Printable View
Heya,
since we only have to wait a couple of days more,I'd like to be controversial and ask :" Which faction do you feel least attracted too?" instead of the usual "What is your favorite faction?"thread.
Personally,I feel the Hungarians aren't very interesting.Their lands aren't very rich,their position on the map is boring I think,why would one play as Hungary when you are able to play as Poland,etc.
Well,I'd like to hear your opinions:2thumbsup:
Hungary and HRE.
some of u may be surprised about me and HRE but oh god just i've heard most of the units nothing unique (typewise).no distinctive unit.
I agree about the Hungarians but even more dis-like the Russians because their units don't seem all that great and fighting rebels for about half the game would get boring indeed.
Hungary
Probably Hungary lol.
Egypt.
I doubt an explanation is needed.
:balloon2:
Mongols, Arabs, Orthodox, Aztecs (if they´re playable at all), basically every faction that doesn´t have soldiers clanking from armour and Knights in shining armour. I know it´s cliche, but first I couldn´t care less and second that´s what I expect from a game with the word "medieval" in the name.
Aztechs and Egypt I must Say,and a few units. not to many good units, have to be a excellent player to actually be good with them..
The only faction I don't care for are the Aztecs.
I didn't care much for the Scots at first, but after seeing their official preview I absolutely hate them.
Them, and Aztecs.
Well, to be honest, I haven't really thought of this question before. But if I have to point out some factions, I'll go with the Turks and the Moors. And I'm only interested in the Aztecs if they are my enemy, I don't think I'm gonna play them myself. I mean, for the love of Feth, they look like pyjama-men! I know it is historic accurate, but I simply can't bring myself to fight with guys dressed like kids.
Ah well, who knows? I might even start respecting them so much, I might be persuaded to give them a go. But I'll play the Turks faster than the Aztecs.
...hungary, and the russians...mostly due to bad experiences in mtw.
I'm probably least attracted to playing as the Moors and the Egyptians. Like another poster said, I want knights and lound clanking armor. To me Russians and Hungarians were very bland in the original MTW, so we'll see.
Probably Venice, at least in historical role-playing terms. It's the one faction that seems the most like a "square peg in a round hole" for this game design. Venice's historical power was in trade, a strong navy, and a city with natural defenses, not so much big land-based armies crashing across Europe and the Holy Lands. The focus on land-based armies in this game just doesn't have the right "feel" for playing a maritime power. And it isn't helped by the (still) primitive representation of navies, blockades, and battles at sea. Then again, this is just speculation... I haven't seen the final game yet. Maybe playing Venice will be more fun than I think it is.
Probably Hungary and Poland. No offense to the Hungarians or Polish.:sweatdrop:
Poland, I reckon they'll be very slow to play as due to poor lands and relatively weak units.
None, im going to play all and im looking forward to all heh
It's only really those surrounded by loads of large provinces - it's so boring to wait three or four turns just to set foot in the enemy's lands.
And if there are too many rebels around you, I'll expand too quickly, be weak when I touch the enemy, and tearful when they take one of my beloved cities. :P
i hungarian and polish lolQuote:
Originally Posted by wraithdt
Hungary, not interested in that one sorry.
Portugal. It seems to me it will be just like Spain, but a little bit to the west (With a historically inaccurate bit in Pamplona).
I personally find England, France, HRE, Egypt, and Byzantium to be very uninteresting since they're all rich and straightforward. Denmark and Scotland don't appeal to me either, given their complete lack of strategic options.
the moors hands down
Aztecs :) oh and the dirty Scots lol
Egypt, and the Turks, they simply have way to many wealthy rebel holdings to take, and perhaps Venice will have different goals then the other nations do, for example they just need to controll the coast? Or perhaps wealth and architecture related goals?
Hey whats wrong with Hungary?
Well I'm really not liking any of the Italian factions, because my preference is for the Northern Europeans and Hungarians and Russ.
I'll probably stun everybody here, but I'm not planning on playing as England. If I'm gonna face them, I'd much rather be fighting for FREEEEEEDDOMMMMMM! (as the Scots), to show who really owns the "English" throne (France), or doing a medieval Operation Sealion (HRE) :laugh4:
Egypt, I never liked them in MTW.
Keep in mind I am one of those people who will probably play every faction.
Still I agree with venice, perhaps because of the martime issue. I do look forward to trying and play them politically, working alliances, spies, so on. Still I wish I could use my navy more effectively, or just see navy battles. Though i also have not played full game so maybe blockades are far more effective this time round.
I like all the factions I have seen so far, but like England (boring) Portugal, Hungary, Poland and Milan (probably will be copycat states of Spain, Russia/Byzantium, and Venice, respectively) somewhat less
The English, generic knight faction. I don't know they just aren't appealing to me.
Besides, everyone else is playing them.
Huh, difficult question. Presumably I will only play HRE, Danes, Scots and Turks, perhaps Spanish or Portugese. From the rest I maybe like the Russian faction least.
Portugal and Aztecs. Portugal shouldn't be in the game, it only became an independent knigdom in 1139, and it colonised Africa and the East, not America.
I also don't like the look of Scotland, Poland, or Denmark.
Egypt doesn't appeal to me at all
Maybe they will come out with African Invasion.Oh and didn't they control what is now Brazil? And for least favorite faction, I guess England (not), but I am tired of just about everyone talking about them. Can't wait to beat them with some Islamic faction (or Italian). :crowngrin: :smash::sultan:Quote:
Originally Posted by Ignoramus
England, but that might just be because I'm Scottish :laugh4:
Seriously though, probably the French, their starting position never appealed to me in MTW either.
Egypt and Aztecs.
Err, but arn't Aztecs non playable anyway? They're an emerging faction, or so I thought...
Haven't seen much from the other factions. I think Ill jump on the bandwagon and say Hungary.
I'd have to say just about every faction available, which is why I'm waiting for a decent mod that offers some variety; the vanilla game does not
.....Orda
In declining order (# 1 I dislike most):
1. Egyptians (boring position in the middle of nowhere, and hated them in MTW)
2. Russians (idem on the position)
3. HRE (all this land... on all sides)
I like all the others to some extent and will definitely try each of them. Why do people have such a problem with:
- Venice. Their role in the Middle Ages was huge, and not exclusively limited to trade and their navy. Remember, wasn't it a Venetian doge who at 90+ years of age stormed the walls of Constantinopel?
- Hungary. Sure, its not on the top of my list either, but there still seems potential for an interesting campaign. They will probably need to make a decision whether to move east or west, and in either case face the associated consequences.
The only thing that could make the Hungarians a bit interesting,is attacking and eliminating the Byzantine Empire in my opinion.:idea2:
The English and the French - they were as boring as it got in MTW, and they seem to be the generic western catholic factions again in M2TW. Actually, in MTW I was never able to force myself to complete a campaign with either of them (the only two factions), despite some of the interestign GA goals for the French. With no GA goals in M2TW I moght not even consider them.
Just as Orda Khan I will be waiting for a good mod to come out.
any islamic faction
scotland
and france
TosaInu: cleaning up, I know it's a ref to another post.
I dont feel like playing france, seems too... classic for my taste. You know, the heavy armoured knights, clanking armours... Pretty much like Kavhan Isbul states, except that i won't wait for a mod, and will just jump to Turks, my MTW1 favourite faction.
TosaInu: cleaning up.
i just meant in the sense that as there something inherently unpleasant about them, so it just wouldnt sit right with me. each to their own though, it is only a game!
TosaInu: cleaning up, I know it's a ref to another post.
Egypt is the least attractive to me, but I will play them along with all the others eventually.
Hungry is going to be one of the most challenging factions to play. Big powerful factions to the South and West, the Mongolonian Horde coming, very challenging; almost as challenging as the Venice faction. Sounds to me like the kind of odds that will keep my mind busy and my troops battle hardened.
Quote:
Originally Posted by KARTLOS
How bout u just dont talk like this. ? I know its hard for a little kid. For this reason I wont play with England. They think they are all that. They all got battered. By the French the Spanyard and the Muslims. :juggle2:
Factions that I never played in MTW because I just didn't care for them:
Poland
Hungary
Egypt
Almohads
France
I'd have to say France is probably the faction I'm interested in, they're pretty much just shiny knights and men at arms. I'm more for the irregular warfare types, like the Turks, with Horse Archers and such.
