Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 37

Thread: My Impressions of the Game

  1. #1

    Default My Impressions of the Game

    First, it is not a bad game but it does have its fair share of oddities.


    I am currently playing the Mide faction. I had previously played Gwined and Circenn with not much success.
    I took the lessons of the previous two and applied it here and now I have control of 50% of Ireland.

    Some oddities
    When you appoint a Governor and general, their loyalty is very low. You just appointed them to a high position, you would think that they would be grateful and loyal. Prior to appointing them, there is a question mark. If this is random there are a lot of ungrateful people in this time period. A lesson I learned is to choose Priest. It increases their loyalty. Once high enough, then I choose specific traits. This generally works well. Although I am not so sure; I had at least two Civil War and It feels like I execute a lot of people. The succession line resembles the Roman Empire has the "King's" own son rose up and revolt.

    I seem to be in a state of perpetual disorder. It seems almost everything results in a lowering of public disorder. It doesn't appear putting down a rebellion leads to any suppression effect as it should. Plus, the rebellions is uneven in pace and timing. I was dealing with rebellions when I was still a small kingdom. This was rebellions generated by characters, not a public disorder. It seems rebellions generated by character traits should be something to contend with later. Moreover, the game should have more children live. This would/ should cause conflicts among siblings. Between the killing of an ungrateful son, other children die young before coming of age. Actually, I didn't know they were a boy, I cannot see where it indicates gender.

    I had my daughter marry the ruler (king) of Connacht and they still would not enter into any sort of alliance. That is just odd.


    Notes
    I noticed that the game is difficult in the beginning, but now it is getting easier. I think it is the reasons I mentioned above. Like most CA games, about the half-way point, it becomes too easy. I said CA, but Paradox is similar.

    Can anyone explain why the game has Governors instead of titles? It seems governors would not apply in this region at this time. Maybe England may have governors due to Roman influence, but not Ireland. But hey, its a start.

    There is some realism here, but there are some gaming aspects too.

    On the topic of Public disorder, it seems it should be -1, -2, -5, instead of -2, -4, -6. I want to note, I have never raised my taxes.

  2. #2
    Daruwind's Avatar Citizen
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Location
    Prague
    Posts
    2,898

    Default Re: My Impressions of the Game

    Quote Originally Posted by PikeStance View Post
    Some oddities
    When you appoint a Governor and general, their loyalty is very low. You just appointed them to a high position, you would think that they would be grateful and loyal. Prior to appointing them, there is a question mark. If this is random there are a lot of ungrateful people in this time period. A lesson I learned is to choose Priest. It increases their loyalty. Once high enough, then I choose specific traits. This generally works well. Although I am not so sure; I had at least two Civil War and It feels like I execute a lot of people. The succession line resembles the Roman Empire has the "King's" own son rose up and revolt.
    Only really working way are offices but the number is limited to three and that is pretty low. Having maybe 5 of them would be far better.

    Governors are more for boosting production, income but the overally loaylty is issue even for generals. I have to build a lot estate buildings but in mid-late game this stopped being issue. For 10 generals and some relatives, I need like 40-50-60 estates max. So with control of bigger part of map I have enough estates for eveyone to have three and donīt need to build more. Respectively new provincies are coming with some agriculture estates so i can slowly demolish old ones...Then i can finally focus on money buildings which of course improve even public order as I donīt have so many priorities for my limited building slots. :-)

    The Priest perk seems too good in general, basically I want all my characters to have it. Well almost all. I think it should be tied with having religions estates. Unless character hold such estate, no loyalty bonus is applied.

    In general I would like more titles connected with more estates/building. Like having option to build castle to grant +2 feudal aristocracy estate and allow character to hold certain office or something like that.
    I seem to be in a state of perpetual disorder. It seems almost everything results in a lowering of public disorder. It doesn't appear putting down a rebellion leads to any suppression effect as it should. Plus, the rebellions is uneven in pace and timing. I was dealing with rebellions when I was still a small kingdom. This was rebellions generated by characters, not a public disorder. It seems rebellions generated by character traits should be something to contend with later. Moreover, the game should have more children live. This would/ should cause conflicts among siblings. Between the killing of an ungrateful son, other children die young before coming of age. Actually, I didn't know they were a boy, I cannot see where it indicates gender.
    Tracking the characters and keeping in check is almost nice minigame. Expect after certain point it become little repetitive. Should i kill em, should i be kind, give or take estates.. Anyway my games so far had quite lot childrens. Usually have opposite problems with too many characters...
    I had my daughter marry the ruler (king) of Connacht and they still would not enter into any sort of alliance. That is just odd.
    yup, diplomacy is still normal garbage. But what i found, it is similar to other TWs. Find factions with good traits, who likes me, boost that with marriage etc, have common enemy and they are more likely to help. :-)
    On the topic of Public disorder, it seems it should be -1, -2, -5, instead of -2, -4, -6. I want to note, I have never raised my taxes.
    [/quote]
    Exactly. It looks like in some areas they increased numbers by +1 and it is making game little more challanging. In other TWs i have usually feeling i can negate one negative penalty with one positive one. In ToB it fells more like i need two positive to counter on negative. :-)
    DMR: (R2) (Attila) (ToB) (Wh1/2) (3K) (Troy)

  3. #3
    Jurand of Cracow's Avatar History and gameplay!
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Cracovia
    Posts
    8,451

    Default Re: My Impressions of the Game

    Hi Guys,
    I've got interests in the period of history and the area (reading Chris Wickham's books, actually) and it was why I'd bought the Thrones. I've played it and you know my review, so I won't elaborate.
    What I want to share is that after a game in ToB I have taken up the TLK mod for Medieval and it have a feeling of having much more understanding why things happen, and also that they happen in a "realistic", sometimes "historical" way. I don't know if it's because I understand the engine, or the M2TW is better programmed, or just because the ToB has it's oddities... (I do tweak the parameters and do some modding, so it may be that me having a kind of "control" of the game gives this feeling).
    On the battlefield it's similar: I have a certain feeling for the units in M2, but in Warscape the soldiers, are just points on the battlefield (with the fast pace of the battles I don't have much time to look into the units...). The main advantage is that you can have a nice replay after the battle and see what was happening.
    Anyway, I'm still unsure what to think about the ToB.
    JoC
    EDIT: I've played a few hours Gwynedd in ToB and:
    - the pre-set (in terms of production) villages really lower the experience: you don't choose, you just get what was pre-cooked;
    - the whole food mechanics feels very gamey: if you're not blessed with many farms, then you are screwed; furthermore, it makes the real limit, not money. Hmm, I prefer the M2TW recruitment pools, to be frank (I've described the ideal recruitment system here).
    - I still don't know why certain generals get certain traits, why they do require estates etc. (it seems that they start longing for the estates only after I got hold on an estate).
    - AI still (as in the ATW) recruits 20-unit armies and you need to have similar ones to face it;
    - yeah, battles are so straightforward: just go and then run towards the enemy... nothing like M2TW-SS battles, not to mention the long EBII. I basically don't pay attention to the data of the units. I've seen a clip with a Warhammer II competitive battle and this looks so differently paced: the player timely decisions seem to have clear impact.

    EDIT2:
    - the new system of recruitment pools (based on 1. probabilities: new unit is likely to show in the poll with a certain probability, iirc I've seen something like between 6% to 66%; and 2. maximum number of units for each unit type) is a good step back to the M2TW system, but it doesn't appeal to me as 1. the player doesn't know the relation between his actions and the changes in the parameters (for each unit type: probability and max number), 2. doesn't seem to have some relation to historical realities. I prefer the M2TW recruitments pools, but the Thrones system is better than anything between them.
    - the scale of the units and map feels quite ok. There's tactical movement indeed.
    - I don't feel immersion when I look at a province data - I'd like more possibilities to set the parameters etc. The buildings do have nice graphics, but I'm much more happy with having RTW/M2TW city-panel with all the data, and also the buildings cards etc.
    - I'm not sure about the granularity of the benefits from traits etc (like +15% of something) - I prefer numbers like +1 Law, +1 squalor etc. (so, actually, some traits in the ToB feel ok, like +1 Influence, +1 Legitimacy). However, it's not so bad.
    - the traits: it's very good there're explanations why the characters get them ("from a port", "from great victory").
    - it's also good there're trade-offs of building higher-tire buildings: so you think twice if you can afford that profit-bringing building given the public order you've got in the province.
    - a rather low marginal profit of the higher-tier buildings is equally good: it's not like you can build one building and afford another full-stack.
    - concerning diplomacy: after a great battle, there's rarely an opportunity to conclude a conflict. Historically, the side heavily beaten would be very willing to have a kind of truce - if only to gather troops and to fix the lost legitimacy at home (presumably by killing some more vocal opponents). The ToB is a total war: you won, but very few changes to make a break / finish the conflict.
    - the usurper allegiance is a great mechanics reflecting the real challenges for a king.
    - the farms are distributed in a pretty unbalanced way. If you're lucky, the food is not a problem for you and you may afford two full-stacks (400 food). Otherwise you may struggle to have even one full stack - and you can't do much about it.

