The TW series is dead. Everything after Medieval II sucks!

[selv]

nevermind, though my question was genuine and not a attempt to start anything. But it was probably useless.

Personaly I woudn't mind finding out how the post m2tw games are one of these days, but this poll lack the option:
'Ask me again when they are available on GOG or in retail, free of steam or any similar malware'

Still, peeking around this section lately motivated me to find a retail version of the first MTW, something I wanted to do for a while but when will I have the time to play... In a few months maybe.

[Flinn]

Gents, the last few posts are getting too personal and rather off topic. Please avoid going into personal wars, as this is against the rules and will lead to edits and possibly infractions. Let's remain on the topic and feel free to express your positions, rather than starting a verbal battle to criticize those of others. I wish to remind you all that everybody has the right to have their own opinions and that respect is always due.

[Axalon]

Isn't this just like rock'n roll - having been declared dead some 40 times over by various people - and yet it is still around somehow? ...TW is obviously still around, this despite how much newer titles might suck according some, while everything is hunky-dory according to others, no? As soon as you change something, you are bound to make some people unhappy/upset, while others will like it, in contrast. How is TW any different?

...?...

- A

[AnthoniusII]

Isn't this just like rock'n roll - having been declared dead some 40 times over by various people - and yet it is still around somehow? ...TW is obviously still around, this despite how much newer titles might suck according some, while everything is hunky-dory according to others, no? As soon as you change something, you are bound to make some people unhappy/upset, while others will like it, in contrast. How is TW any different?

...?...

- A

I wont disagree with that . Most people complain is why succefull features of a TW game do not transfare to the next one. Since MTW we had a revolution called RTW and then a constant downfall regarding game features. The upsolute downfall were RomeII and Attila that TW developers inorder to justify their lack of skills tried to pursuade us unlogical things as logical. That is the hole point about TW. Skilless developers that can not even copy features from previus TW games.

[Lionheart11]

Well maybe not dead but but lacking in devolopment , like a kid that been held back 10 years in school. The monopoly in this Genre has probably done that also, gone lazy with the lack of competition. Everything up to FOTS was great imo, ever since this streamlining word was said.

[Gallus]

Honestly, yes, I think Total War is dying. And there are two main reasons why it's becoming less and less fun for me.

1) Battle engine. Forget the AI, it's always been bad. I don't enjoy M2TW for its cutting edge AI. The engine "evolved" with Shogun 2, and I don't even know what exactly they did, but battles began to suck. Since Shogun 2 I find myself auto resolving a lot, which is something I'v never done in Medieval 2 or even Empire.

2) Restrictive settlement system. It was meant to create an additional challenge in the campaign map, but what actually happened was, it made the settlement management the focus of my campaign, and battles became an inconvenience, leading to even more auto resolving.

The end result? Forgettable campaigns, that all feel exactly the same. The games unintentionally encourage auto resolving, so the games lose all replay value. The crazy units of Warhammer help if you're into that kind of thing, but the battles in historical games have been uninteresting for almost a decade now.

[Athos187]

I actually had some really good battles in Shogun 2, since then though I've needed mods to make the battles interesting. Felt like that game got a really good balance between diplomacy, faction politics, campaign planning and battles.

[Gallus]

I actually had some really good battles in Shogun 2, since then though I've needed mods to make the battles interesting. Felt like that game got a really good balance between diplomacy, faction politics, campaign planning and battles.

I admit, the sieges of Kyoto were fun. The field battles were completely forgettable though. The worst part is that I'm not even sure what's changed, all I know is that I suddenly enjoy the battles again when I play Stainless Steel.

[Dumanthis]

I admit, the sieges of Kyoto were fun. The field battles were completely forgettable though. The worst part is that I'm not even sure what's changed, all I know is that I suddenly enjoy the battles again when I play Stainless Steel.

I for myself had an eye opening experience when I went back to play a campaign in SS 6.4 a while ago. While my nostalgia boosted my joy of playing it again, i could not help noticing all the faults of the medieval 2 that I had not remembered that well. The AI is overwhelmingly bad, both in campaign and in battles. In battles, the AI never flanks your army and chooses to attack only the units in your line directly head on which makes flanking and winning pretty easy. Saw enemy AI just stand in siege battles allowing my cannon towers to mangle them. In campaign the AI hangs around your armies and cities with full stacks but for some sort of reason chooses not to attack you and your cities, giving way to aggressive expansion on their territory. And talk about diplomacy, which needs to be done by microing diplomats to place you want.

Only clearly good feature in Medieval II is the empire building aspect, where you can build your towns and castles pretty much how you like. However, every town and castle ending up being pretty much the same, so I kinda understand the decision for making meaningful building choices in later titles though I am not happy with the limitation of the choices to only 4 buildings.

If you take of the nostalgygoogles form your eyes and evaluate Medieval II as objectively as possible, you realize it was a good total war game back then but certainly not something divine. It has still its own problems and fallbacks, but mods made the replayability good and it was first TW to be modded in that scale (Ofc there are mods for RTW also). But now we have Divide Et Impera for example which is not at all a bad thing. Shogun II is the best vanilla game with Warhammer and so on. I think it is a hasty thing to say there is nothing good or comparable or even better after Medieval II. Clinging on to the moments of joy in the past of childhood or youngster years may prevent from noticing good things in the present.

[Jurand of Cracow]

Honestly, yes, I think Total War is dying. And there are two main reasons why it's becoming less and less fun for me.
1) Battle engine. Forget the AI, it's always been bad. I don't enjoy M2TW for its cutting edge AI. The engine "evolved" with Shogun 2, and I don't even know what exactly they did, but battles began to suck. Since Shogun 2 I find myself auto resolving a lot, which is something I'v never done in Medieval 2 or even Empire.
2) Restrictive settlement system. It was meant to create an additional challenge in the campaign map, but what actually happened was, it made the settlement management the focus of my campaign, and battles became an inconvenience, leading to even more auto resolving.
The end result? Forgettable campaigns, that all feel exactly the same. The games unintentionally encourage auto resolving, so the games lose all replay value.

I agree with this opinion.
ad 1) The battle engine of M2TW is simply better than the Warscape. I get much better feeling out of it. The AI is not perfect in both cases, but still the modded BAI of SS or EBII (while both have very different logic behind) behave better in M2TW than in the R2TW/ATW (I haven't bought ThroB, though). However, atm the best battle system to my mind is in the Ultimate General.
ad 2) The settlement system is much better in M2TW, and the new mods (like SS+, BC) make much more use out of it. In R2TW/ATW the modders cannot achieve such a sophistication, even if they try hard (DEI, AE). The M2TW system is so flexible that it allows total modifications of TATW and EBII mods - I mean not only maps, but the scripts and all the aspects if ingeniously used (like nomadic camps in the EBII). The versatility of the engine incredible.

I for myself had an eye opening experience when I went back to play a campaign in SS 6.4 a while ago. While my nostalgia boosted my joy of playing it again, i could not help noticing all the faults of the medieval 2 that I had not remembered that well. The AI is overwhelmingly bad, both in campaign and in battles. In battles, the AI never flanks your army and chooses to attack only the units in your line directly head on which makes flanking and winning pretty easy. Saw enemy AI just stand in siege battles allowing my cannon towers to mangle them. In campaign the AI hangs around your armies and cities with full stacks but for some sort of reason chooses not to attack you and your cities, giving way to aggressive expansion on their territory. And talk about diplomacy, which needs to be done by microing diplomats to place you want.

Only clearly good feature in Medieval II is the empire building aspect, where you can build your towns and castles pretty much how you like. However, every town and castle ending up being pretty much the same, so I kinda understand the decision for making meaningful building choices in later titles though I am not happy with the limitation of the choices to only 4 buildings.

If you take of the nostalgygoogles form your eyes and evaluate Medieval II as objectively as possible, you realize it was a good total war game back then but certainly not something divine. It has still its own problems and fallbacks, but mods made the replayability good and it was first TW to be modded in that scale (Ofc there are mods for RTW also). But now we have Divide Et Impera for example which is not at all a bad thing. Shogun II is the best vanilla game with Warhammer and so on. I think it is a hasty thing to say there is nothing good or comparable or even better after Medieval II. Clinging on to the moments of joy in the past of childhood or youngster years may prevent from noticing good things in the present.

I don't agree with this opinion. The mods changed many of the worst aspects of the M2TW. Just one petty example: the 1648 mod has a special place where diplomats of all factions sit and there's no need for any microing of the diplomats. And you may find hundreds of these aspects (be sure: not all has changed, AI remains the most problematic issue).

[AnthoniusII]

I for myself had an eye opening experience when I went back to play a campaign in SS 6.4 a while ago. While my nostalgia boosted my joy of playing it again, i could not help noticing all the faults of the medieval 2 that I had not remembered that well. The AI is overwhelmingly bad, both in campaign and in battles. In battles, the AI never flanks your army and chooses to attack only the units in your line directly head on which makes flanking and winning pretty easy. Saw enemy AI just stand in siege battles allowing my cannon towers to mangle them. In campaign the AI hangs around your armies and cities with full stacks but for some sort of reason chooses not to attack you and your cities, giving way to aggressive expansion on their territory. And talk about diplomacy, which needs to be done by microing diplomats to place you want.

Only clearly good feature in Medieval II is the empire building aspect, where you can build your towns and castles pretty much how you like. However, every town and castle ending up being pretty much the same, so I kinda understand the decision for making meaningful building choices in later titles though I am not happy with the limitation of the choices to only 4 buildings.

If you take of the nostalgygoogles form your eyes and evaluate Medieval II as objectively as possible, you realize it was a good total war game back then but certainly not something divine. It has still its own problems and fallbacks, but mods made the replayability good and it was first TW to be modded in that scale (Ofc there are mods for RTW also). But now we have Divide Et Impera for example which is not at all a bad thing. Shogun II is the best vanilla game with Warhammer and so on. I think it is a hasty thing to say there is nothing good or comparable or even better after Medieval II. Clinging on to the moments of joy in the past of childhood or youngster years may prevent from noticing good things in the present.

If in M2TW castles and cities are ending look preaty much the same what about Attila that each Cuture/level of settlement HAS ONLY ONE battlemodel ?? ONLY ONE!!!!
I agree that "vanilla" M2TW AI in sieges is worst than the RTW-1! In M2TW you can not have two or more AI controled armies to assault cities unless they have some kind of artilery while in RTW-1 each AI army builded its own rams, ladders, sapp tunnels and siege towers! In Attila you can have two AI controled armies assault the same time in your settlement BACAUSE there are NO WALLS!!!! In Rome II that settlements had walls AI controled armies simply watched from a distance!
Atleast , even in vanilla M2TW AI could re-use undamaged ladders or rams to penetrate the 2nd even the 3rd line of walls! In Rome II AND Attila there is not such thing 12 years LATER!

I agree with this opinion.
ad 1) The battle engine of M2TW is simply better than the Warscape. I get much better feeling out of it. The AI is not perfect in both cases, but still the modded BAI of SS or EBII (while both have very different logic behind) behave better in M2TW than in the R2TW/ATW (I haven't bought ThroB, though). However, atm the best battle system to my mind is in the Ultimate General.
ad 2) The settlement system is much better in M2TW, and the new mods (like SS+, BC) make much more use out of it. In R2TW/ATW the modders cannot achieve such a sophistication, even if they try hard (DEI, AE). The M2TW system is so flexible that it allows total modifications of TATW and EBII mods - I mean not only maps, but the scripts and all the aspects if ingeniously used (like nomadic camps in the EBII). The versatility of the engine incredible.

