Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Tack]

Anyone else keen?
I'm a little hesitant at the fact it'll be using a bastardised Attila engine- but the time period gets me very excited.

[chevil]

I'm exited.

The new food and recruitment system will either make it one of the best total war games or one of the worst.
I really want to play it and find out.

[lordcooper]

I'd usually be really interested in a new TW game, but they've kinda shot themselves in the foot with Warhammer.

I just can't imagine going from zombies, pegasus knights and corrupted machinery back to 'dudes with pointy sticks'.

[Geltor]

didnt they always do this in Medieval 2 TW with the britannia expansion?

[thvaz]

didnt they always do this in Medieval 2 TW with the britannia expansion?

It was another time period.

[birdy51]

Oh? Is this going even earlier?

[Persus13]

The Medieval II Total War expansion began in the 1200s with Edward I and William Wallace and those folks. Thrones of Britannia starts in the 800s with the Viking invasions and Alfred the Great of Wessex.

I'm interested in the game because Vikings, and I've heard mostly good things about Attila, but I probably won't be able to run this on my computer for another 3 years at least.

[Tack]

Yeah when Attila came out I wrote it off as 'an oversold standalone expansion'.
But I recently picked it up for like $20 and have been really enjoying it. Played the Age of Charlemagne expansion recently as Mercia and had a great time (although the roster is a little basic, but what can you do.)

[Urist McScoopbeard]

Attila is actually a really polished game now, honestly one of the most fun TW's I've played in a while, with a good amount of replayability and not too much gimmicky stuff going down.

[Teneb]

I grabbed this and... it's good. It's pretty damn good. I've seen a lot of complaints that this is an Atilla DLC sold at full-price, but... it's not really. Also brings to mind complaints that Attila was a Rome 2 DLC sold at full price.

Is it simplified? Yes. But simplified doesn't mean bad. Complexity can bring down a game by just having too much stuff going on. I feel like ToB manages to keep what makes Total War great while also making it more focused. Game runs great, too.

[Tack]

That’s really good to hear. The reviews are siting at 65% so it was kind of unsettling.

[snow dwarf]

That’s really good to hear. The reviews are siting at 65% so it was kind of unsettling.

I pre-ordered the game and kind of ruined my fun, by reading the reviews, but the game is a really cool new total war game... Soon when CA releases news about three kingdoms the same guys who call themselves total war fans, are gonna move there and start criticizing.

[Coolnesstod]

I've been playing TW games since Medieval 2, and all I ever hear from 'veterans' is how the newer games are trash and Rome1 is superior.

I actually think the Warhammer TW's were some pretty great games, exploring CA's game design in a way they hadn't before. Warhammer 2 is actually the highest Rated of all the current TW's right now, sitting at 87%. So like with what I did with Warhammer, I won't be comparing ToB with other total wars. Cause its not just a total war, Its a saga, its trying to tell a story through real historical events. Everything in ToB is relatively historically accurate, down to kingdoms and kings. The unit selection is similar per faction, but thats because during that time period and in that conflict, armies used and wore the same equipment and weapons. When people play more of ToB, as well as when mods get all the tools needed to edit more of the game, then I think they will see how good of a game it is.

[Ludorum Rex]

I think ToB is a great game, especially considering the price point. It is a bit low on replayability and there much less room for settlement customization compared to most other TW titles, but to be fair, there are lot of "fake" choices in Attilla. Managing food, unrest and squalor limits the customization, and one could argue that the main settlement customization in ToB has more choice than in Attilla and Warhammer.

For me the biggest disappointment of ToB is the battle AI: It's far below the usual level, and much more buggy than usual. The battles themselves are not buggy, and the units are snappy and consistent when reacting to orders (significantly better than Warhammer) and the pathfinding is also good. I suspect the release was rushed/forced, as indicated by the relatively late delay of the release date. I hope the team gets a bit of time to finish up the bugs and tweaks they couldn't get done in time for the release. With some post-release love, I think ToB will be a really good Total War, especially as an introduction to the series for new players.

The estates mechanic did not pan out well, in my opinion. It's busywork, there are no trade-offs / choices involved, and I think newbies will have trouble finding the Estates UI. But it also doesn't harm the game, and perhaps mods or post-release patches can improve upon it.

I think the harsh reviews are somewhat unfair, and perhaps represent the Total War community being disgruntled and unhappy for various unrelated reasons.

[snow dwarf]

The battle AI did seem a bit incompetent. I managed to kill 4000 men in a siege battle with my 500 men garrison because the Ai wasn't smart enough to attack me from another side even though they managed to break all gates. The AI was just getting massacred trying to get through the choke point instead of sending a unit from another side.