    Anyway, I still think that's the best TW game since Medieval 2, and it's superior to the Med2 in many aspects.
    Last edited by Jurand of Cracow; October 21, 2018 at 03:44 PM.

  4. #4
    ♔Greek Strategos♔'s Avatar THE BEARDED MACE
    Artifex Moderator Emeritus

    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Athens, Greece
    Posts
    11,588

    Default Re: My Impressions of the Game

    Quote Originally Posted by Jurand of Cracow View Post
    Hi Guys,
    I've got interests in the period of history and the area (reading Chris Wickham's books, actually) and it was why I'd bought the Thrones. I've played it and you know my review, so I won't elaborate.
    What I want to share is that after a game in ToB I have taken up the TLK mod for Medieval and it have a feeling of having much more understanding why things happen, and also that they happen in a "realistic", sometimes "historical" way. I don't know if it's because I understand the engine, or the M2TW is better programmed, or just because the ToB has it's oddities... (I do tweak the parameters and do some modding, so it may be that me having a kind of "control" of the game gives this feeling).
    On the battlefield it's similar: I have a certain feeling for the units in M2, but in Warscape the soldiers, are just points on the battlefield (with the fast pace of the battles I don't have much time to look into the units...). The main advantage is that you can have a nice replay after the battle and see what was happening.
    Anyway, I'm still unsure what to think about the ToB.
    JoC
    EDIT: I've played a few hours Gwynedd in ToB and:
    - the pre-set (in terms of production) villages really lower the experience: you don't choose, you just get what was pre-cooked;
    - the whole food mechanics feels very gamey: if you're not blessed with many farms, then you are screwed; furthermore, it makes the real limit, not money. Hmm, I prefer the M2TW recruitment pools, to be frank (I've described the ideal recruitment system here).
    - I still don't know why certain generals get certain traits, why they do require estates etc. (it seems that they start longing for the estates only after I got hold on an estate).
    - AI still (as in the ATW) recruits 20-unit armies and you need to have similar ones to face it;
    - yeah, battles are so straightforward: just go and then run towards the enemy... nothing like M2TW-SS battles, not to mention the long EBII. I basically don't pay attention to the data of the units. I've seen a clip with a Warhammer II competitive battle and this looks so differently paced: the player timely decisions seem to have clear impact.
    Sensible input. Let us know what you think as soon as you play it a bit more though

  5. #5
    Jurand of Cracow's Avatar History and gameplay!
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Cracovia
    Posts
    8,451

