Everything sounds good to me as it sounds reminiscent of my favorite TW- Barb inavasion. I haven't heard anything about my biggest gripe about R2 though- field battles just aren't very gripping.
Everything sounds good to me as it sounds reminiscent of my favorite TW- Barb inavasion. I haven't heard anything about my biggest gripe about R2 though- field battles just aren't very gripping.
'When people stop believing in God, they don’t believe in nothing — they believe in anything. '
-Emile Cammaerts' book The Laughing Prophets (1937)
Under the patronage of Nihil. So there.
Eh I think that's highly subjective and honestly I don't agree myself with that notion but to each their own.
You'd think with the 4 hate threads on the Rome 2/Attila forums would keep the discussion in the other threads on track but nope, people feel like Rome 2 or Attila is bad enough to justify their own stupid hate threads or remarks in other threads. It drives me nuts because there's no hope for a reasonable discussion on the actual forums. I am getting annoyed with CA's emphasis of fire atm but I think it's because there is nothing else to really show right now so they're doing more with less. I think haters are looking too much into it.
Well, all other things aside, I have hope; an interesting period and game seems to go in right direction
Kingdom of Lindon preview video out
DCI: Last Alliance - WIP Second Age mod | DCI: Tôl Acharn - mighty Dúnedain Counter Invasions |
Additional Mercenary Minimod - more mercs; for TATW and DCI | Family Tree minimods - lore improvements | Remade Event Pictures - enhance cultures trough images |
Favorite TATW compilation: Withwnars Submod Collection
Patron of Mank, Kiliç Alì, FireFreak111, MIKEGOLF & Arachir Galudirithon, Earl of Memory
I tried to post a thread in the Attila forum about the faction reveals that CA has started and right out of the gates we get people about accuracy and people about the thread's own existence. I wouldn't have any of this if I posted a thread whining about the faction reveals. I should just stick to my forums and stay there. Whenever I try to branch out I get people arguing semantics about what warrants a thread, semantics about this, semantics about that, members on these forums have a talent for tearing apart statements and breaking it down to a level than normal people wouldn't ever do and claim that it's perfectly acceptable.
Calling all Saxoners !
'When people stop believing in God, they don’t believe in nothing — they believe in anything. '
-Emile Cammaerts' book The Laughing Prophets (1937)
Under the patronage of Nihil. So there.
'When people stop believing in God, they don’t believe in nothing — they believe in anything. '
-Emile Cammaerts' book The Laughing Prophets (1937)
Under the patronage of Nihil. So there.
Either ignore those posts altogether or reply only parts that's related to the thread. That's what I'm doing (or trying to do) most of the time.
Maybe it's best is there's a sticky closed thread of factions list updated every time a faction is revealed and the actual faction thread is as normal.
It's hard to really be excited for it because the past five titles from CA have been pretty mediocre to slightly less than mediocre. One good thing about it is that it is not a gunpowder era built on an engine unsuitable to that style of warfare. The campaign map and battle mechanics in Rome 2 I have a hard time adjusting to. Mostly been playing CKII and EU4, which I feel is more in the spirit of the original CA games.
Heir to Noble Savage in the Imperial House of Wilpuri
The TW3 engine, which ATTILA uses, was created specifically for ETW which is a gunpowder era game, so I don't know what you're on about.
I'm not going to even touch the fact you liken CK2 to older TW games LOL. Or the fact that you say Shogun 2, which is widely accepted to be one of the best Total War's ever, to be mediocre..
So much fail in one post.
Erm, you didn't really read what I posted then. Gunpowder era games are not well suitable for the style of game of TW or are in general uninteresting, in my opinion. Also, the Paradox games capture the spirit of single player empire building campaign style that I enjoyed in the original Shogun, Medieval, Rome, and Medieval II. The titles afterwards have more so been focused on battles at with less detail in the campaign management. Nowhere in my post did I state this as some kind of objective fact, this thread is about how we feel about the upcoming game, not an immature rant thread. So don't turn it into one if you find it possible to hold back the personal charge your posts towards mine.
Heir to Noble Savage in the Imperial House of Wilpuri
Yeah I made this thread so that we could have a reasonable non rant driven conversation. As much as I personally disagree with your opinion FF, I don't agree with Mitch's response.
Now to bring this back on topic I personally am really digging the faction reveal thing they're doing right now. I think what a lot of people are missing is how they are trying to show how diverse these factions will be that's why some of the units in the reveal pictures are rather weird choices, namely the Franks. I mean there's a fine line here that I think that people will be butthurt at regardless of what CA does. If they went more accurate it would build on the accusations of it being a overblown DLC, given the likely hood of the equipment being too similar, at least more than what they're doing. Plus if they put in later more distinct units it makes things easier for my Medieval mod,
So basically this kind of PR game:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Iv3JoYULD98
Last edited by Bethencourt; November 25, 2014 at 10:48 AM.
Bethencourt's 1800
NAVAL MODDING
& Modeling. Milkshape and UU3D. With (more than) colaboration of Wangrin.
You see that going over my head? That's the joke..... but anyways. I know that many people are saying that some of the new features that CA is bringing aren't new BUT if you look carefully on how they're wording it, they're saying that it's a RETURN of the feature. Like look at the latest Dev blog for an example of this. I for one think this game looks very promising although being cautiously optimistic is always reasonable.
You can still hold the beautiful map upside down and belive that you are making the good curse, but it is in the moment of arriving to the shore, or not, when you realise that the great N in there means the north. I can say it would not be the first time we get to this feeling. This time we will get an improved versión of a game that looked as if the first one. I wonder if it will be the second one or just one and a half. These creators tend to take too risky decisions and sell them without testing them, I wonder why don't they consolidate a design and just make historical variations over it. Icecream of diffferent flavours, but not soup of icecream please.
Last edited by Bethencourt; December 01, 2014 at 04:50 PM.
Bethencourt's 1800
NAVAL MODDING
& Modeling. Milkshape and UU3D. With (more than) colaboration of Wangrin.
one thing im sure is that its incredibly ahistorical but since i'm a graphics guy i don't really care anymore they failed on that department years ago and that's when another bunch of DLC's come in to add more flavor to the game.
Last edited by Finch; December 02, 2014 at 10:42 PM.
It's been awhile since I posted here. I find the way many posters act toward CA to be downright infuriating. They get rid of the torches people have been crying about, put in a mechanic which isn't ideal either but I agree with the thought behind it, so that apparently means I have ADD or something cause openly insulting player's preferences is okay in the Attila forums. And then this new DLC poll that came out today is being ridiculed as "damage control". What would these people want CA to do? Not do anything? They try and get feedback from their fans and only get hostility. Why does CA care about Total War Center again!? All they get is anger and insults with whatever they say! If the haters don't get the precise answer they want at the precise time they want then CA is the worst company ever. Flawless logic.