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 keen to see what gameplay changes have been made since Attila for Thrones

Commissar_GCommissar_G Senior MemberRegistered Users Posts: 9,001
As somebody who thinks Attila is far and away the worst total war for a variety of reasons and I'm not going to get into a discussion of that if you disagree.

I'm interested to know how much has changed in Thrones of Britannia to make somebody that despises the very premise of game design in Attila actually buy it.
"As a sandbox game everyone, without exception, should be able to play the game exactly as they see fit and that means providing the maximum scope possible." - ~UNiOnJaCk~
«1

Comments

  • CnConradCnConrad Senior Member Registered Users Posts: 3,072
    Best just not to buy it if you thought Atilla was the "worst" I'm sure the elves magic and single straight walls of Warhammer will keep you plenty busy.


    For all the rest of us Atilla was one of the best Total wars and we hope they don't gut it to streamline it like Warhammer.

    So I repeat once again if you hate the main game no need to check this one out.
  • dge1dge1 Moderator Arkansas, USARegistered Users, Moderators, Knights Posts: 15,187
    Post deleted. Let's avoid posting personal remarks about people expressing opinions Stick to the topic of the thread.
    "The two most common things in the universe are Hydrogen and Stupidity." - Harlan Ellison
    "The right to be heard does not automatically include the right to be taken seriously." - Hubert H. Humphrey
    "Never argue with an idiot. They will only bring you down to their level and beat you with experience.” - George Carlin
  • FossowayFossoway Registered Users Posts: 868
    It would be nice to have a list of all the new features that came with ToB. We'll probably have to wait for some gameplay footage, though.
  • MattzoMattzo Member United KingdomRegistered Users Posts: 1,426
    Yeah, I am really looking forward to seeing the campaign changes. It's all really exciting.
    "Everything in war is simple. But the simplest thing is difficult."
  • TsiarTsiar Registered Users Posts: 244
    CnConrad said:

    Best just not to buy it if you thought Atilla was the "worst" I'm sure the elves magic and single straight walls of Warhammer will keep you plenty busy.


    For all the rest of us Atilla was one of the best Total wars and we hope they don't gut it to streamline it like Warhammer.

    So I repeat once again if you hate the main game no need to check this one out.

    No criticism of Attila allowed eh?
  • CnConradCnConrad Senior Member Registered Users Posts: 3,072
    dge1 said:

    Post deleted. Let's avoid posting personal remarks about people expressing opinions Stick to the topic of the thread.

    Well how was it not the topic of the thread? He said he despised Atilla which the basis of the game. Likely he won't like this. Nowhere has CA said don't worry this game is nothing like Atilla? How is pointing that out worthy of deletion?

    I guess I'll post again without referencing Warhammer :confused:

    This game is built on Atilla. There will be some tweaks, but it will be by and large the same game in a different time period with different units. If you disliked everything about Atilla you will likely dislike much about this game.

    Hopefully that managed to not violate any rules.
  • EsbenrosenkildeEsbenrosenkilde Registered Users Posts: 1
    edited January 12
    CnConrad said:

    Best just not to buy it if you thought Atilla was the "worst" I'm sure the elves magic and single straight walls of Warhammer will keep you plenty busy.


    For all the rest of us Atilla was one of the best Total wars and we hope they don't gut it to streamline it like Warhammer.

    So I repeat once again if you hate the main game no need to check this one out.

    I just had to make an account to respond to this comment. How can you speak "for the rest of us"? In my opinion, since i cant swar, I think Atilla was the worst pile of human remains created by CA efter Rome II.

    Inappropriate comment removed.
    Post edited by dge1 on
  • MattzoMattzo Member United KingdomRegistered Users Posts: 1,426
    edited January 12

    CnConrad said:

    Best just not to buy it if you thought Atilla was the "worst" I'm sure the elves magic and single straight walls of Warhammer will keep you plenty busy.


    For all the rest of us Atilla was one of the best Total wars and we hope they don't gut it to streamline it like Warhammer.

    So I repeat once again if you hate the main game no need to check this one out.

    I just had to make an account to respond to this comment. How can you speak "for the rest of us"? In my opinion, since i cant swar, I think Atilla was the worst pile of human remains created by CA efter Rome II.

