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 money per month for bills, and since we don't believe in showing ads to our users, we try to make the money back through forum registrations.
 
  • Post
  • Reply
Mans
Sep 14, 2011

We have the dimension of an empire.


Chumpion posted:

Aha, it would be so easy as well. CA demanding that they take a communal shower in a mysteriously dark room before they enter the conference would be justified to anyone taking a look at that greasy crowd.

I can't imagine what this modders summit can be attended by from the last few games communities mind, empire/napoleon/shogun main mods are obviously much much more basic than was previously allowed. So unless this conference isn't just an excuse for a big announcement what are they really hoping to bring together?

With any luck they'll open the games to be more modable. Rome and Medieval were a bitch to mod and they went out of their way to make the next games even harder. There any no "mods" in post Empire games, they're basic gameplay changes, nothing comparable to any decent Rome or Medieval mod.



They need to pull their head out of their asses and led modders do their work. With any luck this summit is a way to enter in contact with the few modders left and work something out. Maybe only letting mods come out when they're done as DLC but letting the modders be supported directly by CA.

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

Mans
Sep 14, 2011

We have the dimension of an empire.


They better invite him otherwise he'll retire for the 29th time

Mans
Sep 14, 2011

We have the dimension of an empire.


SeanBeansShako posted:

the fact the only modding that can be done is stats tweaking and reskins really crippled peoples opinions of Empire.



This. If you bought Rome and Medieval 2 you could play in scenarios about the Persian empire, the Trojan War, Warhammer, War of the Rings, Alexander, about four different time frames of the Roman Republic, another 6 or 8 from the empire era, a million variations of medieval history, colonial warfare and made up crazy lands with roman legions fighting against orcs and pirates.


By buying Empires you had a game that took almost a year of patching to allow amphibious assaults.

Mans
Sep 14, 2011

We have the dimension of an empire.


I consider it like Football Manager. Like Paradox games, what you do before the season (war) and the games (battles) is more important than playing them yourself. The wins and losses are the result of your managing actions. Having the player play battles will let them cheese the AI or exploit it to make heroic victories time and time again like Total war (let's face it, even the most recent "spectacular AI!" of Total War games are dumb as poo poo and in Napoleon you can win most battles by just making a standard firing line and let the enemy come at you like Visigoths).


The games are good as they are right now, you can play amazing games with mediocre pcs, they're not big on the disk and they usually have affordable prices because Paradox isn't bleeding money on newer and newer graphics.

Mans
Sep 14, 2011

We have the dimension of an empire.


What's the difference about reinforcements you guys keep talking about?

Mans
Sep 14, 2011

We have the dimension of an empire.


Play it safe and simply post your favorite songs via youtube. I know EB's wonderful music is open to anyone who wants it, not so sure about the official music.

Mans
Sep 14, 2011

We have the dimension of an empire.


And pink-pajama wearing Parthians!

Mans
Sep 14, 2011

We have the dimension of an empire.


Farecoal posted:

I love history, I play Paradox games a poo poo ton, but Total War seems, to me anyway, to be more about what's fun/cool* than historical. And about the "slightly browner phalanxes", isn't that exactly what RTW/EB did?

*See: defeating the Carthaginians with an army of greased pigs and dogs.
RTW's Egyptians are simply a retarded thing. It's literally ignoring history. It's okay to add head hurling Celts and elite Urban Cohorts, that's not historical but it's not the end of the world. But to a lot of people (unfortunately) historical video games are one of the main sources of learning history. I had a guy asking me who was the Pharaoh during Alexander's conquests. He's in loving college!

Alchenar posted:

This.

Phalanxes are loving boring to fight and what was even more stupid was that because they couldn't get into formation on a city wall the best way to beat them was to force the AI into a series of city assaults.

I don't care that the Game Egyptians are in the wrong time period, I want to play a game that has a varied set of unique factions. It should be a unique experience fighting each nation.
That is all the game designer's fault. EB and RS give phalanxes good quality swords, meaning they're as useful in melee as in phalanx formation.

Plus, that's ignoring just how varied and rich the EB middle eastern experience was. The Ptolemy empire had light phalanxes supported by Nubians, native Egyptian assault troops and rear end kicking Galatian Gauls. Pontus was based on flexible phalanxes supported by Anatolian and Armenian light infantry and archers, with dreaded heavy cavalry supporting them. The Seleucids had everything from Macedonian classical Phalanxes to Jewish infantry to Iranian spearmen to Afgan axe wielding assault troops.



