done assassinations which can have some amusing results (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HMlu7ZleclI).

[Gaius Marius]

Not yet, but I have done assassinations which can have some amusing results (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HMlu7ZleclI).

Assassinating a general mid-battle might have a bigger influence in the order of things than outside of the battle.

A headless army out of battle can appoint a new leader. A headless army during a battle is just a bunch of soldiers without morale. :smallbiggrin:

[NW9000]

A pre 1500's america's total war might be kinda fun.

As to shogun 2, i'm loving the ai changes. My first game I figured I'd play on legendary and lost on the second turn...

So I'm now playing on hard, and the AI is actually still intelligent. They landed troops past my front lines and proceeded to steamroll my established provinces, which has never happened to me in a total war game before.

Another time they kept an army hidden in the mountain passes after I sieged a city with heavy losses, then while weak, they sprung out to lay siege. I figured Id be ok since Id starve by the next summer, but they would lose troops from attrition evening the odds. Nope, winter came and they attacked. I lost my favorite general, my heir, and my last surviving son in a heroic last stand in the inner courtyard. Right when I thought I might be ok, ninjas attacked and killed the dismounted general who was in stand and fight mode. My troops lost the will to fight and thus the battle.

Three turns later, boats landed near my capital carrying troops from a" friendly" clan.

[Gaius Marius]

They need to do a Mesopotamy : Total War.

Including an actual factual Ancient Egypt and Ancient Greece.

[Flickerdart]

The problem with Khan: Total War (or Total War: Khan, with the newfangled naming convention) would be that there aren't any significant bodies of water for an enormous part of the campaign map. And the map itself would be insane - if you thought it took a long time to waltz from Paris to Moscow, imagine how long it would take to get to Turkey from China.

[Gaius Marius]

The problem with Khan: Total War (or Total War: Khan, with the newfangled naming convention) would be that there aren't any significant bodies of water for an enormous part of the campaign map. And the map itself would be insane - if you thought it took a long time to waltz from Paris to Moscow, imagine how long it would take to get to Turkey from China.

No offense, but isn't that the point?

[Gwyn chan 'r Gwyll]

No offense, but isn't that the point?

Paris to Moscow had a smaller time scale. Khan: Total War would have a much larger time scale: After all, it DID take them several generations to reach Europe! There were several waves of invasions.
Think of the scale of that map! The steppes, the Arab world, China, other parts of Asia, and the very edge of Europe: Russia Austria, Hungary and Poland is the farthest I'd say it would go.

That would be an amazing game.

[Gaius Marius]

Paris to Moscow had a smaller time scale. Khan: Total War would have a much larger time scale: After all, it DID take them several generations to reach Europe! There were several waves of invasions.
Think of the scale of that map! The steppes, the Arab world, China, other parts of Asia, and the very edge of Europe: Russia Austria, Hungary and Poland is the farthest I'd say it would go.

That would be an amazing game.

Have the Mongolian Hordes consist of different factions, and play a little for the Horde's inner politic, about who's gonna be elected Khan, etc...

Would be awesome.

[Gwyn chan 'r Gwyll]

Have the Mongolian Hordes consist of different factions, and play a little for the Horde's inner politic, about who's gonna be elected Khan, etc...

Would be awesome.

Would be sick gameplay wise. You start off as a horde trying to unite the hordes, then once you manage it, all the hordes become semi-united under you, in that you gain extra huge armies, and minimal control over other faction's armies, and you can go on a conquering spree, but once your current Khan dies, your extra armies disband, and the hordes divide up the land you conquered, and you have to try to unite again.

If the AI unites the hordes, you're given strict missions by them vis-a-vis what to conquer. Restrictions are placed on what you can do, other than conquer in the right direction, and also restrictions on what you build? Perhaps you lose all control of building for that period.


