worst total war game

[Oedipus's Stepdad]

I feel Attila is by far the worst game in the franchise for several reasons. It's almost as if the devs thought that players were having too much fun in Rome 2 and just decided to tune it the complete opposite direction.

First of all, for the degree of complexity added to the game (the huge unit roster compared to Rome 2), the technical details are so much more poorly explained compared to the previous games. For example, a unit of cavalry in Rome 2 usually have between 10 and 50 charge bonus (depending on light/shock/etc.), whereas in Attila the numbers go all the way up to 200 something (seriously, what does that even mean??). The armor and health stats of heavy units seem completely arbitrary (elite units have more health but less armor and vice versa??) in actual battles as the most heavily armed units just melt away like normal units. Controlling cavalry feels extremely wonky; to properly charge I have to constantly click the specific unit I want my cav to charge against and I make the slightest err the entire unit just stops like they hit an invisible wall. Units are just too expensive to maintain properly; even in late game I have to rely on mostly trash tier troops.

I almost dread every experience I've had so far with the campaigns I've played because of how tedious the pace is compared to every other total war games. WHY do units have to lose exp. every time they go into battle? Every time my armies go to war they literally lose more experience because they took some loses. This makes no sense to me and it just seems a cheap way to deliberately slow down the campaign. It's also a nightmare trying to build a fully-maxed training province with all the blacksmiths and armorsmiths because of sheer time it takes to research and build them without losing the towns to barbarians. Seriously how does the Late Eastern Roman Empire not have a single functioning blacksmith?? And at the same time why does every godd@mn rebel army spawn with ONAGERS???

The way the AI always behave on the battlefield makes me want to choke myself; if I don't have artillery superiority they would always use the most cheese and time-consuming tactics which just encourages players to auto-solve all the time. Sieges are the absolute worst part of this game, I've literally not enjoyed a single one I've played. The towers always kill more of my men than the enemy because conveniently in Total War Attila you can no longer control the towers like in previous games and the AI control will just shoot randomly into the fray. Again, it's like the devs want players to just press auto-solve.

AND on top of that the game is the glitchiest Total War game I've played that came out after 2010, even though it's supposed to be an upgrade from Rome 2. What made this take such a huge leap back?

[Big Moustache]

You forgot to mention how screwed up Constantinople is, at start of ERE campaign. With that governors estate. CA made the Roman capital a starving disease pit.

Forget about Rome2, that was your first mistake. Focus on survival and building up. Avoid field battles, you can easily defeat 3x your strength in town defences. Ranged units on a barricade turn into miniguns. Your empire is too large to run about with full stacks in begin.

[Raider Deci]

That was alot. Not going to respond to all, yet, since im on mobile. But I disagree with pretty much everything

But soldiers dying and unit loses experience makes perfect sense to me (and most) , they aint cylons that just reinkarnate

[Shorsmаn]

Жду обновления 1.7

[BolzenHolz]

It sounds that you dont understand the unit stats. Hardcounters (like Axe infantry) are far more usefull than in Rome 2. The only thing is, cavalry is stronger than in previous games. Even a trashy Scout-Equites can cause some serious trouble to ANY infantry unit (esp. if you hit them in the back).

For me it seems that you dont read the tooltips at all (if you take prisoners, you replenish your units BUT they loose all their earned XP).

And if you dont even know what the charge bonus means... well. It´s a additional attack bonus if they charge a enemy unit. Even most infantry units have it.

[Raider Deci]

Originally posted by Fragoos:

Forget about Rome2, that was your first mistake.

Want to second this. This is a hardet game, hard and very hard actually means it is hard (mostly).
You will have more things to account for, morale was reworked and more akin to shogun2/medieval 2. A good charge behind even by the lowest cav can decimate morale where in Rome2 units barely cared. Units also lose fatigue faster but they also regain it faster

[UnDeadDemon]

Attila is a good game & the ai is smarter, its rome 2 thats crap. On rome 2 when you issue attack orders your soldiers will run circles around the enemy trying to attack. On attila they actually run right for the enemy, non of that garbage unit collision from rome 2.

[Scary Barry]

Like other people have said, you went wrong by having the expectations that this was some kind of add-on of Rome 2, instead of being a different game with different mechanics.

Originally posted by Oedipus's Stepdad:

the technical details are so much more poorly explained compared to the previous games.

Pretty much everything has tooltips, hover over something you don't understand with your mouse and it'll explain it.

