Results 1 to 6 of 6

Thread: Thoughts and feedback.

  1. #1
    Spitfire -WONDERBOLT!'s Avatar Vicarius
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Canterlot Castle, City of Canterlot, Equestria.
    Posts
    2,760

    Default Thoughts and feedback.

    The Good


    Retinues are ing awesome as an idea, but are not so well implemented.


    Colour blind options have been included


    The AI has had a little bit of improvement


    The battles are super priddy


    Populations has returned, it needs some work, but it's back where it belongs.


    Large armies return, (sort of)


    diplomacy is quite good, if a little too much of a numbers game, it could do with some RNG
    Statistics are shown.
    The Bad


    The campaign map terrain looks like a child's playset, I'm really not feeling it, and the tress have had a massive downgrade, if you want to do a "fighting on a model of china" commit to it.


    The people walking as trader look like they belong in a cartoon, too spindly.


    High textures up grass, but utra doesn't.


    Game stutters allot on higher settings


    The game doesn't remember if you last played records mode or romance mode, it just defaults to romance


    Seige AI is passive, and derpy, and I don't know why, because they could have just copied and pasted atillia AI.


    There are also no Chinese or English subtitles for the HoH,


    The smoke UI looks poor IMHO, a "brush stroke" would be much better.


    Raiding is gone, perhaps because it would be inappropriate to have Chinese raiding their own "home territory" just as the japanese didn't raid japan because they wanted to conqure it?


    Trade is simplistic


    Generals liking or hating each other and relationships in general is irritating, low impact, and need a total do-over


    Spying is not well fleshed out.


    There is a distinct lack of captains for units (you only need to give a normal warrior a sword and a cloak)


    and there are no-non named generals i.e. captains.


    No in battle reserve system, still.


    generals also spawn with units you might not want.




    No graph screen




    There are no deployment orinetaion options for cutom battle.
    The Ugly


    Armies have shrunk, there are just 6x3 units per army, as there are now 3 generals, there are also no sub units, so you can't split one of your units for tactical flexibility. YOU MUST INCREASE THE RENITUTE TO Giving 24 units, not 18.


    General types are limited to their own high tier units, and I HATE it, especially in factions where you don't have a whole host of generals to chose from.


    *limiting artillery to ranged generals, fine, limiting cavalry to cavalry generals, fine, limiting infantry to infantry, fine, but limiting heavy cav to heavy cav generals, light to light, and god know what to commanders, it SUCKS.
    Give us the option to turn this off, or make it less limiting, when you can only have 3-6 generals in an army, and can't split up units this is far far too limiting) I like the retinue idea, I want it kept, it'll be got for Med 3, for rome 3, for napoleon 2 as brigades, I don't mind a few units being general specialization exclusive, but this SUCKS


    General types and unit match ups don't make a whole lot of sense.


    There is no translate general responses into English option with the subtitles


    Naval battles are gone. While not important to the period, giving each unit a navy would take up allot of dev time, but the two historical battles such as red cliff, are not playable, this is a glaring oversight, and I hope these if not navies are retoactively added with a DLC campaign.


    Autoresolve is again seeminly pre-determined and certain no RNG, seriously how hard is it to add RNG and let people disable it if it bothers them?


    You can rematch battles, great right? But the addition of this option along with save scuming, really highlight how a "pera-death" or in this case "perma-defeat" mode would be so cool.


    Atillia still has infinitely re-spawning armies, and ToB doesn't seem to be getting any improvements ever.


    there's no way to scout for your armies now spies aren't on the map as units, a scout unit is needed.


    What I wanna see in future


    medical 3


    Sieges where a town can be taken but not the castle in the town


    Building on family tress.


    More RNG


    Moddable maps


    Ingame unit creator


    Ingame player character customiation/avitars (SP)


    Less reistictive retinutes, or more gnerals, or generals with sub genrals, allowing for corps, divsional, and birdage comamnder for napoleon 2 when it comes!
    Native period authentic launquages.


    Subtitles for Hard of hearing.


    Custom battle map oriantaion. it adds so much deapth for so little effort.


    Native period lanquages.


    An AI that wins via strat not buff. it should be so powerful given that it has access to all posiblites, jsut make incramental steps guys and code in falicy and mistakes.


    A seige patch, ToB has great sieges copy it?


    Corps comanders with reniture of Divional coamnders, with retinutes of brigade comamnders, by the time of napoleon 3.


    Map orientaion in CB for next game


    In battle reserve system.


    Armies larger than 40, and 40 to be the standard.
    Last edited by La♔De♔Da♔Brigadier Graham; June 02, 2019 at 05:18 PM. Reason: Corrected title spelling
    GIVE CREDIT TO YOUR ENEMY AND LITTLE TO YOURSELF, AS IT MAKES YOUR VICTORY ALL THE GREATER!
    -Under the influence of medically prescribed drugs, please take much salt with this post, you have been warned!
    -Col.32 For an independent Cornish, and English Parliment, within a U.K. that Includes Scotland!

