Whats a good strategy for winning as with Vikings btw anyone? I’ve played them a few times but I always seem to run out of money. I don’t think my play style is suited for them, so how do others win with them?
-XT
Damn…meant to ask this too…whats the strategy for winning with the Danes also on Hard or Expert? I haven’t been able to do this either. Again, I usually run out of money or I become boxed in and unable to expand very well. I can usually survive, but I haven’t been able to win anything but a minor victory with them…and that was a stretch.
-XT
Ironically if I’m playing something like Civ or Warcraft I go for quality over quantity too. Just something about Total War that brings my desire to swarm out. (my favorite play of all time was when I was playing Romance of the Three Kingdoms and beat 250,000 with less then 40,000)
Vikings are pretty simple. Have your northern country produce nothing but units and your southern country go for boat production(though I haven’t played them on hard yet so this may need some tweaking). Right below the blue people (Mericans?) there’s a rebel country with an Abby. Take that for an easy mound of cash. Build nearly ever country you have like this. Watch Towers, Border Forts, Pagan Shrine so you can get the loyality up. Then Fort/muster field so you can start cranking out thralls (when you have about 3 countries upgrade a couple of them to better units through drinking halls). Then take down the Mericans. Watch their countries for abbies to appear and then attack that country. If you run out of cash though attack whatever country is most developed. After the Mericans are gone turn your attention to the Saxons. TRY TO STAY ALLIED with everyone but the Saxons nothing will screw you up worse then having an invation from behind while fighting them. Once you have the Saxons under control scale back unit production and start developing countries for cash. Next is the Welsh. This can be hard b/c your units are spread out and econ still might be a problem. Plus the Irish and Scottish will attack your western coasts if you don’t have enough boats to protect them. After you unify the south under you you’ve won. Attack whoever you want in whatever order you want. Make sure you keep control of the sea though so you don’t have surprise visits from anyone.
Any of you guys play multiplayer at all?
If so, interested in allowing one more to join in your group?
I’ve never heard of this game and don’t really have the attention span for this sort of game but it sounds interesting. You can lay siege on a city then slaughter all its inhabitants and EVERYTHING? Kewl!
As for maintaining loyalty, would it help to hit the hard countries first, before your troops have become jaded and your best men are still alive? Or do you need to build up experience points to stand a chance?
dropzone,
it would take forever to explain all the elements in Total War.
Though there is experience it doesn’t play that huge of a role (your ‘unit’ will gain points that will make them more deadly over time but it really doesn’t effect the game too much)
MUCH more important is the general. As he succeeds he will gain ranks that will make every unit more deadly in the fight. He also gains attributes over time which can help or hurt (if he gains ‘weak attacker’ for instance)
You can play it like say Warcraft where you participate in battles and leave the country governing to the computer (or you can play scenarios that you have a set of units and have to beat the comp on the map like you can play through Joan of Arc’s campaign) the fighting is VERY dependent on tactics. Holding a river or high ground is vital. Watching Calvary sweeping behind you and slaughtering your archers makes you cry. And yes you can assault castles or starve them out. You should bring siege equipment though or you’ll lose a TON of men.
Or you can play it like a board game moving the tiles around on the main map and have the battles auto resolve.
Playing Medieval takes a lot of time and patience. When your empire gets to about 15+ countries it becomes a micro management pain. (though to be fair it doesn’t even compare to Civ in that respect) If you have an attention span problem Viking Invasion is far better for quick campaigns that you can go through fairly fast.
Country loyalty is based on several factors. Distance from the King, distance from the governor, how high the governors ‘dread’ is, tax rate, city improvements, how many solders in the country, religion and how long you have held the country. Watch Towers/Border forts are the cheapest and earliest to get (and have the added bonus of catching Assassins so you don’t have to worry about countering them as much. Keeping a chain of boats keeps your governor/king technically close to the city. Letting the computer manage taxes keeps that under control. And building shrines/churches helps with converting people to your religion (though for me this is only a problem when you play the pagan Vikings)
Probably not fast enough, I fear. Oh well, sounds like it could be fun. 
Thanks for the explanations. 
Definitely not a game for everyone. It takes a LONG time to play though a campaign (well, it take ME a long time…at least 4 hours usually, sometimes days), and there is a fairly sharp learning curve for those not versed in medieval combined arms tactics. The strategy part of the game is fairly straight forward for anyone who’s played resource and technology advancement type games, but if you rely on having the computer auto-play the tactical element you are going to take a lot more losses and the game becomes much more difficult to win IMO.
Still, for someone who likes army level tactical real time combat with a pretty cool strategic turned based element, this is the ultimate game IMO. Also, the game has been out for quite a while, so you can usually pick up a used one in an EB or Babagges for less than $20 (I saw it in the local EB for $15.96 used the other day)…and the Viking expansion for maybe another $10-15. Its definitely worth giving it a try unless you really dislike this kind of thing.
Good summary of the game btw Darkhold…hit all the highlights IMO.
-XT
BTW, does anyone really play this game multiplayer much? I only really tried once, when it first came out, but I was totally disappointed that you could only do the tactical battles…you couldn’t play the strategic campaign part, which to me is what I would like to do multiplayer. I’m curious if anyone else even bothers with the multiplayer.
I think they sort of messed up implementation of this. Its not like war between Christians was unusual or particularly objectionable in Medieval times. In fact, the Popes might have liked a particularly noble and powerful conquerer to unify CHristendom. Like me.
I like playing as the English. From there you can strike south toward France or even Spain, or east toward the Scandinavian countries. Taking them nets you a backdoor into Germany. Taking spain nets you a backdoor into the Middle East. And your home territory is unassailable.
Great thread with many great comments. Out of curiosity, I rarely actually fight the battles myself as I usually let the computer handle them. It seems like I may be missing something. I am going to stick with the Moslem countries for the time being and start building myself a navy!
From my point of view there are simply too many battles to fight them all. I just don’t want to spend 30 minutes on 3 battle each round.
You are definitely missing something Lochdale…the tactical battles are half the fun! Also, I’ve noticed my casualties are 50-75% higher when I let the computer handle it…plus they spread the casualties out among all the different units, which can really suck if you have an asymetric force composition (which I do…heavy on infantry, mixed skirmishers, light on cavalry). Early in the game I rely offensively on hitting the enemy where he’s weak with overwhelming force, which usually causes them to bolt without a fight (if they can)…if they don’t I usually just let the computer auto-fight then. I almost always fight the defensive battles though reguardless as I’ve found that you can have the biggest impact there (kill ratio wise), but once I start getting really powerful units later in the game I go with smaller armies, so I fight it out offensively too.
The English are cool because you get Welsh Longbowmen and Billmen early on…they can make a HUGE difference. And they are definitely stategically well placed to make it difficult to attack…at least the core provences in England itself. Personally as I said earlier I favor Germany and Italy, as the Germans get Switzerland (Swiss Halb. early, Swiss Pikes and Armored Pikes later) right off plus get the Gothic units later on, and Italy gets one of the best early spear unit, Italian Infantry and they get Gothic units too. I use this unit almost through the entire game as its a very solid infantry unit, only surpassed when Italy gets Pikes/Gothic units itself. France is one of the countries in Europe I least like…its pretty tough to play with a divided empire, and your only choice is to go to war with England early and fend off Germany…which also means the damn Pope is going to excommunicate your ass early and often.
The muslim countries are definitely the thing to play for beginners. Frankly I can’t see how you could lose with either the Al. or Egyptians…they get it all. Good strategic position (especially the Al.) plus tons of money and decent units. When playing the Al I’ve actually had my money well over 30k per turn with a large fleet and holding the entire ME (including Constantinople), plus all of Iberia alone.
-XT
After reading this thread, I’ve decided to go out and buy the game. Two quick questions though:
-
Can I go online and play against other people?
-
How does this game compare to Rise of Nations. I heard they are both good. Anybody here play both?
