Install Steam
login
|
language
简体中文 (Simplified Chinese)
繁體中文 (Traditional Chinese)
日本語 (Japanese)
한국어 (Korean)
ไทย (Thai)
Български (Bulgarian)
Čeština (Czech)
Dansk (Danish)
Deutsch (German)
Español - España (Spanish - Spain)
Español - Latinoamérica (Spanish - Latin America)
Ελληνικά (Greek)
Français (French)
Italiano (Italian)
Bahasa Indonesia (Indonesian)
Magyar (Hungarian)
Nederlands (Dutch)
Norsk (Norwegian)
Polski (Polish)
Português (Portuguese - Portugal)
Português - Brasil (Portuguese - Brazil)
Română (Romanian)
Русский (Russian)
Suomi (Finnish)
Svenska (Swedish)
Türkçe (Turkish)
Tiếng Việt (Vietnamese)
Українська (Ukrainian)
Report a translation problem
Discussions Rules and Guidelines
Report this post
For you I would say very hard campaign/hard battles. Once you can beat that go very hard/very hard. Once you hit legendary you won't ever want to go back to any other difficulty though, it's a lot more fun.
Campaign settings in game give battle difficulty, not campaign difficulty...I only see the campaign difficulty option at the very beginning when you start a game. Cant remember what I set it at, any way to check now? thanks...
Yeah, if it was truly easy for everyone you'd see a lot more Legendary wins.
If people look at the global achievements for winning the campaign at any level, and then compare to the percentage getting the Legendary achievement, it's about 1 in 15 of those who beat the campaign do so at Legendary, or just under 7%.
Quite a few people buy the game and never/hardly play it, only play multiplayer or use mods that disable achievements.
Legendary is easy because the AI never changes its "tactics" or "strategy" it only gets more numbers and resources. Pleebs can't beat it because they can't beat normal difficulty settings but, believe it or not there are SMARTER people than you out there and MORE intelligent. Perhaps when you grow up you'll be able to defeat Legendary without any problems because you will learn the tactics of the ai in EVERY game.
Don't be so sad though I actually envy you that don't know tactics and strategy. To be able to win at every tactical and strategy game so easily is boring. At least you get to have fun with your stupidity.and ignorance ;))
I'm accounting for that.
If you just look at Legendary achievement alone, it's 0.9% for Attila and 1.1% for Rome 2; but like you said that's skewed because it is from the entire player base, and there are a significant amount of that base that haven't got the achievement for playing even 20 campaign turns.
And yes, there are people who just do multiplayer (probably not so much in Attila though, where multi is pretty much dead), or mods that mess with campaign records.
But if you look at those who beat a campaign in Rome 2, you have 12.1% for military victory, 2.4% for cultural victory, and 0.9% for economic = 15.4% of those whose campaigns are recorded won in some shape or form.
So with 1.1% winning on Legendary, that's 1.1 / 15.4 = 7.1%
So even if you take into account all the other factors, the bottom line is that 93% of the people who won a campaign and had it recorded did not do it on Legendary.
The achievement for VH is not much higher: 2.3%. Combined with Legendary wins, that still means though that 78% win on Hard or less. So Legendary might be "easy" for some players, but the fact is about 8 out of 10 players that have a recorded campaign win didn't do it on VH, let alone Legendary.
Hard is 4.4%, so that means almost exactly 50% of campaign wins are on Normal or Easy.
What I find more interesting though is that the proportion of VH is over double that of Legendary, 2.3% : 1.1%, which says a lot I think.
It shows me that not being able to save scum is a factor for many people, because aside from being able to save scum and "realistic battles" mode, VH and Legendary are the same. You'd think, if people found VH/Legendary so easy, they'd just opt for Legendary to give as much extra challenge as they can get, but the numbers show people play for wins on VH at a factor of 2:1 over Legendary.
And it also begs the question: if it's so damn easy, why do people want to manually save all the time?
Proportion doesn't work like that. If we were talking whole numbers, sure, you'd be right. Like if I claimed there were 700 people out of 10,000 total who won Legendary, you could say, "yeah but there are 140 people who won Legendary offline, so your numbers are off."
But we're talking proportion. 7% is where I'd deduce a whole number, like 700 out of 10k, so we could extrapolate and say given the trend we're seeing, 140 are around 7% of offline players, which would imply 2,000 offline players. When you add the groups together you'd get 840 out of 12,000: still 7%.
The numbers are of those players who are recorded. That's the sample. So of that sample, the vast majority haven't gotten a Legendary win.
If offline players were to skew the overall proportion, it'd have to be because they constituted some radical or outlying factor, like if 75% of people who played offline won Legendary, then yeah, that would make an impact on the numbers.
But there are two big things to bear in mind here: 1) the vast majority of the players are not playing in offline mode, and even of those who are, most get their achievements tallied when they do connect back into the Steam system; the number of people who play offline, and will always be offline, is extremely small.
2) There is nothing to indicate that an offline player is different from the typical player, as far as gameplay is concerned. The difference is that they're offline. We can say that the gameplay for someone uploading his progress to Steam continuously is the same gameplay as someone not uploading; it's the same game. The campaign difficulty is a function of gameplay, not whether a player is connected to global Steam stats or not.
I forgot to account for the fact that when you earn a campaign completion for a given difficulty, you are also awarded achievement for all difficulties below that.
Like Very Hard at 2.3%: it's actually 1.2% because the Legendary winners also get a VH badge, so it's (2.3 - 1.1 for Legendary), not 2.3%.
EDIT: (Math fix lol) So for Rome 2 you have 1.1 for Legendary, 1.2 for VH, and 2.1 for Hard. That leaves 15.4 - 4.4 = 11 for Normal and Easy. 11 / 15.4 = 0.714
That means of those who have a recorded campaign win, 71% have done so only on Normal or Easy.
** As you can see, the correction actually makes my case stronger. ** /EDIT
Only 14% have beaten Rome 2 on Hard, and not above that. Legendary is still 7%.
The ' VH over Legendary at 2:1' argument doesn't work exactly the same with the new math, but the take home message still holds if you then take into account Hard.
In other words, of those who decide to move up from Hard, the numbers split evenly. People don't go from Hard straight to Legendary; they split 50-50 between going VH and going Legendary, even though the two difficulties are identical in everything but save scumming and battle realism constraints.
This still implies then that those two factors are considered somewhat significant to players, or else we'd see very low number for VH, maybe even near 0. If most players found Hard too easy (which the numbers show isn't the case), and they didn't feel they needed to be able to save scum, or see tooltips and move the camera freely in battles, then why the 50-50 split after Hard?
And you can still say, for Hard, that those who win on that do so at almost exactly half the amount for Legendary, 2.1 vs. 1.1.
Thing is you NEVER said anything about a "Proportion" in your original statement. You made it appear as a matter of fact. Had you said "online only" then I wouldn't have commented. :) Be politically correct now and next time don't try to hide your mistake by jibber jabber bs like you just did. :)