For example, a unit of cavalry in Rome 2 usually have between 10 and 50 charge bonus (depending on light/shock/etc.), whereas in Attila the numbers go all the way up to 200 something (seriously, what does that even mean??).

It means that cavalry charges are a lot more powerful in Attila

The armor and health stats of heavy units seem completely arbitrary (elite units have more health but less armor and vice versa??) in actual battles as the most heavily armed units just melt away like normal units.

They've tried to give more personality and less OP stats to higher tier units by customizing them to suit the faction playstyle. Yes, a lot of the times it wont be worth it to upgrade, and that's where CA messed up, but IMO still a superior system to all factions playing the same.

Controlling cavalry feels extremely wonky; to properly charge I have to constantly click the specific unit I want my cav to charge against and I make the slightest err the entire unit just stops like they hit an invisible wall.

This is done for you to be able to counter AI cavalry. Attila is a game where cavalry is wicked fast, and if you would try and outflank a unit of cavalry with a unit of anti-cav spears, the speed difference would mean cavalry will always be out of reach for a counter. This can still be done by humans, but thankfully not by AI. Watch Legendoftotalwar's No. 1 in "Top 5 Strongest Total War Factions" and "More reasons why Spet Xyon Archers are the no.1 unit in Total War" to understand how to use cavalry correctly in Attila. His ERE and WRE playthroughs are worth watching as well to get some beginner tips for those factions.

But again, every faction group plays differently.

Units are just too expensive to maintain properly; even in late game I have to rely on mostly trash tier troops.

This is done so you can't just unit spam OP units and bulldoze, use units to their strengths and learn how each unit plays.

WHY do units have to lose exp. every time they go into battle? Every time my armies go to war they literally lose more experience because they took some loses. This makes no sense to me and it just seems a cheap way to deliberately slow down the campaign.

New recruits aren't immediately veterans, so if you lose experienced soldiers and fill the ranks up with recruits, the unit will have less experience overall. Sounds about right.

It's also a nightmare trying to build a fully-maxed training province with all the blacksmiths and armorsmiths because of sheer time it takes to research and build them without losing the towns to barbarians.

You're actually surprised that maxed-out buildings are at the end of the research tree? This is the same in every Total War game and I don't understand the problem...

The way the AI always behave on the battlefield makes me want to choke myself; if I don't have artillery superiority they would always use the most cheese and time-consuming tactics which just encourages players to auto-solve all the time.

The Atilla AI is the most advanced and aggressive AI in any TW game, including 3K. If you can't counter it, it means something is off with your tactics. The fact that you rely on siege weapons (which are intended to destroy towers and walls) and spam them, means that you haven't learned the basics of combat in the game.

Attila has quite a learning curve and plays very differently from Rome 2. If you don't have the patience to learn by yourself or dont understand why you lose against AI, it is best to youtube some playthroughs and learn that way.

If you want to play late-roman Rome 2, it is best you buy the Empire Divided DLC for it. Attila is a different entry in the franchise, in a different time period with different mechanics and different units. I'm not the best TW player and by sticking with it for a couple of months, it is the most rewarding entry yet from a battle point of view, but you have to understand this is not Rome 2.

[Bobarcus]

Don't have time to go in detail but just because the game is more in depth and has more difficult mechanics doesn't mean its worse.

[Clearwood]

I got a easy fix don't like it don't play it. See problem solved.

[Searry]

What? This is the best TW game after Three Kingdoms, it has a lot of depth and is very difficult on hard and very hard, kinda like Three Kingdoms. Crisis after crisis as West Rome, other factions are more relaxed.

[Viksteri]

Originally posted by Searry:

What? This is the best TW game after Three Kingdoms, it has a lot of depth and is very difficult on hard and very hard, kinda like Three Kingdoms. Crisis after crisis as West Rome, other factions are more relaxed.

Nah total war warhammer in my opinon is better than attila

[Hat8]

You think Rome 2 was good? Why?

[Werecat101]

To be very honest this game has got some AI problems, mainly the one I talked about in my review, where the AI can suddenly decide to up and migrate for no good reason with all of the AI races.

but if that doesn't happen at legendary the game plays a fairly good game.

what do people call the best well normally its the one that works well on thier PC and is the period of history they like.

[Oedipus's Stepdad]

Originally posted by Clearwood:

I got a easy fix don't like it don't play it. See problem solved.

real byzantine right here

[bearfieldlee]

Originally posted by Henward:

Don't have time to go in detail but just because the game is more in depth and has more difficult mechanics doesn't mean its worse.

That doesn't automatically mean its better either though. The devil is in the detail, which is being discussed.