I find it interesting that you like the Als so much I always found them much more difficult then Egypt. Egypt can roll over N. Africa with no problem and push towards Constantinople fairly easy. After that I run a three(?!?!) front war going striaght north, going through the balklands and heading into Spain b/c I have so many units I can afford to do whatever I want and nobody can stop me.
Have you tried my Viking strat yet? Or did you decide it sounds too different from your play style?
teemingONE,
-
Yes but I’ve never played online so I can’t say how robust it is.
-
I have played Rise of Nations. I liked it but it got boring fast (but considering I don’t play online I probably missed a lot of what you’d enjoy) you build a city on the map (like Warcraft) pump out units research Tech upgrade ages (like Age of Empires) my problem is the single player gets very repetitive. It’d be like playing Warcraft without a story line. Most of the time you control 1 city against 1-3 computer cities though there are other variations (like hold off units for X Mins). Then you rinse and repeat. You also get cards you can buy that will give you random abilities but I just bought them until I found cheapshot cards (one will let you take a piece of land without fighting for instance) and used them b/c I was tired of fighting all the battles. Also it was frustrating how you could only attack once per turn
In short it’s like Age of Empires with a little more of a Civilizations feel to it. I loved the battles but got bored b/c it seemed like I had seen it all in one play through.
I’d give Total War a B+ Rise of Nations a C+.
Oh I should have mentioned in Rise of Nations you can set up skirmish battles with a TON of options. I’ve never seen a game that let you tweak skirmish battles so much so if you’re in the mood to fight a particular type of battle you can set it up easy. (Don’t want to seem like I’m selling the game short by not mentioning something)
Well, I must say this game looks very interesting.
How does it compare with other empire builder games like Europa Universalis II?
Well, as far as record time to victory, I wouldn’t know - I usually play long, slow games right to the end :). That’s because I almost never play conquest, but rather ‘Glorious Achievement’. IMHO it makes for a much more interesting game ( especially if you have to pull off Crusades from northern Europe in the face of compeititors also racing for that prize ). Conquest is only fun I find in the early, or very occasionally mid-game ( if a monster compeititor empire arises ), when it is still challenging. After that it is just a steam-roll, like many strategy games, though the tactical element does still make it more entertaining than most. But I play GA and deliberately paced expansion ( a few factions like the Turks excepted in the early game ). In a sense I role-play, as I’m sure plenty of players do - i.e. I never break alliances, don’t always use absolutely optimal units ( I often prefer an interesting mix over ‘most effective’ ), rarely go for a full kill if I can get peace ( not always possible ), etc… I just find it more fun that way.
Darkhold - I’ll give you a perfect example of why to fight battles yourself ( not necessarily all of them, occasionallty I’ll autocalc as well ). This threrad enspired me to dust off my copy the other night. I started as the Turks, early ( I usually play ‘early’ ), on hard. As the Turks are between a rock and a hard place and have good reason to be out to get the Byzantines historically ( the Sultanate of Rum ( Iconium ) was afterall built on Byzantine territory ), I immediately went for the Byzantine jugular and after some early success got the rather reluctant Egyptians to ally with me ( a future problem if they had stayed true to the alliance, since I don’t break them and they held a Turkish ‘homeland’, Tripoli, needed for points ). Eventually of course the perfidious Egyptians tried to take me from behind, while I was preoccupied in the west and invaded Syria with a HUGE ( for the early game ) army. Now…
I’d been expecting this. There is a reason the Turks can be tough going early on. The Byzantines are the more dangerous with their insanely skilled generals, good economy, heavily developed Constantinople, and slow, cumbersome, but incredibly tough heavy units ( personally I think early game Byzantines are the most overpowering faction ), so I turned on them first. Now the Egyptians inevitably will hit you in the back with numerous stacks. However the Egyptian AI, somewhat ahistorically, prefers to recruit huge numbers of Peasants and Urban Militia, leavened with Desert Archers, Bedouin Camels, and the stray unit of Nubian Spearmen. All of which makes them much less threatening than Kataphractoi. The Egyptians armies are immense, but weak. Now…
