Oops. that should have been addressed to Lochdale.
- Tamerlane
Malthus: I agree with Darkhold - as a strategy game, EU II is far superior and as a history geek, I’ll say I prefer it. It is much deeper. But then again, there isn’t much that is deeper than EU II.
MTW is a different sort of fun. Strategy light ( but plenty of time-consuming micromanagement of economies and religion, if you like that sort of thing ), but tactically deep. Definitely recommended.
- Tamerlane
Aaagh. I’ve been putting off the Viking expansion for months now, waiting for it to drop it price … yet all around me it’s still marked at $29.95.
There’s little I can add to what’s already been said, except for my tendency to try to draw a historical narrative out of the events of the game.
The elder son is a secret heretic and a weak leader? What a shame that the reinforcements commanded by his scheming younger brother failed to arrive at a crucial moment and the heir was slaughtered on the field of battle! However, the younger brother did manage to avenge his sibling’s death, and with heavy heart, became the crown prince…
Get Sweden as quickly as possible and follow the real Denmark’s historic example and build a trading empire ( well, actually the set up a “toll” empire, but close enough ). Also follow the real Sweden’s historical example and expand into the “empty” Baltic. Within easy striking distance and they yield plenty of trade income. Soon you’ll be swimming in cash.
Err…assuming something doesn’t go wrong, that is ;).
- Tamerlane
Well, EU II is my favorite game so far (replacing the Civ franchise), but I feel the hankering for a new game - sounds like this one is fun. You guys sold me on it! 
Like Tamerlane I also ‘role play’ TW when I play. I don’t know near as much history as he does, but I know enough to really enjoy the game from that perspective. I try and follow treaties and I play the Glorious Achievements variant usually.
As an aside, I played the original EU game and frankly it left me flat. I haven’t tried EU II, but you guys have got me thinking now that I might be missing out. I’ve seen it in various computer stores used fairly cheap so I might have to go get a copy for the weekend. 
Thats basically my strategy for the Dane’s, Tamerlane, but for some reason it never seems to work out for me. Usually about mid game I just don’t seem to be able to sustain my expansion for some reason, even with a huge fleet. I can survive, but I can’t really conquer even 2/3rds of Europe (if playing conquest) to ‘win’ on the Hard or Expert level. Must be something I’m missing. Granted, I’ve only tried the Dane 2 or 3 times…they aren’t my favorite historic area so I don’t really get into role playing time for some reason.
BTW, Tamerlane, great description of why to fight it out tactically. I have to say that joy is when you are outnumbered and on the defensive and you get a river crossing scenerio…its like a gift from the gods!! I love having plenty of ranged units with a few good infantry and seeing the enemy try and cross a bridge under heavy fire. It does a heart good. And having a canon or two…rapture. (too bad they won’t let you load with grape, case or chain shot, but I suppose they hadn’t developed that yet)
lno, my suggestion is to look in the used section of your local computer game store. You can get it a lot cheaper than that. I’ve seen both the original and the expansion for under $20.00. You might not get all the docs is the only thing, but there is this thread here were you can ask all the question you need too.
Darkhold, I haven’t tried your Viking strategy yet…I’m currently playing a game with the Turks which I’m enjoying a lot. They are one of the most challenging but interesting countries IMO. I love all the archer types they get, and all the cavalry units too. And their heavy units later in the game are as good as any out there IMO.
I think the Al. are quite easy to play, Darkhold…at least as easy as the Egyptians (I actually think they are easier). They are practically unassailable in the beginning, having only two fronteer territories, unlike the Egyptians that have 5. Also, the Al. starting territories are great for generating money, and they have easy access to the Iberian penisula with is good for money AND has those great iron mines for weapons smiths. Go to war with Egypt (or just wait for them to attack you…they can’t resist) and you can roll them up as well and then take out the Byz. empire as well. At that point you are definitely dominant in the world…nothing can touch you. I usually hang out until the Mongols invade just to be on the safe side (I’ve actually seen them get 16,000 units of thos damn mongol infantry and heavy horse before…woofa), and after they spend themselves on the Russians, remnants of the Byz, maybe the Turks and Hungarians I pretty much begin the final conquest.
Anyone want to take a shot at a slight hijack and describe EU II and the differences/similarities with MTW? Whats good about it? How does it play?
-XT
Well, not having played MTW yet, I can only describe to EU ll half. 
I won’t describe the game mechanics - farr, far too complex for my patience - so I will say right off what I like about the game.
Basically, this is a historical simulation. You can play (in the Grand Campaign version) any country in existance in 1420. The good part is that no attempt whatsoever has been made to ‘balance’ the various potentially playable countries. If you try to play as the Aztecs, it will be hugely difficult!
You are if you like the “grey eminence” behind your chosen throne. You have to balance all sorts of competing factors - religion, culture, colonization, economy, a multitude of potential domestic policies, diplomacy, the effects of various historical events … and of course warfare. The complexity of the model, and its level of attention to detail, is really quite something.
It is by no means simply a wargame (and attempting to play it as such leads to all sorts of unplesant consequences). I would classify it as the best attempt to date to create something close to a real historical (or alternative-historical) simulation. Compared to EU ll, the Civ franchise looks positively childish in simplicity.
This is a game that, to play properly, takes days and days - either you get absorbed in it, in which case it is very addictive, or it will be a big turn-off.
Well I haven’t played the Al in quite some time they just weren’t different enough from the Egyptians to stick out in my mind I guess… I found them harder then the Egyptians (though that’s like saying a pillow is harder then a 1/2 melted marshmellow) and moved on to other countries for the challenge and just pick Egypt when I’m in the mood for something easy.
Maybe I’ll try them out next time I’m in the mood for something light and fun.
So what’s the Hardest countries?
Danes (obviously) then who? I haven’t really played the Argons very much but I found them fairly frustrating. Sicily seems like it wouldn’t fit with my play style so I bet they would be a pain for me. Anyone try them?
I didn’t have a problem with any of the factions in Viking Invation. Though I have only played it on hard using the Saxons and the Mericans. Both of whom are pretty much cake anyway. Mericans are IMO the easiest faction in the entire game to play through.
Thanks Malthus!! I think I’ll give it a shot. Sounds interesting. I assume the warfare is not tactical but basically strategic in nature (i.e. the computer basically rolls for win/lose or some variant on that)?
Darkhold, I think the hardest countries for me to play are: Danes, Sicily, Arg., Turkey, Poland. I had a bitch of a time with Sicily, though if you move fast and are able to build up a nice fleet its winable. Would possibly suit your agressive style I think. The Arg were just a bitch. I can think of no winning strategy for them to be honest and would be interested hearing from anyone who actually managed to win with them. When I’ve played them I focused more on surviving, which was tough enough…I never even got close to winning. Poland is touch but definitely winable. Turkey is very challenging…tough but rewarding if you pull it off. France too I suppose is semi-tough, though more winable than the others IMO. Everything else is pretty much cake and I think anyone who is a reasonable decent strategist/tactician can win pretty easily, though maybe not as fast as you. The pre-countries in Viking Invasion were pretty straight forward except the Vikings for me…for whatever reason I had a tough time winning, though I only played them twice. I kept running out of money even with constant raids, but I was doing hit and run tactics instead of take and hold…might make a difference.
-XT
Basically, there are three kinds of battles: sieges, fleet battles and clashing armies. The battles are affected by all sorts of factors - for example, the presence of historical leaders, the relative technology level, and the types of troops (mixures of infantry/cavalry/cannon). But otherwise, it is basically a matter of rolling dice. No tactical warfare sim at all.
Oh - and another thing I forgot to mention: the game plays in “real time”, not turns. In other words, you turn the clock on, and eveything happens at the same time. You can pause whenever you like, and set the “clock” to run at different speeds, but if you are used to turn-based strategy games it takes a bit of getting used to (although much more realistic, obviously).
This being the case, things like seasons are very important (attrition is a real army-killer – avoid invading Russia in winter! Your armies tend to melt away - as they do in the “White Man’s Grave” of West Africa – unless you have a good historical conquistador as a leader)
In addition, the map is province-based, not based on a notional grid.
As a little aside, attrition losses are calculated at the start of each month, so if you time your army moves properly, you can minimize the effect.
Of course, it’s the reason I never got around to conquering Poland or Lithuania when I was playing as the Ottomans. I was determined to have the interpretation of the Koran taught in the schools of Oxford, and her pulpits demonstrate to a circumcised people the sanctity and truth of the revelation of Mahomet, so I plowed across central and western Europe, annexing as I went.
It took a few centuries, but it also had some interesting effects on the colonization of the Americas.
I actually landed Zapotec warriors in Rome, in 1815.
[I had just returned from vacation in Oaxaca, and remembered that the Zapotecs were in fact playable - after visiting Monte Alban, how could I resist the challenge of offering human sacrifice to the gods in St. Peters? ]
Sadly to say, even at that time, my tech level was so much lower than everyone elses’ (despite successfully preventing European colonization in all of North and South America, which was my sole empire), that the landing could not be sustained for long …
When I buy this game I’ll have to start a new thread to get all the tips on how to play it. Sounds pretty cool. I always wanted to invade Europe with hordes of screaming Aztec warriors.
If you get MTW (or even Total War: Shogun which is also pretty nice) Malthus you’ll have to come back and give your impressions of it. Personally there are few things more pleasurable (well, in a computer game at least ;)) than a desparate pike charge at the enemies center, supported by musket and crossbow fire, with your heavy cavalry charging in from the flanks to slash the enemies weaker ranged units, and your own light skirmishing cavalry on the opposite flank to harrass the enemy and drive him nuts. The only thing better is holding a bridge crossing I suppose.
-XT
Oh, you will hear from me when I get the game - which will be soon!
BTW, it is not easy to invade Europe with Aztec or Zapotec hordes - it is difficult enough merely trying to survive as Aztecs - there is nothing as discouraging as watching fifty thousand of your Aztec warriors dispursed by a tiny handful of Spanish horsemen. Particularly unplesant is when the Treaty of Tordessalis is signed, giving the Spanish the right to grab territories away from you without even a proper declaration of war (which has all sorts of implications in the game) - but you have to declare war on them to get them back! (Damn interfering Pope!)
The only way to survive is to play the Europeans off against each other … and wearing invaders down by continual attacks. Otherwise, your glorious Aztec empire is very likely to go the way of the historical one. The game is not balanced, and Aztecs most definitely get the historical short end of the stick!
The country I always like to play is Portugal. Great empire and colony building early in the game - if only you can avoid Aragon and (later) Spain gobbling you up.
Alright, just got Total War and I’m having trouble setting up trade routes. How do I do it? I built a Port and a Merchant. How do I make boats or whatever I need to trade?
If you scroll up it was explained earlier. Basically you need to have a ship in each sea zone from where you are trading (your port) to the target port. As an example:
Say I 'm the english and want to establish a trade route from Wessex to a port in Portugal. I’d need to have a ship in each of the following zones: English Channel, Bay of Biscay, Costa Verde, and Spanish Coast. Thats 4 ships you’d need to establish the trade route. Its automatic from there. Couple things to watch out for. If an enemy ship is in any of those zones, it breaks the route…basically if you mouse over the sea zone you’ll get a purple Blockaded message. You have to really watch your trade routes, especially when war breaks out suddently. I’ve gone from having 6k surplus florins per turn to -2k in a single turn because someone attacked me and they happened to have ships that broke my trade chains.
Hope that helps. Let us know what you think of the game!!
-XT
Oh…something else that might not have been clear. If there are ports along the way that are neutral or allied (or your own) they ALSO become trade ports. You don’t have to buy more ships. In the example I gave, if France was neutral or allied to you and if they had ports you’d pick up trade from Brittany and Flanders as well as your own other ports in Normandy and Aquitaine (if you had built ports there as well).
-XT
Ahh I think he wanted to know how to build the boats
Upgrade your castle and build a shipyard. You can also build a slipway for stronger ships. After you get the shipyard ships will appear in the unit screen.
Alright, thanks
Doh! Sorry…I’m reading challenged!
-XT