|
Koramei posted:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5Dilj4lssok I really like the detail of horses rearing and refusing to charge into a solid obstacle, like a shieldwall. Would be cool if that could be combined with a mechanic where they will still charge if the infantry formation suffers a morale shock and loses cohesion, as that is why alot of frontal cavalry charges worked in history, because people tended to lose their nerves when heavily armed men on horses came thundering towards them.
|
#
¿
Apr 7, 2018 12:09
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 27, 2024 18:53 |
|
|
Haha! Get hosed Seleucids.  Started augmenting my eastern forces with auxiliary horse archers and they are very effective indeed, playing as Scythians or Parthians must just make you feel very mean.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 7, 2018 17:56
|
|
|
Are war dogs just really good? I put 2 units in one of my armies for fun, released them just ahead of an infantry charge. They murdered 400 men in total without a single doggy being killed. This was against a Galatin garrison that sallied out, I guess against heavily armored men or phalangites or hoplites they'd be much less useful, still that seems very efficient to me.
Randarkman fucked around with this message at 04:30 on Apr 8, 2018 |
|
#
¿
Apr 8, 2018 00:17
|
|
|
I've been thinking of trying out Epirus after I'm done with my Rome game. Anyone here done that? Any recommended strategies? Having taken a look at it, I'd say their starting position is quite weak and not strong enough to take on Rome at the start as you start with tiny armies and not much of an economy to speak of. I was thinking that what you might try to do would be spend as much money as you can at the start getting a decent army, going into negative income if necessary to do so, and then just strike at Larissa and then maybe take out Sparta and perhaps Athens, then grabbing some lands in Illyria. Basically go all in on blitzing Greece and Illyria to set up a proper economic base before attempting to get any further in Italy.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 9, 2018 13:06
|
|
|
Mans posted:I'm glad i'm not the only crazy person who conquers everything carthage related but leaves the capital to last no matter the logistical and strategic difficulties it might cause because damnit, it will be burned. Oh, yeah. A small part of it was necessity though. There was a large number of Numidians (I've mentioned how I hate them) to the south of the armies moving in from the West, which is why I gathered and landed two more legions just south of Carthage in order to be able to move against the Numidians without the Carthaginians hitting me and vice versa. Of course after landing those legions (also seized the other two African ports with fleets and built armies and staffed them with mercs and local levies to deal with revolts) I could have taken Carthage at any time really, but obviously I held off on e: Current situation.  Gonna take a pause from fighting the Seleucids soon, I think. Turn north, it's about time I dealt with those Belgians (who happen to be allied to the Suebi). Randarkman fucked around with this message at 04:07 on Apr 10, 2018 |
|
#
¿
Apr 10, 2018 03:24
|
|
|
nopantsjack posted:pretty much yeah, though actually mosiacs and stuff lol Well, also descriptions and poo poo, a thing to note is that as far as I can tell Romans and Greeks never really remarked upon say North Africans, Near Easterners or Persians looking any different from them (though Ancient Greeks do remark upon the Persians being pale at times), but they definitely thought that Gauls and (especially) Germanics looked very different. All told, most ancient peoples probably looked pretty much like the modern populations, though I would guess there is more variation in the modern genepool and therefore a wider range of appearances in the modern case.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 20, 2018 02:09
|
|
|
The Cheshire Cat posted:Did they have matched animations in the older games? I've always wondered how they did large monsters in the Lord of the Rings mod for Medieval 2, despite that game not having HP pools so one good roll means dead dragon. If every fight was 1v1 then those large monsters would last a lot longer than if everyone was free to gang up on them and spam attacks at once. You still had hitpoints in the older games. It's just that almost all had 1 hitpoint. With a very few exceptions like elephants having multiple. All the conquistador units also had 2 or more hitpoints in the Americas campaign for M2 as well IIRC
|
|
#
¿
Jun 8, 2018 05:16
|
|
|
Hallucinogenic Toreador posted:Welp, guess it's time to buy a new computer. ...Maybe system requirements won't be that beyond Warhammer. I can hope. At least I have a decent graphic card. I actually wonder what the dudes over on TWC think about this, I am curious, I remember back when I was a teenager and actually read and posted on that forum that alot of them were always clamoring for Three Kingdoms.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 8, 2018 21:03
|
|
|