    Default Re: My Impressions of the Game

    Some more thoughts on the ToB versus M2TW mechanics: consequences of "exchangeable" nature of generals.
    (1)
    - ToB: you've got many generals (in and outside the family): they lead the armies or are governors. Because of the loyalty penalty (-1) from removing a general from either function, you have to devote a general to one for life: if he starts by leading an army, he has to do it forever. He may go to the reserve at times (-1 loyalty), but if he just tastes the other role, he would have another -1 loyalty (so while in reserve: -2). (exception: it's irrelevant for the faction leader).
    - in M2: generals may lead the armies and they often become meanwhile governors. This is because they're there at the right moment (it takes time for any general to travel and to take up the function), and because they often get useful features in the process (like Dread - a general with a high Dread can keep public order, and this is very handy in a newly conquered city; or +siege equipment abilities while governing). In some mods there're specializations (DLV, SS, EBII) but there're rather positive incentives to employ a better governor, not penalties for switching between the functions (see eg. my submod to the SSHIP).
    (2)
    - in ToB the generals "teleport". If he's a bad one, may you remove him and assign to another province / another army or just put into reserve. Or you assassinate him meanwhile. What is important for gaming is the location of the army and, as the consequence, the tactical level of gaming is indeed about moving an army.
    - in M2 it's essentially where the general is. You may have a very efficient governor (say, giving +30% mining income) but it may be very inefficient to move him across your kingdom to a province with high-level mines - too many turns lost while on the move. As as result, sending a general to the right place is an important part of gaming, in addition to the tactical moves of the army. You also need to pay attention where are your generals (this is even more important in some mods, like BGR with the system of Wars Councillors and Professional Training Staff).
    (3)
    - in ToB you just hire generals. They're seemingly an infinite resource. However, in practice, you need to keep their number as low as possible due to the loyalty issues: you don't have so many estates to give away, or not enough money for bribes. Therefore their number is a part of playing: you do optimize here.
    - in M2 they're seeming finite unless you've got a facility to train new bodyguard units. However, the engine gives you a new one if you're going low compared to the number of the provinces (Man of the Hour event, adoption). However, in my style of playing (no adoptions, no MotH) they are indeed finite and the management of the family is an essential part of playing.

    Caeterum censeo: the ToB is not bad, but the M2-with-mods is better.
    Last edited by Jurand of Cracow; November 03, 2018 at 05:22 AM.

  6. #6
    Daruwind's Avatar Citizen
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Location
    Prague
    Posts
    2,898

    Default Re: My Impressions of the Game

    The first point should be easily fixable with mods. Some Loyalty overhaul. Compeltely agree with that there are many not directly faults but unnecessary downs.
    DMR: (R2) (Attila) (ToB) (Wh1/2) (3K) (Troy)

  7. #7

    Default Re: My Impressions of the Game

    As I said above, if there was one frustrating thing about the game was the fact that you could not just add a general or governor unless you had money and titles to bribe with. Once I was able to add followers, I clicked on the priest without hesitation. Once I learned that trick, I think I had one general revolt and that was because of an event that lowered loyalty. It is a strange mechanic; personally, if I appoint a governor or general, I should be immediately on his Christmas card list. The loyalty should be high at first but decline over time based on a number of factors, like the size of the kingdom, availability of titles, and personality traits of that character. I get the impression that some of the mechanics were not flushed out as they should have been given the time frame they had to release the game. Also, CA can be a bit arcady with their game mechanics. It is amazing how Paradox manages to stick to historical reality and still produce a difficult game to play/ master.

  8. #8
    Jurand of Cracow's Avatar History and gameplay!
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Cracovia
    Posts
    8,451

    Default Re: My Impressions of the Game

    Quote Originally Posted by PikeStance View Post
    one frustrating thing about the game was the fact that you could not just add a general or governor unless you had money and titles to bribe with.
    This I find quite ok - this is limiting the number of generals. It's a compromise between the tightly limited number of the armies in R2TW/ATW, and the unlimited armies of the RTW/M2TW. I find it a pretty ingenious way of giving you a choice but providing constraints.

    Quote Originally Posted by PikeStance View Post
    Once I was able to add followers, I clicked on the priest without hesitation. Once I learned that trick, I think I had one general revolt and that was because of an event that lowered loyalty. It is a strange mechanic; personally, if I appoint a governor or general, I should be immediately on his Christmas card list. The loyalty should be high at first but decline over time based on a number of factors, like the size of the kingdom, availability of titles, and personality traits of that character.
    I agree. This thinking is also present in one of my mods for SSHIP.

    Quote Originally Posted by PikeStance View Post
    I get the impression that some of the mechanics were not flushed out as they should have been given the time frame they had to release the game. Also, CA can be a bit arcady with their game mechanics. It is amazing how Paradox manages to stick to historical reality and still produce a difficult game to play/ master.
    Yes, indeed. The September update makes many things better. But the food mechanics is arcady, even though it's good for the gameplay. And yes, Paradox pays much more attention to historicity. I'm acually looking very much forward to the Rome: Imperator next year.

