Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 41 to 60 of 74

Thread: The Total War Chat Thread

  1. #41

    Default Re: The Total War Chat Thread

    My computer is not really good but I thought at the time I purchased it that was good enough to run Attila Total War smoothly:

    Alienware 17 R3; CPU: i7-6700HQ @2.6 GHz - 3.5 GHz; RAM: 16 GB DDR4 2133 MHz; GPU: Nvidia GTX 970M 3 GB DDR5

    I am saving money to purchase a better one but I am even thinking considering Attila or ToB because of the performance. I really like Attila's history period, so I guess I will play it at medium settings anyway. Glad to know you can run ToB, that encourage me to purchase ToB when I get the new pc.

  2. #42
    Leonardo's Avatar Reborn Old Timer
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Southern Sweden
    Posts
    3,879

    Default Re: The Total War Chat Thread

    Quote Originally Posted by Incendio View Post
    My computer is not really good but I thought at the time I purchased it that was good enough to run Attila Total War smoothly:

    Alienware 17 R3; CPU: i7-6700HQ @2.6 GHz - 3.5 GHz; RAM: 16 GB DDR4 2133 MHz; GPU: Nvidia GTX 970M 3 GB DDR5

    I am saving money to purchase a better one but I am even thinking considering Attila or ToB because of the performance. I really like Attila's history period, so I guess I will play it at medium settings anyway. Glad to know you can run ToB, that encourage me to purchase ToB when I get the new pc.
    Is that the specs of your computer?

    If it is then the only thing you need to do is to double the RAM from 16 Gb to 32 Gb.
    Under patronage of General Brewster of the Imperial House of Hader.

  3. #43
    Daruwind's Avatar Citizen
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Location
    Prague
    Posts
    2,205

    Default Re: The Total War Chat Thread

    I run i7-7700K (OC for 4.5) + 1080Ti and 32 GB RAM and Attila is still lagging at max settings Wh1,2,3K, ToB working like charm...and TW:Empire siege slowdown lag is there too...

  4. #44
    Leonardo's Avatar Reborn Old Timer
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Southern Sweden
    Posts
    3,879

    Default Re: The Total War Chat Thread

    Quote Originally Posted by Daruwind View Post
    I run i7-7700K (OC for 4.5) + 1080Ti and 32 GB RAM and Attila is still lagging at max settings Wh1,2,3K, ToB working like charm...and TW:Empire siege slowdown lag is there too...
    Because ETW doesn't support compressed gamesaves hence for the lag in-game. Sometimes ETW can actually freeze due for poor performance.
    Under patronage of General Brewster of the Imperial House of Hader.

  5. #45

    Default Re: The Total War Chat Thread

    32 GB is overkill for the time being; 16 should suit you just fine with the proper settings and an effort not to overload the background.

  6. #46
    Daruwind's Avatar Citizen
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Location
    Prague
    Posts
    2,205

    Default Re: The Total War Chat Thread

    If I understand it correctly TW up to ToB, Attila are 32 bit apps so they can use only 4 GB or RAM (RAM + VRAM) only WH1,2,3K are 64bit apps and may utilize more...

    Now 32 GB RAM is a lot but while I often Alt+tab plus let things run whole day and when firefox/chrome are eating like 5 GB by itself...

  7. #47
    Leonardo's Avatar Reborn Old Timer
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Southern Sweden
    Posts
    3,879

    Default Re: The Total War Chat Thread

    Quote Originally Posted by CommodusIV View Post
    32 GB is overkill for the time being; 16 should suit you just fine with the proper settings and an effort not to overload the background.
    Sure, having 32 Gb of RAM is overkill when one is playing plain vanilla, but as soon one install heavy mods e.g a lot of scripting, texture, skins etc then one might appreciate 32 Gb instead of 16 Gb if one wants to prevent unnecessary lag in-game.
    Under patronage of General Brewster of the Imperial House of Hader.

  8. #48

    Default Re: The Total War Chat Thread

    Quote Originally Posted by Leonardo View Post
    Sure, having 32 Gb of RAM is overkill when one is playing plain vanilla, but as soon one install heavy mods e.g a lot of scripting, texture, skins etc then one might appreciate 32 Gb instead of 16 Gb if one wants to prevent unnecessary lag in-game.
    If one insists on background intensive tabs such as the browser example above, then yes, I can fully agree.

  9. #49

    Default Re: The Total War Chat Thread

    Quote Originally Posted by Leonardo View Post
    Because ETW doesn't support compressed gamesaves hence for the lag in-game. Sometimes ETW can actually freeze due for poor performance.
    But also happens in custom battles. Can be due to "pathfinding"? Because my performance is much better in flat maps rather than maps with terrain "accidents", I mean, terrain features, ground contours. I suffer fps drops when AI starts moving its army and when AI units change its path. What can you do when you really like Empire and Attila and both have the very worst performance in the entire Total War saga? I think I have to change my mind to love other periods, need to convince myself that Japan civilization is more exciting, but damn, I love 18th century warfare, what can I do? This guy Daruwind with its supercomputer can't run ETW and Attila smoothly either.

  10. #50
    Leonardo's Avatar Reborn Old Timer
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Southern Sweden
    Posts
    3,879

    Default Re: The Total War Chat Thread

    If you really like cannons and musket fire then NTW (support compressed gamesaves) is quite stable for custom battles.
    Under patronage of General Brewster of the Imperial House of Hader.

  11. #51
    Daruwind's Avatar Citizen
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Location
    Prague
    Posts
    2,205

    Default Re: The Total War Chat Thread

    Nah, my PC was top two years ago, now it is probably average maybe little above. :-)

    Because both ETW and Attila are 32 bits apps. They cannot utilize more resources of my PC, what is worse ETW seems not to use turbo boost for CPU at all. It´s all about the coding. I can provide another examples. I run Oblivion with heavy mods, basically allowing visibility across almost whole map and while game looks old, the FPS are just good,nothing great. Then you have modern games like Witcher 3, Kingdom Come Deliverence with all new techs which are running smoothly and looking way better....Attila is like Oblivion, it is looking like ToB but performance is not great and actually there is small trick to improve it: https://www.twcenter.net/forums/show...tion-to-Attila that being sad, there is probably nothing to fix ETW siege bug (once there are breaches in fortification, AI move units so much around those that it slow down the game to a halt...

    So after certain treshold, more powerful PC will help just with background things. OS, programs, browsers so game has all neccessary resources.

  12. #52

    Default Re: The Total War Chat Thread

    I'll probably skip Attila Total War. How good is performance in Rome 2 Total War in modern gaming computers?

  13. #53
    LestaT's Avatar Artifex
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    Campus Martius
    Posts
    3,861

    Default Re: The Total War Chat Thread

    Quote Originally Posted by Incendio View Post
    I'll probably skip Attila Total War. How good is performance in Rome 2 Total War in modern gaming computers?
    I'm not sure if Ryzen 5 2600 and RX580 still considered modern but below are the sample for Attila and Rome 2 expected performance. Of course actual gameplay performance is different than benchmarks depending on actual units on the screen.

    https://youtu.be/cngDIrUOj0c

    https://youtu.be/2i-MdwHt0ro

    Here's ToB as a bonus.

    https://youtu.be/xV1zt0d2-QY

    ... And Three Kingdoms since, why not? 😬

    https://youtu.be/ruAULngsRDk

  14. #54

    Default Re: The Total War Chat Thread

    Quote Originally Posted by LestaT View Post
    I'm not sure if Ryzen 5 2600 and RX580 still considered modern but below are the sample for Attila and Rome 2 expected performance. Of course actual gameplay performance is different than benchmarks depending on actual units on the screen.

    https://youtu.be/cngDIrUOj0c

    https://youtu.be/2i-MdwHt0ro

    Here's ToB as a bonus.

    https://youtu.be/xV1zt0d2-QY

    ... And Three Kingdoms since, why not? 

    https://youtu.be/ruAULngsRDk
    The Ryzen 2600 is pretty good cpu (i have it also). The only thing is that TW games lean more to Intel chips than AMD ones (pretty stupid, because amd has made a pretty good comeback lately). I do recommend nvidia gpu's (like 1060, 1070, 1080, 2060, 2070, 2080)more than radeon ones. Maybe in the future if amd does the same with gpu's as they did with the cpu's than you can choose more between those 2. Plus 144HZ monitor is also good.

  15. #55

    Default Re: The Total War Chat Thread

    Quote Originally Posted by LestaT View Post
    I'm not sure if Ryzen 5 2600 and RX580 still considered modern but below are the sample for Attila and Rome 2 expected performance. Of course actual gameplay performance is different than benchmarks depending on actual units on the screen.

    https://youtu.be/cngDIrUOj0c

    https://youtu.be/2i-MdwHt0ro

    Here's ToB as a bonus.

    https://youtu.be/xV1zt0d2-QY

    ... And Three Kingdoms since, why not? 😬

    https://youtu.be/ruAULngsRDk
    Thank you for the benchmarks. Clearly ToB performance is far better than Attila, but Rome 2 is also very demanding as I see, this is something to take into account before purchasing a new computer.

  16. #56

    Default Re: The Total War Chat Thread

    Why most people consider Thrones of Britannia disappointing and boring?

  17. #57
    Daruwind's Avatar Citizen
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Location
    Prague
    Posts
    2,205

    Default Re: The Total War Chat Thread

    Quote Originally Posted by Incendio View Post
    Why most people consider Thrones of Britannia disappointing and boring?
    That simple question has actually quite complex answer...

    Rome 2 was massively hyped game partly by CA itself (famous Carthage battle trailer) after launch the game has quite few downs, some things missing. Basically reality crashed many dreams. (During years it got better but hey, who is giving second chance right? Especially up to previous year, new DLCs fixed a lot, added family trees etc.)

    Then came Attila. Which is realy polarizing title. A lot guys were boycotted it as CA haven´t fixed R2 so why buy another "newer" game, lot people was sad due to poor optimalization. Performance is simple bad even today.

    So R2 had massive initial sales, lot people dissapointed. Then Attila with bad reputation and lot people not even bothering. That was state before Warhammer. Now CA did massive leap of faith and entered fantasy. Immidiate success. Lot of new players but bear in mind there was older community which we can describe as loving older titles (med2,Rome) and being historical mostly fans (yeah despite having tons creativity from CA in both Rome, Med2 but tell them) those people were not satisfied even with R2, Attila and now there is this massive hit of Warhammer? Which is again not game for them?!? Outrage.

    Then we learn that we are getting Warhammer trilogy Damn CA! Actually CA tried to do something for history fans....so we got those R2 DLCs and ToB. But there is the catch a lot history people were expecting something big,massive..Med 3, DLC fixing all problems of Attila. But that is the problem. CA wanted to distance ToB from Attila bad reputation so it is standalone with so few mentions of Attila as possible (it is Attila, with fixed performance) and because ToB was set up without following DLCs, the game had to be polished from get go. It is Saga game, not full tentpole game...Basically what CA is doing nowdays for major games, campaign map is big and factions,units,mechanics will be flesh out in time with DLCs/FLCs/Updates. YOu don´t need to buy them, all the stuff will be added into game for free so in time even with bare core game the experience is better, you cannot play new factions but you will play against them. Get a few mechanics here and there (just check updates for Warhammer now..what people get for free. Even free LEgendary Lords/factions...)

    Now of course because ToB was meant to be without those paid DLCs, CA had to spend more resources originally to flesh more other background factions and units, so there are not looking as damn placeholders. But that is limiting resources for core factions,units. Because simply every game has limited resources. So in the end the game feels like having lesser variability in units,factions. So even if the ToB is quite nice game as entry point into series, for older guys it was not enough. It is not Rome3,Med3. Plus due to being build upon Attila some features were cut off like Ambushes, agents (there were nice stat that almost nobody were using ambushes in Attila, which is true..average common Joe. They fixed mechanics for Wh but you cannot fix everything on older engine..)

    Add that we know about 3K and that it will be full of heroes, not straight history mode, plus china..lot guys wanted just Med 3...so many people passed ToB not ever trying. ANd that si probably end of story.

    I have the game, ToB at release had also some problems but majority was fixed with later updates and now I would say it is pretty good, smaller in scope without need to buy a tons of DLCs. But it is not game touching stars. Its not dreamlike Rome2 or Warhammer....
    Last edited by Daruwind; September 20, 2019 at 10:39 AM.

