PDA

View Full Version : Medieval II Total War


Rubenrobbie2
04-29-2010, 06:00 PM
Anyone play this game, its one of the best RTS known. But since i'm more into fairytales and fokelore, I usually play the TATW mod.

otomotopia
04-29-2010, 07:59 PM
PSh, of course I play this game. I love breeding stupid, un-religious generals because they make speeches like this:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f5TRx7WDAt8

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U4oFJH8hL90&feature=related

Kire
04-29-2010, 08:44 PM
I played TATW some weeks ago and it was great =), tho campaign is damn hard if you are on friendly side (elefants+trolls+other mighty units on dark side) leads to frustration =P. And corruption is verrry high in that mod (played as high elf). At custom battle its always nice to look those gorgeous high elven archers shooting poor orcs =). And i also love at original TW their conquer map part =), the only bad thing is how alliance means little and sometimes you feel that its repeating itself.
Too bad that at TATW also buildings arent from middle earth =(.

Negthareas
04-29-2010, 08:56 PM
It was a really good game in my opinion.

But did not capture my passion.

Yami-Yagari
04-30-2010, 03:07 AM
I loved it! it really is a great game, gave me something to do for days.
Just quit WoW when i got this, and it really helped me get over it, but It Pulled Me Back In :( .

Kire
04-30-2010, 07:16 AM
I loved it! it really is a great game, gave me something to do for days.
Just quit WoW when i got this, and it really helped me get over it, but It Pulled Me Back In :( .

I know what you mean.... =P, but i got after that some alternatives (dont think it is allowed to talk about that here =P).

So whats you favourite faction?
At normal TW i like Byzantines (this one is best unit and lore wise) or Russ (second best unit wise) or England (because of island defense and dont like scots because of their way of talking =P) and if i get bored of them all biiig maybe also for Spain or France or Norway. And at TATW mod i like any elf, dale also look nice but never played it in campaign.

nickson104
04-30-2010, 11:24 AM
I loved these games, but I never played this one too much as the upper scale battles enjoyed in near obliterating my computer... fun fun...

Aametherar
04-30-2010, 08:32 PM
While I love this games RTS aspect, the battles get old repetitive and long very fast. The games main aspect (overland mode) is just terribly designed and inflexible in so many ways it really makes the game as a whole unit not good.

Yami-Yagari
05-01-2010, 04:00 AM
While I love this games RTS aspect, the battles get old repetitive and long very fast. The games main aspect (overland mode) is just terribly designed and inflexible in so many ways it really makes the game as a whole unit not good.
It really depends on your playstyle if it will get repetitive or not. Plus it helps if you boost the difficulty if you need mor challenge.

DarkMaster
05-01-2010, 04:43 AM
Never played it, but it's on my list of things to get once I have a respectable PC.;)

wills370
05-01-2010, 05:53 AM
Ive played it. :) was the main reason for upgrading my pc lol so i love it. PErsonally i prefer all the MTW2 and RTW to the modern gun battling ones but its still one of my favorite games ever :) epic mulitplayer aswell many a time me and my brother played it to see who was better :)

nickson104
05-01-2010, 06:02 AM
[QUOTE=wills370;27869]PErsonally i prefer all the MTW2 and RTW to the modern gun battling ones

Snap, i hated the late ages for such units and am avoiding napolean like its the plague :p

Aametherar
05-01-2010, 06:08 AM
It really depends on your playstyle if it will get repetitive or not. Plus it helps if you boost the difficulty if you need mor challenge.

I generally go hardest or bust. I usually go at it over and over til I can beat a game on the hardest except the ones where they intentionally make it unbeatable on the hardest for people who like to use cheat codes and feel like theyre owning.

Negthareas
05-01-2010, 01:20 PM
Same here pretty much. It is one of those Games I have on my list [I had just borrows it temp. from a friend], but have not gotten around to it yet.

As I said - I like to really master my games. As such, I get pretty picky about what I chose to master.

Josh Warner
05-01-2010, 01:38 PM
I generally go hardest or bust. I usually go at it over and over til I can beat a game on the hardest except the ones where they intentionally make it unbeatable on the hardest for people who like to use cheat codes and feel like theyre owning.

I typically mod the total war games to make them harder, mostly weaker starting armies, tweaked unit stats. It also helps to pick the weaker races.



While the world map may not have been enjoyable for all, as a huge fan of turn based strategy games in the past, I quite liked it. I've played in tournaments and such for standard RTSes over the years, and while I love the fast paced action and competitive nature, there's still something to be said for the strategic thinking man's game that is turn based.


Another thing for Total War, since I do enjoy the turn based nature of the game - I've played many a campaign with ONLY automated battles, no abusing the AI. This is quite challenging, and overall pretty fun as long as you're not too OCD on managing everything then turns will take forever. It goes without saying to not load a save when you lose a battle you shouldn't have. The chance you can lose a developed general and a full army to 1:5 odds changes the way you play quite a bit.

Negthareas
05-01-2010, 02:20 PM
This is something I try to do in most games I play - I try to never use quicksaves in FPS's, and I only save RTS games once or twice. Three times at most. I like to try to think as if the game is real, and that I can't commit suicide and then resurect at a previous point in my life.