Even Macedonia itself was extremely varied. It's core was phalanx based but it had the support of a massive amount of cavalry and various Thracian, Greek, Gaul, Getai and other tribes' support.

It turns out that if you're not an inbreded ignorant that has gently caress all knowledge of history you could make a fascinating game based on the Classical era without resorting to Phalanx or Legionnaire only units

Mans
Sep 14, 2011

We have the dimension of an empire.


They need to hire those Russians from the Warhammer mod because that thing is pretty good when it doesn't crash.

Mans
Sep 14, 2011

We have the dimension of an empire.


The Kins posted:

I don't think this has been posted yet...

The latest issue of Australian games mag PC PowerPlay has this on its back page:


They correctly teased Dead Souls PC in a similar fashion and they've had lots of Total War news in the past. And apparently there's supposed to be a Total War announcement at Rezzed on July 6...

If they're going with the three family poo poo again i'm not even bothering with this.

Mans
Sep 14, 2011

We have the dimension of an empire.


Coolodile posted:

...It's a screenshot from the original.

Oh...yes it is, i knew that

Mans
Sep 14, 2011

We have the dimension of an empire.


Spaceman Future! posted:


Fall of the Samurai is about as new as they can go, everything after that became small squad combat. Rome is about as old as you can go, combat before then was a bit too basic to justify a full on strategy game.


Pre-Classical middle eastern history is filled with great time periods to base a war game on. It's the time of chariots, of nomad tribes coming from all directions, bronze and iron weapons, the rise of cavalry and conflicts between the New Kingdom, the Neo Assyrians, the Hittites, the rise of the Greek states and the Sea Peoples who came out of nowhere and hosed poo poo up.

You also have the rise of Persia not to forget how interesting a game focused on Greek city states would be. Imagine Shogun Total war but with the added abilities of exploring far flung places and establishing colonies all over the Mediterranean all the while dealing with your neighbours and facing off against Thracians, Persians, Gauls and Macedonians. It would kick rear end.


And as been said before, we really need a Renaissance game.

What would be truly great would be choosing the starting date. No need to go all Paradox and being able to choose the literal day of the start date, but adding a bit of variety to the game via different scenarios would own and allow a longer longetivity of the game all the while allowing CA to get extra money via the release of payed DLCs. I'd certainly pay 5 bucks to play a scenario about the first triumvirate or any of the million civil wars.

Mans
Sep 14, 2011

We have the dimension of an empire.


Alchenar posted:

We also don't need a Renaissance game. Medieval goes up to 1530 and at the end of the tech tree takes you to the point where filling your armies with musketmen actually starts to be a viable strategy.

Empire starts at 1700, when that transition was complete and covers as a whole the development of gunpowder warfare.

The only thing a Renaissance game could do is cover that transition period, which:
a) is actually done right now by Fall of the Samuri
b) would be quite boring because it would essentially be either Empire with some low grade hand-cannoners and pikemen at the bottom of the tech tree or Medieval with some more gunpowder units at the top of the tech tree.
I disagree, not only was Medieval warfare completely different from the Renaissance but the political intrigue mas much more interesting. The technology was much better and tactics were diverse, meaning you'd get a lot more variety in units than "feudal knight, sergeant and mercenary spearmen". Plus, Medieval's renaissance era is on the end game, where the game is almost over and you're bored with it.

Not only that, but CA's naval system would do wonders for a 16th era Total War game. It would be amazing to extend the map to allow you to go on true explorations of the sea, allowing you to colonize different continents. That's whats lacking in Medieval and Empire. In one era the exploration is limited and boring, in the other the exploration is already done. There's no in-between.

Mans
Sep 14, 2011

We have the dimension of an empire.


Alchenar posted:

The Senate and Roman Civil War. Sure, it wasn't implemented particularly well (nor was the Pope and Crusades in Medieval), but they exist and as concepts are perfectly expandable.

e: but that's just taking us away from the fact that your Renaissance Total War game already exists. Just start a Medieval campaign in the late era or start Empire with a mod that prevents any technology progression.

There is no decent sea exploration, no decent colonial contact with local tribes, no colonial competition with other European states, there aren't deep inter dinastic relationships that would make the game much more interesting and neither a late Medieval 2 or an early Empire do any of that.


And i'll ask this, why do we need a Rome 2? You already have Rome in extremely varied tones thanks to vanilla and mods.


Your Rome Total War game already exists. Just start a Rome campaign and if you're bored download the other 8 or 9 great mods that give you new scenarios.

