Welcome

Please register for Total War Access to use the forums. If you're an existing user, your forum details will be merged with Total War Access if you register with the same email or username. For more information please read our FAQ’s here.

Categories

I'm having so much fun as the Huns

aradimaradim MemberRegistered Users Posts: 73
edited March 2015 in General Discussion
Look, doesn't this look like fun to you? It's so much fun being the center of the world for everyone while camping in the razed steppes, it's like these people can't stop thinking about me even when they sleep.


PPAm1CM.jpg?1

Did anyone even playtest this game?
Post edited by aradim on
«1

Comments

  • seienchinseienchin Senior Member Registered Users Posts: 4,572
    edited March 2015
    aradim wrote: »
    Look, doesn't this look like fun to you? It's so much fun being the center of the world for everyone while camping in the razed steppes, it's like these people can't stop thinking about me even when they sleep.


    PPAm1CM.jpg?1

    Did anyone even playtest this game?
    My theory about the huns is that they werent meant to be playable (They were revealed pretty late and before fans protested that they need to be playable). They are broken. I think so too.
    All the other factions are mostly fun though
  • occiqocciq Senior Member Registered Users Posts: 112
    edited March 2015
    I am loving this game. I play as Huns and some times chased down by 4-6 stacks. I ran away until I think I am ready then turn back and fight. Yesterday I was followed by 6 sassanid stacks with elite soldiers. after 3 legendary battles (on hard) I barely survived, couldnt even chased down enemy. The power balance pulled sassanids from 1st rank down to 8th. Right after replenishing my lines in the next 2 turns (thanks to "merge" option) whole middle east was open to my invasion. following 10 turns was only about razing defenceless sassanid cities because the remaining enemy armies would only flee when they see me coming and continously send "diplomats" to slow me down.

    It was surprizing not to see new spawned stacks even on hard. Also it was odd to see ERE which had only 1 region (Crete) to become the strongest after sassanid down fall. I guess they have a massive interest income.
    Finished Rome 2 Campaigns: none
    Finished Attila Campaigns: Military&Culture Victories with Huns @ Hard
  • DetailedEyesDetailedEyes Senior Member AustraliaRegistered Users Posts: 4,715
    edited March 2015
    Seienchin wrote: »
    My theory about the huns is that they werent meant to be playable (They were revealed pretty late and before fans protested that they need to be playable). They are broken. I think so too.
    All the other factions are mostly fun though
    Agreed, I think they should never have been playable and should have been the big bad villain from the steppe like it seemed they were going to be, instead we got this...
    "We shall have peace. We shall have peace when you answer for the burning of the Westfold, and the children that lie dead there. When the lives of the soldiers, whose bodies were hewn even as they lay dead against the Gates of the Hornburg are avenged! When you hang from a gibbet, for the sport of your own crows, we shall have peace."

    Theoden to Saruman at Orthanc, also my total war philosophy.
  • aradimaradim Member Registered Users Posts: 73
    edited March 2015
    occiq wrote: »
    I am loving this game. I play as Huns and some times chased down by 4-6 stacks. I ran away until I think I am ready then turn back and fight. Yesterday I was followed by 6 sassanid stacks with elite soldiers. after 3 legendary battles (on hard) I barely survived, couldnt even chased down enemy. The power balance pulled sassanids from 1st rank down to 8th. Right after replenishing my lines in the next 2 turns (thanks to "merge" option) whole middle east was open to my invasion. following 10 turns was only about razing defenceless sassanid cities because the remaining enemy armies would only flee when they see me coming and continously send "diplomats" to slow me down.

    It was surprizing not to see new spawned stacks even on hard. Also it was odd to see ERE which had only 1 region (Crete) to become the strongest after sassanid down fall. I guess they have a massive interest income.

    So you weren't chased by 10 full stacks by 402 AD?

    Weird.
  • LoneWolf94LoneWolf94 Senior Member Registered Users Posts: 164
    edited March 2015
    The only thing breaking my Hun campaigns are the Sassanids and their endless satrapies.


    I barely scorched the barbarians in the west and always loaded a save before Arran declared war on me (Arran was allied with Sassanids)

    Until the end all my loads had him declaring war on me (even with the great power diplomatic penalty mod that reduces it)

    So I did my last stands and sent my hordes and burned down Arran.

    I wondered what the easten romans were doing? They had like 6 stacks surrounding an empty village besieging it and never taking it, turns until the village is taken is 24.


    So I do what I do best, I fight, I beat stacks after stacks and when I just finished destryong 6000-7000 enemy troops consisting of elepehants, cataphracts and onagers I get 3-5 other stacks of Sassanids ready to roll.


    Atilla had just 10 bodyguards left in one of my battles, while my reinforcing mercenary spearmen were running to his aid he was singlehandedly fighting off waves after waves of cataphracts all alone surrounded. I zoomed in and saw Atilla gut sassanid after sassanid never stopping waving around his short blade like a bleeding demon, it almost looked like he was about to jump off his horse just to kill another sassanid.

    Suddenly on the campaign map i see Sassanid separatists and Eastern separatists.

    I wonder if this is a glimmer of hope? No unfortunately not, even at war with sassanids (and not the satrapies) they love their enemies when they fight me.

    And positive points to them is like 13 after defeating sassanids. Overall they love their enemies and hate their neutral allies (me) So they will probably declare war on me too (-200 hostile) and ally with the Sassanids (logic? haha)


    So far playing the huns is more about survival than being a scourge.(Mid-End game)

    However letting the AI play the huns they seem to be more like a scourge, possibly because of the endless cash cheat.

    Simple solution would be to decrease the tier 2 horsemen upkeep by a bit.

    In every campaign, when west/east romans fall (they always do) there are 2 sides, the germanics and vikings that love each other and the sassanids and their satrapies, everything else gets squished inbetween. If you fight against the romans to improve your relation with the others you just hasten your own death.

    It kind of discourages me to play the huns lately but I will keep trying. I like the units and the faction itself.



    @OP

    Funny, I keep 3 stacks of my economic generals just where you are right now. A funny coincedence.

    I have 3 others fighting around armenia soon to die by the endless waves, I can create more stacks but I dont have enough funds to keep another full stack. Even if 2 of my generals have maxed buildings with income.

    Keeping tributes are obviously a bad idea. Goodluck OP.
  • Balbuceos JoeBalbuceos Joe Member Registered Users Posts: 72
    edited March 2015
    Sadly, I have to agree that playing as the Huns is nigh impossible.
    Freeing your client states seems like a good idea to start with, at least the ones on the bosphorus, since they will always rebel sooner thatn later and will drag you to wars with the other steppe hordes in the meantime.

    After this I can't see any good ways to make long term plans. Turteling up to buid an economy is an end-turn fest that will boost your imperium and great power enormously, making it more likely that when you go at war with anyone, factions are going to gang up on you.
    If you decide to fight the weaker tribes of the steppes they won't give you much money from riding and sacking and will accelereate the *****torm.
    Even daring to attack the ERE doesn't seem a good idea. If you can overcome their armies, fighting them won't get you any friends. In my latest try (I think it's the 5th already, some of them i have just ragequit), fighting the ERE only made them friendlier towards the Sassanids, who already hate me from the beginning.

    I understand that nobody should like the huns, but since fear is not a mechanic in the game's diplomacy, there's no way to avoid enemies ganging up on you, and since you don't have cities, the AI concieves wars as a never-ending chase that will inevitably lead to your demise since there's only so much map to run and your enemies will come from all parts of it.
    township_rebellion on Steam
  • TheBraveKnightTheBraveKnight Senior Member Registered Users Posts: 1,659
    edited March 2015
    Seienchin wrote: »
    My theory about the huns is that they werent meant to be playable (They were revealed pretty late and before fans protested that they need to be playable). They are broken. I think so too.
    All the other factions are mostly fun though
    I wish that they had remained unplayable and CA had gone through with their original plans for the Huns. That original concept sounded really good

    Now, the faction just feels broken and unfinished
    Current Top 3 Total War List

    1) Thrones of Britannia - Art style, soundtrack, aging portraits, sieges, politics, and trait system!
    (Prob 3 Kingdoms after I invest more hours. Awesome awesome game!)

    2) Warhammer 2 - Eye of the Vortex

    3) Shogun 2

    Honorable mentions - Medieval 1

  • aradimaradim Member Registered Users Posts: 73
    edited March 2015
    Seems like I will have to put off migratory campaigns until CA removes the heat seeking stacks from the game
  • SacerdosSacerdos Senior Member Registered Users Posts: 278
    edited March 2015
    My legendary Hun campaign has been pretty easy actually, but I'm abusing the relations mechanics by perma sieging/raiding the WRE to keep the world friendly to me forever.

    If you don't want to abuse that, then the key is to avoid getting into prolonged wars that cause your enemies to be able to call in multiple factions against you.

    Don't go to war with any faction that has multiple allies/friends unless you can destroy them in a single turn.

    Definitely attack the WRE and ERE from turn 1 for global relations boosts though.
  • Dori34543Dori34543 Member Registered Users Posts: 82
    edited March 2015
    I played as the Huns on hard, and it was really easy. Just keep good relations with everyone except the WRE and obliterate them with auto-resolve. Had to actually fight 1 or 2 battles with them and that was it.

    Ill admit it doesn't feel like they were meant to be playable...on the other hand, could you imagine a game called Total War: Attila without being able to play as Attila? people would hate that.
  • SacerdosSacerdos Senior Member Registered Users Posts: 278
    edited March 2015
    I think the problem most people have is that they think you're suppose to declare war on everyone to sack random cities, but really you only want to declare war on a single target at a time and try to limit your wars as much as possible to maintain relations.
  • Hidden GunmanHidden Gunman Moderator Moderators Posts: 4,606
    edited March 2015
    I have numerous screenies of massed stacks from multiple factions circling my Huns...the longer you stay in one area of the map, the more that cluster.

    My current game only became diplomatically sensible when I got the horde/s into north africa, where the opposition could only come from two directions, and the surrounding areas were large regions with low province densities.

    I have to say that the issues I have found with the Huns as a playable faction does indicate that it has flaws -

    1. Pointless building chain (the settlement chain - no benefit)
    2. Hyper expensive higher tier units (too expensive to maintain in significant numbers)
    3. Overly restrictive diplomatic penalties for imperium gains (becoming a better goat herder makes you a major power, and hated)
    4. Inability to maintain client states (due to client states retaining pre client state alliances and relations, + diplo penalties due to Imperium).
    5. Withdrawal from battle counts as a loss, even if it was a valid 'wearing down' strategy, and your horde/stack suffers infrastructure damage...so you lose any advantage in fighting delaying actions or fighting withdrawals.

    There's a couple of others I'm looking into, and some of those above apply across all factions, but with the Huns they are significant because it is a nomadic faction, unable to settle.

    It is definitely a sick little faction...
    Yes, it's me.

    Gungho |Takeda| Yamagato Masakage

    You have spoken with clarity of thought and rhetorical flourish...you have surely earned the favour of the mods.

    If you didn't, click here...
  • ShiroAmakusa75ShiroAmakusa75 Senior Member Registered Users Posts: 32,666
    edited March 2015
    Everyone whined when CA announced they wouldn't be playable and now see what happens when CA does listen to the loudmouthed whiners and complainers. The Huns would have made more sense and the game a better pace if they had been a lategame menace like the Mongols or Timurids in M2.

    I hope they never listen again.

  • LoneWolf94LoneWolf94 Senior Member Registered Users Posts: 164
    edited March 2015
    Everyone whined when CA announced they wouldn't be playable and now see what happens when CA does listen to the loudmouthed whiners and complainers. The Huns would have made more sense and the game a better pace if they had been a lategame menace like the Mongols or Timurids in M2.

    I hope they never listen again.

    I would have not purchased Atilla total war if it was not for the Huns being playable personally.

    It would be trivial, a very shortsighted move by CA. I am happy they listen to their fans.

    For the record I had no say in this "Hun got to be playable" situation.


    All they need is some tweaking, some change of numbers on the buildings and unit upkeep, a better diplomacy, some stronger cavalry and voila, Huns are ready to go.
  • ZoeDiyaKZoeDiyaK Senior Member Registered Users Posts: 430
    edited March 2015

    1. Pointless building chain (the settlement chain - no benefit)
    2. Hyper expensive higher tier units (too expensive to maintain in significant numbers)
    3. Overly restrictive diplomatic penalties for imperium gains (becoming a better goat herder makes you a major power, and hated)
    4. Inability to maintain client states (due to client states retaining pre client state alliances and relations, + diplo penalties due to Imperium).
    5. Withdrawal from battle counts as a loss, even if it was a valid 'wearing down' strategy, and your horde/stack suffers infrastructure damage...so you lose any advantage in fighting delaying actions or fighting withdrawals.

    Good list, but there is one major point you did not add which is the inability to trade. I understand why they cant trade, it makes sense, but that is a huge reason why they have such a hard time improving their economy.

    Also, point number 5 particularly interested me. Its too bad Hordes cannot make a tactical withdrawal without suffering damage to buildings. That was a major strategy I used in previous TW games, especially in M2. Playing as a cavalry faction with mounted archers (such as Hungary) I would bring my enemy to battle, harass them with horse archers, use all my ammo then simply retreat without any hand to hand fighting. In Attila, Hordes (especially steppe factions) SHOULD be able to perform that strategy without damaged building and suffering huge penalty to integrity.

    I really hope CA tinkers with the game to make Hordes a bit more user friendly.
    "Pop, pop, pop! Boom, boom, boom! throughout the day. No time for memorandums now. Go ahead! Liberty and Independence forever!"
    Davy Crockett, writing the final entry in his journal while surrounded at the Alamo Mission by 1,500 Mexican troops. The next day, he and the entire garrison, nearly 200 militia and frontiersman, were killed to the last man.
    Texas Revolution
    Near present day San Antonio, Texas USA
    Battle of the Alamo, March 1836
  • BelialxvBelialxv Senior Member SteppesRegistered Users Posts: 1,627
    edited March 2015
    Everyone whined when CA announced they wouldn't be playable and now see what happens when CA does listen to the loudmouthed whiners and complainers. The Huns would have made more sense and the game a better pace if they had been a lategame menace like the Mongols or Timurids in M2.

    I hope they never listen again.

    :mad: Nomad hater :mad:

    I prefer having the Huns playable and the WRE not playable than the WRE playable and the Huns unplayable.
    ajz9uoslnqoi.jpg


    HUITZILOPOCHTLI

    god of war

    LIZARDMEN #makelustriagreatagain
    Clan Moulder #masterclan
  • DeepjayDeepjay Senior Member Registered Users Posts: 318
    edited March 2015
    To those saying they dont think the Huns were intended to be playable - I really don't see how CA could have released an Attila (the Hun) stand-alone game without including them. There's simply no way - conspiracy theories aside. It'd be like releasing Rome 2 minus Rome as a playable faction, just wouldn't happen.
  • WesternrulerxWesternrulerx Senior Member Registered Users Posts: 306
    edited March 2015
    Seienchin wrote: »
    My theory about the huns is that they werent meant to be playable (They were revealed pretty late and before fans protested that they need to be playable). They are broken. I think so too.
    All the other factions are mostly fun though

    Play a different faction!
  • occiquieocciquie Senior Member Registered Users Posts: 157
    edited March 2015
    aradim wrote: »
    So you weren't chased by 10 full stacks by 402 AD?

    Weird.

    Maybe because I separated my hordes into the groups, or maybe thanks to careful diplomacy,I never ended up being chased down by ten stacks
    Don't take me wrong, I tried to enter middle east three times with unsuccessful results and had to flee back to steps
    Also found a safe haven in Sicily from another six barbarian stacks. But overall it was a wonderful and fun loaded campaign. I finished the cultural victory by 455.
    "Ah, a surprise funeral? For me?"
  • BMNOBLE981BMNOBLE981 Senior Member Registered Users Posts: 1,212
    edited March 2015
    Its probably the AI using the war target mechanic, since the Huns faction leader stack acts as their capital all the AI factions mark it as there war target, thus the endless game of tag across the campaign map.

    They should make it impossible for the AI to use war target on the Huns if they are being controlled by the player.
    Dr Zoidberg "We fight over matters of honour, and whether or not abbreviations count in scrabble. THEY DON'T"

    “My fault. What I said in the guild was incorrect: rather than ‘death is certain if you follow me’, I actually meant ‘come along and I shall slaughter the lot of you’.”

    Ainz Ooal Gown Overlord Light Novels
  • ranknfileranknfile Senior Member Registered Users Posts: 7,425
    edited March 2015
    Agreed, I think they should never have been playable and should have been the big bad villain from the steppe like it seemed they were going to be, instead we got this...

