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 need a fun Legendary campaign

2»

Comments

  • GettoGecko#7861GettoGecko#7861 Registered Users Posts: 1,686

    Bereaver said:

    Emrysor said:

    None on legendary in my opinion are fun, it skews the game too much, which makes it more boring than easier difficulties.
    My main factors for enjoyment are role playing and getting to steamroll, often, but not always mutually exclusive.
    I often never finish my campaigns either, unless it’s one of the easy/new conditions.
    Turn 180 is about the longest I have ever bothered to play a campaign in all these years, as it’s over by then (not victory conditions but we know we have won already).

    For some people their idea of fun is when you are making things harder. Good example is dark souls, demon souls and such. Personally I do not find the higher difficulties more fun.
    Agree. The current TWW difficulty design is tasteless and artificial.
    I disagree. Legendary is the only difficulty I play and it has been fun for me for more than 2k hours.

    Actually, Legendary is not hard at all if you get grasp of it, it just makes you learn the rules of the game better.

    The way difficulty increased is of course a bit too crude. You still can effectively use melee infantry and any other available tactic to great effect though.
    wrong. It only made late game even more of a chore and made player to adept to its difficulty with lame strategies like corner camping or missile infantry spam, not to mentioned doomstacks.

    Is not hard that I care about, but because it took the fun out of total war game, removing its unique historical style unit formations tactics with one unit spamming like starcraft.
    You know that saying "wrong" and then spouting a lot of nonsense doesn't make you look like you have any clue what you are talking about, similar to a clown who made a formerly respected country the laughing stock of the planet not long ago.

    Every so called cheese strategy relies on specific circumstances to actually perform better than a generalised approach therefore if you don't rely on making making money with videos about that topic to earn your livelihood than a much easier way to play on that difficulty is to use balanced armies.
    Everything that you mentioned works much better on lower difficulties settings yet people like you don't complain about that stuff there, probably because you don't know or don't realise that trying to play that way requiers more work in standard circumstances. To do that on higher settings you actually need a lot of knowledge, practice and experience on higher settings so when you have all that why would you want to put in more work than is needed if you can have a more chilled experience with a standard gameplay approach?
    If this would be an easier way to play on these settings more people would do that and yet the amount of people who really do play on these settings and enjoy them for what they are haven't really increased and people who just claim this is a valid way of playing normally can't pull it off when they try to copy these allegedly OP cheese strats.

    If you wouldn't care than you wouldn't written this nonsense about chore and cheese. TWW is a fantasy title and it offers more tactical options than historical titles simply by adding additional layers like air combat, monsters and magic to the already existing ones. If you think SC is about spamming units than you have little to non experience with the game because spamming units is a pretty save way to lose. Timings, execution and situational awareness are key to the game and even more important than in TWW, if SC is chess TWW is just checkers.
  • TheShiroOfDaltonTheShiroOfDalton Senior Member Registered Users Posts: 34,001


    Everything that you mentioned works much better on lower difficulties settings

    And that's the problem, isn't it? You don't actually have to change up what you are doing when raising the difficulty, just do the same, maybe do it more often and harder. Melee troops are penalized by increasing the difficulty, but missile troops and magic retain their game-breaking power, so you can lean even harder on them.

    That's absolutely crap difficulty design. Either ALL the tools available to the player get dulled or CA thinks of something better to create challenge.
  • GettoGecko#7861GettoGecko#7861 Registered Users Posts: 1,686


    Everything that you mentioned works much better on lower difficulties settings

    And that's the problem, isn't it? You don't actually have to change up what you are doing when raising the difficulty, just do the same, maybe do it more often and harder. Melee troops are penalized by increasing the difficulty, but missile troops and magic retain their game-breaking power, so you can lean even harder on them.

    That's absolutely crap difficulty design. Either ALL the tools available to the player get dulled or CA thinks of something better to create challenge.
    I disagree here. On normal battle and campaign difficulty there are a lot of factions where you get away with using non melee infantry at all, there are even supposed melee factions where you are better off with skirmishers and hybrids instead of actual melee infantry. The more you raise the difficutly, be it battle for higher stats or campaign for more engagements, the more you do need some sort of blocking and tanking unit because it becomes harder to produce routs, chain routs and mass routs. Hybrids and ranged take much more casualties when they do engage in melee so it becomes more and more usefull to have dedicated units to take that damage and therefore melee infantry becomes more important on higher difficulties. I'm aware that on lower settings people like to use melee infantry because they are the most simple unit typ to use. You don't need micro, you don't need much awareness and you don't need to keep an eye on them but massivly using them on lower settings and relying on theym prevents people from learning how to utilise other unit types. I think because you can tank and spank through lower settings with melee infantry some people never really learn what kind of battlefield roles this game offer and how to use them together for better outcome. When just throwing in more stuff will also lead to victory on these settings than people don't have an incentive to learn the games mechanics. Unexperienced players grind their way through the lower setting while experienced can continously produce mass routs and winning battles without having some sort battle, its becomes more like scaring away units and than winning.

    I think melee infantry on lower settings are a swiss army knife that prevents people from learning to use other roles properly. The higher the difficulty settings get the more melee infantries role becomes that of a blocking, pinning and soaking role and thats what they are supposed to be from my point of view. They shouldn't be able to walk long ways through ranged fire and then fighing ranged and artillery in melee or grinding down monsters and cav when charged, yet they can do that on lower settings even though its highly inefficent because of the casualty rate but its a way to get through lower settings and I think thats where the problem originates from. Because some people think that just because they get away with using melee infantry as a swiss army knife on lower settings that grinding through with high casualty rates is a valid strategy which suddenly gets taken away on higher settings but it isn't one in the first place when you compare it to zero to minimal casualty compositions on these settings.

    So its a matter of where you comming from and in which direction you are looking. As a strategy game player I think a good strategy or tactic works independently of difficutly settings and if something stops working just because the difficulty setting changes than thats something that shouldn't be done in the first place and the game should teach that to players from the start, which TWW doesn't do.
    So I would say its bad (non exisiting) tutorial design rather than bad difficutly design. Everything that works on higher settings works even better on lower settings so for me that is logical prove that the difficulty design works because the more you lower the difficulty the better the results become. For me its also prove that the game is bad at teaching its mechanics to players because instead of them realising that something doesn't work on their side when they increase the difficulty they come here and complain about allegedly unfair or crap difficulty design.

    I know your standpoint on the issue and its fine for me but as long as no one can make a logical arguement about why melee infantry should work as a jack of all trades unit role instead of a dedicated one I won't be convinced. And "I get away with that on lower settings" or "I wish/think it should be that way" aren't logical arguements.
Sign In or Register to comment.