Some concerns about the campaign report

[Megas Methuselah]

2) You're describing a game that goes against everything that is Total War for the past 7+ years. The game you are describing is NOT a Total War game. That's why nobody is really agreeing with you.

No, he isn't. Every faction had different win conditions in M2TW and RTW, too. Also, there were preset diplomatic relations at the start of each game in the other TW titles.

1) Relax...nobody's attacking you or criticising you.

Uh... Yes, you are. Deliberate sarcasm, see below:

Have you played Total War titles before?

[ArtillerySmoke]

No, he isn't. Every faction had different win conditions in M2TW and RTW, too. Also, there were preset diplomatic relations at the start of each game in the other TW titles.



Uh... Yes, you are. Deliberate sarcasm, see below:

He made the statement that people were attacking him before I made my statement. So, no...nobody was.

I wasn't being sarcastic either. I was honestly wondering if he was a new player or not.

Different win conditions are one thing. Deliberately forcing certain factions to have certain relations with other factions (especially neighbors) and have certain wars (which is then determining the fate of at least 2 factions) preset as events...just isn't Total War imo.

edit: I still want preset events...I mean, hey those are a staple of the franchise. What I don't want is, for example, in M2TW if I pick France ALWAYS being at war with the Milenese because a preset event triggers that war. What about everything else I'm involved in and planning? In a game with too many preset conditions, the strategy we all know would go out the window. It would be about repeatedly preparing for the same events every campaign.

[Sir Beane]

Keep calm everyone. By all means discuss and disagree on talking points, but don't make any personal comments. There is no problem at the moment, but one might develop.

Just a friendly warning to not get too heated.

[Kalle]

I didnt really claim I was attacked. I felt people thought I had said things that I hadnt said. At least they answered to things I had not claimed in my original post. That could be an attack or it could be a case of misunderstanding. No matter what of the above I wanted to clarify my first post and I did so.

But again I have not made myself clear it seems. At least not to you Artillery Smoke.

The things you write about - preset this and that for the entire game - is not what I said nor wanted. I dont want the entire game preset year after year. But the starting position and stances should be historical imo. (Why else have the historical context at all?)

And again, Jack Lusted has confirmed this will at least partially be so and im happy with that and then you can feel free to think that this is not "total war" if you want to.

If you would care to read my posts you would see it is quite clear I have been around a while since i refer to things happening in medieval total war I. If you have not heard of golden achievements then maybe ask yourself how long you have played total war?

You could also take a look at the joindate at the org. For me it says 2003 for you it says 2009.... That does not meen I think you were born in 2009 but it should make it very clear to you that I have been familiar with the concept of total war games at least from 2003.

Now im off to sleep.

Kalle

[ArtillerySmoke]

I didnt really claim I was attacked. I felt people thought I had said things that I hadnt said. At least they answered to things I had not claimed in my original post. That could be an attack or it could be a case of misunderstanding. No matter what of the above I wanted to clarify my first post and I did so.

But again I have not made myself clear it seems. At least not to you Artillery Smoke.

The things you write about - preset this and that for the entire game - is not what I said nor wanted. I dont want the entire game preset year after year. But the starting position and stances should be historical imo. (Why else have the historical context at all?)

And again, Jack Lusted has confirmed this will at least partially be so and im happy with that and then you can feel free to think that this is not "total war" if you want to.

If you would care to read my posts you would see it is quite clear I have been around a while since i refer to things happening in medieval total war I. If you have not heard of golden achievements then maybe ask yourself how long you have played total war?

You could also take a look at the joindate at the org. For me it says 2003 for you it says 2009.... That does not meen I think you were born in 2009 but it should make it very clear to you that I have been familiar with the concept of total war games at least from 2003.

Now im off to sleep.

Kalle

Honestly? This post you've made is more about defending your experience as a player than defending your point. All you say is "I don't want the entire campaign to be preset".

I mean, it's your idea. It's your job to make people understand if they don't. Not get testy with them when they don't jump up and down and say "GREAT idea". I still just don't think it really is. A fragment of what you're saying? Sure...and that's what Jack confirmed. Every faction, every game, all the time? Absolutely not. I'm not playing the same starting 50+ years every time I use the same faction. It's my opinion, it's not a personal strike against you, it's just what it is. This isn't even mentioning the knowledge you would gain (above what we already know) about every other faction on the map. You'll literally be able to read where their troops are going to move to and fog of war will become more irrelevant.

I have read your ideas. Again...some minor implementation of this. But definitely not the entirety of what you've proposed.

[pyradyn]

.......How bout them Red socks??

Now that the universal (Ok just American, we Like to feel big and bad....) calm down statement has been said. I do Agree a little with what Kalle has said, we need things to be set as they were at the beginning of the game. The Alliance should be how they are and Tech should be how they are. Luckily Jack ended a long debate with his quick posting (got to love CA they do take care of their fans WAY more than any Company) That is all in the game. As for Sweden being attacked at the very very beginning of the game it could unbalance the game. Say the player lose the battle they would be left high and dry. Not saying it wouldn't be cool in a Swedish mod or something. Yes the player could recover but for most of the market they would not like it. I do like the fact that each unit is represented by the quality, based of history. Prussia fielded the most disciplined and combat ready troops. To bad Prussia as I have said before did not have the resources to full a long war until the uniting of Germany out of game period. Just my two cents (Patients the phrase) yes I am looking at you Sire Beane :P

[Kalle]

Honestly, my experience with Totalwar is what you questioned and doubted, a thing Megas also noticed, this is what you wrote;

----------------------------------------
Originally Posted by ArtillerySmoke
Have you played Total War titles before?

Originally Posted by ArtillerySmoke
You're describing a game that goes against everything that is Total War for the past 7+ years. The game you are describing is NOT a Total War game. That's why nobody is really agreeing with you.

------------------------------------------------------

I simply answered to that.

For the rest I have tried explain myself as best I can and people are free to agree or disagree and I should be free to answer those answers as long as I keep myself within the rules of the forums.

Now the demo is here in a matter of hours and the game within a a couple of weeks so there is really no point in continuing this debate or thread. Let any further issues instead be resolved on the battlefield of the game :)

Again thanks to Jack for taking the time to come here and the very quick response.

Kalle

[ConnMon]

Well then.
I do agree with Kalle most heartily. I think everybody being neutral/friendly to everyone else is ridiculous. Isn't that how it was in M2TW? Blech. I think that countries such as France and England should at least be unfriendly to each other, if not at war or otherwise.

[Sir Beane]

Well then.
I do agree with Kalle most heartily. I think everybody being neutral/friendly to everyone else is ridiculous. Isn't that how it was in M2TW? Blech. I think that countries such as France and England should at least be unfriendly to each other, if not at war or otherwise.

Jack Lusted has pointed out that some factions do start out at war with each other, and some are friendlier with others.

Everyone being neutral would indeed be silly.