Dramicus posted:Holy gently caress, the axe troops looked vicious in combat, the animations seem really good. They may have been lovely spears, and they weren't in any kind of closed formation. There's plenty of examples in history of cavalry attacking and defeating spear-armed troops, spears being the ultimate counter against cavalry is very much a game thing (and don't get me started at swords being the counter against spears) and not really a real thing. Spears are versatile weapons good on both the attack and the defense because of their reach and versatility and the ease of using them in formation. Sure you have units of heavy infantry, more often than not armed with spears, withstanding cavalry charges, but that does seem to have more to with presenting a dense sort of solid obstacle that it's hard to make horses charge into (the spears facilitate fighting in such a formation though). When you see cavalry actually being more or less directly countered in battles it seems to more often be with cavalry, skirmishers or massed missile weapons (crossbows were the preferred method of the Chinese to deal with steppe nomads, that and employing steppe nomad cavalry of their own). Anyway... enough about that, it was probably just a trailer and a lovely spear unit attacked by an elite cav unit. They will most likely keep the old RTS rock-paper-scissors weapon strengths. Sadly I say, I don't mind it being rock-paper-scissors, but I'd really love to see spears move out of the ghetto of just being defensive troops you use to fend off cavalry, when properly they should be the most versatile infantry you have, able to fulfill many different roles.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 8, 2018 21:51
|
|
|
Arcsquad12 posted:Please, the only thing that will make the TWC assholes satisfied is a Spanish Reconquista game where the Muslims are an unplayable faction and they're all modeled like brown skinned goblins from Warhammer dying in droves to holy Christian reclaimers. Extremely belated but are the TWC guys angry at Three Kingdoms being the next game? I know it's full of racists and the same kind of people who populate the Paradox forums, but having posted a whole lot on there back when I was a teenager (I was/am a giant history nerd and I had some minor involvement with the Broken Crescent mod for Medieval 2) I remember Three Kingdoms Romance consistently being one of the most request settings whnever there was talk of a potential new TW game. Did that change? They probably would have taken that Reconquista game as well back then though. With the exception that the Muslims would only functionally be goblins, not visually, because of ~~historical accuracy~~ (is unaware that Moorish/Andalucian armies were extremely similar in terms of equipment to Christian Spanish ones, and is fine with hordes of unarmored light cavalry and infantry rabble) e: On a related but different note, a Three Kingdoms style character-focused historical game set in the Crusades would be extremely my poo poo. Particularly if it starts in the 1160s before Saladin seizes power in Egypt. There's a whole bunch of politicking and struggles that took part at that time, particularly on the Islamic side, which is generally ignored in nearly all media that portrays the Crusades, even lots of historical works just glosses over how Saladin had suddenly established himself as the head of a Sunni state in Egypt that was previously home to a Shiite Caliphate. Randarkman fucked around with this message at 09:49 on Apr 7, 2019 |
|
#
¿
Apr 7, 2019 09:36
|
|
|
I watched a couple of early access videos today and the battle AI actually seemed pretty decent all things considered, the youtubers as well seemed genuinely surprised at how well the AI did (again of course with the perspective that it's still an AI). Looks promising. Except for having an impression that the unit roster is a bit bloated with some direct upgrade units, the battles actually remind me a bit of Shogun 2 so far.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 27, 2019 23:43
|
|
|
What do we know about performance and requirements? I can run all the latest Total War reasonably well on high graphics settings (somehow I never had many issues running Attila, luck I guess), though I've got pretty long load times due to no SSD (particularly for Warhammer 2), but I've just learned to live with that. Are there any indications this game will be significantly more demanding than any of the recent ones?Chortles posted:I take it that you're referring to battle AI? I believe that can only be so good before some players would accuse it of cheating in ways different from "better stats, hidden or not." Yeah, I was thinking of the battle AI. This was from youtubers who play alot of Warhammer multiplayer and they were actually pretty impressed with how the AI positioned and moved its units on the battlefield. Of course it can't stand up to a human who knows what they're doing, but it actually seemed pretty decent for an AI. Randarkman fucked around with this message at 18:04 on Apr 28, 2019 |
|
#
¿
Apr 28, 2019 17:58
|
|
|
Haven't gotten the chance to play this alot due to travelling alot this past month (and going away again tomorrow), but so far the game actually seems very neat. It also runs very well for me, much better than either Warhammers and I think also Rome 2.
|
|
#
¿
May 26, 2019 21:59
|
|
|
I have a feeling most of the generic portraits and models for important historical characters is a thing that will be fleshed out over time in (free) future patches.
|
|
#
¿
May 27, 2019 00:15
|
|
|
It's still early, but do we know how the game is doing as regards sales and players compared to the Warhammers? I guess it might have a pretty decent market in China and Korea. The subject matter is popular for all kinds of media and RTS games as well are popular over there (though perhaps not this kind of RTS specifically). I don't know if it's a problem that a Japanese company is publishing the game. That's probably what cost us any chance of a Shogun 2 Korea expansion, but that's more because it would be a Japanese company publishing a game about Japan invading Korea, which is a sensitive issue. I don't really think this is. Anyway I just got curious. What little I got to play of the game this weekend actually left me very impressed and I'm looking forward to playing more later this week. e: Curiosity partly stems from the avove impression of the game and a general impression that CA has really improved as a company over the past five years or so. They seem to particularly have taken lesson from Rome 2's release and reception, a game they actually managed to patch into a pretty drat decent one after a disastrous launch. And despite the controverses over pre-order bonuses and day 1 DLC I feel like their general DLC policy has actually been among the best in the business, compared to many other developers I'm familiar with, with the Warhammer games. It's kind of tacky but I really wish CA all kinds of success these days. Randarkman fucked around with this message at 17:54 on May 27, 2019 |
|
#
¿
May 27, 2019 17:26
|
|
|
Nemo2342 posted:I'm all for watching Total War become a better ROTK game than ROTK. Aren't those games kind of garbage? Seems part of the reaction to Three Kingdoms in China and Korea has been that this will be the death of the company developing those games. Also saw that they never seem to have featured Korea in any way, despite this having been a common request from Korean players. If I were CA I know what DLC/expansion I'd want to do.
|
|
#
¿
May 28, 2019 18:21
|
|
|
Nullkigan posted:Given CA patch rates since Warhammer it's going to be a while before it's worth playing as anyone other than Yuan Shao or someone who can immediately punk him... though at least there was a stability hotfix today. As far as I could tell it seems well worth playing already.
|
|
#
¿
May 28, 2019 18:30
|
|
|
Glenn Quebec posted:False. Loading into battles on HDD sucks rear end. I have it on HDD. It loads battles significantly faster than Warhammer 2.
|
|
#
¿
May 28, 2019 18:41
|
|
|
So since the last thing that happened in my Cao Cao campaign was that I got into a war with Yuan Shao I should probably focus on wiping him out. Also, based on what I'm reading, Commanders are a bit underwhelming compared to some of the other classes. Might I be better off sending Cao Cao home and have him mostly go out on assignments (can you send faction leaders on assignments?) and give faction leader benefits and instead get a strategist into my main army with the other two legendaries? Randarkman fucked around with this message at 19:08 on May 28, 2019 |
|
#
¿
May 28, 2019 18:58
|
|
|
Promethium posted:This is very much an AI exploit but in siege battles you can park some turtle formation spears in range of enemy archers to make them waste their entire ammo against an impervious target, and it also attracts shots from towers to let you burn them down or get in safely. I don't know if it would work. But before starting my Cao Cao campaign I played a little bit of Yuan Shao which I ended up aborting. In that one I had a siege battle against a mine town go south because I underestimated towers and took too many casualties. So I retreated rather than see my army destroyed. What surprised me was that the AI sallied out with its forces to pursue me. I wonder if this behavior could be exploited.
|
|
#
¿
May 28, 2019 21:08
|
|
|
Agnostalgia posted:The tooltip for controlling the Emperor says that I can annex Han territory for a cost. How do I actually do that? There's no diplomacy option to do that. Is it only available for certain factions and the tooltip is just bad? It probably works similar to Liu Bei's ability where if you have an army selected and right click on a settlement name you get the option to annex it at a cost rather than attack.
|
|
#
¿
May 28, 2019 21:53
|
|
|
|
|
#
¿
May 29, 2019 01:59
|
|
|
Would you look at that, Zheng Jiang just showed up for hire in my Cao Cao campaign.