Poland was another boring one. No crusades, and their unique unit was absolutely useless since you couldn't get it till late in the game, and early era knights were better than it.
Never played as Hungary because their position annoyed me, a terrible start location all around. Szekely were fun though.
sorry but when did muslims batter england? i really hope you are not referring to the recent terrorist offences.Quote:
Originally Posted by Burakius
as for the scots and french "battered" is a bit strong,sure england may have lost a few battles but over time england has consistently got the better of both nations.
Probably France and Scotland. I don't really like the whole Braveheart thing for Scotland. For France, they seem too generic. HRE has the gothic units combined with some Eastern influences while England has billmen and longbowmen. France doesn't seem to have any unique units at all.
I played Hungary in MTW and loved them. Their starting position is crappy, but the Szekely were fun. I'm partial to hybrid archer/melee troops and I didn't feel they were handled that well in MTW. Russia's unit selection is pretty underwhelming but the Boyars look fun.
I feel the same way about France in that they were okay, but very generic. If they have some good exclusive knights they will be much more appealing to me.
Russia. Too much land, not enough troops.
having had a look at some of your other posts it seems that you adopt a hardline islamicised view on history (defending the invasion of spain etc) and as such i fear i am correct in asuming that you refer to the recent terrorist atrocities as your islamic victoriesQuote:
Originally Posted by KARTLOS
london is a multicultural capital and people of many different creeds and cultures were harmed. justifying this kind of murder of the innocents as a victory is beyond belief.
it has been depresing to see that whilst the islamic faith has quite rightly come under increased scrutiny in recent years, people such as yourself instead of engaging in some soulsearching rush to justify any kind of islamic atrocity.
same as with Age of Empires
Aztecs
omg i love these smileys:book:
definately HRE, the feudal reality of the holy roman empire is impossible to show in this game really. unless you have armies disband and from in turns to show the flagging loyalty of princess. plus way to much heavy cavalry, not enough archers
i read in the previw that hre cannot get late period proffessional armies lie the english, bu what that means in reality i dont knowQuote:
Originally Posted by Julian the apostate
For myself, I very much doubt I'll play the Polish or Hungarians. I found them to be pretty boring in MTW, and so far neither faction appears as if they're going to be that much more interesting in the sequel either. I could certainly be wrong about that, of course, but I remain skeptical for now.
Gallipoli?Quote:
Originally Posted by KARTLOS
Anyway, I probaly won't be playing as the Danes, just don't like the feel.
gallipoli was something of a deathtrap, due to the entrenched position of the turks, so with hindsight a assualt by anyone would have resulted in high casualties.Quote:
Originally Posted by johhny-turbo
i think australians and new zealanders would take umbrage at the suggestion that it was an "english" loss however, as most of the casualties were from that region.
England, just plain uninteresting.
The debate about the history of conflict between Muslims and England is really, utterly irrelevant. Stop getting so easily offended or take it elsewhere.
Gendarmes? Not sure.Quote:
Originally Posted by Darth Nihilus
Kartlos, I am pretty sure Burakius was not referring to the recent terrorist attacks, although you are not the only person to have wondered if he was.
Please could people avoid dragging in contemporary conflicts when discussing a medieval computer game? It's not necessary and it is particularly problematic when people start accusing other members of supporting modern day atrocities that I doubt any of us here would conceive of supporting. ~:grouphug:
Any more discussion of this topic here or elsewhere on the forum will be deleted as off-topic.
Well, even though an invasion always means a lot of people get killed and some are robbed you can't look away from the fact the Islamic invasion of Spain made Southern (Muslim controlled) Spain one of the most prosperous regions in the world for about two centuries?Quote:
(defending the invasion of spain etc)
And for factions I don't feel very attracted to: I don't know if I'll play as the Spanish, Portuguese or the Moors (at least not in the campaign, and at least not to begin with), for some reason they don't appeal to me (even though Iberia has an exciting history, just some stupid sub conscious reason I think), neither do I think I'll play as Poland, Hungary or Denmark.