Mans
Sep 14, 2011

We have the dimension of an empire.


And don't forget that the Renaissance would actually validate having a merchant system

Mans
Sep 14, 2011

We have the dimension of an empire.


VanSandman posted:

Also gently caress the Mummy Returns Egyptians, that poo poo was always horrible. If you can't have a good time fighting a successor state army, then perhaps Rome isn't the right era for you.

The best part was unpatched Rome when Egyptian cavalry was bugged and had the same numbers as infantry.


Hope you like 120 Egyptian axe wielding Pharaoh loyalists on horses!


That and archers firing in a straight line, right into your infantry's neck

Mans
Sep 14, 2011

We have the dimension of an empire.


SeanBeansShako posted:

Well I was just being a little too general there. What I mean was it'd be nice if the ships were big enough and our crew was more flexible and had more options to fight out a slightly more cramped smaller version of a proper battle on the ships decks.

Might sound fiddily to some, but I'd enjoy it.

This is stretching it, but what would really make naval combat great would be ability to recruit the marines you want to put on a ship. Cartage, Athens, Syracuse and Rome all had fame for having great marines that could do boarding missions with and fight with Excellency. Make it so you can load a unit on to a ship and use that unit as the boarding soldiers.

Alchenar posted:

That sounds like an utterly terrible idea.

How is that a terrible idea? The Classical era was all about ramming and boarding. Only the biggest and most expensive ships had any decent amount of artillery. To not develop the boarding system would be to ignore a great portion of naval warfare. Napoleon's naval battles were good but i don't think a bunch of ships firing arrows at each other would be exciting.

Mans
Sep 14, 2011

We have the dimension of an empire.


Captain Diarrhoea posted:

And yes as a pop-history barbarian I was sad that the cool Lora Segmenta (?) armour Romans are famous for doesn't seem to be in the mod for accuracy purposes.

The game is awesome though, and it's bizarre how the AI seems significantly better than some later titles.

I don't know if you've visited the EB forums for a decent amount of time but it's pretty funny how the EB community HATES Lorica Segmentata. People just foam at the mouth! But yeah, it wasn't used in the time period of the game. Also, be sure to change the requisites you need to make reforms, otherwise the Marian and Imperial reforms will be almost impossible to enact.

Mans
Sep 14, 2011

We have the dimension of an empire.


If CA releases the Lorica Segmentata as a 15 bucks DLC i wonder how many people would bite.

Mans
Sep 14, 2011

We have the dimension of an empire.


DarkCrawler posted:

AI and diplomacy in general are the only faults (well, only un-moddable ones) in Total War systems. The AI only sees the nearest town. No matter if there is an continent-spanning empire behind it with a dozen armies where surviving six battles means you are a rookie pussy and a leader who has so many command stars on his stats that he can throw them at people like shurikens and every patch of enemy land he's stepped over stopped being enemy land as soon as it did so.

No. That doesn't concern the AI. It sees that town. It doesn't have any strategic importance, it's not particulary wealthy...maybe the God-Empire of Zero Losses just forgot to garrison it while it's finishing off another foe.

But it wants that loving town.

And it's going to take it.

With three units.

And dozen turns later when it has been reduced to a single province with zero armies, and five stacks are closing on it's besieged capital...the EMPIRE deigns to send a peace feeler. For some reason, instead of crushing the walls, raping and enslaving what remains living...they are willing to let it go and make you a protectorate. They must be insane.

Well, so is the AI. Because it, and I quote, sees no reason for a ceasefire just yet, why, some of the enemy are still living!



And in Medieval they didn't even look at that lovely town, all they needed was a port to blockade and end it's 54 turn long alliance with it's super power friend

Mans
Sep 14, 2011

We have the dimension of an empire.


American Folk Hero posted:

The Alexandrian successors in-game (and Hellenized factions like Thrace and Pontus) have greater differences between them than the FOUR goddamn identical Roman factions, so I really don't buy that excuse at all.

Don't forget the "barbarian" factions, whose difference was pant color and one or two special units. Not to forget how "varied and diverse" the barbarian factions were in Barbarian Invasion.

Mans
Sep 14, 2011

We have the dimension of an empire.


NoneSuch posted:

I honestly don't think anyone would mind tiny men with dicks unless it would push their age rating over 16+.

EB's naked celts were anything but tiny

Mans
Sep 14, 2011

We have the dimension of an empire.


NihilCredo posted:

The Trojan War sounds like a decent idea for a DLC, actually. Go crazy with poetic aoidic license and make it all about tiny hero units, the diametric opposite from the main game's broader legion-level scope.

The Trojan War mod for RTW was extremely well done, would gladly pay 10 bucks for a professional version of it.

Mans
Sep 14, 2011

We have the dimension of an empire.


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.


This exists? I have current RTW and M2TW saves. Good tip!

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.

Mans
Sep 14, 2011

We have the dimension of an empire.


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.
I don't believe you.

Mans
Sep 14, 2011

We have the dimension of an empire.


Alchenar posted:

And that would be just fine because the game would be better with another unique army type.

Might aswell make Iberian Neanderthals and Parthian Achaemenid Persians too!

It makes zero sense. Screeching Germans ,bone breaking Thracians and matriarchal Scythians are good because CA used myths and fears to make these factions fearsome and more interesting, making the Macedonic Ptolemaic Empire the pride of Ramses is just stupid. And it's been said a million times and i'll say it again, the Ptolemy Empire was the most rich state in terms of unit variety that a game like this can wish for. Macedonian nobility, Galatian mercenaries, Nubian Ethiopian and Jewish soldiers and a base of Egyptians REALLY pissed off against the ruling class. Egypt tends to be overpowered in pre gunpowder games because the area is simply too rich. Turn it into a high rebelious faction were riches can be obtained but there's almost zero loyalty so you're force to use those riches to hire foreign forces or super bribes.


Well, either that or mummified soldiers.

Mans
Sep 14, 2011

We have the dimension of an empire.


snKestren posted:

There are people that like the original Rome with all of the unique civilizations and then there are people who want historical accuracy in a video game. One of the these groups removed flaming pigs, war-dogs, and chariots from the game and added fifty different variations of spearmen.
People keep saying this but i doubt many of them played EB or RS. Not only were they not boring but they actually made the factions varied.

The reason why the Greeks, Seleucids, Pontus and Macedonians were identical was because of CA, the same why all the "barbarians" were identical. In EB every single faction was different, none of this spearman bullshit people keep talking about.

Only the spergiest of spergiest will whine about dogs or pigs. None here are talking about that. Silly is good, historically accurancy is not mandatory. But at least make a game where units are based on the time, not 1000 years before the timeframe.

Davincie posted:

All dogs versus all peasants or al elephants and such were the only things I ever did with the custom battle option.

One unit of Spartan Hoplites vs three entire armies of Parthian Spearmen with the Spartans holding a bridge.

They always held it

Mans
Sep 14, 2011

We have the dimension of an empire.


It's my favorite Med2 mod. The game is very rich and varied and all factions are fun to play with. The only problem comes from the the devs idea that buildings should be ridiculously expensive, but that can be reduced in the text files.

I suggest not playing as the Khwarezmians, the reason the Mongols enter the map is explicitly to beat you up.

Mans
Sep 14, 2011

We have the dimension of an empire.


EB explicitly tells you to play it on normal. Don't tempt the fates.

Captain Beans posted:

Is there a way to easily change some global modifier for building cost? I'm probably going to play it with 40 units per army so if you know of a way to also cut upkeep across the board too that would be good to know.

I wish. I only knew how to change buildings costs, i suck at "moding" MW2.

Mans
Sep 14, 2011

We have the dimension of an empire.


Spakstik posted:

Awhile back I was playing as the Crusader States in M2TW/Stainless Steel and I eventually ran into a problem later in the game when I'd butt heads with the Seljuks: I can't do a loving thing about their goddamn Fari cavalry. They're deadly accurate and apparently pretty decent melee fighters because they chop my light cavalry (the only thing I have that can catch up to them) to bits, and seem pretty good at dodging my ranged troops' projectiles to boot. I guess I could go the Zapp Brannigan route and throw wave after wave of my men at them until they reach their kill limit run out of arrows, but there has to be a better way (I thought mercenaries might be an option, but the Crusader States get a pretty poor selection when it comes to possible Fari counters).

You either force them into sieges battles, massive crossbow stacks or muskets (can you do that as the CS?).

The best part is that after the Turks you'll have a blast fending off the Mongols!

Mans
Sep 14, 2011

We have the dimension of an empire.


Siets posted:

Thanks for the advice. Tomorrow I'll see if I can chip away at the ridiculous 6-army Egyptian horde that is currently sitting outside of Ascalon right now in my game. Ugh.

Also, is there any other way to deal with enemy priests other than just assassinating them? That's what I've been doing until I realized it was skyrocketing my faction leader's dread when all the long I've been trying for a high, chivalrous reputation. I read something about using your own priests to denounce others, but I clicked on a max level priest I had and didn't see the option available.

