My Opinion about Troy

The_Moosk

I was so hyped about this game when I saw the reveal trailer but now I´m just worried and disappointed.
So let´s start in a chronologically correct order.
The news about being exclousive. I was mad about this why should you sell your product like that, why do you have no faith in your work? (I have read their arguments) I still could'nt understand this decision.
Then the Mythical creatures. I thought that the game would be like three kingdoms, that there would be a historical and a mythical mode but there is not, its a mixture of both which is too weird.
Then the official trailer. I saw the graphics and I instantly googled how old the engine was. The engine is 7 years old (warscape engine, was the answer google gave me). But CA said there would be changes which I can hardly see. It looks like someone took the graphics out of a comic and redrew them on a rubberband.
Now the gameplay reveal. I watched it closely and I have to say that this is like rome 2 mixed with three Kingdoms and Warhammer. Then Characters have spells?! Thats not what I wanted, I wanted Brad Pitt (kidding).
Then the texture what is that, also most players would argue that you dont zoom in that much which is right and I totally agree with that but thats not what we were promised.
Then I watched a critics video about this if you want to watch it yourself heres the link:
https://youtube.com/watch?v=YazoJOWwNe0
He has more arguments then me right now and puts them in a very worried video. The most outrageous part is when he says that: "Hector wins in every duell with Achilles" What?! I thought you guys read the Iliad, Achilles absolutly trashed Hector, Hector ran around the Trojan walls 3 Times!
So these are my worries, now to my hopes.
Dear CA Bulgaria, there is still time to fix this (work in progress as shown in gameplay) don't leave us like this, don't be like Bethesda and release an unfinished game just to patch it into a playable state. Saga games don't have to be bad. Show us your work and the heart you put into this project.
Last thing I want to say is that this is not a hate comment or else, I don't want to insult anybody and I don't even think that youre ever going to read this.
(excuse me if my english is bad in some areas)

The_Moosk

I forgot that the Trojan horse is a siege tower and that there can be multible trojan horses!

Captain_Rex#1635

Well to me the game looks perfect. I like everything I see so far.

Only bummer is that I have to wait one year before I can play it...

Valra#7325

ArneSo said:

Only bummer is that I have to wait one year before I can play it...

Except that you don't "have to" wait for a year. You can play it in 2 1/2 months and will even get it for free. It is your own personal choice to wait for a year.

Whiskeyjack_5691#3558

My opinion...
Disappointed. Not just with what we know about the game so far, but where the series as a whole seems to be headed.

I've always liked the game's "truth behind the myth" approach. I thought it a was really cool take, and a lot of the game's interpretations of the myths and legends were honestly fascinating and very clever. Now, all of the game's criticisms and failings are going to be laid squarely at the feet of the "truth behind the myth" approach, which is unfair and I think a damn shame.

The single-entity heroes able to take on entire enemy regiments was something I've never been a fan of, as I find tactics take a backseat to them. Why bother with formations and maneuvering when you can just hurl superpowered heroes into the fray? I had hoped this would be reigned in for Troy, but now we're seeing heroes with magical healing spells, area-of-effect attacks, and units that are immune to flanking (seriously, who thought that was a good idea in an RTS?). The game's going the same way as Warhammer: a MOBA-style spell-spammer, where you mash two stacks into each other with your heroes in the thick of the fighting, and whoever spams the most abilities the fastest wins.

The Epic exclusivity I don't have a problem with, apart from it being a minor inconvenience. But Cody Bonds' video has convinced me that CA are planning to take the money and run; ditch Troy after 6 months, and pump that money into more Warhammer content, and Troy and the rest of us be damned. I had hoped CA would stick with the game, as it had some very interesting new ideas and concepts, like battlefield terrain and the barter economy. Now I think all those great ideas are going to be left go to waste.

Captain_Rex#1635

Valra said:

ArneSo said:

Only bummer is that I have to wait one year before I can play it...

Except that you don't "have to" wait for a year. You can play it in 2 1/2 months and will even get it for free. It is your own personal choice to wait for a year.

The game being free is one of the reasons why I won’t get it in August. It’s seems fishy if you ask me... Nothing in this world is for free and I have no trust into Epic and their Chinese overlords.

Don’t want to spend money on all the DLCs just to see one day that the game disappeared from my library. Because the same happened with Metro exodus.

Epic is a shady platform financed by a very dubious Chinese company, supported by an evil Regime. I’ll stay away from that.

Talavalakas

I think that they will perfectly balanced for the release of the game. As for the fact that the hero provides more support with his buffs - this is even better. No, this is not Warhammer's magic, although it was certainly done at its base. But this is already a problem that the developers were initially allocated not so much money for this Saga. I hope that the developers will heed the comments, correct the animations and improve the balance. Total War on the release is almost always somewhat unfinished, but they will bring to mind the outputs of the DLC with blood that they will not have time to fix for the release. I believe in this game, I’ve been waiting for a game about the Bronze Age for 10 years and I won’t allow myself to be disappointed to the last.

TejaSchwarzhaar#9835

I don't understand why so many people are incontent with the gameplay reveal.

I get that the balancing may be a little off, although I only heard that in the Cody Bond video that Moosk mentioned. But even if Cody Bond is right, balancing is relatively easy to fix.

The graphics look really good to me. Obviously it's not perfect, but it's still by far the best that I've seen in Total War so far (haven't played Warhammer though). Also there are some really nice features like the farm, the fighting looks good to me and the landscape is beautifully done. It is just a pleasure to watch the battles.

I really like how they went with the heroes, they are not primarily for kills but for duelling and buffing your troops (I once started a discussion here supporting exactly that idea). I obviously can't really evaluate the balance here, but again, balancing is easy to fix.

What annoys me is that there are units that can't break from morale. There are some units like that in 3K records and it's really frustrating. So that's definitely a big downside to me.

I like the big differences between the infantry types, although I find light units too fast and heavy units a bit too hard to break, but again, a bit of balancing can fix that. The general idea they realise by that is really good.

So as you see, I am always supporting changes especially in balancing, still I think that they did a really good job overall. I don't want to offend anyone here, but my impression is that many forum users have written off the game especially since Tuesday and now primarily see the areas that need improvements.

Captain_Rex#1635

TejaSchwarzhaar said:

I don't understand why so many people are incontent with the gameplay reveal.

I get that the balancing may be a little off, although I only heard that in the Cody Bond video that Moosk mentioned. But even if Cody Bond is right, balancing is relatively easy to fix.

The graphics look really good to me. Obviously it's not perfect, but it's still by far the best that I've seen in Total War so far (haven't played Warhammer though). Also there are some really nice features like the farm, the fighting looks good to me and the landscape is beautifully done. It is just a pleasure to watch the battles.

I really like how they went with the heroes, they are not primarily for kills but for duelling and buffing your troops (I once started a discussion here supporting exactly that idea). I obviously can't really evaluate the balance here, but again, balancing is easy to fix.

What annoys me is that there are units that can't break from morale. There are some units like that in 3K records and it's really frustrating. So that's definitely a big downside to me.

I like the big differences between the infantry types, although I find light units too fast and heavy units a bit too hard to break, but again, a bit of balancing can fix that. The general idea they realise by that is really good.

So as you see, I am always supporting changes especially in balancing, still I think that they did a really good job overall. I don't want to offend anyone here, but my impression is that many forum users have written off the game especially since Tuesday and now primarily see the areas that need improvements.

This game looks so much better than 3k with its bland clone warriors. Unit design is 10/10!

Qin_Feng

Whiskeyjack_5691 said:

My opinion...
Disappointed. Not just with what we know about the game so far, but where the series as a whole seems to be headed.

I've always liked the game's "truth behind the myth" approach. I thought it a was really cool take, and a lot of the game's interpretations of the myths and legends were honestly fascinating and very clever. Now, all of the game's criticisms and failings are going to be laid squarely at the feet of the "truth behind the myth" approach, which is unfair and I think a damn shame.

