Has anyone else had this problem?

[Lurker on the Threshold]

I recently purchased a new (older game) from the evil Walmart. Not that I don't still love MTW or STW. I just wanted a different flavor. I purchased Stronghold Crusader due the the era. I played it for a couple hours but it just did not have the appeal I had hoped for. (Thank the gods it was only 9 bucks). It seems to me that I have not found any game to stand up to the total package of either of the TW games. Once upon a time I enjoyed playing all kinds; now I'm spoiled and will settle for nothing less then what TW has to offer.

[Derfasciti]

I have rarely found a game that could beat MTW. The only other RTSs that I can remember being really obsessed with were some C&Cs and Superpower2 for a long while. I liked the nukes

[bamff]

Gotta agree, they are "one of a kinds" (hmmm that just looks really wrong in plural, but then I am 'crack brained', so I think I can get away with it) for so many reasons.

[Martok]

I've yet to come across any grand strategy games in recent years that has held the same appeal as Shogun and Medieval Total War. (And since I have the reflexes of an old fogey, I play RTS's only rarely. )

The only exception is Galactic Civilizations 2, but as that's more of a standard turn-based space strategy game, it's like comparing apples to oranges. That said, it's the *only* strategy game that I've found to be as much fun as the first two TW titles. Thus far, the Total War series is unique and has yet to truly be duplicated.

[gaijinalways]

It's definately a cool game. I like other types of sims as well (especially business sims), but as an economy and war game, MTW reigns supreme.

Note that the Civ series rivals MTW for tech building, but the battles suck royally. As noted before, Warcraft is okay, but it doesn't have the long term interconnectiveness over a larger map that MTW has.

[matteus the inbred]

Barely play anything else...Cossacks looked like it should have been the next generation but frankly the battles suck somewhat and it's a bit too 'choreographed' as well...'mission' formats are never quite as much freewheeling fun as campaign stuff. Did love Starcraft and C&C though...

I once owned a WW2 strategy game called Sudden Strike that looked absolutely beautiful and played really well, but had annoying glitches in the AI, took aaaaages to complete and had no building facilities...it was mission based but you got given literally thousands of troops and vehicles...every game ended up with me calling in loads of heavy artillery and bombers and 'creeping' across the map cos while it gave you loads of troops there was no easy way to control them all and have them do sensible things...the AI on the other hand could control all of its troops sensibly, so if you tried a mass tank attack you got picked off while your tanks just kinda sat around waiting for orders...frustrating

[macsen rufus]

I used to enjoy all sorts of RTS games before TW came along: Praetorians, Age of Empires, C&C up to Tiberian Sun (I really loved the Libyan nuke truck suicide squads....), and even the original Warcraft (which got me into pc games in the first place). BUT they all just faded away after TW... too formulaic, or just stand-alone battles with no strategic value, or just too unrealistic.

TW wins because you need to use real tactics, consider terrain, morale, weather etc, not merely crank up your economy and spam out uber-units on to the battlefield faster than the other guy can.

TW is also open-ended, so you can decide your own goals, make up your own "rules" to play to - role-play to history if you like. With most of the other games you end up learning which units to train, where to place them, and how to finish a specific mission on a specific map. Once you've done it once, that's how every other game will go.

And I like a game you win by thinking, not by doing fifty-thousand clicks per second

[caravel]

Stronghold Crusader is an RTS game, like Warcraft or C&C. To be honest I found it quite entertaining, though only for a limited amount of time, and I wouldn't revisit. It does have some good humour in it though. I don't see these type of games as being a replacement for games like STW, MTW or RTW, they're just not the same kind of thing.

[ajaxfetish]

I found some enjoyment in the novelty of stronghold crusader, but it certainly couldn't compete w/ MTW; the longevity was not there.

The combination of turn-based and real time in the Total War series makes for a more realistic strategy experience IMO, giving you time to make long-term plans without feeling rushed, but still having to adapt quickly on the battlefield itself. The best thing about the game, though, is the fairly realistic depiction of battlefield factors such as morale, fatigue, and terrain. There were so many subtle little factors influencing this (such as the overcrowding effect) that made it feel right, and I have yet to see its equal anywhere else.

Ajax

[naut]

MTW and STW are just hands down great.

Classics.

[Jxrc]

RTS not being an option for me (I hate to have no time for planning anything and the obligation to watch everywhere), I would say that there are only, as far as I know of course, a few strategy games as good as MTW:

- Panzer General;
- Steel Panther;
- Civ I;
- Heroes of Might & Magic III.