I'm loving Total War: Khan.
(I hate how they changed it to Total War: Shogun 2. It sounds... wrong)

[Gaius Marius]

If the AI unites the hordes, you're given strict missions by them vis-a-vis what to conquer. Restrictions are placed on what you can do, other than conquer in the right direction, and also restrictions on what you build? Perhaps you lose all control of building for that period.


I'm loving Total War: Khan.
(I hate how they changed it to Total War: Shogun 2. It sounds... wrong)

If you antagonist the Khan too much, you are in deeeeeeeeeeeeeeep trouble...

[Muz]

Khan? Total War: Eugenics?


:smallwink:

[Eldan]

Khaaaaaaan!

Someone had to do it.

Hmm. Other suggestions for good settings? Several parts of Indian history might be interesting, and there would be more than enough factions, too.

[Gaius Marius]

Khaaaaaaan!

Someone had to do it.

Hmm. Other suggestions for good settings? Several parts of Indian history might be interesting, and there would be more than enough factions, too.

the 3 Kingdoms, obviously.

South America would be interesting, although little overeaching authority like the Pope or religion.

Why not delve a tad into fantasy? Total Warhammer would be nice, no?

[Eldan]

I think there's Warhammer mods already.

And yes, South America. That's why I suggested Total War: Cuzco. The Incas had the biggest empire around for quite a while.

I'm not really familiar with precolombian North American history. Were there any big wars? Total War: Iroquois?

[Gaius Marius]

I think there's Warhammer mods already.

And yes, South America. That's why I suggested Total War: Cuzco. The Incas had the biggest empire around for quite a while.

I'm not really familiar with precolombian North American history. Were there any big wars? Total War: Iroquois?

Well, Colonial : Total War would be nice. A nice repeat, made way deeper, of the "New World" event occuring in Medieval.

The base game plays with the South Americans, and eventually you have the European Invasion event, just like the Mongols did in Medieval.

[Muz]

Middle Earth: Total War

I know there's a mod that does this already, but something official would be cool, too.

Of course, it'll never happen.

...I should get Shogun 2 soon so I can actually make some commends in this thread that serve a purpose, huh? :smallwink:

[Flickerdart]

Total War: Total War. Having conquered their respective regions, the victor nations of the Total War games face off against one another in a supreme bid for control.

[Eldan]

Ooh. Civ-style.

Entire world history from about 5000 BC to about 1950 AD. Play any nation, state, empire or tribe. Total War: Total War. :smallbiggrin:

[Arcanoi]

Alternatively, Total War: Total War! Take command of any of the Total War games and wage war for control of the entire franchise! Do you have what it takes to wield the superior UI of Rome, or the classic nostalgia of Shogun, or even the ground-breaking new content of Shogun 2 to crush your enemies?

[Gwyn chan 'r Gwyll]

I think Rome would lose out, sheerly because the vanilla game is just ridiculous. I think the winner would probably be Medieval 2.

[Talkkno]

Ooh. Civ-style.

Entire world history from about 5000 BC to about 1950 AD. Play any nation, state, empire or tribe. Total War: Total War. :smallbiggrin:

How would the Total War engine handle WW1 or WW2 combat at all? Considering the fronts are much much bigger among other things...

[Flickerdart]

How would the Total War engine handle WW1 or WW2 combat at all? Considering the fronts are much much bigger among other things...
Make a custom battle in Napoleon, give each side all artillery. It still runs. The game scales down conflicts anyway - Napoleon had 587 guns at Borodino Kutuzov had 624, but you only get twelve and sixteen respectively in the historic battle.

[Klose_the_Sith]

I didn't say that it was bad for wargames, i never said that. What i said was that it was not a good choice for the Total War engine.

Regardless, this argument isn't going to go anywhere, we both have played the games. It boils down to us both having slightly different personal preferences in video games and neither of us are likely to change our minds.

Well at least you've come to accept that there's nothing wrong with the era for Total War games, beyond your own preference. That's all I was looking for :smallsmile:

And honestly, Total War is just a simulated wargame map campaign. You're kidding yourself if you believe otherwise :smalltongue:

[Leecros]

Throw my vote for the next total war game into

Mesopotamia
Kahn
and possibly Three Kingdoms
in that order.


Well at least you've come to accept that there's nothing wrong with the era for Total War games, beyond your own preference. That's all I was looking for :smallsmile:


What i said was that it was not a good choice for the Total War engine.



:smallconfused:


And honestly, Total War is just a simulated wargame map campaign. You're kidding yourself if you believe otherwise :smalltongue:

It's just the fact that the total war engine is largely uninteresting with modern-ish troops.

I literally fell asleep during a battle in Empire once...

[Klose_the_Sith]

:smallconfused:

Sometimes I like to imagine reasonable discourse :smallsmile:


It's just the fact that the total war engine is largely uninteresting with modern-ish troops.

I literally fell asleep during a battle in Empire once...

You don't like modern troops. You, as in yourself. This proves nothing.

If you don't like Imperial/Napoleonic warfare than that's your choice, but it's the finest I've seen on a Total War engine from my own perspective. Which doesn't make it that, either. This is all entirely preference, dragged into an argument by your refusal to acknowledge it as such.

EDIT: And I am sorry to drag this argument on so needlessly, it just seems that your original attitude was the exact one I took pains to avoid with Shogun 2, instead accepting that the game simply wasn't for me.

[Flickerdart]

Ancient troops: Oh hey, battle is engaged. *squints* Look, an enemy, way over yonder! Let's take a few minutes to ponderously walk over there and then hit him with swords!
Napoleonic troops: Oh hey, battle is engaged. FIRE THE CANNONS!

I know which one I find more fun.

[Gwyn chan 'r Gwyll]

Both of them are pretty boring. Napoleonic is lines of men standing and shooting at each other, ancient is masses of men standing and hacking at each other.

Of course, neither is ACTUALLY like that. Both have cavalry, one has artillery, the other has mad flanking, the masses of men you have to consider light vs heavy infantry, and weapon type as well.

[Leecros]

Sometimes I like to imagine reasonable discourse :smallsmile:



You don't like modern troops. You, as in yourself. This proves nothing.

If you don't like Imperial/Napoleonic warfare than that's your choice, but it's the finest I've seen on a Total War engine from my own perspective. Which doesn't make it that, either. This is all entirely preference, dragged into an argument by your refusal to acknowledge it as such.

EDIT: And I am sorry to drag this argument on so needlessly, it just seems that your original attitude was the exact one I took pains to avoid with Shogun 2, instead accepting that the game simply wasn't for me.

yeah, sorry, my fault for that last post and dragging the argument on. I was running on E and not paying a lot of attention and not thinking too clearly... :smallredface:



anyways back onto shogun 2...



Napoleonic troops: Oh hey, battle is engaged. FIRE THE CANNONS!


Shogun 2 has sniper siege engines.:smalltongue:

For those who don't know, in a battle, Generals have an ability called 'inspire' which improves accuracy and melee damage of that unit for a short time. Well, it works on your siege units also. I think i pegged 2 or 3 enemy generals from half-way across the map. They do move to avoid the fire, but sometimes they just don't move fast enough.

I think it's the Mangonels that I've had the most success with. Hojo missions have the occasional tendency to give you one once you complete it. They're actually pretty scary in terms of how much damage they do to enemy troops. Granted you have to think of the time period, the siege engines in Shogun 2 are made to obliterate clusters of troops since getting into a castle never posed a problem.

Getting into the castle, killing everyone in it and/or capturing the main part of it is the problem.

[Gaius Marius]

Have you tried to use these highly-efficient siege engines against ennemy troops during urban warfare?

A massive volley of ballista bolt in a massed army of infantry would win you the day.

[Flickerdart]

Siege engines also can't be moved, have inferior range and only get a handful of shots. It's not the same at all.

[Leecros]

Siege engines also can't be moved, have inferior range and only get a handful of shots. It's not the same at all.

Bah! Details.:smalltongue: