Azhag quest battle video released

[loony]

I really want to hope it is the SCRIPTED part that makes the bretonian AI do stupid things.
Otherwise it is just so disappointing... an artillery heavy army charges its weak cavalry over the river into a densely packed mass of infantry... that is horrible to watch!

1. the ai fails to evaluate the position of the player forces
2. the AI fails to evaluate the relative strength of forces
3. the AI fails to use its whole army even when the player gives that choice

If this was a good game, they would have shown us 2 videos of the same battle.
Battle 1 would be where the Orcs charge the humies, crush the expeditionary forces and then deal with the arriving main army. It would be utter chaos, no battle lines, charges and countercharges from both sides and lots of friendly fire from bretonian arty.

Battle 2 would be where the Orcs stay in the corner, get heavily damaged by the trebuchets, then get shot by the bretonian archers and only after all missiles at the bretonian side are exhausted, get mass charged by human infantry with cavalry looking for gap in fomations.

the first one would be a phyrric victory, the second - maybe even a defeat.

So my take here is the following, the CA have
a) have once again produced an idiot battle AI, and/or
b) have been unable to design even scritped/quest battles right (where they could nudge the AI into the right direction)

[Charerg]

Well, it is only a promo video, so I wouldn't judge the AI based on this alone. It's a different matter of course if the AI is this bad in the released game, but let's hope that will not be the case.

[Sharpe]

I was like you. And then Rome II came out.

I choose to remain optimistic regardless. CA get a bad wrap but I do think they are transparent and decently passionate about the series.

Favourite vanilla experience was probably Fall of the Samurai. It just seemed to work out of the box.

FOTS is the pinnacle of the series. Regional specializations, UI, naval combat, trade - just the best.

[Påsan]

Fots was pretty cool. If only beacuse i got to blast wooden junks to pieces with a ironclad battleship and watch redcoats gun down samurai with repeating rifles.

It was a pretty solid game throughout really. Then again Attila and Age of Charlemagne both were solid on release. They are on a good streak currently.

[Markas]

Favourite vanilla experience was probably Fall of the Samurai. It just seemed to work out of the box.

Well Shogun 2+expansions were Warscape and I agree it was one of if not the best in the series, so it's primarily other factors that curse others like R2 to mediocrity.

[The Wandering Storyteller]

Release date is 28th of April. Not far away.

[mdoolitt]

The best thing anyone can do is play the game without heeding anyone's opinion or being swayed. Make your own mind up 100%. You hate Total War now, fair penis, but that doesn't mean future games are doomed. I actually think TW:W could be incredible, but the that will be decided in the hours of my first campaign.

If I have to pay $70 to "fairly judge the game". I think I'll be happy to heed the opinions of others who bought it before me. TW:W is absolutely a "wait six months first before buying", at least for myself.

[hep]

So my take here is the following, the CA have
a) have once again produced an idiot battle AI, and/or
b) have been unable to design even scritped/quest battles right (where they could nudge the AI into the right direction)

I think you need an option C)

C) CA believe that making the game somewhat more "arcadey/action focused" will appeal to the masses and generate more sales. They don't want the player to go too long without something exciting happening:
so they speed the battles up, so that the player isn't waiting too long for something to finish
send the enemies in waves so the player doesn't have to spend too long maneuvering before combat starts.
give every unit the ability to break down castle gates so they don't have to wait and build siege weapons.#
give the general/units special abilities which they can activate in combat, so that the player doesnt have to wait for the combat to finish to perform the next action.
Group the settlements into groups of 4 so that the player doesn't have to spend too long in the "boring" campaign map.
Reduce the number of buildings that you can build in a province, so that the player doesn't have to spend too long upgrading buildings.
Reduce the number of general/agents that you can build so that you don't spend ages moving small armies around.
well give them controllable doom divers so that they have something fun to do when the battle is dragging on

I think the AI design is intentional. the orc player played defensively, so the AI rushed towards the player, because the player obviously wants to be attacked when adopting a defensive stance and so that the player didn't have to wait for something to happen

Thundering falls was the same, the greenskins rushed the small amount of goblins into battle with a far superior fortified dwarf army.
e.g. the player is playing defensively, so we will program the AI to give them what they want, which is to be attacked, instead the goblins should have grouped up with the main force in the background and attacked in one big force.
Again the greenskins had a range and speed advantage over the dwarfs in the form of the goblin doom divers and the spider riders/wolf riders.

This is exactly the same scenario, defensive fortified player gets rushed by a far inferior detachment of the main army, when the army could sit back and use their ranged advantage.
(the dwarf cannons had a much shorter range than the doom divers)

It must be intentional

I think creative assembly have a very disjointed view of what the player will enjoy, which is what they try and provide by getting rid of the "tedious" bits, without necessarily realising that that is not necessarily what the player wants.

[Sharpe]

If I have to pay $70 to "fairly judge the game". I think I'll be happy to heed the opinions of others who bought it before me. TW:W is absolutely a "wait six months first before buying", at least for myself.

What ever happened to trying it at a friends house? I have at least 5 mates that will buy this game

[hep]

Well, it is only a promo video, so I wouldn't judge the AI based on this alone. It's a different matter of course if the AI is this bad in the released game, but let's hope that will not be the case.

The thundering falls battle had the exact same bad AI mistake.

e.g.
Brets battle) Darren plays the orcs defensively, fortifying high ground
Thundering falls) Dwarf player plays defensively, fortifying slightly raised ground

Brets battle)Yeoman cavalry started on the battlemap ahead of the main force
Thundering falls)goblins joined the battle map ahead of the main force

Brets battle)Yeoman cavalry see the defensive action and charge straight at it, despite having no advantage.
Thundering falls)goblin detachment see the defensive action and charge straight at it, despite the small detachment being outnumbered and having no chance of winning in the face of a dwarf gunline.

Brets battle)Yeoman cavalry suffer heavy losses and flee
Thundering falls)goblins suffer heavy losses and flee

Brets battle)next wave attacks in the form of bretonnian infantry etc,
Thundering falls)next wave attacks in the form of goblins, 3rd wave from trolls behind, fourth from main army

Brets battle)battle lost
Thundering falls)battle lost

I think warhammer could be the most arcadey TW so far.

I think CA is a victim of its own success, what started out as a one of a kind game, completely unlike anything before it became very successful. This success allowed them to expand beyond a niche target market.
The more successful they have become the more they have to appeal to a wider market, which is diluting what was so appealing about the earlier games, which was how real and immersive it felt in comparison to everything else.

The early total wars were designed by fewer individuals, designing what they thought they would enjoy, big budget games like this are designed by project managers saying stuff like "nobody wants to wait too long between stuff happening, so reduce the amount of tedious stuff"

heres a very telling interview with CA from 2012 for anyone who is interested:

http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/20...ative-assembly

[♘Top Hat Zebra]

I gotta say, Im not really impressed. It feels like they really could have changed the factions up here. In Total War, there's always been "Horde" faction, whether it be the Mongols, or the Maratha, or barbarians. But now they have a literal horde faction, and it's not represented on the battle map in the slightest from what I can see. Slightly more men in an army does not a horde make.

I want to see encouragements for orcs to be really different. Im talking, like, 600 men per unit, massive charge bonuses that cause morale damage to enemies and buff your own units, penalties for sitting back in guard mode, maybe even army integrity losses if you don't kill enough enemies in a fight. Unless you have the rare "Task master" generals, like Azhag. Then you can fight as a more balanced, disciplined force.

Plus the usual complaints, it kind of just looks like Rome 2 with a new coat of paint. I mean, I don't want huge, massive changes to the formula, nor do I expect them, but I thought there would be more than just... This.

[August]

Looks roughly as I have expected it would. Not bad.

I like the fact that campaign will have some special battles with unusual setups to mix things up.

It's not a groundbreaking revolution, but that's not what I expect from TW (since the original Shogun, anyway ).

[warl0rd13]

I think they are focusing on the campaign for major differences, which is fine with me as that has, in my opinion, always been the series bread and butter. I think by and large the battles are mostly going to be like any other total war, with major differences beings magic, monsters, hero units, ect.

I am optimistic for siege however, Warhammer has some awesome fortresses and city's that should be interesting to conquer and defend.

[Person012345]

Why does the AI insist on attacking in waves, it was like this in the thundering falls battle. It throws all strategy out of the window when you don't have to divide before you conquer.
I hope this is purely due to them being quest battles, because Rome 2 used to send units at you in a piecemeal manner. empire was the last game that I remember that used to try and hold a proper battle line and attack as one.

Charging light cavalry with no support at a fortified enemy, bad AI.

Fast battle, if the bretonnians had attacked as one the battle would be done in 5 or 6 minutes.

Looks good though.

The AI will be the usual trash no doubt.

Tiny units.

The music seemed the usual new generation forgettable underwhelming garbage.

The Brettonians were really unimpressive (though I do recognise this is a reduced AI-only roster and "relatively early" units or so they say).

Game looks like a minimum effort waste of ing money from CA yet again. £50 for this seemingly even further watered down tosh are you serious?

I'm out, I'm refunding my pre-order. We'll see how things stand once they've trotted out the DLC.

[Person012345]

By the way, as far as graphics go, I wouldn't judge it too harshly or finally based on a youtube video. TB recently did a video on this. Of course it's still valid to compare it to other videos they've done and also if you see specific problems that aren't down to artifacting and other youtube-related things.

[foesto]

I actually liked the video and I cant wait to play the game myself!

some negative points I agree on tho:
- colour scheme (I really hope they include an army painter)
- AI flanking was great, if only the cav waited for the inf... just Total war AI being Total war AI
- No guard mode for most of the Orc units, or charge without orders would be great!
- What's up with the arrows? what was wrong with the arrows from shogun II?

positives:
- It's the Total war gameplay we all know and love
- Magic doesnt seem unbalanced
- Orcs looked great! I hope they'll flesh out Bretonnia some more, since I love that faction!

[joedreck]

This gameplay is a worst case!How could CA Show us that. They have to know such bad quality will Start a discusdion shortly before release. Also they take always real Bad Players for show Ing us. They are not able to play good and it seems AI is great, but in Real the Tester is worst and it seems not play much time TW games.The AI seems be pretty bad - again. No words for that. About graphics I can t tell anything, cause cant See very well anything. Bad resolution.

[HigoChumbo]

They have to know such bad quality will Start a discusdion shortly before release.

Ain't that good for business?

[HigoChumbo]

They have to know such bad quality will Start a discusdion shortly before release.

Ain't that good for business?

[SKSlave]

Ain't that good for business?

Starting a discussion about the game's apparent bad quality? I'd say it's not the greatest business move ever.