|
|
#
¿
May 30, 2019 01:25
|
|
|
I have to say I really enjoy all the banners units carry with them in this game.   
|
|
#
¿
May 30, 2019 20:29
|
|
|
Zurai posted:Yeah, it's a nice touch. The bannermen plant their banners in the ground before they attack, too, and some of the formations have them line up at the back like a big flag party. Yeah, it's really cool. Looking at the ground where two lines clashed is usually pretty striking. All those flags and corpses.  
|
|
#
¿
May 30, 2019 21:00
|
|
|
stanislaus posted:There's a one turn cooldown after you recall a general so you can't redeploy them on the same turn, but otherwise yes. It makes moving armies around in the lategame way less obnoxious than in previous total wars, though units still have to replenish when they're redeployed I like to keep a vanguard available as a court noble, preferably someone who has traits (like humble) which doesn't make them behave like a spoiled little poo poo when you don't promote them. Then only send them out on the conscription assignment (or whichever one it is that cuts down on mustering time, conscription might be regular replenishment) when I'm redeploying my armies. They need a turn to deploy their effects so assign them the turn before you redeploy your guys and they should fill up pretty fast. Earlier in the game this wasn't really as feasible as I really needed those income-boosting assignments active, but then my realm was also much smaller. Keeping a vanguard and assignment slot free now means that I can quickly redeploy my main army to where it's needed. It's incredibly handy.
|
|
#
¿
May 30, 2019 21:42
|
|
|
Who's the youngest unique character/faction leader/faction heir in the game? Cao Cao just died  I was wondering who'd have the easier time ending up as King or Emperor. Though I was damned close as Cao Cao, and I could have been there a while ago if I had hurried up a bit. Liu Bei just became King.
|
|
#
¿
May 30, 2019 21:47
|
|
|
Kanos posted:Not counting Sun Jian's unique children(Sun Ren not reaching maturity until 207), Zheng Jiang is by far the youngest major character; she starts the campaign at age 18. That seems very young for a "bandit queen". Is she historical? A quick wikipedia search didn't turn up anything, though she might just be a bit too obscure for that. I'm guessing unless she's somehow a noblewoman who turned bandit, none of the sources that might mention her would know how old she was.
|
|
#
¿
May 30, 2019 23:12
|
|
|
The Cheshire Cat posted:She isn't, as mentioned above, but you also have to bear in mind that like, people kind of got into this stuff kind of young back in the day. Joan of Arc was burnt at the stake at age 19. China had a shitload of child emperors (which is actually kind of why they ended up having so many problems, because they were more easily influenced by the court). I take your point. I still think inheriting an empire and becoming a power bandit leader, are a bit different, unless she's the leader because of inheritance from her father or mother or because of their reputation. I was thinking more like Lena Headey in Dredd, but in China and writ a bit a larger. McTimmy posted:Sun Jian killed and decapitated a pirate at 16. Sun Ce got command of Yuan Shu's troops at 19, reunited his father's scattered men and grew to command a force over over five thousand and even before that was gathering men and killing bandits on his own initiative at 18. Those guys are all part of the aristocracy though. I think that's a notable difference, as a noble you can assume leadership through lineage and the reputation of your parents ancestors and such. It's a bit different, though not impossible for (what I presume is) a commoner. Unrelated to that, so Yellow Turbans kind of work differently from the normal factions huh? They have their own offices that work differently and are gated off by character class, they don't seem to have a family tree, they have their own reforms which work differently in that they are unlocked by faction rank but don't have other reforms as prerequisites, and they have different units and character classes. They also use an alternative to prestige to increase their faction rank, and it's not just a nameswap, it's accumulated from different sources than prestige. So really we already have kind of a prototype of how a faction which isn't "normal Chinese", or however you want to label the non-Yellow Turban factions, can be added to the game and work differently within kind of the same framework. So we could possibly maybe get some southern Chinese tribal factions that work a bit differently, Koreans (Goguryeo), northern Barbarians (I think this is possibly a bit late for the Xiongnu but too early for Turks and Mongolians, some other related possibly?) and maybe even some Vietnamese stuff? Randarkman fucked around with this message at 02:26 on May 31, 2019 |
|
#
¿
May 31, 2019 02:24
|
|
|