    Inappropriate comment removed.
    Next time I recommend not creating an account.

    There are lots of us here who think Attila is one of CA's best games. People use the term 'the rest of us' all the time. It's a turn of phrase. No one takes it literally.
    Post edited by dge1 on
    "Everything in war is simple. But the simplest thing is difficult."
  • BlackenedLokiBlackenedLoki Junior Member Registered Users Posts: 155
    edited January 12
    Mattzo said:

    CnConrad said:

    Best just not to buy it if you thought Atilla was the "worst" I'm sure the elves magic and single straight walls of Warhammer will keep you plenty busy.


    For all the rest of us Atilla was one of the best Total wars and we hope they don't gut it to streamline it like Warhammer.

    So I repeat once again if you hate the main game no need to check this one out.

    I just had to make an account to respond to this comment. How can you speak "for the rest of us"? In my opinion, since i cant swar, I think Atilla was the worst pile of human remains created by CA efter Rome II.

    Inappropriate comment removed.
    Next time I recommend not creating an account.

    There are lots of us here who think Attila is one of CA's best games. People use the term 'the rest of us' all the time. It's a turn of phrase. No one takes it literally.

    Agreed, if you don't have anything nice to say...
    Post edited by dge1 on
    Yes, I am one of those people who liked Rome 2 and yes my opinion is still valid.
  • dge1dge1 Moderator Arkansas, USARegistered Users, Moderators, Knights Posts: 15,187
    Tsiar said:

    CnConrad said:

    Best just not to buy it if you thought Atilla was the "worst" I'm sure the elves magic and single straight walls of Warhammer will keep you plenty busy.


    For all the rest of us Atilla was one of the best Total wars and we hope they don't gut it to streamline it like Warhammer.

    So I repeat once again if you hate the main game no need to check this one out.

    No criticism of Attila allowed eh?
    You may criticise all you want, as long as your posted content is within the thread's subject for discussion, and confirms to the conditions set out in the Forum Terms & Conditions. OP is not asking for what you thinbk is wrong with Attila. The question for discussion is what is different fron one game to the next.
    CnConrad said:

    dge1 said:

    Post deleted. Let's avoid posting personal remarks about people expressing opinions Stick to the topic of the thread.

    Well how was it not the topic of the thread? He said he despised Atilla which the basis of the game. Likely he won't like this. Nowhere has CA said don't worry this game is nothing like Atilla? How is pointing that out worthy of deletion?

    I guess I'll post again without referencing Warhammer :confused:

    This game is built on Atilla. There will be some tweaks, but it will be by and large the same game in a different time period with different units. If you disliked everything about Atilla you will likely dislike much about this game.

    Hopefully that managed to not violate any rules.
    It did not.

    Some posts will be deleted due to having inappropriate critical inferences about other members, or are clearly out of bounds when reviewed against the Forum Terms & Conditions. All topics pertainent to a game discussion. The OP's topic question for discussion did not include a desire for information about whether one liked or disliked Attila, but on what might be different from one game to the other.

    Thanks for the question and your post content.

    dge1

    "The two most common things in the universe are Hydrogen and Stupidity." - Harlan Ellison
    "The right to be heard does not automatically include the right to be taken seriously." - Hubert H. Humphrey
    "Never argue with an idiot. They will only bring you down to their level and beat you with experience.” - George Carlin
  • CnConradCnConrad Senior Member Registered Users Posts: 3,072
    @dge1 you have you hands full now and I get it. New game announces along with a bit of confusion and controversy.


    While I may some times tip toe over the line I do respect the job you do. (not that I always agree with you) but we are all people here and people all have their own outlook.

    Back to the topic.

    Atilla did have some problems, not everyone loved it. But every indication that CA has given was that this will be a version of Atilla. Meaning if you liked nothing about the game, likely you will dislike much about this one.
  • mmurray821mmurray821 Moderator Moderators Posts: 5,219
    Personally I find Attila to be one of the worst historical games. Ran fine on my computer and looked beautiful, but the building and food mechanics were so wonky compared to the other TW games along with combat seeming to be just a speed test with little tactics I rapidly shelved it.

    That being said, while ToB is built on that engine, it seems several mechanics have been changed.

    I am waiting to see some gameplay of it before throwing up my hands and declaring it a failure. I like what Jack has said about it so far and am happy to wait and see what the product looks like.
    Total War Forum: Terms and Conditions
    I've never seen the Icarus story as a lesson on the limitations of humans. I see it as a lesson about the limitations of wax as an adhesive.
  • ShadowtwinzShadowtwinz Registered Users Posts: 57
    i bet, it will change 1 v 1 animation and charge mechanics. Maybe increase length of battle.
    Whats the regarding AI , i do believe they will improve it alot due to siege settlement variety. They will have to invest a lot of time in it . And abilities will stay at fantasy point with unrealistic bonuses.
  • EfixEfix Registered Users Posts: 203

    CnConrad said:

    Best just not to buy it if you thought Atilla was the "worst" I'm sure the elves magic and single straight walls of Warhammer will keep you plenty busy.


    For all the rest of us Atilla was one of the best Total wars and we hope they don't gut it to streamline it like Warhammer.

    So I repeat once again if you hate the main game no need to check this one out.

    I just had to make an account to respond to this comment. How can you speak "for the rest of us"? In my opinion, since i cant swar, I think Atilla was the worst pile of human remains created by CA efter Rome II.

    Inappropriate comment removed.
    For me its Warhammer that gets the worst pile of human remains award but people like dragons elves and pixies.
  • petertel123petertel123 Junior Member Registered Users Posts: 690
    Why do people feel like they are superior if they like history instead of fantasy? it's a friggin video game. Both are nerdy and neither are a reason to insult other people.
    Team Bretonnia
    Team Dark Elves
  • LESAMALESAMA Member Registered Users Posts: 413

    Why do people feel like they are superior if they like history instead of fantasy? it's a friggin video game. Both are nerdy and neither are a reason to insult other people.

    Haha, fully agree. It’s just entertainment as is this forum sometimes. I loved atilla although i would have prefered the Warhammer ai and that they Would reverse the end game Climate change and Snow effects. For the rest iT was a Great game!

  • KregenKregen Member Registered Users Posts: 483
    edited January 13

    Why do people feel like they are superior if they like history instead of fantasy? it's a friggin video game. Both are nerdy and neither are a reason to insult other people.

    It’s not so much that history interested people feel superior its that they do not want fantasy elements in games that are ment to be based in real history. There is nothing wrong with fantasy games but history games with fantasy element are no longer history games but have become fantasy games. Some of us would like to keep history games as history games as that is the way we enjoy playing them. Some of us me for one also enjoy fantasy games but both kinds of game scratch different itches. If a dev announces we are making fantasy game based on a particular historic period that is also not a problem, but if they say this will be a history game based in a particular period then I expect it to conform to a reasonable level of historic accuracy.
  • sLorKinGsLorKinG Registered Users Posts: 11
    CA is trolling. They picked the worst fantasy to make total war. Imagine if we had a lotr total war or game of thrones total war,how successful they would become. BUT NOOOO LETS TAKE WORST FANTASY EVER MADE FOR CHILDREN AND MAKE IT INTO A GAME YAY!
  • EfixEfix Registered Users Posts: 203
    edited January 14
    sLorKinG said:

    CA is trolling. They picked the worst fantasy to make total war. Imagine if we had a lotr total war or game of thrones total war,how successful they would become. BUT NOOOO LETS TAKE WORST FANTASY EVER MADE FOR CHILDREN AND MAKE IT INTO A GAME YAY!

    Yep I agree low fantasy would have been so much better and enjoyable plus the armor and units are very very nice looking in both TV show/movies. Warhammer is just over the top for the sake of it I like 40k a lot tho.
  • Commissar_GCommissar_G Senior Member Registered Users Posts: 9,001
    edited January 15
    sLorKinG said:

    CA is trolling. They picked the worst fantasy to make total war. Imagine if we had a lotr total war or game of thrones total war,how successful they would become. BUT NOOOO LETS TAKE WORST FANTASY EVER MADE FOR CHILDREN AND MAKE IT INTO A GAME YAY!

    This characterisation by a lot of you "less adaptable" old heads cracks me up.

