Challenges of Medieval 3!

Jam#4399

CA has to make it better than "1212 AD" Mod.

CA has to make it better than "Manor Lords"

CA has to make it better than their previous title. "Medieval 2"

------------

New Game Engine is a must!
How can they surpass those games/titles if they would just make it in current game engine?

------------

One thing is for sure, if they would make it right, it would be popular and many would buy it as this is the most requested game.

Commisar#2307

No it doesn't need a new engine. Just going new engine doesn't do anything other than axe all the development they've already made over the nearly 14 years.

The current engine already beats two of your listed titles, it's already better than M2s build and has a lot of improvements. It's also newer and has many improvements over the build that 1066 is built off.

Manor Lords isn't yet out so rather hard to gauge if that's even a real challenge.

Jam#4399

Commisar#2307 said:

No it doesn't need a new engine.

Looking at Rome 1 compared to previous titles that were made on old engine, you can clearly see it was an innovation

Same engine with "1212 AD mod," good luck CA!

Compared with M2, yeah the current engine is better in graphics. But how about with games being made with current engine as well? Are you telling the current engine has very good unit collision? Doesn't M3 need improvement? How about unit size increase?
By the way, 64-bit engine is very nice. Hope to see it implemented.

Manor Lords already showcased Real Time Battle features though and some mechanics are better than Total War though.

davedave1124#4773

They often improve the current engine which is often enough. Without having a thorough knowledge of the engine and limitations it’s hard to argue on.

If they’re doing 3K2 and feel they need significant changes then they might but it’ll still be based on the original engine due to it being a TW game.

Commisar#2307

Jam#4399 said:

Looking at Rome 1 compared to previous titles that were made on old engine, you can clearly see it was an innovation

Same engine with "1066 AD," good luck CA!

Compared with M2, yeah the current engine is better in graphics. But how about with games being made with current engine as well? Are you telling the current engine has very good unit collision? Doesn't M3 need improvement? How about unit size increase?
By the way, 64-bit engine is very nice. Hope to see it implemented.

Manor Lords already showcased Real Time Battle features though and some mechanics are better than Total War though.

Looking at Empire to 3K there's clear signs of innovation.

Collision could be improved, is it worth resetting everything else and possibly sacrificing existing working mechanics? Engine already is 64bit, that came with WH1.

While it might, doesn't mean the overall game is or that they end up in the same niche. Stronghold does many things better than TW but doesn't really compete as they go in very different directions and fill different wants.

Jam#4399

@Commisar#2307 have you seen Manor Lords showcase?

Wonder if CA can surpass that?
Units being pushed back upon charge looks very cool. Units retreating slowly without turning back. Etc.....

-------

If CA can make Medieval 3 better than 1212 AD, very nice! Like you said, 64 bit might help.

Commisar#2307

Jam#4399 said:

@Commisar#2307 have you seen Manor Lords showcase?

Wonder if CA can surpass that?
Units being pushed back upon charge looks very cool. Units retreating slowly without turning back. Etc.....

-------

If CA can make Medieval 3 better than 1066 AD, very nice! Like you said, 64 bit might help.

I've also seen the pre-release content of Aliens: Colonial Marines and Cyberpunk 2077. I will wait until it's out on the market before it gets a real rating.

VikingHuscal1066#5774

I personally think that one of the biggest challenges for a Medieval 3 is all the hype and expectations that people have built up for it.

But another major challenge for it is to do more than what's been done before and actually have the factions and armies be interesting and not just a repeat of the knights and such we've seen in M2 and other mods.

But that's also kind of why I would prefer an Empire 2 or a TW: Antiquity, as I think that both settings have an overall easier time of implementation vs hype.

An Empire 2, set from 1684 or so to 1820 could offer a lot of potential interesting factions and armies to the play around with beyond just the European ones.

A TW: Antiquity could offer us a number of pretty interesting campaigns set in the era of antiquity, as well has having the advantage of being set in the more exotic ancient world as opposed to just having more and more knights and such.

Commisar#2307

They hype wont be an issue unless they make mistakes like before - R2 brag about things that don't work or 3K where they make DLC no one is interested in. Otherwise it's just going to be an auto-win for them.