Kire
05-01-2010, 03:13 PM
Another thing for Total War, since I do enjoy the turn based nature of the game - I've played many a campaign with ONLY automated battles, no abusing the AI. This is quite challenging, and overall pretty fun as long as you're not too OCD on managing everything then turns will take forever. It goes without saying to not load a save when you lose a battle you shouldn't have. The chance you can lose a developed general and a full army to 1:5 odds changes the way you play quite a bit.

Isnt there if you play the hardest mod and if you put automatic resolve battle you loose most of the time, even if comp has just some poor troops?=) Well i love automatic resolve but cant do at hard mod because of this=(. Or there matters what kind of general you have, so if it is good the battle would be realistic and not farmers(comp)>knights(you)?

Josh Warner
05-01-2010, 06:57 PM
Isnt there if you play the hardest mod and if you put automatic resolve battle you loose most of the time, even if comp has just some poor troops?=) Well i love automatic resolve but cant do at hard mod because of this=(. Or there matters what kind of general you have, so if it is good the battle would be realistic and not farmers(comp)>knights(you)?

If you want to win for Medieval II at least, you need to properly grow a minimum of two generals. I typically max out fear, though it can be useful to have a chivalry general when conquering. I like to have two with high if not maxed fear, and one chivalry, and I'll leave the chivalry general in a city until the initial unrest dies down so I don't have to exterminate as often to keep them under control.

There are other things that really help, namely abusing Jihad for Islamic races, and regularly assassinating the Pope so you can conquer your neighbors without fear of being excommunicated for Christians. I find that the increased movement for Jihad is terrifyingly powerful, and for most Christian factions you're better off simply ignoring the pope till you're about to be excommunicated then assassinate so you can freely conquer your neighboring Christians.

Aametherar
05-02-2010, 01:55 AM
The thing that really bothered me was that religion played such a strong part, I felt it didn't belong in the game regardless of time period. It's supposed to be a war game not a religious game (I think) lol.

Yami-Yagari
05-02-2010, 05:17 AM
If you want to win for Medieval II at least, you need to properly grow a minimum of two generals. I typically max out fear, though it can be useful to have a chivalry general when conquering. I like to have two with high if not maxed fear, and one chivalry, and I'll leave the chivalry general in a city until the initial unrest dies down so I don't have to exterminate as often to keep them under control.

I never really bothered with focusing on 2 generals only. A 1 star general can still beat a fully upgraded general depending on how big his army is and how well upgraded.


There are other things that really help, namely abusing Jihad for Islamic races, and regularly assassinating the Pope so you can conquer your neighbors without fear of being excommunicated for Christians. I find that the increased movement for Jihad is terrifyingly powerful, and for most Christian factions you're better off simply ignoring the pope till you're about to be excommunicated then assassinate so you can freely conquer your neighboring Christians.

Never really mattered to me, considering every christian nation that dares attack me gets excommunicated :p.
But crusades and jihads can really be abused in a way, simply because of the fact for christians you can recruit great mounted and dismounted knights for almost free, and muslims can get cheap zerg units.

Aametherar
05-02-2010, 07:32 AM
Arr, you guys are making me want to try it again even though I already deleted it and it's such a large file size I don't really wanna reinstall. x_x

Negthareas
05-02-2010, 09:56 AM
The thing that really bothered me was that religion played such a strong part, I felt it didn't belong in the game regardless of time period. It's supposed to be a war game not a religious game (I think) lol.

Well - I see your point. It would have been nice if there was an option of limiting or turning off the religion component. Then again, the game is a historical one, of a time in which religion played a very active important role in society. I can understand why the devs included it.

As a war game - not really necessary.
As a historical war game - important detail.

Aametherar
05-02-2010, 10:10 AM
I must admit, one thing I really loved with this game was playing Amon Amarth in the background during battles (More specifically the Fate of Norns CD) I swear they were made for each other, it managed to improve gameplay for me 10 fold!

Josh Warner
05-02-2010, 11:47 AM
I never really bothered with focusing on 2 generals only. A 1 star general can still beat a fully upgraded general depending on how big his army is and how well upgraded.



Never really mattered to me, considering every christian nation that dares attack me gets excommunicated :p.
But crusades and jihads can really be abused in a way, simply because of the fact for christians you can recruit great mounted and dismounted knights for almost free, and muslims can get cheap zerg units.

A well built general makes an army 2-4 times stronger, it's well worth it.

And if you wait for them to attack you, you grow very slowly. As the british for example I can take all of france and scotland in.. 30? turns or so. Maybe less. Whereas if I let them be the aggressor I grow much slower.

The thing that really bothered me was that religion played such a strong part, I felt it didn't belong in the game regardless of time period. It's supposed to be a war game not a religious game (I think) lol.

If you play a christian faction and regularly assassinate the pope you can ignore religion completely.

otomotopia
05-02-2010, 02:08 PM
I must admit, one thing I really loved with this game was playing Amon Amarth in the background during battles (More specifically the Fate of Norns CD) I swear they were made for each other, it managed to improve gameplay for me 10 fold!

I am impressed! Not many people have found such an awesome band here in the US. Cry of the Blackbirds was my favorite song to play when playing Battle for Asgard (Gosh, what a mistake that was for buying it at $60).