Register a SA Forums Account here!
JOINING THE SA FORUMS WILL REMOVE THIS BIG AD, THE ANNOYING UNDERLINED ADS, AND STUPID INTERSTITIAL ADS!!!

You can: log in, read the tech support FAQ, or request your lost password. This dumb message (and those ads) will appear on every screen until you register! Get rid of this crap by registering your own SA Forums Account and joining roughly 150,000 Goons, for the one-time price of $9.95! We charge money because it costs us $3,400 per month for bandwidth bills alone, and since we don't believe in shoving popup ads to our registered users, we try to make the money back through forum registrations.
«521 »
  • Post
  • Reply
Communist Thoughts
Jan 7, 2008

0.000% of Communism has been built.
Evil, child-murdering billionaires still rule the world with a shit eating grin.

All he has managed to do is make himself *sad*.

Instead of building communism, he now builds a precise model of this grotesque, duplicitous world.




Ravenfood posted:

It's selective realism. Infantry in DeI doesn't sometimes break prior to a charge landing. Everyone responds to commands instantly and you have a near-perfect view of the field. Everyone holds formation where they're ordered to. Its very clear who is and isn't an army. Scouting is basically worthless. Supply lines aren't an issue and every army is more than capable of feeding itself. Its trying to ape a realism simulator without actually doing it instead of going for gameplay considerations, so it ends up feeling very cherry-picked.

Well actually,

Scouting matters now cause they added true LoS to armies so you can lure AI into traps and poo poo and not stumble into their army on the field cause they start invisible unless you've got scouts or a high vantage point.

Supply is modelled and even over the nation too, there's fertilitily levels of the soil and poo poo. Its crazy.
If you give barbs military access they will eat all your food and supplies.

The other things also have some attempts at modelling them, I think even down to javelins sticking in shields.

It's a loving masterpiece mod it's just the battle balance currently sucks.
My Macedonian lancers are killing 10 guys per charge and losing 15. That's just stupid.
Then an elephant runs in and kills 2k men in 60 seconds and breaks the entire army. No joke.

E: drat and now I think about it they started modelling horse breeds now so maybe my thesallian steeds just arent up to it... Time to go to scythia

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

yikes!
Jul 5, 2006



Soiled Meat

Communist Thoughts posted:


E: drat and now I think about it they started modelling horse breeds now so maybe my thesallian steeds just arent up to it... Time to go to scythia

lmao

Ravenfood
Nov 4, 2011


Communist Thoughts posted:

Well actually,

Scouting matters now cause they added true LoS to armies so you can lure AI into traps and poo poo and not stumble into their army on the field cause they start invisible unless you've got scouts or a high vantage point.
Oh yeah? You can find an army spread out and not in battle order because you scouted well enough? You can send fast cavalry to raid a baggage train well enough to cripple an army? Or prevent them from doing the same? Or don't know magically roughly how many men they have, because they all come in blocks of 120? Or your scouts can stumble across enemies and definitely not miscount them? Or just get killed without being able to get back to you in a timely fashion, because as soon as your scouts see the enemy you do to? Like, it might do a ton of very neat, fiddly things, but it isn't going to be simulationist, so adhering to "we made deaths very slow because its not realistic" is a choice.

Because you can't, because fundamentally the game is divided into a strategic and tactical layer where your army moves on a turn-by-turn basis with their army and mooshes into each other in a way that totally ignores all of that other poo poo, which are all far more important to how battles were decided than whether people died in the rout or in combat.

Meyers-Briggs Testicle
Aug 13, 2012

But without the hero, there is no Event.


Buglord

194 yuan shao is maybe the easiest start I've ever seen. many territories, two vassals, at war with gongzun to the north, zhang yan to the west. You get a mission to obliterate kong rong which you can do before the other two even bat an eye. Ally/vassal liu bei south of kong rong (in my game lu bu joined him, and then broke off into a separate entity adjacent to kong). Then two-side war gongzun and zhang with your vassals hopefully helping, it isn't too hard either way.

