Medieval total war 2 allows the player to create a story with how their family progresses. Each and every family member/general can have their own unique traits that lets the player become attached to them and actually give a shit about them. As England I’ve had a father and son fight the Sicilians in the same battle; the father died but the battle was won. Afterwards his son gained the trait “dislikes the Sicilians” because his father was killed in front of him fighting in the battle. I used this character to destroy the Sicilians and he ended up becoming a maxed out commander. His father was adopted as a man of the hour after the fathers commander who happened to be my prince died in battle on his way to Cairo for the crusade. After he was done defeating Sicily, I sent the blood raged son on the next crusade to Antioch to finish what his father and the former prince of England had failed to do before. He did end up dying at Antioch after an unstoppable horde of Mongolian armies besieged and captured the city. The son died bravely in battle killing over 3 times as many men as the mongols, and slaying the Mongolian khan. I should of kept that save, I’m sure legend wouldn’t have a problem breaking the siege of a full horde of mongols.
exactly!!! the story telling was so important to me in TW games, and it hasn't been that way in games!! its so aggravating, i couldn't have said it better my self. I WISH CA would see this comment
That sounds really awesome. I got into Total War games way late. (started with Warhammer) I purchased Thrones of Brittania for something like what you explained creating a story and a family line and becoming immersed in the game (kind of like Mount and Blade).. sadly I am disappointed in Thrones I tried hard to beat more than just one campaign but now it's even harder for stupid reasons like Legend states and it makes me not to even want to play it anymore. I might have to pick up Medieval total war 2 if it ever goes on sale. Does anyone know if it has support for 4k?
Todd Ison if you don’t have medieval 2 then you must buy it whatever the cost. Make sure you get the Kingdoms expansion as it’s essential for most of the mods and it’s a good expansion on its own. Almost any total war game can be played through medieval 2 mods. Want to play Rome? Install Europa Barbarorum 2 or de Bello Mundi. Want to play thrones of Britannia? Well there’s something better called The Last Kingdom. If your into fantasy worlds the Third Age Lord of the Rings mods have been being developed for years and The Elder Scrolls total war mod isn’t done, but it’s damn near perfect. Scenarios that Creative Assembly haven’t even thought of are available for download for no charge at all. Medieval 2 is the best total war game and there’s definitely a reason most people think so. This game is 12 years old and it could still be sold for full price. So buy it, idk if it has 4K support though.
@@sleepshouter5017 That was an aesome description! May i ask,do you know any mod which can i play as Spartacus with his slave army? I already tried a Rome 2 mod but its not updated anymore and you need rollback to update 16 so there are lot of bugs in the game.
@@HueyPPLong It's called 'the last kingdom total war', a mod for medieval 2 kingdoms. They also added the 3.9 Wrath of the norsemen expansion but for me it seems very buggy, the basic versions works fine. It's not that large with only a few factions and not that much diversity in units but it's fun if you like the era with Medievall 2 mechanics. Also someone is working on a vikings HBO mod but it doesn't seem out yet.
yeah, but lets face it... this setting is nearly in total war attila. You can literally play the Danes and roleplay the raids and conquering of england. Its not to far apart and the Units look pretty much the same anyway in both games.
TBF, it's not just CA; swapping depth and challenge for lazy gamey'ness to trying an keep the player engaged spinning their tyres is a common plague of games released this decade. City builders for one are utterly dead as a genre, besides for people who would have been model train nutters in a prior life; Cities Skyline is just fucking boring and annoying to play.
@@RomanHistoryFan476AD I was talking about City Skylines. Yes, the economic aspect of CS is swallow but it is the only "modern" city builder that comes the close SC4.
Things i liked more with the old TWs: -Units as own army without gen -Factions possesing more regions from beginning on in a realistic way -Settlements are displayed small on the campaign map, takes more rounds to reach them, increased amount of fieldbattle instead of boring sieges -Troops arent cheap -Unlimited amount of building slots -aggressive neighbours - no forced march -economy with sense, settlements are important for income -POPULATION feel free to add things!
Definitely agree with the smaller province city sizes. The field battles are so much more fun to play, and yet even in some of the mods for the newer games, they're just not as frequent as the older games. And I hate having to have a general. I really miss the mechanic in the first Rome, even in the fantastic mod EB, where if a single unit put down a rebellion, the unit spawned a new character you could adopt as a war hero into your family tree. That was awesome. Can't do that when you have to have a commander unit now.
It’s just recently started to dawn on me that I liked empires campaign system the best. Apart from a few provinces being too large (looking at you france), the way settlements were managed was good. It could’ve been better but there were distinct differences between various cities and the development of their province. In older tw, unlimited construction meant literally every city underwent the same development, in the same order, and ended up with nearly identical buildings. Sure, the exact military structure might vary depending on which recruitment center that town supports and in med2 you had guild buildings but effectively everything was the same. At least now we have a semblance of this town is an industrial center, that town is a agricultural center, this town is an urban center, etc. There are different archetypes instead of just build all the things in this specific min/max order. Empire also had the little provincial towns that grew based on wealth which created trade off for heavy taxation and helped further add nuance to provinces. Anyway that was a massive tangent. I think a lot of the things tob tried to do were admirable however it failed extremely hard in its execution. The estates looks like a pain in the neck as your reward for doing it correctly is avoiding punishment. I heard the supply mechanic was too weak and could simply be overlooked. The tech tree idea of meeting requirements sounded like good innovation but apparently the techs in the tree suck. Etc.. If someone could just make a thrones dei rebalance equivalent....ooo
Like maybe instead of just punishing you for getting a tech make it have trade offs. To use something from empire as an example, advanced roads makes your armies deploy faster, it helps trade, maybe it could help supply lines (if there were a proper supply line mechanic), and troop replenishment as “fresh recruits” from the manpower pool get sent to the front lines. However it also means enemy units move faster through that region as well. So the player is left wondering, which provinces does he want to upgrade the roads. Obviously the central provinces of the empire, probably provinces leading to and bordering good trade allies, maybe provinces leading to a defended front line territory, probably not a poorly defended province that borders hostile enemy, etc. You still create interesting trade offs of positives and negatives from an upgrade so it’s not just a mindless bonus. But simultaneously it’s not just a secret nerf set to hinder your late game.
Harold Haroldson While entertaining when you’re the one doing it, it’s extremely unbalanced on the receiving end. There’s little one can do to counter such behavior when it’s done properly other than expending an excessive amount of resources. When the counter to something is disproportionately difficult to pull off relative the thing, it tends to feel broken and unbalanced. This problem isn’t obvious in small regions but in oversized territories like france, the imbalance becomes apparent.
I guess that's the biggest issue with recent TW games, there's a bigger focus on player caused challenges, than AI caused challenges. There's all these things you have to work out, and be careful about, and almost none of that is the AI. Play Shogun 2 on a higher difficulty and the enemy comes for your castles in force, but in all TW games since Rome 2, the AI seems to be on a holiday and waits for the player to either go on the offensive, or mismanage his empire and watch it fall apart from the inside. Go play Crusader Kings 2 as a minor lord and try to declare independence from your overlord and see how armies of doom approach your tiny little castle to put your ass in a dungeon. Such a different experience.
To be fair, all AIs are very predictable and easy when you understand them; which is why even harder Crusader Kings difficulties can be beaten kinda easily when you have enough experience; other RTS type games like Starcraft, despite people trying to push the AI beyond with various different attempts in the last 5-10 years, at best I think gives you maybe high goldish teir players, no where near masters; and still predictable. It's just worse mainly because it gave options to you, whereas now newer total wars only get artificially harder by simplifying everything you can do, and handicapping you. But it might be decades before we have AI advance to a level where it is actually as a good as a pro player in advance computer games, being able to think out, plan, and play enough to confound people without some sort of thing to boost them. This isn't Chess, with easily mappable variations of simplicity to beat the best human players. This is millions of variables and actions to take in, sure - basic points overlapping them, but the changes in conditions, etc - make it far more difficult for any computer to be at a high level and have it remotely responsive in time to play at a decent pace. So in the meantime before those decades, make it fun... They don't get that.
Shogun 2 hard difficulty,20th,urn: My army betrays me, i got crushed by my ex-army + enemies taking one undefendend city after another until im at last island, then rebellion started because enemy navy damaged buildings, i needed to fight the rebel army, next another 6 factions declared war on my friend, they sink all my ships and bombarded all ports, im stranded on my island, slowly recovering Rome 2 hard difficulty, 30th turn: 0 manual battles, steamrolling everyone.... fun?
Alphastar is a new concept built on supercomputers that can actually have 30 AIs running multiple games at once for a week to get over 200 years in such a short time. And worked on by hundreds of google employees. It is a game changer, and the first time this shit has happened to any complex game. Also, it doesn't have a sound strategic view yet, and only on one matchup - ON ONE MAP. Granted, the fact it got so far on it's current limitations does open the door for massive quality AI in the future, which is really going to be the first of it's kind. And I am happy my favorite game of all time - Starcraft (though, I do like SC2 a bit less) - is the one to open the floodgates first. I find it interesting, within the last year - three old technologies that had barriers many people would last for a decade or more have changed past their barriers. AI - in this... Hydrogen fuel (now with a new innovation, totally changing the name of the game when it comes transport cost - it isn't expensive anymore, and might now actually be as cost effective as gasoline without too much time at all, and it works a lot like it, in combustion - where people for decades have been saying simply because transportation was an issue in it's current form, it wasn't practical. Now it isn't so). And also AI in regards to cooking. Sure, people thought kitchen robots that can make your food like I, Robot would be a long way off. But they already have a robotic kitchen, that can make you any recipe - exactly like a chef would make it on demand - the consumer version prototype had a public demo within the last few months, and is expected to be released on mass in early 2019 (Moley - ruclips.net/video/I-ghKK0vF9c/видео.html )
@@adrianbundy3249 Google deepmind is a monster. Lowko covered a series of matches where a professional player gets trash canned by it in the first round, and it holds it's own. Starcraft 2 was just a matter of watching enough games and it really does look like watching a player play.