Old stuffs indeed ... Perhaps due to the fact that I had much more time to play then but my guess would be that most new game put too much focus on having great 3-D graphism and forget the need for a decent AI.

[caravel]

I did try out an RTS for Linux a while ago, and wasn't impressed to be honest. It was a kind of WC2 clone, called "Stratagus", which had me racing to out tech the enemy, clickfesting like a loon, and ultimately losing anyway. You don't even get time to blink. I retried about 10 times, each time starting off instantly and chucking out tons of units to hold the enemy off but simply couldn't hold them off long enough. The micromanagement makes it really annoying! The lack of walls and guard towers made defense of the settlement almost impossible.

"What can men do against such reckless hate?"

[Derfasciti]

Galactic Civs 2 and Imperial Glory are both great. I remember being addicted to both for a good bit of time. I mean like addictive, so fun. ...So fun...

[gunslinger]

I thought the C&C series was the best thing ever until I happened across MTW on the top shelf at Wal-Mart for $10 one day. I haven't spent a minute playing C&C since then. (Interestingly, that copy of MTW I bought at Wal-Mart was pirated. The game would play without the disk in the drive, and the cd key was invalid. I eventually bought another copy which was bundled with VI).

For an occasional diversion, I would recommend the newest version of Axis and Allies. It's loosley based on the classic board game. It has a risk-style strat map, but when battles need to take place, you go into RTS mode. However, the RTS is more like C&C than TW. You start the battle with nothing but a corps HQ and maybe a battleship for bombardment if you were making an amphibious assault. The resources you have available in the RTS battle are determined by the pieces you had in that location on the strat map. The AI, especially on the strat map, is pretty horrible, but the game is pretty fun for a limited time.

I'd recommend the game if you can get it for 10 or 20 bucks and just want an occasional different flavor from TW games.

[Motep]

I thought the C&C series was the best thing ever until I happened across MTW on the top shelf at Wal-Mart for $10 one day. I haven't spent a minute playing C&C since then. (Interestingly, that copy of MTW I bought at Wal-Mart was pirated. The game would play without the disk in the drive, and the cd key was invalid. I eventually bought another copy which was bundled with VI).

For an occasional diversion, I would recommend the newest version of Axis and Allies. It's loosley based on the classic board game. It has a risk-style strat map, but when battles need to take place, you go into RTS mode. However, the RTS is more like C&C than TW. You start the battle with nothing but a corps HQ and maybe a battleship for bombardment if you were making an amphibious assault. The resources you have available in the RTS battle are determined by the pieces you had in that location on the strat map. The AI, especially on the strat map, is pretty horrible, but the game is pretty fun for a limited time.

I'd recommend the game if you can get it for 10 or 20 bucks and just want an occasional different flavor from TW games.

huh...the same thing happened with my first mtw copy...and the only pc i found that can compare(in my mind) to the total war games is agae of empires 2 and its expansion. I love making maps (mine are awesome!) and generating triggers (I made a dude have 14000 hp), but the game scenarios suck. The battle maps (suppose i should say the game playing system) are cool, and very strategic, with grand detail and single game that can last forever (once had one 20 hours long).

[Martok]

Galactic Civs 2 and Imperial Glory are both great. I remember being addicted to both for a good bit of time. I mean like addictive, so fun. ...So fun...

I definitely agree with you on GalCiv 2. Definitely a fantastic game, although my computer is too old to run it very well.

I'm surprised you liked Imperial Glory, though. Most reviews I'd read--whether they were written by a professional (e.g., Gamespot, Gamespy, etc.) or a private individual--tagged the game as being a Total War "wannabe", except not as fun. It had looked promising enough, but apparently had control issues (especially during combat), as well as lacking certain "realism" features. For instance, I remember most reviews saying that morale wasn't a factor in battles, and so you would see your cavalry and grenadiers fight to the last man instead of running away.

But I digress. The TW games are still in a class of their own, at least for the time being.

[Quickening]

I'll tell you all of a game that is easily a rival to MTW, Knights of Honour.
Exact same kind of game except that the campain map is also in real time (you can choose to have the rest of the world pause or not during battles). If any of you are looking for a game like MTW then I do not hesitate to recommend Knights of Honour. Although it is a fairly recent game, you might have trouble finding it unfortunately. The graphics are extremely pleasant, the music is superb and it has indepth diplomacy, trade and warfare.

