|
I see that there. posted:Age of Mythology? I would pay significant amounts of money for a game that is basically dominions 3 with a modern UI and engine.
|
# ? Jul 6, 2012 19:41 |
|
|
# ? Mar 29, 2024 01:39 |
|
I see that there. posted:Age of Mythology?
|
# ? Jul 6, 2012 20:05 |
|
Grand Fromage posted:Well, if you believe Virgil he might be right. I see that there. posted:Age of Mythology? I too would love a Trojan War Expansion or hell I want a Julius Caesar expansion.
|
# ? Jul 6, 2012 20:29 |
|
achillesforever6 posted:I rather like the original story of Romulus and Remus The accepted historical one that goes today or one of the seven or so "main" ones that the Romans themselves used at various points. You want one where their dad was a super-raping Hercules and some dude named Celer kills Remus and then Romulus flips him off and calls the city Rome anyway? We can make this happen. Also when Romulus is defeated in battle he doesn't retreat or die, he just says a few dickish things and disappears in a cloud of smoke and/or jetpacks into space.
|
# ? Jul 6, 2012 23:14 |
|
I see that there. posted:The accepted historical one that goes today or one of the seven or so "main" ones that the Romans themselves used at various points.
|
# ? Jul 7, 2012 17:00 |
|
How can I set the camera controls to best mimic those in Shogun 2?
|
# ? Jul 8, 2012 02:54 |
|
Pope Mobile posted:How can I set the camera controls to best mimic those in Shogun 2? Can you state which game? Every Total War game before Empire has funky controls that are impossible to mimic the newer games.
|
# ? Jul 8, 2012 03:20 |
|
Stupid me: Rome.
|
# ? Jul 8, 2012 03:22 |
|
Speaking of Rome/Rome 2: Is the time period supposed to cover the same era? As in Republican Rome up to about 14 AD (IIRC vanilla RTW stopped around there) with Marian Reforms and stuff? Haven't played much of Shogun 2 but I'm hoping Rome 2 has more of the dynasty dynamics like you find in EU Rome and CK1/2, especially after Marian Reforms where you basically have to fund your own armies or they might turn on you. I hadn't played much of EU:Rome, but from glancing the manual there were things like armies being loyal to their commanders and possibly rebelling against you (I think that was in the BI xpack too). Are we still going to play a patrician family in Rome 2? Also, what I miss most moving out of the RTW/M2TW engine to the Empire one is being able to alt+right click move units. They would keep their facing and everything without them turning to face another direction because I didn't click perfectly in front of them. It was awesome in the times where I could rush a group of infantry in front of something weaker to absorb a cavalry charge on an exposed archer group or something similar.
|
# ? Jul 8, 2012 04:13 |
|
It sounded like they want to do all of Roman history, at least until the sack of Rome. No point in leaving out Huns and Vandals just for an expansion pack when it would make the original game much more interesting; they could trigger kind of like the Mongols in ME2:TW. Or if the campaign map stretches as far as, say Mongolia, there could at least be random events when a great warlord unites a large horde and where they go from there (China, Persia, Europe) is anyone's guess.Sober posted:Also, what I miss most moving out of the RTW/M2TW engine to the Empire one is being able to alt+right click move units. They would keep their facing and everything without them turning to face another direction because I didn't click perfectly in front of them. It was awesome in the times where I could rush a group of infantry in front of something weaker to absorb a cavalry charge on an exposed archer group or something similar. This exists? I have current RTW and M2TW saves. Good tip!
|
# ? Jul 8, 2012 09:34 |
|
Nimmy posted:It sounded like they want to do all of Roman history, at least until the sack of Rome. No point in leaving out Huns and Vandals just for an expansion pack when it would make the original game much more interesting; they could trigger kind of like the Mongols in ME2:TW. Or if the campaign map stretches as far as, say Mongolia, there could at least be random events when a great warlord unites a large horde and where they go from there (China, Persia, Europe) is anyone's guess. Yeah, in the RPS interview the guy mentioned invading Carthage as being analagous to a boss fight, it would make sense as a progression mechanic that once the Empire gets big enough it triggers large-scale horde invasions.
|
# ? Jul 8, 2012 12:30 |
|
Nimmy posted:It sounded like they want to do all of Roman history, at least until the sack of Rome. No point in leaving out Huns and Vandals just for an expansion pack when it would make the original game much more interesting; they could trigger kind of like the Mongols in ME2:TW. Or if the campaign map stretches as far as, say Mongolia, there could at least be random events when a great warlord unites a large horde and where they go from there (China, Persia, Europe) is anyone's guess. You realize the time it took to go from Carthage to the Huns right? Most R:TW campaigns ended by 50B.C., that would never work like M:TW. But by now they've learned how smart it is to make multiple scenarios. If they do it right they'll get so much money from me.
|
# ? Jul 8, 2012 15:58 |
|
Sober posted:
This reminds me of a feature I've been wishing for since the original shogun, a toggle (which should be on my default) to keep line depth constant when dragging out battle lines, regardless of unit size. It's so annoying when different unit sizes screw up my pretty battle lines.
|
# ? Jul 8, 2012 20:10 |
|
Mans posted:You realize the time it took to go from Carthage to the Huns right? Most R:TW campaigns ended by 50B.C., that would never work like M:TW. The Pax Romana is a problem, but you could skip it and trigger hordes when the empire got big enough as the post above yours says. The dates don't have to be historically accurate; just try to have it transition roughly around year 0, and if they player takes longer than that to conquer most of the known world, so much the better.
|
# ? Jul 8, 2012 22:04 |
|
Shorter Than Some posted:This reminds me of a feature I've been wishing for since the original shogun, a toggle (which should be on my default) to keep line depth constant when dragging out battle lines, regardless of unit size. It's so annoying when different unit sizes screw up my pretty battle lines. I want to know what the hell happened to using ALT + Right Click to order a ranged unit into melee. This whole "toggle melee mode on/off" thing they've done since Empire loving blows.
|
# ? Jul 8, 2012 22:15 |
|
Mans posted:You realize the time it took to go from Carthage to the Huns right? Most R:TW campaigns ended by 50B.C., that would never work like M:TW. Honestly I cannot even comprehend how you can transition from volunteer legionaries to Marian reform composition (i.e. a professional standing army) and then make it more nuanced from that (where they basically become mercs for hire) with things like generals being more ambitious and gently caress all about the state. I didn't really like that there was no way to transition any old H/P/T troops in RTW to regular legionaries after the reforms. I didn't really touch BI too much but if they could somehow get those mechanics (night battles, loyalty and generals rebelling, etc.) into the base campaign that'd be interesting. Although I guess they have to take some historical liberties because I doubt it'd be exciting if you had to wait for your dude/family members to become consul to lead an army for a little while before Marian reforms kick in and you basically start funding your own armies for personal political gains (which is the fun part).
|
# ? Jul 8, 2012 23:29 |
|
God I wish I could get excited about Rome: Total War 2 (I refuse to accept the new name:p), but I just can't help but feel that since the original Rome:TW, the series has lost it's way. I was a huge fan of the original Shogun and Medieval games, which played well straight out of the box, but for me Rome was a piece of crap out of the box and required the Rome: Total Realism mod to make worthwhile playing. Medieval 2 was ok...The rest up until now have been rather meh. There seems to have been a huge change to the combat between Medieval and Rome, which just never seemed to click with me. I also hate the new (ok not so new now) campaign maps, much preferring the older map which left you with more time for battles than micromanaging troops. But hey, I ramble...
|
# ? Jul 9, 2012 00:12 |
|
Would you guys recommend getting Rise of the Samurai? I thought about buying it since its fairly cheap and I enjoyed vanilla Shogun 2, but from the Steam description I'm not sure if it changes the gamplay enough to warrant the purchase.
|
# ? Jul 9, 2012 12:20 |
|
Jut posted:There seems to have been a huge change to the combat between Medieval and Rome, which just never seemed to click with me. I also hate the new (ok not so new now) campaign maps, much preferring the older map which left you with more time for battles than micromanaging troops. Try going back to Rome now after playing anything from Empire or later, Rome is almost unplayable with how clunky and awkward things are. All total war games are pretty flawed but I can't say they're any worse than they used to be.
|
# ? Jul 9, 2012 14:24 |
|
Vivick posted:Would you guys recommend getting Rise of the Samurai? I thought about buying it since its fairly cheap and I enjoyed vanilla Shogun 2, but from the Steam description I'm not sure if it changes the gamplay enough to warrant the purchase. Rise of the Samurai is a pretty nice DLC expansion that changes things up a little but it's still very much in the vein of the vanilla Shogun 2 campaign even though the agents are a bit different and tactics have changed slightly and there are different buildings, units, and tech trees. Fall of the Samurai is a much bigger change and has a lot more new stuff in it to boot.
|
# ? Jul 9, 2012 14:29 |
|
John Charity Spring posted:Rise of the Samurai is a pretty nice DLC expansion that changes things up a little but it's still very much in the vein of the vanilla Shogun 2 campaign even though the agents are a bit different and tactics have changed slightly and there are different buildings, units, and tech trees. Fall of the Samurai is a much bigger change and has a lot more new stuff in it to boot. Ok, thanks! I think I'll get it then, I played FotS for a while now and would like to play a traditional Campaign again now, so it sounds like RotS should be right up my alley.
|
# ? Jul 9, 2012 17:40 |
|
Vivick posted:Would you guys recommend getting Rise of the Samurai? I thought about buying it since its fairly cheap and I enjoyed vanilla Shogun 2, but from the Steam description I'm not sure if it changes the gamplay enough to warrant the purchase. It's kind of a different experience. You have a much smaller selection of worthwhile units. Foot Samurai are the best archers and swordsmen in the game and will kill everything that isn't Samurai that you point them towards, but they have low unit numbers and high upkeep. Retainers are pretty good against other retainers and will slaughter levy troops but get slaughtered by Samurai fast. Levy troops die in the hundreds but they are cheap and easily replaced. Actually the worst part of RotS is the naval battles. They absolutely blow. It's the worst parts of Vanilla's naval battles without any cannon ships ever being available and the clunky boarding action mixed with no ramming means you just park your poo poo next to one another and hope your fire arrow action becomes available before the CPU's does.
|
# ? Jul 9, 2012 17:58 |
|
Do you think there will be a lot of unit variety in Rome 2? I was just thinking because the melee animations are a lot more complex now and you'd have to make animations for every unit type to fight every other unit type. In Rome 1 the animations were so simple I think they used more or less the same ones over and over and it wasn't too bad. But watching swordmen/axemen/and spearmen all poking at each other in the same way would be quite jarring.
|
# ? Jul 9, 2012 18:50 |
|
When was the last time they had real unit variety? I'm guessing it was Medieval 2, it's really been awhile since they've gone that route and I can't really see how they could avoid having a large variety of units in Rome 2.
|
# ? Jul 10, 2012 00:47 |
|
NoneSuch posted:When was the last time they had real unit variety? I'm guessing it was Medieval 2, it's really been awhile since they've gone that route and I can't really see how they could avoid having a large variety of units in Rome 2. At the very least they have to have Roman, Greek, European Barbarian, and Steppe Barbarian.
|
# ? Jul 10, 2012 08:19 |
|
Nimmy posted:At the very least they have to have Roman, Greek, European Barbarian, and Steppe Barbarian. Controversial as it is, new kingdom Egyptions are in as well.
|
# ? Jul 10, 2012 08:46 |
|
NoneSuch posted:When was the last time they had real unit variety? I'm guessing it was Medieval 2, it's really been awhile since they've gone that route and I can't really see how they could avoid having a large variety of units in Rome 2. Notice the war dog at 1:48 Looking forward to a EBIII beta release in 2021.
|
# ? Jul 10, 2012 14:49 |
|
Nothing like making an army of nothing but wardogs and sending them around eating their way through bandits and rebels.
|
# ? Jul 10, 2012 17:50 |
Shorter Than Some posted:Controversial as it is, new kingdom Egyptions are in as well. Don't forget the Phoenician peoples of Carthage! We'll have pirates and no doubt a rebel rabble version of each faction too. And fingers crossed, Mercenaries.
|
|
# ? Jul 10, 2012 17:55 |
|
Shorter Than Some posted:Controversial as it is, new kingdom Egyptions are in as well. Urgh. There's tons of variety out there. Sure the Ptolemaics had the same Macedonian model but they used a lot of mercenaries since they had manpower problems. I'd even be happy with something semi-accurate as long as we don't get the headdresses and chariots again
|
# ? Jul 10, 2012 19:29 |
|
Shorter Than Some posted:Controversial as it is, new kingdom Egyptions are in as well. Is there any proof of this?
|
# ? Jul 10, 2012 19:44 |
|
I'm playing Medieval 2 and think I'm going to end up winning the game fighting entirely defensive wars. Started as Russia and took all the Steppe to the south and east. Then Poland were dicks and declared war, so I took half of their empire. Then Hungary declared war and I destroyed them entirely. Next, Venice decided my 15 territory empire was a good idea to attack. This was 1 turn after the Mongols arrived (thankfully in Turkish territory), so the armies I was amassing in the east had to come west, but eventually I destroyed their faction as well. Now I'm as far west as Germany and Venice and expect an HRE or Milanese attack any moment. The Byzantines are also sniffing around Bucharest. I just wanted to expand and consolidate to fight the Mongols, but I'm going to end up in France. Fighting in the woods has already been a real hassle for my mostly horse archer army.
|
# ? Jul 10, 2012 19:46 |
|
Sole Survivor posted:Is there any proof of this? Yes, it was in one of the recent interviews though I forget which.
|
# ? Jul 10, 2012 20:33 |
|
quote:I'm playing Medieval 2 and think I'm going to end up winning the game fighting entirely defensive wars. That tends to happen-the AI is weighted to hate you and attack you regardless of sense.
|
# ? Jul 10, 2012 20:37 |
|
The funny thing about AI in Med2 is that even attacking Rebel towns lowers your reputation. Taking cities, even if you were attacked, is also a reputation killer. It's pretty much impossible to play Med2 unmoded with allies. Try Stainless Steel, the game is much better there. Shorter Than Some posted:Yes, it was in one of the recent interviews though I forget which.
|
# ? Jul 10, 2012 20:40 |
|
Mans posted:The funny thing about AI in Med2 is that even attacking Rebel towns lowers your reputation. Taking cities, even if you were attacked, is also a reputation killer. Yeah, I couldn't find anything, and TWCenter hasn't completely melted down, so there's still hope.
|
# ? Jul 10, 2012 20:50 |
|
Mans posted:The funny thing about AI in Med2 is that even attacking Rebel towns lowers your reputation. Taking cities, even if you were attacked, is also a reputation killer.
|
# ? Jul 10, 2012 20:52 |
|
Even if they don't go balls out on variety the greek, roman, and barbarian based factions pretty much have to play quite differently. And thank god, I know some people liked Shogun and Empires homogeneity but give me variety any day
|
# ? Jul 10, 2012 20:57 |
Empire would have had variety if they hadn't fecking rushed the thing. The DLC units look pretty boss compared to the looking line and elite line. The Ottomans looked the best of course. Playing with them is always a challenge.
|
|
# ? Jul 10, 2012 21:12 |
|
|
# ? Mar 29, 2024 01:39 |
|
What's wrong with an Egyptian faction? Wasn't Cleopatra married to a Roman or am I just bad at history?
|
# ? Jul 10, 2012 23:29 |