whats better Medieval Total War or Cossacks?

**jbmagic** · 05-02-2003, 23:57

for people that played both Medeival total war and Cossacks whats better?

thanks

**The Blind King of Bohemia** · 05-03-2003, 14:52

Cossacks is a crock of s**t. For god's sake don't buy it. No military strategy game comes close to the total war series. Simple as that.

**Matt Deckard** · 05-03-2003, 17:10

i heard bad things about cossacks, but if you want an honest opinion DONT POST IN A MEDIEVAL FORUM your are almost guranteed to get everyone voting for MTW

**Blackball** · 05-03-2003, 21:03

I genuinely liked Cossacks, a lot; the single player campaign was frickin' impossible, but multiplayer was a lot of fun. Graphically, it's nothing compared to MTW, and more of a traditional resource management game, but I still consider it a very good game for all of its flaws. In a straight comparison, though, MTW is a better game.

**Husar** · 05-03-2003, 22:55

I loved Cossacks because it was much better than AoE2(in my opinion), but since I know the Total War series, I don´t really play it anymore. But I think, that American Conquest is not bad in MP. It´s got a bad AI, but I´ve heard it should be good in MP(couldn´t really test it on LAN very long).

**Custor** · 05-04-2003, 11:13

Cossacks is grim. I was hoping it would be similar to Shogun but its a poor RTS.

**Gregoshi** · 05-04-2003, 16:33

Hello Custor. Thanks for signing up.

You sound like you are speaking from experience. It is a real bummer when a game turns out to be disappointing. I remember many people looking forward to Cossacks. I've not had that problem much since I drastically cut back on the games I've purchased (due to lack of time).

**BDC** · 05-04-2003, 19:05

I have both (including the newer American Conquest Cossacks thing), and MTW seems much better, especially as Cossacks seems to lack stratagy. Every LAN game I have with it ends with a big bundle, and I have to resort to Pikeman flooding to win. Unlike MTW where LAN battles are cunning and full of tactics. And MTW single player is much better.

**Knight_Yellow** · 05-04-2003, 19:45

medieval gives cossacks a kick in the bossa....

**Stormer** · 05-04-2003, 19:49

Medievals better of course

**some_totalwar_dude** · 05-04-2003, 23:34

both good games, I'm playing the American Conquest demos now and I'm enyoing them.

but still MTW wins hands down.

**Axelthorpe** · 05-05-2003, 08:47

Cossacks is a good game, if you compare it to Warcraft or Command & Conquer series, but isn't even close to Medieval when fighting a battles or comparing realism in unit behavior. American Conquest is a better game than cossacks, it looks better, it's more complex with cavalry-officers, standard-bearers, morale and the possibility to enter buildings and use them as defence.

If you should compare Medieval to anything compare it to Europa Universalis II which is a much better game, but without the battlemode, which makes it a bit boring to play for some people (not me though).
EU2:

Cossacks and AC is a different kind of game compared to Medieval, some people like others hate it, and I, yes I love it.

**Basileus** · 05-05-2003, 09:13

I hated cossacks heh EU 1&2 where good though but the total war series is the best no doubt.

**Nelson** · 05-06-2003, 19:12

Cossacks is a fine traditional, race the clock, build and battle RTS. Total Annihilation was the best ever but Cossacks is good. Anyone who doesn't like RTS games won't like it.

**Longshanks** · 05-06-2003, 19:35

EU2 is a great game Never get tired of it.

**Michael the Great** · 05-06-2003, 20:32

Oh,there will be a new game called Empires:Rise of the modern World,from those who created Empire Earth,just check it out at Gamespot.com,maan just look at those graphics,three times more detailed than EE.
And I believe it expands from year 1000 A.D.to modern times.
HEY Any1 from these forums has has Combat Mission 2?
That game is better than any of EU2,Cossaks,and I'm afraid....TW(sorry)

And if someone mentioned historical accuracy in MTW,well it should then go to www.battlefront.com and see,or check out some buyer opinions on amazon.com
But of course I'm not saying that MTW doesn't rock

The problem with MTW 4 me,is that it just calls for too much micro-management,no automated commands,no nothing.
You just have to control EVERY single unit,tell it where to move,direct it to flank....and lots more.
Yes,grouping,army formations,waypoints,lessen the micro-management but it lacks many (basic) commands that could make it less annoying.
BTW,I'm looking forward to VI too.

