why do I keep coming back to Total War

[rebelscum]

Having played everything in the Total War series, apart from Shogun,( MTW, VI, RTW, RTWBI, MTW2) I am pretty familiar with the Total War experence. I've groaned at the stupidity of the AI, laughed at the gameplay issues, and almost commited suicide when my brand new PC still lags on MTW2 city seige battles. However I am still contemplating buying TW Kingdoms. Is there something wrong with me. There are other games out there, some better written with in game AI that actually works. But every time I see the screens for the new release/expansion I just have to get it. Have I been brainwashed?

[craziii]

it is the uniqueness of the TW series. there is absolutely no games out there that is even similar or on par. IG simply $@#k, and that is the only clone that I know of. CIV 4 + europa are just computerized board games, the battle aspect almost non existent.

[GFX707]

Yeah, it's about time some other company came along with a decent clone and made the fat, lazy, bloated, spoiled TW series actually have to fight for its survival.

This is the one time I wouldn't actually mind a "clone" game coming out.

Why this game has been the only game in its genre for 7 years is a mystery to me.

[Shao]

Rebelscum, consider playing Shogun. Its battle AI is the best of the whole series, imho.

I am thinking of installing it now - until Kingdoms and BC come out :-)

[Alx]

TW is the quintessential hot bitch girlfriend. Looks so enticing on the surface, but once you get to know her a little bit you want to run without looking back.

Then when you spend some time away from her you look back, allured again by the good looks, and think "man, it couldn't have been THAT bad" and you give it another try; only to realize why you split in the first place.

[Lusted]

Why this game has been the only game in its genre for 7 years is a mystery to me.

Well there has been a TW challenger - Imperial Glory. It combined battles, campaign map and naval battles, but didn't get very good reviews.

[GFX707]

Well there has been a TW challenger - Imperial Glory. It combined battles, campaign map and naval battles, but didn't get very good reviews.

Yeah, it was awful - in the naval battles, if your ships drifted more than about a screen away from the enemy, you lost your entire fleet.

The battles were more like command and conquer.

The campaign, from the short amount I played before I took the game back, seemed a lot better than the RTW/M2TW campaign though.

[joe4iz]

I'll buy Kingdoms when it comes out cuz I'm a glutton for punishment.
I still find it hard to believe that some of the same problems from MTW were not changed for the second one. I guess community feedback is not desired.

I could have done with less eye candy but I still like to play the series. It's like ,we really know that you want better AI ,but look we've made the units less cookie cutter!

[jepva]

Maybe subliminally - we just like being able to beat a computer all the time - reaffirming our primal supremacy over the tool.

[hoetje]

Don't know either... I'm sitting on this boards every day a couple of times, and still search at the .com for news... I bought Rome total war first, about 2 years ago,and since then things got rolling ;)

[Orda Khan]

Rebelscum, consider playing Shogun. Its battle AI is the best of the whole series, imho.

I am thinking of installing it now - until Kingdoms and BC come out :-)

By far the best. Fancy graphics mean nothing when the 'huge' battles can't be realised. I enjoyed 4v4 MP battles on 56k and a pretty mediocre PC

...Orda

[Forward Observer]

There is a Medieval Total War wannabe clone in development, but I haven't seen any press on it lately.

XIII Century--Death or Glory

The site doesn't look like it's been updated in ten months or so--other than to change the release date from 2006 to 2007.

Cheers

[craziii]

that site has soo little info it isn't funny for a game that is suppose to come out this year. but yea, that does look like a better clone than IG will ever be, you could tell from the screens alone.

[rebelscum]

Guys,
I'm glad it isn't just me and a bit sad. I agree with jepva, that the game is so easy to beat that it leads to to think you have mastered some sort of art form.
I did enjoy playing some of the mods. I prefer realism to arcade style games. If anyone has an old copy of Shogun that they don't want, e-mail me 'paul.morrison@getonthenet.co.uk' and I'll swap it for something else.