    Besides, I'm a bit concerned with the low ratings of the Thrones in Steam. If it's so low after the reasonable and historical update, is the CA not going to kill all the true-to-history solutions? The problem with the Thrones' battle system is that involved factions marshaled similar units. That's historical reality, no axes-against-elephants. I fear that the next time such a game would involve rather Thor with his hammer and Odin and Valkirias...

  9. #9

    Default Re: My Impressions of the Game

    Popular game, no posts for a month.

  10. #10
    The Noble Lord's Avatar Holy Arab Nation
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Peshawar, Pakistan - Kabul, Afghanistan
    Posts
    7,822

    Default Re: My Impressions of the Game

    So it's worth it to play?
    [IMG][/IMG]
    أسد العراق Asad al-Iraq
    KOSOVO IS SERBIA!!!
    Under the proud patronage of the magnificent Tzar


  11. #11

    Default Re: My Impressions of the Game

    It has a different gameplay than the other titles. It a lot of ways it makes sense; if you do not recruit a certain type of troops, then you shouldn't be able to develop technology for it. One minor criticism is that they should be more trees that correspond with different building types and some of the negatives for some tech advances are more significant than the advantage you gain. If it is on sale and you want a different gameplay, then give it a shot.

  12. #12
    ♔Greek Strategos♔'s Avatar THE BEARDED MACE
    Artifex Moderator Emeritus

    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Athens, Greece
    Posts
    11,588

    Default Re: My Impressions of the Game

    What Pike said plus only when it's on sale though. I wouldn't pay full price for it to be honest.

  13. #13

    Default Re: My Impressions of the Game

    Quote Originally Posted by ♔Greek Strategos♔ View Post
    What Pike said plus only when it's on sale though. I wouldn't pay full price for it to be honest.
    is 20 British pounds worth for this game? or shall I wait next big sale?
    Under the Patronage of Hadrian

  14. #14
    Daruwind's Avatar Citizen
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Location
    Prague
    Posts
    2,898

    Default Re: My Impressions of the Game

    Quote Originally Posted by jegui View Post
    is 20 British pounds worth for this game? or shall I wait next big sale?
    That is hard question. Especially if ToB is competing with older full scale titles that have even bigger discount...

    Going vs discount Rome2,Attila,Shogun2,Wh1/2 - nope.
    Going vs discount DLCs even the great one like FotS, Age of Charlemagne, Toom Kings, Vampire Coast - yes.

    Is ToB a good game? I think yes, it is fresh, a lot mechanics are different, definitely worth trying. Exactly what Pike said. It is different experience. I donīt regret buying it especially now with updates.
    DMR: (R2) (Attila) (ToB) (Wh1/2) (3K) (Troy)

  15. #15

    Default Re: My Impressions of the Game

    Given that Fall of the Samurai is standalone, I'd say it still beats out Thrones on value proposition. The game is just more fun and dynamic on a base level, despite all of Thrones' AI and QoL improvements, and it's not slouching in the uniqueness department either.

    It'll probably go on sale sometime in the future for a lot less though, so keep that in mind.
    Last edited by zoner16; January 03, 2019 at 11:34 PM.
    My Three Kingdoms Military History Blog / Military Map Project - https://zirroxas.tumblr.com/
    Ask me a question!

  16. #16
    ♔Greek Strategos♔'s Avatar THE BEARDED MACE
    Artifex Moderator Emeritus

    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Athens, Greece
    Posts
    11,588

    Default Re: My Impressions of the Game

    Quote Originally Posted by jegui View Post
    is 20 British pounds worth for this game? or shall I wait next big sale?
    Quote Originally Posted by zoner16 View Post
    Given that Fall of the Samurai is standalone, I'd say it still beats out Thrones on value proposition. The game is just more fun and dynamic on a base level, despite all of Thrones' AI and QoL improvements, and it's not slouching in the uniqueness department either.

    It'll probably go on sale sometime in the future for a lot less though, so keep that in mind.
    What zoner16 said

  17. #17

    Default Re: My Impressions of the Game

    Quote Originally Posted by ♔Greek Strategos♔ View Post
    What zoner16 said
    Thanks, I will wait until it drops to bellow 10 quid
    Under the Patronage of Hadrian

  18. #18
    Jurand of Cracow's Avatar History and gameplay!
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Cracovia
    Posts
    8,451

    Default Re: My Impressions of the Game

    An observation: I've sieged a city and then decided to storm it. I had 1150 men with 3 towers and 4 rams, against 800 defenders. I've played manually and was crushed: one tower was burnt, the ram broke the gates but the defenders prevented me from entering and then the burning oil just burnt down my units, the other two towers succeded in delivering troop but they were slaughtered by the defenders (they're of similar quality but I play at Very Hard so I imagine they get big buffs).
    All in all: very good, it's how it should be: the siege forces should have a big advantage to succeed. Next time I'd take 2000 at least (if only I'd have enough food for so many units ;-)

    However, I've tried also an auto-resolve (again, it's Very Hard) - and then I won with marginal casualties.
    What's really bad: now I have every incentive to auto-resolve.

    Any thoughts?

    Besides, I do appreciate how the AI does strategy in the game. I've experienced factions making use of the other wars by taking the settlements that were safe to be taken, jumping on a bandwagon against a weak faction etc.
    Last edited by Jurand of Cracow; January 18, 2019 at 02:38 PM.

  19. #19

    Default Re: My Impressions of the Game

    Your incentive is the thrill of battle!

  20. #20
    Jurand of Cracow's Avatar History and gameplay!
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Cracovia
    Posts
    8,451

    Default Re: My Impressions of the Game

    Well, on the downside, I don't find the traits as well made from the point of view of playing the game. They're a nice flavour but they are an unimportant parameter in the game.

    To be sure, the traits are nicely crafted: good names, logical triggers, the effects make sense etc. There're many of them but now you may learn the levels in the "book of traits", and they're structured into groups in the character panel making it easy to the player to get his bearings. So no problem here.

    However, they matter little for the choices in the game. I mean, you very rarely make a choice of the general based on his traits. A higher level general is always better (you're levelling him up with the followers). The high number of effects that exists in the game makes each of them irrelevant for playing. Take discounts for troop recruitment. There're many versions: discounts for axe and sword, discount for missiles, discount for all of them. As they're not big (10% for all or 25% for particular sorts) and you usually recruit different sorts of units. Besides, the troops are not very expensive upfront and you recruit very rarely (due to the mechanics of auto-refill of the depleted units).

    The issue with the bonuses for income is similar. There're so many different types of income in the game and so many different bonuses that you don't need to bother. Only sometimes there're might be a reason: province Straeffordscir has plenty of industry, and if you have a guy with +25% then it may make a difference to name him governor. But in the other cases: various types of income, various traits, marginal benefits - no need to bother.

    You just need to keep an eye on the Loyalty: this is actually the whole game if played at higher levels of political difficulty (I play vh, but I suspect hard and legendary require similar efforts). You need to keep the king influence above the other guys, you need to prepare your heir (with +2 influence is extremely useful, I've paid 5k for marriage just to get her for the heir), you need to kill those with to low initial one. And give them estates as they want. The worse thing that may happen to you is a civil war indeed.

    The "followers" feature that makes it possible for you to level-up any character in the way you need him (and you know you'll be able to as gaining the points is pretty automatic).

    You also usually have little choice to make for who is leading the armies. You field 3 armies and you have 3 generals. It's always better to keep the same generals after initial pruning (ie. killing him after recruitment he's low loyalty). The reason is: by leading the army they're gaining experience and additional traits, and they're getting better and better. You don't make a choice, you just keep on having them. Plus you cannot switch him to the role of the governor as he'd get a hit to loyalty.

    The only traits that really matter are:
    - public order: very often you have a difficult province and you need that guy with +5 PO bonus just to prevent it from rebelling.
    - upkeep bonuses: they may make big difference to your budget.
    - Loyalty: as described.

Page 1 of 2 12 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
  •