From this, should I proceed to 3 Kingdoms or Rome 2?

[Japanese Schoolgirl]

I hear Rome 2 is alright with updates and it has a nice variety, but 3 Kingdoms has the balance/optimization on level with Shogun 2 while strong in flavour? Still, Attila/Medieval 2 appeal most for me as an era, but these are either obsolete or plagued with issues...

[BastardSword]

Rome 2 is just boring and a big step back from Shogun 2.

Three Kingdoms does some stuff better than Shogun 2 but also does a lot of stuff worse. If you're like me you'll enjoy Three Kingdoms for a time but eventually go back to Shogun 2.

For me what makes Shogun 2 the best TW game is that each campaign is completely different. You never know what the AI will do and they surprise you every time. In Three Kingdoms the same things happen in nearly every campaign, which is a reason that older TW games like Napoleon aren't as good as Shogun 2. Also I like how clear and well-designed the campaign map and menus are in Shogun 2, in Three Kingdoms the campaign map is horribly cluttered and difficult to use.

[Japanese Schoolgirl]

Originally posted by BastardSword:

Rome 2 is just boring and a big step back from Shogun 2.

Three Kingdoms does some stuff better than Shogun 2 but also does a lot of stuff worse. If you're like me you'll enjoy Three Kingdoms for a time but eventually go back to Shogun 2.

For me what makes Shogun 2 the best TW game is that each campaign is completely different. You never know what the AI will do and they surprise you every time. In Three Kingdoms the same things happen in nearly every campaign, which is a reason that older TW games like Napoleon aren't as good as Shogun 2. Also I like how clear and well-designed the campaign map and menus are in Shogun 2, in Three Kingdoms the campaign map is horribly cluttered and difficult to use.

So, there's no worthy successor? I can't play Attila as horribly optimized, unfortunately, and Medieval 2 will feel outdated...

[Red Spot]

Rome 2 has a very disappointing feel to it. The game works, more or less, it just is not even half as satisfying as playing original Rome. So if you opt for the Roman era, just play the original for 1/6th the price Rome2 costs (or even less).

Basically CA has become a different company over the years. Rome was a work of love. M2 was full of new idea's. Shogun 2 was an overhaul of the system that brought forward a more competitive game. Since there it has been pretty much one crap title after the next half-finished title.
Attila for instance is supposed to be a very kewl game, it however is so poorly optimized you can probably not enjoy it at a level you would expect. Napoleon/Empires have nice idea's, they just dun work and CA moved on anyway.

[rory.b.p]

Three kingdoms is decent.
WH2 also good but very expensive if you buy it not on discount.

Have you played Rise of the samurai and fall of the samurai?
Divide et Empera Mod for Rome 2 makes it a lot better but I don't know if it is still being updated, a lot of Rome 2 mods are unsupported on the latest versions.

[twilightgraphix15]

i think atilla is significantly better than rome 2, and i dont have any of the optimization issues most claim for me it actually runs better than rome 2. i still believe med 2 is the crowning achievment of the total war series however

[Commisar Jon Fuklaw]

If you want a worthy successor, your only real options are WH2 and Atilla

[Red Spot]

Originally posted by Commisar Jon Fuklaw:

If you want a worthy successor, your only real options are WH2 and Atilla

WH and WH2 are absolutely no worthy successors for a 'historically based strategy game', which is what TW used to be. CA changed, not for the better though, imo.

[EoNightcore]

Sadly, there is no Total War game that comes close in similarness of feeling to Shogun 2. Every game that comes after this changes up most the mechanics, though some of the general strategy stays the same.

From what I know, Shogun 2 is the last game to have a single province with a single settlement. Every game afterwards (from what I've played, Rome 2, Warhammer, and Warhammer 2) splits up provinces into 2-4 settlements, composed of one major and the rest as minor settlements. Generals are also always required in all armies, meaning that the smaller general-less armies capable in previous Total War games all the way up to Shogun 2 are no longer a thing.

Rome 2 has a more subdued feeling to it than Shogun 2, one I can't really seem to describe. Mod support for that game is quite strong though, so it definitely does have it's supporters. It's also the game where CA started upping the DLC spam. It does have a variety of campaigns, provided most of the DLC for those is bought, though most of them tend to focus on the Romans; fitting for a game called Rome 2. Naval combat is similar to Shogun 2, though navies here can now besiege coastal cities. Rome 2 also features a variety of cultures compared to the mono-cultured Shogun 2, some of whom are featured more accurately than the original Rome. AI is also a tad bit smarter here, though still not the greatest.

I have not yet played Three Kingdoms, so I cannot offer my thoughts on that game.

[Björn]

neither, shogun 2 is the end of an era and will never be back.

[Maniac86]

Ignore the nay sayers, Rome 2 is amazing, especially rhese days post patches and content, i know for some reason everyone in the TW community puts Shogun 2 on a pedestal, but personally i always felt it was a little boring and samey, it doesnt help that I was never really into Samurai and that sort of culture.
I do love three kingdoms though, its just hard to jump around between the games (i say this having 5 diff. total war games installed at the same time)

[Johnny_L]

I don't have 3K, I'm not that interested in Asian cultures, and I love the Romans, so it's quite obvious that I'll have a biased opinion. That being said, Rome II is a great game and some of the DLC's do add more interesting content to it, though CA took some bad decisions here and there.
You also mention Attila and Medieval II, both great games, though Attila happens to be plagued by issues, such as crashes.

[BastardSword]

Originally posted by Maniac86:

Ignore the nay sayers, Rome 2 is amazing,

lol no

i know for some reason everyone in the TW community puts Shogun 2 on a pedestal, but personally i always felt it was a little boring and samey

Shogun 2 campaign 1: Otomo takes over all of Western Japan. Player fights for dominance in the east against a Hojo and Takeda alliance.

Shogun 2 campaign 2: Takeda becomes Shogun and takes over all of Japan except for Kyushu and Shikoku and a bit of western Honshu, where the player has his headquarters.

Shogun 2 campaign 3: all major clans (except the player) are wiped out. Most of Japan is taken over by Hatakeyama, Shoni and Honma.

Shogun 2 campaign 4: Honma takes over all of eastern Japan. Oda takes over all of central Japan. The player and Chosokabe fight for dominance in the west.

Shogun 2 campaign 5: every clan declares war on the player early on. Eventually only Date, Takeda, Choskabe and Shoni are left, and they mercilessly attack the player over and over again.



Three Kingdoms campaign 1: Yuan Shao takes over the north, Sun Jian takes over the south

Three Kingdoms campaign 2: Yuan Shao takes over the north, Sun Jian takes over the south

Three Kingdoms campaign 3: Yuan Shao takes over the north, Sun Jian takes over the south

Three Kingdoms campaign 4: Yuan Shao takes over the north, Sun Jian takes over the south

Three Kingdoms campaign 5: Yuan Shao takes over the north, Sun Jian takes over the south

I had the same issues with Napoleon, literally the same things happen in every campaign. Every campaign in Shogun 2 is completely unique, and that's the main reason I love it so much. You never know what crazy chaos you're going to get.

[Red Spot]

Originally posted by Maniac86:

Ignore the nay sayers, Rome 2 is amazing, especially rhese days post patches and content

It is an awesome game. It just got made worse with some of its patches and simply is not worth the money when you want a full(ish) package with DLC's. Next to that the siege AI pretty much does not work. Great fun defending a siege when the AI has no clue how to attack, those used to be the most relaxed battles but in Rome 2 they dun work well or at all.

[EoNightcore]

Originally posted by Maniac86:

i know for some reason everyone in the TW community puts Shogun 2 on a pedestal, but personally i always felt it was a little boring and samey, it doesnt help that I was never really into Samurai and that sort of culture.

That would certainly play heavily into enjoyment of a game, if one wasn't interested in the era or story that a game was taking place in. Alot of players likely placed Shogun 2 up high on any Total War ranking due to the fact that the game itself is relatively balanced due to making most of the clans utilize the same pool of units, as well as having each major faction start in relatively same situations. One province, one trade partner, and one enemy. When everyone starts in the same situation, anything could happen; well, except the Wako Pirates ever showing up in a game and doing something significant.

