Advertisement
by Great Houses of Xie » Fri Jun 15, 2018 2:23 pm
by United Muscovite Nations » Fri Jun 15, 2018 2:25 pm
by Forsher » Fri Jun 15, 2018 8:46 pm
Great Houses of Xie wrote:Oh, lawdy, now he says that he's not arguing economics while initially following up with the following: "Frankly, I feel like the more recent Total Wars I've played (Attila's Charlemagne version and R2) have basically just made the early game more expensive, you ride out those problems and eventually you can actually afford stuff and then eventually you're just crazy wealthy."
It's fun to claim that I'm not reading something; it's even more fun to look at you and see that you're not reading YOUR OWN POST. Technically, I guess, you COULD not read while typing, lel
LAWL, OK, so, I suppose the screenshots demonstrate several things. First off, the year is 1780+, a year I literally never get to because I always win Empire a solid 30-40 years earlier; I'll note that you're still not even close to winning by 1780, which is even more entertaining.
Indeed, if I were to spend an additional 60-80 turns wasting time and building up my armies instead of actually doing anything productive, yes, I, too, could amass massive armies like that.
As such, I don't see my fewer armies as being "bad army building" and your more numerous armies as utter boredom, and, by extension, failure.
Indeed, the AI COULD amass large armies, but I was referring to my own armies, lel. Given how glacially slow you do anything, I'm not surprised the AI amasses far larger armies in your campaigns than in mine, such that hordes were my only concern, regarding extremely large and time-consuming battles. As an aside, one of the reasons why I trend towards blitzing things is precisely to stop the AI from getting huge.
Indeed, I did. And it was not at all difficult to "identify characters." The first unit in every stack was a general, iirc, and thus would gain exp when sent into battle. As soon as that general got a second star, boom, character with stats. Admittedly, it really sucked when a peasant unit just happened to be the general, but wutevs. In this manner, it was extremely easy to create, if you will, characters and thus rotate out the corrupt governors. It's worth noting that because I was too busy winning and not sitting around building more armies, I definitely had fewer armies and thus fewer characters to look through.
Such a system did incentivize such fiddling, since, as you noted, characters could build up corrupt traits which could suck. Thus, obviously, it's necessary to rid the corruption by just shifting governors. I don't know how you arrive at the argument that somehow I should be stupid and let my corrupt guys stay in charge; I suppose I would be incentivized to keep them in charge if I felt like nerfing my own economy.
I'm reading a few guides that are saying that in M1, a "little bit of income" is generated by various buildings when the player has no trade partners, which could then be increased by other buildings.... I wish said guides had concrete numbers, but it's definitely not the 0 income that you claim.
Definitely only 4ish levels of castle, but upgrades for the castles could be built. However, there was no limit to the building slots, so a province could get real fat, whereas there's a very limited number of building slots and worthwhile buildings to build since....Empire, I'd like to say.
Corruption wasn't mandatory like it is now; it was limited to governors before. In other words, it could be managed and removed before; it is a feature now that can't be removed. I suppose I was not clear what I meant.
I suppose the question then, is, what do you consider "early" "mid" "late" game? I'm used to playing OPMs or gimped sick men, so my definitions are less concrete turn counts and more phases of the game. "Early" defines my early expansion against 1 or 2 immediate neighbors, probably with an early rival (eg my Syracuse vs Rome or Colchis vs Armenia). "Mid" defines my ability to then take on the next big bad(s) (eg using the Syracuse example, then going after Carthage or Colchis vs a major Anatolian power, forgot who it was now), but this time able to rapidly build up my economy, at the same time. "Late" is when my economy is on a roll and I have multiple armies deathballing around taking all comers.