    How many people can you name under the age of 13 that played Warhammer? If Warhammer is for children then chess is for babies.

    I'm curious which theme from Warhammer is so kid friendly that this utter tripe keeps getting spouted. Is it the genocide? The human sacrifice? The slavery? The hedonism? The constant barbaric invasions? The regicide?
    "As a sandbox game everyone, without exception, should be able to play the game exactly as they see fit and that means providing the maximum scope possible." - ~UNiOnJaCk~
  • petertel123petertel123 Junior Member Registered Users Posts: 690
    sLorKinG said:

    CA is trolling. They picked the worst fantasy to make total war. Imagine if we had a lotr total war or game of thrones total war,how successful they would become. BUT NOOOO LETS TAKE WORST FANTASY EVER MADE FOR CHILDREN AND MAKE IT INTO A GAME YAY!

    Because the LotR and GoT licenses are cheap and easy to obtain right?
    Team Bretonnia
    Team Dark Elves
  • CanuoveaCanuovea Registered Users Posts: 7,980
    Warhammer made perfect sense. Machiavelli made the point that half measures are rarely a good idea, and this is true here.

    Warhammer is very warhammery, meaning it goes all out. Dragons and Elves and Dwarfs and Steam Tanks and Vampires and Egyptian Mummies and Conan and EVERYTHING. If you go fantasy, might as well make it as diverse and interesting as you can.

    Game of Thrones? Barely fantasy at this point compared to Warhammer. It could have been done with previous total wars just as well... minus maybe the dragons. Lord of the Rings, while the better fantasy, doesn't have as much stuff to go around. Air units? Well... Eagles I guess. Fell Beasts. Uh, dragons if you push it. Vampires if you REALLY push it. Certainly no really flashy magic (though I'd love to see the various Harads, Variags, and Umbar represented in Total War fashion next to the Noldor and company).
  • dodge33cymrudodge33cymru Registered Users Posts: 1,431
    I'm just hoping charges have improved, although the lack of clashing in the trailer doesn't fill me with confidence. Warhammer's are over the top, but a step in the right direction IMO.
  • KregenKregen Member Registered Users Posts: 483

    I'm just hoping charges have improved, although the lack of clashing in the trailer doesn't fill me with confidence. Warhammer's are over the top, but a step in the right direction IMO.

    Yes when two shield walls clash they should stay in formation and start pushing against each other whilst trying to attack
    Over, under or through the opponents shield wall. I’m also hopeing shield walls will be a formation with different types offering standard shield wall in various depths and also the wedge formation shield wall the bore's tusk used to split and break the opponents shield wall.
  • ShadowtwinzShadowtwinz Registered Users Posts: 57
    [quote]"when two shield walls clash they should stay in formation and start pushing against each other whilst trying to attack
    Over, under or through the opponents shield wall"[/quote]
    Mission impossible with current engine and mechanics. In best case they could push deep in after unit is killed while maintaning formation.

    tho I would consider this as defence possition to hold line for longer time.
    In addition throwing spears should rather be special ability intead of charge mechanic.

    What can suit current capabilities of engine, i think, it's better combat animations and unit spacing, unit target finding ( if not holding shiewall ).
    You can easily notice in movies or other forms of practice how Units charge and are spaced in battles, the yare not always in line but loose in the field.
  • KregenKregen Member Registered Users Posts: 483

    [quote]"when two shield walls clash they should stay in formation and start pushing against each other whilst trying to attack
    Over, under or through the opponents shield wall"[/quote]
    Mission impossible with current engine and mechanics. In best case they could push deep in after unit is killed while maintaning formation.

    tho I would consider this as defence possition to hold line for longer time.
    In addition throwing spears should rather be special ability intead of charge mechanic.

    What can suit current capabilities of engine, i think, it's better combat animations and unit spacing, unit target finding ( if not holding shiewall ).
    You can easily notice in movies or other forms of practice how Units charge and are spaced in battles, the yare not always in line but loose in the field.

    That may well be so I would not know, never the less that's still how shield walls should work
  • FranzSaxonFranzSaxon Registered Users Posts: 2,030
    Well, this thread went to ****. Ink how anyone says Attila is bad. I am one of conrads points, I think Attila is the best TW besides the horrid optimization. And im not counting those around the bush heaters who say Attila "runs great" for them. Yeah, on medium and low settings with blood Nd gore turned off or on medium or large unit size. Give me a break. Anyway besides that Attila is amazing. If you hate Attila you really should stick to WH and three kingdoms. for the rest of us, we will throughouly love butchering Danes with king Alfred.
  • gisgo1909gisgo1909 Registered Users Posts: 79

    Well, this thread went to ****. Ink how anyone says Attila is bad. I am one of conrads points, I think Attila is the best TW besides the horrid optimization. And im not counting those around the bush heaters who say Attila "runs great" for them. Yeah, on medium and low settings with blood Nd gore turned off or on medium or large unit size. Give me a break. Anyway besides that Attila is amazing. If you hate Attila you really should stick to WH and three kingdoms. for the rest of us, we will throughouly love butchering Danes with king Alfred.

    So I've played all the historical TW games since S1 came out. My least favorite ones are S2 and Attila. S2 because if you've played as one faction, you've played as them all. It was a good game with very little replay ability(for me). Attila had a lot of good things going for it. But what is good about 2 minute battles where units route at the sight of blood? What is good about a **** building system which has you building the exact same thing everywhere or else you'll starve in the late game? What is good about **** optimization? What is good about 2/3 of the map being scorched and not rebuilt? What is good about taking ages to march across the map because the whole world is suddenly Antarctica? I would mention the campaign AI but it's not really any worse than the rest of the games. Although I have a collection of single mods which make the CAI in Rome 2 pretty damn good (for TW). I guess a family tree, governors and the new horde mechanic magically wash all those negatives away for you. But for a lot of people like me it doesn't. Haven't you ever wondered why so few people play Attila? Other than climate change and horde factions, what does Attila do better than it's predecessors? Unit and faction diversity? Nope, Rome 2 does that better. Campaign mechanics? Nope Empire, Med 1 and 2 do that better. Battles? Nope, most TW games do that better. Politics? Nope, Empire, S2, Med1 and 2 do that better. So what is it exactly that Attila does objectively better than it's predecessors?

    And no, I don't play WH. I put about 30 hours into the first game and put it away. All flash no substance. I won't buy any of the other WH games and if 3K turns out to be fantasy or has no unit diversity, I won't buy it either. If you like Attila, that's great. But don't insult those of us who don't by telling us to go play the fantasy games.

    Having said that, I'm looking forward to ToB even if I'm worried that it will end up with no unit diversity (S2) and very little options for buildings in settlements (AoC). Which is what I think the OP is getting at.
  • ShadowtwinzShadowtwinz Registered Users Posts: 57
    edited January 18
    Good point. Rome 2 total is way better than Attila.

    The settlement developing system in Attila can't be worse.
    I Agree, construction sites doesn't make sense at all. I want CA to return to M2tw mechanics at any cost.
    Squalor feature is non noticeable. It cause no impact to campaign at all.
    Food system isn't thought well before implented. When Edict can provide more growth than overstocked food supplies, it doesn't make sense too. Imo this has to be reworked from scratch to actualy give a chance in ToB.
  • FranzSaxonFranzSaxon Registered Users Posts: 2,030
    ^I agree on many of ur points, and i mod out morale completely to enjoy Attila. I guess that doesn't count as a point toward vanilla enjoyment. But with no morale so battles actually last, plus the time period and graphics, and all the mods, the combat just is so enjoyable to me it became my fav game. Im not really rating it from mechanics and im not arguing it has better mechanics. I really dont care cuz theyre good enough for me with the battles being so good. It just looks like a battle simulator its so good. Yeah 2v2s run like dog ****, but I still will be forever satisfied with Attila. Medieval mods, AoC, vanilla, ancient empires otw, its just heaven for me. And I do enjoy the politics system. But vanilla suffers horribly from lack if diversity. Some Germanic factions literally have one unique unit. The rest are the exact same units. Germanic spearmen ect. Thats a really shady look. Despite all that it just looks to good for me to complain about, and the combat just feels awesome to me. Dont care if its not real formations, (obviously armies didn't engage in hundreds of personal combats next to each other) its close enough and its a game.
«1
Sign In or Register to comment.