I don't agree with this opinion. The mods changed many of the worst aspects of the M2TW. Just one petty example: the 1648 mod has a special place where diplomats of all factions sit and there's no need for any microing of the diplomats. And you may find hundreds of these aspects (be sure: not all has changed, AI remains the most problematic issue).

M2TW engine -thanks to very dedicated modders- has proven the most versitile game of all time!
Anyone can bring its features to its limmits! From script to animations to graphics improvements to total reconstruction of the game with mods like TATW and others!
I agree that even in very hard difficulty (TGC uses RealyBadAI i think) i can still watch my units fight while i have the real time to give orders and found my self lost in a battle chaos. That simply can not be achieved in Rome II or Attila in any way!!
Complicated scripts can alsoturn this game to educational tool as a Hungarian team proved with construction of famous battles with astonishing results!
Even the models of the last games are not same quality! I mean you can not have a sword in a sword scabbard! or Javelin in right hand position. Even vanilla M2TW engine had more natural animations not to mention those animations that modders did!!!

[Gallus]

M2TW engine -thanks to very dedicated modders- has proven the most versitile game of all time!

It's certainly up there. TATW modders achieved unbelievable things with it, from custom settlements to flying monsters. The new games don't even enable map modifications. It's a real shame. Modding has always been a very important part of TW games for me. There's nothing quite like the feeling of running a game you've been modding for hours, and seeing that it actually works! I honestly don't know what the justification for removing the modding support was. Mods are what keeps games alive years after release. Hell, I bought M2TW because I wanted to play TATW!

And now I want to go back to modding my custom First Age campaign for M2TW again.

[izzi]

For me personally, i don't think that TW games are dead. The problem is the lack of competion for that genre. It remembers me like what the Intel CPU's where for a while. Best CPU's on the market (for gaming atleast), and you could see that in a while, they just improved slightly or not entirely because of the monopoly position they where having. Now with the popular Zen architecture from AMD, we can see that Intel is having issues to improve and even panicking a bit, now that AMD is improving they're CPU's. That's what CA needs.
What really bothers for me personally, is the lack of modding tools they are having for their recent games. I even have the feeling that they are not going to support modding anymore. That worries me a bit (as a modder). That's why I stick with S2TW. From al the games, it's the best (warscape engine) and most moddable. You can change the battle environment, campaign map is moddable, units, ships, cannons,...+ the game runs pretty smooth.

[AnthoniusII]

It's certainly up there. TATW modders achieved unbelievable things with it, from custom settlements to flying monsters. The new games don't even enable map modifications. It's a real shame. Modding has always been a very important part of TW games for me. There's nothing quite like the feeling of running a game you've been modding for hours, and seeing that it actually works! I honestly don't know what the justification for removing the modding support was. Mods are what keeps games alive years after release. Hell, I bought M2TW because I wanted to play TATW!

And now I want to go back to modding my custom First Age campaign for M2TW again.

Even the graphics of M2TW are very close to highly payed Attila ones!
An example of how models can have multiple 3d objects on them without pinning (something that CA/SEGA devs never accomplished in Rome II and Attila)

An other example:

For me personally, i don't think that TW games are dead. The problem is the lack of competion for that genre. It remembers me like what the Intel CPU's where for a while. Best CPU's on the market (for gaming atleast), and you could see that in a while, they just improved slightly or not entirely because of the monopoly position they where having. Now with the popular Zen architecture from AMD, we can see that Intel is having issues to improve and even panicking a bit, now that AMD is improving they're CPU's. That's what CA needs.
What really bothers for me personally, is the lack of modding tools they are having for their recent games. I even have the feeling that they are not going to support modding anymore. That worries me a bit (as a modder). That's why I stick with S2TW. From al the games, it's the best (warscape engine) and most moddable. You can change the battle environment, campaign map is moddable, units, ships, cannons,...+ the game runs pretty smooth.

Modding tools was the primary promise CA/SEGA gave when announced Rome II! The sad thing is that TWC members ensure us that a full pack of such tools is on its way! But instead of a full pack of modding tools they Fulled us!
Now shameless as they are , they call their mods as "overhuall" without map change at all!

[Bigbossbalrog]

Warhammer 2 just won the official poll, I guess more people like "Fail Hammer" then your rusty holy grail

[Gallus]

Warhammer 2 just won the official poll, I guess more people like "Fail Hammer" then your rusty holy grail

Fun fact, official TWC poll says most members haven't even played Warhammer.

[Axalon]

Warhammer 2 just won the official poll, I guess more people like "Fail Hammer" then your rusty holy grail

Maybe I am overly paranoid, but I certainly could believe that it was fixed or rigged somehow to end up that way. Perhaps its just me (being overly suspicious of CA, and their marketing schemes ever since Empire and then RTW2)....

- A

[Axalon]

BTW, this is a really good/beautiful screen AnthoniusII, have some recognition and reputation for it, on me....



Like it! Err... Back to topic!

- A

[AnthoniusII]

BTW, this is a really good/beautiful screen AnthoniusII, have some recognition and reputation for it, on me....



Like it! Err... Back to topic!

- A

Inorder to become those models "alive" more than ten people worked on them.
I can not take the Credits for them also.
For the modding history i name some of them that model parts, textures etc I use to make this and other units.
=NF=Basileios the 2nd
Slash-5
LeifErikson
Absinthia
Stefaneke
Matthaeus
Socal_Infidel
Sumskilz
hyretic
markhaselb (unique animations).
Pacco
Strelac
tone
Dome

What I did? I picked parts of models, parts of textures , put the model under gravity/realism mod (the non pinning effect and the -as possible- gravity effect on 3d onject on models).
I fixed some model bugs on MARKA horses and voila!
I hope that moderators will forgive that off topic but justess is the uknowlegment of everyones contribution.
That way all modders should "show" their work and be greatfull that others before them worked for them. Those in the list above and much many more worked in the mod we are about to release and they are responsible for the finall result you see. In the end a Gravity/Realism Tutorial will be published to help everyone just the way many modders helped me.

[Flinn]

I hope that moderators will forgive that off topic but justess is the uknowlegment of everyones contribution.

it's fine but let's stop it here ok?

besides, backing to the topic.. today I was watching some videos on youtube about graphics of TK.. in all due honesty I never paid very much attention to graphics (sure I like eye candies every once in a while, but still...), but I'd rather focus more on game mechanics, which is were I think the series lacked more in general; vanilla Rome or Med 2 were not so better than vanilla Rome 2 IMO, there are some limits that are there since ages (such as limited number of warriors on the screen) .. it is pretty much obvious that as Rome and Med 2 are much more moddable, many of these limits have been amended by modders, so I really don't want to start a rant over this again, I think that less or more everybody agrees on this.. but well, if I were CA I would have worked more on mechanics and reality rather than graphics; this is clearly a marketing choice (with the fancy and shining WH series on the top of this logic) and it's a consequence of the period we are living ... if you look at all the most recent titles, basically none is moddable as it was in the past (either we don't have tools, or there are more hardcoded things, etc) and the whole process started years ago (tangent example, I was a modder of NWN1 at the time, when I was running with a friend a small online shard.. modding was intuitive and fast, very flexible; when NWN2 came out we were all excited, and we got terribly deluded .. pretty much the same that happened with Rome 2 I guess).

However, in all due honesty I'm happy that we still have Rome and Med 2 with so many great mods and I don't think I'll ever adapt myself to the new titles.. sure I enjoyed both Empire and Shogun, because the setting was different from the old titles, but everything that "copies" the old Rome and Med 2 is simply not interesting to me