So you control the north, then on top of that you get a mission to be friends with your cousin yuan shu which means you can eventually easily vassal him when cao cao starts swinging. as long as you have both liu bei and yuan shu on your side (again, very easy, both are conducive to it) cao cao gets attacked on three sides. Then you just become a windmill of vassals and armies, liu bei almost single handedly killed sun ce and yan baihu before i vassaled yan.

the game asked me to move to "very hard" multiple times before i relented. it changed nothing. liu zhang (south west) and ma teng became the other emperors somehow, now its just a deathball west until i take their seats. i'm gonna kick back and let my vassals do the work while I get 35000 gold per turn (with two armies in the field)

e: also the yellow turbans are an unstoppable wrecking ball int he south and control probably 7-8 territories including changan
e2: in a weird twist of fate I managed to adopt ma chao and marry zheng jiang. yuan shao is living his best life
e3:
my vassals are amassing their armies next to my capital. they're friendly and have battle assignments. i'm not sure what this means.

Meyers-Briggs Testicle fucked around with this message at 17:01 on May 13, 2020

Chortles
Dec 29, 2008


The Three Kingdoms 1.5.2 patch is now in a Steam beta branch, here's the patch notes. I did laugh at this part:

3K 1.5.2 beta patch notes posted:

Xun Yu now gets a unique weapon at Marquis of Wansui level in custom/multiplayer battles
because I looked it up and it is indeed wŗnsuž as in 'ten thousand years'/'long live'/banzai in Japanese, and apparently that's a historical title of his too.

As far as battle changes go:
  • Zhou Tai's unique passive Undying Vow got changed "to be active so it deactivates under the right conditions" and his autoresolve value presumably got reduced,
  • Sun Ce's Blood Fury is now dueling-only (a de facto buff for him as it prevents him from berserking as frequently as he used to against units),
  • the Zhanmajian Infantry and Handmaid Guard got nerfed via "Reduced power", while the Handmaid Guard and Xu Chu's '+ general's damage resistance' passive auras both got nerfed (way too late in Xu Chu's case but still),
  • Yan Baihu's Poison Volley got a seeming nerf via halved duration,
  • Mounted Crossbows got more ammunition
  • the Qiao sisters' and Two Zhangs' passive abilities got changed to "now have correct deactivation conditions"
  • "Fixed issue where change to Knowledge of Body healing value wasnít included in update 1.5.0"
  • several custom/MP battle characters got corresponding faction-specific units added to their lineup (e.g. Sun Ren now has access to Tiger Guard) while Gao Shun, Yan Baihu, and Yan Yu got the Defenders of Earth and Protectors of Heaven,
  • Diaochan and Xun Yu now get Unique-quality weapons in custom/MP battles at Enchantress and Marquis of Wansui cost/stat levels respectively
  • and finally unit fixes include "Qiang Hunters were using wrong attribute set", "Mercenary Cavalry Captain now correctly using cavalry spacing rather than infantry spacing", and a lot of units got Caltrops, Smoke Screen, and/or formations
At the campaign layer there's plenty of diplomacy fixes, supposedly fervour is finally fixed (specifically "Fixed issue where Fervour effect bundles were not being removed after the Mandate War ended"), several campaign fixes for bandits (e.g. Zhang Yan and Zheng Jiang get their respective uncapped recruiting of their own faction-specific units back, while Zheng Jiang may again Demand Tribute from Han factions) in particular, and a bunch of rebalancing (e.g. "
Halved Prestige given by LŁ Buís Personal Victories
", while Sun Ce's campaign should be a bit easier thanks to a nerf of Wu Jing's campaign AI aggressiveness and fixing his character-rewarding missions to eventually grant the characters if they're completed before the characters come of age).

MiddleOne
Feb 17, 2011



Meyers-Briggs Testicle posted:

e3:
my vassals are amassing their armies next to my capital. they're friendly and have battle assignments. i'm not sure what this means.

Yeah it's a thing. Vassals 'protect' your capital once the kingdom phase starts.

Agean90
Jun 28, 2008




I'm having the exact opposite issue with my last few battles in dei where no unit breaks until they've taken 75% casualties,even if it's some lovely garrison unit vs nobel thracian warriors charging into them from behind

Agean90 fucked around with this message at 18:55 on May 13, 2020

Meyers-Briggs Testicle
Aug 13, 2012

But without the hero, there is no Event.


Buglord

MiddleOne posted:

Yeah it's a thing. Vassals 'protect' your capital once the kingdom phase starts.

Can I tell them to gently caress off and do something useful

ninjahedgehog
Feb 17, 2011

It's time to kick the tires and light the fires, Big Bird.


Yeah in the diplomatic menu there's a "War coordination" button where you can then assign them targets on the map. They're ....ok at following it but it's better than them just hanging around playing slap-dick at your capital

EDIT: oh, just saw they had battle assignments. In that case

EDIT2: on the other hand, you're playing as Yuan Shao so you deserve every bit of pain that comes your way. This post made by the rear end-hosed by 20 vassals at once gang

ninjahedgehog fucked around with this message at 19:21 on May 13, 2020

MiddleOne
Feb 17, 2011



Meyers-Briggs Testicle posted:

Can I tell them to gently caress off and do something useful

Annex.

Fuligin
Oct 27, 2010


The only thing the game is really missing as a proper 3K adaptation is intrigue. Constant intrigue. Intrigue within scheming within plotting. Once you actually found a kingdom the court should turn into a proper nest of vipers

Meyers-Briggs Testicle
Aug 13, 2012

But without the hero, there is no Event.


Buglord


thats gonna spook my hundred vassals nty

GyverMac
Aug 3, 2006
My posting is like I Love Lucy without the funny bits. Basically, WAAAAAAAAAAAA
AAAAAAAAAAAHHH
HHHHHHHHHHHHHH


Has anybody tried the 1212 medieval mod for Attilla? It looks real slick, seemingly got a lot of content and unique units, even papacy and crusader mechanic in place.

Captain Beans
Aug 5, 2004

Whar be the beans?

Hair Elf

GyverMac posted:

Has anybody tried the 1212 medieval mod for Attilla? It looks real slick, seemingly got a lot of content and unique units, even papacy and crusader mechanic in place.

What it has is quite good.

But what it lacks is quite a lot. Campaigns kind of run out of steam after like 90 turns, no events, AI seems to turn off, tier 2 and 3 units donít exist yet. There are some sub mods that can correct a lot of this but not all of it. They seem to be really testing what they do release, which is why the first 1/3 of a campaign is pretty good. Hopefully they put out some more updates soon.

Qubee
May 31, 2013




I would love love love if the next TW game had dedicated supply lines: if you go and conquer a territory disconnected from your homeland, you need to set up a forward operating base or something that brings in supplies from your homeland. These could be similar to trade routes a la Empire: TW that can be raided or interrupted. And then having a dedicated unit like a mule baggage train (for Rome era) that you can set on automated routes to bring supplies from the outpost to the frontline / your army.

It would add so much flavour to the campaign map. Enemy army going balls deep into your territory but is too big of a threat to take out in a battle? Send small raiding parties to gently caress with their baggage trains. Eventually their soldiers will run out of food and they'll suffer attrition, so they can either sack the local areas or retreat back to the outpost and defend their baggage trains. It sounds janky typing it but I reckon with a bit of work, it'd be a really smooth game mechanic that adds a lot of depth to the campaign map. Land grabbing would be a much more involved and conscious effort, you'd have to sort the logistics out so your army stays supplied in enemy territory, whilst also defending the vulnerable supply lines.

A glorious campaign you envisioned where you go and conquer tonnes of land hits a roadblock because you are logistically incapable of supplying your various armies spread throughout enemy territory, so you either need to put the campaign on pause and bolster your supplies, or just retreat to the places you've captured and try again next spring. I've been on both the giving and receiving end of a doomstack just knocking settlements over like dominoes and the person hosed being completely powerless to stop it. It would be nice if there was a little more nuance to it than just "I have a doomstack so I can go and wipe out 60% of your territories unless you get a doomstack to stop me".

Verviticus
Mar 13, 2006

Security? Please escort the fan in section 106, row 16, seat 1 out of the building right now and bar him from coming here again!



alex314 posted:

They removed "faster battles" submod? I remember it being absolutely essential.

3K Mandate campaign question: what happens when YT get to 50 provinces when I'm on Han side? They got to 30 and show no sign of stopping despite me killing Gong Du. Will their unstoppable wave go ever south or is there some stops added?

if they get to 50 and conquer luoyang they immediately win

edit: did xu chu's damage resistance buff even work? it was supposedly 80%, you think that would be obviously noticeable, but i never actually saw its effects

Verviticus fucked around with this message at 22:44 on May 13, 2020

Communist Thoughts
Jan 7, 2008

0.000% of Communism has been built.
Evil, child-murdering billionaires still rule the world with a shit eating grin.

