# Games that have disappointed you



## Marv1991 (Dec 16, 2014)

The main one for me would have to be Spore. I had followed the game since it first entered the public eye and was expecting really great things from it, which is probably why I was disappointed in it: too much expectation. Don't get me wrong, the tech behind it was pretty awesome, but I thought it really lacked depth in each of its many different gameplay elements. Hopefully, No Man's Sky doesn't follow suit, i.e. too much emphasis on procedural generation.

Others that have disappointed, but don't deserve any thoughts:
Aliens: Colonial Marines
Aliens vs. Predator(2010)
Soldier of Fortune: Payback

These are all the ones that I can think of right now, but I'm sure you guys/gals will remind me of many more. :b

Let the hatefest begin!


----------



## BTAG (Jun 27, 2013)

Destiny

I wasn't expecting to love it, but I expected to like it enough to play more than 1 hour. I was so incredibly bored, that I couldn't bring myself to play more than that.

Shadow of Mordor

I was really excited when it was the cover of Gameinformer, but my excitement waned over time. After hearing so many people compliment it, I got excited once again, but all I got was a bland 3rd person action game, with an uninteresting main character. Even my love of Lord of the Rings couldn't force me through it.

Watch Dogs

It was just incredibly over hyped, and not fun to play in the slightest.

Those 3 are all from this past year, and I honestly can't remember the last time I didn't finish a game before that. It takes a lot for me to not feel compelled to finish something, but those 3 accomplished the impossible.


----------



## Grog (Sep 13, 2013)

Dragon age series . 
Thought it would be more like assassins creed and Gta and stuff .


----------



## Scrub-Zero (Feb 9, 2004)

Diablo 3
Thief
Stalker: Clear Sky


----------



## Esteban (Dec 8, 2014)

-San Andreas

I had trouble getting into the early GTA games, partly because GTA gameplay isn't that great to begin with. But, combine that with how ugly they were, and I just couldn't stick with it. Boring. 

-Doom 3

It's just a boring game. Boring monster closets, boring looking levels, boring characters

-Uncharted 3

As much as I liked Uncharted 2, this one just didn't do it for me. It was missing something that the second one had. IDK exactly what. Pacing? Dialogue? I was bored throughout much of the third one. 

-Thief (reboot)

I was a huge fan of the originals, so this one really let me down. They removed all the charm the earlier games have and replaced it with a lot of poorly done generic drivel. 

-Batman: Arkham Asylum 

This game bored me. Except for the Scarecrow parts, I found this game to be a chore to get through. This bugs me though because this game is really well polished. I also don't like the cartoon-y character models.

-Dead Space 3

The character interactions in this one are just really bad, and not in a good way like in the resident evil games. They also removed a lot of the atmosphere of the first two games. They turned it into a fairly generic (with ****ing coop) third person shooter.

-Deus Ex: Human Revolution

This game can't seem to hold my interest. It's just one big meh. This surprises me somewhat because I like stealth games.


----------



## TuxedoChief (Jan 11, 2015)

- Warframe

The grind in that game put Destiny to shame, and the gameplay got boring pretty fast.


----------



## ikrisskross (May 19, 2014)

Halo: Master Chief Collection
---------------------------------
I cannot even fathom how much this game has destroyed the hopes and dreams I had of reliving what was probably one of the best gaming experiences of my life when I was younger. 343 Industries hyped this game up so much and did such a great job of doing it, that when the game released, it made it that much worse. They promised the Halo 2 along with the other games would play exactly as they shipped 10 years ago... If you honestly just look at posts all over the internet, it's probably considered one of the worst launches of games.. Period. Constant crashes, extremely difficult to play with friends, games don't save, achievements don't unlock, control settings are messed up, everyone just quits out of every game because there's no penalty to just leave. You spend at least 10x the amount of time on the game trying to get INTO a game, than actually playing. And that's actually not an exaggeration.


----------



## SilentLyric (Aug 20, 2012)

paper mario sticker star for 3ds. the battle system was completely broken and I just got bored. Didn't have the charm of the gamecube one. Then I found out I overpaid for it. I played it like twice.


----------



## noconfidenceguy (Dec 16, 2013)

Final Fantasy 13 was the biggest letdown for me, bar none. Bought it on the release date without looking at reviews, with no doubts in my mind that it would be a great game. Gave the game about eight hours before I could take no more. Gameplay up to that point was sub par but what really got to me was the horribly written characters.


----------



## ScorchedEarth (Jul 12, 2014)

Alpha Protocol - Controversial game but I found it not to my liking. Low production values, which were also poorly used. Gameplay was meh despite some interesting ideas. The game felt somehow odd and dated.

Final Fantasy 12 - Barely felt like a Final Fantasy. More like a steampunk adaptation of Star Wars. Which could be awesome but it was downplayed and low-key. Not what I associate with Final Fantasy. 

Assassin's Creed 2, Dragon Age. I bought into the high scores for both games, and both rubbed me the wrong way. I couldn't get into Dragon Age because at least initially it made no effort to provide a unique story, and the world was bland. In AC2 I just didn't like the characters or settings and the gameplay wasn't challenging enough to make up for that.

Telltale's The Walking Dead: OK, not a huge disappointment and honestly, I shoulda seen it coming. It's not a bad game, but it's built up as this epic story that you can steer in whatever direction you want. That's a half-lie. Yes, your choices matter but obviously, in order to maintain some kind of structure without branching off in 9001 different paths, the game often has to find ways to undo your choices. For example, you choose one of two characters to save and two chapters later, they get killed. In the same exact scene, no less. I was hoping for some replay value but in retrospect, if you think about it, I shouldn't have. Still worth that one playthrough where you make the choices you think would in that situation.


----------



## Noto (Sep 10, 2014)

On the top of my head, the Dead Space series was most likely my biggest disappointment. I absolutely love Sci-Fi and Horror, so it seemed to be right up my alley. The endless praise the first two received also pushed me further to check it out, and my expectations at that point were likely a bit higher than they should have been.

It turned out to consist purely of jump-scares and small rooms. Everything looked the same, felt the same, and the game dragged on _extremely _slowly. It wasn't scary, wasn't fun, creative, or original, and I found it had little to no merit for me whatsoever.

Another, on a much smaller scale, was Miasmata. In concept, it sounded amazing, but playing it turned out to be a bunch of awful.


----------



## Kilgore Trout (Aug 10, 2014)

C&C 4: Tiberium Twilight
I expected new units and abilities introduced, but they just added this lame offence-deffence-support thing. 

PES 2011 and later
It just sucks. 

Sins of a solar empire:rebellion
I was looking for a strategic game that has alien races in it but it was too diplomacy and research oriented. I wanted something more action-oriented like warcraft. 

Empire TotalWar
Couldn't figure out how to produce a damn unit after hours.


----------



## Cronos (Mar 31, 2013)

ikrisskross said:


> Halo: Master Chief Collection
> ---------------------------------
> I cannot even fathom how much this game has destroyed the hopes and dreams I had of reliving what was probably one of the best gaming experiences of my life when I was younger. 343 Industries hyped this game up so much and did such a great job of doing it, that when the game released, it made it that much worse. They promised the Halo 2 along with the other games would play exactly as they shipped 10 years ago... If you honestly just look at posts all over the internet, it's probably considered one of the worst launches of games.. Period. Constant crashes, extremely difficult to play with friends, games don't save, achievements don't unlock, control settings are messed up, everyone just quits out of every game because there's no penalty to just leave. You spend at least 10x the amount of time on the game trying to get INTO a game, than actually playing. And that's actually not an exaggeration.


MCC originally persuaded me to get an Xbone. I got into Halo pretty late (Halo 3) and was hyped about playing the older games. I went on the 343 forums and saw nothing but rage threads. I haven't been following Halo 5 much. Maybe that might persuade me.

*Halo 4*, especially pre-TU. I was so hyped and drank so much Mountain Dew in anticipation (and to get XP codes).

*Destiny.* If it wasn't meant to be taken seriously, I would've enjoyed it a bit more. The game felt like a parody of MMORPGs.

*Bioshock: Infinite.* Cool story but the gameplay was so boring.


----------



## dead24 (Sep 24, 2011)

Beyond: Two Souls. I loved Heavy Rain but this game bored me.


----------



## AussiePea (Mar 27, 2007)

Watch_Dogs. My over-hyped garbage ever.
Far Cry 4. It's just Far Cry 3 again.


----------



## sajs (Jan 3, 2015)

The game of life.

No .. not the board game (this one was kinda fun, I had children, money and all) .. the real one.

lol.


----------



## Kanova (Dec 17, 2012)

Grog said:


> Dragon age series .
> Thought it would be more like assassins creed and Gta and stuff .


Lololololololol what even gave you that impression? Though I would have to agree, at least for the last 2 games but for different reasons. The second one was just a giant pile of filth that never deserved to see the light of day. The third one was all MMO like even though they repeatedly said they were listening to the fans, but what they didn't hear was all the fans begging it to be more like the first one. I mean, its not awful, but certainly isn't GOTY worthy. (Not to even mention the bug filled multiplayer)

And then pretty much every Total War game after Medieval 2. I really dislike how they changed how the game worked, the layouts and even the character cards. They are like, little sketches now instead of actual pictures of what the unit is. They just don't work as smoothly as Medieval 2.


----------



## To22 (Apr 6, 2012)

*Rage:* I was anticipating this game for literally years. Though, the game wasn't bad, I was too bored to play for more than a couple hours. The first word that comes to mind when thinking of Rage is flat. Rage assumed that it'd be inherently interesting, Rage felt no need to try harder to entertain me. Rage was the first game I simply refused to finish.

*Brink:*
The hype for this game among the competitive shooter community was extremely disproportionate to the quality of the game. People think Destiny was overhyped? Sure, from a pure numerical perspective (because it's Bungie and Activision), but at least Destiny had solid fundamentals. Destiny's issue was likely *business, while Brink was simply a bad game through and through. Brink had no redeeming qualities beyond it's concept. Literally everything about Brink could have been far better.

Splash Damage inspired the idea that I'd get lost in this revolutionary wall-running mechanic on a game dedicated to skillful, player versus player combat. Splash Damage inspired the idea that competitive, cooperative, and story mode were to become one intense yet harmonious experience. Splash Damage inspired the idea that I were at the Brink of finding my next favorite competitive multiplayer experience. Brink was my Titanfall, only difference being that Brink was a really crappy game. I have to give credit to Splash Damage, though- Splash Damage certainly isn't short on creativity and risk taking.

*Crysis 2:*
Crysis 1 was considered one of the most graphically intensive games of it's time, naturally, once I heard of Crysis 2 coming to consoles I got hype. I watched nearly every Crysis 2 tech demo, trailer, gameplay, and read every Crysis 2 article. Crytek "gave me" (I mean that loosely) the impression that Crysis 2 would be pushing the boundaries of console hardware whilst also providing a rich and sophisticated story telling experience. Crytek even went as far as to releasing a PvP beta. Naturally, I was the first to hop on that beta, and I LOVED IT....

Crysis 2 turned out to be pretty ugly on consoles, I mean, EPIC Games completed embarrassed Crysis 2 with their Gears of War series; from 1 to 3. Also, Crysis 2 had underwhelming, cliche gameplay. The Nano Suit was supposed to make me feel like a super solider, but in reality I felt all too human (well, video game human). If the Nano Suit in the actual game functioned like the Nano Suit in the trailers, perhaps then I'd feel like a super soldier. Ultimately, the game simply bored me. Half way through the game on it's hardest difficulty, I put that ish on easy just to get it over with. Oh and the frame rate, lag, and hideousness of the PvP killed that experience off pretty quickly.

*Warhammer 40k: Space Marine:*
I'm nearly dumbfounded by the thought. Space Marine was yet another console installment to a beloved PC series that I overhyped. The game was just... lame. From the art design, to the combat, to the story... just... lame.

*Far Cry 2:*
One of the most frustrating games I've ever played, I couldn't even finish it. The A.I. constantly respawning killed the entire game. Of course, I hyped it up because of the popularity of the Far Cry franchise.

*Bionic Commando:*









*Fable 3:*
Peter Molyneux


----------



## ikrisskross (May 19, 2014)

Cronos said:


> MCC originally persuaded me to get an Xbone. I got into Halo pretty late (Halo 3) and was hyped about playing the older games. I went on the 343 forums and saw nothing but rage threads. I haven't been following Halo 5 much. Maybe that might persuade me.
> 
> *Halo 4*, especially pre-TU. I was so hyped and drank so much Mountain Dew in anticipation (and to get XP codes).
> 
> ...


It was such a huge letdown.. What makes me angry is the fact that we were completely lied to about what would be in the game. The reason you saw so many rage threads is because this game was supposed to be exactly like it shipped 10 years ago. Original Xbox Halo 2. Instead, they ported over Halo 2 Vista and anyone with enough experience in both of those games can tell you they're TWO COMPLETELY different experiences.. H2Vista was SOOOO bad. And what's worse, the people who never experienced Halo 2 in its prime thinks that *this* is the game we hyped up so much, and they think we're all morons for liking such a horrid game.


----------



## MylesB93 (Feb 25, 2014)

noconfidenceguy said:


> Final Fantasy 13 was the biggest letdown for me, bar none. Bought it on the release date without looking at reviews, with no doubts in my mind that it would be a great game. Gave the game about eight hours before I could take no more. Gameplay up to that point was sub par but what really got to me was the horribly written characters.


This ^^

I loved the sequel to be fair, even though I know a lot of people hated it. Wasn't too keen on Lightning Returns though...


----------



## ScorchedEarth (Jul 12, 2014)

I played 13 expecting crap with a nice coat of paint and... well, that's kind of what it is by FF standards, but the gameplay gets good later. Soundtrack's nice too.


----------



## Marv1991 (Dec 16, 2014)

Zone said:


> *Brink*
> *Fable 3:*
> Peter Molyneux


Completely forgot about Brink, which is a testament to how poor it really was.

Couldn't agree more about Fable 3 xD

*Unreal Tournament 3 
*Played the sh** outta Unreal Tournament 2004 and was massively disappointed in it's "successor". Can't remember why specifically because it's been a while, but I do remember disappointment, and that's what counts here :b.


----------



## blueman1027 (Aug 9, 2013)

*Watch_Dogs* - I bought this game expecting cutting edge graphics and replay value with a lively modding community. I got none of those. Not to mention, you couldn't add your own music to the game's god-awful soundtrack.

*SimCity* - aka SimDRM. Seriously, it's as if Maxis/EA wanted this game to fail from the start. I really hope Cities: Skylines can pull through and be the next good city builder.

*APB Reloaded* - This game has soooooo much potential, but it's been dealt some crummy cards. The game's original creators went out of business. Shortly after, the game was bought and made free-to-play. Ever since then, the game has had continuous issues with lag, hackers, a "threat level" system that makes it irritating to play with friends that aren't equally as skilled as you, a community plagued by immaturity and tryhards, and a company that milks the game for everything it's worth.


----------



## Salvador Dali (Oct 26, 2013)

Thief (2014): Glitchy, boring plot and characters, doesn't compare to the earlier games in the series, mediocre game overall.

Final Fantasy (all of them): I know I'm probably going to be stoned for this, but these are some of the most boring games I've ever laid my hands on. And this is coming from someone who used to play the Dragon Quest games (and enjoy them) when I was younger.

Metal Gear Rising: Revegeance: I knew it wasn't going to be like a traditional Metal Gear game, but it just felt like some kind of DmC rip-off, not mention I managed to complete the game within about 6 hours (and never play it again since).


----------



## ScorchedEarth (Jul 12, 2014)

Playing Fable 2, the impression I got is that you're supposed to have a wank over the things you _can_ do in the game, as opposed to actually enjoying the game. Unless Peter's idea of enjoyment precludes any kind of difficulty, because both it and apparently Fable 3 are total cakewalks.


----------



## BillDauterive (Oct 24, 2012)

Grand Theft Auto 5. :no

I was so hyped about the game as well considering that I have enjoyed all the past games in the series. I even enjoyed GTA4 a lot, even though many people saw it as a major step back from San Andreas.

The gameplay in GTA5 is solid and fine but just that the story mode is complete garbage, especially the ending. It just felt so rushed and anticlimactic towards the end. I didn't see as much character development and drama as in past game either.

There wasn't any special final battle between the protagonists and villain like all the other past games such as the shootout in the mansion in Vice City, the city riots in San Andreas, killing Dimitri at the Statue of Happiness in GTA4, etc. Just push a guy in a locked trunk of a car off a cliff. Wow.....just wow......


----------



## Aribeth (Jan 14, 2012)

Batman: Arkham City, The Witcher 2 and Divinity: Original Sin. Everyone said they're great. They got high ratings. So I tried them and they were pretty ****ing crappy :/

Also, Deus Ex (the first one). Elitists couldn't shut up about how good it was. It wasn't good at all. I actually enjoyed DX: Invisible War a lot more. And that game was totally dumbed down and stuff.

Oh, and every Bioshock game was like this for me: Nice graphics, nice atmosphere, story seems interesting... 2 hours later, it turns into a mess of a random fps, just shooting people everywhere and stuff. Bored the crap out of me and stopped playing.


----------



## Zyriel (May 20, 2011)

BTAG said:


> Shadow of Mordor
> 
> I was really excited when it was the cover of Gameinformer, but my excitement waned over time. After hearing so many people compliment it, I got excited once again, but all I got was a bland 3rd person action game, with an uninteresting main character. Even my love of Lord of the Rings couldn't force me through it.


I wouldn't say it was bland, although it did feel like Assassin's Creed set in the LOTR world lol. The combat, towers, discovery, side missions, almost everything. Except more gritty, and with more brutal combos. The whole game was an enjoyable experience for me though as I like that Ranger "feel", exploring, wandering, completing objectives in the wild. Only problem I really had, was the ending or rather lack of in terms of boss battles. It felt rushed. 



Grog said:


> Dragon age series .
> Thought it would be more like assassins creed and Gta and stuff .





LawfulStupid said:


> Assassin's Creed 2, Dragon Age. I bought into the high scores for both games, and both rubbed me the wrong way. I couldn't get into Dragon Age because at least initially it made no effort to provide a unique story, and the world was bland. In AC2 I just didn't like the characters or settings and the gameplay wasn't challenging enough to make up for that.


I had the same expectations originally with with Dragon Age: Origins. I installed it and the combat was turn based, I was like wtf? Then finally tried it a few months later when i was bored. I eventually got into it for the depth of story and character development which was really surprising to me. On top of the ability to use the tactical menu for NPC AI, and overall utilizing the terrain to pull off insane maneuvers on nightmare. Took awhile fo rme getting used to though, since it was extremely different from my expectations.

AC2, took me awhile to get into too. I liked the crusades time period of the first one. Brotherhood and Revelations as well lol. I never finished AC3 though. 



Scrub-Zero said:


> Diablo 3


Diablo 3 was rather disappointing to me as well. I played it mainly for the story, since I liked the lore of the Diablo universe. The gameplay though, was really disappointing compared to Diablo 2. It removed most of the aspects of gameplay that gave the game it's "re-playability".

Stat point allocation, building a spec around gear, etc. Or just what spec to play from a diverse set of abilities that required certain gear. A lot of the experimentation factor was just totally removed. Then the random maps for exploring, etc. The game felt "pre-packaged" rather than something to trail blaze. A totally wrong feeling for that hack-slash genre, as well as the stylistic art fashion, which resembled more of WoW than Diablo.

If you want to try something similar or what I would consider it's "true" successor in terms of gameplay, I'd suggest Path of Exile. It's more gritty and seems to embody what Diablo 2 had. 



pouria19 said:


> Sins of a solar empire:rebellion
> I was looking for a strategic game that has alien races in it but it was too diplomacy and research oriented. I wanted something more action-oriented like warcraft.
> 
> Empire TotalWar
> Couldn't figure out how to produce a damn unit after hours.


I felt the same way with Sins of a Solar Empire: Rebellion. I totally picked the wrong race/faction though for my playstyle I think. The one I played was more akin to Zerg, than Protoss, so was playing it so wrong lol. I didn't like the combat either, it had hardly any tactical manuevering, was more based on economics, diplomacy, research as you mentioned. Making it a macro game, rather than a micro one where most RTS are.

Empire - Total War, another game I had difficulty with. Not because of the inability to produce units though. It works totally different from prior games, and the units are centralized in the main province so they replenish when you're on "home turf". In contrast to Medieval 2 and prior titles where you have to "re-stack" the units or retrain them manually. The problem I had with it, and Napoleon Total War, was the lack of diversity in units per faction. Each faction felt pretty much the same for the most part, just different bonuses. Which was also the same for Shogun 2 actually. Which limits one's strategic capacity, and ability to win through sheer tactical victories or usage of terrain, army composition in opposition to numerical disadvantage. 



Zone said:


> *Far Cry 2:*
> One of the most frustrating games I've ever played, I couldn't even finish it. The A.I. constantly respawning killed the entire game. Of course, I hyped it up because of the popularity of the Far Cry franchise.





AussiePea said:


> Watch_Dogs. My over-hyped garbage ever.
> Far Cry 4. It's just Far Cry 3 again.


I played Far Cry 2, which was totally different from 3 lol. Although 2 was annoying the constant Maleria and stuff, I never did finish it. Gameplay itself wasn't that bad though. 3 I just couldn't get into at all, the NPC's annoyed the hell out of me ~_~ 



Zone said:


> *Warhammer 40k: Space Marine:*
> I'm nearly dumbfounded by the thought. Space Marine was yet another console installment to a beloved PC series that I overhyped. The game was just... lame. From the art design, to the combat, to the story... just... lame.


As in comparing it to the Dawn of War series?

I was a bit disappointing in the overall game play in terms of lore. However, the game itself was decent, except it didn't provide much challenge even on the highest setting lol. Can pretty much just run around destroying everything. Even the last boss fight was one of those "hit this", "hit that" not an actual encounter, more of an interactive cinematic. 



Aribeth said:


> The Witcher 2 They got high ratings. So I tried them and they were pretty ****ing crappy :/


Witcher 2, I feel the need to defend. I really liked the characters, the philosophical and political aspects of it, within the factional strife of the story line. But aside from that, in my opinion, has one of the greatest melee combat elements in any game. Compared to say, Assassin's Creed or Shadow of Mordor, that have great graphics and animations, Witcher 2 actually takes positioning, blocking, and parrying into account.

Compared to Witcher 1 though, the gameplay is quite different. Witcher 1's combat is "timed" based on a sound lol which makes it a bit awkward and takes awhile to get used to. Witcher 1 had a great potion system though that required you to "prepare" for certain encounters or use certain potions and elixirs vs certain enemies.

Witcher 2 also uses sigil magic which allows for tactical use of terrain, timing of magic in addition to melee combat, for dynamic combat experiences.

There's a bunch of games I played "just to finish" lol or never finished. I tend to not expect much from games now lol. A lot of the newer ones have been rather disappointing, (not all) but tend to be rushed, and lack depth older titles had. I also don't usually read reviews either though (so unaware of things like hype or what not), most of the companies or idiots they hire to write them are loud mouth fools that know nothing. Nor have any real experience, or anything to say other than, "I don't like it" without any reasoning as to why. Or they're just bad at the game itself, so blame the game instead of their lack of skill lol. Especially some of the more "popular" gaming sites or review sites, whatever, hire these people that can't even move their character properly (in PC games at least). Yet people absorb their opinions instead of making their own ~_~


----------



## Scrub-Zero (Feb 9, 2004)

Zyriel said:


> If you want to try something similar or what I would consider it's "true" successor in terms of gameplay, I'd suggest Path of Exile. It's more gritty and seems to embody what Diablo 2 had.


I've been playing Path of Exile since open beta 

Lovely game with a ton of build freedom. Well, if you're not a build of the moment kind of player anyway.


----------



## Kilgore Trout (Aug 10, 2014)

Zyriel said:


> Empire - Total War, another game I had difficulty with. Not because of the inability to produce units though. It works totally different from prior games, and the units are centralized in the main province so they replenish when you're on "home turf". In contrast to Medieval 2 and prior titles where you have to "re-stack" the units or retrain them manually. The problem I had with it, and Napoleon Total War, was the lack of diversity in units per faction. Each faction felt pretty much the same for the most part, just different bonuses. Which was also the same for Shogun 2 actually. Which limits one's strategic capacity, and ability to win through sheer tactical victories or usage of terrain, army composition in opposition to numerical disadvantage.


I only played Rome Total War from the series. I loved it very much. I completed the long campaign many times. I only bought Empire Total War because it had naval battles, but i got so disappointed with gameplay that i didn't play the campaign even once. You are right, instead of introducing that nightmarish gameplay they should have introduced diverse units and cool abilities and left the gameplay intact. Like it was in Rome Total War.


----------



## Zyriel (May 20, 2011)

Scrub-Zero said:


> I've been playing Path of Exile since open beta
> 
> Lovely game with a ton of build freedom. Well, if you're not a build of the moment kind of player anyway.


Ahh yeah I played for awhile^^ Can't remember I couldn't stick with it though lol. Played Duelist, Shadow, and Witch I think. Yeah it does take some planning on that web thing. That's one part I found interesting, it's like each character is on the same web for passive abilities (if I remember correctly) but start at different points. Was pretty challenging as well, especially if you don't get decent drops haha. Was getting 1-2 shot in some areas, if I didn't have any "oh ****" exit abilities slotted xD 



pouria19 said:


> I only played Rome Total War from the series. I loved it very much. I completed the long campaign many times. I only bought Empire Total War because it had naval battles, but i got so disappointed with gameplay that i didn't play the campaign even once. You are right, instead of introducing that nightmarish gameplay they should have introduced diverse units and cool abilities and left the gameplay intact. Like it was in Rome Total War.


Ahh you may like Rome 2 Total war then. It has quite the diverse units and factions. With naval combat, (mostly ramming other ships though lol). Various cultures as well too, with different religions, politics, economics, and unit/building rosters built around the themes. Generals also have abilities as well to use, along with many units having active or toggle on/off abilities which makes for interesting battlefield tactics^^

You might like Medieval 2 Total (Older now) but has one of the best unit/faction, and overall gameplay of any of the Total Wars. There's a bunch of full mods too for it. Like Broken Crescent (Crusades time period but with more Middle Eastern factions), Sicilian Vespers (Renaissance period Europe with more gunpower units and heavier armor), Third Age Total War (LOTR based, with all many factors of Middle Earth duking it out, including Dwarven, Elven, and Orcish ones along with the Kingdoms of Men) to name a few.


----------



## Kilgore Trout (Aug 10, 2014)

Zyriel said:


> You might like Medieval 2 Total (Older now) but has one of the best unit/faction, and overall gameplay of any of the Total Wars. There's a bunch of full mods too for it. Like Broken Crescent (Crusades time period but with more Middle Eastern factions), Sicilian Vespers (Renaissance period Europe with more gunpower units and heavier armor), *Third Age Total War (LOTR based, with all many factors of Middle Earth duking it out, including Dwarven, Elven, and Orcish ones along with the Kingdoms of Men)* to name a few.


OH MY GOD!!! You made my day man, probably made my month, and months coming after that :boogie:boogie
This is my dream came true. LOTR as a total war mod! 
thanks man :nw 
i love u :heart


----------



## UndreamingAwake (Apr 11, 2011)

Dragon Age Inquisition. @*Zyriel*, you heathen. :lol Empire was one of the best Total War games i've played so far and I played them all except the first Shogun. My map is colored a nice bright orange btw. United Provinces my arse. More like United New World Order. But seriously, Rome 2 was kind of "meh" too imo.


----------



## Kilgore Trout (Aug 10, 2014)

Why do i always overreact?