Grand Fromage posted:I'd like expansion into the border regions. But since they're already semi-ahistorical with the Romance mode, I'd enjoy a whole alt history thing where Romans or Bactrian Greeks show up. Alexander II: The Alexandering. That'd be stupid. I'd much rather have them portray the Kushan Empire which was an actual fascinating historical empire, which probably deserves the majority of credit for exporting Buddhism out of India and most prominetly into China. "Romantify" it, I'd have no problem with that, but I'd be a bit annoyed if they skip over portraying the Kushans in order to stick Greeks and Romans in Central Asia (Tarim Basin would make sense as a region to include). McTimmy posted:They weren't though. Sun Jian was a merchant's son who earned recognition solely by kicking rear end. Yeah, Sun Ce could lean on his father's name, but both Sun Ben and Sun Jing couldn't unite Jian's men the way Ce could despite their experience and familial relations. Even Yuan Shu liked him. And Yuan Shu only liked four people. Oh, well, that's what you get by assuming stuff. Randarkman fucked around with this message at 02:47 on May 31, 2019 |
|
#
¿
May 31, 2019 02:43
|
|
|
Grand Fromage posted:That... would be actual history, not alternate history. Yes. Romans and Greeks in the Tarim Basin at this time is still stupid, alt-history or not. And the game isn't really alt history at start up, it's historical fiction, romance or whatever, but it's not really alt-history until you play that first turn.
|
|
#
¿
May 31, 2019 03:02
|
|
|
Kind of feel like Yuan Shu would fit better as a strategist than a commander. I mean, he even looks like a strategist in his style of dress.
|
|
#
¿
May 31, 2019 03:36
|
|
|
Speaking of Yuan Shu. Any strategies for starting out with him? Seems like he has a pretty rough start. I've done two runs now, in both I easily crushed the initial army, but found my starting army a bit too weak to assault the Nanyang jade mine without it being an absolutely pyrrhic victory, it also seems like after that Xu Huang always comes walking up with a half-stack or something and then a turn or two after that Dong Zhuo comes for your capital and I wasn't able to do much due to having taken casualties both taking the jade mine and beating of Xu Huang.
|
|
#
¿
May 31, 2019 15:43
|
|
|
Morrow posted:The utility of Sun Jian's mercenaries is not to be underestimated. Not only do they come fully mustered, but they can drop into any character's retinue. That goes for all the unique units I think. Though the mercs might be extra useful here maybe because (I believe) they come in melee infantry, archer and cavalry variants. How do their stats compare to the militia units? I really like Cao Cao's tiger and leopard cavalry, they are a bit slow for cavalry, but they hit hard and they have good armor. Randarkman fucked around with this message at 16:32 on May 31, 2019 |
|
#
¿
May 31, 2019 16:29
|
|
|
What's the best way to recruit generals from other factions? I guess capturing them in battle is one, though it seems relationships (and certain traits I believe) influence whether this can be done or not. You can perhaps also use spies to get them to leave a faction? There seem to be many interesting characters around who are trapped within the Han Empire and such. e: Where's Sima Yi at the start? Randarkman fucked around with this message at 18:25 on May 31, 2019 |
|
#
¿
May 31, 2019 18:14
|
|
|
Zurai posted:It's a little strange because historically swords are the "kill peasants" weapon. Swords are pretty bad against anything in armor, compared to maces, polearms, axes, or most any other melee weapon, but they're really, really good at butchering unarmored people. Considering the general lack of armor among the majority of the units in this game, swords should be better than they are. Historically swords are a secondary weapon, a status symbol and a personal defense weapon carried and used when travelling or not otherwise directly engaged in war. For actual use in combat, spears, axes, various polearms, pickaxes, warhammers and so on are much more useful for a whole host of reasons (often how conducive they are to fighting in formation, their reach and ability to destroy shields or smash or pierce armor) and this is borne out in that very seldom do we hear about the sword being the primary weapon of any ancient or medieval soldiers (the Romans seem to stand out as an exception, but they were also javelinmen and one of their javelins was long and heavy enough to be used as a spear, which it probably often was) with the exception of cavalrymen where sabres and such often were really useful, particularly against lightly armored opponents. Even as a backup weapon in close combat a dagger would often prove more useful than a sword for being less unwieldy and for its use in grappling and such. Swords beating spears, spears (exclusively) beating cavalry, is pretty much exclusively a video game thing. Unrelated to that, I got to thinking and the retinue system could actually make for a pretty interesting "mercenary company" system where you have certain characters who travel around as mercenary captains and can be hired on a temporary bassis (perhaps with a system for actually negotiating a contract and the mercenaries being more or less satsified, and possibly deserting or revolting depending on how well you stick to the contract, and the traits of the captain would also play a part). These would then be special general types/retinues that can incproporate units dependent on their mercenary origin that you, as a Chinese warlord, won't normally have access to . Could be an interesting way to incorporate non-Chinese (even off-map) characters and units into the central Three Kingdoms conflict once they eventually (hopefully) get added.
|
|
#
¿
May 31, 2019 21:31
|
|
|
Moridin920 posted:Basically somehow medieval 2 still has the best siege battles. That's a funny way to spell Shogun 2. Also, excepting Empire, Medieval 2 had some of the worst AI of the entire series. A pretty drat good game for its time, but there's a whole bunch of people out there who view it with some ridiculously rose-tinted glasses.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 2, 2019 18:15
|
|
|
Gamerofthegame posted:climbing absolutely tanked stamina (and dealt attrition) so it was pretty easy to deal with the once in a while the player had to fend one off Your guys also had a chance to fall off to their deaths IIRC. With higher walls you'd get more fatigued and more dudes would fall and die. So it wasn't really feasible to just straight up climb the higher walls, there you were better off attacking a gate or a lower portion of the wall to get inside the castle.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 2, 2019 18:39
|
|
|
Since there was talk of Medieval 2 and a potential Medieval 3 I kind of had some thoughts and did a little writeup how I thought some of the elements from Three Kingdoms might hypothetically employed in such a title. Personally I think another game set in the Middle Ages would be more interesting if it had a narrower focus (time period, geographical) than Medieval 1 and 2, but here I'm assuming a broad focus.
Some thoughts on character classes for a Latin culture. “Latin” in the medieval sense as the “Christian West” or “Christendom”, encompasses the English, French, Italian, German, Scandinavian, Hungarian, Polish and Iberian regions, as well as the Holy Land which recruits special Outremer units if controlled by Christians. The different nations within the culture would have their own more or less unique rosters (English, French and German would be quite similar to each other for an example, but Hungarian and Iberan would be a bit more unique). As I imagine them character classes would be a bit more multiclass than in Three Kingdoms (there would for instance be much more roster variations and differences between regions and cultures), and perhaps they'd only have access to their class units and nation unique units, and not have access to the basic units of all classes. Knight
Castellan
Courtier
Bishop
Mercenary Captain
Most historical kings and other rulers should be Castellans and Knights, with a couple of Courtiers (again should have a better name) as appropriate, female Knights should be rare but not totally non-existent and only men should be able to be made Bishops. So new characters born would be the the three first ones with the two others being appointed or spawning as appropriate. Generally characters can move freely within their own culture, recruiting units based on their location as I specified. Different cultures (Byzantine, Nomadic, Eastern European/Russian, Islamic, for example) would have different character classes and ways those work. Randarkman fucked around with this message at 20:43 on Jun 2, 2019 |
|
#
¿
Jun 2, 2019 20:31
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 27, 2024 18:53 |
|
|
Mantis42 posted:I don't want heroes to become a mainstay of the historical titles. It's fine for this setting, but the duel system isn't deep or interesting to worm its way into every future title. If retinues stay I hope they expand it to an actual chain of command. I'd want characters to be still be important and their retinues to be the foundation of your armies. I also kind of want them to be single entities (I like the single commander riding around), just single entities that are more for support and such rather than combat. Though with some being more or less survivable, if not exactly "killy". A kind of compromise between records and romance, leaning more towards records. Perhaps with a function for characters to be able to attach and detach to units in their retinues to serve as their bodyguards, granting some stat boosts and such, rather than having a dedicated bodyguard unit. Randarkman fucked around with this message at 21:17 on Jun 2, 2019 |
|
#
¿
Jun 2, 2019 21:14
|
|