• Medieval II: Total War - A retrospective on ten years of success!



    It was November 2006 when CA officially released Medieval II: Total War; ten years have passed and despite the improvement of the graphics technologies and the new directions of the video game market, this awesome masterpiece is still alive and running, loved by millions of fans and modded by some of the most talented modders available. How is it so? Why so much success even after so many years, while in the modern times the average life-time of a game isn't going beyond two years? Multiple reasons can be referenced and if you are curious to know some of them, please join us and listen to the thoughts of a neophyte and of a long-term player of this evergreen success!

    Medieval II: Total War - A retrospective on ten years of success!
    Giving Medieval II a second chance - by IlluminatiRex

    My first real encounter with the Total War series was with Napoleon: Total War in 2010. Prior that, I had never heard of the series. While I have played hundreds of hours of the newer games, I never gave the older ones much thought Ė even though they are so highly regarded. My first time playing Medieval II was years ago now, and I remember not being all that much into the experience. According to Steam I had clocked roughly 15 hours, but I donít remember much of those 15 hours. Thatís not a good sign, as I tend to remember things I enjoyed.Iíve heard a lot about Medieval II since joining TWC, especially all the praise itís gotten. For the longest time I never really understood why that was. In the little of it I played, I did not personally see the appeal. It was dated. At the time, I would have certainly described it as clunky or clumsy. It didnít have the sleekness or sparkle of the newer games. As a result, it sat there in my library gathering dust and waiting to be played. I never thought that moment would truly come again.

    However, in a bout with boredom one evening I decided to give Medieval II another chance. As I said, in the past I had been put off by the fairly archaic feeling the entire game had. The camera controls, the graphics, the campaign map, campaign mechanics, and how battles felt. I did not enjoy any of that for a variety of reasons. Looking back, I feel that was because it felt so different from what I had grown to enjoy Ė the modern Warscape era Total War. So, when I launched Medieval II I was not expecting to play for all that long.


    The battle tutorial has you defeating Harold Godwinson at the Battle of Hastings in 1066, officially starting the Medieval Era.

    Something was different this time however. This was the first time I felt engrossed by the experience. The introductory cinematic, the menu music, all of that truly drew me in for the first time. Wanting to reacquaint myself with the older styled games, I started up the tutorial missions. There was an introductory cinematic, which I hadnít much expected. In fact, I donít ever remember that being there for the tutorial Ė but surprisingly enough it was. It provided atmosphere and I enjoyed it.

    The battle tutorial went well, no major hiccups and all the scripted events fired as they should. However, the campaign tutorial Ė the one I truly needed Ė fell apart almost instantaneously. The game prompts you to move Rufus back to Caen from England. However, you cannot put him in the transport. There were a variety of other bugs that seem to have cropped up due to the gameís recent update that merged the base game and the Kingdoms expansion. So, I was left dead in the water in terms of game mechanics. Those mechanics were one of the primary reasons why the game had left me feeling alienated in the past, and I was about to dive in without any help.

    So I took a look at the available factions you have to start with in the Grand Campaign: England, France, The Holy Roman Empire, Spain, and Venice. I chose France, and thus started a path I do not regret going down. At first it looked and felt archaic, but soon I was drawn in. Campaign wise, this is most certainly now my favorite in the series. There is actual depth to the campaign, and it feels like Iím forced to make choices regarding my armies and various holdings. For example, I absolutely adore how you increase a unitís armor. This is represented both within the unit stats, and with the visuals on the battlefield. It feels natural. While the newer games do have armor and weapon stat boost with buildings, much like here, it doesnít have that visual representation which I feel truly makes it feel like a reward. This mechanic makes you feel like you want to upgrade your buildings and armor. I also really enjoy the retraining mechanic. I do remember that when I first tried both this and Rome: Total War that I didnít like it all that much. But now, I value the depth it provides. Combined with population, it feels like you are actually managing an army. It does not try to achieve this feeling artificially using a mechanic like army caps. It has actual depth, and makes sense. In the past I never understood either of those mechanics. In Napoleon: Total War your units automatically replenished, why not here? Why do I have to lug them back to a city to retrain for a turn? Those are questions Iíd imagine I had asked myself when I first played it years ago. This time however, I got the hang of these mechanics and they made sense. I was able to make money at the end of my turns (which looking back, I do distinctly remember as having been a problem), and most of all I was really enjoying the entire experience. So France marched onwards to glory.


    Lancelot enjoyed being ordered to battle, as such he gained loyalty. The characters feel realistic!

    Glory comes at a price of course, and that price is being slave to the Pope and to rebels. I wasnít all that big of a fan of rebels holding those regions in the past, primarily since I was so used to all regions being held by a faction of some sort Ė whether they were a major or minor player. Now I see it as a great opportunity to have a mad dash to capture territory before rival major nations do. This gives a much more interesting start to a campaign in my eyes. While you are able to declare war on anybody in the newer games, thatís a big deal. That changes your reputation with various factions, and in some cases your neighbors are way too big for you to effectively take on. The rebels even the playing field a bit. While some rebel regions are held by at least half a stack, they still provide plenty of options of where to expand early in your campaign. You could also opt to start stepping on the toes of other factions, but its not required. Overall I feel that it gives you more choice in terms of early expansion.

    Speaking of the Pope, one of the big complaints Iíve heard about Medieval II are the missions assigned by the Pope. Personally, at least from what Iíve seen so far in this French campaign, I do not mind them. They tend to be fairly simple, such as build a church or hire a new priest. Not being excommunicated has its perks such as having better general relations with other Christian nations. In my game, Portugal learned that the hard way and was excommunicated after it attempted to take Bordeaux from me. I was close to being excommunicated at that point, having blown off the Popeís previous request just so I could really see what would happen. Perhaps Portugalís CAI saw that and thought it would be OK within the Popeís eyes due to my low Piety. Portugal was wrong and was excommunicated. In addition to Pope missions, I also received missions from my ďcouncilĒ. These missions were also fairly simple, such as take a specific city from rebels. Again, I didnít mind them, and I felt that they give interesting short term goals. I find the missions to be an engaging way of helping you advance your campaign in various ways while providing tangible rewards in units and money. However, I would not mind if they did not exist.

    Of course, I've yet to talk about diplomacy. Unlike in the newer games, you use your diplomat on enemy leaders or towns to initiate diplomacy with that faction. At first I felt this was convoluted and intuitive (especially coming from the recent games), but soon I started to enjoy the feature. It takes time to move a diplomat to the proper location, and your diplomatic success can succeed or fail depending on how skilled both your diplomat is, and the person they are communicating with. Like many other aspects of the campaign, it adds depth.


    Portugal gets itself excommunicated.

    Another aspect of the campaign I enjoy is balancing yourself between castles and towns. Your castles provide soldiers but not a lot of income. While the opposite is true of towns. This allows you to make interesting choices in terms of region specialization. Over time, do you convert the castles in the center of your empire to towns? How much do you balance them in either direction? Much like the rebel towns at the start of the campaign, it allows you to make interesting choices regarding the future of your nation.

    Then of course you have your characters. Kings, heirs, and nobles. The trait system for these characters seems to me to be far less arbitrary than compared to either Rome II or Attila and it provides an almost RPG like experience as you use these individuals within your campaign. Likewise, each agent type feels distinct and as if they have a specific use. Princesses, spies, assassins and more allow you to take a variety of differing actions within your campaign. My favorite agent is actually the princess. Converting enemy generals is fun, and makes sense within the agentís context (a marriage). Iíve even had my ally Spain convert one of my best generals! Comparing this to a Total War game Iím far more familiar with, Rome II failed in this regard. Characters didnít feel like people, and all agents could essentially do the same thing. It made the campaigns feel very similar and unvaried. It was almost an illusion of choice unlike in Medieval II.

    In addition to the campaign mechanics, Iíve also found I love all the little details CA packed in. While I canít say Iím a fan of the videos that play after agent actions and such, I do very much enjoy details such as the voice clips that play when you hover over the different choices of what to do with prisoners. There are also funny lines that play when you click on an AI factionís army, city, or agent. Not to mention the fairly lengthy and often funny pre-battle speeches by your general. There is plenty of variation and they are fun to listen to. Details like that give the game a personality that I enjoy, and feel is missing from the newer games.


    Even this small battle against rebels feels epic and visceral!

    I also really like the battles as well. I donít really think theyíre all that much slower compared to other games in the series, but the battles feel as if everything that happens has weight behind it. From cavalry charges to a single man battling it out with another. There is a sense of weight to it all, that I feel is kind of hard to describe Ė but it makes it feel much more visceral and real. I remember prior to Rome IIís release that staff at CA had stated they wanted the combat to feel visceral and real, while it seems they actually had achieved that same feeling almost ten years ago. While yes, you do have men thrown into the air because of a cavalry charge, it doesnít feel all that out of place or unreal in context.The battles also feel less cluttered. While the UI takes up roughly the same amount of space on the screen as in newer titles, it feels much more neat and orderly. The battlefieldís themselves feel the same way, less cluttered. There is detail within them, but they are not distracting. A complaint directed at the newer titles Iíve seen is that the units donít feel as if they exist on the battlefield, and that is something I can really agree with and understand now. Similar to the feeling of weight, itís fairly hard for me to accurately describe. I would say itís a mix of the visuals and feeling of weight everything has. Units donít clip through each other and it looks like a battle. Most of all I feel in control of my army, a real army, and actually commanding them. It doesnít feel like Iím commanding a virtual army at all.

    However, while I do enjoy battles overall the sieges leave me wanting more. While the basic battle and siege mechanics are solid, I've noticed that every siege devolves into a fight in the town center, with both sides just throwing everything into the melee. It's not all that engaging, and frankly takes me out of the experience every time because it's boring. Although, this is sadly a problem not just limited to Medieval II.Medieval II has depth and feels real. That's some of the best praise I can give Medieval II, and games in the Total War series. Medieval II is one of the few that achieves both depth and and being engrossing enough to make it all feel real. While some of the mechanics have shown up in the games released since, I think CA has lost some of their overall vision in trying new things and not keeping what works. Because the systems they had in Medieval II worked and made logical sense (combined with the immersive UI and details) the game is extraordinarily engrossing. There is actual choice within the campaign and within battles. As I stated previously, I feel as if Iím actually in control of an army. I would hope CA attempts in the future to find a balance like Medieval IIís again. I personally feel theyíve gotten close with titles such as Attila, but there are elements that still hold those titles back from being extraordinary.

    Overall, I think thereís a lot that the newer Total War games could borrow and learn from this title. I think thereís a lot of value that Total War fans can get out of Medieval II because of its depth, even if you havenít given it much of a chance before. While I donít think itís perfect, I feel like I have missed out on a lot by not truly giving it a chance before now. Iím glad I decided to play it again, and I hope other fans who may have skipped out on it because it is a ten year old game give it another shot, because they may end up surprised like I was. I definitely see now why Medieval II gets so much praise and is seen by many as the best in the series. I will be getting many more hours out of both the vanilla game and the variety of available mods.

    ~~~ ~~~ ~~~ ~~~ ~~~ ~~~ ~~~


    A story of a never-ending love
    - by Flinn

    As an old-timer of strategic games, my story begins back to the times when those games were just few undefined pixels and a bunch of unintelligible symbols on the screen.. ahh the time spent with my Commodore 64 and later with the first AmigaÖ yes, Iím that old actually! When I first met a TW game (the old Shogun) my gaming life was shaken up and since then I always gave a try to almost all TW games, while I could not help but to remain attached to Medieval II, which I consider to be a milestone in my gaming life: now that Iím close to my fortieth year and I have a family and many responsibilities, Iím still playing it whenever I have some free time and the right attitude to do so (you know, that healthy desire of domination and the lust for gore, that everybody has here and there during life); itís always time well spent! I donít deny that over the last ten years Iíve tried some other strategic games (some of which I enjoyed quite much, to be honest), but when I look for a solid strategic and immersive experience, I always go back to my Med2 Gold Edition retail version (yes, I know itís quite rare nowadays, but I said you Iím old, didnít I?).

    "Take that, you scum!" Most probably what those English Knights thought while charging through the ranks of the hated French heavy infantry!

    Jokes aside, the title has truly millions of fans around the world, and not only for the Vanilla version, but why then? In my opinion, due to three main reasons: the setting of medieval warfare, which is probably the most appreciated (along with the Roman one), because of the most classical view of chivalry and feudalism and of course for the fast changing scenarios; the easy moddability of the game, which allowed the creation of hundreds of mods and thousands of submods, some of which reached the level of recognized masterpieces (even a neophyte like me can apply some solid changes to the main campaign without need for guidance and by just modifying a single text file); and of course the overall quality of the original work, which has been increased sensibly over the years by CA and indipendent modders.In particular I consider the campaign map one of the best ever made for what concerns balance between details, level of zoom and a bearable requested hardware (and not that eye tiring too!); later versions of campaign maps are surely richer in details (many of which are totally useless in any case, at least for what concerns gaming purposes), but I always found pretty difficult to distinguish the particulars in those new maps, and, most important, they donít allow me to have an overall understanding of the situation with just a glance, something that happens with Med2 instead. Donít get me wrong, the campaign map (or the battle maps, for what matters) arenít close to be perfect, but for the level of clarity they are probably the best made. Besides, as modding has shown, it is possible to do almost everything with both campaign and battle maps (as long as you stay within hardcoded limits although; for instance campaign maximum height has always been a issue in some extent), hence diversity is granted, especially for mods.


    Campaign map can be rich of details and yet easy to understand.

    When Kingdoms expansion was introduced, the game got a significant step forward (in my book, the cultural switching system is a major improvement), as it also showed that it was possible to increase immersion and details by focusing on a specific moment or region within the game. I very much enjoyed my first Crusaders Campaign, it was simply epic to be able to drive in battle so many great historical characters (not to speak about the new ancillaries/traits); I was really disappointed with the inability of the Vanilla AI to manage the Crusades and the Outremer states, but whit the expansion pack I was thrown straight away into the period and I got a full immersion form the experience: the unique feeling of pulling my Templars Knight out of Kerak just to send them to pillage some poor village around or the joy of executing the hated Crusaders with the bardiches of my beloved Sultanís Guard, both were priceless feelings. If I look back at the experience, I have to say it was probably the best ever, even more immersing than the one I had with, say, Third Age: Total War (which remains a masterpiece from all the points of view, in any case). The other Kingdoms campaigns also proved to be unique experiences on their own; for example, for once it was possible to deal with the Mongols in a way that did not mean running around the map to avoid their dreadstacks or praying for their armies to take another route than the one that leads to your capital. Needless to say that I enjoyed very much all of them, in particular because of the unicity of each faction and the level of adaptability required to play all of them (I remember well how much I struggled to develop and apply new battle strategies to be succesful with some of the new factions, such as the Mayans or the Aztecs, just to cite two of them).


    The level of details you can reach isn't that inferior to later titles and in some cases is even better (due to color tones, for the most).

    I donít know how many hours of play I have with the Vanilla game or with Kingdoms expansion, but for sure I played every faction at least once and some of them many times (England was a must, not to speak about Italian factions or Denmark/Viking factions) and I really much enjoyed the variety of troops and tactics to be applied (something that, I have to say, hasnít been seen again in later titles, especially with Empire/Napoleon and Shogun 2; this is another of the reasons why Med 2 is still so popular, which anyway falls within the third point above). Sure, the game has its own limits (in particular for what concerns some of those hardcoded), but that was never a real setback, especially because in my opinion the game was originally not mean to be that realistic, but more an immersive experience and a sound strategical challenge, which could provide you with many different problems and give you many different tools to work with (hence, for instance, the presence of 4 different agents, that have been almost completely removed or concentrated into one single agent in later titles); at the same time leaving the door open for modding has sensibly increased the interest and the activity around, which in part has returned in form of ideas and new models/tools which have been later implemented into the system or even have served as an inspiration for later titles. I have to say that all we TW players owe much to Med 2; to be honest I really doubt we would have had so many new titles, if not for the continuous interest and success of this "old" title.


    Pikemen fight! See how real it looks, in its own fashion.

    As a member of this community, I wish to spend few words about the future of this awesome title. If you look at the Med 2 fora it seems evident that for years this game has been the apple of the eye of modifications for TW series; tens and tens of great mods and hundreds of submods make up for a huge quantity of material to look at, thus grating almost infinite possibilities and alternatives. I'm pretty sure that for the next years we will still see many of them coming out, none the less as the time goes it is normal that the interest fades. As a matter of fact the fundamental limits for the modders are the so called "hardcoded limits", which basically are values inscribed in the exe file and that cannot be permanently modified without braking the terms of services; the exe itself, in facts, actually stores inside many fixed values (usually bound to the hardware potentials of the time when the game was developed), thus imposing some annoying issues to be un-editable (such as the afore mentioned maximum height or the maximum/minimum number of men per unit, as examples).

    As a solution, a new procedure was proposed: the Memory Editing Project; the logic is that it should be legit for a user to edit its own memory without any consequences, as it's user's memory, he bought it and he can do whatever he wants with it. As a matter of fact, when executables are launched, they are loaded and mapped into the computer's memory and, there, their instructions can be edited as will without breaking any law (pretty much the same of game trainers). Clearly, itís up to the modders to present their own projects of memory editing to TWC and CA (actually both this project and the other one for Rome:TW have received official authorization for a go), so as long as the project is developed within such frame, and authorizations are granted, the user is free to mess with memory at his own will.

    How does it work in practice? Memory editing is temporary: the editing you do to the exe loaded into your memory will not last after the game itself has been closed, so the only way to have them standardized and to make them easily accessible to users, is to put them into a launcher/patcher. The launcher itself will take care of creating a fully deployed game process in a suspended state, modifying some small parts of it in order to change its behavior, and finally resuming its execution.

    An unofficial banner for the M2:TW Memory Editing project.

    It looks easy, but it's not so as a matter of fact: actually the main issue with memory editing is that analyzing an executable is a very difficult and time consuming task to accomplish, that requires a high knowledge of software architecture and assembly code, along with sufficient skills in using IDA Pro, OllyDBG or any other similar debugger and a hexadecimal editor. As the developers of the projects clearly stated: what is really need is collaboration. Unfortunately it seems that for the moment the Med 2 Memory Editing Project is on hold/abandoned, as Zarathos, the leader, has stepped down because of the impossibility to develop the project by himself; I won't say it's dead yet, but without the interest and support of other modders, it will probably be so very soon, hence I hope that things will change in a way or another: I'm not a modder so I can't say for sure, but I deem that the benefits of having a full working editor are quite obvious.

    Alternatively, a petition to remove hardcoded limits has been proposed; once again, it seems like that the situation isn't moving forward as hoped. Most probably a new petition will be issued soon, but in any case, for anyone interested to see the things improving, it could be worth to follow up with this idea and maybe get in contact with Frunk about.

    I'm sure many hope to see the title alive and running for many years to come and I'm totally convinced that we all look forward to see a Medieval III: Total war coming out soon!


    Director's Note: Many thanks to both paleologos and Veteraan for providing some of the screens included in the article.
    Comments 39 Comments
    1. Gigantus's Avatar
      Gigantus -
      10 years already? And still I am working on mods for it...

      Thanks for the trip down memory lane.
    1. Alwyn's Avatar
      Alwyn -
      Great article, I like the two perspectives. Your article explains very well the reasons why Medieval II is still such a popular game.
    1. ♔atthias♔'s Avatar
      ♔atthias♔ -
      all hail the two blue guys for this article
      great work fllin and illmunatirex[spelling?]
    1. The Wandering Storyteller's Avatar
      The Wandering Storyteller -
      Great article, but what are the mods used?

      Also could you guys do a spotlight on some of the released mods on MTW II, which features mods on China and some of the less well known mods?
    1. SanyuXV's Avatar
      SanyuXV -
      Great article, RomeTW/Med II/Shogun II are my favourite TW games to date. But Med II takes the cake when it comes down to ranking, CA will be hard pressed to churn out a game that is greater than this classic
    1. Flinn's Avatar
      Flinn -
      Quote Originally Posted by The Triumph of Rome View Post
      Great article, but what are the mods used?

      Also could you guys do a spotlight on some of the released mods on MTW II, which features mods on China and some of the less well known mods?
      Hello mate, some of the pictures are from Vanilla Med 2, others are from either Massive Overhaul Submod for TATW or from DCI:Last Alliance submod (another submod for TATW, still WIP).
      As per your second request, I suggest you to give a look here and here.

      Basically the list of mods/submods is simply too long to detail all of them, best and quickest solution is to check yourself according to your tastes. With a quick scroll I found this one, for instance.
    1. Lugotorix's Avatar
      Lugotorix -
      Great article! I liked IlluminatiRex's bit about traits. They really have depth to them that makes Medieval II and it's mods a unique experience from the other, newer games. I've had countless hours of fun with mods like Arthurian, and have greatly enjoyed the base game. Medieval also has one of the best expansions to it's name, Kingdoms, which are exemplar of everything a mini-campaign can be.
    1. Lifthrasir's Avatar
      Lifthrasir -
      It's funny to see that a game that you're not enjoying at the 1st time can become so addictive. I started with RTW and it took me a while to definitively go for M2TW. I really didn't like it at first because of all these features. But after a while, I found them very good.
      I know that feeling when you play for quite a long time and you know you should stop but you can't help yourself thinking "just one more turn, just one more turn". 2 hours later, you're still playing

      Great articles. They brought me so many good memories
      Not to mention that I started modding because of this game.