All he has managed to do is make himself *sad*.

Instead of building communism, he now builds a precise model of this grotesque, duplicitous world.




Captain Beans posted:

What it has is quite good.

But what it lacks is quite a lot. Campaigns kind of run out of steam after like 90 turns, no events, AI seems to turn off, tier 2 and 3 units don’t exist yet. There are some sub mods that can correct a lot of this but not all of it. They seem to be really testing what they do release, which is why the first 1/3 of a campaign is pretty good. Hopefully they put out some more updates soon.

To this day I still don't believe attila actually has campaign ai

Ham Sandwiches
Jul 7, 2000



What the total war games really need are nato counters;

Meyers-Briggs Testicle
Aug 13, 2012

But without the hero, there is no Event.


Buglord

Qubee posted:

I would love love love if the next TW game had dedicated supply lines: if you go and conquer a territory disconnected from your homeland, you need to set up a forward operating base or something that brings in supplies from your homeland. These could be similar to trade routes a la Empire: TW that can be raided or interrupted. And then having a dedicated unit like a mule baggage train (for Rome era) that you can set on automated routes to bring supplies from the outpost to the frontline / your army.

It would add so much flavour to the campaign map. Enemy army going balls deep into your territory but is too big of a threat to take out in a battle? Send small raiding parties to gently caress with their baggage trains. Eventually their soldiers will run out of food and they'll suffer attrition, so they can either sack the local areas or retreat back to the outpost and defend their baggage trains. It sounds janky typing it but I reckon with a bit of work, it'd be a really smooth game mechanic that adds a lot of depth to the campaign map. Land grabbing would be a much more involved and conscious effort, you'd have to sort the logistics out so your army stays supplied in enemy territory, whilst also defending the vulnerable supply lines.

A glorious campaign you envisioned where you go and conquer tonnes of land hits a roadblock because you are logistically incapable of supplying your various armies spread throughout enemy territory, so you either need to put the campaign on pause and bolster your supplies, or just retreat to the places you've captured and try again next spring. I've been on both the giving and receiving end of a doomstack just knocking settlements over like dominoes and the person hosed being completely powerless to stop it. It would be nice if there was a little more nuance to it than just "I have a doomstack so I can go and wipe out 60% of your territories unless you get a doomstack to stop me".

the AI already doesn't abuse this, its more of the player who can zip around the map at a whim, charge headfirst into the enemy to take the emperor seat etc. i wish the 3 kingdoms AI would use their retinues the way we can. it makes attacking large central powers incredibly easy if you can take a single territory behind them. that one city can churn out an army every turn. that change would certainly make the overworld grand strategy aspect a bit more fair.

three changes I wish they would make are making diplomacy make a bit more sense, making battles less of an "all or nothing" thing, and actually make me work for the final stretch
1. Some of the AI's decisions are wild, you have two territories and I have 20, you're going to declare war on me? why? and at the same time I can trade a handful of shiny beads (ancillaries i usually forget about) for an entire territory or negate your "must be independent" condition. At the same time the "its out of the question" penalty can be insane, at least propose some kind of alternative. I know you refuse to become a vassal and have -8012380 feeling towards it, would you rather become an ally? You're friendly with me so you must be conducive to *something*.
2. Retreating from a battle should lose you something. does it lose you morale? I don't think it does atm. most medieval battles were stalemates which is boring but i feel like on hard/vh all of my auto-resolve battles are either "decisive victory" or "decisive defeat". if garrisons could retreat that would also be interesting, just abandon the city or raze it yourself while flipping the bird
3. my last three games have selected emperors who are tiny kingdoms with no vassals on the opposite side of the map. Hopefully this changes with the nanman - introducing a major faction with real power in the south. Maybe it's because Ive been playing cao cao / yuan shao / liu bei and my first 50 turns are spent obliterating competition in the north. I feel like if you have 6 vassals and 50 territories and the only options for emperors are ma teng and shi zhu the game should say "congrats you won" instead of having them hold out for another 20 turns

e: this reads like a manic stream-of-consciousness manifesto lol

The Cheshire Cat
Jun 10, 2008



Fun Shoe

Qubee posted:

I would love love love if the next TW game had dedicated supply lines: if you go and conquer a territory disconnected from your homeland, you need to set up a forward operating base or something that brings in supplies from your homeland. These could be similar to trade routes a la Empire: TW that can be raided or interrupted. And then having a dedicated unit like a mule baggage train (for Rome era) that you can set on automated routes to bring supplies from the outpost to the frontline / your army.