  18. #58
    Abdülmecid I's Avatar ¡Ay Carmela!
    Moderation Overseer Civitate Moderation Mentor

    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Posts
    4,735

    Default Re: The Total War Chat Thread

    It depends on a variety of factors. First and foremost, it's an incredibly expensive game for what it offers. Kingdoms or even Charlemagne were significantly cheaper and yet they arguably provide more content time of enjoyment to the average player. Secondly, the theme is quite boring and, to be frank, outside the United Kingdom, nobody is really interested in the "Dark Ages" of the British Isles. Creative Assembly attempted to exploit the popularity of the Game of Thrones series (title and the graphics/music of the announcement trailer were an obvious reference to the show) and the Vikings (for the third time in recent history, after Charlemagne and the pre-order bonus for Attila), but unsurprisingly the customers did not find these efforts particularly convincing. Moreover, the design was really mediocre, to put it mildly.

    Apart from a couple of controversial decisions about removing core features, like ambush battles, culture and naval units, the campaign map is rather simplistic and constructing an empire is essentially limited to matching the correct colours, green with green, yellow with yellow and etc. Additionally, the AI is incapable of competently manoeuvring its armies, while new features, attempting to imitate the example of the Paradox franchise, were implemented in an extremely poor fashion. Estates are notoriously broken, even after CA tried to patch them, and right now, the campaign actively encourages you to leave your empire underdeveloped, because, in a classic case of artificial dilemmas going extreme, the disadvantages of buildings surpass their slim advantages. Overall, all these problems easily negated the few positive aspects and resulted into Throb sinking into obscurity and indifference essentially the same week it was released.

    For an informative review about the game and a list of its unbalanced issues, I recommend you the videos made by Republic and Legend respectively:



  19. #59

    Default Re: The Total War Chat Thread

    I did not buy ToB or TK. I was not particularly excited about either game. However, Troy look good to me and I might buy it a couple of weeks into release. I also bought Warhammer and Warhammer 2 with a pretty strong desire. I wonder what made me be excited for one game or not the other? I remember being pretty disappointed by Rome, Attila, and Shogun. For some reason, I just don't find the engine or the new games themselves, particularly enjoyable for melee combat. I really liked Empire and Napoleon, and Roma Surrectum is my favorite mod to this day. I also really like Radious Mod on Warhammer. I thik it's the "longer" fights that make the game enjoyable to me, but the rock paper scissors, nature of the last few games or so, really make the battles fairly short.

    I think this is funny because I actually grew up playing RTS like Starcraft Brood War and I was a very competitive SC2 player back in the day. Liking longer battles in Total War is essentially an anathema to that.

  20. #60

    Default Re: The Total War Chat Thread

    Quote Originally Posted by Sukiyama View Post
    I did not buy ToB or TK. I was not particularly excited about either game. However, Troy look good to me and I might buy it a couple of weeks into release. I also bought Warhammer and Warhammer 2 with a pretty strong desire. I wonder what made me be excited for one game or not the other? I remember being pretty disappointed by Rome, Attila, and Shogun. For some reason, I just don't find the engine or the new games themselves, particularly enjoyable for melee combat. I really liked Empire and Napoleon, and Roma Surrectum is my favorite mod to this day. I also really like Radious Mod on Warhammer. I thik it's the "longer" fights that make the game enjoyable to me, but the rock paper scissors, nature of the last few games or so, really make the battles fairly short.

    I think this is funny because I actually grew up playing RTS like Starcraft Brood War and I was a very competitive SC2 player back in the day. Liking longer battles in Total War is essentially an anathema to that.
    For me, probably the best Total War game is Shogun 2 Total War. I am not really interested in japanese history, but this game provides lots of content along with DLC Fall of the Samurai, which also provides the only 19th century warfare experience in the entire Total War saga. Historical battles are very immersive and performance is another good reason to confirm that Shogun 2 will be surely in my next computer. Empire and Napoleon are also my favourites because of the period, however, I am not convinced about how AI manages gunpowder in Empire and sometimes formations are dissapointing, but still is decent for me, what I can't stand is how AI manages gunpowder units in Medieval II, that ruined my experience with interesting mods such as 1648, about the Thirty Years War. Three Kingdoms is not of my taste, I respect anybody that likes it but I don't have much interest in what I have seen. Troy may change my mind because of the period, and also I have been looking for mods based in Ancient Greek so would be a great opportunity to play an entire Total War game based on Ancient Greek, no need to play mods (By the way, I would be interested in a Medieval II Total War mod based on Ancient times, either Egypt or Greece). Hopefully Troy Total War won't demand a supercomputer...

Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •