Worth buying?

[Professor Funpancake]

I genuinely do not care about the community shenanigans but only about the gameplay and features. Is it worth it, or another skinned version of Troy? Loved Napoleon, Rome 2 and the Warhammers. How does it compare to those without discussing the community stuff?

[Darth Glorious]

Originally posted by Professor Funpancake:

I genuinely do not care about the community shenanigans but only about the gameplay and features. Is it worth it, or another skinned version of Troy? Loved Napoleon, Rome 2 and the Warhammers. How does it compare to those without discussing the community stuff?

Yes, you can see for yourself:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WH2ZRRxZvnI&list=PLV2U5Ov1FXfDuLTCGlSDU_HLMdiZAeAod

[BEEP!]

I'd say wait for the dlcs & a heavy discount.

[Andra]

Originally posted by Professor Funpancake:

I genuinely do not care about the community shenanigans but only about the gameplay and features. Is it worth it, or another skinned version of Troy? Loved Napoleon, Rome 2 and the Warhammers. How does it compare to those without discussing the community stuff?

TLDR: Highly recommend.
I loved troy and played it to death, people can say what they like about that, but i can with absolute confidence say this is not just a reskin of troy as people claim.
There's new mechanics on the campaign map like outposts and forts which become a vital part of strategising your territory the bigger your territory gets.
There's units native by region, you can only get Nubian longbowmen by conquering territory in the upper Nile for example, and as your territory grows, your armies can become multicultural, taking the best of each to compose your armies. You can also stick to just your faction units, if you wish - depends on what you decide to build.
There's new mechanics in the form of the royal traditions, you can choose between egyptian and hittite courts to join, and scheme and plot, order assasinations or bribes, blackmail or theaten, etc.
Start a civil war to crown yourself pharaoh, or pick one of the ancient legacies to follow, building great monuments, focusing on trade, or conquest to earn legitimacy towards the crown.
You can change your equipped ancilliaries to change what the general and their bodyguard use in battle, and how they play. My first move was to change Tausret from a chariot archer, to being a heavy armor,heavy shield and Khopesh melee brawler.
You have access to new sorts of maneuvers in the battles themselves, you can order units to push the enemy in a direction you choose, or to give ground, retreating while fighting to draw the enemy in to be encircled.
There's much, much more, and none of this was in Troy.

[Kendji]

Imo yes, I'm already over 50h of play, and I envisige more. My recomendation is, if you like strategy and grand strategy, this game will be worth the money. However, if you don't care for legacies, outposts/forts brought back, deeper economy, but instead you care about the battles. The battles are ok imo, but not alone worth full price, then wait for sale or spend on something else. This game is strongest in the strategic sphere.

[PERICLES1789]

Originally posted by Kendji:

Imo yes, I'm already over 50h of play, and I envisige more. My recomendation is, if you like strategy and grand strategy, this game will be worth the money. However, if you don't care for legacies, outposts/forts brought back, deeper economy, but instead you care about the battles. The battles are ok imo, but not alone worth full price, then wait for sale or spend on something else. This game is strongest in the strategic sphere.

I approve.

[Captain Baldy]

I bought the Dynasty version and I have hardly played it but when the blood DLC hits I know I will be playing this game till my fingertips blister. I feel it was worth it however because I am a bit of a fan for the Bronze age and also because... Hittites

[Powtmow]

Don't support this company

[381]

is it true that you have only 3 factions to chose from ? xd if yes that's mean only buy on heavy discount

[Toblm]

Originally posted by 381:

is it true that you have only 3 factions to chose from ? xd if yes that's mean only buy on heavy discount

8 factions.

[Salvation]

Originally posted by Professor Funpancake:

I genuinely do not care about the community shenanigans but only about the gameplay and features. Is it worth it, or another skinned version of Troy? Loved Napoleon, Rome 2 and the Warhammers. How does it compare to those without discussing the community stuff?

Wait for a 50% discount and more DLC's

[Many-Named]

Originally posted by Salvation:

Originally posted by Professor Funpancake:

I genuinely do not care about the community shenanigans but only about the gameplay and features. Is it worth it, or another skinned version of Troy? Loved Napoleon, Rome 2 and the Warhammers. How does it compare to those without discussing the community stuff?

Wait for a 50% discount and more DLC's

^

[Defmonkey]

Originally posted by Professor Funpancake:

I genuinely do not care about the community shenanigans but only about the gameplay and features. Is it worth it, or another skinned version of Troy? Loved Napoleon, Rome 2 and the Warhammers. How does it compare to those without discussing the community stuff?

Yes i think this game is worth buying. If its worth it at the price i will leave that up to you. Most people who argue about the price, when told they can get steam keys for much cheaper, will change their tune and find something else to complain about. I have already got my moneys worth as far as i'm concerned with over 150 hours in the game on launch and early access combined. (I bought the dynasty edition at the base steam pre-order release price)

Personally i did not get into Troy and i don't find this game plays like Troy. Napoleon however is one of my favourites, and this game uses some ideas that were first started with that game. I enjoy the Warhammers but they are lacking in some areas i find. Rome 2 launched so badly i barely have interest in playing it and preferred using my time in Atilla instead, though Atilla does suffer from performance issues also. Pharaoh is the first TW game in a while that has revitalized my enjoyment in playing TW and so far a very polished and stable release.

[Kendji]

It's not Troy, it's not a Troy reskin, imo it is what Troy should have been when done properly. The resources are from Troy, however in Pharaoh they have much stronger impact and you have to trade, especially in early game. The AI does actually worthvile diplomatic trade deals, while in Troy you got spammed bad/useless deals, which was annoying. Pharaoh has aditional featutes, such as court and legacies not in Troy and made Troy feel a bit bare-bones and so forth.

[VoiD]

Was just posting this
https://steamcommunity.com/app/1937780/discussions/0/3941272762726615272/

Originally posted by VoiD:

I appreciate how they've learned valuable lessons from their diplomacy systems, building upon the issues seen in Three Kingdoms. In Pharaoh, vassals truly act as vassals, and the concept of vassalage has been significantly improved. Once a faction becomes a vassal, they gain protection from external attacks. You can't bypass this protection by joining a war against them, making vassals a more meaningful aspect of the game.

Furthermore, I'm glad to see that they've made an effort to address the excessive replenishment seen in recent Total War games. While you can still achieve substantial replenishment if you invest heavily in bonuses, it's no longer as overpowered as it has been in Rome, Three Kingdoms, or Warhammer. This adds an element of strategic depth to managing your armies.

Sieging has also made a welcome return, although I have dislike the ability to attack gates, the game encourages you to build siege weapons before assaulting a city, and the wait time before launching an assault (often 2+ turns) adds value to city walls and fortifications.

The imperial system with legitimacy and the civil war mechanism seems to be one of the better implementations in Total War games in recent years. It's a more organic and immersive system. Civil wars don't feel gamey or forced, they occur naturally within the gameplay. The contenders challenging the emperor for the throne are the larger kingdoms within the realm, and they need legitimacy to trigger a civil war. Multiple pretenders can vie for the crown, making it an engaging and dynamic aspect of the game.

While there are certainly aspects of the game that can be critiqued, it's unfortunate that the game hasn't received the recognition it deserves. In terms of quality, it's one of CA's best releases. It's been bug-free, with no post-release crashes, and many of the changes are for the better. It's a shame that the title hasn't captured the interest of the gaming community, possibly due to the time period and the association with the Troy brand.

I sincerely hope that CA doesn't discard the positive aspects of this game and considers them when developing future titles. If they decide to update their engine or create a new game set in a more popular time period like Medieval 3 or Empire 2, they should build upon the lessons learned from Pharaoh. They've taken several steps in the right direction, and most of the issues with Pharaoh, such as the Rome 2 combat, buildings, and growth mechanics, aren't exactly new to this game.

[Professor Funpancake]

Depressing. I am not interested in another Troy game as I thought that was hot garbage, but that one was free at least. The battles mean much more to me than the economy/buildings. Troy just lacked the replayability that TOTW3/Napoleon/Rome2 etc has. Thanks gents