@@andrewwaldschmitt4757 I can tell you aren't much of a follower of Starcraft yourself, and only got drawn in because of the hype around Alphastar here. "a professional player", you mean first a non-protoss professional play playing protoss anyway because it could only do PvP, and then a week later, MaNa, an actual Protoss player, but not necessarily at elite level in tournaments. It won by using things like EPM that is several times faster than the fastest human player we know of right now, by like 3x to 4x in engagements, you know, the time you want to actually use micro and apm to save your army, and win the whole game usually? Yeah... But because it doesn't spam click things like humans do for macro and building all game, the average is still lower; but that is a stupid cop-out by the designers. News flash: Hackers, ie: cheaters, human cheaters - in the game, have had micro hacks for years. Auto-splits, auto-blinks, etc, ones that can set your apm to 10k+ at times, or levels like this. If they had such assists running, like MaNa, he would have wiped the floor all 5 games against this AI so far, taking away the main reason why it managed to win the five times it did. (and lost when they tried to give it more human like restrictions). Question: If a person would be disqualified from tournament for using such tools, why the fuck do you want to pretend an AI doing them makes this a legit proof that they are better right now? No, they aren't. They are just hacker level mid-tier player right now, which lets them punch up a few levels. I do expect them to get better, but they aren't there yet. They made a bunch of tactical blunders. Also - if you want breakdown over everything, don't watch Lowko, the hype train man. Watch BeastyQT, an actual ex-pro youtube streamer now, he had better insights. Furthermore, someone who has dabbled in AI, Brownbear, had the best analysis of it in detail besides - and he demonstrated exactly what I am talking about. Right now, you would probably be best suited to say the AI went 1-1 in matches that actually should remotely count. Here's the latters video: ruclips.net/video/sxQ-VRq3y9E/видео.html
To be honest I always got the feeling that CA was trying to mimic the level of depth from Paradox games with many of these features, but failed to understand the meaning and context behind them. Often thinking they where making an interesting and interactive system when really they are just forcing players in to an awkward balancing act with only penalties for not being on top of it. Over all though I get the impression that the team responsible for making ToB has there heads too far up their assess. Already convinced that its just the players who are too inept to understand how great their game is and tweaking a few things here and there to play lip service to the complaints.
Yeah I honestly hoped they could mimic some stuff from crusader kings like families and land management but now that I see it, it doesn't really fit a game that's more about action rather than pure administration
The problem is CA is getting too big and trying to do too many things at once. They used to release a single game every 3-4 years with maybe two or three expansions. Currently, they are producing content for three games concurrently (WHII, 3K, and Troy). ToB seems to have been abandoned. I just bought it on sale for $13. They are also probably near to releasing WHIII. SO instead of focusing on one game at a time, they've divided their company into teams ... I would imagine there are three or four teams. The A team is the one working on Warhammer. The B team seems to be the one working on 3k. So Troy (and possibly ToB) are being made by the C team. So the worst designers, instead of implementing orders from the best designers because they're all working on the same product, are out here making their own decisions without any oversight from the more talented people at the company.
It sucks how it's just an ATTILA 2.0. Should have been a separate expansion or DLC for TW:Attila, instead of it being a standalone game of a new spinoff that started out miserably.
I enjoyed Attila and Age of Charlemagne. If this was Attila 2.0 I would be happy. This game is only based graphicaly on Attila and has nothing interesting about it. Its a downgrade from Attila.
CA learned from Medieval 2. They are making their games barely moddable for the community and then they release their own mods which they call a seperate games and ask a full price for them. Whats funny about that is people paying for this shit and then them being surprised when those games suck donkey dick. You want good games? Stop givng devs money for making shit ones. Otherwise its low effort and ez money for them.
Agreed, it is just so bloody boring... There is no content or meat to the game. Bloody just give modders the kit to the game so they can make mods that are 10 times better (LoTR)
I’ve asked Creative Assembly for this on the official forum already. They could make a killer Game of Thrones mod on this map since a slight re-arrangement of land masses will make Westeros. I do like the recruitment mechanic where your forces don’t start as full stacks all at once as well. The rest could be fixed by modders
Haha, Legend started off cool and calm, but you can really hear the frustration building up further and further the more he explains things within the game. I'm just hoping that Three Kingdoms will be better.
I agree, Mr Mac. Three Kingdoms is my personal favorite in the series so far. Some people don’t like it that much, but out of all of them, I absolutely adore the combat and story in 3K
Ah, there is legend we know I got scared for a moment when he released the Thrones of Britannia campaign. I thought he got possessed by CA. But now he is back Welcome back legend
Definitely feel the same way as you having just bought it for the same reason. Love the setting, but damn. Started my campaign and hated estates almost immediately for the same thing, they're a chore. Auto-resolve back in medieval 2 at 55% balance of power meant you would lose a sizeable chunk of your army that you would then have to recruit from the ass end of nowhere and bring to the front to replenish. Here instead you lose maybe 15% as you said and it just replenishes in a turn between "recruit captives" or "occupy city."
They are improving estates, so you actually get rewards for certain traits, bonuses for food or what have you. Before the game was released, I would go on the reddit sub and hype my idea of what estates could be (or should be) and here we are heading into 2019 and they're just now doing this. Why even put a pretty good historic concept in like that if it's just for influence/loyalty bonuses/maluses? It always should have been something that made you think that made you excited to get better income from more loyal lords, or more food, or faster recruitment. I have played the game for 30 minutes because Warhammer's unit diversity and flavor (speech, characters, memes) is just too compelling. The thing about mods is, I can still have fun with vanilla versions of certain TW games (in fact, I did for Medieval 2) but this game would require mods, but there aren't enough made for it.
Some of your complaints reminds me of some of the problems with Stellaris when it was first released. Only getting penalties as you tech up and no bonuses. Example being that the reason you would adopt a new tech is because it either makes something stronger, cheaper, lighter or more efficient while keeping everything else the same. However, the way paradox made it, at first, upgrading a weapon would give you a slight damage boost for a major cost and upkeep penalty. So the best army was un upgraded corvettes that were a couple times over your max fleet limit because it was stronger and cheaper, in every way, than having any kinds of upgrades. They have since fixed it, with a couple of major updates, and the game has become quite enjoyable. CA on the other hand can't seem to fix any of their later releases to save their sinking ship. Sad.
It really becomes sad when there are a whole ton of 'upgrades', that only leave you worse off in >90% of situations. It's just sad. Legend said it best, 'why you you ever both researching that'? But yeah, Stellaris did originally come to mind as well, but moreso I felt like it was just the continued track record of the newer generation of TWs, just done way more over the top into aggravation.
Stelaris has the problem of terrible AI and rampent cheating, its so bad that a tiny empires build fleets way behond there possible capacity in so little time
sadly the A.I in Stellaris is just a broken mess. It essentially has the TW Problem. They increase difficulty by giving A.I major bonuses wich often leads to a playstyle were you are really just focused on catching up as fast as possible.
This was the game that finally snapped me out of my Total War fandom. Nothing they do now has any connection to reality; everything is now weird mechanics floating on top of spreadsheet balancing and button clicking. Nothing organic like population - how tf do they keep getting away with making "grand strategy games" without functioning population mechanics? Nothing immersive like generals' speeches, moba-like battles, AI designed to annoy the player instead of expanding (and bloated like crazy with cheats), naval battles removed, schizophrenic UI design, horrible music...
I think things like the estate system are desgined not to be gamey mechanics, but to relfect the kinds of challenges a leader in Britain would face. Because the consequences of letting your nobles get either too powerful or too dissatisfied with your handouts were grave in practice. Getting overextended was inviting civil war, and monarchs of the era were often forced to work very hard and make massive concessions to their key supporters, as their rule was often based on very shaky, informal grounds and interpersonal relationships. It's important to remember that TW games are often trying to emulate historical conflicts, not just create game mechanics in a vacuum.
flowonthego Empire is the shit. I liked the province system (though some regions needed to be split further...cough france), I like the little towns growing as a result of increased wealth so there was incentive not to overtax. This could be further improved by having the player specialize their regions like we see in later titles (industrial, agricultural, urban, commerce, etc). I liked the resources and the fluctuating market, which you could purposely manipulate the price by limiting supply. They could’ve taken this further by having trade embargo diplomacy etc. maybe if you flood the market an ally could ask you to stop and get angry if you don’t. I liked the tech tree and I would’ve welcomed prerequisites like we see in ToB. I liked be age of sail stuff and introduction of naval combat. I didn’t mind the split map situation. I even grew to like the ranged combat once I learned what the proper tactics of that style was like. Ugh. Empire had so much potential, so much so that despite its failures it was still an awesome game. Imagining what it could’ve been had it included various aspects we saw mods add (darthmod, imperial splendour, etc). Ooh. An empire 2 that did all these things would be sooo gooood.
ty for sharing, i feel like CA really dug their nails into the money train with warhammer and weren't willing to do anything to improve further. (tho from what I've seen they've been heading down this path awhile) Hopefully failures like this will help them improve in the future.
I feel like Attila had a good economic system. You build buildings, you get a decent income from them. It's satisfying to build up your provinces and there are trade-offs between squalor, public order and income and religion. It might have been nice to have more build slots like in Medieval 2 but on the whole I liked Attila better than Rome 2. This Thrones of Britannia looks like a step in completely the wrong direction . Thanks Legend for letting us know so that we didn't waste money on this.
Actually, compared to Attila, it’s simpler BUT I will say that this Video aged poorly when compared to the current state of ToB. I think you should consider taking another look at a more recent review, preferably one where they show the gameplay because while it’s not as fun as Troys campaign, which imo. had one of the best campaigns in a long time, despite everything else going on in that game. , ToB gives you a very unique world which ( if modded but even then it does not have to be a big overhaul, some tweaks can be more than enough ) and imo. it makes for a good Saga title ( aka a smaller expansion like experience ). I compared it a lot to the expansion for Attila, Charlemagne which I loved because the era is a personal favourite of mine and Attila was and is for me perhaps the best way to experience historical total war - while less diverse in terms of culture, it’s more focused scope imo. can really work in its favour.
I get you brah. My favorite assassin’s creed game is the one everyone else hates...AC Rogue. I bought thrones of Britannia, I played a few campaigns, I thought it was fine and I got my money’s worth. No harm no foul. It’s finel
When I first bought this game I wasnt a fan, but it was kind of funny because I actually came back and played it again after finishing the last kingdom on Netflix, which takes place at literally the exact same time period. It was a lot more fun because the location had context related to the show. I like the game well enough. I think some of the new mechanics are really interesting, even they they weren't all executed well.
Agree with everything in this video. I recently fired up my old Dyflin campaign and was surprised to see I was losing money, and had corruption levels exceeding 50% in almost all of my provinces. To make matters worse, when I took new settlements, I would just lose more money because of the building upkeeps. I had zero incentive to expand... It's like the developers make these changes without then testing how it effects campaigns.
Any Total War game set in the Middle Ages shouldn't have armies in the Rome II style. It doesn't make sense for the feudal system in any way; instead we should be able to recruit units at settlements like in the older games and have to march them to join the main army. They shouldn't remove features just because the AI is too dumb to handle them, they should be fixing the AI.
I feel like 2018 is a pinnacle of inferior products. It's like they totally lost will to create product that is fun to play. Just never ending hype shit thrown at us and then doubling down on products once they are released. I seriously consider stop playing new games at all. Just repetitive dung, with the same stinky smell wrapped as a prime cut t-bone. Bethesda, Blizzard, EA, CA, Capcom...AAA Gaming Industry is in a really bad state creative-wise. Perhaps because dev studios became factory lines, and people who code only care about their monthly checks. Demoralised by corporate structure and feeling of being trapped in something they don't like.
I saw it in the faces of the CA employees when they did some thing awhile back and invited some Chinese total war fans for a photo op. Those depressed faces still haunt me to this day..