By this time I had begun producing Turcoman Horse ( slightly upgraded horse-archers ) in Rum and Armenian Heavy Calvary in Armenia ( great unit which gets a valor bonus in Armenia ). Expecting just such a treacherous attack I had begun strengthening my positions in Syria, Edessa, and Little Armenia with these troops. When the attack came, it came with over 3,400 troops ( or, as I prefer to think of them, 34,000 ). An immense mass of Peasants, a somewhat smaller, but still large mass of Urban Militia, large number of Desert Archers, several camel units, a couple of units of spearmen, and a four-star general. To counter I had about 450 or so. Mostly an even mix of TH and AHC, with one unit of foot archers and my general, a four-star Amir with a unit of Bedouin Camels. Just for fun I tried an auotcalc - defeat, maybe 400 enemy dead to my 250 or so. Fighting it myself…
Well, the biggest danger was the first and last rush. The first came with waves of Peasants and UM backed by a veritable swarm of archers. This was actually a dangerous combination, because with a four-star general leading them the peasants and UM could conceivably hold long enough for the archers they screened to do a crippling amount of damage. Didn’t held matters that I was fighting on dunes and starting on not much of a slope. But I had a good general and vastly better troops. My TC started ripping them before they could set, most of my AHC hit them frontally to fix them in place ( and shred their calvary vulnerable units ), while two units of AHC swept from the left flank and hit the archers in the rear and sides, disrupting as many of them as possible until the Egyptian front lines had collapsed and general mop up and pursuit of the general could take place. I made sure of the general, chasing him fully off the screen, and in the course of doing so shifted my force to a more advantageous spot on the dunes - one side of a tall, narrow dune “valley” with a deep trough. The successive waves that followed had to walk down, then charge up a steep incline, where my calvary would repeatedly charge, then regroup - perfect killing ground. The only time it got dicey afterwards was the aforementioned last wave - half a dozen Bedouin Camel units ( dicey opponents for horse calvary, which described the bulk of my army ) in addition to the pesant swarm. But lacking a general themselves and with the help of my own camel unit I prevailed.
I lost well over half my force, maybe two-thirds, and barely survived. But I killed over 30,000 ( err…3,000 
). That’s the potential difference when you fight it yourself :).
- Tamerlane
Malthus,
first don’t think the nation building in Total War is anywhere near most empire building games. It’s very straightforward. The only considerations are if you should work on your econ or build up your units (well and the loyalty of the population which is only a problem when you first conquer them or if you lose connection to your king).
Diplomacy is fairly non-existent. You can either be Allied, neutral or at war with the other nations. And no explanation is given why a nation won’t ally with you. The most asked for feature is Rights of Passage (if you want to attack France and Germany is in the way tough luck attack Germany) this is going to be added to Rome Total War.
I personally like the Board Game feel of the map. If I want deep empire building I play Galactic Civ. If I want a game where I don’t have to worry about every building I make every step of the way and just want to fight I load Total War.
The joys of this game is the tactics and strategy. Do I attack some easy rebel providence for more territory? Do I attack that country that’s getting a little to strong on my border? And when you fight should I move to the forest to keep the archers off me? Do I take the high ground? Can I get my Calvary behind the pikemen to kill off their archers?
Who said I never fight my own battles? 
Strangely just the opposite of xtisme I usually fight all the first few rounds when I have few men and battles can be tight then switch to auto-calc after my empire is up and running and I know I’ll swarm them under and have tons to spare.
Then when I have a couple of countries with truly elite units I might fight a few battles just to have the joys of watching the slaughter.
One of my fave things to do is have everyone under my boot by 1200 but leave the last Papal State alone. Then I stick some elite units where the Mongols are going to show up. Then see the minium I can fight them off with. Now that can be a long tiring battle.
Hmmm I should start playing the late period more often so I can play with guns more. Except for the scenerios I never even see them.
Anyone play Shogun Total War scenerio where you have guns vs a (seemingly) endless calvary charge? Sweetness.