----------



## Zyriel (May 20, 2011)

pouria19 said:


> OH MY GOD!!! You made my day man, probably made my month, and months coming after that :boogie:boogie
> This is my dream came true. LOTR as a total war mod!
> thanks man :nw
> i love u :heart







Haha np, the units are pretty pro and really unique per faction (for the most part). Oh here's the unit rosters, history, and stuff xD

http://totalwar.honga.net/faction.php?v=tatw3

Here's the Downloads:
http://www.moddb.com/mods/third-age-total-war/downloads/third-age-total-war-30-part-1of2

http://www.moddb.com/mods/third-age-total-war/downloads/third-age-total-war-30-part-2of2

This has the link to the patch files, and installation directions:
http://www.twcenter.net/forums/showthread.php?500418-Third-Age-Total-War-3-2-Released&



Metalunatic said:


> Dragon Age Inquisition. @*Zyriel*, you heathen. :lol Empire was one of the best Total War games i've played so far and I played them all except the first Shogun. My map is colored a nice bright orange btw. United Provinces my arse. More like United New World Order. But seriously, Rome 2 was kind of "meh" too imo,


Lol yeah I still gotta finish DA: Inquisition, but yeah was a bit disappointed in that ~_~

Ugh I could not get into Empire for some reason, I did play it awhile though. I like my Polish Hussars lol, or the Ottoman Grenadiers or Jannisaries (forgot which) just storming the breach xD

I played quite a bit of Rome 2, Brittania, Macedon, Suebi, Carthage, Sparta, Egypt, forgot what else factions I got decently far with lol. Rome 2's graphics and UI were a bit "different" from the older ones lol. Like the unit cards, tooltip, and overall tree progression. Was more similar to Shogun 2. And the whole end of the turns in the previous patches haha, took forever to even finish a move ~_~ probably why I played so much of it lol.

I think Total War Attila will probably be more like a "Rome 2" than Rome 2 was lol. Pretty much the same game with optimization, a few new additions, different time period (Fall of the Roman Empire beginning of the Dark Ages). But more gritty and darker than Rome 2 was. Factions look really interesting lol:

http://wiki.totalwar.com/w/Total_War_ATTILA_factions


----------



## Gusthebus (May 22, 2012)

Crackdown, Mortal Kombat vs. DC Universe, any Resident Evil game after Nemesis, Dead Space, Lost Planet, Army of Two.. I can name more and give reasons but ehhhhh I am lazy


----------



## Kilgore Trout (Aug 10, 2014)

thanks @Zyriel
nice video and useful links


----------



## To22 (Apr 6, 2012)

blueman1027 said:


> *Watch_Dogs* - I bought this game expecting cutting edge graphics and replay value with a lively modding community. I got none of those. Not to mention, you couldn't add your own music *to the game's god-awful soundtrack.*
> 
> *APB Reloaded* - This game has soooooo much potential, but it's been dealt some crummy cards. The game's original creators went out of business. Shortly after, the game was bought and made free-to-play. Ever since then, the game has had continuous issues with lag, hackers, a "threat level" system that makes it irritating to play with friends that aren't equally as skilled as you, a community plagued by immaturity and tryhards, and a company that milks the game for everything it's worth.


Yeah, Watch_Dogs did have a bad soundtrack. The budget for that game must have been nearing its limit lol. Either that, or someone was too lazy to find proper music.

Oh and I agree about APB Reloaded. I was really hype for that game too. I barely played it, but it didn't take much for me to become massively disappointed. APB was the only game I was willing to play on my inadequate PC... or at least, I hoped I'd be willing.



Zyriel said:


> I played Far Cry 2, which was totally different from 3 lol. Although 2 was annoying the constant Maleria and stuff, I never did finish it. Gameplay itself wasn't that bad though. 3 I just couldn't get into at all, the NPC's annoyed the hell out of me ~_~


I agree and I forgot all about that Malaria nonsense. The Malaria stuff was to blame for much of my frustrations, for sure.


----------



## Scrub-Zero (Feb 9, 2004)

Zyriel said:


> Ahh yeah I played for awhile^^ Can't remember I couldn't stick with it though lol. Played Duelist, Shadow, and Witch I think. Yeah it does take some planning on that web thing. That's one part I found interesting, it's like each character is on the same web for passive abilities (if I remember correctly) but start at different points.


You gotta love that skill tree though. It seems overwhelming at first but it's also very straight forward if you plan your build and not only go for damage nodes.

It's also interesting that some characters are generally made for melee or casting, but you can still come up with completely opposite builds and still succeed in late game.

My main right now is a spell casting marauder. He's pretty strong and very tanky, yet uses spells like a witch would. If he's as good as a witch, it could be argued because i run late game maps by myself(75+) with little to no difficulty.

I'm planning on making a melee evasion+block Witch for my next character. We'll see how that goes 



Zyriel said:


> Was pretty challenging as well, especially if you don't get decent drops haha. Was getting 1-2 shot in some areas, if I didn't have any "oh ****" exit abilities slotted xD


Poe is very unforgiving at times. Even with good gear i still die sometimes. 
The important thing is maxing your resists. once you've done that the game gets a bit easier.

I remember struggling for gear too when i started. God, i had the cheapest two handed mace ever and i got stuck farming the docks for the longest time.
I had to push slow or i would die lol. Eventually i looted a good dps mace and i finally got ahead of the game. Did maps and made a bunch of new characters using my old one to farm items for them.


----------



## Zyriel (May 20, 2011)

pouria19 said:


> thanks @Zyriel
> nice video and useful links


:yes


----------



## Salvador Dali (Oct 26, 2013)

Eggshell said:


> If you didn't know, some of the people who created the Devil May Cry series now work at the studio that made Revengeance, including the series creator Hideki Kamikya (I don't think he worked on Revengeance himself though). I've never played a Metal Gear game before but I've wanted that game for a couple of years now since Platinum Games is one of my top 5 studios. They also made the Bayonetta games so maybe you wouldn't like them after all.


If you enjoy DmC/Bayonetta, then you probably would enjoy Revengeance. Hack 'n slash games aren't my favourite genre I admit, but I do like the God of War games, and I did enjoy Revengeance to an extent, I was just disappointed with the length of the game, the story/characters and the fact that I felt like I could of gotten better value if I had just brought a DmC game.


----------



## UndreamingAwake (Apr 11, 2011)

Zyriel said:


> Lol yeah I still gotta finish DA: Inquisition, but yeah was a bit disappointed in that ~_~
> 
> Ugh I could not get into Empire for some reason, I did play it awhile though. I like my Polish Hussars lol, or the Ottoman Grenadiers or Jannisaries (forgot which) just storming the breach xD
> 
> ...


Yeah, tbh, don't expect too much from DA:I. I only found the main quest interesting. All the side quests were just a bunch of MMO style quests. Go here, fetch this, do that, kill X amount of Y monster.

Interesting. I thought Empire was very overwhelming when I first looked at the campaign map, compared to previous installments, but when I got used to it, I loved it. Tbh, i'm more of an infantry (armchair :lol) commander, and usually only use cavalry as rout-chasers or flank harassment so i'll pick a unit of Swiss Infantry or Holland Guard over those troops you listed any day.

I swear I could not get into Rome 2 though. The combat = terrible imo and the unit cards... First time I looked at it I was like "wtf, their budget must have ran out and they hired a 10 year old to draw this ****." :lol Graphics also seemed to actually have decreased from the previous games.

Atilla just sounds like another recycle of Barbarian Invasion if you ask me...

Oh I also forgot to mention Destiny. I got my Xbone with Destiny in the bundle. The first time I played I was like, ok it's kind of fun to play together. But it just bored the **** out of me after I finished the story. The voice acting is pretty bland too. I find it hard to believe this game was the most expensive game ever made.

Even though I enjoyed it, I expected a bit more from Watch_Dogs.

Saints Row IV... I consider myself a fan of the series, but the last game was just... Blegh. A ****ing simulator, really? I already thought The Third was inferior to Saints Row 2 (which is still the best one of them all imnsho), but IV was just garbage, and it was the only one I actually pre-ordered. It seems that whenever I decide to pre-order a game, it turns out to be garbage lol. I pre-ordered SRIV and DA:I and both didn't live up to my expectations.

Also @*pouria19* If you decide to install Third Age Total War, you might want to remove the ridicilous AI Garrison Spawn script. Seriously, the game is tough enough on VH/VH. No need for the AI to cheat it's way to infinite armies. I played as Gondor. It was kind of nasty to finally having pushed through to Minas Morgul and then having the AI spawn two or three entire armies right next to you. That's not a challenge, that's just cheating by the AI.


----------



## JustThisGuy (Mar 24, 2012)

Zone said:


> *Brink:*
> The hype for this game among the competitive shooter community was extremely disproportionate to the quality of the game. People think Destiny was overhyped? Sure, from a pure numerical perspective (because it's Bungie and Activision), but at least Destiny had solid fundamentals. Destiny's issue was likely *business, while Brink was simply a bad game through and through. Brink had no redeeming qualities beyond it's concept. Literally everything about Brink could have been far better.
> 
> Splash Damage inspired the idea that I'd get lost in this revolutionary wall-running mechanic on a game dedicated to skillful, player versus player combat. Splash Damage inspired the idea that competitive, cooperative, and story mode were to become one intense yet harmonious experience. Splash Damage inspired the idea that I were at the Brink of finding my next favorite competitive multiplayer experience. Brink was my Titanfall, only difference being that Brink was a really crappy game. I have to give credit to Splash Damage, though- Splash Damage certainly isn't short on creativity and risk taking.
> ...


Yeah, my brother bought Brink new and was really disappointed by it, and p.o.'ed that he paid $60 for such a cruddy game with poor controls.

Warhammer 40K: Space Marine. Even fans seemed fine the reboots and thought it was a great edition. I...did not. It was very simple. I understand the mech-suit is meant to make you feel heavy, but the sluggish movement was annoying. There was barely a story. It was just OK. Beat it on hard. Couldn't platinum b/c no one was online, but didn't really care to platinum it anyway.

It's funny, I've read up on the intricate stories and things about Warhammer, as a dice game, video game series, as well as the expanded universe through books and stuff, yet it seemed like this game lacked all of that, ironically by cramming it all into one game. Like it's orcs and goblins, then chaos realm marines and demons, which in the sagas came later. LOVED the concept of elves and orcs and goblins and stuff (IN SPACE), but it didn't get around to a lot of things. It was just a 1-dimensional character you slowly ran around with, shooting (easily with auto-aim) until the game was done. I will say, though, the final battle took me 4 or 5 tries. I'm talking hard mode here, though. Ah well.

Remember quickly deleting it off my DL list on my PS3 to make room for 2 other full games. Which is another thing! It took up way too much room for such a simple game; small sandboxed levels with PS2 graphics. I mean, come on.

Oh and I'll add:

*Lollipop Chainsaw*
It's a funny game, but it's not a particularly fun game. I thought it'd be like Bayonetta or Heavenly Sword, but your a cheerleader against zombies. Sigh. Bad controls, redundant moves (though you do gain them as they go along, it's basically the same moves extended), somewhat easy, but I just got bored and turned it off. Only finished the first level. I can only see going back to it out of desperation and having nothing else to play. And it was created by James Gunn, so I was extra excited, but alas, it blew.

Many Star Wars games have depressed me. *Episode 1: Phantom Menace*, *Episode 1: Jedi Power Battles*, *Clone Saga*, *Episode III: Revenge of the Sith*, and *Star Wars: Demolition*, which I guess was an attempt at being a destruction derby but with Star Wars' vehicles and stuff. So stupid. Course that one doesn't really count, knowing that the concept was dumb. But...sigh...I bought it. 2 bucks! Heh. Oh, and *Star Wars: Starfighter* and its sequel *Jedi Starfighter*. The control are ridiculously stupid. It's like the creators didn't play it themselves before putting it out. Twice in row. Amazingly bad.

Sidenote: I love how spellcheck takes "Jedi" as word but not "Sith." Kind of funny.

That's all I can think of off the top of my head for right now.


----------



## Kilgore Trout (Aug 10, 2014)

Metalunatic said:


> Also @*pouria19* If you decide to install Third Age Total War, you might want to remove the ridicilous AI Garrison Spawn script. Seriously, the game is tough enough on VH/VH. No need for the AI to cheat it's way to infinite armies. I played as Gondor. It was kind of nasty to finally having pushed through to Minas Morgul and then having the AI spawn two or three entire armies right next to you.That's not a challenge, that's just cheating by the AI.


Very helpful advice, you just prevented another disappointment :yes
I hate it when AIs cheat.


----------



## JustThisGuy (Mar 24, 2012)

Just thought of two.

*Defiance*
Based off the show I don't watch. Hah! I was just curious and it was $10, so... Really linear, everybody looks the same, everybody has no interesting objectives, hardly any story. They acted like it'd link to the show or something, but I didn't feel like the show was relevant to the game at all. Not that I watched it, but there were no mentioning of any storyline(s). Sucked.

*Final Fantasy XIV* 
Really hate to put an FF on the list, but sucked so bad. I made a really cool character and couldn't do **** with him. He was a blue catman. Heh. 'Course the fact that everyone around me was a level 50 (the level cap), no one would help me or anything. Big reason why I dislike MMOs: elitism. Bleh. Bought it for $10, too, along with Defiance, and they bored me within two days. Go figs.


----------



## H i (Nov 23, 2013)

diablo 3

guild wars 2

grim dawn (although I do enjoy some of the mechanics of this game)


----------



## Zyriel (May 20, 2011)

Metalunatic said:


> Yeah, tbh, don't expect too much from DA:I. I only found the main quest interesting. All the side quests were just a bunch of MMO style quests. Go here, fetch this, do that, kill X amount of Y monster.


Thanks for the heads up man. But ugh, that's honestly what I felt for Borderlands 2 after awhile ~_~ I wonder if it's just me or has it always been like that? I honestly remember games being different back in the day, lol possibly because of a lack of quests in general. So much grinding X_x made quests feel like a huge deal when they were first implemented into games.



Metalunatic said:


> Yeah
> Interesting. I thought Empire was very overwhelming when I first looked at the campaign map, compared to previous installments, but when I got used to it, I loved it. Tbh, i'm more of an infantry (armchair :lol) commander, and usually only use cavalry as rout-chasers or flank harassment so i'll pick a unit of Swiss Infantry or Holland Guard over those troops you listed any day.


Haha, I think it was too much of the "lack of heathenism" for me :b I think it was the time period too, I didn't care for the whole line up and shoot mentality of the era lol. Yeah, I also tend to like shock troops, use guerilla tactics, or hammer-anvil approaches in my playstyle lol. Or an artillery commander once I have access to it. Interesting the different styles of play people have xD 



Metalunatic said:


> I swear I could not get into Rome 2 though. The combat = terrible imo and the unit cards... First time I looked at it I was like "wtf, their budget must have ran out and they hired a 10 year old to draw this ****." :lol Graphics also seemed to actually have decreased from the previous games.
> 
> Atilla just sounds like another recycle of Barbarian Invasion if you ask me..
> .


Really? I liked the combat. A lot of giant melee's lol, and constant positioning, re-positioning, flanking, formations, etc. (I think that's what I didn't like about Empire actually lol lack of melee especially in sieges and stuff, get frustrated with units routing ~_~) I agree with the unit cards though it was hard to tell a lot of them apart lol. You do get used to it over time though, I sorta like the "tribal feel" of them for the Barbarian factions. It didn't fit the Hellenistic or Latin ones though.

Yeah it probably will be lol. They did change some mechanics though, like melee units get fatigued quicker with heavier armor, but also regen stamina quicker when out of combat. So the player will have to cycle in troops more, and make tactical choices in holding certain areas and overall strategic elements on the battlefield to prevent routing, or outflanking the enemy. Will need more reserves, and using different types of troops to hold or take key locations. That along with scorched earth tactics is well worth it for me. Plus the campaign is sorta like the Mongols invading in Medieval 2, the Hun invasion, so it's like fighting against the clock in a survival match lol. 



Metalunatic said:


> Saints Row IV... I consider myself a fan of the series, but the last game was just... Blegh. A ****ing simulator, really? I already thought The Third was inferior to Saints Row 2 (which is still the best one of them all imnsho), but IV was just garbage, and it was the only one I actually pre-ordered. It seems that whenever I decide to pre-order a game, it turns out to be garbage lol. I pre-ordered SRIV and DA:I and both didn't live up to my expectations.


Ahh I never played Saints Row 1 @[email protected] always wanted too never got around to it. I loved 2 though lol, was my favorite. I know what you mean with 3 and 4 lol. 3 was alright, I didn't like how they replaced Shaundi's voice actor though. 4 just was like..... I couldn't get into it either lol. Felt so wonky lol, alien invasion and stuff ~_~ It's like really? A street thug, to president like that hahaha, 3 was bit over the top too, but, had like a comicy overtone, that gave it it's charm. I guess 4 did too, but just @[email protected] I don't even know. I liked the feeling 2 had lol, actually was somewhat believable, and quirky at the same time. 



JustThisGuy said:


> Warhammer 40K: Space Marine. Even fans seemed fine the reboots and thought it was a great edition. I...did not. It was very simple. I understand the mech-suit is meant to make you feel heavy, but the sluggish movement was annoying. There was barely a story. It was just OK. Beat it on hard. Couldn't platinum b/c no one was online, but didn't really care to platinum it anyway.
> 
> It's funny, I've read up on the intricate stories and things about Warhammer, as a dice game, video game series, as well as the expanded universe through books and stuff, yet it seemed like this game lacked all of that, ironically by cramming it all into one game. Like it's orcs and goblins, then chaos realm marines and demons, which in the sagas came later. LOVED the concept of elves and orcs and goblins and stuff (IN SPACE), but it didn't get around to a lot of things. It was just a 1-dimensional character you slowly ran around with, shooting (easily with auto-aim) until the game was done. I will say, though, the final battle took me 4 or 5 tries. I'm talking hard mode here, though. Ah well.


Oh that's because in the lore, it's two totally different "universes", or rather multiverses I guess. Both are based on the Table Top game as you mentioned. Warhammer is the fantasy one, set on a planet similar to earth. With Orcs, Elves, Dark Elves, Undead, the Empire, Chaos etc.

Warhammer 40k is a whole universe with that similar stuff lol. Orcs in Space, the Empire is the Imperium of Man with different Space Marine Chapters and the Imperial Guard, Sisters of Battle, Inquisitors. Elves are Eldar, Dark Elves are Dark Eldar, then there's Necrons (Undead based around "Old Gods" pretty much ), Tau (High tech, caste system style aliens with a Confucist theme but immune to the 'warp'), Tyranids (Organic hivemind alien creatures).

Oh and Chaos that sorta connects it all together. The Chaos gods exist through emotions/thoughts/desires, living in an "immaterial realm" outside of normal reality. It's the same Chaos gods in both Warhammer and Warhammer 40k that "feed" on those emotions, but were also brought into existence by them. Anyone who is a "psyker" has access to the warp, (psychic power, telekinesis, in other words "magic" or occult stuff) but is also heavily influenced by it and can be "corrupted" by it or go insane.

Thus the immortal psyker races (Eldar-Dark Eldar) that have immense psychic power or emotional drives brought into existence Slaanesh (Youngest Chaos God of Pleasure, Aesthetics, Art, Beauty, Pride) through wanton Hedonism. The other 3 are Tzeentch (God Of Change, Evolution, the Mind, Sorcery), Khorne (God of Blood, Carnage, War, Physical Combat), and Nurgle (God of Decay, Disease, Pestilence, Staticness). So each God is at war with each other due to their "spheres of influence", in constant perpetual balance lol. Yet somewhat "unites" against the Empire of man in the "world" of Warhammer Fantasy (Northern Tribes are devoted to Chaos gods) where the Inquisitors root out "heresy" and in Warhammer 40k the fallen Space Marine Chapters.

Yeah the game Space Marine though kinda lumped a lot together without much explanation to the lore lol. That often happens though in those games, Space Marines (chasing down Chaos and rooting out "heresy") vs Chaos (seeking some relic lol) vs Orcs (randomly there causing problems on a WAAAGH!) vs Imperium of Man (that just happens to have colonized a dormant Necron palnet) vs Tyranid Invasion vs Eldar trying to rid the universe of Chaos or Necrons lol. If you're into RTS games, try the Dawn of War series, gives more in depth perspectives to each faction or rather the factions within the factions lol.


----------



## JustThisGuy (Mar 24, 2012)

Zyriel said:


> Oh that's because in the lore, it's two totally different "universes", or rather multiverses I guess. Both are based on the Table Top game as you mentioned. Warhammer is the fantasy one, set on a planet similar to earth. With Orcs, Elves, Dark Elves, Undead, the Empire, Chaos etc.
> 
> Warhammer 40k is a whole universe with that similar stuff lol. Orcs in Space, the Empire is the Imperium of Man with different Space Marine Chapters and the Imperial Guard, Sisters of Battle, Inquisitors. Elves are Eldar, Dark Elves are Dark Eldar, then there's Necrons (Undead based around "Old Gods" pretty much ), Tau (High tech, caste system style aliens with a Confucist theme but immune to the 'warp'), Tyranids (Organic hivemind alien creatures).
> 
> ...


Space Marines, along with the companion Kill Team game, were reboots of the video game franchise, yea?

So, is this going back to the normal timeline or continuing...?




I've researched, but have yet to find a definitive answer.


----------



## Zyriel (May 20, 2011)

JustThisGuy said:


> Space Marines, along with the companion Kill Team game, were reboots of the video game franchise, yea?
> 
> So, is this going back to the normal timeline or continuing...?
> 
> ...


I don't think it's a reboot since it's a totally different company that developed it. Space Marine was made by Relic Entertainment (Same company as Dawn of War) which was sold by THQ to Sega.

I don't know Games Workshop's opinion on it (since they own the franchise and lore). But from a personal opinion, I'd say it was more of a game within the setting of the universe. The IP itself is Warhammer 40k and each game is probably considered a franchise within that setting. The word 'Chapter" in the regards to Space Marines, are like "groups" affiliations, squadrons, sort of like Roman Legions. Except with a more specialized view like Knightly Orders of the middle ages, Knights Templar, Knights Hospitallers, Teutonic Order, etc.

Like the "Space Marine" game had to do with 'Ultramarines' Chapter of Space Marines. Where as Dawn of War had to do with the 'Blood Ravens' Chapter.

The original game Space Hulk, I think had to do with the 'Dark Angels' Chapter of Space Marines, etc. Possibly all within the same timeline but different events across the galaxy and various intervals. So that newer Space Hulk might be a reboot of the original Space Hulk game, but probably has nothing to do with "Space Marine", "Dawn of War" or any other Warhammer 40k game like "Fire Warrior" (Tau centered fps game that was really bad lol).

Like this game too that's in the works, Warhammer 40k - Eternal Crusade:


----------



## JustThisGuy (Mar 24, 2012)

Zyriel said:


> I don't think it's a reboot since it's a totally different company that developed it. Space Marine was made by Relic Entertainment (Same company as Dawn of War) which was sold by THQ to Sega.
> 
> I don't know Games Workshop's opinion on it (since they own the franchise and lore). But from a personal opinion, I'd say it was more of a game within the setting of the universe. The IP itself is Warhammer 40k and each game is probably considered a franchise within that setting. The word 'Chapter" in the regards to Space Marines, are like "groups" affiliations, squadrons, sort of like Roman Legions. Except with a more specialized view like Knightly Orders of the middle ages, Knights Templar, Knights Hospitallers, Teutonic Order, etc.
> 
> ...


Most of what you said went over my head. Haha! Not a Warhammer 40K fan, but I could be if they make something better than Kill Team or Space Marines.

So maybe Space Hulk could be badass, who knows.


----------



## DannyBoy64 (May 5, 2014)

Beyond Two Souls
That's it. I don't like to hype games.


----------



## Thedood (Nov 27, 2013)

No game will ever come close to dissapointing me more than *Final Fantasy 8* did.

I preordered it, skipped school that day, stayed up all night and waited for Electronics Boutique to open that morning so I can run home and play it. I was so crushed.. I felt like I flushed 50 bucks down the toilet. I hated it so much. After many years, it has slightly grown on me at least to the point of not absolutely loathing it and actually took the time to beat it a few years ago, but I still see it as such a massive disspointment compared to Final Fantasy 7.


----------



## WhatBITW (Jan 26, 2013)

Most annually released franchises after the first few installments eg. sports games, the WWE series, Call of Duty.


----------



## blueman1027 (Aug 9, 2013)

JustThisGuy said:


> Just thought of two.
> 
> *Defiance*
> Based off the show I don't watch. Hah! I was just curious and it was $10, so... Really linear, everybody looks the same, everybody has no interesting objectives, hardly any story. They acted like it'd link to the show or something, but I didn't feel like the show was relevant to the game at all. Not that I watched it, but there were no mentioning of any storyline(s). Sucked.


I watched the trailers for that game and thought it looked cool. Then, I watched a Let's Play of it, and lost all interest. lol



Metalunatic said:


> Saints Row IV... I consider myself a fan of the series, but the last game was just... Blegh. A ****ing simulator, really? I already thought The Third was inferior to Saints Row 2 (which is still the best one of them all imnsho), but IV was just garbage, and it was the only one I actually pre-ordered. It seems that whenever I decide to pre-order a game, it turns out to be garbage lol. I pre-ordered SRIV and DA:I and both didn't live up to my expectations.


I have to disagree with you there! I really liked SR4 with all the crazy superpowers. SR3 was the low point in the series if you ask me, with SR2 being the best. I just hope that Volition goes back to SR's roots with their next SR game. I think they've went about as far as they can go with the crazy SR games anyway.


----------



## Joe (May 18, 2010)

Marv1991 said:


> Couldn't agree more about Fable 3 xD


The problem with fable isn't that the games are bad, it's that Peter Molyneux gives them such unrealistic expectations that no game in existence can meet. Fable 2 was one of my fav games of all time, I can't remember fable1 since I played it like 10 years ago but even though Fable 3 was lacklustre I still liked it.


----------



## absreim (Jun 19, 2012)

Diablo 3
Dragon Age 2 - although I didn't think it was as bad as the worst critics made it out to be
World of Warcraft: Wrath of the Lich King - at least it got me to quit the game
Mass Effect 3 - it had the potential to be so much better, instead the story was ruined by a bad ending and forced upon the player bleeding-heart emotions that I could not relate to


----------



## Arbre (Mar 9, 2014)

absreim said:


> Diablo 3
> Dragon Age 2 - although I didn't think it was as bad as the worst critics made it out to be
> World of Warcraft: Wrath of the Lich King - at least it got me to quit the game
> Mass Effect 3 - it had the potential to be so much better, instead the story was ruined by a bad ending and forced upon the player bleeding-heart emotions that I could not relate to


My girlfriend is a huge Dragon Age fan and says the Dragon Age 2 isn't as bad as a lot of people make it out to be.

The ending in Mass Effect 3 was bad. I was already disappointed with the game because it had even less exploration than the first two games. Exploring the Milky Way might be my favourite part of Mass Effect.


----------



## UndreamingAwake (Apr 11, 2011)

pouria19 said:


> Very helpful advice, you just prevented another disappointment :yes
> I hate it when AIs cheat.


You're welcome, and I agree. First time I saw that I was like "wtf, where did he get those armies from? Were they just waiting for me inside Mordor?" Then It happened again while assaulting Barad-Dur, and I realized it was some sort of spawn script. Took it out 5 minutes later after a quick google search. I never cheat in my TW games, I appreciate the AI showing me the same courtesy lol.



Zyriel said:


> Thanks for the heads up man. But ugh, that's honestly what I felt for Borderlands 2 after awhile ~_~ I wonder if it's just me or has it always been like that? I honestly remember games being different back in the day, lol possibly because of a lack of quests in general. So much grinding X_x made quests feel like a huge deal when they were first implemented into games.


No, you're right. Games are beginning to get pretty weak when it comes to solid stories and quests... The last good game in that regard was Mass Effect 3 imo. At least out of the games I personally played, that is.