[VoiD]

Rant time:

I know what you're feeling and I think I know the reason it happened, it all started in Rome 2 when CA began moving in the wrong direction.

For some unknown cursed reason they got the idea stuck in their heads that total war = battles, and everything else is unecessary, proving they never really understood their fans, from that point on most of the changes they've made into their games have been for worse.

Ironically the only rise in quality happened in WH, because of all the new ♥♥♥♥ they had to make, and 3k, but well' get there.

See, none of the bad things were mistakes, none of it was an accident, everything was planned, CA seems to think that this is what their players want, it's not, they are aiming for less, for simplicty, deluded in thinking the battles are what matter.

The battles in Napoleon were WAY better than Empire, so why nobody plays Napoleon? Why was empire the most popular TW game for a decade?

The battles in Attila were way better than Rome 2, why did Attila sink so quickly? Why did Rome 2 remain so popular in comparisson until this day?

CA doesn't get it, what makes or breaks a total war game is the main campaign, I'd go as far as to say that it's basically the ONLY thing that really matters, because Empire had the worst combat in the entire series and it was still the most popular for a decade, make an interesting campaign, with lots of mechanics, features, areas, maps, diplomacy, NAVAL COMBAT, etc... And the players will love it, make a bland campaign that plays out the same every time (Napoleon, 3k) and players will quickly abandon it.

So, sometime, someone in CA had this terrible idea: "let's simplify the game", and the result was a simpler, bland province system we've seen in Rome 2 which unfortunately is still being used as a base for their other games, the removal of the political aspects of the game, the family tree (removing it was no accident, only hardcore internet rage made them consider getting it back into the game, and it's still too simple), after that they have moved away from naval combat in WH (big mistake, it could have had the best naval battles in TW history) and the apex of dumbing down/simplicity was finally TW: ToB, where they removed EVERYTHING, there was NOTHING besides battles, no agents, no economy, no real politics, nothing, everything was solved through battle, every modifier, mechanic, conflict, everything was solved through battle, and as result it was the most boring game CA ever made.

Someone in there might have realised their entire mindsed was just plain wrong, and I fear 3k was heading into the exact same direction as ToB, might have been why the game was delayed, to start adding some mechanics, and possibly some diplomatic tools into the game besides battles, else it would have failed as bad as ToB.

I don't think CA realizes but their base players are probably more akin to hardcore grand strategy players who often also play paradox games, and nothing like the arcadey games they want to promote, every single release since Rome 2 had complaints about it being too arcadey, the battles being too fast, too many skills to spam, etc... They often solve the issue, partially, but they don't seem to get that it's an issue.

Want to make the best total war game ever?

First they have to realize the bar they set with Warhammer, any half assed TW game released will have it's playerbase canibalized by WH, it's just a plain better game, the campaign is MASSIVE, there are TONS of unique mechanics for each of the races and even factions within races, the variety between 2 faction in WH is greater than every other historical total war game, combined, nothing they have ever done so far, even the good games will stand against the bar they have set themselves.

What they need is a real project, a comitment project, something like a Medieval 3 total war that's not restricted to just europe, even if they have to release the game in parts, like WH, adding a continent at a time, eventually unlocking the entire ♥♥♥♥♥♥♥ world in a single campaign, with time progression and real changes in warfare, going from mail, to plate, to firearms in a single campaign, where you can take the odd route and get some of your medieval knights to end up fighting ♥♥♥♥♥♥♥ samurai in japan, anything less than knights fighting samurai in japan would end up losing to WH's massive scope and variety, and historical will never come back, it needs to be Shogun + medieval + empire +FOTS in one game, trilogy or not, and don't forget the naval combat, WH has ♥♥♥♥♥♥♥ dragons, historical can afford to have a couple of ships firing at each other with different skins.

And don't forget all the different mechanics, the legitimacy of monarchies, political tasks from republics, keeping the tribes together through force or diplomacy, a unique shogunate mechanic for japan, another for the chinese empire, etc..

For the record WH's campaign already happens in 4 continents, so it's not far from that kind of size, but with far more variety than historical could ever have, these "sagas" and their tiny scopes are never going to make it.