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.


Done with Total War and Three Kingdoms. I give up.

RisingWindRisingWind Registered Users Posts: 2
I really do my best to like these games, I really really try to ignore how awful they are and just role play. But I can't anymore. Three Kingdoms has the worst mechanics of any strategy game I've ever played. There is no rhyme or reason to anything. It's totally random, the AI cheats, there are endless stupid options that aren't fun at all that are just gimmicks. Leveling up generals is stupid, leveling up the tree every 5 turns is stupid, spying is stupid, diplomacy would be cool but it's stupid. A faction has 1 city left, and I offer peace. Nah, to offer peace is like -80 when they have no allies or army. Makes complete sense. Stupid.

What really broke my will is how badly they program the AI. Like, the first 30 turns nobody attacks me. I steam roll. Then without warning, world war is declared and I'm attacked on all fronts and my ally randomly leaves the alliance and becomes my enemy. So I think whatever, garbage idiotic mechanics by terrible developers, I'll just work through it. But then again like 30 turns in, something flips and all of a sudden an enemy faction that I have been neutral with invades with 7 full stack armies and oh ya, a faction twice their size became a vassal to them. So now like half the map is attacking me, when the turn previous they were all neutral, and even though I have double the territory I can't even field 4 full stack armies. Let alone concentrate them all and just abandon my territories because that triggers another garbage hacky mechanic, the rebellions. I can adjust to hack idiotic programming, but not when it just keeps changing the rules turn to turn. Not when full stack armies come out of nowhere and go right to my capital.

Another thing, the army structure is stupid. The recruitment is stupid. Why the hell do I want three generals having their own units? What purpose does this serve? They don't fight with the units so what the hell were they even going for with that?

Long story short - Too many stupid mechanics that are straight up hacky and stupid gimmicks. Diplomacy is broken as ALWAYS. But what really sets this Total War apart from the others I've played is the extremely hacky triggers that can't be predicted or prepared for. Might as well just send a lightning bolt and destroy my armies. The current system is just as random and unfair.

I just want a war game with diplomacy. My bad for looking to the Total War series. Won't happen again.


  • RisingWindRisingWind Registered Users Posts: 2
    edited November 2019
    I should have known when I loaded the game the first time that it would be hack garbage when I had a bunch of female generals. This series is too woke for me. Might as well have Zulu warriors as Roman Generals. I mean why not? Be more inclusive you racist hacks.

    This game would be much better if I could turn off all the stupid triggers and remove like 80% of the functionality(spying, tree, general skill points ect), and then removed 80% of the diplomacy logic and it just let me make deals whenever I wanted. Sure, that would be too easy, but at least I could role play. Instead of my ally for the past 200 turns refusing to help me in a war, when I ALWAYS fought for them.

    Rome 1 had a much better system of garrisoning units. This game makes it too expensive to have armies, too expensive to garrison, so it's a big dance regarding attacking and dealing with rebellions. It's stupid and hacky. Not realistic. "Just build the armies when you need them!" Sure sure, I'll play a war game with no armies. That's fun.
  • nephlitenephlite Registered Users Posts: 407
    You are complaining about every part of this game, which means you don't have to play this game.
  • Aventus_MaximusAventus_Maximus Registered Users Posts: 471
    I agree, 3 kingdoms is my last purchase. New programming techniques are not about simulation anymore but about granting a succesful action story, and for this every trick 'they' know off will be used.

    I wish i could tell you where to look for a good diplomatic strategic game, maybe paradox could allure you with their versions of wargames, or 4x such as stellaris, Age of Wonders Planetfall…. Else.... maybe look and see what the Endless Space developers have in store for you. I'm just done with a week of Galciv III and can report the same attitude as you can find the the last games of the total war series.