[HarunTaiwan]

I had high hopes for EB, but the thing CTD.

[Zasz1234]

I have to say the reason for coming back is that the games are so damn fun. Let's face it they capture that feeling of being a general like no other games have. That aside, I will probably buy Kingdoms (If I have any space left on my computer) it just sucks that the expansion will leave the Grand Campaign completely untouched. I mean seriously, throw us a bone here.

[Didz]

Well there has been a TW challenger - Imperial Glory. It combined battles, campaign map and naval battles, but didn't get very good reviews.

Thats becuase it was Total rather than TotalWar.

[TinCow]

When it comes down to it, the TW series are the only games that really make you feel like you're fighting a real battle. Everything else either looks unrealistic or heavily scaled down. That in itself is a major plus, even when the AI fails to challenge us.

[BadGenome]

I have to say the reason for coming back is that the games are so damn fun. Let's face it they capture that feeling of being a general like no other games have. That aside, I will probably buy Kingdoms (If I have any space left on my computer) it just sucks that the expansion will leave the Grand Campaign completely untouched. I mean seriously, throw us a bone here.

I sort of doubt that will be the case, as every expansion so far has had some effect on the Grand Campaign. For example, they've been touting the fact that Kingdoms adds the ability to issue orders to reinforcements, so I'd be very surprised if that feature wasn't introduced to the GC.

[Fate]

Yeah, it was awful - in the naval battles, if your ships drifted more than about a screen away from the enemy, you lost your entire fleet.

The battles were more like command and conquer.

The campaign, from the short amount I played before I took the game back, seemed a lot better than the RTW/M2TW campaign though.

Imperial Glory was so close to being good.
I personally quite enjoyed the battles (except the lack of morale, and inability to withdraw once engaged in melee).

The campaign map didnt suit me, and the naval battles were borderline. It was relaly close to being a great game, but in the end it just didnt happen.

If they'd left it open and moddable like total war there would've been a lot more possibilities.

[Didz]

Imperial Glory was so close to being good.
I personally quite enjoyed the battles (except the lack of morale, and inability to withdraw once engaged in melee).

Well that alone was enough to consign it to the circular filing cabinet in my opinion.

In the Napoleonic period it was said that The Morale v The Physical was as 10 v 1. In other words battles were decided by morale, so to launch a Napoleonic game with no morale rules was totally pointless.

[The Stranger]

Rebelscum, consider playing Shogun. Its battle AI is the best of the whole series, imho.

I am thinking of installing it now - until Kingdoms and BC come out :-)

only do that if you can look beyond graphics... i know graphics isnt everything but i simply cant play shogun any more... it's just not the same.. cant rotate camera, cant do a whole lot of other things... mtw i can play but the battle are still not the same...

[Slug For A Butt]

only do that if you can look beyond graphics... i know graphics isnt everything but i simply cant play shogun any more... it's just not the same.. cant rotate camera, cant do a whole lot of other things... mtw i can play but the battle are still not the same...

It's not just the graphics. The campaign map is a dog, the units are not diverse enough and the battlemap AI is not as wonderful as I seemed to remember it. The last time I reinstalled it, the AI actually defending the high ground when it wanted to fight was not enough to compensate me for the mind numbingly boring job of chasing the enemy round and round and round the battlefield before I could corner it when it didn't want to fight.
I think the reason I keep keep reinstalling and playing other TW games (coming back for more) is for nostalgia really, I keep looking at the older games through rose tinted spectacles, it's only when I have played them again that I remember why I uninstalled them in the first place. The only exception is RTW which is still my favourite TW game by far because of the unit diversity and time period.