[mtman]

Hi Guys, I'm new here & want to introduce my self, I'm known as mtman. I have been playing RTW (Mostly the single player) since it came out & can't get enough of it. I been every faction in the game & still love it. I have RTW Barbarian Invasion but afraid to load it because I don't want to ruin the regular game. Any one have input on this? Also I can't wait for Medieval 2 to come out. Was wondering if its any different than RTW ?

[Martok]

Welcome to the Org, mtman. Glad to have you here!

I'm afraid you're actually in the wrong forum, though, if you wanted to discuss Medieval 2 Total War. The forum that you're in (the Main Hall) is dedicated to the the game's predecessor, Medieval Total War. If you have questions about Medieval 2, then I encourage you to visit the forums dedicated to it--there's plenty of people there who will be more than happy to discuss the game with you. Good luck, and have fun!

[caravel]

**dusts self off and blows away cobwebs**

Eh? what's that?? You'll have to shout up son, these old ears aren't what they were... hold your horses now, new fangled games? I've only one thing to say to that load of old rot...

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

GAH!

and...

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

Welcome!

[Motep]

how do you make thing spoilers...?

[Martok]

@Caravel:

how do you make thing spoilers...?

On the right upper side of your posting screen, there should be the following icon: B; just highlight the text you want to hide, and then click that B icon. (Note that it's different from the boldface icon, which is on the upper *left* side.) It ought to be right next the icon that looks like ABC.

[Derfasciti]

I definitely agree with you on GalCiv 2. Definitely a fantastic game, although my computer is too old to run it very well.

I'm surprised you liked Imperial Glory, though. Most reviews I'd read--whether they were written by a professional (e.g., Gamespot, Gamespy, etc.) or a private individual--tagged the game as being a Total War "wannabe", except not as fun. It had looked promising enough, but apparently had control issues (especially during combat), as well as lacking certain "realism" features. For instance, I remember most reviews saying that morale wasn't a factor in battles, and so you would see your cavalry and grenadiers fight to the last man instead of running away.

But I digress. The TW games are still in a class of their own, at least for the time being.

Your're right Martok, especially about the morale and fighting to the last man. That is very annoying. however, I LOVE Napoleonic history and I loved the graphics and all. It just really brings back some nice memories of a summer where i didn't really have any responsibilities to worry about.

[Motep]

@Caravel:


On the right upper side of your posting screen, there should be the following icon: B; just highlight the text you want to hide, and then click that B icon. (Note that it's different from the boldface icon, which is on the upper *left* side.) It ought to be right next the icon that looks like ABC.

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

Thank you very much.

[Martok]

@Derfasciti: Ah, I see. I could probably say the same about BotF (Birth of the Federation). It was a horribly flawed game in many ways....but since I'm nuts for both Star Trek and turn-based strategy, I loved it anyway--warts and all. In addition, just as with you and Imperial Glory, BotF reminds me of a simpler and more carefree time in my life.

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

Thank you very much.

[Innocentius]

Has anyone tried Europa Universalis? It's like MTW, although set to a later era (1492-1718 IIRC) and with a lot more focus to diplomacy, politics and economy.

[caravel]

I've heard of it but never tried it. Personally I'm not convinced that the STW/MTW game engine works so well with the "pike and musket" style of warfare, and I'm utterly convinced it doesn't work with the Napoleonic period. This is not an unreasonable point of view. Modders can only do so much. If only the STW/MTW engine could reproduce the intricate formations that are part of such warfare. e.g. Square formation, which is pretty vital to Napoleonic warfare. I'm not judging the mod at all, just giving my opinion which is always open to change.

You've reminded me of Fields of Glory a Napoleonic era strategy game... which I'm downloading now... good lord found it on an abandonware site!!! The problem with that is the speed, they tend to march *ahem* rather too quickly on a PC with anything better than a 400MHz CPU and more than 32MB of RAM... anyway it'll probably crash! Luckily I have Windows 98SE though!!

[Lurker on the Threshold]

See, Now I played Patrican (about the Hanseatic league) for ages prior to MTW/STW and IT was the only other game to have me laying in bed after lights out thinking about how to deteat a certain element. Another game to pick up on the cheap if you can find it.

No battles (other than real time sea battles) to speak of but it was fairly intricate in the areas of diplomacy, etc.