It would add so much flavour to the campaign map. Enemy army going balls deep into your territory but is too big of a threat to take out in a battle? Send small raiding parties to gently caress with their baggage trains. Eventually their soldiers will run out of food and they'll suffer attrition, so they can either sack the local areas or retreat back to the outpost and defend their baggage trains. It sounds janky typing it but I reckon with a bit of work, it'd be a really smooth game mechanic that adds a lot of depth to the campaign map. Land grabbing would be a much more involved and conscious effort, you'd have to sort the logistics out so your army stays supplied in enemy territory, whilst also defending the vulnerable supply lines.

A glorious campaign you envisioned where you go and conquer tonnes of land hits a roadblock because you are logistically incapable of supplying your various armies spread throughout enemy territory, so you either need to put the campaign on pause and bolster your supplies, or just retreat to the places you've captured and try again next spring. I've been on both the giving and receiving end of a doomstack just knocking settlements over like dominoes and the person hosed being completely powerless to stop it. It would be nice if there was a little more nuance to it than just "I have a doomstack so I can go and wipe out 60% of your territories unless you get a doomstack to stop me".

If they ever do an empire sequel I think this would make a lot of sense. One thing about the TW games (and a lot of strategy games in general really) is because they abstract supply lines away, naval power ends up being much, much less important than it was in real life. So it's especially weird when it's modelling a period where having the best navy was the thing that determined your military power and in-game it's just like "yeah you can buy some boats if you have some spare cash if you want but you won't really use them".

I feel like they probably wouldn't do this because the AI wouldn't be able to handle it, though. It's the same reason why the AI gets drastically reduced effects from attrition - it doesn't really have the kind of strategic thinking to avoid it so instead it just gets to mostly ignore it.

Anno
May 10, 2017

I'm going to drown! For no reason at all!

I also think a bunch of players would dislike it and find it tedious to manage.

golden bubble
Jun 3, 2011

yospos


Meyers-Briggs Testicle posted:


2. Retreating from a battle should lose you something. does it lose you morale? I don't think it does atm. most medieval battles were stalemates which is boring but i feel like on hard/vh all of my auto-resolve battles are either "decisive victory" or "decisive defeat". if garrisons could retreat that would also be interesting, just abandon the city or raze it yourself while flipping the bird


I mean that's how history is. This isn't a stalemate, but simply refusing to start a battle at all. From the Fabian strategy during the Roman republic to how France was able to retake lost territory from England during the 100 years war without a single significant field battle, refusing to fight a field battles is a real strategy that really works. Battles occur because both sides either think they can win the battle or they have no choice but to fight.

Qubee
May 31, 2013




I just recently found out I can completely decimate opponent armies by seizing all their food-producing territories, and that's what made me go off on the tangent about supply lines. I was going against someone who was fielding quite a few tough armies, so I decided to gently caress their easy farmlands up to mess with their economy. I then started to notice they were all suffering attrition and it gave me a yearning for supply lines. If the TW devs were able to include a mechanic like this that wasn't tedious to manage, I think it would be really fun to have ingame.

The Cheshire Cat
Jun 10, 2008



Fun Shoe

The food economy in 3K is very weird because on the one hand the AI seems to highly value food as a trade resource when you offer it to them, but on the other hand it seems to view all its own food production provinces as "this old thing? Sure you can have it I guess"

skooma512
Feb 8, 2012

You couldn't grok my race car, but you dug the roadside blur.

The Cheshire Cat posted:

The food economy in 3K is very weird because on the one hand the AI seems to highly value food as a trade resource when you offer it to them, but on the other hand it seems to view all its own food production provinces as "this old thing? Sure you can have it I guess"

And I wouldn't be surprised if the AI's food deficit penalties are either diminished or not calculated at all. I see these guys going -10 like it's cool and nothing feels any different when dealing with them

Qubee
May 31, 2013




That's why I keep ignoring the game when it recommends I put the difficulty higher. I don't know if it'll actually affect how the AI behaves, or makes them do things slightly more logical, or if it'll just cop out by tacking on absurd bonuses to their economy / morale that makes defeats feel unfair and wins feel silly.