    It was announced they would not be playable. Then the babies started to cry. So - to shut the babies up - the Huns became playable. I haven't tried them, and I probably won't. So they are not a problem for me.
    "Whoever desires is always poor" - Claudian
  • Hidden GunmanHidden Gunman Moderator Moderators Posts: 4,606
    edited March 2015
    It's all fixable, much of it through any generic diplo/imperium tweak in a patch...anything not addressed we mod. It's just a matter of deciding what we want and need, for either case - an appeal to CA for tweaking; and/or to baseline any mods.
    Yes, it's me.

    Gungho |Takeda| Yamagato Masakage

    You have spoken with clarity of thought and rhetorical flourish...you have surely earned the favour of the mods.

    If you didn't, click here...
  • leyasu888leyasu888 Junior Member Registered Users Posts: 5
    edited March 2015
    I definitely would not have bought the game if the Huns were not playable
  • AkrotiriAkrotiri Senior Member Hellenic RepublicRegistered Users Posts: 873
    edited March 2015
    @ Ephraim_Dalton

    I completely agree. I have been saying that for a while on these forums that CA should stop listening to the very few(but very vocal) people concerning game mechanics and perceived issues.

    1)They complained that in RTW2 Rome and the major factions never survived or built empires and now all my campaigns since patch15 is a slugfest between me, Rome, Carthage, Boii, Galatia, Armenia, Egypt every time.
    2)They complained about torches so now we have soldiers stabbing gates which is even less realistic.
    3)They complained Rome2 was too easy for them so now Attila is a frustrating Rageathon.
    4)They complained the AI in Rome2 always recruited low tier units mid-late game and now they complain that they can't recruit low tier units with the new Attila recruitment mechanics.
    5)They complained that there was only 1 playable German faction in Rome2 and now they complain that Attila is mostly Germanic barbarians which is boring and lacks diversity.
    6)They pre-emptively complained about the Huns being unplayable and now they complain that the Huns feel broken.
    7)They complained about the lack of family tree and city-management and now they complain that they can't balance public order and Food in their cities.
    Need I say more?
    "Hence we will not say that Greeks fight like heroes, but that heroes fight like Greeks"
    -Winston Churchill , after the Greek victory against fascist Italy during WW2.
    explorechios.gr
  • occiqocciq Senior Member Registered Users Posts: 112
    edited March 2015
    ranknfile wrote: »
    It was announced they would not be playable. Then the babies started to cry. So - to shut the babies up - the Huns became playable. I haven't tried them, and I probably won't. So they are not a problem for me.

    If you don't like Huns, then don't play it, that simple. I for one, being "a baby" as you put it, would not have bought the game if Huns were not available. After finishing Huns at hard dificulty, I am thinking of starting at legendary.

    I can NOT believe we are discussing about an included and optional feature rather than what is missing. :p
    Finished Rome 2 Campaigns: none
    Finished Attila Campaigns: Military&Culture Victories with Huns @ Hard
  • seienchinseienchin Senior Member Registered Users Posts: 4,572
    edited March 2015
    xiosisland wrote: »
    @ Ephraim_Dalton

    I completely agree. I have been saying that for a while on these forums that CA should stop listening to the very few(but very vocal) people concerning game mechanics and perceived issues.

    1)They complained that in RTW2 Rome and the major factions never survived or built empires and now all my campaigns since patch15 is a slugfest between me, Rome, Carthage, Boii, Galatia, Armenia, Egypt every time.
    2)They complained about torches so now we have soldiers stabbing gates which is even less realistic.
    3)They complained Rome2 was too easy for them so now Attila is a frustrating Rageathon.
    4)They complained the AI in Rome2 always recruited low tier units mid-late game and now they complain that they can't recruit low tier units with the new Attila recruitment mechanics.
    5)They complained that there was only 1 playable German faction in Rome2 and now they complain that Attila is mostly Germanic barbarians which is boring and lacks diversity.
    6)They pre-emptively complained about the Huns being unplayable and now they complain that the Huns feel broken.
    7)They complained about the lack of family tree and city-management and now they complain that they can't balance public order and Food in their cities.
    Need I say more?
    Wow... wow...
    Come on man, you cant really think that?
    You blame the fans for design decisions of CA that you dont like? Even if the fans play a part in this by influencing CA, CA plays their part as well.
    I do not even agree on all of your points like EE having to many empires or Attila beeing a ragefest but all of these points are rather a proof that the critical opinions of the fans are all put together to the lowest common denominator at CA just like you did in you post.