I'd never thought i'd see it but ToB just has no redeeming features. At least Attila had some interesting things going on, but this game just doesn't. It feels like they plastered the loyalty mechanic onto everyone because if it didn't exist you could just steamroll everyone within 150 turns. Make everyone have loyalty and you spend more time infighting than actually getting shit done. On top of that estates, diplomacy and the campaign map in general is just awful and cramped. Maybe I've been spoilt by TW:WH 2 but right now ToB seems to be abandon ware. This game launched in early May of 2018 and apart from the generic blood and gore DLC there has been no content for it at all. Meanwhile TW:WH 2 has had 2 large patches and 4 factions added with more content to come in 2019. It really looks like CA knew what they made was a new and worse Attila and just cut their losses and ran, abandoning ToB and focusing on the latest warhammer game instead.
Recently got +100 hours on this game, and to be honest I quite enjoy it. There are some flaws indeed: AI for sure. But I do like the idea of having nobles, supplies for armies, food, etc. The patch released in December did a huge improvement.
I think the big problem with redemption arcs, and this game has one, is that they rarely get coverage. Take Cyberpunk 2077. It started out as good but obviously far from what was promised but thanks to a literal great anime show and it’s continued updates, now it’s worth it. With Britannia, they mainly just fixed the base game but with mods, it’s as much fun as any other TW if one likes the setting and I think people will miss its strengths and even worse, it’s innovation because they mainly see it from the perspective of videos like this which were rightfully angry back in the day but nowadays, this has all changed so much.
My last Total War title was Rome II I was so discussed by that I haven't bought one since and I played the game from the very first one, ironically the one I liked the best was Fall of the Samurai(so for me it was like sudden jolt from best to worst in one release!). I just can't believe what they have stripped away from these titles
CA can't handle complexity. The ideas are great but Total War cannot sit in-between genres and remain enjoyable. They have to make up their minds. Total War is either about great battles with light economic simulation and empire management to maintain armies, or it's an economic and empire management sim, with light battle mechanics. I don't think they can rectify it unless they revamp the series and get back to what made these games fun in the first place.
Talking about how everything caused corruption and had upkeep reminded me of Attila. How every building seemed to cause squalor and make your settlements worse. I mean damn even a market or several basic farms could cause a damned plague....never heard a wheat field killing someone til total war Attila lol.
EU4 player here with a decent amount of hours Estates are just as shit in that game, they're boring point farms with no significant interactions apart from minor flavor events.
I get where you are coming from, and medieval 2 is my favorite too, but I do really like this one as well, but the setting might be what is making this bias, I hope CA goes back to the old majestic deep formula of making these games
There’s a medievall 2 mod on this time era so you might want to give that a try. The last kingdom total war, but don’t get the ‘wrath of the Northmen’ mod expansion because it’s buggy
nah I still like rome 2 and attila far more, but this setting is what intrigues me the most, just finished watching the last kingdom, its frekaing brilliant
I think estates in EU4 are garbage, just another thing to click about for modifiers, and it's almost idiot proof, it's too easy it's meaningless, and kind of lazy
I just bought ToB in sale ust to see how low Total Wars could sink and found out it is the best Total War game for me, on par with Shogun 2. It is quick, streamlined, but with strategic depth. When I want 20 hours long campaign and relax I play ToB, when I want to spend 100+ hours and micromanage I play Shogun 2. It's a different take on the same game, and should be played as such.
I think the problem is that on one hand, people expect the same game which it’s just not and other other, it got so much better with patches and mods that playing it today is night and day compared to its release. For me, it clicked even I looked at it like a boardgame. I had a lot of complaints during my first campaign ( Wessax to England ) on normal - obviously too easy ( sadly the game lacks a regular tutorial ) so for my next one I added mods, upped the campaign & battle difficulty and it’s like night and day. Went from „meh“ to „SHIELDWALL! SLAUGTHER THEM!“ in no time.
Thank you for this Legend. A lot of things CA needs to listen to. This game should have been epic. With the success of TV shows like The Last Kingdom and Vikings, both set during the same time period, it's shocking to see how terrible this game turned out to be. There was so much potential for a fun, immersive experience. Instead we got an uninspired, boring and exceptionally narrow minded telling of a very rich historical epoch.
I have watched until "I have loaded an old game across multiple versions and expected my old save to be compatible", and then I stopped, since all the credibility flew out of the window.
Bought this game in a sale 2 days ago because I like the time period despite the bad reviews. In an early battle I was attacked by a larger Northymbre army. They charged at mine but stopped half way then withdrew to their original position. All except their general and king Guthrim who proceeded to charge my whole army alone with 11 men in his unit. The AI is fucked. His character model is cool though.
And this is why I move to EU4 and other Paradox games! I didn't play TW for the campaign babysit mechanics... developing cities use to be helpful for economy... battles were more realistic and fun... so what happened ?! WHAT THE F*CK HAPPENED ?!?
I mean you could just do what I do and play paradox games with only the DLCs you truly like. I been playing EU4 for years and I've not bought a DLC since like.. 2015 probably
Creative Assembly being uncreative NICE! Love your videos keep them coming just bought, medieval 2, Napoleon, Rome 2, and Shogun: FOTS on steam just because I’ve been watching your vids lmao
I feel you... I think this product was just a way to garner cash up easy with no need to design or create to much. No animations , old mechanics , same engine of Attila , a few retouches, removes a lot of abilities, low model count ... easy project for easy cash - and the worse part its working for them. Look When you say everything might be legit I agree ... depth and shallow can both be an advantages or disadvantages. I have noticed a lot of players like the shallow games with almost no strategy that CA puts out - the problem for me is that they market the games and are reviewed at the same level as if they did what they used to do ! Old games had depth , design and way more work put into them than the new games - admit it and move on ... don't lie to the costumers. I have friends that now enjoy the new TW games because they are focused on battles and not on campaign - for me its a problem cause the franchise was known for creating a games which focuses and combines both campaign and battles ... if CA decided to kill this line of though - admit it market the new games differently and bury the title Total War ... create a new franchise that focuses on Battles. You would lose me as a costumer but that's ok ... there is plenty of people who would love it.
Im at the part where the debt increases for each village and city I capture, I had a similar reaction to LGOTW « Wtf is that shit? » Also, « Why my generals gets their loyalty down each turn, why there is no MISSION SUCCEEDED when i give a general an estate he asked me?! »
This video was made more a year ago. Since them and for some months (or weeks?) ago again, there was released another patch with some nice improvements. Is still not the best Total War Game but better than the bad reputation has got. To all who watch this take this please in mind. This game is very challenging cause of the loyalty mechanism, many negative events causes frustrations (but it will stop after a while if u do it right or handle it ) or the missing Garrison in the minor Settlements. But if you do the right decision, depending if you understood how it works the game, it's very enjoyable. It's important too, not to grow to fast and not to stack up your army to 20 units to fast. You can wait of an Rebbelion to provide a war and attack them to get the Settlement without a war. The new culture mechanism allow this if you look up for this in neighbour regions. If you decide to go on war against a faction, you have to secure the minor Settlements and it will takes hard decisions how you will to do it. Leave i my son or brother-in-law with an army or not....maybe not and take the second army to the war???. And how strong may it be in case of defense? I'm playing now north umbria, on normal but it's harder than the other factions. And it's the best campaign run of all I had. Give ToB another chance. It's worth it. I am not newbie in TW. I started with TW Medieval (1) and played a lot of TW games.
I played through it in March of last year, and tried one more time with a modded campaign of the Normans, but i could not be bothered.. The thing is, this game is boring and a chore. Thats basically it. And I am so very sorry to say that, because it looks great, it has some interesting mechanics, but at the end of the day, thats its. It is based on Attila, my favourite unmodded TW game, and sadly copies Age of Charlamagne, the worst, most boring DLC I could think of. AOC had the same problem, with an interesting setting and mechanics, but oh so damn boring. Same here, the units are basically the same for each faction, so why would i replay with another? With a map that huge, and the mechanics annoying you, combined with boring combat and huge inter turn management due to a fuck ton of settlements, no wonder people dreaded playing again. I really hope TW Troy will learn from this mistake and have diverse rosters, useful and interesting mechanics and fill the game with interesting stuff to do.
@@jonathanbatz3183 everything is true. But for those who like this age or love the series "Vikings" or "The last Kingdom" is a pleasure to play his own Story. And it isn't needed a different Roster. It's not really true, some factions got unique Troops. But the game is authentic too. In this time there was only Swords, Spears, Shields and Axes. Which great differents could you do as programmer? (And it is not WH) The differents lies at the Startpositions. This why some Factions got different challenges. Wessex is one of the easiest for example. Mide or Northmbria are surrounded from potential enemies. Yes for those who played Attila must be dissapointing to see the same engine. Attila is one of the few TW games which I didn't played. For me (and others ) is it also something new. And then don't forget the siege battles. The maps of these battles are much better than from others TW Games. And maybe a little better or equal of Three Kingdoms.
@@Cris_Shatty agreed, there is sloght variation (more agile spearthrowers for Ireland or axemen for the Scandinavian factions), but in the end, the roster is nearly identical, with the same upgrades and the same type of cost (levy, militia and professionals). I wouldn't like to see more difference, like s heavy fyrd focus for Wessex, small but brisk Vikings and ambushy scots. Even the look is very much the same. The only difference being the Normans, who arrive very late. If you haven't played Attila, you should, it is a grand game with a crazy difficulty level for established factions (WRE), tough Battles and the same siege battles. Also, the map is much more focused, the difficulty lies in other problems such as public order, loyalty, culture and raiders.
LegendofTotalWar becoming LegendofParadox, welcome to the dark side :) I always dream of a co-op game between CA and Paradox, they are moving towards each other a little. Emperor:Rome let you choose the tactic in a rock-paper-scissor style, CA is trying to implement corruption and civil wars since Rome2 adding some more diplomacy options. The dream game would be Paradox campaign management with Total war battles and city/castle development. I was thinking to it the other day with my brother, some sort of density-style development, the bigger you get the more density of building and population you can make in some areas.
“You should buy his game....if you want to waste your money.” That’s exactly how I felt after purchasing Rome 2, and playing for several hours. Even today, the AI in that game is awful. The battles are just terrible, and they just turn into giant mosh pits of soldiers.
There are rewards for estates, they are called estate rewards. Sometimes it is several turns of happiness, or higher crop yield, other times it is straight gold reward. Give the game another fresh try, it definitely has its problems, but there are some great mechanics in the game (like estates, special buildings, etc.) that set it apart and give you some unique gameplay in my option. Love the channel.
I would love to see how a revisit with some basic mods would look in his opinion. This sort of mini review imo. arguably reflects what the game was like back in the day but they seem to have improved - I picked it up again when Pharao expectedly wasn’t all that great and overall, the even the base game is now overall good and with mods it’s actually a fun TW title with some of best sieges of the entire franchise. Also, the 1066 mod - so much fun.
i just bought this for £2.50 in the summer sale, its very simple but the politics mechanics im still trying to get my head around it, 3 hours in playing as england so far
You still playing it? I bought this game years ago but haven't put any time into it lol I don't have an opinion on it tbh, certainly nowhere near as strong as Legend's, but I do find his criticisms very much on point. I get the impression ToB started out as a different project but CA shifted focus and put a junior intern team to finish it.
@@therexbellator oh god no...I played about 10 hours and realised all countries were boring, annoying politics systems, crappy combat with no difference in units
I think there was a simular situation in Rome 2 but with food had a save and 10 full staks with +20 food came back after a update and was in a massive food deficit.
Been revisiting this. The estate problem is fixed, and I generally don't autoresolve so those weren't issues. The point about making more money by having less infrastructure is a good one, I'll have to see what happens when I get to the end game. I also agree about allegiance that there should be some bonus to work for, although it's the same as religion in Attila. The last patch helped it seems.
Wish I watched this before I bought the game on sale. Battles were okay but the campaign is trash. Besides the gradual recruitment being realistic I'm so tired of everything else, so many tedious mechanics and braindead AI.
Spoken like a warrior. I, too, remember that feeling of having only two poor norse provinces, while all those British lands, plumb with wealth, lie there, completely unprepared for the _furor_ _normannorum_ . Ah, the times...
I love it when a game commentator speaks his fucking mind instead of pussyfooting around everything. Total War has become a game factory with shitty micro payments for unfinished products. Thanks for calling out this shambolic addition to the franchise.
I play it with DEI sometimes, but idk why it feels way less immersive than the older titles. Anything past M2 seems bland-I only played empire a lot bc I like the time period.
Rome2, Medieval2, Empire.. glorious games. Medieval sometimes crashes, and Empire has a few issues.. but it doesn't lessen these games a bit. Rome 2 though.. that game just rocks.
Today there is no estate penalty and the estates are run differently today especially the noble! And I really doubt if the other things are still valid. The auto resolve is different as well
At least there are heroes in the workshop that fixed many of the issues with great mods, but it's still a bad game. I remember playing my first and only naval battle on the West Seaxe campaign and I was talking with a friend while I showed him how my men were vomiting and shouting along with the vikings as if they were having a boat party while nobody killed anyone. It was a quite funny bug, but it was not so funny when I realised that the battle couldn't be fought so I had to autoresolve and lose more than half my army.
It is a real shame, as I love the location and time period and was really looking forward to this game. The art is really cool too. But I must agree the game machanics are poor and need much love.
I think you should take a look at it again, reason being that they fixed a lot of the core issues and while it’s not like all the other TW titles, it has some unique strengths that combined with the right mods actually make this very much fun. Also, since it has no DLC other than blood & gore, you get a full ( small ) title and that means that all mods, which while not as many as Rome 2 or Attila etc. are still plenty, are compatible.
Unpopular opinion here: I liked it. It's not perfect, the lack of variety is probably the one that gets people to hate it to begin with. But, i like that units needed some time before getting to full potential. Like, i actually needed to plan ahead. Also, it solved the problem where AI factions just suddenly spawning out gazillions of armies out of nowhere in the last games. Also, learning the new system were actually fun for me. Still it has the problem where endgame is always boring but, it's not meant to be a full blown total war game. Oh, and units in this game is balanced pretty well. The timing is very good. Battle lasted just enough and not too long. I might just be weird. I mean i hated shogun 2 for the stupid naval AI spams and liked rome 2 for its variety hahah
It sucks that every time a new total war game comes out I find myself doing crazy mental gymnastics to try to convince myself it's a good game and I'm having fun...Sad I know, but I just can't stop from hoping total war will be good again lol
Estates should be like renting... You dont pay someone to live in the place you own to "look after" it, they pay you to stay in and use the place you own...
Im glad you mentioned medieval 2 hope you dont mind a mini rant. To me personally the pinnacle of total war all around was medieval 2. I feel like after shogun 2 putting in the realm divide (which was a nice endgame event to prepare for and one that hits you hard when first encountered) they decided hey, people like realm divide. It also helps with difficulty so how about we just add a bunch of realm divides ie civil wars. In warhammer its chaos doomstacks coming for you. In medieval when the mongols come and you were England it was mostly a none issue in that region. If you were one of the eastern factions or succeeded with a crusade and held Jerusalem then its a big problem. Also even tho medieval 2 settlement system was way more simplistic and didnt really have the regional resources to the extent of later iterations in a way it feels more dynamic. The simple fact that hey this town would make a good choke point so how about i convert it into a fortress and have this be the defense for this front. Or playing one of the Italian powers and taking forts on islands and converting them to cities so you dont have to deal with using navies to combine the units together. Also each faction and generals had such a different personality and you could roleplay and do things vastly different each playthrough. How about we make a corrupt King that sacks and pillages and is feared by all. Maybe a chivalrous King who treats prisoners well and is fair to the people. Or maybe one that is concentrated on infrastructure and has a general or son who takes care of the war front. Or maybe we can use religion manipulating rome to our benefit so we can strike out at our neighbors. Or even screw it make peace with our catholic neighbors and focus on pushing out Islam or vice versa. Your general even gets perks based on those decisions giving them a kind of unique feel. Look at the Italian powers in medieval 2 if that game came out now their rosters would probably all be the same units maybe a single unit different for the one you get at purchase before having to buy a dlc. Thats another thing you could play pretty much all the factions for free if you defeated them. Except for rome, rebels, mongols and tirimuds (who are pretty much event factions). The later games like rome 2 had more factions but come on. If you play Arverni your surrounded by factions who are Arverni but a different name. Most of a campaign if your not playing as Rome Carthage and maybe a couple others is just fighting a bunch of little clone tribes or nations until you get big enough to throwdown with another famous faction. and then they sell it to us as dlc later on. Shogun 2 understandable its one island country pretty much but still all these factions like Honma, Hatekeyama, Shoni you cant play unless you mod and they have the same damn units everyone else does except one niche unit some factions have. In Medieval 2 genoa, venice, and sicily are all right next to eachother but you have people who play sicily that hate genoa, play genoa that hates venice and so on. Because Genoa from the jump has the best crossbows and have to deal with the other italians, Holy roman empire in the mountains to the North, and france in the west. Venice had the best infantry had to deal with italian powers, holy romans, hungary and byzantines. Sicily had muslim archers and norman knights had to tackle italians, byzantines to the east, also moors and islamic armies from africa. All three had same base militia but different units later on that made them feel different plus the type of enemy and expansion evolution they had to go through even tho they are in the same region. Warhammer of course the factions feel different which i think taking that route help revitalize the series alot. Still tho warhammer theres the good guys and bad guys for the most part you dont have to deal with the good guys if you are one. It is enjoyable but id like a good historical game too and it seems they aren't exactly hitting them out of the ballpark in that aspect. Thrones of Britannia seems like a peak in what total war was getting towards on the historical side. It just looks really bland and the things they did to keep difficulty from what I've seen and played is atrocious. And what happened to the little things like if you had a unit of spearman with base armor outfitted them with leather they visually looked different in battle give them metal and they look different again. It was cool having spear units that were there since the beginning and see them from just guys with spear and shield into fully armored experienced soldiers who could do more on the front. All i can hope for is 3 kingdoms will be amazing. It was a dream idea ive had for so long having the 3 kingdoms era mixed with total war style gameplay. After what they've done on the historical side (even tho 3 kingdoms leads toward more mythical or fantastical) Im gonna wait and be highly skeptical. Their selling it like the diplomacy is gonna be leagues beyond what we've seen and the battles are gonna feel totally different with how generals got kind of squads within the stack. Idk seems like alot of promise but games recently have shown me not to expect much. Anyways great video and yeah im glad i skipped this one
Merchants wouldn't save this game, as salty as legend would get if they were added. The corruption in this game is so bad, you would end up paying the merchants to sell your goods.
I love totalwar and I study this period of history in the British Isles. This game disappointed me. I love seeing all the family trees of figures I've studied, the artwork is beautiful, the map is actually good for revision BUT the mechanics are just bizarre... I wanted to love it. I really did.
I think since you already own it, mod it with a few basic additions for starters and then give it a try again. If you take your time to learn it’s, although narrow luckily very distinct and overall interesting path, it’s actually quite fun. The main problems were fixed, the battle AI is okish ( as per usual, total war keeps being total war ) but the campaign is honestly where it shines IF one understands that despite being simple, it’s a lot more complicated to plan ahead because late game tech upgrades are for example less like a simpel boost and more like a choice, having a lot of armies vs. having armies that can muster their forces quickly is a very deliberate thing and while it’s never truly difficult unless you make bad decisions like spreading your empire out in a wrong way, it’s actually quite a good time.
I enjoyed it when it first came out, won a campaign as Ireland, haven't been back though so I clearly didn't love it that much. Having seen what they've done with estates and the economy, I probably won't be going back
Medieval total war 2 allows the player to create a story with how their family progresses. Each and every family member/general can have their own unique traits that lets the player become attached to them and actually give a shit about them.
As England I’ve had a father and son fight the Sicilians in the same battle; the father died but the battle was won. Afterwards his son gained the trait “dislikes the Sicilians” because his father was killed in front of him fighting in the battle. I used this character to destroy the Sicilians and he ended up becoming a maxed out commander. His father was adopted as a man of the hour after the fathers commander who happened to be my prince died in battle on his way to Cairo for the crusade. After he was done defeating Sicily, I sent the blood raged son on the next crusade to Antioch to finish what his father and the former prince of England had failed to do before. He did end up dying at Antioch after an unstoppable horde of Mongolian armies besieged and captured the city. The son died bravely in battle killing over 3 times as many men as the mongols, and slaying the Mongolian khan. I should of kept that save, I’m sure legend wouldn’t have a problem breaking the siege of a full horde of mongols.
exactly!!! the story telling was so important to me in TW games, and it hasn't been that way in games!! its so aggravating, i couldn't have said it better my self. I WISH CA would see this comment
Literally never did any of the RPG stuff in any total wars.
Just played to win
Didn’t even know people did until I saw some let’s plays
That sounds really awesome. I got into Total War games way late. (started with Warhammer) I purchased Thrones of Brittania for something like what you explained creating a story and a family line and becoming immersed in the game (kind of like Mount and Blade).. sadly I am disappointed in Thrones I tried hard to beat more than just one campaign but now it's even harder for stupid reasons like Legend states and it makes me not to even want to play it anymore. I might have to pick up Medieval total war 2 if it ever goes on sale. Does anyone know if it has support for 4k?
Todd Ison if you don’t have medieval 2 then you must buy it whatever the cost. Make sure you get the Kingdoms expansion as it’s essential for most of the mods and it’s a good expansion on its own.
Almost any total war game can be played through medieval 2 mods. Want to play Rome? Install Europa Barbarorum 2 or de Bello Mundi. Want to play thrones of Britannia? Well there’s something better called The Last Kingdom. If your into fantasy worlds the Third Age Lord of the Rings mods have been being developed for years and The Elder Scrolls total war mod isn’t done, but it’s damn near perfect. Scenarios that Creative Assembly haven’t even thought of are available for download for no charge at all.
Medieval 2 is the best total war game and there’s definitely a reason most people think so. This game is 12 years old and it could still be sold for full price. So buy it, idk if it has 4K support though.
@@sleepshouter5017 That was an aesome description! May i ask,do you know any mod which can i play as Spartacus with his slave army? I already tried a Rome 2 mod but its not updated anymore and you need rollback to update 16 so there are lot of bugs in the game.
I'm loving the description.
CA would do well to get more of LOW's input. He is insightful.
It's too long imo
XD
Short and to the point.
Well Wisdom
Concise.
It's a shame because it's such a great setting.
Eddie There’s a medievall 2 mod on this era that does it better than this shit game
@@Lemmonjuice-wt6zu What's the name of it? I know they have the British isles in the vanilla dlc "kingdoms" but I've never tried a mod of it.
@@HueyPPLong It's called 'the last kingdom total war', a mod for medieval 2 kingdoms. They also added the 3.9 Wrath of the norsemen expansion but for me it seems very buggy, the basic versions works fine. It's not that large with only a few factions and not that much diversity in units but it's fun if you like the era with Medievall 2 mechanics.
Also someone is working on a vikings HBO mod but it doesn't seem out yet.
@@Lemmonjuice-wt6zuThat sounds awesome. I'll check that out.
I loved the Britannia campaign.
yeah, but lets face it... this setting is nearly in total war attila. You can literally play the Danes and roleplay the raids and conquering of england. Its not to far apart and the Units look pretty much the same anyway in both games.
So they changed the game to be annoying to play instead of just boring?
thats the most CA thing I think Ive ever heard
@@RomanHistoryFan476AD Rome 2 is a great game
TBF, it's not just CA; swapping depth and challenge for lazy gamey'ness to trying an keep the player engaged spinning their tyres is a common plague of games released this decade. City builders for one are utterly dead as a genre, besides for people who would have been model train nutters in a prior life; Cities Skyline is just fucking boring and annoying to play.
@@anasevi9456 you know a better option?
@@RomanHistoryFan476AD I was talking about City Skylines. Yes, the economic aspect of CS is swallow but it is the only "modern" city builder that comes the close SC4.
nah, this isn't ca, this is lusted.
Things i liked more with the old TWs:
-Units as own army without gen
-Factions possesing more regions from beginning on in a realistic way
-Settlements are displayed small on the campaign map, takes more rounds to reach them, increased amount of fieldbattle instead of boring sieges
-Troops arent cheap
-Unlimited amount of building slots
-aggressive neighbours
- no forced march
-economy with sense, settlements are important for income
-POPULATION
feel free to add things!
Merchants from Medieval 2
Definitely agree with the smaller province city sizes. The field battles are so much more fun to play, and yet even in some of the mods for the newer games, they're just not as frequent as the older games.
And I hate having to have a general. I really miss the mechanic in the first Rome, even in the fantastic mod EB, where if a single unit put down a rebellion, the unit spawned a new character you could adopt as a war hero into your family tree.
That was awesome.
Can't do that when you have to have a commander unit now.
It’s just recently started to dawn on me that I liked empires campaign system the best. Apart from a few provinces being too large (looking at you france), the way settlements were managed was good. It could’ve been better but there were distinct differences between various cities and the development of their province.
In older tw, unlimited construction meant literally every city underwent the same development, in the same order, and ended up with nearly identical buildings. Sure, the exact military structure might vary depending on which recruitment center that town supports and in med2 you had guild buildings but effectively everything was the same.
At least now we have a semblance of this town is an industrial center, that town is a agricultural center, this town is an urban center, etc. There are different archetypes instead of just build all the things in this specific min/max order. Empire also had the little provincial towns that grew based on wealth which created trade off for heavy taxation and helped further add nuance to provinces.
Anyway that was a massive tangent. I think a lot of the things tob tried to do were admirable however it failed extremely hard in its execution. The estates looks like a pain in the neck as your reward for doing it correctly is avoiding punishment. I heard the supply mechanic was too weak and could simply be overlooked. The tech tree idea of meeting requirements sounded like good innovation but apparently the techs in the tree suck. Etc..
If someone could just make a thrones dei rebalance equivalent....ooo
Like maybe instead of just punishing you for getting a tech make it have trade offs. To use something from empire as an example, advanced roads makes your armies deploy faster, it helps trade, maybe it could help supply lines (if there were a proper supply line mechanic), and troop replenishment as “fresh recruits” from the manpower pool get sent to the front lines. However it also means enemy units move faster through that region as well.
So the player is left wondering, which provinces does he want to upgrade the roads. Obviously the central provinces of the empire, probably provinces leading to and bordering good trade allies, maybe provinces leading to a defended front line territory, probably not a poorly defended province that borders hostile enemy, etc. You still create interesting trade offs of positives and negatives from an upgrade so it’s not just a mindless bonus. But simultaneously it’s not just a secret nerf set to hinder your late game.
Harold Haroldson
While entertaining when you’re the one doing it, it’s extremely unbalanced on the receiving end. There’s little one can do to counter such behavior when it’s done properly other than expending an excessive amount of resources.
When the counter to something is disproportionately difficult to pull off relative the thing, it tends to feel broken and unbalanced. This problem isn’t obvious in small regions but in oversized territories like france, the imbalance becomes apparent.
“If you haven’t yet purchased this game you should buy this game, if you like to waste money.”
*insert “They really had us in the first half” here*
I guess that's the biggest issue with recent TW games, there's a bigger focus on player caused challenges, than AI caused challenges. There's all these things you have to work out, and be careful about, and almost none of that is the AI. Play Shogun 2 on a higher difficulty and the enemy comes for your castles in force, but in all TW games since Rome 2, the AI seems to be on a holiday and waits for the player to either go on the offensive, or mismanage his empire and watch it fall apart from the inside.
Go play Crusader Kings 2 as a minor lord and try to declare independence from your overlord and see how armies of doom approach your tiny little castle to put your ass in a dungeon. Such a different experience.
To be fair, all AIs are very predictable and easy when you understand them; which is why even harder Crusader Kings difficulties can be beaten kinda easily when you have enough experience; other RTS type games like Starcraft, despite people trying to push the AI beyond with various different attempts in the last 5-10 years, at best I think gives you maybe high goldish teir players, no where near masters; and still predictable.
It's just worse mainly because it gave options to you, whereas now newer total wars only get artificially harder by simplifying everything you can do, and handicapping you. But it might be decades before we have AI advance to a level where it is actually as a good as a pro player in advance computer games, being able to think out, plan, and play enough to confound people without some sort of thing to boost them. This isn't Chess, with easily mappable variations of simplicity to beat the best human players. This is millions of variables and actions to take in, sure - basic points overlapping them, but the changes in conditions, etc - make it far more difficult for any computer to be at a high level and have it remotely responsive in time to play at a decent pace. So in the meantime before those decades, make it fun... They don't get that.
Shogun 2 hard difficulty,20th,urn: My army betrays me, i got crushed by my ex-army + enemies taking one undefendend city after another until im at last island, then rebellion started because enemy navy damaged buildings, i needed to fight the rebel army, next another 6 factions declared war on my friend, they sink all my ships and bombarded all ports, im stranded on my island, slowly recovering
Rome 2 hard difficulty, 30th turn: 0 manual battles, steamrolling everyone.... fun?
Alphastar is a new concept built on supercomputers that can actually have 30 AIs running multiple games at once for a week to get over 200 years in such a short time. And worked on by hundreds of google employees.
It is a game changer, and the first time this shit has happened to any complex game. Also, it doesn't have a sound strategic view yet, and only on one matchup - ON ONE MAP.
Granted, the fact it got so far on it's current limitations does open the door for massive quality AI in the future, which is really going to be the first of it's kind. And I am happy my favorite game of all time - Starcraft (though, I do like SC2 a bit less) - is the one to open the floodgates first.
I find it interesting, within the last year - three old technologies that had barriers many people would last for a decade or more have changed past their barriers. AI - in this... Hydrogen fuel (now with a new innovation, totally changing the name of the game when it comes transport cost - it isn't expensive anymore, and might now actually be as cost effective as gasoline without too much time at all, and it works a lot like it, in combustion - where people for decades have been saying simply because transportation was an issue in it's current form, it wasn't practical. Now it isn't so). And also AI in regards to cooking. Sure, people thought kitchen robots that can make your food like I, Robot would be a long way off. But they already have a robotic kitchen, that can make you any recipe - exactly like a chef would make it on demand - the consumer version prototype had a public demo within the last few months, and is expected to be released on mass in early 2019 (Moley - ruclips.net/video/I-ghKK0vF9c/видео.html )
@@adrianbundy3249 Google deepmind is a monster. Lowko covered a series of matches where a professional player gets trash canned by it in the first round, and it holds it's own. Starcraft 2 was just a matter of watching enough games and it really does look like watching a player play.
@@andrewwaldschmitt4757 I can tell you aren't much of a follower of Starcraft yourself, and only got drawn in because of the hype around Alphastar here. "a professional player", you mean first a non-protoss professional play playing protoss anyway because it could only do PvP, and then a week later, MaNa, an actual Protoss player, but not necessarily at elite level in tournaments.
It won by using things like EPM that is several times faster than the fastest human player we know of right now, by like 3x to 4x in engagements, you know, the time you want to actually use micro and apm to save your army, and win the whole game usually? Yeah... But because it doesn't spam click things like humans do for macro and building all game, the average is still lower; but that is a stupid cop-out by the designers. News flash: Hackers, ie: cheaters, human cheaters - in the game, have had micro hacks for years. Auto-splits, auto-blinks, etc, ones that can set your apm to 10k+ at times, or levels like this. If they had such assists running, like MaNa, he would have wiped the floor all 5 games against this AI so far, taking away the main reason why it managed to win the five times it did. (and lost when they tried to give it more human like restrictions). Question: If a person would be disqualified from tournament for using such tools, why the fuck do you want to pretend an AI doing them makes this a legit proof that they are better right now? No, they aren't. They are just hacker level mid-tier player right now, which lets them punch up a few levels.
I do expect them to get better, but they aren't there yet. They made a bunch of tactical blunders.
Also - if you want breakdown over everything, don't watch Lowko, the hype train man. Watch BeastyQT, an actual ex-pro youtube streamer now, he had better insights. Furthermore, someone who has dabbled in AI, Brownbear, had the best analysis of it in detail besides - and he demonstrated exactly what I am talking about. Right now, you would probably be best suited to say the AI went 1-1 in matches that actually should remotely count.
Here's the latters video: ruclips.net/video/sxQ-VRq3y9E/видео.html
To be honest I always got the feeling that CA was trying to mimic the level of depth from Paradox games with many of these features, but failed to understand the meaning and context behind them. Often thinking they where making an interesting and interactive system when really they are just forcing players in to an awkward balancing act with only penalties for not being on top of it.
Over all though I get the impression that the team responsible for making ToB has there heads too far up their assess. Already convinced that its just the players who are too inept to understand how great their game is and tweaking a few things here and there to play lip service to the complaints.
Underrated comment.
Yeah
I honestly hoped they could mimic some stuff from crusader kings like families and land management but now that I see it, it doesn't really fit a game that's more about action rather than pure administration
The problem is CA is getting too big and trying to do too many things at once. They used to release a single game every 3-4 years with maybe two or three expansions. Currently, they are producing content for three games concurrently (WHII, 3K, and Troy). ToB seems to have been abandoned. I just bought it on sale for $13. They are also probably near to releasing WHIII. SO instead of focusing on one game at a time, they've divided their company into teams ... I would imagine there are three or four teams. The A team is the one working on Warhammer. The B team seems to be the one working on 3k. So Troy (and possibly ToB) are being made by the C team. So the worst designers, instead of implementing orders from the best designers because they're all working on the same product, are out here making their own decisions without any oversight from the more talented people at the company.
It sucks how it's just an ATTILA 2.0. Should have been a separate expansion or DLC for TW:Attila, instead of it being a standalone game of a new spinoff that started out miserably.
Even worse it's how similar it is to the Age of Charlemagne DLC
At least Attila has great music
I enjoyed Attila and Age of Charlemagne. If this was Attila 2.0 I would be happy. This game is only based graphicaly on Attila and has nothing interesting about it. Its a downgrade from Attila.
Atilla 0.2 because it is worse
CA learned from Medieval 2. They are making their games barely moddable for the community and then they release their own mods which they call a seperate games and ask a full price for them. Whats funny about that is people paying for this shit and then them being surprised when those games suck donkey dick. You want good games? Stop givng devs money for making shit ones. Otherwise its low effort and ez money for them.
"I've liked shit games too"
That was the most unexpectedly hilarious thing I've heard in a while!
Agreed, it is just so bloody boring... There is no content or meat to the game. Bloody just give modders the kit to the game so they can make mods that are 10 times better (LoTR)
Give All tools to modders so they can make a better game for you
@@aksmex2576 Exactly, AND! they won't charge us for it!
I’ve asked Creative Assembly for this on the official forum already. They could make a killer Game of Thrones mod on this map since a slight re-arrangement of land masses will make Westeros. I do like the recruitment mechanic where your forces don’t start as full stacks all at once as well. The rest could be fixed by modders
It's a safa
4:49 I've liked shit games too.. Haha! We all have mate. Such a golden thing to say.
Haha, Legend started off cool and calm, but you can really hear the frustration building up further and further the more he explains things within the game. I'm just hoping that Three Kingdoms will be better.
Johie definitely is!
@Fhjthnl Lol Iuyo tf
three kingdoms is honestly my favourite total war since medieval 2, I think it's even better than Shogun 2.
I agree, Mr Mac. Three Kingdoms is my personal favorite in the series so far. Some people don’t like it that much, but out of all of them, I absolutely adore the combat and story in 3K
Ah, there is legend we know
I got scared for a moment when he released the Thrones of Britannia campaign.
I thought he got possessed by CA.
But now he is back
Welcome back legend
Definitely feel the same way as you having just bought it for the same reason. Love the setting, but damn. Started my campaign and hated estates almost immediately for the same thing, they're a chore. Auto-resolve back in medieval 2 at 55% balance of power meant you would lose a sizeable chunk of your army that you would then have to recruit from the ass end of nowhere and bring to the front to replenish. Here instead you lose maybe 15% as you said and it just replenishes in a turn between "recruit captives" or "occupy city."
They are improving estates, so you actually get rewards for certain traits, bonuses for food or what have you.
Before the game was released, I would go on the reddit sub and hype my idea of what estates could be (or should be) and here we are heading into 2019 and they're just now doing this. Why even put a pretty good historic concept in like that if it's just for influence/loyalty bonuses/maluses? It always should have been something that made you think that made you excited to get better income from more loyal lords, or more food, or faster recruitment.
I have played the game for 30 minutes because Warhammer's unit diversity and flavor (speech, characters, memes) is just too compelling.
The thing about mods is, I can still have fun with vanilla versions of certain TW games (in fact, I did for Medieval 2) but this game would require mods, but there aren't enough made for it.
Some of your complaints reminds me of some of the problems with Stellaris when it was first released. Only getting penalties as you tech up and no bonuses.
Example being that the reason you would adopt a new tech is because it either makes something stronger, cheaper, lighter or more efficient while keeping everything else the same. However, the way paradox made it, at first, upgrading a weapon would give you a slight damage boost for a major cost and upkeep penalty. So the best army was un upgraded corvettes that were a couple times over your max fleet limit because it was stronger and cheaper, in every way, than having any kinds of upgrades.
They have since fixed it, with a couple of major updates, and the game has become quite enjoyable.
CA on the other hand can't seem to fix any of their later releases to save their sinking ship. Sad.
It really becomes sad when there are a whole ton of 'upgrades', that only leave you worse off in >90% of situations. It's just sad. Legend said it best, 'why you you ever both researching that'? But yeah, Stellaris did originally come to mind as well, but moreso I felt like it was just the continued track record of the newer generation of TWs, just done way more over the top into aggravation.
Stelaris has the problem of terrible AI and rampent cheating, its so bad that a tiny empires build fleets way behond there possible capacity in so little time
sadly the A.I in Stellaris is just a broken mess. It essentially has the TW Problem. They increase difficulty by giving A.I major bonuses wich often leads to a playstyle were you are really just focused on catching up as fast as possible.
I like Thrones of Britannia. Don't know why
This was the game that finally snapped me out of my Total War fandom. Nothing they do now has any connection to reality; everything is now weird mechanics floating on top of spreadsheet balancing and button clicking. Nothing organic like population - how tf do they keep getting away with making "grand strategy games" without functioning population mechanics? Nothing immersive like generals' speeches, moba-like battles, AI designed to annoy the player instead of expanding (and bloated like crazy with cheats), naval battles removed, schizophrenic UI design, horrible music...
Taking a trip back in time to here after seeing your Pharoah video!
Same here!
I think things like the estate system are desgined not to be gamey mechanics, but to relfect the kinds of challenges a leader in Britain would face. Because the consequences of letting your nobles get either too powerful or too dissatisfied with your handouts were grave in practice. Getting overextended was inviting civil war, and monarchs of the era were often forced to work very hard and make massive concessions to their key supporters, as their rule was often based on very shaky, informal grounds and interpersonal relationships.
It's important to remember that TW games are often trying to emulate historical conflicts, not just create game mechanics in a vacuum.
I personally dislike the mechanics of TW after medieval 2.
What about shogun 2?
You know what, I liked Empire just because Naval combat introduction. Napoop was enjoyable.
Shogun 2 is the best total war fight me
flowonthego
Empire is the shit. I liked the province system (though some regions needed to be split further...cough france), I like the little towns growing as a result of increased wealth so there was incentive not to overtax. This could be further improved by having the player specialize their regions like we see in later titles (industrial, agricultural, urban, commerce, etc).
I liked the resources and the fluctuating market, which you could purposely manipulate the price by limiting supply. They could’ve taken this further by having trade embargo diplomacy etc. maybe if you flood the market an ally could ask you to stop and get angry if you don’t.
I liked the tech tree and I would’ve welcomed prerequisites like we see in ToB. I liked be age of sail stuff and introduction of naval combat. I didn’t mind the split map situation. I even grew to like the ranged combat once I learned what the proper tactics of that style was like.
Ugh. Empire had so much potential, so much so that despite its failures it was still an awesome game. Imagining what it could’ve been had it included various aspects we saw mods add (darthmod, imperial splendour, etc). Ooh. An empire 2 that did all these things would be sooo gooood.
i think is more like games after Shogun 2 that took a dive to the negative and basically limits your freedom and player agency a good deal.
"i like my games to make sense" is a fair statement for any game genre
ty for sharing, i feel like CA really dug their nails into the money train with warhammer and weren't willing to do anything to improve further. (tho from what I've seen they've been heading down this path awhile) Hopefully failures like this will help them improve in the future.
I feel like Attila had a good economic system. You build buildings, you get a decent income from them. It's satisfying to build up your provinces and there are trade-offs between squalor, public order and income and religion. It might have been nice to have more build slots like in Medieval 2 but on the whole I liked Attila better than Rome 2. This Thrones of Britannia looks like a step in completely the wrong direction . Thanks Legend for letting us know so that we didn't waste money on this.
Actually, compared to Attila, it’s simpler BUT I will say that this Video aged poorly when compared to the current state of ToB. I think you should consider taking another look at a more recent review, preferably one where they show the gameplay because while it’s not as fun as Troys campaign, which imo. had one of the best campaigns in a long time, despite everything else going on in that game. , ToB gives you a very unique world which ( if modded but even then it does not have to be a big overhaul, some tweaks can be more than enough ) and imo. it makes for a good Saga title ( aka a smaller expansion like experience ).
I compared it a lot to the expansion for Attila, Charlemagne which I loved because the era is a personal favourite of mine and Attila was and is for me perhaps the best way to experience historical total war - while less diverse in terms of culture, it’s more focused scope imo. can really work in its favour.
They did look at Paradox for their gameplay mechanics - just check out Three Kingdoms diplomacy!
Aidenpons I’ll give you rice for your empire
the technology rant is the funniest thing ever! i can watch this and laugh still in 2020
"Don't follow the hive mind and dislike or like something just because everyone else does."
True words have been spoken!
I get you brah. My favorite assassin’s creed game is the one everyone else hates...AC Rogue. I bought thrones of Britannia, I played a few campaigns, I thought it was fine and I got my money’s worth. No harm no foul. It’s finel
When I first bought this game I wasnt a fan, but it was kind of funny because I actually came back and played it again after finishing the last kingdom on Netflix, which takes place at literally the exact same time period. It was a lot more fun because the location had context related to the show. I like the game well enough. I think some of the new mechanics are really interesting, even they they weren't all executed well.
That's like i feel about Three Kingdoms. I totally regret buying it.
Agree with everything in this video. I recently fired up my old Dyflin campaign and was surprised to see I was losing money, and had corruption levels exceeding 50% in almost all of my provinces. To make matters worse, when I took new settlements, I would just lose more money because of the building upkeeps. I had zero incentive to expand... It's like the developers make these changes without then testing how it effects campaigns.
Never played never will
Emperor of Mankind they should put it as one of those quotes on a loading screen.
You ain’t missing ANYTHING.
You saved yourself tons of nerves
You saved your soul and money
Nice TL;DW in the description.
Sometimes I wonder if they even play or test their games before releasing them
Any Total War game set in the Middle Ages shouldn't have armies in the Rome II style. It doesn't make sense for the feudal system in any way; instead we should be able to recruit units at settlements like in the older games and have to march them to join the main army. They shouldn't remove features just because the AI is too dumb to handle them, they should be fixing the AI.
I feel like 2018 is a pinnacle of inferior products. It's like they totally lost will to create product that is fun to play. Just never ending hype shit thrown at us and then doubling down on products once they are released. I seriously consider stop playing new games at all. Just repetitive dung, with the same stinky smell wrapped as a prime cut t-bone. Bethesda, Blizzard, EA, CA, Capcom...AAA Gaming Industry is in a really bad state creative-wise. Perhaps because dev studios became factory lines, and people who code only care about their monthly checks. Demoralised by corporate structure and feeling of being trapped in something they don't like.
I saw it in the faces of the CA employees when they did some thing awhile back and invited some Chinese total war fans for a photo op. Those depressed faces still haunt me to this day..
P. Cox Do you have a link to that? xD
Notice me senpai 👐
I'd never thought i'd see it but ToB just has no redeeming features.
At least Attila had some interesting things going on, but this game just doesn't.
It feels like they plastered the loyalty mechanic onto everyone because if it didn't exist you could just steamroll everyone within 150 turns. Make everyone have loyalty and you spend more time infighting than actually getting shit done.
On top of that estates, diplomacy and the campaign map in general is just awful and cramped. Maybe I've been spoilt by TW:WH 2 but right now ToB seems to be abandon ware. This game launched in early May of 2018 and apart from the generic blood and gore DLC there has been no content for it at all. Meanwhile TW:WH 2 has had 2 large patches and 4 factions added with more content to come in 2019.
It really looks like CA knew what they made was a new and worse Attila and just cut their losses and ran, abandoning ToB and focusing on the latest warhammer game instead.
Thanks a million Legend you have saved me time and money. They put lipstick on a pig.
He turned into French in 13:41 😂😂😂😂
This must become a meme
try again when the update comes soon
its supposedly quite large, havent looked at the patch notes
but now you own it may aswell see how it changes lol
Recently got +100 hours on this game, and to be honest I quite enjoy it. There are some flaws indeed: AI for sure. But I do like the idea of having nobles, supplies for armies, food, etc. The patch released in December did a huge improvement.
I think the big problem with redemption arcs, and this game has one, is that they rarely get coverage. Take Cyberpunk 2077. It started out as good but obviously far from what was promised but thanks to a literal great anime show and it’s continued updates, now it’s worth it.
With Britannia, they mainly just fixed the base game but with mods, it’s as much fun as any other TW if one likes the setting and I think people will miss its strengths and even worse, it’s innovation because they mainly see it from the perspective of videos like this which were rightfully angry back in the day but nowadays, this has all changed so much.
My last Total War title was Rome II I was so discussed by that I haven't bought one since and I played the game from the very first one, ironically the one I liked the best was Fall of the Samurai(so for me it was like sudden jolt from best to worst in one release!). I just can't believe what they have stripped away from these titles
Gotta save up money for Imperator Rome.
It really becomes savage from the technology part.
5 minutes in, I didn't come here expecting a pep talk but I fuckin got it and I'm loving it
CA can't handle complexity. The ideas are great but Total War cannot sit in-between genres and remain enjoyable. They have to make up their minds. Total War is either about great battles with light economic simulation and empire management to maintain armies, or it's an economic and empire management sim, with light battle mechanics. I don't think they can rectify it unless they revamp the series and get back to what made these games fun in the first place.
Talking about how everything caused corruption and had upkeep reminded me of Attila. How every building seemed to cause squalor and make your settlements worse. I mean damn even a market or several basic farms could cause a damned plague....never heard a wheat field killing someone til total war Attila lol.
“We’re not going to get a better opportunity than 33% off” Laughs in 75% off
EU4 player here with a decent amount of hours
Estates are just as shit in that game, they're boring point farms with no significant interactions apart from minor flavor events.
I get where you are coming from, and medieval 2 is my favorite too, but I do really like this one as well, but the setting might be what is making this bias, I hope CA goes back to the old majestic deep formula of making these games
There’s a medievall 2 mod on this time era so you might want to give that a try. The last kingdom total war, but don’t get the ‘wrath of the Northmen’ mod expansion because it’s buggy
nah I still like rome 2 and attila far more, but this setting is what intrigues me the most, just finished watching the last kingdom, its frekaing brilliant
I think estates in EU4 are garbage, just another thing to click about for modifiers, and it's almost idiot proof, it's too easy it's meaningless, and kind of lazy
Aye, they revamped it now though by making estates part of the base game and percentage based
I think I understand the design decisions in Thrones of Britannia now. They designed it on how the UK is currently run.
I fear that we will get the same product with Total War Troy
And I fear it will be a 60 dollar DLC to Rome
I just bought ToB in sale ust to see how low Total Wars could sink and found out it is the best Total War game for me, on par with Shogun 2. It is quick, streamlined, but with strategic depth. When I want 20 hours long campaign and relax I play ToB, when I want to spend 100+ hours and micromanage I play Shogun 2. It's a different take on the same game, and should be played as such.
I think the problem is that on one hand, people expect the same game which it’s just not and other other, it got so much better with patches and mods that playing it today is night and day compared to its release.
For me, it clicked even I looked at it like a boardgame. I had a lot of complaints during my first campaign ( Wessax to England ) on normal - obviously too easy ( sadly the game lacks a regular tutorial ) so for my next one I added mods, upped the campaign & battle difficulty and it’s like night and day. Went from „meh“ to „SHIELDWALL! SLAUGTHER THEM!“ in no time.
Thank you for this Legend. A lot of things CA needs to listen to. This game should have been epic. With the success of TV shows like The Last Kingdom and Vikings, both set during the same time period, it's shocking to see how terrible this game turned out to be. There was so much potential for a fun, immersive experience. Instead we got an uninspired, boring and exceptionally narrow minded telling of a very rich historical epoch.
I have watched until "I have loaded an old game across multiple versions and expected my old save to be compatible", and then I stopped, since all the credibility flew out of the window.
Bought this game in a sale 2 days ago because I like the time period despite the bad reviews.
In an early battle I was attacked by a larger Northymbre army.
They charged at mine but stopped half way then withdrew to their original position. All except their general and king Guthrim who proceeded to charge my whole army alone with 11 men in his unit. The AI is fucked.
His character model is cool though.
And this is why I move to EU4 and other Paradox games! I didn't play TW for the campaign babysit mechanics... developing cities use to be helpful for economy... battles were more realistic and fun... so what happened ?! WHAT THE F*CK HAPPENED ?!?
I mean you could just do what I do and play paradox games with only the DLCs you truly like. I been playing EU4 for years and I've not bought a DLC since like.. 2015 probably
@@cgollimusic TBH they haven't made any good worthwile dlc since then
I haven't had such a good chuckle all year!
Thinks for the content. You are truly the most legendary total war player.
This review is very fair.
Sounds like they nailed the mechanics of that time period
Creative Assembly being uncreative NICE!
Love your videos keep them coming just bought, medieval 2, Napoleon, Rome 2, and Shogun: FOTS on steam just because I’ve been watching your vids lmao
I feel you... I think this product was just a way to garner cash up easy with no need to design or create to much.
No animations , old mechanics , same engine of Attila , a few retouches, removes a lot of abilities, low model count ... easy project for easy cash - and the worse part its working for them.
Look When you say everything might be legit I agree ... depth and shallow can both be an advantages or disadvantages. I have noticed a lot of players like the shallow games with almost no strategy that CA puts out - the problem for me is that they market the games and are reviewed at the same level as if they did what they used to do !
Old games had depth , design and way more work put into them than the new games - admit it and move on ... don't lie to the costumers.
I have friends that now enjoy the new TW games because they are focused on battles and not on campaign - for me its a problem cause the franchise was known for creating a games which focuses and combines both campaign and battles ... if CA decided to kill this line of though - admit it market the new games differently and bury the title Total War ... create a new franchise that focuses on Battles. You would lose me as a costumer but that's ok ... there is plenty of people who would love it.
R1TW, M2TW, ETW & NTW - THE BEST and REALLY STRATEGY GAMES
Basically till the new "rethought" interface that started with R2TW and so on.
Never a nice feeling when you feel you waste your money :( That feeling keeps me patient when I am on the fence about a purchase!
"If you haven't yet purchased this game, you should buy this game now... if you want to waste money." *spit my coffee*
Im at the part where the debt increases for each village and city I capture, I had a similar reaction to LGOTW « Wtf is that shit? »
Also, « Why my generals gets their loyalty down each turn, why there is no MISSION SUCCEEDED when i give a general an estate he asked me?! »
I bought it too, the Norman's need stirrups.
Technology that makes your enemies stronger? That sound's like England today....
"Never going to get better than 33%"
Hehe I just bought for 66% off
This video was made more a year ago. Since them and for some months (or weeks?) ago again, there was released another patch with some nice improvements. Is still not the best Total War Game but better than the bad reputation has got. To all who watch this take this please in mind.
This game is very challenging cause of the loyalty mechanism, many negative events causes frustrations (but it will stop after a while if u do it right or handle it ) or the missing Garrison in the minor Settlements. But if you do the right decision, depending if you understood how it works the game, it's very enjoyable. It's important too, not to grow to fast and not to stack up your army to 20 units to fast. You can wait of an Rebbelion to provide a war and attack them to get the Settlement without a war. The new culture mechanism allow this if you look up for this in neighbour regions.
If you decide to go on war against a faction, you have to secure the minor Settlements and it will takes hard decisions how you will to do it.
Leave i my son or brother-in-law with an army or not....maybe not and take the second army to the war???. And how strong may it be in case of defense?
I'm playing now north umbria, on normal but it's harder than the other factions. And it's the best campaign run of all I had. Give ToB another chance. It's worth it.
I am not newbie in TW. I started with TW Medieval (1) and played a lot of TW games.
I played through it in March of last year, and tried one more time with a modded campaign of the Normans, but i could not be bothered.. The thing is, this game is boring and a chore. Thats basically it. And I am so very sorry to say that, because it looks great, it has some interesting mechanics, but at the end of the day, thats its.
It is based on Attila, my favourite unmodded TW game, and sadly copies Age of Charlamagne, the worst, most boring DLC I could think of. AOC had the same problem, with an interesting setting and mechanics, but oh so damn boring. Same here, the units are basically the same for each faction, so why would i replay with another? With a map that huge, and the mechanics annoying you, combined with boring combat and huge inter turn management due to a fuck ton of settlements, no wonder people dreaded playing again. I really hope TW Troy will learn from this mistake and have diverse rosters, useful and interesting mechanics and fill the game with interesting stuff to do.
@@jonathanbatz3183 everything is true. But for those who like this age or love the series "Vikings" or "The last Kingdom" is a pleasure to play his own Story. And it isn't needed a different Roster. It's not really true, some factions got unique Troops. But the game is authentic too. In this time there was only Swords, Spears, Shields and Axes. Which great differents could you do as programmer? (And it is not WH) The differents lies at the Startpositions. This why some Factions got different challenges. Wessex is one of the easiest for example. Mide or Northmbria are surrounded from potential enemies.
Yes for those who played Attila must be dissapointing to see the same engine. Attila is one of the few TW games which I didn't played. For me (and others ) is it also something new. And then don't forget the siege battles. The maps of these battles are much better than from others TW Games. And maybe a little better or equal of Three Kingdoms.
@@Cris_Shatty agreed, there is sloght variation (more agile spearthrowers for Ireland or axemen for the Scandinavian factions), but in the end, the roster is nearly identical, with the same upgrades and the same type of cost (levy, militia and professionals). I wouldn't like to see more difference, like s heavy fyrd focus for Wessex, small but brisk Vikings and ambushy scots. Even the look is very much the same. The only difference being the Normans, who arrive very late. If you haven't played Attila, you should, it is a grand game with a crazy difficulty level for established factions (WRE), tough Battles and the same siege battles. Also, the map is much more focused, the difficulty lies in other problems such as public order, loyalty, culture and raiders.
LegendofTotalWar becoming LegendofParadox, welcome to the dark side :)
I always dream of a co-op game between CA and Paradox, they are moving towards each other a little. Emperor:Rome let you choose the tactic in a rock-paper-scissor style, CA is trying to implement corruption and civil wars since Rome2 adding some more diplomacy options.
The dream game would be Paradox campaign management with Total war battles and city/castle development. I was thinking to it the other day with my brother, some sort of density-style development, the bigger you get the more density of building and population you can make in some areas.
“You should buy his game....if you want to waste your money.”
That’s exactly how I felt after purchasing Rome 2, and playing for several hours. Even today, the AI in that game is awful. The battles are just terrible, and they just turn into giant mosh pits of soldiers.
Legend telling it how it is. Love the truth from this guy 🔥
There are rewards for estates, they are called estate rewards. Sometimes it is several turns of happiness, or higher crop yield, other times it is straight gold reward. Give the game another fresh try, it definitely has its problems, but there are some great mechanics in the game (like estates, special buildings, etc.) that set it apart and give you some unique gameplay in my option. Love the channel.
I would love to see how a revisit with some basic mods would look in his opinion.
This sort of mini review imo. arguably reflects what the game was like back in the day but they seem to have improved - I picked it up again when Pharao expectedly wasn’t all that great and overall, the even the base game is now overall good and with mods it’s actually a fun TW title with some of best sieges of the entire franchise.
Also, the 1066 mod - so much fun.
i just bought this for £2.50 in the summer sale, its very simple but the politics mechanics im still trying to get my head around it, 3 hours in playing as england so far
You still playing it? I bought this game years ago but haven't put any time into it lol I don't have an opinion on it tbh, certainly nowhere near as strong as Legend's, but I do find his criticisms very much on point.
I get the impression ToB started out as a different project but CA shifted focus and put a junior intern team to finish it.
@@therexbellator oh god no...I played about 10 hours and realised all countries were boring, annoying politics systems, crappy combat with no difference in units
I think there was a simular situation in Rome 2 but with food had a save and 10 full staks with +20 food came back after a update and was in a massive food deficit.
My favourite TW game is also Medieval2. Haven't stumbled upon anything with such climate and enjoyable gameplay.
If you're here for the rant, it begins at 11:37
Pat pat. I feel the same. So sad about this game, bc I really liked expansion to Medieval I Total War: Brittania.
Been revisiting this. The estate problem is fixed, and I generally don't autoresolve so those weren't issues. The point about making more money by having less infrastructure is a good one, I'll have to see what happens when I get to the end game. I also agree about allegiance that there should be some bonus to work for, although it's the same as religion in Attila. The last patch helped it seems.
Thanks for this review. It hits the nail on the head of a lot of things CA has been doing since Empire.
Wish I watched this before I bought the game on sale. Battles were okay but the campaign is trash. Besides the gradual recruitment being realistic I'm so tired of everything else, so many tedious mechanics and braindead AI.
Looks like I will stick with Viking invasion medieval total war. My favorite expansion
Spoken like a warrior. I, too, remember that feeling of having only two poor norse provinces, while all those British lands, plumb with wealth, lie there, completely unprepared for the _furor_ _normannorum_ . Ah, the times...
I appreciate the intensity and anger. CA really fucked this one up, repeatedly.
I love it when a game commentator speaks his fucking mind instead of pussyfooting around everything. Total War has become a game factory with shitty micro payments for unfinished products. Thanks for calling out this shambolic addition to the franchise.
Rome 2 fan here.... Anybody else?
I play it with DEI sometimes, but idk why it feels way less immersive than the older titles. Anything past M2 seems bland-I only played empire a lot bc I like the time period.
YES!
Whengamersrise
I love it.
Rome 2 is criminally underrated
Rome2, Medieval2, Empire.. glorious games.
Medieval sometimes crashes, and Empire has a few issues.. but it doesn't lessen these games a bit.
Rome 2 though.. that game just rocks.
Today there is no estate penalty and the estates are run differently today especially the noble! And I really doubt if the other things are still valid. The auto resolve is different as well
So can we actually buy this game now? Or is still crap?
@@SilverSoulxd Yeah its amazing!! If you want I am making videos so you can watch it and see if its good for you :-)
At least there are heroes in the workshop that fixed many of the issues with great mods, but it's still a bad game. I remember playing my first and only naval battle on the West Seaxe campaign and I was talking with a friend while I showed him how my men were vomiting and shouting along with the vikings as if they were having a boat party while nobody killed anyone. It was a quite funny bug, but it was not so funny when I realised that the battle couldn't be fought so I had to autoresolve and lose more than half my army.
It is a real shame, as I love the location and time period and was really looking forward to this game. The art is really cool too. But I must agree the game machanics are poor and need much love.
I think you should take a look at it again, reason being that they fixed a lot of the core issues and while it’s not like all the other TW titles, it has some unique strengths that combined with the right mods actually make this very much fun.
Also, since it has no DLC other than blood & gore, you get a full ( small ) title and that means that all mods, which while not as many as Rome 2 or Attila etc. are still plenty, are compatible.
Unpopular opinion here: I liked it. It's not perfect, the lack of variety is probably the one that gets people to hate it to begin with. But, i like that units needed some time before getting to full potential. Like, i actually needed to plan ahead. Also, it solved the problem where AI factions just suddenly spawning out gazillions of armies out of nowhere in the last games. Also, learning the new system were actually fun for me. Still it has the problem where endgame is always boring but, it's not meant to be a full blown total war game. Oh, and units in this game is balanced pretty well. The timing is very good. Battle lasted just enough and not too long. I might just be weird. I mean i hated shogun 2 for the stupid naval AI spams and liked rome 2 for its variety hahah
It sucks that every time a new total war game comes out I find myself doing crazy mental gymnastics to try to convince myself it's a good game and I'm having fun...Sad I know, but I just can't stop from hoping total war will be good again lol
Estates should be like renting... You dont pay someone to live in the place you own to "look after" it, they pay you to stay in and use the place you own...
I wish they went back to the old style world map:(
Im glad you mentioned medieval 2 hope you dont mind a mini rant. To me personally the pinnacle of total war all around was medieval 2. I feel like after shogun 2 putting in the realm divide (which was a nice endgame event to prepare for and one that hits you hard when first encountered) they decided hey, people like realm divide. It also helps with difficulty so how about we just add a bunch of realm divides ie civil wars. In warhammer its chaos doomstacks coming for you. In medieval when the mongols come and you were England it was mostly a none issue in that region. If you were one of the eastern factions or succeeded with a crusade and held Jerusalem then its a big problem. Also even tho medieval 2 settlement system was way more simplistic and didnt really have the regional resources to the extent of later iterations in a way it feels more dynamic. The simple fact that hey this town would make a good choke point so how about i convert it into a fortress and have this be the defense for this front. Or playing one of the Italian powers and taking forts on islands and converting them to cities so you dont have to deal with using navies to combine the units together.
Also each faction and generals had such a different personality and you could roleplay and do things vastly different each playthrough. How about we make a corrupt King that sacks and pillages and is feared by all. Maybe a chivalrous King who treats prisoners well and is fair to the people. Or maybe one that is concentrated on infrastructure and has a general or son who takes care of the war front. Or maybe we can use religion manipulating rome to our benefit so we can strike out at our neighbors. Or even screw it make peace with our catholic neighbors and focus on pushing out Islam or vice versa. Your general even gets perks based on those decisions giving them a kind of unique feel. Look at the Italian powers in medieval 2 if that game came out now their rosters would probably all be the same units maybe a single unit different for the one you get at purchase before having to buy a dlc.
Thats another thing you could play pretty much all the factions for free if you defeated them. Except for rome, rebels, mongols and tirimuds (who are pretty much event factions). The later games like rome 2 had more factions but come on. If you play Arverni your surrounded by factions who are Arverni but a different name. Most of a campaign if your not playing as Rome Carthage and maybe a couple others is just fighting a bunch of little clone tribes or nations until you get big enough to throwdown with another famous faction. and then they sell it to us as dlc later on. Shogun 2 understandable its one island country pretty much but still all these factions like Honma, Hatekeyama, Shoni you cant play unless you mod and they have the same damn units everyone else does except one niche unit some factions have. In Medieval 2 genoa, venice, and sicily are all right next to eachother but you have people who play sicily that hate genoa, play genoa that hates venice and so on. Because Genoa from the jump has the best crossbows and have to deal with the other italians, Holy roman empire in the mountains to the North, and france in the west. Venice had the best infantry had to deal with italian powers, holy romans, hungary and byzantines. Sicily had muslim archers and norman knights had to tackle italians, byzantines to the east, also moors and islamic armies from africa. All three had same base militia but different units later on that made them feel different plus the type of enemy and expansion evolution they had to go through even tho they are in the same region.
Warhammer of course the factions feel different which i think taking that route help revitalize the series alot. Still tho warhammer theres the good guys and bad guys for the most part you dont have to deal with the good guys if you are one. It is enjoyable but id like a good historical game too and it seems they aren't exactly hitting them out of the ballpark in that aspect. Thrones of Britannia seems like a peak in what total war was getting towards on the historical side. It just looks really bland and the things they did to keep difficulty from what I've seen and played is atrocious. And what happened to the little things like if you had a unit of spearman with base armor outfitted them with leather they visually looked different in battle give them metal and they look different again. It was cool having spear units that were there since the beginning and see them from just guys with spear and shield into fully armored experienced soldiers who could do more on the front. All i can hope for is 3 kingdoms will be amazing. It was a dream idea ive had for so long having the 3 kingdoms era mixed with total war style gameplay. After what they've done on the historical side (even tho 3 kingdoms leads toward more mythical or fantastical) Im gonna wait and be highly skeptical. Their selling it like the diplomacy is gonna be leagues beyond what we've seen and the battles are gonna feel totally different with how generals got kind of squads within the stack. Idk seems like alot of promise but games recently have shown me not to expect much. Anyways great video and yeah im glad i skipped this one
There's only one thing that can solve this game "MERCHANTS"
Merchants wouldn't save this game, as salty as legend would get if they were added. The corruption in this game is so bad, you would end up paying the merchants to sell your goods.
I love totalwar and I study this period of history in the British Isles. This game disappointed me. I love seeing all the family trees of figures I've studied, the artwork is beautiful, the map is actually good for revision BUT the mechanics are just bizarre... I wanted to love it. I really did.
I think since you already own it, mod it with a few basic additions for starters and then give it a try again. If you take your time to learn it’s, although narrow luckily very distinct and overall interesting path, it’s actually quite fun.
The main problems were fixed, the battle AI is okish ( as per usual, total war keeps being total war ) but the campaign is honestly where it shines IF one understands that despite being simple, it’s a lot more complicated to plan ahead because late game tech upgrades are for example less like a simpel boost and more like a choice, having a lot of armies vs. having armies that can muster their forces quickly is a very deliberate thing and while it’s never truly difficult unless you make bad decisions like spreading your empire out in a wrong way, it’s actually quite a good time.
I enjoyed it when it first came out, won a campaign as Ireland, haven't been back though so I clearly didn't love it that much. Having seen what they've done with estates and the economy, I probably won't be going back
Ca: we dont like you legend. You wont get any game copies.
Me: Thats a good sign ;). Go legend.