Total War Forums

+ Reply to Thread
Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 11

Thread: Rome 2 vs. Shogun 2 slower battle pace?

  1. #1
    Senior Member Sergeant
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Location
    Virginia, USA
    Posts
    260

    Default Rome 2 vs. Shogun 2 slower battle pace?

    Ok so I know this has probably been mentioned before but I thought I should bring it up again. For those people at E3 or Rezzed does it look like the battle pace in R2 will be significantly slower than S2? I know I had a heck of a time trying to really enjoy the battle, i.e. zooming in on the action during the battle while trying to stay in control of the tactics and ridiculously fast pace that was present in Shogun 2. I found myself pausing during battles several times on harder modes of difficulty just to keep up with the pace of the battles themselves. I'm hoping we'll see battles scaled back in pace more similarly to Empire or Napoleon. Not quite as slow but definitely not as fast as S2...

  2. #2
    Senior Member Brigadier Lucius Verus's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Location
    Jakarta, Indonesia
    Posts
    1,200

    Default

    Don't worry I see the battle is slower than shogun 2. Beside CA confirm that battle pace will be 25% slower than Shogun.
    Sometime you just need to relax

    My most wanted option in diplomacy "give region option" still hope it will finally make it in future patch.

  3. #3
    Senior Member Major aznpwnstar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    622

    Default

    oh nice, shogun 2 and FotS i thought were both a teensy bit too fast for my taste. Only some games with heavy skirmishing do i get the real enjoyment of battle in those 2 titles.

  4. #4
    Senior Member Captain killua's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Posts
    557

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Lucius Verus View Post
    Don't worry I see the battle is slower than shogun 2. Beside CA confirm that battle pace will be 25% slower than Shogun.
    This ^ and read Mackles ,Hardwaremasters and Shireknights threads about the demoes they played at E3 and Rezzed. Most of them agree that game play is slower compared to STW2
    Last edited by killua; 07-11-2013 at 08:48 AM.
    Everyone's a pacifist between wars. It's like being a vegetarian between meals.
    ~Colman McCarthy, american peace activist

    Only the dead have seen the end of war.
    ~Plato

  5. #5
    Senior Member Colonel
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Posts
    852

    Default

    Yeah, as long as melee fighting isn't over after 10 seconds (like present videos indicate). I want epic battle lines, hard fights and no chicken-run

  6. #6
    Senior Member Sergeant
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Location
    Virginia, USA
    Posts
    260

    Default

    I really felt like S2 made the samurai look like pansies when they retreated after such a short time in combat lol

  7. #7
    Senior Member Lieutenant
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    Kent
    Posts
    457

    Default

    There is the slow play button in Shogun 2 if you don't like pausing for orders, I'll often put that on at the moment of impact. Doesn't work for Multiplayer of course.

    I'll definitely be happy with a slower pace though - I like the tension from having to plan the movement in advance. The first Rome was great, but too fast for me after STW and MTW 1

  8. #8
    Senior Member Corporal Quadro2k's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Posts
    138

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Karlvontyr View Post
    There is the slow play button in Shogun 2 if you don't like pausing for orders, I'll often put that on at the moment of impact. Doesn't work for Multiplayer of course.

    I'll definitely be happy with a slower pace though - I like the tension from having to plan the movement in advance. The first Rome was great, but too fast for me after STW and MTW 1
    Completely agree. I loved MTW 1 and the amount of tension that would be built way before the clash had even began.

    I think people often get things confused when someone says they want slower battles. It isn't as simple as slowing down time. It's related to how well units hold up and how fast they moved and get fatigued. I found that MTW 1 as a result allowed for more strategy and manoeuvring. The morale system worked much better and it wasn't like you had to slaughter every man in the unit to break them neither. I say that because some people seem to think that's what people want when they say they want units to have better morale. It was awful in Shogun 2, numbers meant nothing.
    Last edited by Quadro2k; 07-11-2013 at 12:09 PM.

  9. #9
    Senior Member Lieutenant
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    Kent
    Posts
    457

    Default

    That is not my appraisal of Shogun 2 - morale and the factors affecting morale (being flanked, having supporting units,missile casualties, losing a fight, proximity of the general) definitely are a factor in my battles. Units rarely recover once broken, but you can get wavering units back into the battle or to hold. I tend to build spear and bow armies, and I find spear wall ashigaru can hold a line for a fair while , giving you the chance to break their line elsewhere and start to flank.

    The maps are smaller , which has pro's and cons, but affects the time for a routing unit to recover.

    Anyway I certainly agree that some chess like placement/advancing , and giving proper weight to fatigue are important to the total war experience.Very good point.

  10. #10
    Banned Corporal Cvetko's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Posts
    147

    Default

    If you saw the latest official Battle of the Nile commentary gameplay video, you would see, that speed is not really too fast

+ Reply to Thread
Page 1 of 2 1 2 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