Zyriel said:


> Haha, I think it was too much of the "lack of heathenism" for me :b I think it was the time period too, I didn't care for the whole line up and shoot mentality of the era lol. Yeah, I also tend to like shock troops, use guerilla tactics, or hammer-anvil approaches in my playstyle lol. Or an artillery commander once I have access to it. Interesting the different styles of play people have xD


Haha, well yeah, there's basically four religions in that game; Protestant, Catholic, Islam and Animism. Which is why I love those "all faction" mods. I actually tried playing a campaign as one of the Native American tribes. Buggy as hell, but it was still fun, until I encountered my first enemy with a solid block of line infantry. :lol

Oh, shock troops, love those. Speaking of shock troops... I had this amazing campaign battle where I was playing as the United Provinces. I had invaded the Americas after conquering all of Europe and India, where Spain and Great Britain reigned supreme. Great Britain was my ally since the beginning of the game, so I pretty much could wipe out Spain whenever I wanted to. Mind you, I always set the unit size to Huge to make each battle look epic. 
So I was transporting my full stack consisting of 2 horse artillery cards and the rest consisting of Light Infantry through the woods in the western Americas. All of a sudden the jackass ambushes me with one complete army and another, smaller army with about 6 unit cards. Half his force consisted of line infantry, about 3 stacks of Light Infantry, and the rest was cavalry, including 2 generals. I was grossly outnumbered, but I really got lucky with the terrain. My army started right in the middle of a forest, right next to a hill that was only passable on my own side, on which I could place my artillery in such a manner that I could effectively utilize Canister Shot. 
I had my light infantry stretched out all the way from the side of the hill to the edge of the map and plant stakes before combat started. Now mind you, all my units except the canons could hide, so I also had the element of surprise. I think I sat in my chair waiting, for roughly 10 minutes, on x3 speed, begging for him to finally attack me. :lol So he finally does, but due to the stakes my infantry had planted, half his cavalry killed themselves off for me, and his first wave of line infantry had no choice but to break rank while passing through them, at which point they became real easy pickings for my hidden troops. 
All the while my cannons are tearing chunks out of his reserves, and even managed to blast the general of his main force straight to the afterlife. Most of his force pretty much decided to give up at that point and shattered, save for his artillery and some individual units, at which point I decided it was time to fix those bayonets and run them all down. In the end, my very one-sided army of roughly 1400 light infantry and two horse artillery batteries won against his force which consisted of nearly 3000 soldiers of pretty well-balanced units.

I swear, thinking about that battle makes me want to play the game again. But yes, I completely agree with you. I'd like to have a word with the person that at some time after the invention of firearms, in some place, somewhere, thought it was a good idea to all stand in a line and take shots at each other and call it sound strategy. I mean, I understand muskets took a horribly long time to reload and were also really bulky, but really? 
 



Zyriel said:


> Really? I liked the combat. A lot of giant melee's lol, and constant positioning, re-positioning, flanking, formations, etc. (I think that's what I didn't like about Empire actually lol lack of melee especially in sieges and stuff, get frustrated with units routing ~_~) I agree with the unit cards though it was hard to tell a lot of them apart lol. You do get used to it over time though, I sorta like the "tribal feel" of them for the Barbarian factions. It didn't fit the Hellenistic or Latin ones though.


You had a problem with routing in Empire? See, that was the main problem I had in Rome II, actually. I mean, I was playing as the Iceni in my campaign. I figured, hey, I conquered all those other noobs on this island, so i'll just go have some fun, make me some ships and go annoy the Romans like any good Celt should. So my guys were all like "row row row yer boat" for a few turns until I actually managed to reach Italy. Yes, I managed to reach Italy in one go without being attacked once at sea... First weird thing... So once I land I get into a fight with a Roman army. We're roughly equal strength. Ofc I outnumber him with like 200 guys, since picking a fight while having equal numbers against Romans is something I consider stupid, but anyway... My point is, there comes a point in this battle where I'm fighting a group of full strength Triarii which were guarding the AI's flank with two groups of Painted Ones, one full strength and the other roughly half strength. Uphill. Triarii. And the Triarii *break* after, like, 20 seconds. What? I get Painted Ones cause fear etc, but come on, i'm fighting uphill against a unit with excellent defense and good morale. And that's just one example i've seen of soldiers breaking way too easily. 




Zyriel said:


> Yeah it probably will be lol. They did change some mechanics though, like melee units get fatigued quicker with heavier armor, but also regen stamina quicker when out of combat. So the player will have to cycle in troops more, and make tactical choices in holding certain areas and overall strategic elements on the battlefield to prevent routing, or outflanking the enemy. Will need more reserves, and using different types of troops to hold or take key locations. That along with scorched earth tactics is well worth it for me. Plus the campaign is sorta like the Mongols invading in Medieval 2, the Hun invasion, so it's like fighting against the clock in a survival match lol.


That all actually does sound promising, giving more tactical depth to the game. It would be interesting to see a World War 1 Total War one of these days.




Zyriel said:


> Ahh I never played Saints Row 1 @[email protected] always wanted too never got around to it. I loved 2 though lol, was my favorite. I know what you mean with 3 and 4 lol. 3 was alright, I didn't like how they replaced Shaundi's voice actor though. 4 just was like..... I couldn't get into it either lol. Felt so wonky lol, alien invasion and stuff ~_~ It's like really? A street thug, to president like that hahaha, 3 was bit over the top too, but, had like a comicy overtone, that gave it it's charm. I guess 4 did too, but just @[email protected] I don't even know. I liked the feeling 2 had lol, actually was somewhat believable, and quirky at the same time.


Yeah I actually liked Saints Row 1. SR2 was the first one I played. It was on sale on Xbox Live. Then played The Third, then finally decided to buy 1 lol. It's kind of annoying that you can make a chick in all of the games except the first one. Doesn't make sense, storywise. It's also kind of funny that there's only a distinct female character in The Third and IV. In 2 it's just basically the female boss acting (even walking) like a guy.
But yeah lol, it's kind of wacky to go from gang banger to president, but that's Saints Row for ya. I agree, SR2 was just the best. It had a badass feel to it, but also was funny in the right places.



blueman1027 said:


> I have to disagree with you there! I really liked SR4 with all the crazy superpowers. SR3 was the low point in the series if you ask me, with SR2 being the best. I just hope that Volition goes back to SR's roots with their next SR game. I think they've went about as far as they can go with the crazy SR games anyway.


Feel free to! See, that's kind of the thing. It actually became boring extremely quickly to me due to the fact you got those super powers. Planes, obsolete. Cars, obsolete. Hell, I even felt guns were obsolete after a certain point. A few more days to Gat Out Of Hell. I seriously hate you won't be playing The Boss in that one... I too hope they'll return to the original SR setting, but I guess they went this route to get away from the "Goofy GTA clone" image.


----------



## RainboWater (Jan 3, 2015)

Off the top of my head:

*Far Cry 3* And that's pretty much it. I still haven't finished it. It was fun at first, collecting and crafting stuff and all that. But eventually it got a bit boring. And then a tad bit irritating. It's been collecting dust for a while now. Not sure when I plan on finishing it...

I'm more into story based games, anyway.


----------



## SaladDays (Nov 26, 2013)

H i said:


> diablo 3
> 
> guild wars 2
> 
> grim dawn (although I do enjoy some of the mechanics of this game)


Why am I not surprised so many people say Diablo 3 and Grim Yawn :lol


----------



## Scrub-Zero (Feb 9, 2004)

SaladDays said:


> Why am I not surprised so many people say Diablo 3 and Grim Yawn :lol


At least Grim Dawn has a chance to redeem itself with later patches lol. Not that i've played grim dawn yet. I'm waiting until it's more complete.

Diablo 3's rep is made already though. What's the term people use? oh yeah. Jay Wilson. **** that loser.


----------



## RainboWater (Jan 3, 2015)

absreim said:


> Diablo 3
> Dragon Age 2 - although I didn't think it was as bad as the worst critics made it out to be
> World of Warcraft: Wrath of the Lich King - at least it got me to quit the game
> Mass Effect 3 - it had the potential to be so much better, instead the story was ruined by a bad ending and forced upon the player bleeding-heart emotions that I could not relate to


I actually liked Mass Effect 3's ending. I mean, I don't like how confusing everything was without the Extended Cut DLC. But overall, I was perfectly fine with the ending. I wish I could understand what most people hate about it?


----------



## absreim (Jun 19, 2012)

RainboWater said:


> I actually liked Mass Effect 3's ending. I mean, I don't like how confusing everything was without the Extended Cut DLC. But overall, I was perfectly fine with the ending. I wish I could understand what most people hate about it?


For me it was that the ending wasn't fleshed out enough, which the Extended Cut DLC solved. The general idea was fine. I am fairly happy with the ending if the Extended Cut DLC is considered. Still, it is a bit disappointing that they released the game in the state that it was before the Extended Cut was made.


----------



## Dilweedle (Oct 17, 2013)

*Far Cry 2*:
Fun game, but I didn't like it nearly as much as Instincts or Evolution. Especially since your feral powers have been switched with malaria, and a large portion of the game is spent driving vehicles that you constantly have to get out of and repair. I expected more animals too, not just herbivores that run in front of your car. No predator mode in the multiplayer either, so playing on custom maps wasn't as fun.

*Too Human*:
It has terrible balancing issues. Like being a melee based character and fighting enemies that explode when you melee them, so you have to switch to a gun that barely does any damage because it's not meant for your class. The death scene is obnoxiously long too.

*Destroy All Humans: Path of the Furon*:
Loved the first two, but this is one of the worst games I've ever played. It's a buggy mess that's obviously unfinished, with half the visuals looking current-gen while others look like a PS1 game. The first time I played it I had to restart the game because an enemy I was supposed to kill got stuck in a wall. Plus the dialogue is nowhere near as good as the first two games.

*Crackdown 2*:
I like the wingsuit, helicopter, magnades, etc. But the vibrant comicbook city from the first game was redesigned so that each of the islands lost their distinct cultural influence in favor of a single grey-brown wasteland filled with the same enemies. They also replaced the badass agents with like 4 generic dudes, and once they put the suits on they're all identical except for the color. That said I did have fun screwing around with friends and it has some good licensed songs in it.

*SSX (reboot)*:
Permadeath, rewind is clunky, no traditional multiplayer, characters barely talk, etc. It's still fun, but it's a shell of it's former self. It has a good soundtrack though, and I like the wingsuit.

*Sonic '06*:
I don't really need to explain this one. I grew up playing Sonic games on the Genesis, and I really liked the Sonic Adventure games. So you can imagine my surprise when they dropped this turd in my lap.

*Halo 4*, *Destiny*, *Fable 2*, & *Fable 3*:
There were parts of these I enjoyed but they were all overhyped and disappointing.


----------



## Sprocketjam (Feb 16, 2014)

RainboWater said:


> I actually liked Mass Effect 3's ending. I mean, I don't like how confusing everything was without the Extended Cut DLC. But overall, I was perfectly fine with the ending. I wish I could understand what most people hate about it?


Original ending made all your past choices irrelevant.


----------



## Dragonskull (Jan 10, 2015)

*Destiny*- When you actually start playing the game, it seems interesting but it dies off very quickly. I'm used to grinding it out in MMO's but this was just the same **** over and over again. I mean honestly, how many different variations of the same mission can you make for one game that is, in my mind, limited. The storyline sucked as well. It was just "poof, your done. Nothing else to do but more grinding." Overall just a lackluster game for its hype.

*Titanfall*- I loved this game when it came out but the premise of it being almost entirely multiplayer through me off. It was cool to melee kick, stealth, drop a titan on someone, titan punch someone, and overall just pilot a titan. The problem was in the lack of weapons and the fact that it just seemed to be over hyped. It was supposed to rival CoD but it kinda fell flat....flat like a pizza.


----------



## Zyriel (May 20, 2011)

Metalunatic said:


> No, you're right. Games are beginning to get pretty wea
> k when it comes to solid stories and quests... The last good game in that regard was Mass Effect 3 imo. At least out of the games I personally played, that is.





RainboWater said:


> I actually liked Mass Effect 3's ending. I mean, I don't like how confusing everything was without the Extended Cut DLC. But overall, I was perfectly fine with the ending. I wish I could understand what most people hate about it?





absreim said:


> For me it was that the ending wasn't fleshed out enough, which the Extended Cut DLC solved. The general idea was fine. I am fairly happy with the ending if the Extended Cut DLC is considered. Still, it is a bit disappointing that they released the game in the state that it was before the Extended Cut was made.


Lol yeah I liked the whole Mass Effect series too. I was fine with the ending somewhat, I knew **** was gonna hit the fan lol, just how to mitigate **** flying all over the galaxy :b I found it sorta ironic how you're allowed to pick though lol (I mean it is a game so yeah, player choice etc.) But still haha.

I did like the storyline though. I think the best part of Mass Effect 1 though (in the story arch, not the player character's story or subplots, etc.) the overall sense of "discovery" leading up to the Protheans, and the anticipation of identifying the Reapers. The whole sense of mystery and intrigue, at the same time, being denied as mythology by the majority lol.

I don't think a lot of people understood it because many don't either (A) pay attention to the story, (B) play the previous games in succession lol, or (C) don't really care what happens as long as they feel like they "won". So they just are confused not knowing what is happening in the overall meta-plot, independent of the player's objective or view.

A lot of games seem to only focus on a linear storyline of the protagonist, thus the player and they're usually character-centric. Which makes the player the "hero" but the whole game universe seems to revolve around them and their choices lol. Mass Effect on the other hand relies on player choices as well to tell the story, but the events still unfold, and things happen around the player, independent of the choices made in a cause-effect scenario for the overall galaxy.


----------



## Zyriel (May 20, 2011)

Metalunatic said:


> Haha, well yeah, there's basically four religions in that game;Protestant, Catholic, Islam and Animism. Which is why I love those "all faction" mods. I actually tried playing a campaign as one of the Native American tribes. Buggy as hell, but it was still fun, until I encountered my first enemy with a solid block of line infantry. :lol


Ahh that is true, I forgot about the Native American tribes! Skirmishers, decoys, ambushes and flanking xD Yeah I liked playing those too lol. Mmm wasn't there Hindu too or were the playable Indian factions Muslim?



Metalunatic said:


> Oh, shock troops, love those. Speaking of shock troops... I had this amazing campaign battle where I was playing as the United Provinces. I had invaded the Americas after conquering all of Europe and India, where Spain and Great Britain reigned supreme. Great Britain was my ally since the beginning of the game, so I pretty much could wipe out Spain whenever I wanted to. Mind you, I always set the unit size to Huge to make each battle look epic.
> So I was transporting my full stack consisting of 2 horse artillery cards and the rest consisting of Light Infantry through the woods in the western Americas. All of a sudden the jackass ambushes me with one complete army and another, smaller army with about 6 unit cards. Half his force consisted of line infantry, about 3 stacks of Light Infantry, and the rest was cavalry, including 2 generals. I was grossly outnumbered, but I really got lucky with the terrain. My army started right in the middle of a forest, right next to a hill that was only passable on my own side, on which I could place my artillery in such a manner that I could effectively utilize Canister Shot.
> I had my light infantry stretched out all the way from the side of the hill to the edge of the map and plant stakes before combat started. Now mind you, all my units except the canons could hide, so I also had the element of surprise. I think I sat in my chair waiting, for roughly 10 minutes, on x3 speed, begging for him to finally attack me. :lol So he finally does, but due to the stakes my infantry had planted, half his cavalry killed themselves off for me, and his first wave of line infantry had no choice but to break rank while passing through them, at which point they became real easy pickings for my hidden troops.
> All the while my cannons are tearing chunks out of his reserves, and even managed to blast the general of his main force straight to the afterlife. Most of his force pretty much decided to give up at that point and shattered, save for his artillery and some individual units, at which point I decided it was time to fix those bayonets and run them all down. In the end, my very one-sided army of roughly 1400 light infantry and two horse artillery batteries won against his force which consisted of nearly 3000 soldiers of pretty well-balanced units.
> ...


Your story sort of makes me want to re-install Empire or possibly Napoleon lol xD

Hahaha I love stakes, they're so good! I don't know why all infantry don't carry them lol or at least light infantry, and in other games, or most archers. Julius Caesar used to have his men dig ditches, entrenchments, and deploy stakes around the area of the battlefield. Controlling the terrain, allows you to control the enemy's movement, which allows you to control the flow of battle 

It's funny how sometimes the AI charges directly into pike formations, bayonets and such haha. I had a similar thing happen in Rome 2, except was totally ambushed in a forest. Was Iceni and strolling through Dacia lol (So really far lol) just 3 armies from out of nowhere haha and every direction. Ballista's sorta helped but they don't have the range to fire accurately on things that close lol. Chariot maneuvering, good formations holding with shield wall, and Chosen swordsmen to fight to the death^^

I think the firing rotations for line infantry is for that volley. Usually it was like intervals to keep the shots going while the others reloaded. It was developed out of pike and shot formations to protect the early musketeers (armed with an even slower loading arquebus or early muskets lol) from cavalry charges. Except over time, armies stopped equipping and training heavy cavalry, and the pikes stopped being used. Where the bayonet comes it, so it became sorta that same formation fighting against that same formation for centuries lol. Light cavalry was still around too but as like dragoons, as mounted, higher mobility infantry lol. I guess it's like before that too, in the Hellenistic days, Phalanx vs Phalanx and pikes vs pikes lol.


Metalunatic said:


> You had a problem with routing in Empire? See, that was the main problem I had in Rome II, actually. I mean, I was playing as the Iceni in my campaign. I figured, hey, I conquered all those other noobs on this island, so i'll just go have some fun, make me some ships and go annoy the Romans like any good Celt should So my guys were all like "row row row yer boat" for a few turns until I actually managed to reach Italy. Yes, I managed to reach Italy in one go without being attacked once at sea... First weird thing... So once I land I get into a fight with a Roman army. We're roughly equal strength. Ofc I outnumber him with like 200 guys, since picking a fight while having equal numbers against Romans is something I consider stupid, but anyway... My point is, there comes a point in this battle where I'm fighting a group of full strength Triarii which were guarding the AI's flank with two groups of Painted Ones, one full strength and the other roughly half strength. Uphill. Triarii. And the Triarii *break* after, like, 20 seconds. What? I get Painted Ones cause fear etc, but come on, i'm fighting uphill against a unit with excellent defense and good morale. And that's just one example i've seen of soldiers breaking way too easily.
> 
> That all actually does sound promising, giving more tactical depth to the game.
> 
> It would be interesting to see a World War 1 Total War one of these days.


Mmm yeah problem I had with Empire was my tactics I think lol. Especially on sieges or huge cluster**** melee's I like troops holding the line so I can maneuver other troops in and flank. Except with those light infantry style troops you have to rely more on mass units, than specific ones for certain tasks. I get frustrated lol.

With your Iceni, lol that would be the problem. Painted Ones are more of flankers that can't withstand much melee vs heavier troops like Triarii. They can if veterans, high morale, or upgraded weapons and such. But still in a toe to toe battle, lack the stamina and armor for a slugfest except with shieldwall on. Even then, they're better to just hold an area, till they can be reinforced and cycled out. Better used to taking on other light troops, spears, skirmishers or as support to heavier troops, guarding the flanks.

I think it all depends on playstyle too per faction. I don't play well with some of the factions lol, (like in Empire pretty much all of them haha). I like heavier infantry that are versatile and specific units for specific tasks. So my armies become extremely specialized (which not all factions allow on their unit roster ~_~) for their role and region. Like raiding, exploring, defending areas, or all out war, vanguard forces to set up forts, open warfare, or siege forces. 




Metalunatic said:


> Yeah I actually liked Saints Row 1. SR2 was the first one I played. It was on sale on Xbox Live. Then played The Third, then finally decided to buy 1 lol. It's kind of annoying that you can make a chick in all of the games except the first one. Doesn't make sense, storywise. It's also kind of funny that there's only a distinct female character in The Third and IV. In 2 it's just basically the female boss acting (even walking) like a guy.
> But yeah lol, it's kind of wacky to go from gang banger to president, but that's Saints Row for ya. I agree, SR2 was just the best. It had a badass feel to it, but also was funny in the right places.


LOL the female boss thing haha, but honestly a lot do tend to somewhat act like that. Well gangster type girls, and even non, ones in some areas like that lol.

I think it's because Saints Row 2 was probably more of a hit than 1 lol. So when you go back and play 1 it's like your missing a lot of the game haha. 2 did have a vast amount of open are and stuff though, the world in general compared to 3. Yeah I think you keyed on the main thing, the funny parts were in the right areas. Had dark humor and parodies in the radio stations, stores, and overall city/suburb life in the undertones lol. Like these:











3 got more wacky, and took way from the subtlety of the humor lol. Plus they got rid of the metal station in 4, and I didn't like the DJ in 3 haha. Plus they lowered the number of overall radio stations.


----------



## UndreamingAwake (Apr 11, 2011)

Zyriel said:


> Ahh that is true, I forgot about the Native American tribes! Skirmishers, decoys, ambushes and flanking xD Yeah I liked playing those too lol. Mmm wasn't there Hindu too or were the Indian factions Muslim?


Ah you're right ofc! The Maratha Confederacy was Hindu. Maybe the Mugdal Empire too. Damn those guys were annoying when they demolished the Maratha's in my Dutch playthrough.




Zyriel said:


> Hahaha I love stakes, they're so good! I don't know why all infantry don't carry them lol or at least light infantry, and in other games, or most archers. Julius Caesar used to have his men dig ditches, entrenchments, and form stakes around the area of the battlefield. Controlling the terrain, allows you to control the enemy's movement, which allows you to control the flow of battle


Stakes are awesome alright. They have saved me in so many battles, as well as line infantry with trenches. It's amusing to watch the enemy trying to climb them, all the while you're just picking them off without breaking a sweat. Tbh, i'm going to start SRIV now (did an entire playthrough from SR2 onward with a female Boss), and then I feel like playing a Total War game again. Can't decide between trying another round of Empire or Third Age... 




Zyriel said:


> It's funny how sometimes the AI charges directly into pike formations, bayonets and such haha. I had a similar thing happen in Rome 2, except was totally ambushed in a forest. Was Iceni and strolling through Dacia lol (So really far lol) just 3 armies from out of nowhere haha and every direction. Ballista's sorta helped but they don't have the range to fire accurately on things that close lol. Chariot maneuvering, good formations holding with shield wall, and Chosen swordsmen to fight to the death^^


Damn your red letters lol, every time I want to type something after a quote my text turns red. :lol So did you win, or? I never take ballistae with me. Catapults at the most. 




Zyriel said:


> I think the firing rotations for line infantry is for that volley. Usually it was like intervals to keep the shots going while the others reloaded. It was developed out of pike and shot formations to protect the early musketeers (armed with an even slower loading arquebus or early muskets lol) from cavalry charges. Except over time, armies stopped equipping and training heavy cavalry, and the pikes stopped being used. Where the bayonet comes it, so it became sorta that same formation fighting against that same formation for centuries lol. Light cavalry was still around too but as like dragoons, as mounted, higher mobility infantry lol. I guess it's like before that too, in the Hellenistic days, Phalanx vs Phalanx and pikes vs pikes lol.


Yes, you're talking about fire by rank as it's called in the game. Every line fires, ducks down and reloads, then the next rank fires a volley, and so on, and so forth. It's a pretty cool sight, but it's still ****ing stupid to just line up. If I had my own brigade in those days, I'd totally order my troops to wear uniforms with a bull's eye at the front. :lol Great for morale, I think. You know, the first thing I usually do in Empire when it comes to Pikemen, is send them off into battle, storm the nearest enemy settlement along with the Militia, wait until i'm on the defense before I commit to actually fighting, hope they last long enough to do some damage during the enemy's charge, and then stop caring...




Zyriel said:


> Mmm yeah problem I had with Empire was my tactics I think lol. Especially on sieges or huge cluster**** melee's I like troops holding the line so I can maneuver other troops in and flank. Except with those light infantry style troops you have to rely more on mass units, than specific ones for certain tasks. I get frustrated lol.


Really? I found the sieges in Empire to be so easy I just pointed my artillery at the walls, had a drink and wait while the walls in front of me crumbled in several places and my artillery ran out of ammo, after which we'd just charge in and take the citadel/fort. 




Zyriel said:


> With your Iceni, lol that would be the problem. Painted Ones are more of flankers that can't withstand much melee vs heavier troops like Triarii. They can if veterans, high morale, or upgraded weapons and such. But still in a toe to toe battle, lack the stamina and armor for a slugfest except with shieldwall on. Even then, they're better to just hold an area, till they can be reinforced and cycled out. Better used to taking on other light troops, spears, skirmishers or as support to heavier troops, guarding the flanks.


No, that's the thing. My Painted Ones beat the Triarii into a bloody pulp, while charging and fighting said Triarii straight uphill! It didn't make sense to me. I was just trying to keep the Triarii busy to get my cavalry into position, and my cavalry was halfway across the field and the Triarii decided to bail lol. Smh. 




Zyriel said:


> I think it all depends on playstyle too per faction. I don't play well with some of the factions lol, (like in Empire pretty much all of them haha). I like heavier infantry that are versatile and specific units for specific tasks. So my armies become extremely specialized for their role and region. Like raiding, exploring, defending areas, or all out war, vanguard forces to set up forts, open warfare, or siege forces.



Hmm, I admit that that sounds more specialized than what I always do in a Total War game, and kudos for that lol. Personally I just prefer to build armies that have a strong core, with a few units thrown in that perform certain duties on the battlefield, but if said special units were lost, no biggie. We can do it the old fashioned way. I also let most of my armies travel in stacks of two once I developed a solid economy. One army that is more "siege" orientated, and another one better equipped for open field maneuvers. Sometimes, when I have a good position on the map, like in lots of forest, or very hilly terrain, I offer the enemy "bait", by sending a force that is, in sheer numbers at least, inferior to what the enemy has. And then you crush them with logic and sound tactics.




Zyriel said:


> LOL the female boss thing haha, but honestly a lot do tend to somewhat act like that. Well gangster type girls, and even non, ones in some areas like that lol.
> 
> I think it's because Saints Row 2 was probably more of a hit than 1 lol. So when you go back and play 1 it's like your missing a lot of the game haha. 2 did have a vast amount of open are and stuff though, the world in general compared to 3. Yeah I think you keyed on the main thing, the funny parts were in the right areas. Had dark humor and parodies in the radio stations, stores, and overall city/suburb life in the undertones lol. Like these:
> 
> ...


Yeah I hear ya. My current Boss is a kind of buff, tattooed alternative chick with piercings. In SR2 she was just plain butch lol, but in SR3/4, think Dani Andrews with black hair. Not exactly what I consider attractive, but I felt it made a bit more sense with the attitude, you know, as opposed to some preppy pretty girl.

Nah, I wouldn't say I "missed" a lot about Saints Row 1, actually, despite an overwhelming Pistol presence among gang members, resulting in other weapons, even uzi's, being more rare than in other games. Which is actually kind of realistic if you think about it. The only other things that I missed, like I said, was the presence of a female option, and checkpoints at decent points, but other than that I think SR 1 was a very enjoyable game.

Most commercials in the first two are just plain hilarious, I agree. And you're right; Corn Dog was so much cooler. "You like pop music? Go **** yourself!" I hope they bring back The Blood 106.66 in the next game.


----------



## Zyriel (May 20, 2011)

Metalunatic said:


> Ah you're right ofc! The Maratha Confederacy was Hindu. Maybe the Mugdal Empire too. Damn those guys were annoying when they demolished the Maratha's in my Dutch playthrough.


Mmm I don't know much about that time period. I think the Maratha might have been Hindu and Mugal were Muslim. I remember watching some documentary on the British Empire vs the Mugal Empire I think it was, and the problems with the coating for the ammunition for the time being either pork fat (insulting to Muslims) and cow fat (insulting to Hindus), which caused a lot of problems amongst the infantry. 



Metalunatic said:


> Stakes are awesome alright. They have saved me in so many battles, as well as line infantry with trenches. It's amusing to watch the enemy trying to climb them, all the while you're just picking them off without breaking a sweat. Tbh, i'm going to start SRIV now (did an entire playthrough from SR2 onward with a female Boss), and then I feel like playing a Total War game again. Can't decide between trying another round of Empire or Third Age...


Lol it's great dancing around it, serves as a good way to hold locations with less troops too xD

Haha, Total War games are so different for me trying to get into a faction lol. Like say between Third Age and Empire, I mentally need a different mindset @[email protected]



Metalunatic said:


> Damn your red letters lol, every time I want to type something after a quote my text turns red. :lol So did you win, or? I never take ballistae with me. Catapults at the most.


Haha, I just remove all the colors first lol yours does the [.color=black] lol. Oh yeah I won, lost most of that army though, huge casualties, pyrrhic victory! Was well worth it though, one army for three lol, plus all the troops became veterans and general leveled up xD That whole area in Dacia, I think I had to "whittle down" since they kept reinforcing their towns. So kept luring out their armies to border skirmishes with my smaller forces. Was at war with them (unknowingly since they ambushed my scouting force), Secluicid (pushed back), random Celtic tribes around the Black Sea, Steppe Tribes (invading the northern provinces), and a Rebellion in the east lol. So my armies were pretty stretched thin. Haha I always usually have at least 2 ballista per army once they're available^^



Metalunatic said:


> Really? I found the sieges in Empire to be so easy I just pointed my artillery at the walls, had a drink and wait while the walls in front of me crumbled in several places and my artillery ran out of ammo, after which we'd just charge in and take the citadel/fort.


Lol that's the way I do it too, demolish the walls. But pushing forces into the breaches, while they're defending them lol. Empire did have grappling hook things to scale the walls too though. That era eh, most of the fighting didn't make too much sense at all ~_~



Metalunatic said:


> No, that's the thing. My Painted Ones beat the Triarii into a bloody pulp, while charging and fighting said Triarii straight uphill! It didn't make sense to me. I was just trying to keep the Triarii busy to get my cavalry into position, and my cavalry was halfway across the field and the Triarii decided to bail lol. Smh.


Mm Triarii are the veteran spear unit mm? I think I was thinking of the higher veteran legionairres. Ahh yeah the cavalry for Iceni aren't that good unless they're the fully armored ones. They didn't have decent lancers if I remember right, the Noble Horse was better at actually fighting than charging. Then the regular mounted riders that looked like Painted Ones on horses were pretty light lol, I just used them for running down the enemy for the most part or dealing with skirmishers. I try to position my horsemen in like hidden flanking positions at the start of the battle to ambush the enemy lol. 



Metalunatic said:


> Hmm, I admit that that sounds more specialized than what I always do in a Total War game, and kudos for that lol. Personally I just prefer to build armies that have a strong core, with a few units thrown in that perform certain duties on the battlefield, but if said special units were lost, no biggie. We can do it the old fashioned way. I also let most of my armies travel in stacks of two once I developed a solid economy. One army that is more "siege" orientated, and another one better equipped for open field maneuvers. Sometimes, when I have a good position on the map, like in lots of forest, or very hilly terrain, I offer the enemy "bait", by sending a force that is, in sheer numbers at least, inferior to what the enemy has. And then you crush them with logic and sound tactics.



I sorta build around a theme I think instead of a core. I'm constantly changing or upgrading them though. I try to give it a general with strengths that will support the role of that particular army.

Yeah I kinda do that with my armies too the more "siege" focused as opposed to battlefield ones with more cavalry. Sometimes they have to hold out or maintain sieges for awhile though till I can reinforcements there. Especially against, larger empires with 3-4 field armies in addition to garrisons lol. So terrain and wearing them down till I can mobilize enough troops, I don't really like getting into those long drawn out wars with factions though lol. I try not to commit to full scale battles, since I end up usually being at war on multiple fronts lol. Need my armies to be ready to mobilize in key locations, yeah I rely on terrain mostly too especially per type of army. The battle location itself can be the difference between a victory or defeat. 



Metalunatic said:


> Yeah I hear ya. My current Boss is a kind of buff, tattooed alternative chick with piercings. In SR2 she was just plain butch lol, but in SR3/4, think Dani Andrews with black hair. Not exactly what I consider attractive, but I felt it made a bit more sense with the attitude, you know, as opposed to some preppy pretty girl.
> 
> Nah, I wouldn't say I "missed" a lot about Saints Row 1, actually, despite an overwhelming Pistol presence among gang members, resulting in other weapons, even uzi's, being more rare than in other games. Which is actually kind of realistic if you think about it. The only other things that I missed, like I said, was the presence of a female option, and checkpoints at decent points, but other than that I think SR 1 was a very enjoyable game.
> 
> Most commercials in the first two are just plain hilarious, I agree. And you're right; Corn Dog was so much cooler. "You like pop music? Go **** yourself!" I hope they bring back The Blood 106.66 in the next game.


Lmfao I haven't played a girl for the whole game through yet. I think I may, I used that Russian voice one. I couldn't sit through it for the most part though, I liked my Cockney (I think) guy accent better, especially for the comments.

Oh you brought up a good point, in Saints Row 2 I used mostly a pistol. Even when I had batter guns lol, not sure why, I liked getting perfect shots. Sometimes I had to use the assault rifle in those "oh ****" situations though lol just things everywhere haha. Yeah I like when things are more "evened" out, makes it more fun for me if everyone has gear at the same level.

Same I hope they do too, Lol Corndog! I can't believe they removed it at all though that 106.66, I mean wtf? That's just messed up, need variety! I did listen to some of the other stations though too, so funny classical music driving with a billion things chasing you haha xD I did like it when all the gangs were at war with each other made it interesting going into certain territories and they were already fighting.


----------



## Imbored21 (Jun 18, 2012)

Diablo 3
Every Mario Game


----------



## ocelot81 (Jun 1, 2013)

Destiny


----------



## sqrkbkwmqko (Sep 28, 2014)

Tales of Phantasia, when I completed the game because it was really good and I didn't want it to end. It got me depressed.


----------



## UndreamingAwake (Apr 11, 2011)

Zyriel said:


> Mmm I don't know much about that time period. I think the Maratha might have been Hindu and Mugal were Muslim. I remember watching some documentary on the British Empire vs the Mugal Empire I think it was, and the problems with the coating for the ammunition for the time being either pork fat (insulting to Muslims) and cow fat (insulting to Hindus), which caused a lot of problems amongst the infantry.


Yeah you're right, the Mughals were Muslim, and the Maratha's were Hindu. I just looked it up. Yeah, I picture a bunch of guys just standing there in formation, getting the order to fire. "Yeah sorry sir, i'm not going to fire my weapon. There's pig fat on my bullets!" Meanwhile, bullets are flying all around him. :lol



Zyriel said:


> Lol it's great dancing around it, serves as a good way to hold locations with less troops too xD
> 
> Haha, Total War games are so different for me trying to get into a faction lol. Like say between Third Age and Empire, I mentally need a different mindset @[email protected]


True, true. What are your thoughts on caltrops though? I never use those things. I find them inferior to either trenches or stakes in almost any situation.

Really? The concept is pretty much the same in every game in whatever time period they have made a game about to me tbh. You build your economy while harassing your enemies, forge alliances and trade agreements, make sure you keep naval superiority and build your forces. Then you draw battle lines, run up to the other guy, smash/shoot his face in, you plunder his cities, profit and repeat. :lol



Zyriel said:


> ...


There's a certain ironic charm to pyhrric victories, though. At the end of the day, you won, but in a way you also lost so much the cost was barely worth it, if at all. I tend to save the replays of those battles the most, right after grand Heroic Victory fights.

So what happened to get you in that position? Did you try to bargain or at least try some other form of diplomacy on any of the factions you got into a war with?



Zyriel said:


> Lol that's the way I do it too, demolish the walls. But pushing forces into the breaches, while they're defending them lol. Empire did have grappling hook things to scale the walls too though. That era eh, most of the fighting didn't make too much sense at all ~_~


Oh, when I see that the AI puts infantry in the breach, I turn my cannons on the infantry. I don't think i've ever used the grappling hooks lol.The only kind of siege I usually play out until they surrender due to starvation are the star fortresses, since they have a ****load of cannons in those towers, and i'm not going to sacrifice my soldiers.



Zyriel said:


> ...


Yeah, Triarii are the spearmen veterans before the Marian Reforms. Pretty cool units imo. Yeah I know man, their cavalry isn't exactly top of the line lol. Which suits me fine, since like I said i'm more of an infantry commander anyway, but what you describe about running down routers etc is usually the main thing I use cavalry for anyway (I think you're talking about Briton Scout Riders btw?) In the sword and steel periods I prefer a solid block of heavily armored warriors over any pompous noble on his "high horse", which is what I love about the Iceni, since they get generals that actually fight on foot.The thing I don't love about them is their complete lack of actual archers. They got slingers and... Javelin Skirmishers. Yay. Which is funny, because historically, I believe the Gauls (Arverni) had lots of archers, if you go by Caeser's accounts of his battles with them, yet in this game they, like the Iceni, also do not have archers. Wtf lol.



Zyriel said:


> ...


A theme? Like what? I'm not sure I get what you mean there lol. You mean like I used to make a full army of Arcani or Druids in Rome 1? :lol

Lol, I usually end up in nothing *but* full-scale war. Again, different playstyle I guess. It sucks that there's no multiplayer campaign before Napoleon (which I consider the second-most boring TW to date), otherwise it'd be cool to see how well it'd go if we teamed up against a VH/VH AI lol.

That actually kind of reminds me of this time in my Dutch Empire playthrough ("here he goes again" :lol) when I was still conquering Europe and had every faction turn itself on me in nearly rhythmic sequence lol. I was just done destroying Spain in Europe (he'd end up conquering about 65% of the Americas with the other 35% belonging to GB, however), and trying to root out the Italian States from Italy, whom proved to be surprisingly persistent. Meanwhile, my Prussian ally gets attacked by Austria (Poland-Lithuania got wiped out at the start of the game), who I was until then at peace with. Of course I stick by my allies, plus if Prussia had fallen, my north-eastern border would have been exposed to both Sweden and Austria. So now I have a war on two fronts, with coffers that were still recovering from my war with Spain. Suddenly, two turns after Austria attacked Prussia, Sweden decides to start hammering my third ally, Westphalia, who only had two provinces, the two directly below Denmark, forgot their names. 
So, again, of course I stick with my allies, plus I didn't want a bunch of "neutral" Swedes at my northern doorstep, ready to invade. Here's the cool part. Sweden sent two and a half full army stacks against Westphalia, who only had 1 and three-quarter full stacks. And he actually manages to *kick Sweden's **** all the way back to Sweden, and conquers Denmark in the process to boot. When I saw that I was like ":um k".

So I thought my northern border was secure again (big error on my part), and decided to keep hammering away at Italy and Austria, taking three of the latter's cities in the south. Two turns later, Sweden arrives back in Westphalia's land in force, and I have next to no armies to help him nearby. So I decide to try and bargain for a peace treaty between the three of us, with which he thankfully agreed. I finally manage to bring Italy to it's knees a few turns later, and decide to leave one of my armies in Italy, and send the rest, which was probably like three stacks or so, to the Westphalian border, because I kind of expected him to attack again soon, you know. And ofc Sweden decides to raid my naval trade route right above Holland 5 turns later.

I build more armies in the east, basically just zerging Austria with endless waves of Line Infantry and horse artillery (I love horse artillery, because of the mobility and all that) and some regiments of horse thrown in here and there for good measure. Beat his *** all the way back to Russia, while at the same time engaging Sweden, landing in Norway and Sweden via sea. I managed to push them back to Finland at the same time Austria tried surrendering. Which I didn't accept, since he was pretty much dead anyway. So a few turns later I crush Austria, only to have Prussia, who's *** I just saved and got into the war with Austria for in the first place, turn around and backstab me... I completely curb stomped him ofc. Can't let traitors live and all that. Two turns later, the Ottoman Empire (which pretty much spanned all of Turkey, Greece, Serbia, Romania and northern Africa at that point) decides to declare war on me. One turn later, I notice a Russian army standing on my border. I'm thinking "is he really going to be that stupid?" Yes, he was that stupid. Again, i'm fighting on three fronts, even further away from my industrial and martial centers where I could recruit the most effective units. I spent the better time of my campaign fighting off the Ottomans. Turns out Sweden and Russia had formed an alliance to fight me too lol. I was pulling my hair out at that point haha. Basically all the bigger European powers were attacking me, except GB who was my very passive ally throughout the game. The only thing he did was block Sweden's naval trade routes. Eventually Russia turned on Sweden for some reason (got greedy I guess), who, in turn, then proceeded to smack the living **** out of Russia, conquering all his territory. :lol So now I had two giant foes instead of one big one and two smaller ones. Anyway, I managed to destroy all of them in the end, but goddamn, got to give credit to those Caroleans for lasting as long as they did. They outlasted the Ottomans by, like, 8 years. Anyway, point in case, I know the feeling of having all the factions that matter in the game pretty much ganging up on you lol.



Zyriel said:


> ...


Oh yeah, I had the Russian voice the first time I made a chick in SR2 as well. I later switched over to Laura Bailey's voice.
The Cockney voice, is that the quirky Caucasian voice? If so, I had that one for my first Boss as well lol. It's hilarious as hell.

It's because dual wielding pistols just looks cool, especially if you have the GDHC .50 or Shepherd .44 guns, plus, like you said, it's pretty much 100% accurate in this game lol, especially when you use fine aim.

I hear ya, equal gear means that it all comes down to skill, which, at the end of the day, is what matters.

I'll be honest... I tried playing SRIV today, but I just can't, man. You're pretty much invincible within the first 5 hours of the game. It's nothing but jumping around gathering data clusters and spending it on powers and doing some activities. Most of the "Metal"/Rock songs are on GenX. What? That used to be such a lame station lol. Also, **** that DJ, The Tastemaker. No SRIV for me. It ended with the conquering of Steelport in SRTT as far as i'm concerned lol.


----------



## T Studdly (Jul 20, 2013)

*Dragon Age: Origins*

My friend praised this game so much and he bought it for me to play myself. Well, the story is nice I guess but the game play is just dry to me, feels like a chore to clear a room. I want to try DA2 as well as it looks less dry but everyone says it sucks compared to origins, now I want Inquisiton because that looks exciting as well but I want to complete Origins and Da2 to lock in my choices. No motivation though...

*Dead Island: Riptide*

I liked Dead Island, so me and a friend bought this to play co-op. Welp, beat it in one 11 hour sitting. There were a lot of new things that were cool, the new character didn't interest us though, we just played our characters from Dead Island 1. The story wasn't interesting to me as the first game was, and it felt boring for some reason.

*Bioshock Infinate*

This game was way too short tbh, beat 9 hours one sitting. I expected more, I didn't get the ending at all, and though it was fun there was absolutley no replay value to be honest. One of those games where I played once than uninstalled it and never touched it again.

*Dark Souls*

I was excited to play this because a lot of people said it was fun and I like a challenge, it wasn't the challenge that turned me off, it was just so boring. Eventually I got stuck at a boss with bad gear and no fire bombs and I just quit and uninstalled it. Not sure if I wanna try the second game.


----------



## Zyriel (May 20, 2011)

Metalunatic said:


> True, true. What are your thoughts on caltrops though? I never use those things. I find them inferior to either trenches or stakes in almost any situation.
> 
> Really? The concept is pretty much the same in every game in whatever time period they have made a game about to me tbh. You build your economy while harassing your enemies, forge alliances and trade agreements, make sure you keep naval superiority and build your forces. Then you draw battle lines, run up to the other guy, smash/shoot his face in, you plunder his cities, profit and repeat. :lol


It depends on what I'm fighting against, and the layout of the map/fort. I tend to like stakes and trenches more too. Although, sometimes slowing the enemy is crucial instead to keep them in the kill zone for artillery, or to slow advancement so shots get off.

Oh I understand the technical aspects of the game. It's more of the "atmosphere" to me, that takes mentally aligning with the proper mode of thought I would say lol. Independent of similar genre, I need to "feel" it I guess and be immersed in the world. Some games I can't feel, so I have difficulty actually caring about to finish, if I can't relate to the cause I'm fighting for, faction, or identify with any characters. 



Metalunatic said:


> There's a certain ironic charm to pyhrric victories, though. At the end of the day, you won, but in a way you also lost so much the cost was barely worth it, if at all. I tend to save the replays of those battles the most, right after grand Heroic Victory fights.
> 
> So what happened to get you in that position? Did you try to bargain or at least try some other form of diplomacy on any of the factions you got into a war with?


Yeah I save most of those victories too on replays too lol. I just end up forgetting which was which ~_~

In that particular battle, even though it was labeled a pyhrric victory, it was well worth the effort. Significantly weakening multiple armies, which left the provincial capital pretty much defenseless (aside from garrison troops) for my siege army and my field army to move forward and prevent any reinforcements from other settlements.

I tend to not bargain with enemies unless they're willing to concede to becoming client states. Or pay a large sum of gold if I need it lol. If not, there's no use, they waged war on me, they will fall and be utterly crushed^^



Metalunatic said:


> Oh, when I see that the AI puts infantry in the breach, I turn my cannons on the infantry. I don't think i've ever used the grappling hooks lol.The only kind of siege I usually play out until they surrender due to starvation are the star fortresses, since they have a ****load of cannons in those towers, and i'm not going to sacrifice my soldiers.


Ahh, I like surrounding my enemies so they can't retreat or cycle troops out/in or regroup. I want their spirits crushed, and morale broken so the battle doesn't take longer than it should.

I hardly force the enemy to surrender, unless I have a full cavalry army or something lol. Takes too long on my own forces outside of garrisons, hate the upkeep cost ~_~ I usually take out the towers first too (unless they can be captured easily and used against the enemy), and attack at multiple locations to spread their defenses thin. The AI usually falls back to the center, which allows the artillery (if there's any ammo left lol) to fire into that focused location (often ruins the city though ~_~ which /sigh costs a lot to repair after). That's exactly why I love shock troops, I expect them to get into the fray and win the day lol. Like this:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Forlorn_hope

And also why in games like Empire, they route for me haha. I expect to much from them I suppose. I like having my vanguard ready to charge in and take the day, banners waving! Just a brutal onslaught in the glorious charge to victory xD



Metalunatic said:


> ...


I tend to like infantry too, especially heavy infantry.

Yeah Scout Riders lol the mounted Painted Ones :b

Interesting view on cavalry lol with the "high horse" haha. Heavy cavalry does have it's uses, especially flanking and smashing enemy formations. I've had a few games with just the general alone, take out multiple groups of light infantry during sieges and such. Or cause the enemy to route from one well placed charge during the thick of a 50-50 battle, when outnumbered, to turn the tide.

Yeah especially since the Iceni are Britan Celts, I thought were known for longbowmen ! I gotta play as Averni still! They usually get decimated quickly on most of the games I've played lol. I do like archers, especially heavier ones. In Medieval 2, The Byzantine Empire had Guard Archers and Trebizond Archers. Mm in Broken Crescent too, Georgia had nice Archers, mostly dismounted horse ones in full armor, so were good for guarding flanks of your formation, and could be used for melee after they ran out of ammo.



Metalunatic said:


> A theme? Like what? I'm not sure I get what you mean there lol. You mean like I used to make a full army of Arcani or Druids in Rome 1? :lol
> 
> Lol, I usually end up in nothing *but* full-scale war. Again, different playstyle I guess. It sucks that there's no multiplayer campaign before Napoleon (which I consider the second-most boring TW to date), otherwise it'd be cool to see how well it'd go if we teamed up against a VH/VH AI lol.


Ohh no no lol not massed units, well somewhat. Like a focus of the army, what their objective will be. Like my field armies are mostly cavalry, fast moving, with mounted archers to fight in open fields unhindered (if the faction allows). Siege armies are composed of mostly heavy infantry to take the walls with high stamina and morale. Support/rearguard armies usually have defensive units, more artillery, etc. Full scale armies are like a mix, depending on the specific General's traits, and more versatile to fight on any terrain. Depends on the faction though, but also what I'm fighting against in terms of strengths/weaknesses and the overall terrain.

That's an interesting concept lol, especially since playstyles are so different haha. 



Metalunatic said:


> ...


I read all of that lol just shortened it. Epic battles or rather campaigns sir lol, I tend to rely more on culture and relations in the meta game I think. Usually focus on economy and diplomacy first so I don't get drawn into huge wars lol. Which I end up getting into anyway, but usually through alliances or ones that break due to rival factions within my own alliance or an over aggressive faction that seems to think their arms can reach anywhere lol.

Towards the mid game there are usually 3-4 main alliance groups though, which target each other. When one faction gets large enough though, all the diplomacy in the world doesn't seem to matter, they just will attack anyone lol. I tend to keep spies all around though, and dignitaries/priests to spread culture/religion around near my borders. It sorta allows you to see where your enemies are, even before they wage war lol. Trade usually secures most alliances though, as well as giving away border provinces (prior to Rome 2 lol). Client states help out as well^^ Yeah I know what you mean, when one faction is small yet holds out forever haha like the little island ones, much respect to those!




Metalunatic said:


> Oh yeah, I had the Russian voice the first time I made a chick in SR2 as well. I later switched over to Laura Bailey's voice.
> The Cockney voice, is that the quirky Caucasian voice? If so, I had that one for my first Boss as well lol. It's hilarious as hell.
> 
> It's because dual wielding pistols just looks cool, especially if you have the GDHC .50 or Shepherd .44 guns, plus, like you said, it's pretty much 100% accurate in this game lol, especially when you use fine aim.
> ...


Lol yeah it's the British sounding one, that is *the* Boss to me haha, says stuff like "You just got knocked the **** out mate!"

Yup aiming down the sites, even turning behind you while your driving just headshots constantly haha.

I need to finish it sometime lol. The story isn't that bad, I think it's somewhat of the gameplay to me too, not really sure what it is. 



Metalunatic said:


> That all actually does sound promising, giving more tactical depth to the game.It would be interesting to see a World War 1 Total War one of these days.


I just saw this right now lol I find that curious too, it would be an interesting game to say the least. The combat was so different since times were changing. There was still cavalry running around, yet trenches and machine guns. It went from the era of "honor" and "courage" on the battlefield with banners, charging into the fray, to mines, machine guns, mustard gas in trench warfare. Those prop planes flying around, and zeppelins. Mmm Company of Heroes you might find interesting. It uses a lot of cover mechanics and line of sight, for infantry, in a WW2 setting.


----------



## Zyriel (May 20, 2011)

T Studdly said:


> *Dragon Age: Origins*
> 
> My friend praised this game so much and he bought it for me to play myself. Well, the story is nice I guess but the game play is just dry to me, feels like a chore to clear a room. I want to try DA2 as well as it looks less dry but everyone says it sucks compared to origins, now I want Inquisiton because that looks exciting as well but I want to complete Origins and Da2 to lock in my choices. No motivation though...


I know what you mean about Origins in terms of game play. It takes awhile to get used too. If/when you do though, the game has great potential for strategic thinking, and building up your party. It feels like a "raid" somewhat from an MMO, except you're controlling all the characters lol, and can equip them accordingly. The true charm is in the story and character development, dialog, lore, interactions with characters, etc.

DA2 still has the character charm, but lacks a lot of the (what you originally hated about it lol). The combat is faster or at least animations, but loses a lot of the strategic aspects, planning, equipping, that made Origins what it was lol. 



T Studdly said:


> *Dark Souls*
> 
> I was excited to play this because a lot of people said it was fun and I like a challenge, it wasn't the challenge that turned me off, it was just so boring. Eventually I got stuck at a boss with bad gear and no fire bombs and I just quit and uninstalled it. Not sure if I wanna try the second game.


I've heard that a lot too lol about the "challenge". I have yet to really sit down and get into it. Took so much just to get the controls working properly for me lol, not sure if I have the will (or rather attention span lol) to invest into building up a character haha.

I tend to like games that rely more on skill than gear, and things that are grindy, I usually lose interest in if there is no end goal, something to figure out (story-character wise), or I have some personal challenge (in terms of skill) I feel I need to "prove" to myself lol or something to test (spec-build). So thanks for the heads up there^^


----------



## UndreamingAwake (Apr 11, 2011)

Zyriel said:


> ...


Maybe I just suck at deploying caltrops, but I never noticed they had much of an effect on anyone lol. I'll test it out in a custom battle today though. I'll go red line corner hugging while having all units capable of it drop caltrops in front of my lines.

Yeah I get what you're saying now lol. Like Shogun 2. I generally don't care too much for samurai and stuff. It was really boring. I think I gave up after 10 turns. I got to say that after Empire, most Total War games haven't been what I expected anyway, including Rome 2, which is regrettable since I was looking very much forward to that one. And Napoleon was basically just a rip-off of Empire with less factions and units that looked a bit different.



Zyriel said:


> ...


As for replays... I wanted to record a few with Bandicam and post 'em, since I had this replay saved from two days ago where I fought in the Carribean against the pirates with 1 unit of those Native American Musketeers on horseback, an inexperienced general and 6 units of Militia against 9 units of Buccaneers while defending against him as he sallied forth from his town I was besieging (this game is on H/H). I won the battle with 10 General's Bodyguard, and during the last charge on the last group of Buccaneers my General gets shot. :lol I was lucky they didn't break. I pretty much had to fight half the battle with the General's unit and the Missile Cavalry by dividing his group up first, then pull him further apart, and as soon as a group was isolated, charge them from both sides and hope you crush them before the other groups reached them. I learned a lesson there; one does not simply use Militia as Line Infantry. They broke after 5 minutes or so.




Zyriel said:


> ...


You completely surround your enemies? Huh. Have you never read Sun Tzu's The Art of War, brother?! :lol Nah, i'm being a know-it-all jackass right but now, but seriously, always leave the enemy an opening to retreat through, because units that are fighting to the death are stronger than usual, which is reflected in games. I usually let them retreat, then chase and cut them down as they flee. That way there is no resistance anymore, and those that escape are usually not making up too big of a number anyway anymore.

Upkeep shouldn't be a huge problem though, when you got your tradeship routes established and guarded, and enough trade agreements? Granted, in my current campaign I got nearly bankrupt yesterday because three different factions decide to block my naval trade routes and ports.

Yeah that's what I miss in Empire though, although logical considering the period and weapons used: the skirmishes in those Huge cities, like the Rome map in Rome 1.

I read that Forlorn Hope bit. It's funny to read that that term actually came from Dutch. I never would have guessed, but after reading it, i'm thinking that actually makes a lot of sense lol.




Zyriel said:


> ...


Oh, don't get me wrong, definitely cavalry has it's uses, but at the end of the day nothing beats a solid block of footsloggers. The only places where i'd rather have cavalry are on steppes and in deserts, which is why I usually avoid attacking factions in those places unless i've either no choice through them declaring war on me or there being nothing else to conquer.

Yes, my favorite tactic too, to keep the enemy occupied on one side, and while they're fighting you just ram the cavalry in their flank or rear. Sometimes I like to charge in the enemy settlement while they're retreating from outside the settlement back to safety. That way there's a good chance they'll capture the gatehouse, allowing my infantry to enter the city.




Zyriel said:


> Ohh no no lol not massed units, well somewhat. Like a focus of the army, what their objective will be. Like my field armies are mostly cavalry, fast moving, with mounted archers to fight in open fields unhindered (if the faction allows). Siege armies are composed of mostly heavy infantry to take the walls with high stamina and morale. Support/rearguard armies usually have defensive units, more artillery, etc. Full scale armies are like a mix, depending on the specific General's traits, and more versatile to fight on any terrain. Depends on the faction though, but also what I'm fighting against in terms of strengths/weaknesses and the overall terrain.
> 
> That's an interesting concept lol, especially since playstyles are so different haha.


Interesting that you have full cavalry armies. How very Scythian of you. :lol I tried playing that faction and I honestly thought there was way too much space needed to command such an army effectively in the confines of a Total War battlefield, but that might just be me.




Zyriel said:


> I read all of that lol just shortened it. Epic battles or rather campaigns sir lol, I tend to rely more on culture and relations in the meta game I think. Usually focus on economy and diplomacy first so I don't get drawn into huge wars lol. Which I end up getting into anyway, but usually through alliances or ones that break due to rival factions within my own alliance or an over aggressive faction that seems to think their arms can reach anywhere lol.
> 
> Towards the mid game there are usually 3-4 main alliance groups though, which target each other. When one faction gets large enough though, all the diplomacy in the world doesn't seem to matter, they just will attack anyone lol. I tend to keep spies all around though, and dignitaries/priests to spread culture/religion around near my borders. It sorta allows you to see where your enemies are, even before they wage war lol. Trade usually secures most alliances though, as well as giving away border provinces (prior to Rome 2 lol). Client states help out as well^^ Yeah I know what you mean, when one faction is small yet holds out forever haha like the little island ones, much respect to those!


What difficulty do you usually play on? Not asking that to compare skills or anything, but because I noticed that the higher the difficulty is, the less you can rely on your allies staying your allies. For example, I was not allied with the Ottoman Empire. We were on "very friendly" standing with each other, had trade agreements etc. Out of the blue, he declares war of me, and my "very friendly" GB ally decides to join him instead of me. Of course I just sent three massive armies, all at the same time, to the British Isles and crush all three of his capitols in the same turn. I wiped out GB in one single turn after they betrayed me. No way am I relying on my allies again. :lol The only two, so far, reliable allies I have in this campaign are Austria and the Maratha Confederacy.

Well, Sweden wasn't exactly a small empire, spanning all of Scandinavia and all of Russia and Ukraine on the campaign map. In this campaign, Savoy (which is one of those city-states) already controls 5 provinces.  I've never seen one of those factions do that much before lol. He even has a colony in Africa now, right next to Morocco, which is mine. :lol

You do that too huh? Sending preachers and stuff to cause religious uprisings in the enemy provinces. I love that stuff. I make sure every big province has the capability to train those.

Lol it's so annoying to have those AIs constantly demanding their just conquered territory back from me along with a peace treaty, right after *they* started the war. I'm like "*****, gtfo of my face, you wanted a war, you got one" lol. I think the only client state I managed to have was Hungary, after I took all but one territory from him. I tried more often, but usually they prefer to fight to the bitter end. In games outside of Empire it never worked for me once. Or maybe i'm better at shotgun diplomacy as opposed to actual diplomacy.

I know about those expansionist nations, right? It's funny, because my alliances sometimes break over my "territorial expansion", but the only reason I do that is because people keep starting **** with me, and I just defend myself by sacking and claiming all their lands. :lol What do they expect me to do if they attack me? Sit back with my super defensive army that I can't afford because I don't own enough land to support that army? Logic.




Zyriel said:


> Lol yeah it's the British sounding one, that is *the* Boss to me haha, says stuff like "You just got knocked the **** out mate!"
> 
> Yup aiming down the sites, even turning behind you while your driving just headshots constantly haha.
> 
> I need to finish it sometime lol. The story isn't that bad, I think it's somewhat of the gameplay to me too, not really sure what it is.


Yes, that one! He's genius. Wait, you never finished Saints Row 2 or the series in general?




Zyriel said:


> I just saw this right now lol I find that curious too, it would be an interesting game to say the least. The combat was so different since times were changing. There was still cavalry running around, yet trenches and machine guns. It went from the era of "honor" and "courage" on the battlefield with banners, charging into the fray, to mines, machine guns, mustard gas in trench warfare. Those prop planes flying around, and zeppelins. Mmm Company of Heroes you might find interesting. It uses a lot of cover mechanics and line of sight, for infantry, in a WW2 setting.


Yeah, if you think about it, warfare in this day and age is so much more cowardly compared to the old-fashioned line and smash/shoot 'em up. Company of Heroes huh? Just looked it up on google, it definitely looks interesting. I'll check the game out, thanks!

Damn character limit.


----------



## Sinatra (Mar 13, 2013)

Dead Island


----------



## Zyriel (May 20, 2011)

Metalunatic said:


> caltrops


Mmm I guess it would depend on the map itself and the amount of troops you're facing. When the enemy funnels into one area (which it usually does) the placement of it can create a potential kill zone. In terms of WoW, it's like a frost aura trap with entrapment for Hunters. Placed in a decent choke point, it creates a kill zone to slow, frustrate, and pick off enemy players as long as they're kept busy within it. 



Metalunatic said:


> Yeah I get what you're saying now lol. Like Shogun 2.


Haha I'm the opposite there in terms of the mentality/aesthetic of Samurai culture, except I felt the same with Shogun 2 mm it just felt too similar, all the factions. Besides the different banners, passive bonuses, and my liking of certain Warlords/Clans during that period lol. The gameplay was rather bland.

I guess insular societies are like that, which is what I found sorta bleh about Empire too, similar playstyles for each faction, which limits my ability to create my own lol. Feel forced into having do something ~_~ 



Metalunatic said:


> I learned a lesson there; one does not simply use Militia as Line Infantry. They broke after 5 minutes or so.


Ahhh haha I've had that happen a lot, losing a general in the thick of fighting, especially in Medieval 2, sometimes right at the end of the battle too haha. I try not to use my general unless I have to though, but if there's no other option and that cavalry is needed, then I just risk it. Whether he wins or dies doesn't matter to me, if you're on the verge of losing or fighting superior numbers, then courage and tactics win the day xD

Yeah militia does that lol, I've won a few iffy defense battles in Rome 2 with mostly those militia type spearmen, forgot the name, farmers and levy freeman I think lol. Mainly holding chokepoints and trying to maneuver whatever other troops I had to take out the ranged and stall or peel off heavier troops lol. 



Metalunatic said:


> You completely surround your enemies? Huh. Have you never read Sun Tzu's The Art of War, brother?! :lol


Haha not always, touche with the Art of War too there xD Most of the time, I try to though. It depends on the game in general or the map in specifics, and what I have to work with in terms of army makeup for both my army and the enemies. Sometimes it's better to push through in one area, also depends on the artillery or siege I have.

In Total War games though, the enemy (especially in melee) tends to get "shaken" when they're surrounded or see enemies to the side/behind them. So it's important to outflank them whenever possible. That's why I like heavy infantry too, they usually have decent charge, stamina, morale to "push" through the melee without losing too many casualties. Most of those large fights are push/shove matches lol and why the Romans/Hellentistic factions with "fight as formation" is extremely useful to holding key choke points. The Barbarian factions melee is far superior in damage, with frenzy and headhunting, often times in morale and stamina too if they can break an enemy formation. Except they don't fight as a unit and get split part apart easily by cavalry or other melee since they fight like a mob of individual warriors instead of with group cohesion. I try to user spearmen or other troops to support their flanks, and use them to "break" enemy formations through trying to constantly maneuver them into positions and keep their formation , a lot of microing haha. 



Metalunatic said:


> Upkeep shouldn't be a huge problem though, when you got your tradeship routes established and guarded, and enough trade agreements?


It's not too much upkeep itself, I'm just cheap and don't like spending lol. I like having a surplus since I often "switch" the focus of certain provinces to create a more efficient economy for the faction overall. Creating closer barracks, blacksmiths and such to the frontlines. Which sometimes creates problems having enough food, growth, and happiness for populations. Plus I tend to fund ally factions a lot too, so they fight proxy wars on the fringes of my empire to guard my borders lol. 




Metalunatic said:


> I read that Forlorn Hope bit. It's funny to read that that term actually came from Dutch. I never would have guessed, but after reading it, i'm thinking that actually makes a lot of sense lol.


Haha yeah, back when your country was an Empire probably lol. I learned the term from Medieval 2, the Holy Roman Empire had this insane 2handed sword unit equipped with a Zweihander I would use a lot of lol:

http://www.twcenter.net/wiki/Forlorn_Hope_(M2TW_Unit)


----------



## Zyriel (May 20, 2011)

Metalunatic said:


> The only places where i'd rather have cavalry are on steppes and in deserts, which is why I usually avoid attacking factions in those places unless i've either no choice through them declaring war on me or there being nothing else to conquer.
> 
> Interesting that you have full cavalry armies. How very Scythian of you. :lol


Lmfao Scythian of me xD I played them in Rome 1 until the huns just totally wiped me off the map for the most part lol. Yeah I hear that lol, there's been a few factions I liked that were mostly Cavalry. In Medieval 2, France and Poland. France later in the game gets dismounted Knights and Voulgier (polearm unit) to deal with sieges and such. Cavalry is usually high upkeep too, and just fails at taking cities especially with mass pikemen/spearmen in choke points. Mm which makes me think about playing one of those Steppe nomad factions (have yet to) in Rome 2. I just hate having no versatility though ><! Feels like playing a shadow priest or something, lots of bang, yet go oom and hardly any utility lol.




Metalunatic said:


> What difficulty do you usually play on? Not asking that to compare skills or anything, but because I noticed that the higher the difficulty is, the less you can rely on your allies staying your allies.


It depends on the faction. Some Very Hard if it's considered "easy" some "Hard" if it's harder. I've had to play medium for map, and very hard for gameplay though on certain ones where it's just non stop invasions from every direction. In Medieval 2 for example playing as Lithuania vs Teutonic Order on Very Hard was just frustrating as hell lol. Whole game, no matter what I did, I never really gained any ground. Crippled economy from the start, held certain provinces, had to abandon some from the giant onslaught lol. Same with Spain, played on Very Hard, yet "failed" the Grand Campaign, didn't take certain places for the objective lol. Ended up getting in wars with factions I shouldn't have, went to war with the Papal States for example haha, controlled most of Europe though. Same with some Nomad style factions in mods lol, just keep getting more and more in debt and upkeep on harder difficulties, even raiding settlements and such. Eventually everyone else is advancing, getting armies, and you can't get out of debt to stabilize yours at all lol or I just fail at playing those factions :b

Yeah usually larger factions or ones similar to your size will betray you lol. A lot goes off your "reputation" too with other factions. Some are "deceitful", "steadfast" etc. It really pisses me off when I go to war for an ally, then they make peace in few turns, sometime ally later in the game, and I'm still at war with them lol.



Metalunatic said:


> Well, Sweden wasn't exactly a small empire, spanning all of Scandinavia and all of Russia and Ukraine on the campaign map.


That's true lol Sweden was pretty powerful in the past haha, left their influence. So did a lot of countries though like Portugal and Venice during the middle ages too. Sparta in classical times. I really hate having those colonial style Empires, it makes logistics a nightmare @[email protected] I'm not the best "pirate" I guess lol I invade a lot by sea, but more of transportation and blockading ports, not something constant haha. In Rome 2, Rhodes and Sardes or Syracuse are like that. 




Metalunatic said:


> Sending preachers and stuff to cause religious uprisings in the enemy provinces. I love that stuff. I make sure every big province has the capability to train those.


Yup lol, culture is usually one of my focuses, I usually have certain areas for a "focus" of it though, with shrines everywhere that help the local economy. I like having a happy populace so I don't have to worry about putting down revolts. Need the propaganda machine working :b




Metalunatic said:


> In games outside of Empire it never worked for me once. Or maybe i'm better at shotgun diplomacy as opposed to actual diplomacy.


Yeah those ones are annoying lol, get all haughty about it too. It takes a lot of "work" over time lol. In Medieval 2 a higher level diplomat helps, plus merchants that controlled key resources on the map. Empire I actually had some difficulty with diplomacy lol I guess because of the time haha, same with Shogun 2, lower amount of factions too. Rome 2 with the trade agreements, and territorial or cultural negotiations^^



Metalunatic said:


> :lol What do they expect me to do if they attack me? Sit back with my super defensive army that I can't afford because I don't own enough land to support that army? Logic.


Lol I think that's how a lot of the middle ages were. Robber Barons, putting up these "trade posts" so they could embezzle taxes from people. Then moving troops, etc. and expect you to pay for stuff lol. I guess that's also why marriage proposals and such were used to broker agreements. Another thing in medieval 2, princesses lol that help secure alliances. I guess logic will always be trumped by greed haha, they AI often just looks for pretexts for war. 



Metalunatic said:


> Damn character limit.


I finished SR2 and 3, didn't finish 4 though lol.

Ahh NP, you'll probably like it. It's more tactical than say Empire, terrain is really important, using cover, setting up machine gun nests, snipers, creating lines of fire. You can garrison troops in houses and use grenades to flush them out. Smoke grenades obscure shooting, etc. Dawn of War is like that too, but has a lot of melee and such which sorta trumps the ideas of positioning lol, since some units can just take massive amounts of punishment.

Yeah character limit is a ***** haha. Mm sorry to the rest of the people who view/use this thread too for taking up so much space haha. I cut down a lot of the text too, edited my replies as well, still walls of text ~_~


----------



## Kind Of (Jun 11, 2014)

I bought Space Hack for 19 cents and have literally 3 minutes logged. It's like an MMO seen through the eyes of a 10-year-old with incredibly bad taste.

P.S. Do not give it to your 10-year-old. They will run away from home.


----------



## UndreamingAwake (Apr 11, 2011)

Zyriel said:


> ...


Yeah that's what I found when I tried it out the other day. Some environments it's practically useless, but I found it became a bit more usable in hilly terrain, particularly with hills that are impassable in some places. Yay for an (circumstantial) extra tool of warfare at my disposal.




Zyriel said:


> ...


Yes, exactly my point man! All the factions pretty much had the same units. Which, I guess is true for Empire to a degree, especially the European factions, but since i'm also not that into the whole samurai era, it was extra boring to me. I also wasn't a fan of how they did the campaign map in terms of art used. It literally felt like I was playing on a tabletop with an environment made out of paper. And that's coming from someone who actually used to play Warhammer on tabletops (since you mentioned that down the line, more on that later lol).




Zyriel said:


> ...


I agree. Sometimes victory belongs to the stupid and reckless as opposed to the careful and calculating. I tend to leave my general either behind my archers, whom I usually leave behind my spearmen in those time periods or right next to my cannons in Early Modern TW games.

Best hope you have some solid ranged in that case, yeah. I've done it a few times too, holding off superior armies in terms of training, equipment and even sheer numbers by using some solid missile troops. Particularly in Medieval 2 when playing the English. Those Longbowmen you mentioned, awesome troops. Or just get some good Pavise crossbowmen in there if you lack those. In Rome, I prefer to use troops that carry around javelins though. There's nothing more amusing than having the enemy charge up to you, have all your units set to fire at will and watching the javelins rain down, causing the enemy to rout even before you have to touch them in melee. Which is why, if i'm playing as the Romans for example, I will often have a few units of Velites in my armies as opposed to all of them being auxiliary archers.




Zyriel said:


> ...



You should read it if you're interested in that sort of thing, man. I swear that some of that advice actually helped me get better at Total War games lol. Hell, there's people learning from it in modern militaries, in business, you name it. I have it in digital format on my phone. Anyway, to be honest with you, speaking of army makeup, I have to admit that a lot of the most memorable battles were where I was defending against an invading nation and I had to scramble a semi-organized ragtag bunch of units together to fend them off.




Zyriel said:


> ...


Lmao @"I'm just cheap and don't like spending." At most of my turn ends i'll have a depleted treasury tbh. I am constantly upgrading my buildings, farms, docks, recruiting troops. I like to keep my entire empire churning and grinding like a non-stop war machine. That's why I want a strong economy. You don't want your war machine to collapse under the strain of the upkeep. "Oh, you can actually stand against one of my armies? That's ok, here's another one for ya!" Hey, what can I say, I played Imperial Guard on the 40k tabletop and in Dawn of War. Just keep throwing men at them and they're bound to eventually fall over and die, right? :lol 
I often train enough armies to besiege at least 50% of a large faction's cities in one turn, or 100% of them if the faction is smaller, and then just crush them in one or two turns, without them having the ability to fight back. And if they sally forth while i'm laying siege, even better. I'm super comfortable on the defensive. I should really work on my attacking strategies though, since they're far from flawless. Of course, I try to make sure my empire connects physically, although playing Empire repeatedly has taught me a lot on being able to fight on different fronts at the same time. For example, I am currently playing as the Dutch again, and you start with territory in all three theaters. I left India alone for now and still only have my starting province there, but i've conquered all of mainland Europe, North-western Africa and the southern part of the Americas at the same time.

You know, I actually feel like recording a massive Empire Total War battle, make a youtube vid out of it, and put some Iced Earth's Gettysburg music behind the video. That would be glorious. I modified the unit size to 400 per unit yesterday. Unfortunately it hasn't passed over to my current campaign, but when I start a new one i'm going to enjoy those massive battles lol.




Zyriel said:


> ...


We've never been a real "empire" in the typical sense. I mean, we had colonies and all that, but a trade empire would be a better word, I guess. During the 17th century we had our Golden Age. We pretty much dominated all the trade in the world.

Ah yeah, Zweihanders. I would recruit a bunch of those guys, stick them behind my main line, and as soon as the enemy had made melee contact i'd fan them out and pincer the enemy with a charge in the flank. Serious casualties from those guys. Varangian Guard are another example of those awesome units that have such an amazing hard-hitting capability.



Zyriel said:


> ...




Lol. Agreed, they were a very difficult faction to play without being overrun, and especially when you're fighting those more disciplined factions like Greeks or Romans. And yes, there's the sieges... Good luck getting that battering ram to the gate or those ladders at the walls when those jackasses can't even be bothered to get off of their horses and help push lol. A Shadow Priest, lmao. Shadow Priests are... Idk, I found it a boring class. Have one at 80, but never bothered to level her after that.




Zyriel said:


> ...


Oh you tried that too huh, playing Lithuanians against the TO on VH/VH? Yeah... I practically had my *** handed to me there too. Like you, I had problems with my economy, could hardly afford a unit, upgrade my buildings... Glad to see it isn't just me! Then I tried to play the TO on VH/VH, and, though it was a bit rough in early game, I practically smashed through everything and everyone around mid-game.

It's hilarious that you got into a war with the Papacy though. I hate that so ****ing much. All those rebel Popes once you crush them... It's like every few ****ing years there's a rebellious holy man rising up trying to usurp Italy. :lol What mods are you talking about with the nomad factions? Do you just mean the all-factions mod or..?




Zyriel said:


> ...


Yeah, Sweden was pretty badass in the day. Vikings, Caroleans... How times change. Sorry to any Swedes reading this, but I just think you guys should return to your roots instead of what you've become! :lol

As for colonial empires, yeah, go play the United Provinces in Empire lol, and you're pretty much forced to play in at least two different theaters and keep up your colonies. Of course, the first thing I do around turn two is make alliances with all those city states, Austria and Prussia, and then declare war on the Spanish and French. That way you can take their territory in both the Americas and Europe.



Zyriel said:


> ...




Of course! Make yourself seem like a super benign ruler by exempting them from taxes for a year or two while repairing the buildings, spread the word "All hail Zyriel!", "Praise Metalunatic!"and all that sort of ****, and then repress them by making them pay Very High taxes, recruiting every able bodied person in the country and send them off to fight and conquer, muahahah! Or, you know, you can keep the population happy like you suggest and not have rebellions on your hands. I learned that the hard way after putting taxes up to Very High in Medieval 2 while I was playing the English. I had conquered pretty much the entire map, and suddenly I have a civil war on my hands. :lol Ah well, at least it prolonged the game a bit.




Zyriel said:


> ...


Ah yeah, I kind of miss having to actually control a diplomat and sending them off to some random town and barter. In later games they give you a high-tech telepathic headset that allows you to communicate with leaders halfway across the globe to ask if they maybe want to trade or gang up on a faction you both are at war with.




Zyriel said:


> ...


Yes, that's true. Greed will always have come before acting like a human being for a lot of people, especially for people in places of power. Power corrupts, after all. Which is why the only people in power should be the ones that don't want it if you ask me...


----------



## UndreamingAwake (Apr 11, 2011)

Zyriel said:


> I finished SR2 and 3, didn't finish 4 though lol.
> 
> Ahh NP, you'll probably like it. It's more tactical than say Empire, terrain is really important, using cover, setting up machine gun nests, snipers, creating lines of fire. You can garrison troops in houses and use grenades to flush them out. Smoke grenades obscure shooting, etc. Dawn of War is like that too, but has a lot of melee and such which sorta trumps the ideas of positioning lol, since some units can just take massive amounts of punishment.
> 
> Yeah character limit is a ***** haha. Mm sorry to the rest of the people who view/use this thread too for taking up so much space haha. I cut down a lot of the text too, edited my replies as well, still walls of text ~_~




Yeah I don't blame ya lol. SRIV is just pure **** in my opinion. Don't expect much from Gat Out Of Hell either...

Sounds good, which makes me think of Brothers in Arms. have you ever played that series? I loved Hell's Highway. It's basically a tactical FPS where you are an American (Staff) Sergeant with his squad, whom you can give orders around the battlefield. It's set in WW2, in Holland (including an excessive amount of windmills... :lol), during the time of Operation Market Garden. It's pretty realistic in that it's not a run and gun game, but cover-based. Stick your head out when the enemy is still firing at you, and you've got a good chance you'll get your top blown off. You have an MG team, a bazooka team, assault team, recon team, and you need to place them across the battlefield, all the while you're under fire from the enemy. Once you finished it, you get Authentic mode. No crosshair, no ammo bar, no map or radar. Just you, your gun, your squad and your instincts.

Glad to see more of the faithful, battle-brother. Lol. I played Dawn of War, Winter Assault, the second expansion I didn't really care for and Dawn of War 2. I loved the first one and Winter Assault though. It made me play tabletop 40k actually. I had a Sisters of Battle and Imperial Guard army (It was the Sisters Repentia that made me include them. Hey, don't judge me, I was 16. :lol) I always thought the 40k universe was so hilariously gritty. "In the grim darkness of the far future, there is ONLY WAR!" It's like they try to be so super badass that you just can't take it seriously anymore. 
Seriously though, best cover in DoW? Craters! Lol. Readily available, and usually give solid defensive bonuses.

Anyway, I had an IG footslogger army consisting of Armageddon Steel Legion Guardsmen, Catachans and Cadians. I always wanted to get some Death Korps of Krieg in there too, those look awesome with the WW1 styled artillery and gasmasks and ****. Pity Forge World sold them for those insane prices. Sold it this past summer to pay for stuff I needed. I also had 4 LotR armies. Gondor (which was my main army), Angmar/Mordor, Isengard and Galadhrim.

Haha, yeah we did kind of hijack the thread didn't we?


----------



## Esteban (Dec 8, 2014)

Dragon Age: Inquisition


The combat gets boring so fast. Rift after rift after rift after rift after rift after rift and on and on and on and on and on

I mean, I don't mind if a game is repetitive as long as it's fun, but I don't think closing rifts is all that fun. Strategy doesn't count for all that much either. Just level up until you can tackle some area with ease. 

I'm finally nearing the end up this incredibly long game, but I'll probably have to wait a while so that I can stand the combat again.


----------



## UndreamingAwake (Apr 11, 2011)

Esteban said:


> Dragon Age: Inquisition


Word. Biggest disappointment in the series so far. I expected this one to fix everything DA2 did wrong and be an awesome blend of Origins and the few things about DA2 that were actually fun.


----------



## Zyriel (May 20, 2011)

I hope you don't mind, I took the liberty of just not quoting, I think we both can follow well enough, with that to shorten the message. Haha you made me think! Mostly all of my tactics are circumstantial I think ! Never not the opportunist I suppose :b

Dutch were actually one of the main trade partners of the Japanese in feudal times^^ You guys and the Portugese bringing guns and Christianity lol. Which the Daimyos seemed to love, well the guns, not so much the Christianity though haha.

I think the paper "feel" was intended lol. Japan used to use a lot of paper, umbrellas, even walls/doors were made from waxed rice paper lol. Probably to convey the culture of "beauty", "harmony", "perfection" which all seems predestined to end, fleeting and bound by duty and honor, or something of the like.

I usually leave mind towards the rear as well, but I also expect my General to fight. I can't stand cowardly Generals that route so quick into the fight haha. If one of my own flees on the battlefield and causes a mass route, well if he lives, he gets banished or sent to some remote outpost on a suicide mission pretty much haha.

Yeah I usually have a "perimeter" of forces depending on the faction. Mostly defensive spear forces around artillery and General. Most times my garrison armies have a lot of ranged and spears to defend the walls. I don't use ranged much in siege combat though on the attacking side, unless they just happen to be there. Lol yeah I know what you mean, positioning them to rain a hail of doom is great! Can even hear the pelting, *thuck* sound of the javelin when it hits a shield. I do like the sound of arrows whistling though, whoooooosh shwoo shwoo~ so pleasant xD

Oh I've read it, I just don't follow it as doctrine. The Art of War and The Prince by Niccolo Machiavelli are good reads too, along with the Book of Five Rings by Miyamoto Musashi^^ I've taken some of the concepts, but more of like "applying" it to my own thinking or rather verifying certain thoughts? Not sure how to explain lol. I like creating my own formations and strategies based on the criteria at hand. Which allows the testing of scenarios for concepts and such. Some of their ideas don't apply to certain things or mesh with my personal philosophy though lol.

Yeah same here lol, my "heroic" or "decisive" battles are often random. On the brink of defeat or outnumbered, then turning the tide through sheer tactical displays or using of terrain etc.

Oh I upgrade mine and such too, but a lot need to be saved up for in terms of upkeep costs with land management. Some towns I've had to scrap or abandon and such, if there's a plague, civil unrest, storms. Once I get a decently strong economy I try to get the population growth up and manage the taxes accordingly. Some provinces benefit better with certain cultural or entertainment centers to balance out the industry and such. With Rome 2 there's "growth" that adds another factor than before, along with happiness and taxes, food, squalor, (forgot what else lol) to manage and balance out. Medieval just took building more religious stuff, a decent Governor and a large garrison to keep order lol.

Lol the Imperial Guard reference xD haha Zerg style! Well in real life, it worked for the Russians in WW2 o_o! I tend to play more of a Protoss style in everything, though lol quality > quantity. I expect my troops to be well trained and fight to the death, anything less irritates me haha. Although I've had to play with mass amounts of things on the defensive ~_~ it's alright if they're versatile troops though I guess, like Hoplites, can count on them to hold the line^^

I do that too, have multiple armies hitting multiple cities at once. Problem is when you're fighting on more than one front, or something random happens, like a rebellion, or invasion from a different faction. I try to make sure my borders are secure with border provinces decently guarded though.

I don't even know what unit size I use lol, that would be an epic video xD

Yesss Varangian Guard! One of my favorite units on the Byzantine Empire^^ I really liked that factions unit rosters, so well balanced, I guess one of the perks of being an "Empire" lol.

Yup or even if you do it's like such a waste lmao. That's why with those factions I usually just force them to surrender or charge out lol. In reality, it's probably more efficient, in game terms though, holy **** takes it's toll on upkeep costs mobilizing huge cavalry forces like that ~_~

I didn't mind it, just yeah boring, same rotation over and over lol. I ended up healing more ~_~ eventually respecced for it lol.

Yup, I did pretty well against the Teutonic Order for awhile, then the goddamn Mongols had to invade, so fighting on both sides ~_~ had to pull out of the east, and let them clash with each other lol. Samagotian Axemen were so good, only real heavy infantry I think I had ! Just held out so long against those damn well armed TO troops, Ridderbrudders, all the fully armed Knight and Pikemen @[email protected] just a slaughter against the poor Lithuanian troops with like hardly any armor lol. I don't think I ever finished that campaign though, just sorta felt like deflated after all those epic battles, yet losing the overall war.

Lol the Pope started it! Excommunicated me for France attacking me, then telling me to make peace with them >_>! Wasted my whole time on that though then, Milan eh, always up your *** with their Broken Lances lmao. That was back when I didn't use much diplomacy though haha, and had "very high" taxes one everything too. was constantly crushing rebellions lol, my old mouse would accidentally double click as well, so wasted so many turns haha.

Oh no, the mod was called Broken Crescent:

http://www.twcenter.net/wiki/Broken_Crescent

It's a good mod for Crusades time period, set in the Middle East/Eurasia mostly though. Adds a lot more of those Eastern style factions, so many spear units, and horse archers lol. The armor detail is really amazing and the music overhaul ! Here's some old random screenshots lol and what I put my poor armies through haha (And guilds or PvP groups in MMOs LOL). Yet that's the cost of a well earned victory, and is ever so sweet^^ (Byzantine Empire, Georgia, and Kypchak Confederacy):














































Think this is one of the Crusader/Christian factions mobilize song:





Hindu faction battle one:





Kingdom of Jerusalem songs:





The Georgia mobilize is epic as hell, can't find it online though lol.

I haven't played United Provinces at all, I should try! Wouldn't want to bring shame your country though, especially with my lack of Empire skills haha. What's the bonuses of the faction?

LMFAO, not gonna lie, I am quite the tyrant lol. Although I do opt for efficiency in my Kingdoms and there is justice! I try to keep the populace happy through culture and enough food lol. I want them united so I can focus on the campaigning and have well trained troops. In Rome 2 you always get a civil war, no matter what I think when you get to a certain stage of the campaign  i tried to avoid it too lol.

LOL so true! Just randomly talking to these guys in Greece from Brittania, asking if they want to trade, nothing even close to there haha. I do miss the merchants too, it gave such a good economic flow to control certain things like spices, silks, etc. I guess it's still alright now though, controlling certain provinces, a lot less though in terms of getting income spikes lol.

That is a very insightful opinion about power sir, insightful indeed @[email protected]


----------



## Zyriel (May 20, 2011)

Metalunatic said:


> Yeah I don't blame ya lol. SRIV is just pure **** in my opinion. Don't expect much from Gat Out Of Hell either...
> 
> Sounds good, which makes me think of Brothers in Arms. have you ever played that series? I loved Hell's Highway. It's basically a tactical FPS where you are an American (Staff) Sergeant with his squad, whom you can give orders around the battlefield. It's set in WW2, in Holland (including an excessive amount of windmills... :lol), during the time of Operation Market Garden. It's pretty realistic in that it's not a run and gun game, but cover-based. Stick your head out when the enemy is still firing at you, and you've got a good chance you'll get your top blown off. You have an MG team, a bazooka team, assault team, recon team, and you need to place them across the battlefield, all the while you're under fire from the enemy. Once you finished it, you get Authentic mode. No crosshair, no ammo bar, no map or radar. Just you, your gun, your squad and your instincts.
> 
> ...


Oh thanks, I never played Brothers in Arms, I'll check it out. Sounds intesnse lol, I'll either love it, or get frustrated as hell lmao xD I liked Sniper Elite, MoH Airbourne, CoD World at War and the older ones set in WW2.

I don't remember what my favorite Dawn of Was lol. First one was pretty good, had a great storyline in the original game. I liked the expacs though, yeah the Dark Crusade and Soulstorm. I don't remember if I played Winter Assault ! I usually played Eldar, Dark Eldar, Necrons, or Tau. I liked Sisters Repentia too in the Sisters of Battle haha. I kinda have problems playing human factions though, so hard to "feel" lol so alien to me :b Yup it's what keeps that franchise going haha, always something to write about with everyone always at WAR! for random various reasons lol.

DoW 2 kinda disappointed me too, I liked the story though, just felt a bit "rushed" in the overall game lol. After awhile the maps were too similar too, it took a lot of tactical gameplay though, with controlling your squad lol. More tactical RPG then RTS imo. Was like DA 1 mixed with one of those oldschool Starcraft custom maps haha. After you get decent power armor, and a Dreadnought though, just bulldoze through **** ~_~ I liked having to actually play strategically using line of fire and such, instead of tank and spank mechanics lol.

Oh wow that's awesome, I've never owned the actual pieces or even played the Table Top version lol. I've just read the lore books and stuff ~_~ It looks expensive to get into haha, I've seen some great painted ones though!

Yup we do, sorry about that to everyone else though. Please continue to use the thread lol. Hopefully some information is useful or interesting, so we don't come off like selfish pricks lmfao.


----------



## UndreamingAwake (Apr 11, 2011)

Zyriel said:


> ...


No problem at all! I tend to check threads i've posted in regularly anyway, regardless of whether i'm quoted or not.

I get what you mean. But I hate having to just respond whatever the enemy does. I like to be the one controlling their reactions to me, not the other way around.

Yeah but the Portuguese were Catholic, we were Protestants. So essentially they got two forms of Christianity. THat was the only fun feature in Shogun imo. The ability to convert to Christianity and unlock matchlock units. Of course every other clan hated your guts afterwards lol.

Oh yeah, I know even walls were made of paper lol (thank you, Splinter Cell: Chaos Theory). But yeah, it might be the feel, but I don't like dem feels, bro. :lol

Haha, speaking of cowardly generals... I'm going to show you a battle a bit further down where my General's morale actually shatters, but is unable to retreat from the battlefield because he gets stuck behind a house. Because of that the game didn't give him a trait that is linked to cowardice, but rather ups his Command by 1 star, hahaha. But yeah, it's that that battle ended in an unexpected victory, or I'd have lynched him by means of suicide run as well... Lol. We're such benevolent rulers, right?

I prefer to not fight without a spear wall in melee time periods. They're awesome against everything except ranged troops, since they're so massed. I agree that ranged infantry/cavalry are pretty useless while assaulting walls. Unless it's a smaller settlement, in which case things often made of wood. Wood + fire = happy besieger. Yeah, I know right? That sound when the units hurl the javelins en mass, too! WHOOP! (Did you notice we're typing like we're in a poor early 90s Batman comic now? Kapoow!)

Well, I have yet to read Machiavelli's The Prince, but seriously, unlike Sun Tzu, that guy must have been a psycho, judging by the few quotes i've seen from him. :lol Never even heard of The Book of Five Rings. I have to look that up now. Lol no, obviously i'm not saying that you'd need to blindly follow everything in there. I doubt the man himself would approve of you doing that in the first place. That's the whole point though, to have guiding principles, not some handbook that tells you exactly what to do in X situation by reacting with Y. What are some of the things that don't match with your philosophy btw?

I just do whatever is needed to restore public order. Rebellious people? Exempt taxes, send in troops, build some buildings for order improvement. First thing I do if I conquer a region with a different religion is raze all religious buildings and build my own. Out with the old, in with what suits me. :lol

Imperial Guard are awesome. Pure and simple. 









Oh, and if throwing troops against the enemy doesn't work, there's always this:









I always wanted to buy a Baneblade for the tabletop, but damn those things are insanely expensive.

Anyway... Yeah, the Russians pretty much beat back the Germans with zerging, and scorched earth tactics of course. About quality vs quantity. I like quality troops as well, of course. I mean, i'd never send 2k of Militia Hoplites against a 1k disciplined Roman army or anything, you know. But what i'm saying is that average professional soldiers can become badass veterans after only a few battles. Replenish troops, lose maybe one rank of their experience, but they gain stats with every battle they endure. You soon have a force that's effective in both quality and quantity. Starcraft player eh? I'm such a pro-human elitist. Terrans 4 lyfe. Only reason I would ever vouch for the Zerg is Kerrigan. Yum. Besides, Raynor is a badass. Protoss are cool though. En Taro Adun!

Yes, exactly. Guard your borders, secure the heart of your empire (this includes from within, like rebellions etc) position your armies as close to their cities on your side of the borders as possible, and, when everything is in position, you launch an all-out war. 9 out of 10 times they won't even know what hit them.

Ah yeah, I actually did make that clip. It didn't turn out quite as epic as I hoped, but this is one of the most enjoyable battles i've fought in this campaign so far. I was on the defensive while besieging Vienna, Austria itself. Two armies crunched down on me from two sides. I was outmanned and outgunned. This was the result (be sure to watch in HD btw, otherwise you can't make out what's going on): 
"The slaughter now ensues, bodies fall like rain... They valiantly pursue, yet doomed to remain..."













I also thought this was a fitting song since the UP wears blue uniforms and Austria wears white/grey. :lol I'll try making a new one when I have the 400 units per infantry unit campaign going. Imagine, now a full army is around 2.2k at most. With those settings, you'd have that same army with 5 or 6 units. I just hope my PC can pull that weight lol. I might even do a recording of my entire campaign if I can bring up the guts for it, just for ****s and giggles.

It makes sense for the Varangian Guard to be epic. They were vikings after all. Varangian = Varyag. You probably know the Amon Amarth song, "Varyags of Miklagard." Byzantine was a great faction for sure, but ofc they were the remnants of the Eastern Roman Empire, so that's to be expected.

Exactly! It requires such a different playstyle, which is kind of fun in and of itself, but to me it's frustrating, because to me it feels like i'm missing the backbone of the army due to lack of infantry. And yeah, agreed on the upkeep. Something like 200+ gold per unit per turn for up to 120 cavalry units. You pay less for twice that size in one infantry unit.

What I liked about the Lithuanians were those poleaxemen called Giltiné's Chosen, when you build those altars to the Goddess of Death. Those TO Ritterbrüder are ****ing cool though, with the helmets and stuff. You know what else I love about Medieval 2 and it's expansions? The music! Britannia, Teutonic and vanilla had such amazing atmospheric menu music. Not too big of a fan when it comes to the Americas campaign though. I used to train Gothic and Teutonic knights when I played as the Holy Roman Empire in vanilla Medieval 2 routinely, since they were amazing heavy cavalry that could smash through even English and French knights.

Ah yeah, the ****ing excommunications... I hate that **** too. Imagine living in that world. Today it's inconceivable that Rome has such power over countries anymore. How times change lol. Ah yes, Milan... I always thought they and Venice were annoying as ****.

That mod looks interesting! Pity i'm not in a Medieval mood right now, but i'll keep it in mind for when I am. I like the screenie where you just had a few dozen guys left lol. Kudos for that!

Try us! If you can look past the super mouthy, no-nonsense up-in-your-face people and ****ty politicians and other bureaucrats, we're actually pretty cool. :lol Well, if you decide to play as the United Provinces, the bonus you get is that right before a battle, you have the opportunity to let all your troops imbibe tons of alcohol, resulting in a bonus called "Dutch courage", (accuracy -5, reloading skill -5, melee +10, morale +20). :rofl

Nah, we have access to some cool unique units such as the Holland Guard, Blue Guard, etc. Plus, we're the only faction that starts in all three theaters.

Hey, sometimes you need to crack down on the populace to teach them some respect yeah. I should really complete a Rome 2 campaign but I just can't care enough right now! :lol

Yes, telepathic diplomacy several centuries back in time. Proof that aliens are real and provided ancient civilizations with long distance communication devices! I always knew it! I'd rather have a solidly flowing economy as opposed to spikes in the economy here and there though tbh.


----------



## UndreamingAwake (Apr 11, 2011)

Cool, definitely check it out! I can't guarantee that you'll like it of course, but I personally love it since it actually makes you think. Ah yeah I played the MoH Airbourne demo, and have the real game on the 360 but haven't played it yet. CoD WaW was cool. The last one to include a decent campaign co-op which I played with my sis. I love Modern Warfare 2 & 3 the most out of all the CoD games though. Recently finished them on Veteran. 

Lol. Those are all factions I couldn't care less about. Well, except maybe the Tau. I'm more of a human faction person. Space Marines (if they can still be called human), especially Dark Angels and Black Templars, Imperial Guard and Sisters of Battle. "Kill the alien, the mutant, the heretic." :lol
Yeah pretty much. Every story is just some random war somewhere on some retarded, battle-blasted planet. 

Yeah but seriously man, I play DoW for the massive, neverending push and shove shooting matches from their base to yours, to theirs and back again. The first one had that in abundance. I played single Skirmishes for hours on end, with volume turned up. Seriously epic. "For the Emperor!" and somewhere on the other side of the battlefield you hear some maniacal Khorne Berserker cackle something about "Blood for the Blood God!" :lol Yeah, I loved the original DoW story too, about the Blood Ravens chapter. I knew that Librarian wasn't to be trusted lol. 

Thanks! I might just have some pics of them somewhere but i'm not sure. It is massively expensive, man. If you're not filthy rich, don't do it. :lol Take my advice. Also, when you stop and sell it, you most likely won't even make back about 1/3rd of your original expenses. Prices keep going up too.

Yeah, or maybe they'd like to chime in on our awesome Total War discussions! :lol


----------



## Allenoir (Dec 17, 2014)

Hmmm I'm not often disappointed with games I buy but Re6 and Resident Evil Operation Raccoon City definitely fit that category. 

I loved Leon's story and I love love love that Sherry was brought back but that's about it. Chris' campaign was not enjoyable at all. 

Now ORC could have been great but you had to have another person with a copy of the game to play together. I wanted my bro or sister to play alongside me and they couldn't. I don't like shooters so it was too hard for me alone. The support AI was incredibly stupid. I was really excited about the whole thing too. It had a great premise.


----------



## Fat Man (Nov 28, 2013)

Hyrule Warriors. At first it was fun but after a few days it got really boring.

Pokemon X and Y. It was too easy. After the 3rd gym my Pokemon were over leveled for the rest of the remaining gyms. The elite 4 was no challenge at all and the champion was total push over. Nuzlocking the game with the EXP share turned off made it a little bit challenging, but it was still a breeze to beat.


----------



## Zyriel (May 20, 2011)

Metalunatic said:


> No problem at all! I tend to check threads i've posted in regularly anyway, regardless of whether i'm quoted or not.
> 
> I get what you mean. But I hate having to just respond whatever the enemy does. I like to be the one controlling their reactions to me, not the other way around.


Haha I need to learn to do that, try to but get side tracked @[email protected]

Interesting, I guess I play more reactively ! Never thought about it like that, I do like taking control of a situation as well though, just depends on the situation when to fall back and play defensively or when to go all out. I like knowing what my enemy has up their sleeve first, otherwise end up getting into a huge debacle without proper intelligence. Well with spies you can see their army's compositions, but the placement of units.

In the first Shogun I don't think I ever converted, foolish samurai honor, well unless I played the Oda Clan :b Same with the Byzantine Empire, hardly any gunpowder units lol yet still held my own. I guess I have a thing for playing with handicaps and being the underdog lol. Or I'm just stubborn as hell and stick to personal principles, even in the face of defeat xD

Haha, I hear that about feels in the general sense. I do like atmosphere though, something I can feel right about defending^^

LOL at getting suck behind a house! I've had a few generals that I've spared if they had good traits or won battles in the past. I do let them redeem themselves though if they win a battle later. Sometimes they prove me wrong or rather "learn" courage lol (ironic because's just AI and we're controlling them) haha. Yeah even without the traits though, I know in medieval 2 they'd develop them through the circumstances in battle. Some were better as governers than general though lol and vice versa.

Unless you're the Danes! Well Danes had Swordstaff militia, which had spear wall I think lol nice versatile unit. LOL *pow* *zam* *swish* *woosh* xD

That's sure with Machiavelli, I think it might have been the time period. Renaissance Europe, Catholicism and Feudalism. One had to be extremely careful in terms of words and motives without coming off like a "heretic" lol. Plus the city states, and the extreme power plays at hand. Sun Tzu on the other hand, could look at it from a larger perspective as an empire pretty much. With disciplined troops, formations, and thinking of war in abstract absolutes, focusing more on morale, numbers, and logistics. Where as Machiavelli looks at it more from a political perspective, and tactics involved which can undermine a larger strategy. Miyamoto Musashi in contrast looks at it from an individual perspective, from the warriors point of view, rather than as the general or ruler. Sorry, forgive me there^^ things I can't really divulge in public though, one's philosophy is an ongoing shift of perspectives and somewhat of a personal matter. But to quote the Space Marines, "Knowledge is Power, Guard it Well" :b

Yeah you can do that with spies to insight unrest then send in dignitaries lol. I try not to even let it get to that point of rebellion, I usually exempt taxes or lower them at the start of controlling the province too. Each province to me has to have a focus though so get's rebuilt to serve that. I'd rather not have to send in troops and pay for upkeep costs, instead of focusing on campaigning lol. I usually try to get the order level to positive before leaving a smaller garrison, hate taking any steps backwards @[email protected]

I gotta quote the Eldar there lol, "humans and their tanks" lmao xD






Haha Adun Toridas^^ Yeah Raynor was pretty hardcore for a Terran lol. Open minded too, trusted Tassadar, fought alongside Fenix, and listened to the advice of Zeratul. Kerrigan can be such a *****, but a damn good military leader lol.

I tend to have different armies in different regions ones set purposely for mobility and defense. Then other others as invasion forces, usually camped somewhere lol. Then the scouting forces to draw out enemy armies. I don't like long sieges I suppose, like field battles better haha.

Oh that was very epic sir! So funny the cavalry that tried to flank from behind lol. Square formation, and then it runs right into it LOL Spectacular use of terrain and placement for artillery! That mid area was a good choke point to hold too, they just kept funneling in lol. You were so right, Gettsysburg was the perfect song!

I guess that's one of the drawbacks for having a large Empire though, can't trust anyone lol. The Varangian Guard was the Byzantine Emperor's personal bodyguard, mercenary vikings too lol. It's kinda sad though, when Constantinople fell, if the Varangian Guard was still around. That probably would, maybe not changed the course of history, but they would have possibly been able to hold off the Ottoman siege forces for longer. 

http://www.soldiers-of-misfortune.com/history/varangian-guard.htm

"But the Crusades also brought about the end of the Varangian Guard. In 1203 Venice succeeded in using the whole crusader army for the conquest of Constantinople. As a consequence of the usual internal intrigues the only reliable troops on the Byzantine side where the foreigners: the Guard - mostly English and Danish by this time - and the Pisans, who defended their trade privileges against Venice. When the Crusaders managed to enter the city in their first major assault, they suffered heavy losses and were driven back by the Varangians."

That's why I usually don't use much cavalry unless it's a faction focused on it. Even then though, ugh I'm cheap ~_~ Sometimes it's invaluable though like the Crusader Knights or Cataphracts, just so good!

Oh yeah Giltine's Chosen! I liked those lol, I only had one city capable of producing them though and it was always out recruitment slots. The MVPs in my armies were the Samagatian Axemen, they just never broken under pressure, was amazing. One battle I held this crappy fort up a hill, HUGE line of infantry and knights that just marched in a line lol. I used some ranged to peel of the heavier knights off and wear them out, but still was outnumbered like hell. Won the battle eventually, but really heavy losses, and they had multiple armies ready to invade ~_~ and lost it in the long term.

Yeah the Holy Roman Empire was amazing overall, really nice unit roster. Largest problem was the position lol. I would end up at war with Milan, Denmark, France, Hungary ~_~ I swear that campaign all the factions were so devious and fickle lol. England's mounted Knights weren't that good in that campaign, in my opinion. Their dismounted polehammer ones though, really good and the longbow men lol.

Yup about Rome, and later the Papacy lol how the mighty have fallen. All empires tend to fall in time, over expand, internal corruption, and eventually make so many enemies they're fighting on too many fronts, then collapse from within. It is really hard to imagine such powers existing in the first place though lol.

Haha thanks, was getting besieged in that screenshot lol. That was one of those steppe factions. Had no money to really train anything so ended up with really small armies trying to hold territory in huge debt. There was this one battle I got "close defeat" on in Rome 2, not even sure how I "lost" enemy routed, battle ended, my general was still alive lol. Maybe a time limit or bug or something.

Ohhh I like units with "Guard" in their name, sounds like you can count on them lol. That Dutch courage sounds good too lol could solve my routing problem haha, +morale and melee! Gotta try them in a skirmish xD

Yeah I know how that is, I've felt that way about some of the factions I've played on there lol. I usually just do skirmishes if I get the "feel" to play so I don't start campaign without the proper motivation haha.

That's true a solid economy is better in the long term lol. I liked getting little bursts to buy some extra units, or do some frivolous upgrade though was like ooohhhhhhhhhhhhh~ then nod your head in satisfaction xD Plus the merchant would increase rank and bring in larger income streams, controlling that resource lol. Well until he would get assassinated or an army of merchants from another faction trying to buy him out lol. Then gets bought out by one with like 1-2 stars ~_~


----------



## Zyriel (May 20, 2011)

Metalunatic said:


> Cool, definitely check it out! I can't guarantee that you'll like it of course, but I personally love it since it actually makes you think. Ah yeah I played the MoH Airbourne demo, and have the real game on the 360 but haven't played it yet. CoD WaW was cool. The last one to include a decent campaign co-op which I played with my sis. I love Modern Warfare 2 & 3 the most out of all the CoD games though. Recently finished them on Veteran.
> 
> Lol. Those are all factions I couldn't care less about. Well, except maybe the Tau. I'm more of a human faction person. Space Marines (if they can still be called human), especially Dark Angels and Black Templars, Imperial Guard and Sisters of Battle. "Kill the alien, the mutant, the heretic." :lol
> Yeah pretty much. Every story is just some random war somewhere on some retarded, battle-blasted planet.
> ...


Band of Brothers: Hell's Highway? Oh that's cool your sister plays too! I liked Reznov in WaW, guy was such a badass lol. Yeah I agree there, MW 2 was probably the most difficult for me, and my favorite out of those ones. 3 was so toned down compared to 2 lol.

Haha, a true Space Marine, much respect there even though we'd end up on opposing sides of the battle lines, a duel of honor, and a worthy adversary^^ I like the Eldar's mentality, since they think similar to me, so it feels sorta like "home" in the Craftworlds lol. Yet the Dark Eldar are like my repressed emotions lol plus the Archon has a mini army lol. The Necrons, I don't care for the faction really, I just like their lord as a unit lol can handle **** by himself and most units are resilient and efficient. And the Tau, not sure if I "like" them as a faction, their society does make sense to me though lol so the greater good and I do like the cool mech-style technology. Plus the faction's focus on situational awareness, terrain, and interesting combat schools, Kauyon - "Patient Hunter" and Mont'ka "The Killing Blow" lol.

Oh you might like this:






That looks epic as hell xD

You might like the books Xenology and Liber Chaotica too. It's made so it seems like written by an Inquisitor I think about the other species, and about the different factions within Chaos. Really awesome, the pages look like an actual tome with scribbles, and much of that, "killing the alien, mutant, and heretic", "XENOS!" haha xD

Hahaha, yesss nothing like a maniacal laugh:






Whole reason to play Chaos right there :b

Yeah that librarian was shady from the beginning lol, knew he was up to something. I like Sindri and Lord Bale, those two were so funny haha. Bale is the guy who does Dinobot's voice from Beastwars lol.











"We have faiiiiiiilllled!" lmfao xD

Yeah it looks massively expensive, way out of my budget haha, plus no one to play against so kinda pointless to have for me lol. Did you paint them yourself? I've seen some pre-painted and sold too per sub-faction. I think there's a lot of people who don't actually play, just collect them, or like painting them.


----------



## UndreamingAwake (Apr 11, 2011)

Zyriel said:


> ...


Well, to quote Napoleon: "The battlefield is a scene of constant chaos. The winner will be the one who controls that chaos, both his own and the enemies'."

But yeah, by that defensive logic, you'd forever hurdle into a corner, observing what the enemy does, letting him get you on the ropes while you react to him, and never taking the initiative. I mean, I guess you could go for attrition wars, but I do not find those very satisfying or effective. Guess i'm just more of a Blitzkrieg guy (or well, the pre-modern day equivalent of that anyway) on the offensive, while keeping enough armies back at home to defend your cities in case the enemy decides to slip an army past you.

I'll take your word on anything about the first Shogun lol. My first Total War game was the first Medieval, when I was like 11 or so. Then came Viking Invasion and I was sold. Then they released Rome and I think I might have had a Total Wargasm. 3D units in massed formations, so much variation in unit types! Of course individual soldiers all looked like clones in a single unit, but hey. :lol

Haha yeah, well, as much as I love Empire, when I played Medieval 2, I rarely used gunpowder units myself. Back in that day they weren't as effective anyway. I mean, a bunch of archers could still fire three to four volleys in the time it took those gunpowder units to reload their rifles. And let's not even talk about weather, like snow or rain or any other circumstances that could cause the rifle or canon to explode, malfunction or otherwise make it inoperable.

Yeah I kind of miss leaving a general in a city in Empire, like you would in Rome 1 or Medieval 2. I still have this habit, even though it's not a requirement anymore. Of course, sometimes those same governors could become corrupt and lazy as ****, reducing public order and whatnot, in which case i'd be just like "ok, you know what, bro? You **** up my city I entrusted to you, i'll go let you be ****ed up by the enemy now. K thx, bye."

Ah yeah, Swordstaff Militia. You're right, they can do Phalanx formation, which was pretty cool, considering they also had decent defense for militias, plus they could be stationed for free if the city allowed free stationing slots.

Haha, fair enough. My favorite Machiavelli quote is "Kill them all, God will recognize His own." That is just so ****ed up, man. :lol Like I said, i'll look up the Five Rings book. It sounds interesting to hear things from a "soldier's perspective" as opposed to that of the commander's. And lol it's cool. That's a cool quote from 40k, here's another one for you: "An open mind is like a fortress with it's gates unbarred and unguarded." So true. I hate it when people go all "be more open-minded!" and i'm just sitting there, thinking "All you really mean by that is that you want me to agree with you. If you truly had such an open mind you'd accept that there are people that see the world differently than you do.", know what I mean? Words of wisdom, courtesy of Warhammer 40,000. :lol

Yeah exactly. And there's certain regions that just won't stop rebelling! Like Vienna, Austria or Moscow in my last campaign. I had an entire freaking army stationed there. Killed off rebellion after rebellion, had exempted taxes, but still they continued to

Interesting, that's another difference between the two of us in terms of playstyle, I guess. I tend to raze all those useless buildings, then build my own version of it, and other than that I just aim to assimilate the province as quickly into my empire as quickly as possible. I mean, you'll often get good developed military buildings or commercial centers when you conquer an enemy capitol city anyway.

To that, sir, I say "Eldar! Purge the Witches!" Leman Russ, Basilisks, Land Raiders and Baneblades are awesome. I do like the Fire Prism however. It was one of my favorite tanks to use before Winter Assault. Then came the Guard and I was like "kewl, more heavy artillery." Nah but seriously, I used to play Eldar in 40k. Hell, I even had a unit of Howling Banshees and a Guardian Squad or two in my Imperial Guard tabletop army when I didn't use the Sisters. That's the amazing thing about playing the Guard. You can team up with Space Marines, Sisters of Battle, Eldar (even Dark Eldar I believe, but only as "Desperate Allies"), Chaos (if you're Traitor Guard) and Tau. Oh, which reminds me, I had this Saint Celestine model from the SoB. I bought some Pegasus Wings from Warhammer Fantasy from Games Workshop and converted her, fitting the wings under her jetpack and cloth that was held up by those two robo-cherub babies. "B!tch, I don't need no ****ing jetpack, I got wings!" :lol Not the most original idea, but I did think it looked really cool. I painted her armor with the base colors of Boltgun Metal, Skull White and Shining Gold, eyes completely white. Not honking my own horn here, but it looked really badass.

About Kerrigan, i'm assuming here you played the first StarCraft? She wasn't a ***** there. She actually was kind of a smexy redhead. I'm 99% sure she's a Scorpio. :lol I'm currently watching the early 2000's Battlestar Galactica series, and I suddenly hear a very familiar voice, thinking "I know the voice of this chick (the tall blonde Cylon)." Turns out it's the same lady that voiced Kerrigan in SC2. Also, Ghosts and Firebats rule! I still think it's a bummer StarCraft: Ghost got cancelled.

Yeah I totally hear you! That's how I do it too. Multiple armies everywhere. I never directly assault the walls either. Too many casualties. Unless there's canons. Everything is better with canons.

Thank you, thank you. It was a very enjoyable battle to fight for sure. And I know right? You'd think an AI of Hard and above would be smart enough to not send his cavalry right into a Square Formation, but hey, it's not like i'm going to complain about his mistakes hahaha.

That is an interesting piece of history to read, thanks for that! In light of our 40k discussion here, this made me laugh: "The Imperial Guard was later formed by Cretans." :lol

Cataphract! One of my favorite cavalry units in vanilla for sure. It's pretty cool if you think about it. Even in Rome they had Cataphracts, all the way up to the Medieval period. They must have been extremely effective troops.

Sounds like you had a heroic "last stand" in that battle, despite having lost the war. My current VH/VH campaign isn't going too bright either in Empire. I tried playing Rome 2 again two days ago. I don't know man, I don't find it enjoyable. Maybe i'm doing something wrong, but I find it incredibly boring, plus they completely weirded out the city building and troop recruitment lol. It feels like a halfway different game. I tried playing as the Iceni again, managed to conquer the main British Isles (not Ireland though), and it was just "meh". I'll give it another shot from the start though, now that I understand it a bit better. Hopefully it'll be more enjoyable this time. Failing that, i'll start as Rome. If I still don't like it then, i'm just going to pass on Rome 2 man.

I know right? HRE is pretty much getting assaulted from all sides. On top of that, they always start with a poor reputation with the Pope, resulting in super fast excommunications and crusades against your country. It's pretty ****ed up lol.

Yeah, I was actually having a discussion with someone else on here about those empires. He said he thought that if the current Western power NATO/UN) would fall, it would probably be by nuclear war, and I kind of agree with that. That sounds weird though, having won the battle, but getting a lost battle. That should have been a Pyrrhic Victory at least. But yeah sometimes my units break from sheer exhaustion, even after the battle was won and I got the "You have won, want to continue chasing blabla" message in Rome 2 too.

I was kidding about the Dutch Courage ability btw. :lol

Haha yeah, after a certain point I just gave up on Merchants man, because they would just get bought out, assassinated and whatever, like you said. No matter their skill level.

Haha, Brothers in Arms: Hell's Highway. But yeah, the game series is very similar to the Band of Brothers series, basically. That's part of the reason I love it so much. I actually found MW1 far more difficult on Veteran than MW2 tbh! In MW1 enemies had impeccable aiming, superhuman reflexes and everything. MW2 was far more realistic if you ask me, plus had a much better story. ****, that General Shepard's such a double-crossing *****.


----------



## UndreamingAwake (Apr 11, 2011)

Hey, like I said above, I used to play Eldar in DoW quite a lot before Winter Assault. But Imperial Guard and Space Marines are just more to my personal liking. But yeah, i've won quite a few battles there with the use of those warp gates which make your buildings invisible, can transport troops etc. Train a couple of Rangers, snipe all the enemies, train a ****load of Guardians until you have better buildings, then train the **** out of Warp Spiders, Dark Reapers and Howling Banshees, plus Wraith Lords and Fire Prisms. And then, when you capture the Relics:




"I walk again... A God among mere mortals." Epic! 8) Plus, the music in the background of this video is so bloody awesome and fitting. Goddamn it, now you got me wanting to play Dawn of War again haha.
The Dark Eldar are a bunch of psychotic BDSM fetishists though. Which would make their women kind of sexy because of all the leather and lack of other, more decent clothing, if they weren't bent on killing everything, including the people they ****ed... :sus Creepy Slaanesh worshippers. But then, pretty much anyone but the Loyalist Space Marines are out of their damn minds in this universe lol. Although that's what they're the Emperor's children for. I'd also mention the Tau, but they're a bunch of well-meaning space-commies. The rest of the Imperium is pretty much a crazed Catholic fascist regime (in space).

I hear ya, Necrons are boring as hell, both in the videogames as well as on the tabletop. I fought a few Necron players on the tabletop... Not fun at all. "Oh look, Will, you just shot up half of my Necron Warriors with your fancy Kasrkins (yay Hotshot Flashlig... I mean Lasguns)! Whatever shall I do..? Oh, I know! Reanimate!" I was SOOO glad when they released the 5th Edition Necron codex; they were nerfed heavily. Reanimation Protocol is the walking, Guass-Rifle carrying Avatar of Cheese! I knew this guy that played Tau. Know what I did? Closed on him as soon as I could, since the average Tau are pathetic in melee, but excel at long-range fire fights as you probably know, so yeah... Fix those bayonets to your flashlights and charge, "For the Imperium of Man!" :lol

Meh, Grey Knights are overrated! :lol Terminators are the coolest Space Marine units in DoW. "A moment of laxity spawns a lifetime of heresy." But my favorite quote has to be "Thou Shalt Not!"

_"1.Thou shalt not refer to the Adeptus Soritas as "Bolter ******es" nor shalt thou go anywhere near our sisters during the time of the "Red Rage," lest thou wishes to be the first human to enter orbit without the aid of a shuttle."_ :haha

That book is a good recommendation, thank you. Let's see if the Black Library has something on that. Maybe i can get it in PDF format to read while i'm on a bus or in a waiting room or something.

Ah man, Beast Wars? Nostalgia right there, haha. I used to watch that stuff when I was kid. I didn't know that that was that same guy.

Well, initially that was what I did. Just collect, assemble, convert, paint and put them on display, like modelling cars or trains, you know? When I became less bothered by SA I went out every now and then to a Games Workshop gaming center and played some matches. But yeah, when I started it was a lot less expensive though. You kind of pay double now what you used to pay for the same box. It's pretty insane.

Addendum...: So after posting this message yesterday, I started up Rome 2 again right after typing this. Playing as Iceni. So I conquer the entirety of the British Isles and I find out you can only have 2 fleets, and 4 armies? This leaves half my cities unmanned except for the generated garrison. You also can't move your troops without a General anymore. What. The. ****. I'm going to see if I can remove the army cap, otherwise i'm uninstalling this filthy pile of stinking garbage and go back to Rome 1 with the Total Realism overhaul mod lol. Ever played that btw? Very enjoyable! 
But seriously, there's so much wrong with Rome 2 it's not even funny. Where's the family politics from Rome 1? Where's the ability to split up your forces, even if they need a new General for that, like any quasi-capable military commander with a half a brain in history would do if the circumstances demand it? I mean, I get the whole armies in ratio to empire size thing they're going for here, but why not just do it like "upkeep cost and town population" like they did in previous TW games? This worked just fine. The limit is just ridiculous. The melees are more like schoolyard shove and push brawls as opposed to holding a line and skillfully subduing the enemy. Where's Loose Formation to protect yourself against enemy ranged units? Guard Mode? The UI isn't the same old clear thing it was in previous installments. It's now this halfway weird semi maze. Oh, and let's not forget magical wooden pocket boats your armies carry around all the time, everywhere! Creative Assembly fell victim to the stereotypical "streamlining" (read: dumbing down) of their franchise that so many games have been victim to lately.


----------



## 8888 (Oct 16, 2014)

Scribblenauts for Nintendo DS. It was fun to make any object appear but I feel it was hard to get the character to interact with the object properly to complete the goal. I could get it to work but it just was annoying and not relaxing, therefore I saw no point in playing the game.


----------



## Zyriel (May 20, 2011)

Metalunatic said:


> Well, to quote Napoleon: "The battlefield is a scene of constant chaos. The winner will be the one who controls that chaos, both his own and the enemies'."


That is so true! I have a tendency to incite chaos without trying lol, but in the thick of it all gotta know your purpose^^ Haha like the Eldar Wraithlord quote, "I know my purpose in these fallen times!"

I agree, it's honestly better to have control and not rely on improvisation. Organization and contingency plans, at least in terms of strategy. Although on the actual battlefield I tend to play more tactically, and throw my opponent off course of their own strategy, thus undermining their ability to anticipate the next move. I don't really rely on attrition either, though it does work better in some situations, I'm too impatient for that lol. It's like playing an affliction lock or any class with dots lol, I rely more on burst generally. But timing counts for a lot, so I tend to like having ways to counter.

Haha that is where I fail totally. As much as I avoid it, I tend to get into multiple front wars, when the territory is large enough. Usually have to make some makeshift army or patrol the territory enough in case areas do get invaded until main forces can arrive. I try to fortify certain key locations though that work as an entry point into the larger area.

Yeah that's what I'd like to see individual units with more variety. Especially amongst barbarian style factions that don't have standardized equipment lol.

Lol I think the main use of gunpowder units in medieval were the sound/noise. 2-3 plus pikes defending flanks, and archers/crossbow men covering are usually enough for causing mass routes unless they can somehow flank your position lol. Gotta watch lines of fire though haha, lots of friendly fire in those early firearms X_x

I liked that too lol. Could see the political corruption happening lol I remember a few times they'd get bought off >_>! Also limited your ability to have decent army generals though because of the governance.

I remember this one battle with swordstaff militia I was fighting against Denmark on a river battle. Oh man was outnumbered too and they almost broke my lines, even under heavy cannonfire and arrow volleys. They'd route but rally and come back, gained much respect for them after that lol.

Lol at Machiavelli's quote, a lot of things at that time were pretty ****ed up haha. Warfare was rampant between city-states even within Catholic ones. Leonardo Da Vinci who was a friend of Machiavelli, was pretty opposed to violence for the most part, and a vegetarian, yet marketed himself as an inventor and engineer of siege weapons lol. That was a pretty generic belief at the time though. Crusaders from 1090's-1400's probably believed that. "God wills it". 
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deus_vult






It even inspired crusades against other Christians, like the siege and sacking of the Croatian city of Zara, and Orthodox Capital of the Byzantine Empire, Constantinople lol. The irrationality of religious fervor at one of it's finest in history ~_~

http://www.historytoday.com/jonathan-phillips/fourth-crusade-and-sack-constantinople

So true there about being open minded. Most people just want you to agree with them instead of seeing the opposite side of the argument lol. I like to see things from a bird's eye view.

Oh with the Book of Five Rings, Miyamoto Musashi wasn't a samurai himself, but a warrior, and regarded as a Kensai "sword saint" lol. He was more of a duelist, may or may not have fought in war (undocumented). However he fought against the greatest duelists (at the time) in Japan from various backgrounds, and prestigious sword schools. Who ironically often tried to assassinate or ambush him with large numbers to protect their status lol. He developed a style using two swords to combat fighting against many adversaries, and using the environment or improvised weapons. So his accounts are pragmatic and personal, through combat experience, as opposed to theoretical or long term strategic dealing with logistics, formations and such.

Haha those rebellions, well you gotta respect them though for that stubborn loyalty haha xD Lol probably like, "ugh now what? AGAIN?" /fizzle lol

Yeah I never really raze anything I leave most the way it was lol. Unless the buildings don't provide any decent bonuses that is, or are just useless in general. Some do provide alternate bonuses not available to your faction though lol at least in Rome 2. In medieval most just worked the same I think with different names was more on the vicinity than the building like libraries or racetracks.

Haha touche on the witch purging xD I forgot they called the Eldar Farseers, "witches" like this:






That is extremely badass lol, worth horn honking imo, especially the cloth and painting it yourself xD

Yeah I played the originally Starcraft sorta religiously for awhile lol. I wouldn't doubt if she had either a lot of Aries, Capricorn, or Scorpio in her chart lol. I'd say Leo too but, Zerg just screams efficiency, master of combat, not afraid to get her hands dirty, total control through hivemind lol > dignity, pomposity, generosity (only in terms of "swarm" lol) and the like, even her being a "Queen of Blades" lmao. Kerrigan's original personality was similar to Jaina lol. "You got it", "Sure thing" forgot what else she said lol and Jaina, "Shhh I'm tryna think here!" Then Kerrigan became like Sylvanas as the Forsaken Queen haha. Well that latent psionic power, mixed with feelings of abandonment and betrayal by her friends/species, memories/thoughts of the overmind can probably do that lol. Ohh I haven't seen the new Battlestar Galactica, well newer, I've seen the old one from the 80s though lol gotta check it out! Yeah if I played terran I usually went tank/marine push while trying to tech up to Ghosts for nukes lol. Lockdown was just so damn good, since most people massed Carriers or Battlecruisers. Irradiate too! Mm yeah and Firebats were the bane of Zerglings and Zealots lol. Ghost looked really interesting, I remember reading about it in those old gaming magazines haha, least Blizzard kept Nova as a character though^^

Imo, the Byzantine Empire's whole military composition at least in terms of military equipping and formation was superior to it's adversaries. They would use layers of padded armor with lamellar over it. So was pretty impenetrable for the most part, and a lot of damage in battles of the time, seems to come from blunt force trauma, which padding mitigates. Problem was they lost a lot of territory due to ideological differences, Catholics in the West and Muslims in the East. Which limited trade, so people converted and moved out of their territory so it became a shell of it's former self and a relic of a bygone world come the middle ages. Haha where the word "Byzantine" comes from to describe anything, which many people consider overly complex.

I doubt it would come to falling. Especially by looking at the real horrors and atrocities that exist in war by looking at the fall of the Soviet Union, Chechnya, Yugoslavia, and now Syria-Iraq. Plus after seeing the fallout of just Fukushima, and Nagasaki, Hiroshima in WW2 the world at large wouldn't want a nuclear war. Luckily most countries respect the others as trade partners, with pretty positive relations, since the global economy functions together as a whole. And the warnings of some of the greatest minds of the century, like Albert Einstein saying, "I know not with what weapons World War III will be fought, but World War IV will be fought with sticks and stones." Hopefully progress will be made through collaboration, education, breaking down racial, religious, and political tension, and working towards a more sustainable future economically.

Lol here's screenshots of it:





































Horrid debacle of a battle, outnumbered like hell. I think it was one of my lighter scouting parties that got ambushed and I retreated or something. I did win though lol, at least nothing happened to my army on the campaign map. The enemy ones lost generals and ended up being forced back though, so it might have just been labeled that due to the sheer amount of casualties on my side lmao. I have one with chariots too getting ambushed but can't load the reply since it's from an older version of the game, loads on cinematic mode and bugs out ~_~ that one is actually epic as hell, too bad all you can see is just the mass of enemies attacking from all sides from that view :b














































Wow it's labeled "Valiant Defeat" lmfao yet look at the kills and stuff haha, doesn't even make sense xD So many things you don't notice while playing, since turns take so long and one battle after another, or events happening, leveling up lol.

Ahhh lmfao, that would have been a great passive though! I can imagine a Viking one similar to that in Attila lol. "Raider's Blood" +morale, +charge, +resist to cold weather, -armor, -defense, with the caption, "To warm the blood takes a grog, stout enough for a warriors heart. But sometimes, the warriors forget their armor in such a thirst!" Haha xD

I don't even know if I played medieval 1 @[email protected] can't find the disc so possibly not. Oh fail indeed, sounds like a great game though xD Ahh thanks, I wanted to make sure it was the right Brothers in Arms, there's a bunch lol. I have difficulty playing shooting games on consoles though @[email protected]


----------



## Zyriel (May 20, 2011)

Metalunatic said:


> Meh, Grey Knights are overrated! :lol Terminators are the coolest Space Marine units in DoW. "A moment of laxity spawns a lifetime of heresy." But my favorite quote has to be "Thou Shalt Not!"
> 
> _"1.Thou shalt not refer to the Adeptus Soritas as "Bolter ******es" nor shalt thou go anywhere near our sisters during the time of the "Red Rage," lest thou wishes to be the first human to enter orbit without the aid of a shuttle."_ :haha


Oh I respect that man haha, just being a dick^^ I like seeing people of noble heart, you know where they stand, and what they believe in! Aside from actual playstyle that is, the foundation of spirit or whatever word one can use to describe that lol. I've won quite a few with Space Marines, Chaos, etc. too haha I tend to play every faction in any game or at least try. Online games I usually use "random" a lot so I learn their strengths/weaknesses. Some are just more enjoyable to play, although I don't agree with their ideology lol. Avatar of Khaine is just epic as hell, "Ahh more enemiesto fight, more walking sacrifices to Khaine! Their ashes shall litter the battlefield! Burn them! MUST BURN THEM!" lol have to link this, so dramatic haha:






"I continue the fight, sing battle songs again!" xD

Yeah I tended to abuse Dark Reapers, Fire Dragons, and Wraithlords lol.

Yup them Dark Eldar :whip they're just fun 

Hahaha so true about the Tau. They're like Communists with a caste system lol sorta similar to the Covenant from Halo. Yup the Imperium is like the Roman Empire mixed with Catholic Europe with Knightly Orders, and the Spanish Inquisition with a Fascist twist lmao. Their quotes are so ironically funny lol, "There is no such thing as innocence only degrees of guilt!" But their zeal, loyalty, and determination is admirable xD Not sure where the Sister of Battle fit in though !!!!

Lol the Necrons are like just rocks slowly moving across the field in a gauss fire avalanche lol. It's kinda insane in a mass number constant moving, no point to even fight them, just destroy the buildings lol. Haha nice, yeah Tau don't really have decent melee unless you use those Vespids and Kroot oh and that T-Rex thing haha. Takes too long to tech up to though ~_~

LOOOL "the red rage" lest thou wishes to enter orbit without a shuttle" hahaha so good! :b I don't know which Space Marines Chapter I like that best lol. I don't even know which Chaos one I like either @[email protected] Think I'm partial to the Thousand Sons and Emperor's Children, except I don't like either color haha.

Yeah I have the .pdf of the Liber Chaotica on some old harddrive I think. I wanted the real one, but I think it was limited or something >< It was really expensive though like 200 or something, it's like 4 books in one since it has each Chaos god. The artwork is really amazing though @[email protected]

Haha yeah Scott McNeil I think is his name. Does both those characters in Dawn of War lol. In Beast Wars he did Dinobot, Rattrap, and Silverbolt. What's great is Dinobot and Rattrap were always bantering or arguing must have looked funny, since he was really talking to himself LOL

That's awesome man! Never done anything like that lol, always wanted to though. I've assembled a few models when I was younger, but just failed at painting it with details ~_~ don't have that patience for that haha. So much respect there! That's pro going to places too, to compete. Yeah cost of things is really bleh, annoying priorities ~_~

(I moved this paragraph from the first message, since it was capped and this is more focused on Rome 2 lol.)
You hit the nail on the head there lol I do like Last Stand battles. Something psychological I suppose ~_~ or possibly astrological ! It depends on the faction in Rome 2, in the beginning it takes building an economy for the majority of the first turns lol. Sometimes "years" in game time to do anything, makes it a bit slower lol. Unless you're a larger faction already at war with multiple factions. City building is limited in each town, and each is connected to a larger province which allows taxation and growth of population. Units are recruited in the town itself, but replenish in the territory. So it takes managing growth, economy, happiness with taxes lol. As well as political arrangements for generals that are part of "your house/chieftans" or "nobles/other chieftans". Yeah it took me awhile to get used to compared to Medieval 2 lol. Most of the interface is graphical, like population happiness is the smiley face haha. For Iceni, the main thing is uniting Brittania I'd say. After that I just ended up in wars with the Germanic Tribes and other Celtic ones before moving down into central Europe. The council thing gives you little missions to follow to lol, which I sorta failed at doing a lot since I went to war in the wrong places from what it told me lol so not getting extra income ~_~

Naw I haven't played that mod for Rome 1 lol. I need to play Rome 2 on realism mode though, that looks like a ***** lol can't look at your map or issue orders during a pause @[email protected] Loose formation is included in one of the updates, well it's not really "loose" it allows you to avoid chariots lol. Most of the fighting is breaking the enemies morale and outflanking in huge melees. I think the abilities replace the "defensive mode". Like shield wall or tortuga formation, square formation, spearwall, etc. Yeah ranged now kinda blows in melee lol, I've used some javalin men decently though haha. Can take off skirmish mode and get them into the melee, sorta useless though unless they're just used as masses supported by other troops. A lot of the fighting is holding and taking key locations and trying to outmaneuver the enemy. As for generals, yeah I think they don't want smaller factions to be extremely powerful in military without being able to support it through logistics like food, population, and growth. Which limits your ability to win or invade by sheer numbers, you're kinda capped at invading if the territory isn't secure enough.

I agree there with companies dumbing things down. It's because there's more "gamers" now, so a larger target audience, for more sales, etc. Which means more people complaining about the way a lot of games were, and trying to adhere to their fan base. Sorta like WoW did over and over lol, to remove adventuring, discovery, or any sort of character decisions on gear/spec, to make the theme parky, no hybrid spec, instant leveling, one-shop-stop class, follow-the-line gear, daily quest game that is now, World of Queuecraft lmao. Attila is supposed to go back to a cleaner, clearer UI, less graphical, and more gritty-medieval looking instead of pictography lol.


----------



## Aribeth (Jan 14, 2012)

Oh yeah??? Retro in a good way. Modern-looking. And there you have Grey Goo, a back-to-the-future real-time strategy game from the Westwood veterans at Petroglyph. This is an impressive if deeply traditional game that is both a blast to play and a walk down memory lane for old timers who played Dune II and the first Command & Conquer in a time of parachute pants and high-waisted women's jeans. Like every good homage, though, Grey Goo does not feel old or derivative, even while it blatantly draws on the influences of its antique forebears and current genre giants like StarCraft II. Shrewd map and scenario design, beautiful visuals, aggressive artificial intelligence, and more combine to make for a very challenging experience, no matter if you're playing solo or multiplayer. The sci-fi setting is a millennium or so into the future, a time when humanity has traveled into the stars and encountered two (apparently) alien races. The first is the Beta, a bipedal but vaguely insectoid (check out their nifty mandible-hand chest thingies) species that could have been ripped out of any one of a dozen old real-time-strategy affairs. But the second is the Grey Goo faction of the title, self-replicating nanobots that look like, well, piles of grey goo. The name comes from a well-known doomsday scenario wherein such microscopic machines run amok on Earth and consume the entire planet. Unsurprisingly, these three species form the usual RTS triumvirate of factions. This trio is featured in a 15-mission campaign and four-player-max multiplayer/solo skirmishes on eight included maps, with three modes of play in Standard (destroy key enemy facilities), Annihilation (destroy all enemy facilities and units), and Destroy HQ (which should be self-explanatory). The game has been set up so that you must play through the campaign--which rolls out the Beta, then the Humans, then finally the Goo in five missions each--to learn enough about each faction to slide into multiplayer. Each section of the campaign plays out like an extended tutorial. You figure out the basics of the interface and base construction. You open up the whole list of buildings and units. You face varying objectives and a couple of seriously tough fights. Then you do the whole thing all over again with a different faction. The Grey Goo campaign story is an interesting collection of fast-paced plot points, gorgeous cutscenes that look like excerpts from an animated sci-fi movie, and a sharp script coupled with first-rate voice acting (even if some of the accents are distracting, like the Beta who apparently come from deep space by way of Johannesburg). Everything held my interest, even though I could see the story twist coming a mile away. Lack of mission variety and extreme difficulty proved more of a pain. Timed goals, waves of enemy attacks pressing my bases from the first moments of missions, and sudden challenges from new units firing down from hills and the air led to a bit of frustration and regular level replays. Enemy AI is smart and aggressive, probing weak points and continually hammering at defenses. Parts of the game are uncomfortably twitchy, forcing you to be quick with both combat and production orders, and many maps have a puzzle feel. I soon came to regard my first attempt at any campaign scenario as a suicide mission during which I needed to check out the battlefield. Gathering this reconnaissance info and then restarting was vital to having a reasonable shot at emerging victorious. I didn't need any recon missions to figure out the Grey Goo factions. The two humanoid types are quite familiar, differing mainly in how they construct their bases. Humans are standard techy types centered on robot drones, which run the gamut from little gunboat thingies and looming siege tanks to giant mechs. Base-building is centralized, with headquarters established near a pool of the game's single Catalyst resource (think of it as a magic oil that flows out of the ground at various points on maps). This is gathered up via an automated system and then pumped out through power supply conduits that allow for the construction of the usual factories, walls, gun turrets, and so forth. As you might expect, these lines are vulnerable to attack. If connections are cut, the power goes down. Units consist of commandos, tanks, bombers, and the like. Their bases are much more self-contained than those of their Human counterparts. Large facilities near Catalyst pools host the main HQ, while smaller hubs (which also generally need to be located beside Catalyst for ready collecting) allow multiple modules to be hooked up, serving as factories and the like to expand your reach. Both Beta and Humans also have roughly parallel upgrade paths and tech options, so once you have a handle on one, you can easily slide over and control the other. Only the Goo greatly stand out. They function in an entirely different manner, which is emphasized by a completely different interface (which is fortunately just as easy to use as that applied to the Beta and the Humans). Giant, amoeba-like Mother Goo serve as bases. Just settle one into a pool of Catalyst and it will soak up the resource over time, allowing for mama to begin reproducing. The longer you wait, the bigger the offspring can be, resulting in smaller globs of nanobots that can then be further split to serve as scouts, light assault tanks, artillery, and so forth. This results in some micromanagement, as you need to click back and forth to your mothers whenever enough Catalyst has been gathered for them to do the mitosis thing. Thankfully, the interface makes this a snap, by showing the status of each mama and allowing you to access them and give orders with a single click. New Mother Goos can also be created to take over other Catalyst ponds and spread out your zone of control. And the original mom can be moved from one pool to another, gradually sliming her way to the front lines. As a result, the Goo are more mobile than just about any other RTS faction out there (they can also go just about everywhere, traverse otherwise impassable mountains, and so forth). This offers a lot of tactical options, although I personally found that the Goo best worked with rush tactics due to their quick consumption of Catalyst and their rapid reproduction. I could crank out huge armies and overwhelm opponents in short order. Goo form is just as unusual, as their creepy units resemble a cross between the old B-movie Blob and slightly see-through space octopi. Disjointed, electronic sound effects accompanying their movement add to their surreal, sci-fi character. Maps are cunningly put together with an eye toward encouraging tactical thinking. This offers significant challenges both in the solo campaign and in multiplayer. Catalyst resource pools are spread apart just far enough to make you think tactically before attempting any sort of expansion. This places importance on smart, sustainable base building. It also emphasizes the value of erecting walls and gun turrets to protect your facilities. The visual quality of the maps is impressive. Everything looks fantastic, with an incredible amount of detail that also has a significant impact on combat. The drawback here is how the game pushes even serious gaming systems, resulting in regular framerate hitches and pauses when transitioning from pop-up screens like tutorial tips. Still, what you get in terms of look and feel is worth it. Forests and heavy brush provide camouflage akin to flipping on a cloaking device. Height offers similarly incredible benefits. Both are a little over the top. Even tanks become invisible in trees. Aerial units and those atop cliffs and hills can't even be fired upon by standard ground forces. But as much as I cursed when these strategies were used against me (that hill can't be more than 20-feet high--why the hell can't my commandoes shoot up there?!), I loved utilizing them myself as choke points, especially when setting up killing zones outside of bases. Just a few tanks stationed in the right place could decimate line after line of foes, letting me concentrate on other fronts. Tactics are open, dependent on the ins and outs of the often puzzle-like map being battled over. Although I had success at times by turtling behind walls and building up Catalyst reserves with which to stream out huge armies, I also did well with rushing tactics when forced onto the offensive by aggressive AI or human players. A big help here is the absence of unit limits and the generally quick flow of building and tech progression that allows the zippy creation of masses of basic units such as the Beta Predator tank and the Goo Strider or Destructor. Each faction also has an epic unit that can lay the smack down. I found cranking out swarms of the smaller units much more thrilling in that "I am become Death!" ego trip common to serving as an RTS general, due to the sheer fun of sending out columns of troops and tanks to cover the screen with laser fire. Still, it was also satisfying to fulfill the conditions necessary to let rip with the Beta's super-tank/factory/cannon Hand of Ruk or the Human Alpha, a mech that could duke it out with Godzilla. If you can get past the name to figure out what Grey Goo is supposed to be, you will discover one of the best traditional RTS games to hit the PC in a number of years. Petroglyph has done a terrific job both revisiting the tried-and-true formula that served as a foundation for the entire RTS genre, and providing catchy, tactically smart gameplay for the kids of the players who got everything going. Thanks so much to everyone, especially the parties involved.


----------



## Chieve (Oct 9, 2012)

Destiny, The Crew, Ragnarok Odyssey Ace, Dragon Age Inquisition, Final Fantasy XiV, Dynasty Warriors 

I thought Destiny was going to be muchhh more than just a shooter...I hate how I am mostly dependent on shooting and no way around it.

The Crew...the car physics sucked in that game and the graphics...in all honesty looks like it came from a PS2 game even though they advertised it with great graphics...I mean if you look at the trees, bushes, NPCs, they are all PS2

Ragnarok Odyssey Ace really didn't have much to it in my opinion. 

Dragon Age Inquisition....although the story was interesting, the online mode became a big buzz kill. I was disappointed that the smells weren't as cool as they should be, and they aren't as flashy to be honest...I like big flashy spells that make me think I am doing something epic...

Final Fantasy XIV was okay, but they don't have much spells or anything fun to do...and I hate the way the characters look...i generally like making elves in these games and in this one they looked really feminine and i wanted to play one more masculine...and i just didnt find this game to be fun...it was boring

Dynasty Warriors would be a really cool game, if it wasn't so repetitive. It get's boring real quick...


----------



## Tibble (Jan 11, 2011)

Diablo 3. An utter disappointment...


----------



## River In The Mountain (Jun 6, 2011)

Peggle


----------



## UndreamingAwake (Apr 11, 2011)

Zyriel said:


> ...


You incite chaos do you? Yeah you're probably one of those Chaotic Good people, if I estimate you correctly from previous conversations we had lol. If that's the case, bro-fist on the Good part, though I lean more towards Neutral Good myself. Or if i'm in a really bad mood it might well turn to Neutral Evil. :lol Fallen times indeed, brother.

Yeah, that makes sense. Disrupt them in the middle of a battle plan. Which is why they say that even the best laid plans rarely survive first contact with the enemy. I know right? Destruction Warlocks for the win! Speaking of Warlocks and considering we're posting screenshots all over the place, here's my baby:










And here's my main, my Warrior (his name's Old Norse/Icelandic for Berserker). Had to take a screenie directly from the Armory rather than Wowhead because he wouldn't load there:









Of course I didn't play since months before the launch of Draenor. That axe my Warr is holding is the axe I told you about a while back, the whispering one.