    People think AI is passive and needs to be more intelligent aggressive and fokussing on expanding = You make that "Game is too easy", CA does what? Make the AI cheat more and handicap the player even more. Noone asked for that.
    Players want AI to have reasonable army compositions with less obsolete units and slinger spam = You say "they wanted less low tier troops" and CA probably thought "Less levies? Okay make a forced upgrade". No one asked for that.
    Just to clarify things here, I actually do like the forced upgrade (allthough its not polished yet) and I love Attila as well as rome 2. Just wanted to clarify things here
  • jeffsongjeffsong Member Registered Users Posts: 76
    edited March 2015
    Erstus wrote: »
    I wish that they had remained unplayable and CA had gone through with their original plans for the Huns. That original concept sounded really good

    Now, the faction just feels broken and unfinished
    Absolutely no...Huns campaign is the biggest breakthrough in my opinion.
  • pumpkinbreadpumpkinbread Senior Member VagabondRegistered Users Posts: 151
    edited March 2015
    The Huns aren't so hard. Pick and choose your wars. 2015-03-12_00001.jpg

    Been doing fine from the get go. Cruising toward the minor victory conditions with two military stacks (Saving up population for a 3rd) and one economic (general only) parked in Gepids territory.
    :p
  • Gunga_dinGunga_din Member Registered Users Posts: 358
    edited March 2015
    LOL!

    I just had the same situation. Like, not exactly the same just because the enemies are sclavenians, antheans and a bunch of sassanids satrapies` and I think it`s 411. It`s the same spot, tough. Good defensive position and you can get 3 hordes supporting each other without rivalry penalties

    I got some ideas on how to make the hunnic situation better (didn`t finish the campaign, tough, so I might be wrong):

    - diplomacy feels shallow and ineffective. I don`t really care about the penalty, since I intended to declare war on anyone I could sack and would`ve made a lot of enemies anyway, but subjugating, which could be a way around this, feels broken. As the game progresses, the real horde is the amalgam of accumulated enemies chasing us;
    - no replenishment. Ok, there`s some replenishment, but not enough. Best way to keep a steady army is merging depleted units and recuiting new ones; Of course, if you could keep some tribes easily domesticated, we could have some kind of safe replenishing haven. Even then, rivalry compromises it;
    - btw, stacking rivalry gets crazy! Why not put a limit on it? Diminishing returns are so big it`s better to keep few armies, since they can easily be swarmed if very spread out;
    - btw (again), why do we get swarmed? My 1st playthrough was with the Jutes. Ok, I had a good defensive position up there in Denmark and raided every freakin thing from britannia to africa, but, eventually, my enemies would stop pursuing me. This doesn`t happen as the Huns. Everyone is relentless and their combined hatred of the Huns is big enough to allow 10-18 trespassing armies from different factions with no bad blood in between them;
    - military costs are too high! I don`t know if upgradable units was a design choice to help AI build it`s armies, create some historical immersion or whatever reason, but it really hurts the Huns. What the hell, hunnic horsemen`s upkeep is almost 100% more than hunnic mounted warband`s and the unit is pretty much the same! Maybe even worse...

    I play on hard difficulty and unless we get a good boost when Attila takes over, like the AI does, this campaign is gonna be very underwhelming. Although I feel all aspects of the game are very well connected, so maybe a simple change could tip the balance in the right direction.

    TL;DR: Op is right. Attila, the scourge of god? More like run Attila, run!
  • SacerdosSacerdos Senior Member Registered Users Posts: 278
    edited March 2015
    - no replenishment. Ok, there`s some replenishment, but not enough. Best way to keep a steady army is merging depleted units and recuiting new ones; Of course, if you could keep some tribes easily domesticated, we could have some kind of safe replenishing haven. Even then, rivalry compromises it;
    You get full replenishment in allied and tributary territory as a horde.
Sign In or Register to comment.