My advice is to work your way up through the series chronologically by release date, maybe skip napoleon. By then when you get to Rome II most the bugs will be patched.
Poll: Which Total War game would you recommend?
- Thread starter Zhukov
- Start date
Shogun 2 may not have unit variety between factions, but everyone still gets a huge roster of units with a great variety of roles. It's also generally the most polished game in the series, with nice UI, the first in-game encyclopedia and a good artistic direction.
I would suggest Rome Total War or Medieval 2. They're from the last generation of games, and they cover the basics really well. Just be ready to deal with an unpleaseable Senate and a Batshit insane Pope.
Of those, I would go with Medieval 2 just for the Kingdoms expansion. They take the massive conflict of the base game, and focus on smaller, more detailed regions. There is an Americas campaign, with the spanish Conquistadors, Britannia covering the Scottish and Irish wars, The Teutonic Campaign, where the Teutons tried to exterminate paganism throughout the Rhine and into Poland, and the Crusades, where the Christians and the Muslims tore up the Middle East.
Of those, I would go with Medieval 2 just for the Kingdoms expansion. They take the massive conflict of the base game, and focus on smaller, more detailed regions. There is an Americas campaign, with the spanish Conquistadors, Britannia covering the Scottish and Irish wars, The Teutonic Campaign, where the Teutons tried to exterminate paganism throughout the Rhine and into Poland, and the Crusades, where the Christians and the Muslims tore up the Middle East.
I'll try and summarise the advantages and disadvantages of them:Zhukov said:
Rome:
+ Massively varied map, campaign, and unit roster. Pretty much every faction has at least a few unique units, and mercenaries mix things up as well.
+ Decent UI, is a solid engine and platform. Not buggy (except some siege pathfinding, but that's not a real problem)
+ Is the most colourful and expressive total war game. Insane strategies will sometimes work, specialised units are horribly effective, meaning you can really play as a Magnificent Bastard, and feel correspondingly proud when you pull it off.
- Is dated now.
- Is absurdly unbalanced/exploitable in some ways (looking at you General Bodyguard, Berserkers, forester warband)
- AI is flawed compared to later versions (though general tactical colourfulness mitigates this).
Medieval II:
+ Generally solid - the engine is refined, the units relatively balanced, but still varied enough to be interesting
+ Really significant evolution of units - you go from shield walls to musketeers during the course of the campaign
+ Tones down some of Rome's 'eccentricities' while maintaining a level of tactical effectiveness.
+ Kingdom's expansion is probably one of the best DLC's ever. 4 complete campaign scenarios with modified mechanics, about 15 mostly new factions, different maps.
- Is distinctly medieval. If you don't like the era that might be an issue.
- Newer than Rome but still dated and AI flawed.
Empire:
+ Massive globe spanning map. Theatres in Europe, Middle East, India, North America, Carribean. Smaller naval trade locations in Africa, South America, East Indies.
+ Naval Battles and emphasis on naval trade - blockades, trade routes, etc are really important, making global strategy and diplomacy a must.
- Really fucking buggy; Memory leaks, dodgy AI, crashes, save issues. Back up your saves, mods needed for best experience
- Might be too big for first time Total War player, campaign is kind of sparse.
- Line infantry tactics interesting, but battle tactics a lot more static and attritive, imo a bit boring.
- Small unit roster, though that is mitigated by getting the unit DLCs.
Napoleon:
+ Campaigns a lot tighter and more involved
+ Units tweaked so that battles are more tactical than Empire (though not as much as Rome or Medieval II)
- Much smaller map than Empire - Europe only, less emphasis on trade.
- Unit roster still small, though a little more varied in abilities now
Shogun II:
+ Pretty, and battle animations great, battlefield terrain varied enough to keep things interesting
+ AI is actually decently aggressive in campaign
- Naval combat is abysmal. Pathfinding is shite, units are frustratingly poor, outcomes seem determined by chance.
- Unit roster is crap - only a few types of unit, and not that much difference between them. Factions are all basically identical.
- Even though it's melee based, the battles always seem to devolve into attritive messes. Less tactical than Empire.
I normally put multiple hundred hours into total war games, I put about 20 into Shogun II before giving up.
I've only played Rome II about 15 hours so far, so I won't comment on it yet. But what I can already say is that it's better than Shogun II!
All things considered I'd narrow it down to Napoleon, Rome, or Medieval II. Of those it depends what grabs you.
Rome I remains my favourite game of all time, so I'll vote for that, but any of those three are a pretty good choice as an introduction to the series.
OneCatch - that's a pretty good summary of the TW series.
I would personally recommend europa barbarorum http://www.europabarbarorum.com/ it's historically sound, really adds loads to awesome features to the RTW game and is very stable when installed with alexander total war
I would personally recommend europa barbarorum http://www.europabarbarorum.com/ it's historically sound, really adds loads to awesome features to the RTW game and is very stable when installed with alexander total war
Go with Medieval 2 or the first Rome- both are very good, they have solid mechanics and can be bought cheap nowadays- but I feel that Rome battles are more faster paced than in Medieval 2.Zhukov said:
I also found that Medieval suits me better, but it's because I like middle ages better than I like Roman period of history.
Just wait until they do another Steam sale. I got every TW game up through Empire a few years ago for dirt cheap (IIRC it was like $30 for all the games...this was before Shogun 2 came out).
But failing that, I'd say the newer games are better for a new player. They've slowly streamlined the interface, as well as looking better and the AI is "smarter". My personal favorite is Empire, although it's got some flaws, it's also got the most variety and scope.
But failing that, I'd say the newer games are better for a new player. They've slowly streamlined the interface, as well as looking better and the AI is "smarter". My personal favorite is Empire, although it's got some flaws, it's also got the most variety and scope.
Medieval 2 Total War, if you have any interest in modding than that is your game. Warhammer, Hyrule, I believe they have a LOTR mod as well, there was a Warcraft mod in development but it was abandoned last January sadly.
Though, you might get frustrated with the Religion in Medieval 2, in the base game, the Pope gets really pissed with you if you attack fellow Christians, constantly demanding you stop.
But whichever you choose, make sure you look up balance mods, most of the games need them.
Though, you might get frustrated with the Religion in Medieval 2, in the base game, the Pope gets really pissed with you if you attack fellow Christians, constantly demanding you stop.
But whichever you choose, make sure you look up balance mods, most of the games need them.
My favorite is Medieval 2, for love of the time period and setting. It's dark, gloomy, units look different and get bloody after combat, and there are no pink-pajama'd Parthians. Combat seems a lot for visceral, as the mists gather to obstruct the oncoming forces as fire arrows burn their way into the enemy.
In contrast to Rome, my second favorite, the same mechanics are implemented, but differed. Infantry footslogs are longer, and, while there are less unit "types," there is still plenty of variation, with the choices between city-based militias and castle-based professionals. Cavalry is also stronger, and doesn't loose half their unit when they charge pikemen from behind: they are skilled killing machines when used effectively, just as they should be. Unit groups are also large, ranging from 40-75 for heavy infantry to militia, who can actually form an effective fighting force, when commanded correctly. Also, artillery is much more obtainable, as well as necessary against multiple walled-castes.
There are also plenty of nations to chose from, with distinct flairs in technology and unit choices. Whether that's a simple different unit or a lack of diversified heavy cavalry to a wide access of horse archers, it does add some nice variation to barbarian, Romans, Eastern, Greeks, Egyptians, and Carthaginians with only slight variation of visual and unit choices.
Additionally, the Britannia campaign is worth getting the Kingdoms expansion itself, whilst the Americas campaign is boring (I'm still in progress. Para España!). Teutonic is decent, and I've yet to try Crusades.
In contrast to Rome, my second favorite, the same mechanics are implemented, but differed. Infantry footslogs are longer, and, while there are less unit "types," there is still plenty of variation, with the choices between city-based militias and castle-based professionals. Cavalry is also stronger, and doesn't loose half their unit when they charge pikemen from behind: they are skilled killing machines when used effectively, just as they should be. Unit groups are also large, ranging from 40-75 for heavy infantry to militia, who can actually form an effective fighting force, when commanded correctly. Also, artillery is much more obtainable, as well as necessary against multiple walled-castes.
There are also plenty of nations to chose from, with distinct flairs in technology and unit choices. Whether that's a simple different unit or a lack of diversified heavy cavalry to a wide access of horse archers, it does add some nice variation to barbarian, Romans, Eastern, Greeks, Egyptians, and Carthaginians with only slight variation of visual and unit choices.
Additionally, the Britannia campaign is worth getting the Kingdoms expansion itself, whilst the Americas campaign is boring (I'm still in progress. Para España!). Teutonic is decent, and I've yet to try Crusades.
Either go with Rome, or Medieval 2. My personal favorite among all is Rome, I just really, really love that game, and still play it from time to time. I didnt like both Empire and Napoleon, the whole setting and combat just feels weird to me somehow..
I would recommend one of these three.
Medieval 2: Decently easy to run, good gameplay, nice setting, fairly good introduction to series.
Rome 1: My personal favorite (though facing stiff competition from its successor), but shows its age in places. Also Phalanxes were laughably over powered and completely broke the game against the terrible AI. If you feel up to modding then Rome might be a good choice.
Shogun 2: Most streamlined of the Total War games, but also fairly hard on hardware depending on your rig. At least for me Feudal Japan just wasn't as much fun as Ancient Rome or Medieval Europe, but that's just personal preference.
Just my thoughts as a long running fan of the total war series.
Medieval 2: Decently easy to run, good gameplay, nice setting, fairly good introduction to series.
Rome 1: My personal favorite (though facing stiff competition from its successor), but shows its age in places. Also Phalanxes were laughably over powered and completely broke the game against the terrible AI. If you feel up to modding then Rome might be a good choice.
Shogun 2: Most streamlined of the Total War games, but also fairly hard on hardware depending on your rig. At least for me Feudal Japan just wasn't as much fun as Ancient Rome or Medieval Europe, but that's just personal preference.
Just my thoughts as a long running fan of the total war series.
My recommendation is to get Medieval II and the Kingdoms expansion and then go download the "Rule Britannia" mod. I logged 1000 hours in the original R:TW when I got Medieval II. I was pretty iffy on MII and had decided to just go back and play R:TW again because I was having more fun with that when I discovered the Rule Britannia mod for Kingdoms. It made that game so much fun to play.
For someone new to the series, i'd recommend the first Rome Total War. The learning curve is softer compared to other total wars because the maps are well balanced and it's also very fun. You can pick from three Roman factions, each of which lead to very different campaigns so you can get hundreds of hours out of it.
Medieval 2 i think is quite a bit harder so i wouldn't recommend you start off with it. If you're campaigning around France you'll be invariably zerg rushed by Milan in the 13th century because their faction isn't well balanced. Likewise, Inquisitors are over-powered and i've known them to kill well over half my ruling family for heresy. It is still a good game mind you- the Kingdoms expansion pack is great, but the buggy AI issues add an frustrating layer of challenge to it.
Empire Total War is pretty damn good as well. You have multiple campaign maps and they've done a good job of reflecting the importance of colonies and trade routes and intellectual ideas in that era. It's a very different game to the previous total wars so there is quite a steep learning curve.
I'd recommend you start off with Rome Total War, and once you're good at that play either medieval or empire total war.
Medieval 2 i think is quite a bit harder so i wouldn't recommend you start off with it. If you're campaigning around France you'll be invariably zerg rushed by Milan in the 13th century because their faction isn't well balanced. Likewise, Inquisitors are over-powered and i've known them to kill well over half my ruling family for heresy. It is still a good game mind you- the Kingdoms expansion pack is great, but the buggy AI issues add an frustrating layer of challenge to it.
Empire Total War is pretty damn good as well. You have multiple campaign maps and they've done a good job of reflecting the importance of colonies and trade routes and intellectual ideas in that era. It's a very different game to the previous total wars so there is quite a steep learning curve.
I'd recommend you start off with Rome Total War, and once you're good at that play either medieval or empire total war.
Rome.
It's cheap and has the best mid to late game of the series. Especially as a Roman faction.
But I'm still loving Rome 2 and I've yet to encounter anything to stop that.
It's cheap and has the best mid to late game of the series. Especially as a Roman faction.
But I'm still loving Rome 2 and I've yet to encounter anything to stop that.
I know a lot of people are going to say Rome 1, but I actually don't think it's that good. Solid, yes, but not as good as Shogun 2 in my eyes. The only really bad thing is probably the Realm Divide mechanic (well, that and the accents in the english version).
I always warn people of going for the Total War games that have a lot of guns in them - *I* like them, but I'm a sucker for that kind of thing. Very many are going to say they hated it. Also, Empire had some very bad balance, AI and difficulty issues, so I'd actually avoid it.
EDIT: You know what, thinking about it? Rome 1 is probably still the way to go. It has a nice learning curve if you're new and only gets really dangerous and tactical in the late midgame.
I always warn people of going for the Total War games that have a lot of guns in them - *I* like them, but I'm a sucker for that kind of thing. Very many are going to say they hated it. Also, Empire had some very bad balance, AI and difficulty issues, so I'd actually avoid it.
EDIT: You know what, thinking about it? Rome 1 is probably still the way to go. It has a nice learning curve if you're new and only gets really dangerous and tactical in the late midgame.