Early game, using my definition, is easier on the economy side, since I'm more focused on rapid advances and good generalship to gain huge advantages. At a few hundred cost for the early game economic buildings and few hundred cost for units, the early game has stayed the same across all the TWs (barring already developed settings like Empire and Napoleon). It's the midgame that I have to worry about balancing things, since I need to quickly grow my economy to be able to support multiple stacks for lategame, and I can't afford to pull one of my few frontline stacks from the front to deal with rebellion. Early game, because I'm working with such small territory, dealing with rebellion is easy; I actually just got through murdering 2 rebel spawns as Syracuse, hah.
tl;dr: lol, really? Accusing me of "not reading" while ignoring the refutation of the original points you made, which was "two interesting features" that made MTW "superior"
Two interesting features of the original (and superior) MTW.
Two interesting features of the original MTW.
and "just made early game more expensive..." Clearly, MTW has a BETTER economic curve than the latter TWs and same early game, rendering your complaint moot as clearly MTW hits that point FASTER while having the same early game. Trade income could nosedive, but wasn't wiped out (and depending on the buildings, could still be substantial, cuz hilariously fat percent increases). Corruption is for lazy nubs in MTW and felt far more in latter TWs (ie, no bite, definitely a bark, though)
by Great Houses of Xie » Wed Jun 20, 2018 4:16 pm
by Forsher » Thu Jun 21, 2018 12:00 am
Great Houses of Xie wrote:It would be mere ideology or tautologies if it wasn't clear that blitzing remains superior to being hilariously slow. And indeed, the paragraphs were separate issues, which was why they were dealt with in turn, admittedly starting from the last moving up.
Issues that you have identified that I also noted which help further the idea that blitzing is factually better, as opposed to personally:
1. Increased number of characters
Indeed, I pointed out that because I win so fast, my list of characters is far smaller than the "hundreds" that you claim, in all likelihood truthfully so. As such, I then also pointed out, and you affirmed, that it's far easier to manage said list, which leads into 2.
2. Increased amount of corruption
More characters, and more time spent accumulating traits, leads to more difficulty in managing corruption. Again, you affirmed this. And, despite your thinking that I was not aware of corruption, again, I was easily able to roll through the list of characters and quickly ascertain who needed to be changed out or not, partly because of the paucity of characters, relatively speaking, and paucity of traits. Never mind that the "everyone is getting corruption traits" is a wildly overblown statement.
3. Larger armies
Needless to say, larger armies is a lot more upkeep
\Hubris? I suppose if you consider your economy getting wrecked by utter mismanagement, which includes corruption and upkeep, as interesting and fun, by all means, continue.
NeuPolska wrote:Game gets harder as you get larger and the economy fluctuates instead of just accumulating money
Great Houses of Xie wrote:To be fair, playing as ANY of the Romes is freaking easy, lol, cuz they're so big and they start with already substantial armies/economies. [...] but by then I'd already gotten so huge that it's too late for them to stop me and my doomstacks/economy
And, indeed, you consider governors getting corruption interesting (and, by extension, mismanagement is interesting; as an aside, there's another word for mismanagement), a game mechanic that I've pointed out is in later TWs, thus negating the claim that M1 is somehow more interesting because of it.
Furthermore, f you argue that rather than the 0 that you originally claimed for trading with yourself, the latter TWs also reduce the amount of insider trading to effectively 0. Whereby, once again, negating your claim that M1 is more interesting, since the latter TWs also have the same mechanic.
As for there being 6 levels of castle, whoops, my mistake; I never got those, lol, as there were far more important buildings to first be built. To get an optimized economic province, it was something on the order of a solid 50 turns of construction? Naturally, due to budget constraints, not every province I'd owned from the beginning could be built up as desired *shrug*.
As for the attempting to use your definition of early game with the notion that early game is "more expensive", I'll have to think on that one, considering I'll have to upend my own sense of early game understanding to try and determine whether or not your consideration of early game is more expensive or not. Given that your early game matches my understanding of midgame, in a rough sort of way, and my understanding is that the midgame got more expensive, I strongly believe that I'm inclined to agree.
by NeuPolska » Sat Jul 14, 2018 10:27 pm
Kar-Esseria wrote:Who is that and are they female because if not then they can go make love to their hand.
Impaled Nazarene wrote:Go home Polska wins NS.
United Mongol Hordes wrote:Polska isn't exactly the nicest guy in the world
Impaled Nazarene wrote:Hurd you miss the point more than Polska misses Poland.
Rhodesialund wrote:when you have Charlie ten feet away or something operating operationally.
Nirvash Type TheEND wrote:Gayla is living in 1985 but these guys are already in 1916
by Seraven » Tue Sep 11, 2018 8:27 pm
The Alma Mater wrote:Seraven wrote:I know right! Whites enslaved the natives, they killed them, they converted them forcibly, they acted like a better human beings than the Muslims.
An excellent example of why allowing unrestricted immigration of people with a very different culture might not be the best idea ever :P
by Impaled Nazarene » Sun Nov 18, 2018 7:49 pm
Kiaculta wrote:Oh, Kar, you silly sack of shit.
Soviet Haaregrad wrote:Bickering ist krieg.
Infected Mushroom wrote:isn't this a bit extreme?
Finland SSR wrote:"Many dictatorships are oligarchies.
Many democracies are oligarchies.
Therefore, many dictatorships are democracies."
-said no one ever. I made these words up.
Genivaria wrote:"WHY!? Why do this!? Thousands of planets and trillions of innocent lives gone! For what!?"
"It seemed like fun at the time."
by The Two Jerseys » Sun Nov 18, 2018 8:37 pm
Impaled Nazarene wrote:Why did they break autoresolve in Rome 2 onwards. I can have 1.5x bigger army, be on the defensive, not facing any cavalry, mega units or super mercenaries and still lose autoresolve.
by Impaled Nazarene » Sun Nov 18, 2018 8:52 pm
The Two Jerseys wrote:Impaled Nazarene wrote:Why did they break autoresolve in Rome 2 onwards. I can have 1.5x bigger army, be on the defensive, not facing any cavalry, mega units or super mercenaries and still lose autoresolve.
Autoresolve is an idiot. If I can rout a single militia regiment using artillery fire long before they get within musket range, there's no reason why my army should be suffering casualties if I autoresolve the battle.
Kiaculta wrote:Oh, Kar, you silly sack of shit.
Soviet Haaregrad wrote:Bickering ist krieg.
Infected Mushroom wrote:isn't this a bit extreme?
Finland SSR wrote:"Many dictatorships are oligarchies.
Many democracies are oligarchies.
Therefore, many dictatorships are democracies."
-said no one ever. I made these words up.
Genivaria wrote:"WHY!? Why do this!? Thousands of planets and trillions of innocent lives gone! For what!?"
"It seemed like fun at the time."
by The Two Jerseys » Sun Nov 18, 2018 9:18 pm
Impaled Nazarene wrote:The Two Jerseys wrote:Autoresolve is an idiot. If I can rout a single militia regiment using artillery fire long before they get within musket range, there's no reason why my army should be suffering casualties if I autoresolve the battle.
and most of your units lose a few men too which is even more rediculous. But I'd take Empire's and shogun's autoresolve over Rome 2's
by Impaled Nazarene » Sun Nov 18, 2018 10:50 pm
Kiaculta wrote:Oh, Kar, you silly sack of shit.
Soviet Haaregrad wrote:Bickering ist krieg.
Infected Mushroom wrote:isn't this a bit extreme?
Finland SSR wrote:"Many dictatorships are oligarchies.
Many democracies are oligarchies.
Therefore, many dictatorships are democracies."
-said no one ever. I made these words up.
Genivaria wrote:"WHY!? Why do this!? Thousands of planets and trillions of innocent lives gone! For what!?"