**Michael the Great** · 05-06-2003, 20:33

Gregorshi,
why can't I post .jpg images on these boards?

Edit: Michael, you got a PM. - Gregoshi

**KyodaiSteeleye** · 05-06-2003, 23:29

well, i haven't got Cossacks but have played the demo - must say that RTS strategy games in the cossacks/c&c vein really irritate me because you basically can build a huge bit of infrastructure in the same time as it takes to fight a battle - its all to do with how fast you can play as to who wins, and you need eyes everywhere on the map all the time - the MTW format of turn based strategy/building and then real time battles is SOOOOO much better, and SOOOOO much more realistic.

On Universalis - i agree, its a great strategy game which knocks the socks off MTW on the strategy element - but falls down because it has no real time battle element (and although the strategy is RT, the building/battle elements take the proper amount of time, which makes me much happier ).

**SirGrotius** · 05-07-2003, 05:09

1) EUII, 2)MTW, 3)Cossacks. Any questions?

MTW would be number one if it had the same level of detail and suspended disbelief a bit more in terms of assassins living forever, etc. Rome Total War looks like it might take the Gold because Crusader Kings (the new EU, set in the medieval ages) looks a bit grim.

**Losfalos** · 05-14-2003, 16:03

Cossacks beats MTW for fun and hot pressure to win from the word go - just like all rts games do

cossacks is definitely in the top 5 or 6 rts games of all time i think...

mtw is nice for armchair pleasure where you take your time

i think combat mission 2(havnt played it) will probably be my fav 1 game though cos its just so micro moment managed - you can choose to feel every soldier's fear - though it is in a genre of its own again. i cant get a copy of it

**Sjakihata** · 05-14-2003, 22:26

Cossacks is not even good, it sucks.

MTW at least has a little fun (esp if u dont know shogun)

**Skie Mirror Silvanoshei** · 05-15-2003, 03:16

MTW is better. 'Nuff said.

**Bane** · 05-15-2003, 06:41

I played cossacks - once. It's gathering dust in my closet...It never made it to the stage of 'I think I'll reinstall it and give it a go'

Don't know why -- just never appealed to me...Shogun on the other hand has been on and off my computer since I first got it.

I remember the first time I played STW and a few of my buds were watching -- we were amazed at the battles, and I always felt bad for my little dudes when they got whacked -- guess my dread rating stinks...

**ScardeyMcScaredOfTheClanMcScared** · 05-15-2003, 12:47

Why not get both demos and try them out for yourself.

**Gregoshi** · 05-15-2003, 14:24

ScardeyMcScaredOfTheClanMcScared...hello. My fingers are cramping up or I'd say more. I can't even

.

**Losfalos** · 05-15-2003, 14:50

Oh yeah

One thing cossacks does have over MTW is that you can field 8,000+ men on the screen at once in Cossacks..
Max for MTW must be ..um..? I dont know - technically i guess you could field 8k with 4-6 factions in one province fighting..

What's Max for Multiplayer?

Cossacks i think has gone beyond hte 8k limit for 2 players though...

(MTW is still really ace - Cossacks is just different)

**some_totalwar_dude** · 05-15-2003, 15:59

Medieval can place 6x3200=19200 men on the field in theory. but don't count on it to have a decent frame rate with so much men.

in reality the maximum limit of the engine lies at about 15000 men, still ALOT of men IMO.

Thread: whats better Medieval Total War or Cossacks?

Thread Tools

Display

Bookmarks

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions