CA's Total War: The Celtic-Han-Lizardmen alliance that never was

[Toth]

Yeah, I highly doubt mod compatibility. And admittedly, I remain skeptical. Some half-assed remake with mildly overhauled graphics really doesn't excite even though Rome was the Total War I spent the most hours in and still think the pathfinding and unit collision is significantly superior to everything that came afterwards.

I guess it doesn't help that I could just install Europa Barbarorum II which looks much bettern than the screenshots I saw of the remake...

[Werthead]

10 minutes ago, Corvinus85 said:

I expect the mods will have to be remade, like the Homeworld mods.

The Homeworld mods had to be remade because it was a completely different engine, but the Homeworld 2 mods needed much less work to upgrade them (and some modders were brought on board during development, so were ready to launch).

Ah, one of the streamer videos just said there will be a "mod manager" feature for the game. The question is if they'll allow the Total Conversions or will limit things to the .ini tweaks of more recent games. Again, not so much of a problem for Rome, but a massive one for Medieval II if they go down that route.

[Heartofice]

It costs £25 on steam ?! That’s ridiculous. That’s very optimistic. Also they have updated the map? I didn’t want it updated actually. I really miss the whole Risk style maps from Medievial

[Werthead]

If you have the original game on Steam, it's 50% off, so £12.50 for the remaster is reasonable.

They seem to have disabled the original collection, so you can't buy the original collection for £4 or whatever the going rate was to save £12. If you have a boxed copy of the game you might be able to activate it on Steam and that would trigger the discount as well.

It was Shogun and Medieval which had the Risk-style map, Rome had a full 3D movement map.

[Heartofice]

Why would I have the game on Steam?! I think I recently found the old CDs for the game in my garage when I was having a clear out. I think it was about the time of Empire that I’d even heard of Steam

[Werthead]

2 minutes ago, Heartofice said:

Why would I have the game on Steam?! I think I recently found the old CDs for the game in my garage when I was having a clear out. I think it was about the time of Empire that I’d even heard of Steam

The last time I installed from CD I had to faff around to get it working properly, so when I had some Steam credit saved up from selling stuff, I just got Rome and Medieval II on there for convenience when they were about £2 each in a Steam sale. Given how old and small they are by modern standards, it's also much faster to download and install them via Steam than it is from the boxed copies.

[Toth]

Holy crap, Legend is already playing the game:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SztXPwTqe9k

Seriously, it looks just like the original Rome with just a couple new assets sprinkled in here and there.

[Corvinus85]

8 minutes ago, Toth said:

Holy crap, Legend is already playing the game:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SztXPwTqe9k

Seriously, it looks just like the original Rome with just a couple new assets sprinkled in here and there.

All the content creators are throwing videos on youtube. The UI certainly seems somewhat different from what I remember.

[Werthead]

The UI is somewhat different and you can rotate the map now, which you couldn't before. And certainly everything is shinier, and the game doesn't just run on one core (which means sometimes Rome and Medieval II will chug on a modern PC running a 3080ti because it's trying to logjam everything through one processor). Looking smart, although I'd hesitate to drop £24 on it.

People on Reddit have been experimenting with using their CD serial keys to activate the game on Steam and it seems to be working with anyone who's bought the game in the last 10 years or so, but very hit and miss before that. Someone did make it work with a 2004 OG copy though, and someone else contacted Sega customer support and got a new key generated (!) which seems extreme to save £12, but okay.

[Corvinus85]

Well I just did a quick search of my house, and I don't have any CDs. I've no idea what I did with them. I do have Medieval II, which I had already used to get the Definitive Edition on Steam.

Honestly, I am only mildly excited for it, and a bit apprehensive about what CA's plans are with this remastering strategy. Rome was a great game and I poured hundred of hours into it, but once Medieval II came out, I pretty much left it behind. I'm sure they're thinking of remastering that game, as well, which will open the possibility to enjoy the mods on higher quality as Wert said. But this worries me that CA may never do a proper Medieval III.

 

[Heartofice]

Any Medieval 3 game would need a massively reworked campaign I think. Anything less would just come across like a budget Warhammer game.. a bit like the Saga games they released 

[Werthead]

1 hour ago, Corvinus85 said:

Well I just did a quick search of my house, and I don't have any CDs. I've no idea what I did with them. I do have Medieval II, which I had already used to get the Definitive Edition on Steam.

Honestly, I am only mildly excited for it, and a bit apprehensive about what CA's plans are with this remastering strategy. Rome was a great game and I poured hundred of hours into it, but once Medieval II came out, I pretty much left it behind. I'm sure they're thinking of remastering that game, as well, which will open the possibility to enjoy the mods on higher quality as Wert said. But this worries me that CA may never do a proper Medieval III.

I think Medieval III is a slam-dunk. They've pretty much covered every major war and theatre of note for the last 3,000 years apart from the American Civil War (which they won't touch with a barge-pole), so either they go forwards to WWI which would require a complete rethink of their mechanics or they start revisiting eras they've already been to. And clearly the medieval period, which they haven't touched since 2007, is the one needing the most attention.

In fact, they could easily do it as a three-part Total Warhammer style release. The base release could be the Dark Ages, focusing on Western Europe, then expand to the Middle-East and Africa for the Crusades and then add America for a Renaissance finale. Maybe have the Mongols showing up as part of a grand unified Mortal Empires-style campaign.

Someone did also discover that they'd re-trademarked the Total War: Medieval name last year, but of course now that could be for a potential remaster rather than a full sequel. 

[Stannis Eats No Peaches]

I’m honestly quite meh on this, though I do have the original on steam so I can get it somewhat cheaply. Having glanced at that YouTube video above, it looks pretty much the same, but I think the higher resolutions may only highlight how bare Rome looks compared to Medieval 2. I’d be interested in a Medieval 2 remaster, particularly if they improve the pathfinding, which I think was worse than in Rome.

Maybe I’ll get it, but I have so many games and not a lot of time.

[Spockydog]

Just returned to Total Warhammer 2 after a couple of years away.  I am having so much fun, due to two things that have utterly transformed the experience. First, the Mortal Empires end turn times have been slashed dramatically. And secondly, I love the fact you can now turn off the Chaos invasion.

So instead of ruining the map with all the late game devastation, you now get lots of decent sized empires to fight or trade with. Everything just feels better, the magic, the unit balancing, the graphics. Awesome.

 

[Heartofice]

13 hours ago, Spockydog said:

Just returned to Total Warhammer 2 after a couple of years away.  I am having so much fun, due to two things that have utterly transformed the experience. First, the Mortal Empires end turn times have been slashed dramatically. And secondly, I love the fact you can now turn off the Chaos invasion.

So instead of ruining the map with all the late game devastation, you now get lots of decent sized empires to fight or trade with. Everything just feels better, the magic, the unit balancing, the graphics. Awesome.

 

Agree, both of those things have transformed the gameplay. Mortal Empires used to be a slog and if you were a faction that didn’t really feel like it should be fighting chaos I used to just get annoyed by the invasion. Like why be a vampire count fighting chaos.. doesn’t seem right. 
 

Ive gone back to Mortal Empires runs after trying to do a load of vortex campaigns, and it’s so much more fun.. far more sandboxy. I realised I was just getting annoyed that I was getting pushed in a number of directions, even with factions that don’t totally require it. ME’s freedom to make your own story is what makes it so good

[Spockydog]

27 minutes ago, Heartofice said:

ME’s freedom to make your own story is what makes it so good

This is it. For the first time in a TW game, there isn't some bullshit mechanic that kicks in when you're having too much fun. Like that one in Shogun 2 where every single faction declares war on you at once.

I really like the Dark Elf dlc, voiced by Ramsay Bastard. I love the monster roster, and the faction mechanics, but it's tough as hell. Once those pointy-eared bastards on Ulthuan come after you, it's really quite difficult to hold it all together. Great fun.

 

[Corvinus85]

My Cao Cao campaign in 3K is sort of meandering about. Perhaps I should have been more aggressive, but there is one thing I dislike about how the AI conducts the campaign, which made me more cautious. I'll get to it later.

But I can't really call it my Cao Cao campaign anymore, because he died of natural causes in the year 210, which I think is 10 years too early historically speaking. He was 55. Maybe I shouldn't have had him march his army across the Yellow River in winter.

Cao Ang, the eldest son is the new faction leader. The family is extensive, though. I had Cao Ang married early on and he has boy and 2 girls. His younger brother Cao Pi, who is a general in the field and member of the faction council has three children, as well. Cao Cao's two daughters I married off to nobles from other factions for advantageous deals. One of them even got me a region from Liu Bei. Cao Cao's cousin, Cao Ren married Sun Ren of all people. They have 2 kids, too. Sun Ren is a general in the field, while her husband has done other things for me. When Ang inherited the throne, I decided to stir up some shit by shuffling the council a bit. I removed Cao Ren from his position as chancellor invoking his fury - his satisfaction fell from the 90s all the way to single digits, but I placated him somewhat with a title and an ancillary. Now I've reached the rank of Duke, so the prime minister position opened up and I gave it to him, so he's all happy again.

So the Duchy of Wei has risen, being behind Liu Bei's Shu-Han duchy, and way behind Sun Ce's Wu, who has declared himself emperor. The kingdom of Wu is a monstrosity in the south, having taken over much of it. Only Shie Xie still resists, and the Nanman tribes in the south-west. Lü Bu is still around, but he has only a few territories left, and has lost control of the Han emperor. The emperor is now under the control of... Kong Rong. And here is where I have a problem with the campaign AI, and how the game is designed.

I understand that the two big rivers in China are major waterways, and were used extensively for travel, but the AI abuses the hell out of them. Kong Rong made his way into the west by travelling on the Yellow River and took the capital, but his territory is extremely broken up. I am loath to do the same. There should be some challenges to limit how much the AI can travel on the rivers (and the player, too). Maybe naval battles are necessary, or have some options to blockade the rivers if you control both banks.

I've also been reluctant to go to war with any of these major factions because I have really good relations with all, actually being in a coalition with Liu Bei, Sun Ce, and Kong Rong. Also the imperial favor system works a bit like the pope in Medieval II, where you were under threat of excommunication if you kept attacking catholic factions. But here there is a way to reduce the other factions' favor if you take some risks.

Other things: Cao Cao's scheme mechanic is interesting, but can be very limited at times. Some schemes are only available if you're in trouble, for example if you have really low public order in a commandery, or no food. And the credibility currency only increases through schemes that add bonuses to you, which are limited in number. In the later game maintaining high credibility gets easier, as you have the option to increase the number of pawns you need for the schemes.

At some point in the game I gained access to units from the Northern Army, which was cool, as they are strong, though expensive. But I'm not sure why I got them. It happened after Liu Bei's faction became a duchy, but I wasn't at that rank yet.

 

[Heartofice]

One question I have for players of 3 Kingdoms, is are there any mechanics in the game which are completely unique, and which aren’t extension of mechanics in other games? I’m not massively familiar with everything in the game but as a general trend I know Warhammer tends to repackage ideas from earlier games and make them seem new and interesting.

I know duels is a big thing in the 3 kingdoms but is it really new or is it just a  fancy way of doing something that Warhammer sort of already does?

[Corvinus85]

1 hour ago, Heartofice said:

One question I have for players of 3 Kingdoms, is are there any mechanics in the game which are completely unique, and which aren’t extension of mechanics in other games? I’m not massively familiar with everything in the game but as a general trend I know Warhammer tends to repackage ideas from earlier games and make them seem new and interesting.

I know duels is a big thing in the 3 kingdoms but is it really new or is it just a  fancy way of doing something that Warhammer sort of already does?

Looking only at its predecessors, because I haven't played Troy, I would say that most of it is certainly repackaging, but like Warhammer it's good repackaging that makes it seem different. 

A few things that may be unique:

- Yes, the game has the two modes of play, Records for 100% historical gameplay, and Romance for a bit of fantasy gameplay, with the generals being superhuman and able to fight duels with each other. The duel mechanic borrows from Warhammer, with the generals being able to activate abilities as the WH characters. The uniqueness comes from the fact that while dueling, they cannot be attacked by anyone else, so the rest of the armies may fight around them or just wait and see what happens. The combat is pretty neat, though it's almost an extension of how army models fight each other on the campaign map. (I prefer to play with the Records mode)

- Food as a tradeable resource; unlike the other resources that you typically have access to from specialized buildings, which are pooled together in your trade income, food is its own thing, necessary to have, as in other games, but also to be used as currency.

- Recruitment and army organization: 3K takes from Britannia the idea of mustering units. (I don't particularly like that) But what feels new is that an army can have up to three generals. Sure, the old TW games allowed you to have more than one general in an army, but those added generals were mainly just powerful cav units, while here it feels like they are actually assistant generals, each capable of providing different buffs for your army. The units are linked to the generals, being considered the general's retinue. Each general can have a max of 6 units, so that actually makes the army to be 21 units in total. When you raise an army, you start with one general who automatically comes with some units (or the full 6 for a character who had already been a general). Then you add another general, and then another. You can recruit units individually within a retinue or swap them out with other units.

- Characters are jack-of-all-trades: any character can serve in almost any role; it comes down to knowing your characters, where they excel, and where they suck. A character can be a general, an administrator, a member of the faction council, or just a member of the court to be sent to do tasks. Some can also be spies. (There are no agents in the game)

- Espionage: I don't think this mechanic is that well developed, and I haven't used it much with great success. Your characters that can be spies can be sent to infiltrate another faction, where they will take a position as any other character. Then you can order them to do various sabotage acts, dependent on what position they gained. They can be caught, or they can turn their cloak, too. You have to watch out for spies in your own court.

- Making coalitions: a more loose alliance, where you vote to accept new members, and are not obligated to join a war, though it improves relations if you do.

- Being able to trade objects: stuff you don't use on your characters, like weapons, armor, ancillaries and horses can also be added to your diplomatic deals.

[Corvinus85]

I'm thinking I will get Rome Remastered when it's released. In anticipation, I've decided to replay Total War: Rome II Attila. Sorry, Attila is a superior game to Rome II in every aspect. And Rome Remastered includes Barbarian Invasion (and Alexander) so it fits. The reason I've not played more Attila is because I dislike the starting position of about the half the factions, but it's a good game otherwise.

I decided to play with the Eastern Roman Empire, because it's just ridiculous to play with the Western, and I'm using the Radious mods. You know Attila is better than Rome II when the main chapter objective is always survive until a certain year. It's funny how aggressive the AI can get. To not lose my alliance with the WRE, I've entered in wars with the Gaelic peoples of Britain and the Jutes of Denmark, and I see them push deep in western Europe. I recently took Genoa from Italian rebels, only to find that there was a Caledonian army just west of the Alps.