The single-entity heroes able to take on entire enemy regiments was something I've never been a fan of, as I find tactics take a backseat to them. Why bother with formations and maneuvering when you can just hurl superpowered heroes into the fray? I had hoped this would be reigned in for Troy, but now we're seeing heroes with magical healing spells, area-of-effect attacks, and units that are immune to flanking (seriously, who thought that was a good idea in an RTS?). The game's going the same way as Warhammer: a MOBA-style spell-spammer, where you mash two stacks into each other with your heroes in the thick of the fighting, and whoever spams the most abilities the fastest wins.

The Epic exclusivity I don't have a problem with, apart from it being a minor inconvenience. But Cody Bonds' video has convinced me that CA are planning to take the money and run; ditch Troy after 6 months, and pump that money into more Warhammer content, and Troy and the rest of us be damned. I had hoped CA would stick with the game, as it had some very interesting new ideas and concepts, like battlefield terrain and the barter economy. Now I think all those great ideas are going to be left go to waste.

My thoughts exactly, except for the epic store. I don't like the whole fantasy zoomer bait they're going for. In three kingdoms it's pretty clear they're not touching records ever again, and now this game. A shame, because I was also intrigued by the truth behind the myth approach, but alas, it's still really goofy.

TejaSchwarzhaar#9835

@ArneSo
Yes, you're absolutely right and it's unfair that no one seems to care about that, but I guess at the moment bashing Troy is in vogue...

mahboi1

Qin_Feng said:

Whiskeyjack_5691 said:

My opinion...
Disappointed. Not just with what we know about the game so far, but where the series as a whole seems to be headed.

I've always liked the game's "truth behind the myth" approach. I thought it a was really cool take, and a lot of the game's interpretations of the myths and legends were honestly fascinating and very clever. Now, all of the game's criticisms and failings are going to be laid squarely at the feet of the "truth behind the myth" approach, which is unfair and I think a damn shame.

The single-entity heroes able to take on entire enemy regiments was something I've never been a fan of, as I find tactics take a backseat to them. Why bother with formations and maneuvering when you can just hurl superpowered heroes into the fray? I had hoped this would be reigned in for Troy, but now we're seeing heroes with magical healing spells, area-of-effect attacks, and units that are immune to flanking (seriously, who thought that was a good idea in an RTS?). The game's going the same way as Warhammer: a MOBA-style spell-spammer, where you mash two stacks into each other with your heroes in the thick of the fighting, and whoever spams the most abilities the fastest wins.

The Epic exclusivity I don't have a problem with, apart from it being a minor inconvenience. But Cody Bonds' video has convinced me that CA are planning to take the money and run; ditch Troy after 6 months, and pump that money into more Warhammer content, and Troy and the rest of us be damned. I had hoped CA would stick with the game, as it had some very interesting new ideas and concepts, like battlefield terrain and the barter economy. Now I think all those great ideas are going to be left go to waste.

My thoughts exactly, except for the epic store. I don't like the whole fantasy zoomer bait they're going for. In three kingdoms it's pretty clear they're not touching records ever again, and now this game. A shame, because I was also intrigued by the truth behind the myth approach, but alas, it's still really goofy.

If this is really where the series is going I'm done. I came here for historical battles, not a glorified MOBA. Single entity hero units are antithetical to the entire idea of Total War

dge1

Folks, focus the discussion on what you know about the game. If the conversation moves into a business discussion about Creative Assembly's business choices the thread will be moved to Chat.

AkisTheGReatest

@Qin_Feng .Kinda off-topic but have they actually said that they will no longer support records mode?

Sheikh_Nimr#9382

Did you really guys buy the "truth behind the myth" marketing jargon? It was a clear case of going as much fantasy as the limited budget permitted. When the PR team says something, you firstly need to process it through your critical thinking lens. By the way, it was clear from the beginning that there would be no Records mode for Troy.

Finally, just a minor detail, the Warscape engine is 11 not 7 years old. It was introduced not with R2 but with Empire.