  2. #2
    LestaT's Avatar Artifex
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    Campus Martius
    Posts
    3,862

    Default Re: Thoughts and feedback.

    I dont really mind not having naval or river battles but I hope that we'll get the option later to manually fight the river battles on some river bank maps, like what was introduced with Warhammer 2.

    Regarding the Captains, some factions I believe can recruit units lead by Captains. The Yellow Turbans factions and also SunJian if I'm not mistaken.

    For me personally, I would prefer trabuchets not as field units but a unit that can only be build on siege battles, provided that you have a Strategist as one of your commanders.

  3. #3

    Default Re: Thoughts and feedback.

    Only thing that really ticks me off is that they manage to up the siege defence AI, now they’ll do idiotic imitation of the ‘layered’ defence or ‘hold reserves’ , they’ll ‘fall back from chokepoint to chokepoint if outmatched’ supposedly, this is so amazingly stupid I don’t even know where to begin.

    Even if they implemented it perfectly it wouldn’t help the AI one bit, and it isn’t implemented properly, it causes the defence AI to derp out, run around aimlessly, waste troops defending areas that doesn’t need defending.

    The only real resistence are the OP towers, hell it probably intentional since the defence AI is so bad,the worst thing is that they’ll never fix it, they spent tons of effort building this AI defence framework from the ground, reverting would be too much work and admitting defeat. Incredible how much effort can be spent on making the game worse.

  4. #4

    Default Re: Thoughts and feedback.

    I don't understand why they've made Siege defence AI more passive compared to Attila. In Attila, the defenders would sally forth with their cavalry, and when having numerical superiority would press the attack. Why remove this?

  5. #5

    Default Re: Thoughts and feedback.

    Quote Originally Posted by BreadBuax View Post
    Only thing that really ticks me off is that they manage to
    Quote Originally Posted by BreadBuax View Post
    up the siege defence AI, now they’ll do idiotic imitation of the ‘layered’ defence or ‘hold reserves’
    , they’ll ‘fall back from chokepoint to chokepoint if outmatched’ supposedly, this is so amazingly stupid I don’t even know where to begin.

    Even if they implemented it perfectly it wouldn’t help the AI one bit, and it isn’t implemented properly, it causes the defence AI to derp out, run around aimlessly, waste troops defending areas that doesn’t need defending.

    The only real resistence are the OP towers, hell it probably intentional since the defence AI is so bad,the worst thing is that they’ll never fix it, they spent tons of effort building this
    AI defence framework from the ground, reverting would be too much work and admitting defeat. Incredible how much effort can be spent on making the game worse.


    I disagree. I prefer this style of siege defense and would like them to continue developing it. I find siege assaults dreadfully boring in a lot of other titles because it always just turns into a giant rugby scrum for the walls or gate/breach and there's nothing to do but wait for the melees to end.

    I don't really care if it technically "helps" the AI. I just want siege assaults to be less dull. I've already had a few that were actually very enjoyable in 3K, primarily because the AI had this idea where it layered and spread out its defenses rather than just throwing it all into the first meat grinder that became available. Perhaps it was ultimately less effective, but I actually had fun, which has been a rarity in Total War siege assaults for me outside of Shogun 2.

    Of course, there are still issues with it. It repositions far too often, it gives up the walls too easily, and it has the old Thrones problem of keeping its general on the capture point rather than near the people it needs to support. These are probably just heuristic tweaks and likely wouldn't require a completely new design, so they may get better with patches. Outside of AI issues, the garrisons are usually too small in the city sieges, units don't properly rally on the capture point, the defender's advantage isn't properly accounted for in morale which means that routing from army losses happens too fast, and of course, towers are overpowered. The last one is particularly painful because it's what leads me to often not want to play siege assaults because it feels like I'm losing a huge amount of my army to BS unless I out BS it by bringing trebuchets, which I'm rather loathe to do.

    Quote Originally Posted by JupiterMoneta View Post
    I don't understand why they've made Siege defence AI more passive compared to Attila. In Attila, the defenders would sally forth with their cavalry, and when having numerical superiority would press the attack. Why remove this?
    I'm guessing that the redesign of the siege defense AI probably made the sally out option a bug farm. If they're trying to make the passive defense better by redesigning it from the ground up, then the counterattack possibility as it was in previous titles likely contradicted how the AI was supposed to be viewing the battle.

    For major cities I can understand since there's rarely enough cavalry in their garrisons to make a sally worthwhile, but some of the minor settlements were given garrisons that were half cavalry, and so it just looks bizarre on them.
    My Three Kingdoms Military History Blog / Military Map Project - https://zirroxas.tumblr.com/
    Ask me a question!

  6. #6

    Default Re: Thoughts and feedback.

    I dont like how simple building system is. It's like Mark II of that horrible system in Thrones of Britannia.

Posting Permissions

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