They've already shown they can do a larger range of units with less overlap so it's also not an issue.

VikingHuscal1066#5774

Commisar#2307 said:

They hype wont be an issue unless they make mistakes like before - R2 brag about things that don't work or 3K where they make DLC no one is interested in. Otherwise it's just going to be an auto-win for them.

They've already shown they can do a larger range of units with less overlap so it's also not an issue.

Well, it kind of will if you think about it.

I mean, with how some people hype up the idea of a Medieval 3, you'd think it was the Second Coming or something.

I just think that while the period could be interesting and all, there's still a lot of stuff that would just be repeating what we've already seen from the Medieval period.

They'd REALLY need to bring some new stuff to the table to make it work properly.

Commisar#2307

VikingHuscal1066#5774 said:

Well, it kind of will if you think about it.

I mean, with how some people hype up the idea of a Medieval 3, you'd think it was the Second Coming or something.

I just think that while the period could be interesting and all, there's still a lot of stuff that would just be repeating what we've already seen from the Medieval period.

They'd REALLY need to bring some new stuff to the table to make it work properly.

Not really, and that would be the minority of the fans of it. Which still means it's an easy slam dunk of PR unless they repeat those mistakes I mentioned which can happen with any time frame.

But the same can be said for your choice of time periods but they have less of a following. The only thing they need to add for a M3 at this point is religion, but they'd also need that fort your choices.

VikingHuscal1066#5774

Commisar#2307 said:

Not really, and that would be the minority of the fans of it. Which still means it's an easy slam dunk of PR unless they repeat those mistakes I mentioned which can happen with any time frame.

But the same can be said for your choice of time periods but they have less of a following. The only thing they need to add for a M3 at this point is religion, but they'd also need that fort your choices.

Well, like I said, with how much some people still hype of M2, as if it's still the best TW game ever, it's easy to think that those are the same people who hype up the idea of a M3 too.

And they'd need far more than just newer religion system alone to make a M3 truly great, not just good.

At least when I talk about an Empire 2 or TW: Antiquity, I'm not wanting CA to reinvent the wheel as it were, but rather refine them.

I just want the TW games so that they can be at least good first and foremost and then be made great with additional content and updates.

Commisar#2307

VikingHuscal1066#5774 said:

Well, like I said, with how much some people still hype of M2, as if it's still the best TW game ever, it's easy to think that those are the same people who hype up the idea of a M3 too.

And they'd need far more than just newer religion system alone to make a M3 truly great, not just good.

At least when I talk about an Empire 2 or TW: Antiquity, I'm not wanting CA to reinvent the wheel as it were, but rather refine them.

I just want the TW games so that they can be at least good first and foremost and then be made great with additional content and updates.

Most of the community doesn't seem to hype up M2, they take it for what it is but the time period is the most popular in community hubs.

The current systems would already make it good and an improvement over the previous.

Actually no, your own statements would go against that. They'd need to reinvent multiple things for E2 and Antiquity for them to work the way you want. Far more needs to be changed than for a M3.

Jam#4399

I love Medieval for its time period.

Just look at those armours and weapons of soldiers and ornaments of cavalry. They would be awesome!

Look at the cities, castles, citadels, forts, settlements. They would be nice to siege.

Kings, Generals, Barons, Sultans, Prince, Merchants, Popes, etc... hope each of them would have their unique speeches.

If Roman times were bloody, I hope Medieval would be brutal.

*Really really hope that each factions knights and cavalry would be visually different from each other...

--------------

Mud should now play a role regarding the outcome of battle.

Weather should make units tire faster and rain to reduce visibility.

mitthrawnuruodo#4895

The challenge as always is the audience, which claims to care about historical accuracy and realistic gameplay until they get historical accuracy and realistic gameplay.

VikingHuscal1066#5774

Commisar#2307 said:

Most of the community doesn't seem to hype up M2, they take it for what it is but the time period is the most popular in community hubs.

The current systems would already make it good and an improvement over the previous.

Actually no, your own statements would go against that. They'd need to reinvent multiple things for E2 and Antiquity for them to work the way you want. Far more needs to be changed than for a M3.

Well dude, I'm obviously talking about the people who do over hype both M2 and the idea of M3, not literally every fan of the TW games.

And I'm kind of think that they need to do more than just add in a religion system to the current system to make the game as great right off the bat as a lot of people expect it to be.


And no dude, I'm not wanting them to reinvent the wheel for how the TW games would work for an E2 or TW: Antiquity, I want them to basically do two things in particular.

And those are to learn from past games and to mix in and refine some of the newer things they'd added in to more recent TW games.

For instance, they could not only slightly rework Troy's unit weight class system for a TW: Antiquity, but also possibly do the same for its neat weapon switching mechanic as well.

I'll give you that they would need recreate some animation sets for an E2, but they would only really have to do so much work with them, as many of them would be pretty universally used, such as line and light infantry animations.

VikingHuscal1066#5774

mitthrawnuruodo#4895 said:

The challenge as always is the audience, which claims to care about historical accuracy and realistic gameplay until they get historical accuracy and realistic gameplay.

I agree with that statement.

Because a lot of people want a M3 or something, but don't fully think about what making one all entails.

Commisar#2307

VikingHuscal1066#5774 said:

Well dude, I'm obviously talking about the people who do over hype both M2 and the idea of M3, not literally every fan of the TW games.

And I'm kind of think that they need to do more than just add in a religion system to the current system to make the game as great right off the bat as a lot of people expect it to be.


And no dude, I'm not wanting them to reinvent the wheel for how the TW games would work for an E2 or TW: Antiquity, I want them to basically do two things in particular.

And those are to learn from past games and to mix in and refine some of the newer things they'd added in to more recent TW games.

For instance, they could not only slightly rework Troy's unit weight class system for a TW: Antiquity, but also possibly do the same for its neat weapon switching mechanic as well.

I'll give you that they would need recreate some animation sets for an E2, but they would only really have to do so much work with them, as many of them would be pretty universally used, such as line and light infantry animations.

Which are fanatics, they will be disappointed if they don't do M3...so they will be disappointed either way. It's akin to not doing E2 or R3 because it would disappoint you. Is that tiny number really more than the rest of the community?

Such as? It's currently the only mechanic missing that is really required for it. Others are just modification of existing systems.

And again they can do the exact same for M3, we even have weapon switching way back in M2 from what I've heard.

Not just the animations but oh so much more needs to be changed for it to work. The province system and the battles need to be changed for starters. Firing a canister shot in to an infantry block to have none die because they have 1,000 health...

VikingHuscal1066#5774

Commisar#2307 said:

Which are fanatics, they will be disappointed if they don't do M3...so they will be disappointed either way. It's akin to not doing E2 or R3 because it would disappoint you. Is that tiny number really more than the rest of the community?

Such as? It's currently the only mechanic missing that is really required for it. Others are just modification of existing systems.

And again they can do the exact same for M3, we even have weapon switching way back in M2 from what I've heard.

Not just the animations but oh so much more needs to be changed for it to work. The province system and the battles need to be changed for starters. Firing a canister shot in to an infantry block to have none die because they have 1,000 health...

Well, not exactly Commisar.

I'm not obsessed with them making a E2 or TW: Antiquity, I'm just trying to be realistic about it all. Because I really do try to think about these things from an objective viewpoint and just what might make the best TW game possible for the most people, be it an E2, TW: Antiquity, or M3.

And in the end, I just think a E2 or TW: Antiquity would work better than a M3 in terms of making a truly great TW game.

I also don't think CA should try to introduce a ton of mechanics for every playable faction to make a historical TW game work well, I actually kind of think that they should somewhat simplify things to an extent, with maybe some more focus on universal mechanics and such with only a mechanic or two sprinkled between factions here and there.

I will say that one thing they could possibly do with a M3 would be to basically add in a "create a unit" type of mechanic that allows players to basically choose how they equip units, kind of how a lot of medieval lords and kings prepared their armies and such back then.

Maybe with some stuff like that, CA could really do something interesting with a M3.


And I will agree with you, that they should not have health bars and such in historical TW games, though they work fine in Warhammer.

Personally, I think they should go back to how health was handled in Rome 2, where it was pretty universal for the most part.