"It seemed like fun at the time."
by Post War America » Mon Nov 19, 2018 4:29 am
Gravlen wrote:The famous Bowling Green Massacre is yesterday's news. Today it's all about the Cricket Blue Carnage. Tomorrow it'll be about the Curling Yellow Annihilation.
by The Huskar Social Union » Mon Nov 19, 2018 4:42 am
Post War America wrote:I've never really had a problem with Rome II's AI. Though I must admit I didn't get it until well after release.
by Impaled Nazarene » Mon Nov 19, 2018 5:40 am
The Huskar Social Union wrote:Post War America wrote:I've never really had a problem with Rome II's AI. Though I must admit I didn't get it until well after release.
At release it was very stupid, i didnt have anywhere near as many problems as some people did but it was not great.
You can find videos on youtube of enemy armies charging towards the players lines then falling back at the last second and kind of just running around in circles. Watching that was fucking bizzare.
Auto resolve battles in general can be a pain in the ass, in the warhammer games peoples artillery seem to be destroyed constantly in auto resolves but the rest of the army barely takes any losses.
Kiaculta wrote:Oh, Kar, you silly sack of shit.
Soviet Haaregrad wrote:Bickering ist krieg.
Infected Mushroom wrote:isn't this a bit extreme?
Finland SSR wrote:"Many dictatorships are oligarchies.
Many democracies are oligarchies.
Therefore, many dictatorships are democracies."
-said no one ever. I made these words up.
Genivaria wrote:"WHY!? Why do this!? Thousands of planets and trillions of innocent lives gone! For what!?"
"It seemed like fun at the time."
by The Huskar Social Union » Mon Nov 19, 2018 5:54 am
Impaled Nazarene wrote:The Huskar Social Union wrote:At release it was very stupid, i didnt have anywhere near as many problems as some people did but it was not great.
You can find videos on youtube of enemy armies charging towards the players lines then falling back at the last second and kind of just running around in circles. Watching that was fucking bizzare.
Auto resolve battles in general can be a pain in the ass, in the warhammer games peoples artillery seem to be destroyed constantly in auto resolves but the rest of the army barely takes any losses.
The ai on the map used to seem like they had extra move points. You'd take a province, then their army runs around your army's range and then take the province you just took if you chased them and if you didn't they'd take the province you just came from. By the time you chase them down its a dozen turns later. The ai still does this but not as bullshit, instead they just slip through your engagement radius.
Autoresolve however? Fuck don't even bother if there's an army in the settlement. The ai gets to add another 500-1000 troops to their army. best hope you like fighting offensive sieges or diverting a second army to win an auto resolve at 68%. Warhammer improved sieges iirc in that the AI no longer gets a bigger doomstack. Autoresolve was much more tolerable imo but i haven't played much and never fight battles because fucking hell total war insists on making their games run like shit on minimal graphics. Of course to paraphrase the immortal words of Total War God Xie: Never Autoresolve, always fight battles. To which I say: Fuck loading times.
I have a 4 year old gaming laptop and before shitvidia decided to roll out good updates i couldn't even play Attila. The fucking campaign map lagged.
Basically this series is shit and the problems make Empire look great. That being said: when things work and the AI doesn't ruin your day Post Shogun 2 Total War is the most fun in the series.
by Forsher » Mon Nov 19, 2018 6:29 am
by The Vekta-Helghast Empire » Tue Nov 20, 2018 5:39 am
by Impaled Nazarene » Wed Nov 21, 2018 1:57 am
Kiaculta wrote:Oh, Kar, you silly sack of shit.
Soviet Haaregrad wrote:Bickering ist krieg.
Infected Mushroom wrote:isn't this a bit extreme?
Finland SSR wrote:"Many dictatorships are oligarchies.
Many democracies are oligarchies.
Therefore, many dictatorships are democracies."
-said no one ever. I made these words up.
Genivaria wrote:"WHY!? Why do this!? Thousands of planets and trillions of innocent lives gone! For what!?"
"It seemed like fun at the time."
by Impaled Nazarene » Wed Mar 13, 2019 7:52 am
Kiaculta wrote:Oh, Kar, you silly sack of shit.
Soviet Haaregrad wrote:Bickering ist krieg.