      So now, when CA will release that damn right about the hardcoded limits to let us mod in a way never done before for the benefit and pleasure of the community???
      This game must have been paid for itself for ages now. A little favour would be highly appreciated
    1. MasterOfNone's Avatar
      MasterOfNone -
      Med2, along with Rome I, are definitely - in my view - the two best games in the TW series. They strike a good balance between the more hardcore 2D strategy of Med1 and the more "realistic" later games. Which one is best of those two is often a topic of some debate. For me, it's Rome, for others Med2. Both have the best mods (though I believe I'm correct in saying that Rome has more (and a greater diversity of) mods than Med2 - at least last time I totted them up. But the games share much in common enginewise. I also found the poorer unit cohesion and responsiveness (as well as the weird animations) a bit of a put off in Med2, and the bug where units would mill around the bottom of ladders (usually in sieges with more than one wall layer), perhaps that latter has been dealt with by mods.

      Rome has some stunning mods, too, such as EB (also on Med2) and the full-conversion FATW. In any case, I must admit I've totalled up many hundreds of hours on both engines over the last 11 years, and yet my copy of Attila still only has 1 hour on it. I think that says something
    1. dvk901's Avatar
      dvk901 -
      I second MasterOfNone's comments that Rome1 and Med2 are definitely my favorite games. Both are great foundations for many wonderful mods, and I hope people continue supporting them. Just download FATW Dominion of Men 3.1 myself, and look forward to playing it.
    1. IlluminatiRex's Avatar
      IlluminatiRex -
      Glad you guys enjoyed the article! I was definitely inspired after starting up Medieval 2, and well, it led to this great double-piece with Flinn (and it was great getting to collaborate with him)!
    1. Flinn's Avatar
      Flinn -
      Quote Originally Posted by IlluminatiRex View Post
      Glad you guys enjoyed the article! I was definitely inspired after starting up Medieval 2, and well, it led to this great double-piece with Flinn (and it was great getting to collaborate with him)!

      It was my pleasure too, mate

      @ MoN: definitely Rome I and Med II have many common perks; as for me I loved Rome I too, but I guess it's also a matter of personal likings about the period and, mostly, which kind of mods you met before (I entered TWC due to TATW, hence my love for Med II could only be increased by this).
    1. MasterOfNone's Avatar
      MasterOfNone -
      CA would be onto a winner if they merged all the best bits of Rome 1 and Med 2 into a Dark Age game that covered a bit of both periods
    1. Flinn's Avatar
      Flinn -
      Quote Originally Posted by MasterOfNone View Post
      CA would be onto a winner if they merged all the best bits of Rome 1 and Med 2 into a Dark Age game that covered a bit of both periods
      Indeed; well, hope doesn't cost anything, so let's hope
    1. Incontinenta Buttox's Avatar
      Incontinenta Buttox -
      Great article.

      M2TW remains my most played game of all time, I spent years playing hotseat campaigns on these forums. I believe this is still the finest game in the Total War series. The series has been heading backwards ever since.
    1. warman222's Avatar
      warman222 -
      I don't play Medieval 2 anymore, but I'll never forget the impact it's had on my life including where I started modding, via sub-mods for Third Age!

      Also... I had no idea I could post in these comment sections now...
    1. Frunk's Avatar
      Frunk -
      Fantastic article, gentlemen. Let's hope M2TW is able to live on for another 10 years, perhaps!
    1. Flinn's Avatar
      Flinn -
      Quote Originally Posted by warman222 View Post
      Also... I had no idea I could post in these comment sections now...
      everyone can comment on articles!

      Quote Originally Posted by Frunk View Post
      Fantastic article, gentlemen. Let's hope M2TW is able to live on for another 10 years, perhaps!

      you can have a say in this mate ...
    1. Vlixes's Avatar
      Vlixes -
      Lately I thought "Perhaps I will stop playing TW at forty", "perhaps I am experiencing my last years in TW" (I am already in the middle-thirties). But seeing someone like Flinn, already in his forties and still playing and talking about TW with such a passion has instilled a doubt in me. Maybe I will still play TW at forties! (Btw, I started to play TW also with Shogun 1. It would be nice to see a commentary about this game and Medieval 1, now that we have them available on Steam).
    1. Flinn's Avatar
      Flinn -
      I wonder if this will happen again when getting closer to my fifties..

      As I like to say: "What is good is good, and age can only make it better!", though of course the mods make up for a great addition to Med2.

      About articles on old titles, I think they will not result that interesting, but hey never say never, so ..