    I'm going back to building trains, cities ( simcity not cities, don't get me wrong ) and hoping that my gaming future won't consisting out of baldurs gate, command and conquer tiberian sun, mass effect and doom :p ( oh yea and maybe the first shogun which is still a solid challenge

    Male Parta Male Dilabuntur – ‘What has been wrongly gained is wrongly lost.’
    Fiat Lux – ‘Let there be light.’
    Alea Jacta Est – ‘The die is cast.’
  • Warlord_Lu_BuWarlord_Lu_Bu Registered Users Posts: 2,755
    You make valid points and I agree with most of them... particularly the AI's behavior, they way they cheat and also act towards logical things like "oh... I've only got 1 city left, a broken army and no allies? sure... I'll still fight to the death against PLAYERS".

    Note that they AI will subjugate themselves to another AI in a heart beat... but Players? unless they love you to bits (which makes no sense) they will never accept you as an overlord (which is completely ridiculous).
    "I am the punishment of Tengri, if you had not sinned, he would not have sent me against you." - Chenghis Khan Temujin
  • ShiroAmakusa75ShiroAmakusa75 Senior Member Registered Users Posts: 31,317
    edited November 2019

    You might have noticed that little marker that shows up when you go on a conquering spree which marks you as an ever increasing strategic threat and makes other factions grow increasingly weary of you. That's the game reacting to you being an overly aggressive warmonger. Maybe you should have also paid attention to the traits of your allies because some traits make them detest warmongers.

    Nah, your criticism is solely based on the fact that you have not been paying attention and apparently want the game to solely fuel your power fantasy without reaction.

    For that go and play Warhammer.

  • ZilongZilong Junior Member Registered Users Posts: 501
    Is this parody? it seems like this post is either parody or satire.
  • MrMecHMrMecH Registered Users Posts: 2,358
    I really do my best to like these thread, I really really try to ignore how awful you are. But I can't anymore

  • Misaka_ComplexMisaka_Complex Registered Users Posts: 3,356
    In order to beat the broken mechanics in the game you must abuse the broken mechanics to beat the game. Be like Lu Bu who can delete entire armies alone and redeploy him the next turn at full health. If you add him to another army with 1 general only when you redeploy him the next turn he will also be able to move that same turn. Broken? Yes, Necessary? Also yes. How to delete 3-4 stacks of enemies? Make an army of 1 OP general with cavs, 2 strategist - 1 with crossbows only and 1 with trebs only. This way you barely take any casualties and the enemy is pretty much dead before they reach your army, and right click the enemy generals with cav and done. You also replenish your ammo fully for the next fight so you can fight multiple stacks with this army composition.

    The biggest problem here is the treachery bug which breaks diplomacy so that needs fixing.
  • JacquestheApostateJacquestheApostate Senior Member Registered Users Posts: 707
    Good riddance.
    3 Kingdoms is a great game campaign wise. Make ranked battles in Records mode. Until that is done it won't be complete.
    Gun Cav in Shogun II should have a Retainer!
    Give us another Avatar Campaign!
  • wunderb0rwunderb0r Junior Member Registered Users Posts: 694
    edited April 23
    nephlite said:

    You are complaining about every part of this game, which means you don't have to play this game.

    can we engrave this with big golden letters and put it on every game forum in the universe, please??
    Post edited by BillyRuffian on
  • LESAMALESAMA Member Registered Users Posts: 2,035
    Mmmh don’t play the game then if You don’t like it. I like it :smile: and imo 3k is one of the best polished totalwar to date.

    Only criticism is:
    1) the lack of communication from ca on future updates
    2) diversity (other cultures/regional differences)
    3) council mechanic (never use it/ need it and porely executed)
    4) some balance issues (For example Militia to cost effective)
    5) some annoying bugs

    For the rest 100 point from me!
  • shattishatti Registered Users Posts: 696
    edited November 2019
    if u complain about cheating AI
    look to diplomacy, the relations are always there,
    u just have to read them, specially when playing in high difficulty
    the AI is bad,
    that's why they have more stacks than u. (sadly this is the way to have a good challenge)

    there is a stable very good mod for units unlock

    the game is the best total war for me, even with it's dirt
  • Whiskeyjack_5691Whiskeyjack_5691 Registered Users Posts: 4,160
    Seems pretty clear OP has no interest in an actual discussion and only dropped by to say "dis gaem sukz, I dun't like it" before buggering off, so shouldn't this thread be closed?
  • ArneSoArneSo Hamburg, Germany Registered Users Posts: 21,628
    I have mixed feelings about 3k.
    It’s by far the most polished total war game, but in terms of faction variety, units and cultural diversity it is one of the worst.

    It failed to motivate me for a long time because it is to barebone and repetitive compared to Rome 2 and Warhammer. It simply bored out to fast... Battles are always the same doesn’t matter which faction you choose. So Cao Cao plays exactly like Liu Bei in the end.

    If the next DLC will be good again I might come back, but I really fear that I lost my interest after all these months without content or updates. Having good fun with warhammer and Troy will also come next year.

    Most players already stopped playing it and it’s pretty much dead since July. 8P also failed to keep players active in the game.
    Nurgle is love, Nurgle is life
  • dge1dge1 Moderator Arkansas, USARegistered Users, Moderators, Knights Posts: 21,487
    Wrong area for feedback. Given the OP's post content and apparent conversation focus, moved to Rants.
    "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/Mark Twain
    “Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it.”–George Santayana, The Life of Reason, 1905.

  • mitthrawnuruodomitthrawnuruodo Junior Member Registered Users Posts: 1,971
    edited November 2019
    Total War AI has always been stupid hence lopsided balancing is used to provide challenge. This should be improved. No arguments there.

    AI's diplomatic behaviour often seem random and nonsensical, and biased against the player, and this has been the case for all Total War games. This game actually makes a massive improvement by making it transparent so you can better manage your negotiations. If an AI faction with a single city refuses to subjugate because of -80 relations, it means there are other diplomatic penalties at play due to your actions (or sometimes due to bad diplomacy logic that needs to be fixed) during the campaign. You are just not paying attention.

    The game also actively requires you to maintain alliances and vassals until you are strong enough individually, as it was in history. If you use the same "steamroll everyone" braindead diplomatic approach from previous games, you will suffer. You are blaming the system for your lack of diplomatic strategy.

    I could understand you throwing a fit over this after playing Warhammer or Britannia, but it seems rather arbitrary and counterproductive to target 3K, when it is actually significantly better in this regard. We should encourage CA to stay on this path and make further improvements.

    Another thing, the army structure is stupid. The recruitment is stupid. Why the hell do I want three generals having their own units? What purpose does this serve? They don't fight with the units so what the hell were they even going for with that?

    This, however, takes the cake as one of the dumbest criticisms possible. Do you know what is the one thing that has been common in all armies across the globe and across history, other than the obvious like soldiers and weapons? IT'S FLIPPING ARMY STRUCTURE! We finally have a Total War game that incorporates this essential, realistic and historically accurate element of warfare to some extent. It is not just about "fighting with the units". If you move the leader to a different corner of the map from the troops, that is your choice. It is about training and recruitment. You need a capable cavalry commander to recruit expert cavalry troops and get the best out of them. Some leaders are better at leading whole armies, others better at being subordinates. It is bloody brilliant that this game simulates these important strategic elements.

    But of course, some casual gamer can not figure out the extra bit of depth, so it must be dumb. A historical strategy game that requires historically accurate strategy?! Who would have thought?

    It seems pretty obvious you are just terrible at this game, and are now crying sour grapes.
  • carbiniz3rcarbiniz3r Registered Users Posts: 6
    Worst part is, if you wanna play an older total war game, you cant even get proper support. Iv been bumping a support post for 3 months with no reply.
  • MKEsbjornMKEsbjorn Registered Users Posts: 528
    so i think a lot has been mentioned about the diplomacy like the strategic threat. maybe another problem you had was that maybe you were in central plains? but there are ways to avoid the diplomatic disaster that you find yourself in.

    2nd, rebellions. really? i have never had it happen to me. just build a temple and upgrade it. build the taxation office, get the reform and then demolish it.

    no money, have you looked at your corruption? the more territories and the higher rank you are the higher the corruption. in my first game i had half of china and 7 stacks (i think) and was earning 7k a turn. my corruption in almost every commandary was 70% as i had build the wrong things and not paid attention to corruption.

    with all that said, are there bad or stupid parts of the game. of course. but i think most games have some flaw. you know that you can't stand it anymore and that's fine. there are other people who will continue to enjoy the game.
  • Sparky1066Sparky1066 Registered Users Posts: 1
    I think Total War peaked at Empire and has backwards ever since. Restriction on number of Generals and Army's Why? If your economy can support more why restrict it, sure there are Mods that rectify the issue but why should it be needed? Then there is the increasing conversion to Total Civilization! If I want to play Civilization I will, because Civ. does it much better. I want to play Total War! I did give a monkeys about sanitation, whether my populous is happy, I want to recruit armies and fight.

    Please get back to Total War
  • ShiroAmakusa75ShiroAmakusa75 Senior Member Registered Users Posts: 31,317

    I think Total War peaked at Empire and has backwards ever since.

    Absolutely laughable.

  • Arknav555Arknav555 Registered Users Posts: 127

    I think Total War peaked at Empire and has backwards ever since. Restriction on number of Generals and Army's Why? If your economy can support more why restrict it, sure there are Mods that rectify the issue but why should it be needed? Then there is the increasing conversion to Total Civilization! If I want to play Civilization I will, because Civ. does it much better. I want to play Total War! I did give a monkeys about sanitation, whether my populous is happy, I want to recruit armies and fight.

    Please get back to Total War

    Go back to Empire, where France is one region and Sweden won't give peace when you destroyed everything they have.
  • RamhackRamhack Registered Users Posts: 1
    edited February 23
    Okay first : There has, as far as I know been no strategy game EVER where the AI wasn't complained about a lot. Here's the thing. Expecting AI to compete with human players on an even playing field is like expecting to win the lottery 5 weeks in a row. It really really isn't going to happen. Even at it's best level in projects that are way beyond recreational, AI can't even hold a conversation with human. And can barely beat us at chess. Which sounds impressive until you realise that compared to just about any game chess is a simple game with few moving parts. That's why it's considered such a direct competition of intellect by some. Precisely BECAUSE of it's simplicity. And it's extremely procedural tactics and capacity for perfect information. The computer has perfect memory and a database that was uploaded and refined over years with way more plays counters and information than most normal people would be able to process. And that's the only reason it was able to win.

    But put in the amount of complexity of a total war game and all that falls apart quickly. It's about time we stopped complaining about AI. Besides I've seen people like the OP all over the place. If it wasn't for this they would be complaining that it's too easy to snowball. They will literally shout at the game because it doesn't get things "just right" for their skill level.

    Second .. You .. Were .. Snowballing. Do you even know what those times were like? Smaller powers being afraid of being absorbed. Anyone who got too far ahead of the game would be ganged up on by the rest. Anticipating and preparing for and even using that is part of the strategy. You basically became the new Dong Zhuo. Or did you think that everyone who went against him did so for idealistic reasons?

    Plus complaining about the unit limit is daft. It's a game limitation. And reflects the troops and units that the generals themselves organised, trains and commands. You might as well complain about all the other game mechanics, Whadya mean I need moneh for troops? Sure it might be a bit annoying to you but it's no reason to spit the dummy like you are.

    I agree that spying and confederation need work. But these are rough edges an an otherwise excellent game that has given me hours of fun.

    If you want a game that gives diplomacy, deception and a clash of minds. Then you need to play against humans. Your computer isn't going to outsmart you anytime soon. Especially in the modern day when people can just look up how to break mechanics on the internet. And as far as predicting the triggers. I did fine. I've had a couple of campaigns where I misjudged things and lost a long running campaign. But most losses for me occur early. Because I actually figure out who the diplomatic players are and keep an eye on their evolving attitude. If you just ignore those aspects of the game and are like lol stack go smash. Then yeah you're going to get a few nasty surprises.

    I know that was a bit of a wall but jeez people like the OP annoy the hell outta me.
  • StjornleysiStjornleysi Registered Users Posts: 2
    I hope you realize that female generals were a thing during this time period. its not just them "acting woke".
Sign In or Register to comment.