Do you want to game it?

Grab nine units, surround the priest with your units and when you've made a full square around him send a unit to the middle. The priest will have nowhere to go and will die a confusing death. This works with any non military unit in the game.


And there's a reason why CA made it so that you could only buy the same unit three times in multiplayer*. Spamming a full stack of cheap Turkish horse archers with silver chevrons was hilarious. Stick to walls, the AI tends to be dumb and will always try an assault if they have superior numbers even if the majority of their army are horse archers. If you're in the open you can try to spread your units out with a few light(poo poo) troops in the front to soak up arrows. I honestly think that if the Ottoman Empire had the roster it has on Medieval 2 they'd be the best faction on Napoleon\Empire Total War.

*I think you can buy it more than three times but it becomes extremely expensive.

Mans
Sep 14, 2011

We have the dimension of an empire.


I think you can only "defeat" heretics. For some reason your priest can battle against a Calvinist or a Lollard but encountering an Orthodox or a Pagan priest is like fighting a brick wall.

Mans
Sep 14, 2011

We have the dimension of an empire.


The AI is literally too dumb to be competitive even when the tactics amount to "make a firing line, fire". How the hell does anyone expect CA to develop an AI that can understand covering fire, suppression, artillery support, tank breakthroughs and individual unit AI.

A ww2:total war would make the beginning of Enemy at the Gates look like tactical brilliance.

Mans
Sep 14, 2011

We have the dimension of an empire.


Youtube has the weirdest videos.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M9EQsCjqiMk

Mans
Sep 14, 2011

We have the dimension of an empire.


It's probably not real game footage, if that is actual footage then the game will be awful (look at the way both formations are positioned, all scrambled and chaotic).

Mans
Sep 14, 2011

We have the dimension of an empire.


Alchenar posted:

What I won't get but would actually like is if they took this opportunity to really distance themselves from the freeform risk-strategy that's what's preventing any kind of interesting diplomacy or storytelling from taking place. They've already hinted at how entering certain areas on the map will trigger event/plot chains etc.

Say that instead of controlling a region from the start ala Rome 1, your character is sent to Govern a province of Republic by the Senate. You are responsible for building an army, for sending revenue back to Rome (affecting your prestige and influence there) and for dealing with the inevitable threats on the border, whether through diplomacy or vassalisation or outright annexation.

At the end of your term you get to push for another Governorship and your influence in Rome determines how much say you have in where you go. The army you've raised comes with you and you get to benefit from the experience it's gained and the rpg-lite decisions you've made to customise your legions and personally invest in them (raising a legion should be an expensive undertaking, and the difference between rookie and battle-hardened units should be a Big Deal).

This all sets you up for an endgame Roman Civil War that makes much more sense and actually matches history - as the factions in the Senate become more and more polarized eventually you get the message to surrender your posts and return to Rome. At that point you get to pull a genuine Julius Caesar, gather your legions and march on Italy (as opposed to just moving the super stack you've had waiting on the Rome border into the city and winning immediately).
Not only is this cool but it would also work for Carthage, Gaul tribes and Greek City states. Not a bad idea at all.

Mans
Sep 14, 2011

We have the dimension of an empire.


I guess the roster would be boring but Alchemar's idea would be great for a Mongol:Total War mod.

Mans
Sep 14, 2011

We have the dimension of an empire.


SeanBeansShako posted:

I don't know, the revival of it just looks like they've thrown in a few Portugal related bells and whistles to me.

That's good enough for me

Mans
Sep 14, 2011

We have the dimension of an empire.


UberJumper posted:

So apparently Darth Vader the author of Darth Mod just quit the modding scene forever:

https://www.facebook.com/DarthMod/posts/146924002116188?notif_t=feed_comment

He'll be back 2 weeks after release.


And gently caress i'm getting so excited for a videogame, i haven't been like this since Red Orchestra 2.


...Don't break my heart again vidja games!

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

Mans
Sep 14, 2011

We have the dimension of an empire.


V for Vegas posted:

I thought 'unit bloat' was a terrible thing and Shogun's 'more types of trees than units' was the best TW game because it cut the number of units drastically.

It's a game about the whole of Europe, North Africa and the Middle East, possibly with the Arabian peninsula and the Iranian plains showing up too.


A game of this size should never, ever, EVER, have the same homogenization as a game about loving Japan.

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • Post
  • Reply