Commisar#2307

VikingHuscal1066#5774 said:

Well, not exactly Commisar.

I'm not obsessed with them making a E2 or TW: Antiquity, I'm just trying to be realistic about it all. Because I really do try to think about these things from an objective viewpoint and just what might make the best TW game possible for the most people, be it an E2, TW: Antiquity, or M3.

And in the end, I just think a E2 or TW: Antiquity would work better than a M3 in terms of making a truly great TW game.

I also don't think CA should try to introduce a ton of mechanics for every playable faction to make a historical TW game work well, I actually kind of think that they should somewhat simplify things to an extent, with maybe some more focus on universal mechanics and such with only a mechanic or two sprinkled between factions here and there.

I will say that one thing they could possibly do with a M3 would be to basically add in a "create a unit" type of mechanic that allows players to basically choose how they equip units, kind of how a lot of medieval lords and kings prepared their armies and such back then.

Maybe with some stuff like that, CA could really do something interesting with a M3.


And I will agree with you, that they should not have health bars and such in historical TW games, though they work fine in Warhammer.

Personally, I think they should go back to how health was handled in Rome 2, where it was pretty universal for the most part.

Neither are they. They just think from their perspective that M3 would be the best they could do. You've already shown you feel the opposite so you would be disappointed if they went that way. Right now, as far as we can tell most of the historical fans would be happiest with M3, they've constantly shown that.

For the most part it doesn't make sense to do that for factions. Most didn't have hugely different styles it was more flavour. Part of why 3K scored less for me was arbitrary mechanics for factions and trying to continue that will lead to more and also more broken mechanics in both bugs and balance.

It really isn't. Historically most units equipped themselves or were effectively a preset design.

In the time frames where armour plays a role I can get behind the health bars, death by a thousand cuts and all that as armour tends to be good at keeping you alive although I don't think it added anything to the game. Battles worked fine in the early games and even S2 without it. R2 still had health bars and units could still tank what should of been lethal damage. If anything going back to the original system of if a hit passes defences then it should take that unit out with some elites getting a single save.

VikingHuscal1066#5774

Commisar#2307 said:

Neither are they. They just think from their perspective that M3 would be the best they could do. You've already shown you feel the opposite so you would be disappointed if they went that way. Right now, as far as we can tell most of the historical fans would be happiest with M3, they've constantly shown that.

For the most part it doesn't make sense to do that for factions. Most didn't have hugely different styles it was more flavour. Part of why 3K scored less for me was arbitrary mechanics for factions and trying to continue that will lead to more and also more broken mechanics in both bugs and balance.

It really isn't. Historically most units equipped themselves or were effectively a preset design.

In the time frames where armour plays a role I can get behind the health bars, death by a thousand cuts and all that as armour tends to be good at keeping you alive although I don't think it added anything to the game. Battles worked fine in the early games and even S2 without it. R2 still had health bars and units could still tank what should of been lethal damage. If anything going back to the original system of if a hit passes defences then it should take that unit out with some elites getting a single save.

Well, from what I've seen from some people, some of them act as if M2 is still the be all end all of all TW games, which it just isn't, no matter what anyone says.

But the point is that I do try to be realistic about what would make the best overall TW game, and not just for me alone.

And from what I've seen, a lot of people don't tend to think too deeply about what this or that period really entails when it comes to how they would be translated into a TW game.

I mean, at least I am realistic enough to think of how CA could do periods they may have done before but do it better this time around.

Like I've pointed out before, an Empire 2 has the possibility to give us a truly grand scale campaign, while a TW: Antiquity could take all of what Rome 2 did but improve on all of it.

And like I said, I just think that CA would have to do some interesting things to make a M3 more than just that big medieval mod for Attila. And a create your own unit mechanic would be interesting.


Though I have to disagree about R2's health and all.

I mean, the stats were increased across the board so that missile units wouldn't be OP. Because if you look at the stats for proper elite units, many of them were able to take "lethal hits" because they had far better armor and shields than lesser units, which does make sense.

I mean, I've seen plenty of heavily armored units in Rome 2 take a nice bit of damage before they really start losing guys to missile fire.

I mean, the old system left far too much room for ridiculous exploits and such, the newer R2 system would work just fine.

Commisar#2307

VikingHuscal1066#5774 said:

Well, from what I've seen from some people, some of them act as if M2 is still the be all end all of all TW games, which it just isn't, no matter what anyone says.

But the point is that I do try to be realistic about what would make the best overall TW game, and not just for me alone.

And from what I've seen, a lot of people don't tend to think too deeply about what this or that period really entails when it comes to how they would be translated into a TW game.

I mean, at least I am realistic enough to think of how CA could do periods they may have done before but do it better this time around.

Like I've pointed out before, an Empire 2 has the possibility to give us a truly grand scale campaign, while a TW: Antiquity could take all of what Rome 2 did but improve on all of it.

And like I said, I just think that CA would have to do some interesting things to make a M3 more than just that big medieval mod for Attila. And a create your own unit mechanic would be interesting.


Though I have to disagree about R2's health and all.

I mean, the stats were increased across the board so that missile units wouldn't be OP. Because if you look at the stats for proper elite units, many of them were able to take "lethal hits" because they had far better armor and shields than lesser units, which does make sense.

I mean, I've seen plenty of heavily armored units in Rome 2 take a nice bit of damage before they really start losing guys to missile fire.

I mean, the old system left far too much room for ridiculous exploits and such, the newer R2 system would work just fine.

I've seen far more people who act like Historical is dead as it can't compete with the Fantasy line no matter what anyone says. Again minority that's not going to be happy no matter what doesn't mean anything of value.

As has been repeatedly shown it isn't. It is based off your personal views and in general only been backed here by you.

Yeah a lot don't think too much about how things will work for a game with the existing systems, but we do know that the Medieval setting would work and does work with the existing systems.

But that's the same in 3K and other games, it works that way thanks to the health pool they can drain. Armour and shields and defence skill delays the loss of it. I don't want a historical game where a soldier can get shot through and keep fighting like nothing simply because he has 100 health and the shot only does 50 damage. I've got far better games to play that type of combat with.

davedave1124#4773

I don’t think I he health pool system stops soldiers from being one shot by early firearms or arrows is an issue at all as this happens in modern games. Even in Shogun 2 there was simply a hidden health bar rather than an honest version with R2. I remember Samurai getting up from grenades in the face.

When it comes to grapeshot or firearms I think it’s be pretty easy for CA to throw in a randomiser based on unit stats to outright kill units on the wrong side of a volley. The idea that simple stat changes is hard work for CA maybe a little off. If CA want to they can easily create grapeshot devistation.

VikingHuscal1066#5774

Commisar#2307 said:

I've seen far more people who act like Historical is dead as it can't compete with the Fantasy line no matter what anyone says. Again minority that's not going to be happy no matter what doesn't mean anything of value.

As has been repeatedly shown it isn't. It is based off your personal views and in general only been backed here by you.

Yeah a lot don't think too much about how things will work for a game with the existing systems, but we do know that the Medieval setting would work and does work with the existing systems.

But that's the same in 3K and other games, it works that way thanks to the health pool they can drain. Armour and shields and defence skill delays the loss of it. I don't want a historical game where a soldier can get shot through and keep fighting like nothing simply because he has 100 health and the shot only does 50 damage. I've got far better games to play that type of combat with.

Well, that is somewhat true, as you can do quite a bit more with fantasy settings as compared to historical ones, but I do think that CA's still has it in them to make a couple of nice big historical TW games, so I hold out hope for an E2 or TW: Antiquity.

And I never said that the medieval period can't work, just that if they really want a M3 to truly be great, they'll need to do more than just improving some diplomatic options and without going with the outdated old ways from M2.


Well, they have to do something to make the units not just die at the slightest breeze Commisar.

And maybe the old ways of units just having 1 HP or whatever are not only old and outdated, but pretty stupid for today's TW games.

I mean, the 100 health thing could work pretty well, and wasn't too far off from how Rome 2 worked, and that game factored in armor and shields and all that, without being too overly complicated.

And maybe things like guns could just have REALLY high damage, that also all but ignores all the heaviest armor.

That sort of thing could work really well in an Empire 2, where not too many units retain tons of armor and such.

Commisar#2307

VikingHuscal1066#5774 said:

Well, that is somewhat true, as you can do quite a bit more with fantasy settings as compared to historical ones, but I do think that CA's still has it in them to make a couple of nice big historical TW games, so I hold out hope for an E2 or TW: Antiquity.

And I never said that the medieval period can't work, just that if they really want a M3 to truly be great, they'll need to do more than just improving some diplomatic options and without going with the outdated old ways from M2.


Well, they have to do something to make the units not just die at the slightest breeze Commisar.

And maybe the old ways of units just having 1 HP or whatever are not only old and outdated, but pretty stupid for today's TW games.

I mean, the 100 health thing could work pretty well, and wasn't too far off from how Rome 2 worked, and that game factored in armor and shields and all that, without being too overly complicated.

And maybe things like guns could just have REALLY high damage, that also all but ignores all the heaviest armor.

That sort of thing could work really well in an Empire 2, where not too many units retain tons of armor and such.

Which means it's not really true at all. They end up being quite different games and have their own strengths and weaknesses.

And again they wont be using M2. It's been a long time since then. The new set up allows so much more than they could do back then so far more improved options.

They already had, they didn't just drop dead from a breeze before the health bars - they tended if anything to last longer. The more modern battles are often viewed as ending really quickly as units take losses and then break.

But that's just the same. If the target has 100 health and the weapon does 100 damage it's the same as if they had 1 and it did 1 damage. However this then runs the issue that if melee doesn't do similar damage it is just ends up being worse and I know you like melee.

Jam#4399

In Thrones of Britannia, if you got hit, you are already incap.

Hope they relay it in upcoming historical games for realism.

VikingHuscal1066#5774

Commisar#2307 said:

Which means it's not really true at all. They end up being quite different games and have their own strengths and weaknesses.

And again they wont be using M2. It's been a long time since then. The new set up allows so much more than they could do back then so far more improved options.

They already had, they didn't just drop dead from a breeze before the health bars - they tended if anything to last longer. The more modern battles are often viewed as ending really quickly as units take losses and then break.

But that's just the same. If the target has 100 health and the weapon does 100 damage it's the same as if they had 1 and it did 1 damage. However this then runs the issue that if melee doesn't do similar damage it is just ends up being worse and I know you like melee.

I know they won't be using the M2 engine and such, I'm just saying that they would need to be more than just the old styles of systems and such to make a M3 a truly great TW game, that's all.


And well, you're making it sound like the units just die now with little effort, which I'll somewhat give you, but I still think it worked really well back in Rome 2, as most of the stats factored into why the more elite troops could take more damage and all.

And I'll give you that they could stand to maybe standardize the stats a little and bring it back to something like Rome 2's stats and all, as I would like shields to be more than just a basic missile resistance, but I don't think they should just go back to the old systems of 1 HP and such either.

I honestly think that they should refine Rome 2's system of health and armor and all that, as it seemed to work pretty well, as it did allow many elite units to feel tanky without them being invincible, because they could be whittled down with concentrated fire.

But I just think that the Rome 2 levels for stats worked better, as it was able to do stuff to make elite units feel properly powerful and all.

I personally think that in something like an Empire 2, an elite unit like the Winged Hussars should have like 50 armor, but it means more in melee than at ranged, at least when it comes to guns anyway, as it would allow them to feel pretty tanky without being quite as ridiculous as older cataphracts.

Commisar#2307

VikingHuscal1066#5774 said:

I know they won't be using the M2 engine and such, I'm just saying that they would need to be more than just the old styles of systems and such to make a M3 a truly great TW game, that's all.


And well, you're making it sound like the units just die now with little effort, which I'll somewhat give you, but I still think it worked really well back in Rome 2, as most of the stats factored into why the more elite troops could take more damage and all.

And I'll give you that they could stand to maybe standardize the stats a little and bring it back to something like Rome 2's stats and all, as I would like shields to be more than just a basic missile resistance, but I don't think they should just go back to the old systems of 1 HP and such either.

I honestly think that they should refine Rome 2's system of health and armor and all that, as it seemed to work pretty well, as it did allow many elite units to feel tanky without them being invincible, because they could be whittled down with concentrated fire.

But I just think that the Rome 2 levels for stats worked better, as it was able to do stuff to make elite units feel properly powerful and all.

I personally think that in something like an Empire 2, an elite unit like the Winged Hussars should have like 50 armor, but it means more in melee than at ranged, at least when it comes to guns anyway, as it would allow them to feel pretty tanky without being quite as ridiculous as older cataphracts.

But again it will be. They already have new systems and continue to rework existing ones, improve them and add new ones. The basis of 3K already easily sets up a great game.

the health bar it's sort of both. Launch multiple volleys of arrows against a unit without a single kill then suddenly they start dropping like flies because the health bar system. Before elite units still existed and still worked fine, they got better armour and defence stats but if you took an arrow/sword/spear to the eye it still dropped them.

VikingHuscal1066#5774

Commisar#2307 said:

But again it will be. They already have new systems and continue to rework existing ones, improve them and add new ones. The basis of 3K already easily sets up a great game.

the health bar it's sort of both. Launch multiple volleys of arrows against a unit without a single kill then suddenly they start dropping like flies because the health bar system. Before elite units still existed and still worked fine, they got better armour and defence stats but if you took an arrow/sword/spear to the eye it still dropped them.

I can agree with most of that, though I disagree with the idea that unit health was all that bad.

I mean the reason could be multiple factors, like what kind of archers are firing the volleys and all and are they shooting at light units or heavy units, all that kind of stuff.

I mean, the shields in Rome 2 did actually block incoming fire from the front angles for a bit, so that also may have played a part as well. So I think that if you also factor in what kinds of units are in play as well, it kind of makes sense that they unit didn't being shot didn't take any losses.

And I'll agree that they could probably stand to refine the interplay between different units and quality levels and such.

Commisar#2307

VikingHuscal1066#5774 said:

I can agree with most of that, though I disagree with the idea that unit health was all that bad.

I mean the reason could be multiple factors, like what kind of archers are firing the volleys and all and are they shooting at light units or heavy units, all that kind of stuff.

I mean, the shields in Rome 2 did actually block incoming fire from the front angles for a bit, so that also may have played a part as well. So I think that if you also factor in what kinds of units are in play as well, it kind of makes sense that they unit didn't being shot didn't take any losses.

And I'll agree that they could probably stand to refine the interplay between different units and quality levels and such.

It's not bad for the melee based games although it does have issues like I said but for a gun powder one it does become bad.

Works pretty much across the board. Low tier units have enough health to tank an arrow or two even from the top tier archers.

Yeah they should, it's good to get it as a stat in 3K although it still didn't fully work. Can remember trying the testudo formation and marched head on to the archers and lost more men than if I just charger over that distance due to the speed and them still taking damage.

VikingHuscal1066#5774

Commisar#2307 said:

It's not bad for the melee based games although it does have issues like I said but for a gun powder one it does become bad.

Works pretty much across the board. Low tier units have enough health to tank an arrow or two even from the top tier archers.

Yeah they should, it's good to get it as a stat in 3K although it still didn't fully work. Can remember trying the testudo formation and marched head on to the archers and lost more men than if I just charger over that distance due to the speed and them still taking damage.

Ok, I'll give you that, but I think that it's just tricky to find a right balance for such things.

I mean, in a TW: Antiquity or even M3, they'd probably have armor and shields mean a lot more, but they could probably still make heavy crossbows and guns pretty good against armor.

I think the trick with armor and all in an Empire 2 is to find a way to make it meaningful without weakening guns.

I personally think that one way they could make it work is to somewhat standardize things like weapon and missile damage so that guns easily have more than 100 damage, with maybe even a thing that allows them to ignore armor, but the armor matters more in melee. I think it could do the missile damage for an Empire 2 something like this

Regular Bows: 30-35 damage.
Elite/Powerful Bows: 45-50 damage.
Firearms: 120-160 damage.

I know that sounds like quite a lot of damage, but they are muskets after all. But you get the idea.

But that's the trick I think they would have to really figure out, how to make armor work more for melee than ranged protection.

I also think that they should bring back the accuracy and reload skill stats as well.