Infected Mushroom wrote:isn't this a bit extreme?
Finland SSR wrote:"Many dictatorships are oligarchies.
Many democracies are oligarchies.
Therefore, many dictatorships are democracies."
-said no one ever. I made these words up.
Genivaria wrote:"WHY!? Why do this!? Thousands of planets and trillions of innocent lives gone! For what!?"
"It seemed like fun at the time."
by The Huskar Social Union » Wed Mar 13, 2019 7:56 am
Im looking forward to it, but the gameplay stuff loooked a bit rough, especially the AI so im glad they delayed when they did.Impaled Nazarene wrote:We really should keep this thread somewhat running so as to avoid semi-gravedigs like this.
For starters though I am somewhat hyped for 3k as it is so different from the rest of total war that the letdowns might not be as crushing unlike the recent games.
Also what are the best mods for empire. I need a deeper game less boring game but I do not want one that is just going to make the AI ridiculously hard for no reason.
by NeuPolska » Thu Mar 14, 2019 6:06 am
Impaled Nazarene wrote:We really should keep this thread somewhat running so as to avoid semi-gravedigs like this.
For starters though I am somewhat hyped for 3k as it is so different from the rest of total war that the letdowns might not be as crushing unlike the recent games.
Also what are the best mods for empire. I need a deeper game less boring game but I do not want one that is just going to make the AI ridiculously hard for no reason.
Kar-Esseria wrote:Who is that and are they female because if not then they can go make love to their hand.
Impaled Nazarene wrote:Go home Polska wins NS.
United Mongol Hordes wrote:Polska isn't exactly the nicest guy in the world
Impaled Nazarene wrote:Hurd you miss the point more than Polska misses Poland.
Rhodesialund wrote:when you have Charlie ten feet away or something operating operationally.
Nirvash Type TheEND wrote:Gayla is living in 1985 but these guys are already in 1916
by Impaled Nazarene » Thu Mar 14, 2019 8:52 am
NeuPolska wrote:Impaled Nazarene wrote:We really should keep this thread somewhat running so as to avoid semi-gravedigs like this.
For starters though I am somewhat hyped for 3k as it is so different from the rest of total war that the letdowns might not be as crushing unlike the recent games.
Also what are the best mods for empire. I need a deeper game less boring game but I do not want one that is just going to make the AI ridiculously hard for no reason.
Darthmod is pretty much it
The blood and smoke ones aren’t bad, General Andy’s musket sounds is a personal favorite, and orange crush is good for making the marathas not ruin the game
Kiaculta wrote:Oh, Kar, you silly sack of shit.
Soviet Haaregrad wrote:Bickering ist krieg.
Infected Mushroom wrote:isn't this a bit extreme?
Finland SSR wrote:"Many dictatorships are oligarchies.
Many democracies are oligarchies.
Therefore, many dictatorships are democracies."
-said no one ever. I made these words up.
Genivaria wrote:"WHY!? Why do this!? Thousands of planets and trillions of innocent lives gone! For what!?"
"It seemed like fun at the time."
by Andsed » Thu Mar 14, 2019 12:50 pm
by Impaled Nazarene » Thu Mar 14, 2019 12:55 pm
Andsed wrote:Nice to see we have a total war thread. I think my favorite of the total war games is Rome 1. I mean I like all of these new games but Rome 1 will always have a special place in my heart as it was the first Total war game I played.
Kiaculta wrote:Oh, Kar, you silly sack of shit.
Soviet Haaregrad wrote:Bickering ist krieg.
Infected Mushroom wrote:isn't this a bit extreme?
Finland SSR wrote:"Many dictatorships are oligarchies.
Many democracies are oligarchies.
Therefore, many dictatorships are democracies."
-said no one ever. I made these words up.
Genivaria wrote:"WHY!? Why do this!? Thousands of planets and trillions of innocent lives gone! For what!?"
"It seemed like fun at the time."
Advertisement
Users browsing this forum: No registered users
Advertisement