So question: does campaign / battle difficulty actually affect anything meaningful? Or does it just give the AI a stupid bailout in terms of ludicrous morale / popping doomstacks out despite having a bankrupt economy?

Eimi
Nov 23, 2013





The next Rome game better be made so that by fighting in a triplex acies I'm not nerfing myself.

Chomp8645
Sep 1, 2006

Vvardenfell awaits.



Eimi posted:

next Rome game

Alternate universe post.

Meyers-Briggs Testicle
Aug 13, 2012

But without the hero, there is no Event.


Buglord

how is everyone else playing 194 lu bu's start?

on easy/normal i could circle back and fight cao cao off but on very hard i got mercilessly owned.

I'm not sure how easy this is to replicate but my first 15 turns were a whirlwind, i managed this twice in a row

1. fight the xiahou's, slay both, immediately vassal under li jue, fire most of your generals
2. cao cao's armies forget about you and beeline to li jue, nows your chance to make some crossbows and marry diaochan
3. cao cao is going to declare war on li jue along with everyone else. his armies will probably (hopefully) take the han emperor
4. I went to luoyang + lumberyard and smashed both to maintain momentum (lumberyard I razed, those places suck lol)
5. fight off cao cao's hoards which arrive one at a time. I somehow managed to capture him en route to luoyang
6. declare independence from li jue. this makes people love you again
7. annex yingchuan and take the han emperor. the wei army will be outside waiting to murder you. if you stay in yingchuan at the end of turn you're pretty much boned (I am bad at castle fights and lu bu was very close to dead). instead, walk outside end of turn. they will either engage you or start a siege on yingchuan which has all of its walls still.
8. either way you win, lu bu gets health back, you can more safely mop up the rest of wei. you have the han emperor and are making 3k per turn

not sure where to go from here but its a solid rear end start

e: hey I held the emperor for 10 turns before he boogied out which is much longer than I expected

Meyers-Briggs Testicle fucked around with this message at 07:34 on May 14, 2020

Captain Beans
Aug 5, 2004

Whar be the beans?

Hair Elf

Qubee posted:

That's why I keep ignoring the game when it recommends I put the difficulty higher. I don't know if it'll actually affect how the AI behaves, or makes them do things slightly more logical, or if it'll just cop out by tacking on absurd bonuses to their economy / morale that makes defeats feel unfair and wins feel silly.

So question: does campaign / battle difficulty actually affect anything meaningful? Or does it just give the AI a stupid bailout in terms of ludicrous morale / popping doomstacks out despite having a bankrupt economy?

Battle AI does change its behavior when changed from Normal to Hard (and higher). The biggest change is the AI wonít waste ammo shooting at targets that wonít take any real damage. On normal you can march a turtle formation with commander skills boosting the missile block to 100% and the AI will shoot all their ammo and do zero damage.

Battle AI does boost enemy moral, but I think on hard itís boosted by less than 4. Obviously the higher up you go in difficulty the more insane that gets.

Hard/Hard is a pretty good difficulty if you are familiar with TW games. Hard on the campaign makes your generals a bit more difficult to keep happy and it does boost the AI some, but the AI isnít as good as the player at building commandaries that synergize, so I think it balances out.

Meyers-Briggs Testicle
Aug 13, 2012

But without the hero, there is no Event.


Buglord

I watched a video where someone pitted two sabre militia against each other on hard / very hard and it looks like very hard is just "hard with a stupid number of bonuses to the AI"
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uCDp-ayYcx4#t=1372s

Verviticus
Mar 13, 2006

Security? Please escort the fan in section 106, row 16, seat 1 out of the building right now and bar him from coming here again!



lol ive only ever played this game on vh and i thought i was maybe just insane or never using my units right. i get so much mileage out of generals that i mostly use infantry as fodder/numbers padding and later to auto-resolve

edit: i thought maybe people had like some sort of special tactic that let them actually engage in infantry vs infantry battles that didn't end in 15 seconds

Verviticus fucked around with this message at 22:58 on May 14, 2020

toasterwarrior
Nov 11, 2011


Yeah that's a TW staple. I never play on battle difficulty past Normal, the stat bonuses enemy units get means that you're basically fighting enemies a tier higher than they actually are, and I'm not a fan of that.

Verviticus
Mar 13, 2006

Security? Please escort the fan in section 106, row 16, seat 1 out of the building right now and bar him from coming here again!



toasterwarrior posted:

Yeah that's a TW staple. I never play on battle difficulty past Normal, the stat bonuses enemy units get means that you're basically fighting enemies a tier higher than they actually are, and I'm not a fan of that.

the game is already kinda easy though so i dunno how to address it. maybe i'll just play hard and only take outnumbered battles or something

Ham Sandwiches
Jul 7, 2000



Campaign set to VH and battles set to Hard is a pretty good mix of the AI getting some bonuses in combat but still being doable. VH/VH simply means that friendly melee units melt, though it's something you can work around for sure. Just easier for some factions than others.

With the difficulty settings, Hard and VH really mean a huge reduction in melee unit effectiveness but ranged units and magic are basically unaffected. Cav is affected a bit, but still effective in most of its roles just suffers more when left in melee combat.

And the AI units will almost never rout on VH combat difficulty, which changes the flow of battles a bit as well.

Majorian
Jul 1, 2009

Spit it out, Georgy. Staging a coup here.



Communist Thoughts posted:

To this day I still don't believe attila actually has campaign ai

One thing I've noticed is how much more of a strategic direction the WRE's separatists have than the WRE itself. I guess that fits historically, to some extent, but I find it kind of funny. "Oh, NOW you Western Romans know what you're doing?"

e: anyone played as Lu Zhi or Tao Qian yet? If so, are either worth trying? I'm just kind of working my way through the 182/190 factions before I dip my toe in Eight Princes.

Majorian fucked around with this message at 00:29 on May 15, 2020

StashAugustine
Mar 24, 2013

Do not trust in hope- it will betray you! Only faith and hatred sustain.








The Cheshire Cat posted:

If they ever do an empire sequel I think this would make a lot of sense. One thing about the TW games (and a lot of strategy games in general really) is because they abstract supply lines away, naval power ends up being much, much less important than it was in real life. So it's especially weird when it's modelling a period where having the best navy was the thing that determined your military power and in-game it's just like "yeah you can buy some boats if you have some spare cash if you want but you won't really use them".

I feel like they probably wouldn't do this because the AI wouldn't be able to handle it, though. It's the same reason why the AI gets drastically reduced effects from attrition - it doesn't really have the kind of strategic thinking to avoid it so instead it just gets to mostly ignore it.

Navy stuff sucks in total war since you've got a huge empty plain with no terrain barriers, huge movement speed, and no way to react to the enemy; same as a lot of 4x games. Board war games have solved this by either having massive sea spaces and abstracting it all or allowing reaction moves but computer games seem to be lagging behind

MiddleOne
Feb 17, 2011



Oh my god they fixed Zheng Jiang. She can once again demand tribute from non-bandit factions.

Kaal
May 22, 2002

JEREMY CORBYN BULLIED MY NAZI GRANDPA IN PRIMARY SCHOOL



StashAugustine posted:

Navy stuff sucks in total war since you've got a huge empty plain with no terrain barriers, huge movement speed, and no way to react to the enemy; same as a lot of 4x games. Board war games have solved this by either having massive sea spaces and abstracting it all or allowing reaction moves but computer games seem to be lagging behind

Shogun 2 FOTS kinda got this right, since blockades actually work pretty well once you figure out how to do them right (a central fleet with pickets holding chokepoints, supplemented by flying squadrons to actually go on the offensive). It helps that they got away from the dysfunctional ramming and boarding systems.

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

Blooming Brilliant
Jul 12, 2010



Majorian posted:

e: anyone played as Lu Zhi or Tao Qian yet? If so, are either worth trying?

Lu Zhi's early game is pretty frantic and fun since you're on the Zhang Brother's doorsteps. Afterwards it's kind of meh, your standard North Chinese faction start, probably a bit easier since Dong Zhuo isn't much of a threat in 182.

His Book mechanic is neat but not really that fleshed out, same situation as Liu Chong's trophies.

It's kind of funny seeing how 3K and Warhammer use each other as respective testing grounds for mechanics, since Grom the Paunch's Food mechanic looks like a better version of the Book/Trophy stuff.

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • Post
  • Reply
«521 »