The_Moosk

Yesterday I watched some other videos about the gameplay of Troy and other opinios from youtubers, as all of you did as well (atleast I would think so).
Now I think that the gameplay wasnt that bad (don't mistake me here I'm still shocked) but it isn't as bad as it would seem.
In the other videos I never saw Achilles and Hector really duell, but if it is like cody stated that Hector always wins, is it a thing to patch (I already explained why) but heres another reason: Achilles did'nt only kill Hector he also killed Hector and Paris brother (which I don't know the name of) and he was also a skilled swordsmen. I do hope that in the time remaining
CA Sofia still has time to fix a lot of this.
I mean they worked on this project over six months! they had to read the Iliad which isnt very short. Put some more heart into this, make a great game and see how we, the players like it. isnt that what all developers want?

Qin_Feng

AkisTheGReatest said:

@Qin_Feng .Kinda off-topic but have they actually said that they will no longer support records mode?

Iirc they did say they had no plans of significantly changing it. I think it was on the forums, not in a blogpost. To be honest, records mode doesn't need a lot of things to be more enjoyable, I'd be happy with General abilities at the very least, but it's a shame we're not getting even that. Also the new mechanics are clearly geared towards romance, like the duel requirements that are kind of wonky for records I guess, since duels just means clashing with another general.

ImpartialHorse

I think Troy just has the disadvantage of being based off the 3k model of normal armies + SE heroes, which is the worst of both worlds. I'm glad it's going to be free, it has the potential to be fun with the different infantry types and terrain playing some part, although it's a bit of a shame if it's all overshadowed by all the magic abilities, but at least this way I get to try it, otherwise I would probably give this one a miss.

I hope this spells the end of the uncomfortable reality/fantasy mix titles, and that the more realistic unit battle mechanics from Troy can be used to underpin a new generation of historical titles.

TejaSchwarzhaar#9835

I don't get why so many guys keep complaining about "all the magic abilities". So far we have only seen one ability that doesn't fit the realistic aspect. Don't get me wrong, I want that to be removed as well, but it is by far not as big of a problem as it sometimes sounds around here.

I find Troy very promising regarding that almost every unit is different from the other ones and has its special abilities, which also is a good sign for upcoming historical titles.

ImpartialHorse

TejaSchwarzhaar said:

I don't get why so many guys keep complaining about "all the magic abilities". So far we have only seen one ability that doesn't fit the realistic aspect. Don't get me wrong, I want that to be removed as well, but it is by far not as big of a problem as it sometimes sounds around here.

I find Troy very promising regarding that almost every unit is different from the other ones and has its special abilities, which also is a good sign for upcoming historical titles.

I hope so too. My main worry is more that the heros (and their abilities) will dominate over the unit to unit combat tactics in a similar way to 3k.

TejaSchwarzhaar#9835

Yes I definitely see that point. Still I like the way of Troy better than the way 3K did it, because I find inspiring the troops more realistic than killing 500 soldiers. But you are right, it should be a bit more balanced.

One thing that I consider to be more problematic is that there are units that fight to the last man, at least as long as their general is alive. This might be realistic or not, who knows, but it definitely screws the tactics side.
So here I would like to see some rebalancing.

Achilles13

TejaSchwarzhaar said:

One thing that I consider to be more problematic is that there are units that fight to the last man, at least as long as their general is alive. This might be realistic or not, who knows, but it definitely screws the tactics side.
So here I would like to see some rebalancing.

Actually even if their general is dead (Smart Donkey Hector gameplay), it is very unrealistic, it would have suited shogun 2 for samurais (who run off the battlefield like a rabbit). I need to admit that I do not know what to think about that. On one hand this is realy stupid when their hero and whole army is dead and they keep fighting no matter how big is the number of opponents - its suicide. On the other this is very heroic which may suite spirit of the game so its not something which really bother me. However I would rather like them to be nearly unbreakable since even in epos being foundations and inspiration for the game soldiers run off the battlefield like... all the time - even heroes. And doesnt it make Illiad any less heroic - everybody want to live - theyre no Japans