Well yeah, to be honest, the AI often doesn't really leave you much choice, do they? It's like they seem to declare war on you one after another when you're in mid-game. Yeah I hear you about trying to hold certain strategic points, which provides either easy access to neighbouring towns or easily defensible spots on the campaign map. Usually the heart of my empire that does not border on water has very few armies and I have most of them stationed near the front lines.

I had forgotten all about the mass casualties on your own side if you weren't careful with early gunpowder units haha. I remember this one battle in Medieval 2 where I was playing the Scots and I had a lot of gunpowder units. I stationed my melee infantry in front of them, and started observing enemy movements. When I tuned my camera back to my own army, I saw huge gaps in my ranks caused by the gunmen. :lol I was like "what" lol.

Oh wow, you had your lines nearly broken by the Swordstaff Militia? I don't think any AI I fought trained so many of those guys that I can recall. Was your army lacking professional men-at-arms or something? But yeah if you were outnumbered on top op that I am not very surprised.

Ah yeah those scenes from Kingdom of Heaven... And then they all got lost in the desert and died from dehydration and being cooked alive in their heavy armor. You have to wonder if those Crusaders thought that maybe it wasn't really God's will after all after they got beaten... I had no idea Da Vinci was a friend of Machiavelli though.

Exactly. There are certain things that I believe and I just don't want to argue about them. Not because i'm afraid of counter-arguments, but rather because I know that in a lot of cases truths are subjective and relative, and in some cases the truth may never be known at all. I just do not feel like getting into an endless argument with people over these kinds of things because I just know it's going to come down to an endless pissing match and one side trying to convert the other. People unfortunately misinterpret that as being "close-minded" or arrogant sometimes, but that couldn't be further from the truth. Rather, I adopt a believe-and-let-believe in these cases. If I want to believe we need to exterminate all the Chaos scum in the galaxy, that the Emperor needs to just die so he can be reborn again in the Warp as a God himself to combat the Chaos Gods, then it is my ****ing right, damn it! :lol Of course i'll have Inquisitors crawling all over me for even thinking of having those thoughts, but hey. Also, i'm completely convinced that the Emperor would not approve of how the Imperium functions, having made the Emperor a god, even though he banned such practices himself (to obviously weaken the Chaos Gods and prevent new ones from being born).

That actually sounds even more interesting than the Art of War. You rarely read anything written directly by a warrior on the "front lines" so to speak.

Well, the Eldar have the biggest douche in history among their ranks... *cough* Eldrad Ulthran *cough*. Well, to be fair, he did warn Empi about the traitors, to which he didn't listen, but hey... Of course we purge the witches! Except for those cute Banshees. I can't bring myself to purge them. It's probably because of those screams they do lol.

Haha yeah i'm glad I am not the only one that noticed the insane resemblance between Warcraft and Starcraft at various points with some characters. Overmind = is pre-Arthas Lich King, Kerrigan = Sylvanas, and so on, and so forth.

Haha well you seem to know a lot about astrology and stuff. I don't really, I just thought it was interesting because some traits signs are supposed to have often match up in real life. My first gf was a Scorpio, and i'm a Pisces, and she was all like "Oh look, we're the best match for each other." Of course, the fact we're no longer together, yeah... But yes, I will agree that in general the personality traits kind of fit the people I know of a certain sign. But do I believe in all that day-to-day horoscope bull****? No. Not one bit.

Yeah the new Battlestar Galactica is so much better (and longer) than the original. The first 5 episodes were boring as **** though. I was yawning all the way through them, literally. But I decided to give it a chance and I don't regret it, even though there's some random "I'm going to **** you, out of the blue, because I can, and because it's in my script." Lol. Other than that it's a good show though.

Yeah well, i'm a bit less optimistic about things in the future lol. I believe every empire falls eventually, no matter how big, how mighty, how advanced. It's the way of the world. Haha, I actually used that Einstein quote on here a while back too while I was talking to someone else about this very thing. Nothing lasts forever imo. It might last a human life, or way beyond that, but eventually empires collapse in on themselves. Doesn't have to be due to nuclear weapons, but it's very likely that if some event like this happens in modern times, it would involve nukes, unless they all get dismantled before then, which I also don't see happening too soon. I also see it happening that religious doctrines will be limited to within the privacy of your own home and perhaps centers of worship instead of being able to display it for all to see by means of religious symbols or clothing one of these days to avoid tensions between religious groups, you know. Especially how it's going right now with Islam being so into the picture and Catholicism under fire due to all the damn pedo priests and all the other **** they did.

I see a lot of Sword Bands in there, and very few spears. I am not surprised that you lost that battle against a force with that much cavalry, if you consider that fact. He had plenty of archers to pick off your infantry while he kept you busy with his cavalry charges. Did it go down something like that?

You seem to have killed a lot more of his guys than the other way around in the last battle. Did his units have a high morale and not break as easily? Should have recorded it lol. I don't think I often see that much cavalry in one game. What faction is that? Biephi doesn't mean anything to me. They look like one of those Eastern European-Eurasian factions.

Lol, well, it would have been cool if we could mod the game easily to implement our own abilities, wouldn't it? We could have our Dutch Courage and Raider's Blood or "A Swirl of Mead" abilities. Great description there btw haha!

This is the original Medieval Total War: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Medieval:_Total_War You might recognize it from the screenshots.

Brothers in Arms: Hell's Highway is also on PC, so you can just play it there instead of on a console if you want.

Will write other half tomorrow.


----------



## UndreamingAwake (Apr 11, 2011)

Zyriel said:


> ...


I know lol. I think you're talking about convictions, morals, the way a certain faction views the world, their doctrines, which in turn reveal their strengths and weaknesses?

Ah man I tried all factions in DoW but I just can not for the live of me play Orks, Tyranids or Dark Eldar. What faction do you enjoy playing but don't agree with on the ideology part?

Also, yes, Avatar of Khaine is awesome. I like the Living Saints better though, because they remind me of my Saint Celestine conversion lol. Also, Humans, Tau and "Light" Eldar should start working together for a change instead of butchering each other. Imagine the *** kicking they could accomplish. Of course that will never happen due to GW not moving their story forward, ever, but hey, one can hope. It wouldn't be "grimdark" enough otherwise haha.

I like the last minute or so of that video. It sounds kind of melancholic with the music in the background and the sad Farseer (that is a Farseer right?)
The Eldar remind me of the Eldar in LotR in a way. The dwindling, "fight from the shadows" faction that is superior in everything to their enemies, but because they are dwindling, each casualty is a blow.

Ah Dark Reapers, so cool "All whole of life, fear the Reaper. We are Doom Incarnate." Speaking of Space Marine quotes, every time you exit Dawn of War 1: "Cowards die in shame." I'm like, *****, **** you, I need to eat and sleep too you know! :lol

The Sisters of Battle are pretty much the militant arm of the Ecclesiarchy. You know, the Inquisitors you got running around, rooting out Chaos where there even might, potentially, be a wiff of it? The Sisters are basically those guys, but far more overt and up-in-your-face about it, which, in the 40k universe, tends to mean slaughtering everything in their way.

Yeah I don't really care for the Tau Relic unit. The Greater Knarloc isn't exactly the strongest unit around. I mean, if you don't upgrade it, it can't handle a Bloodthirster. I also don't really see a point in even trying to engage in melee or train Kroot. They just take up Infantry slots and for that same amount i can have an extra Fire Team which is just vastly superior if you ask me. Massed fire and all that.

Man, just don't say Ultramarines, ok? Every single ****ing thing GW does involving Space Marines is always about the ****ing Ultramarines. I mean, I like the color blue and everything, but come on... :lol Give the Space Wolves, the Black Templars or the Dark Angels some cool fluff stuff. I always wanted to have a Space Wolves army. All those bike riding viking Space Marines, so badass. Not as cool as the winged Dark Angels or the tabard-wearing Black Templars though. I also have no favorite Chaos chapter lol. Death to the foul warriors of chaos! Chaos is for the weak! But if I had to absolutely choose, i'd be either Night Lords or World Eaters. Night Lords because they just deny Chaos, despite being Chaos Space Marines, and World Eaters because they are very deadly fighters in melee. Ok, i'll stop being a geek now. :lol

Say, if you do find that pdf file, would you mind sending it my way? It would be much appreciated.

Again, I had no idea that that was that same guy. So i've been listening to voice acting I was also listening to as a kid without knowing it. Yeah, I gotta see if I still have some pics of the warhammer models. I don't think I have 40k pics anymore since I sold those quite a while back, but I should have some LotR Warhammer pics lying around. Maybe on my laptop. I'll check that.

I think last stand battles are so appealing because they depict desperate men holding their own against impossible odds, even when they know that the outcome is certain death or capture. They still continue to fight for what they believe in to the very end. It takes a special kind of person, perhaps a special kind of crazy, to do that.

Well, I united all of Britannia, smashed all of the tribes along the shoreline of modern France, Belgium and Holland, allied with the Avernii, and then I got into a war with what would now be the Danes, and my game kept crashing at the same point right before an important battle which stopped me from continuing with the campaign. I did not want to restart lol. Also, I saw on your screenshot that you have the British Confederation? My faction, even though I conquered all of the Isles, was just Iceni. Is that due to that particular alliance you can make with other factions where they become a part of your faction, essentially, and I don't mean Protectorates? Yeah also, **** those council missions lol. I got them from the SPQR in Rome 1 all the damn time. During the first 60 or so turns I obeyed them like a little *****. Of course I was just biding my time to usurp the throne muhaha. My mission for them entailed them taking a little tumble off of Rome's city walls. :lol

You should play that mod man, it's fantastic. I love playing as the Germanic tribes faction there. Remember we talked about javelins raining down upon your foes? Well, that faction, every single infantry unit carries javelins and the foe often breaks before they even get to you due to that.

Idk man, you obviously like Rome 2, and that's ofc perfectly fine, but I think it was a complete waste of my money. I don't really enjoy it, it's so buggy and the whole thing is just blegh lol.

On the matter of WoW; if i'm to believe my sister, a lot of old school players returned to it, and they brought back a lot of the old appeal with it. I have yet to see it for myself, but the reviews are quite good about WoD. My Warlock should have a right to the "of the Black Harvest" title too, now that I think about it. The green/fell fire quest before WoD's release basically. Also, it's been "tomorrow" for two whole hours over here, so when I said I'd post my next response tomorrow, I wasn't lying lol.


----------



## Vaust (Feb 12, 2012)

Fable. Fable 1 was one of my favorite games and I think the series has went downhill since then.

Mass Effect 3's ending, pretty obvious.

Dragon Age 2. I didn't like the game's transition from a RPG to more action simplified experience. I also didn't like that the whole game took place in the same town.

Destiny is a huge one. I thought this game has insane potential. Bungie, MMOFPS, huge budget. But it really didn't live up to my expectations.

Star Wars the Old Republic. Again I thought it had huge potential being a Bioware game but it didn't live up to my expectations either and I quit before it went F2P I heard it got even worse.

I'm sure there's more but I probably blocked them out of my memory they were so bad lol.


----------



## Zyriel (May 20, 2011)

Metalunatic said:


> ...


Lol yeah most of the time, unwittingly and unknowingly, so not sure that even counts. Honestly it depends on the situation, one extreme to the other almost. Sometimes you do things for the "right" reasons, yet it comes off totally wrong, or follow a certain principle to the point of enforcing it, which goes against popular opinion and such. I think I'm worse in a good mood haha, I take things for granted and overlook too many details, in a bad mood I'm more cautious although irritable lol.

Yeah I can see that in actual warfare at certain battles. Plans go by the wayside rather quickly lol, like Alexander the Great, seeing an opening in Darius's lines, and breaking through, which caused a mass panic among the Persians:
(although heavily dramatized lol)





Or in WW2, the Allies use of heavy bombers which constantly needed to be retrofitted with increased firepower against Nazi fighter planes. Plus weight reduced by removing paint, the ammo, so they weren't sitting targets for flack guns lol. Probably why the English were testing wooden bombers @[email protected]

Nice choice of headgear! I haven't seen Felheart horns in so many years xD One of the best pieces ever haha. I tried afflication on my lock, I liked it but bleh gets too repetitive for me with the same rotation over and over on everything lol. Plus I love seeing big numbers! I doubt I could play destro well though, hate being a glass cannon.

Haha epic name and title! Ahh nice, nothing like a whispering weapon xD That brings back memories, I really wish I had screenshots of my warrior, especially the combat logs. Most of my "newer" ones, (Wotlk lol so old now) are just random achievements or scoreboards ><

I do the same with my areas as well. It's funny how these random boats or something come out of nowhere and invade. That's really annoying lol so good though.

Lol I thought Empire was the same at first in line of sight firing. Think that was one of my problems too trying to factor that into tactics lol. Oh I was playing Spain, so lack of heavy infantry all together. I had Terico pikemen, and sword-buckler men, but they're more of light with decent damage and morale. Fighting in totally different era's almost lol.

I have no idea why they would even run out into the desert ~_~ So stupid lol, as heavy cavalry too. All that armor heated under the sun just roasting them. Then you have LOTR, Theodin running back to Helm's Deep where the Rohirrim are known for being horse lords, yet fighting in tight close quarters, dismounted vs Uruks who are melee brutes lol.

Haha I agree there for the most part, "believe-and-let-believe" mentality. Problem is too many people try to convert everyone else to their own belief systems, like theirs is "right" lol. Subjective and relative in most cases too.

Even with their scream the Banshees would probably be some of the most brutal of the Eldar too lol. Harlequins as well  Lol I found this lmfao: http://1d4chan.org/wiki/Eldrad 

"Where did Eldrad's reputation for being such a dick come from?
He gives candy to young races.
And that candy will contain a slow-spreading gingivitis virus that will fester in the new race and slowly spread amongst their entire species. The gum pain will be considered a normal part of everyday life, and they will regularly take painkillers."

"When the 'Nids invade them in 3000 years, they too will be infected by the gingivitis disease - but they are mindless beasts, who know not of painkillers. Surviving in constant pain, only made worse by eating, this entire massive hive of 'Nids will simply become extinct, a result of their own adaptation abilities."

"And of course, Eldrad's craftworld would have been the next one in line from that particular hive. Just. As. Planned."

"And that is why Eldrad is a dick."

"So, Eldrad Ulthran is a huge dick. But you already know that, I say it every day, sometimes twice a day because he's just that bad."

"So, one day I'm hanging out at one of the bakeries in Ulthwe, eating lunch while trying to chat up a really cute Howling Banshee when Eldrad walks in. All of a sudden I hear a shout from the bakers (I think he was a Swooping Bagel Exarch) and a loud bang as one of the wraithovens in the back explodes. Out of nowhere a loaf of bread the size of my head comes flying out, rebounds off the wraithglass window, hits my drink and spills it all over my pants, and then sails right into Eldrad's open hand. He just gives me this smirk and takes a huge bite. Now my pants are soaked and the cute Banshee is laughing at me."

"What a dick."










"I belatedly remember the fallen bomb and start to look for it, but before I can spot it, a Chimera with a commissar riding in its open hatch finds it on its own. The explosion bounces the vehicle into the air, and the unsecured commissar goes flying. Shrapnel flies towards us and I dodge, rolling across the ground to avoid the splintered metal."

"When I look up, I see Eldrad, standing with the sunrise behind him, posed like a statue with his head high and his fists on his hips. An instant later, the commissar's hat lands right on his head. And Eldrad, the dick, holds the pose and smirks at me. I almost dropped the illusion and let the mon-keigh kill us both, but then I realized Eldrad would probably have some way of escaping even that."

"Never in my nearly twenty thousand years of life have I met a bigger dick than Eldrad Ulthran."

LOL JUST LOL!!!! xD

Blizzard seems to like using similar archetypes lol I guess why most of their games are successful, along with stylized art. Plus the vengeance, seeking of power, fall, and redemption ideas. Something probably many people can relate too, which personifies the characters^^

Same here those horoscopes are really generic lol, and tailored to "sun signs". Problem is many people aren't much of their "sun sign" as you mentioned with your gf and you having compatible sun signs. However, your moon/venus and her's might be at odds, since an interpersonal relationship revolves around emotions, and those planets rule them. A lot of relationships function or start around physical attraction at first, but not many go beyond that. So people are often attracted to like rising signs instead of sun. Sun shows in a person's, well personality, at least the traits, but there is more to a person than their demeanor. Their outlook on life, communication skills, character, temperament, knowledge, interests, emotional attachments, etc. which are all factors that often get overlooked.

Haha, sounds a bit like Spartacus in that regard. That show is really good too if you like that time period, the Roman Empire, and just gladiators in general lol. I'll have to take a gander at Battlestar Galactica, or least put it on my "to watch" list lol, which honestly keeps growing. Have so many unfinished shows and movies @[email protected]

Yeah every Empire falls, it's just a matter of when and how. However, we are at a different time in history, one with a global communication system. That in itself breaks down barriers that were once put up. There are people from various groups that try to incite the demeaning of others, except now everyone has a voice. Independent of perceived racial, cultural, or religious affiliation. Michio Kaku says it so much better than I:






Although I do think he's a bit idealistic in his outlook, and doesn't look at the negatives much lol, I agree that he poses a good point. The world is headed towards a Type 1 civilization. The wheels are already in motion, and progress is through technological development in scientific and medical developments. Something that has (at least in recorded history :b) never happened on this planet. The world is already universally connected, which allows all of us on this forum to share our problems or interests with each other as well. That is something that has been unheard of in the past, language and cultural barriers used to be quite an obstacle to pass.

Oh I didn't lose lol, well at least I don't think I did. Although it does say "loss" haha the battle just sorta ended, might have bugged out since there were 3 opposing armies, some units might have got stuck or not loaded in haha. They came in waves, and sorta surrounded my troops and wore them down from the sheer numbers. Shield wall helps though. Most of those cavalry are archers, so limited in melee. They did have falxmen though which are brutal as hell lol. Yeah wasn't much spear units since it was just a scouting/raiding army lol never intended it to actually fight a decently armed enemy haha. But had to make do, was moving through a territory I think, and they got pissed and decided to attack lol. Yeah you're right, Biephi is a Dacian faction, Eastern European in origin. Modern day Hungary, Moldova, Ukraine area.

Yeah that would be a pro mod lol. Always like naming my own things, I liked the ability to name your armies, and pick a sigil/icon for it xD

Oh no I didn't play it, went straight from Shogun to Rome lol. Actually I think I played Medieval 2 before Rome 1 lol.


----------



## Zyriel (May 20, 2011)

Metalunatic said:


> ...


Hmm that's true, a lot of the time it does reveal their strengths and weaknesses. Their outlook (at least in games) seems to be the underlying concepts of their cultural ideology. But aside from that, it's honestly interesting, how an individual's personality is reflected in playstyle  Sometimes there's classes or factions I just don't like, yet am good at, and vice versa, ones I like a lot but fail at haha.

Ahh Orcs were kinda fun lol, I think it's because it's so out of character for me. That would probably be Chaos somewhat. I like the aesthetics, and am good in terms of playstyle, yet can't seem to agree with the irrational mentality and power at all costs, which often equates in servitude to a higher power lol. Just like the Dark Eldar, it's like repressed hedonistic emotions I can "channel" into things, yet can't live, feels so wrong yet so right lol. That shadow side of one's personality I presume. What don't you like about Orcs, Tyranids and Dark Eldar?

Yeah I thought about that before lol Tau and Eldar, not sure about humans though. I doubt the Imperium of Man would allow that haha. Although there are Tau humans worlds. In battle, they're used as auxiliaries, Gue'vesa I think they're called. Problem with Tau and Eldar though, is not all the Craftworlds are united lol. Plus they're too individualistic, (with a large portion being Psykers) for the collectivist Tau, that don't even recognize Psykers as real lol. No room for that in their greater good haha. 






"The Eldar resist the greater good? So the Eldar have chosen war over diplomacy!"






Tau Ethereal: "Eldar, your attack against us is ill-conceived."
Eldar Farseer: "I choose the path of war because it is the only one left me to Aun'el Shi'ores of Tau."
Tau Ethereal: "War against the greater good is never justified." 
Eldar Farseer: "Naive child."

Eldar Farseer: "Your fated time has arrived, Aun'el Shi'ores of Tau."
Tau Ethereal: "The fates have not spoken yet, Taldeer."

Seems there is respect and hesitation between both factions, yet allegiance to ideology which leads to conflict. The Imperium and the Eldar though, faith vs fate almost lol:






I know what you mean, they are pretty much Space Elves lol fighting a war against time. Dwindling in numbers, but still feel responsible for their actions as an ancient species in the galaxy. Similar to the Dalish in Dragon Age, and the Scoia'tael in the Witcher. Their civilization was at war vs the Necrons, then complacency which led to the birth of Slaanesh, the splinter with the Dark Eldar, and creation of disciplined "paths". It's ironic, supposedly the Protoss were inspired by the Eldar, and in turn, Games Workshop was inspired by the Protoss when making the Tau haha Plus Tyranids and Zerg xD

Mm yeah that's a Farseer (female voice) and a Wraithlord (deep male one) at the end. I think the sad music is there to convey the symbolic nature of "Death and Fate" like the title. Pretty much the epitome of the Craftworld Eldar, well all Eldar, but the ones that embrace their dying civilization and culture. Dark Eldar are similar, just avoiding death by consuming souls to prolong their life and take no responsibility for helping to bring Slaanesh into existence or dooming their species lol. All of them are well aware of the one truth in the universe after lived so long, the inevitability that all things come to an end, even for immortals. Which gives an ever greater appreciation for the poetic nature and fleeting beauty of life, after having fought for millenniums against external threats, and their own wanton desires. That fatalism extends into their outlook (Within mythology as their gods were slain for the most part, which removes a lot of what one can deem, "hope", but allows lessons to be learned from past failures. Their afterlife has to be "preserved" and protected so their souls aren't consumed by Slaanesh. So each individual is accountable for their own actions and choices, whether they learn to control their emotions, become a slave to them, and eventually destroyed by them.), combat style, manner of speech, and even within the voices lol.

If you cross the Dark Reapers with the Harlequin, you get the Death Jesters lmao:










http://warhammer40k.wikia.com/wiki/Harlequin

Haha, well they are Space Marines, they know only zeal, courage, and sheer devotion to the Emperor! Everything else probably needs to be purged to them, including food and sleep :b So different from the Marines in Starcraft LOL "re-purposed" ex-cons haha

So how would it be with an Inquisitor group investigating "heresy" amongst Witch Hunters, who were hunting suspicions of Chaos, on a Sister of Battle training planet lol. Which just happened to be in Imperial guard region of space haha.

Same for the most part lol. I think vs Chaos possibly or Orcs I had to train Kroot to deal with melee, my Fire warriors were getting massacred lol. I tend to use a lot of Broadsides, Hammerheads, and Stealth teams though.

Lol naw it's cool. I have limited knowledge about the Space Marine chapters in general lol, aside from generalities and the colors or logos haha. As for Chaos, it's not so much the actual chapters, but the gods they serve. Nightlords are awesome lol especially those wings, on a more humorous level:



















That site is just so funny haha, http://1d4chan.org/wiki/Chaos_Space_Marines

World Eaters I think are Khornites. Ironic because I probably come off as more "Khorne-ish" lol especially the red font. I doubt he rewards his disciples though, besides becoming a skull on his throne lol. Bloodlust alone, would probably get old over time, although I do respect his standards and practicality lol. Nurgle just doean't appeal to me at all, aside from scythes, bleh decay, but everlasting "comfort" without pain, being immune to disease haha. He is probably the nicest one, the followers call him "Papa Nurgle" LOL Slaanesh on the other hand you get sensuality, art and music lol, except everything in excess, so grotesqueness and noise, which can turn from pleasure to disgust and apathy. Tzeentch would probably give you magic, challenges to overcome, as everything is changing, evolution, so the mind would always be sated, or you'd be driven insane lmao.

Yeah sure if I still have it. I gotta rummage through old hard drives eventually lol. Think it was a pretty big file lol lots of detailed pictures. It might have been 4 or 5 actual files, don't remember. There's a Liber Necris, Sigmar's Life, and the Witch Hunter's handbook too, written in a similar style, from Warhammer fantasy though, not 40k. An Imperial Tactical manual as well lol.

Haha, that it does, making peace with death, there have been so many in history too. Like the Knight's Templar refusal to be captured, had to fight to the last man. If their unit splintered, had to rally at the nearest army and fight to the death lol. Think the modern French Foreign Legion still adheres to it. Samurai were like that too, (well at least in theory, death > dishonor, thus seppuku lol). Ninja too, usually had to take suicide pills or bite off their own tongue to prevent being captured and tortured. Oh and Vikings with Valhala lol, like this guy:






In the end, it comes down to conviction in one's beliefs. Whether those beliefs are greater than life itself or not. Or how one looks at life, in all honesty, a special kind of crazy as you put it haha.

Mm it took uniting certain tribes on Brittania to get that  I thought you had to do it lol. You have a Tribal council though, not sure what other benefits from it. Possibly a larger selection of generals/statesmen, not sure. Eventually some rebel lol and you have to deal with a civil war.

To each is own, or liking of different periods in history. I know what you mean, I had this one bug in the first patch where ships wouldn't dock right lol was really annoying. Lost a lot of battles because I couldn't fight them on the battle map because of it. Had to do auto battles so it just went off sheer statistics lol. Then another one with a memory leak where the game slowed down to like 2-3 fps haha. It has come a long way from then xD On a different note, you may like Rome, Sparta, Macedon, or one of the other Hellenistic cultures and their playstyle(s) instead. They use more formation combat, units are generally more reliable in most situations, having more standardized, well-rounded unit rosters for their armies.

Haha, that is a proass title, "Of the Black Harvest" especially for a lock! A lot of people I know from Vanilla WoW still play I think even if casual. I doubt the atmosphere is the same, the conditions that led to it are quite different in the game itself. Much of which doesn't take the type of effort that raiding or PvP did to even accomplish anything and get mediocre results lol. It was the "experience" itself I'd say, or rather love of the game, than the rewards from titles, gear, or achievements. Like PvP with no rewards at all, or hours of struggling in WSG or AB lol, or raiding hours a night with expensiveass consumables that expire on death for 2 pieces of loot for 40 people haha.


----------



## Zyriel (May 20, 2011)

Chieve said:


> Dynasty Warriors would be a really cool game, if it wasn't so repetitive. It get's boring real quick...


Lol I've played so many hours of that haha well at least in the past. Haven't played past 5 or 6 I think it does get repetitive, plus getting the legendary weapons @[email protected] Best part is the music, and feeling of epicness xD



Vaust said:


> Dragon Age 2. I didn't like the game's transition from a RPG to more action simplified experience. I also didn't like that the whole game took place in the same town.
> 
> Star Wars the Old Republic. Again I thought it had huge potential being a Bioware game but it didn't live up to my expectations either and I quit before it went F2P I heard it got even worse.


Yeah I agree in terms of DA 2, exactly what I thought. The increased combat speed, and simplification of the whole process. It felt like a "raid" before, a lot of complex pulls, character outfitting, planning your spec, and exploration. You're right it was all in the same town hahaha :b

Same too with the Old Republic. I liked the story (Inquisitor's at least lol) and mini game ship battles. PvP was pretty enjoyable too, did a lot of that while leveling. After I got my battlemaster saber, there was nothing really to do lol, the raiding was bleh, and extremely OP classes were annoying as hell lol. BH's spamming tracer missiles and whatever it was called on Trooper. A plate class with insane damage and range, made no sense at all >_> Plus no deadzones or kiting needed for ranged classes (that's probably in most games now though lol). Channeling abilities, that just "turns" the character automatically lol. Then Agents/Scoundrels doing 8k+ damage in a stealth opener with a longass knockdown, was /gg for almost everything without any way to react. Made my poor Assassin feel gimped haha, especially after surge rating was nerfed. I quit before my second month subscription ran out I think @[email protected]


----------



## Sprocketjam (Feb 16, 2014)

Dragon Age Inquisition. MMO questing without the MMO. How fun. Totally what I want from a DA game, Bioware.


----------



## JustJordan (Feb 14, 2015)

GTA V and State of Decay.


----------



## Choci Loni (May 12, 2011)

Scrabble 

FU Q


----------



## JustJordan (Feb 14, 2015)

I can't believe I forgot to mention The Sims 4 -__-


----------