Haven't seen you since Rome was released, here to stay ?Quote:
Originally Posted by Colovion
:balloon2:
The generals and politicians ultimately in command where English. It proved to the ANZACs that the English were not as good generals as the press believed, it also showed the disdain that the English had for colonials.Quote:
Originally Posted by KARTLOS
The ANZACs performed far better when given more free reign under better generals and indeed some of their own were outstanding.
I would contend however that Gallipolli was not a muslim vs english/christian battle. It was one secular nation vs another.
Yes indeed :2thumbsup:Quote:
Originally Posted by Dutch_guy
Loving the M:TW2 demo.
exactlyQuote:
Originally Posted by Papewaio
we probably would, at that.Quote:
Originally Posted by KARTLOS
and as protest, i shall not be playing england! har har! take that.
Getting back on subject :laugh4:
After seeing the French review at IGN I'm thinking that it might be quite interesting to play as them.
Off topic for (just quickly)
Galipolli wasn't an Anzac or British defeat. It was an allied defeatQuote:
Originally Posted by Wandarah
In terms of the casulaties, I think they were pretty horrendous all round. The best estimates of casualty figures breakdown something like this:
- Australia: 18.500 wounded and missing - 7,594 killed.
- New Zealand : 5,150 wounded and missing - 2,431 killed.
- British Empire (excl. Anzac) : 198,000 wounded and missing - 22,000 killed.
- France : 23,000 wounded and missing - 27,000 killed.
- Ottoman Empire (Turkey) : 109,042 wounded and missing - 57,084 killed.
- Furthermore 1.700 Indians died in Gallipoli, plus an unknown number of Germans, Newfoundlanders and Senegalese.
( These figures are educated guesses, but still approximate and controversial. They are taken from various sources, i.c. official Turkish, Dr Geoffrey Partington, Bernd Langensiepen, Robert Rhodes James, Spencer Tucker and Geoffrey Moorhouse. )
Back to the topic:
I never played in MTW I:
1. England
2. France
3. HRE
Why? Because they are always (sometimes only :)) in medieval games and that isn't very correct when we play game about medieval times (especially in XI - XV centuries).
Egytp.
Quote:
Back to the topic:
I never played in MTW I:
1. England
2. France
3. HRE
Why? Because they are always (sometimes only :)) in medieval games and that isn't very correct when we play game about medieval times (especially in XI - XV centuries).
Umm, are you saying that England and France weren't big nations in medieval times or did I completely misunderstand you?
If I misunderstood you don't get angry :furious3:
Im Scottish and will play as Scotland
I wont be playing as the English, dont want to despite living here and my half English kids being born here ;)
Something satisfying about kicking English ass on M2TW
I loved Hungary on MTW due to the magnificient Szekeley and the close proximity to Avar Nobles and look forward to playing them as my next faction.
Got the game yesterday and tried Spain then unlocked to get Scotland :)
Hungary.. Russia.... serbia.. no offence to anyone who mite originate from those countries..
The French.....I mean come on they are french (Yes that is a biast remark from a German) and the Hungarians
Yes SIGGE you had understood it good.
For example the military power only in XV century Poland (allied with Lithuanians) was bigger than in XV century England and don't forget about Turkey and Hungary which could easily destroy France in these periods.
And what about 10-11 century when the battles between HRE and Poland where fought and Poland survive it with no special problems. Is it a prove of military power or what?
Woah, is it just me or is there waaaaay to much testostorone in this thread.
People not wanting to play a faction for whatever reason should be cool with everyone else surely??? I like to think of it as not getting value (or diversity) for you hard earned $$$ when buying the game.
As a New Zealander (and hence interested in the Gallipolli theme here) I would point out that we got our behinds handed to us on a plate by the Turks. I point out that 90 odd years later Australia, New Zealand AND Turkey gather to remember what happened there. At the same place I might add - and with very little trouble (despite the differences in religion). This battle is far more recent than many battle some of the people here seem to take so personally.
And after all this who will I not be playing??? Probably the Turks - because we fought tooth and nail 90 years ago??? No - I am just useless with the troop types they have :laugh4:
People find boring the eastern european factions (aka Hungary, Russia, Poland here), because in all the TW Games (either ancient or medieval themed) the east-european factions and provinces are ahistoricall, there was very little research done on them, they look like they are unfinished and simply thrown in the game like that, etc....