[The Stranger]

true true... only i have it with MTW... somehow whatever people say I never really encountered gamebreaking bugs (maybe cuz i never bothered to look) and I also want nobody pointing them out (Ill close my yeyes put my fingers in my ears and scream) i just like the game... occasionally reinstalling it play around a lil bit get bored and uninstall but I still like it. I only like RTW with EB... I dont like mtw2 at all and uninstalled it a week after i bought it... not bothering to finish more than 5% of a campaign. the bugs just killed it for me... +i have no times to mod or the wishes to do so... still im going to buy kingdoms... why.... dunno... I think they invented the gameequivelent of cocaine... im always hoping for a change... (mainly in the game industry with its stupid christmas rushing)

I mean what you can do with the tw series is just endless and just thinking about it can fill my day... sad.. i know

[Didz]

Graphic's are not that important to me, I am mch more interested in gameplay and STW/MI is far superior in that respect. Its interesting to hear people slagging off the map and lack of diversity as it seems to me that it was the changes in both these area's which brought about the decline in gameplay. The original STW campaign map provides a Risk style challenge and required strategy to beat, the new animated maps are just slow and meanlingless, they have no real impact over strategy at all.

[The Stranger]

the map is great in all the games... but i was never able to play shogun seriously cuz i played mtw first... i think mtw is the best and truly like it... its diverse enough for me and i enjoy adding some units where i see fit... it hasnt lost its magic for me where the others did

[Zasz1234]

I sort of doubt that will be the case, as every expansion so far has had some effect on the Grand Campaign. For example, they've been touting the fact that Kingdoms adds the ability to issue orders to reinforcements, so I'd be very surprised if that feature wasn't introduced to the GC.

From what I've read in the Kingdoms Balance Thread from Lusted is that the only changes are in the Kingdoms campaign and that they will not be in the grand campaign. At least that is how it seems.

https://forums.totalwar.org/vb/showthread.php?t=89698

[sapi]

From what I've read in the Kingdoms Balance Thread from Lusted is that the only changes are in the Kingdoms campaign and that they will not be in the grand campaign. At least that is how it seems.

https://forums.totalwar.org/vb/showthread.php?t=89698

Correct; 1.3 is purely a MP compatibility patch.

[BadGenome]

From what I've read in the Kingdoms Balance Thread from Lusted is that the only changes are in the Kingdoms campaign and that they will not be in the grand campaign. At least that is how it seems.

https://forums.totalwar.org/vb/showthread.php?t=89698

Hadn't seen that thread. Bummer.

Although the new balancing sounds fun.

[Slug For A Butt]

Graphic's are not that important to me, I am mch more interested in gameplay and STW/MI is far superior in that respect. Its interesting to hear people slagging off the map and lack of diversity as it seems to me that it was the changes in both these area's which brought about the decline in gameplay. The original STW campaign map provides a Risk style challenge and required strategy to beat, the new animated maps are just slow and meanlingless, they have no real impact over strategy at all.

I disagree wholeheartedly, I find increased unit diversity gives me many more battlefield options, gives me the opportunity to fight fundamentally culture vs culture battles. Phalanx vs Legion vs HA vs Chariot vs Berserker vs Elephant vs Naptha/Headhurler vs Longbow etc, each can be the antidore to anothers overpowering unit roster. I find unit diversity only a good thing, I find different factions having different fighting capabilities a good thing, something that was completely lacking in STW.
The original STW campaign provides a RISK style challenge which is, I think, better left to the board game. And I think when you control a mountain pass or a river crossing the last thing I would call it is meaningless, with no strategic impact. Maps now actually mean something.
Does anyone here remember a game called "Archon" for the C64 decades ago? It was played on a chess board in a very similar style to chess, but instead of just landing on a piece and removing it like in chess, you fought a mini battle over the square. I'm sorry, but I find STW's campaign map almost as primitive and meaningless.
I suppose it's all down to personal preference, but everytime I reinstall STW it lasts 2 evenings before I'm bored with it and return to RTW or M2TW.
Hopefully you notice that I am stating my prefernces, I am not stating that A is better than B, I am simply saying that I prefer A over B. It's all down to personal taste.