Poll: Medieval 2: Total War

Recommended Videos

Pulsifer

New member
Dec 26, 2007
25
0
0
The core question for the Total War series is, and always has been; Do you want to rule the world? The answer is also the answer to your question; should I buy this game?

[If_no;goto_"peggle"]


For those of us who have faithfully followed the series through it's three previous installments - Shogun, Medieval and Rome - the core gameplay of M:TW2 will be immediately familiar. For the benefit of those who don't, the game offers you two meta-games in which you will prove your suitability to the throne of Emperor.

The strategic map, in which you start as one of five immediately availible nations*, is where the big-picture game is played. It's not really complicated; the goal is your flag above their cities and castles. But, of course, that's their goal, too. And with the Pope about, telling everyone to just chill and be nice - and you'll quickly find a Crusade knocking on the door of your capital if you don't listen - you'll often find yourself treading a path on the subtle side of Hannibal in your quest.

To aid you in this, you are given four distinct ways of making this all easier; diplomacy, espionage, assassinations and, if all else fails, war. An enemy can often be talked into giving away a city if you offer him a suitable diplomatic incentive. However, if your neighbours remain stubbornly opposed to gentle assimilation, spying out their cities and having their leaders quietly toe-tagged will make your inevitable sieges and field battles dramatically easier.

And once that comes into play, we go into the second meta-game of M:TW2 (or is that M2:TW?)- the tactical map.

The tactical map, commonly known as the combat interface, is where the Total War series have traditionally split paths with other Risk-like games. This is where you start feeling like you decide the outcome of your bid for world control, your choices have consequences and it's your genius or idiocy that conquers the enemy. It distances you from the feeling that you're playing a numbers and odds game, like Civilization, and that's what makes the Total War series special.

(You are, of course, playing a numbers game, but it's one that doesn't wait around every corner to remind you by hitting you in the face with a baseball bat. And it's one that takes the luck and skill factor into account.)

So, as two armies clash on the strategic map, you'll be brought into a zoomed-in version of the map, placing you and your opponent into the context of the map. This is the above-mentioned and aptly-named tactical map, where you're given a bird's eye overview of your army's position and your enemy army's position. You manouever to gain the advantage for your units and to counter your enemy's advantages. Broken down, it's a complicated game of chess with rock/paper/scissor-type units. However, the historically [largely] correct relative strengths of units as well as the impact of terrain and tactics serve to milden the edge of that design, and in some cases it even warps them. Remember; even a pike unit is defenceless against horse when they're charged into from behind.



Once you've grasped the inherant subtleties of the two meta-games, you'll also start getting an appreciation of the bonds between them. For instance, an unit of Sergeant Spearmen bloodied and experienced from a Papal crusade can bring back battle-bonuses like damascan-steel armour and weapons, high discipline and strong morale. A unit like that will be absolutely brutal when deployed correctly in a battle in mainland Europe. It will also have strategic benefits, like an "honour" bonus to your law and order rating when used as part of a city or castle's garrison. And generals with the same background will become absolutely invaluable, strategically, and a fearsome thing to face on the battlefield.

Now, a lot of this might sound like tedium and details, adding to the already significant workload of micromanaging your cities, fleets and macromanaging your campaign. And it is.

See, that's why I popped the question in the start of the review. Do you want to rule the world? If you don't - if you don't bring your own motivation - this very much open-ended, storyless game with close to zero explosions and naked chicks will quickly become boring. While you might find the battle sequences interesting and challenging, you'll quickly get bored of those, too, out of context.

And to top that, you can actually get beaten in this game. Trashed. Completely annihilated. Easily. Your kingdom will only be known in history books, as a footnote, mispelled and sadly so very, very alone. All alone. This game is mean.

But if you do bring that motivation - if you're actually genuinely interested in history, crave to try your hand at beating the world, or if you're a sadomachistic nutbag, this game will give you everything you can dream of. The contented sigh of watching opponent after opponent - empire after empire - crash down in a silent, unremarked, unremembered thunderclap of flames. The visceral satisfaction of brutally tearing apart army after army by beating your opponent in a tactical game to the death - a game that might as well have been reality. The grin-inducing cheer of having conquered the world with Scotland.

And that's why I'll say that if you do, buy this game, if you don't, stay clear. It's pretty - the new graphics are neat and sometimes cinematically beautiful - and well-done, but if your spark just isn't there, find yourself another game.






*More are added to your list of choices once they're defeated in a campaign, or all of them if you manage to achieve world domination.
 

Melaisis

New member
Dec 9, 2007
1,014
0
0
[If_no;goto_"peggle"]
I like it. ;)

I approve highly of this review. Of course I speak from pure ignorance - only playing Total War up to Rome, but it appears the series still keeps some of its basic, fun principles. Which, as it happens, this review appears to bring to light splendidly.
 

wilsonscrazybed

thinking about your ugly face
Dec 16, 2007
1,654
0
41
Great review, I enjoyed reading it. Having logged more time in this game than any other world domination title, I would have to say that this game is pure bliss for people who like to micromanage.

** Light Spoiler**
You might want to talk briefly about the inevitable gameplay bog down that happens midgame while you're managing a bunch of fronts while the Mongols invade... twice...
** End Spoiler**

You could also mention that there is no multiplayer for the campaign mode. That will be a big issue for many people, myself included.

Overall a good job, great to see some people put effort into their reviews.
 

Pulsifer

New member
Dec 26, 2007
25
0
0
wilsonscrazybed said:
Great review, I enjoyed reading it. Having logged more time in this game than any other world domination title, I would have to say that this game is pure bliss for people who like to micromanage.

** Light Spoiler**
You might want to talk briefly about the inevitable gameplay bog down that happens midgame while you're managing a bunch of fronts while the Mongols invade... twice...
** End Spoiler**

You could also mention that there is no multiplayer for the campaign mode. That will be a big issue for many people, myself included.

Overall a good job, great to see some people put effort into their reviews.
Major d'oh moment for me here. I meant to mention those things, and I've now edited in two more paragraphs into the OP. They're shoe-horned in and don't really fit with the rest of the review, but they certainly have to be there to give the reader an accurate picture of the game.

Thanks for pointing it out, and thanks for the appreciation! I'm working on an additional review for the expansion pack, Kingdoms. If you have any input, I'd love to discuss it here.

Pulsifer
 

wilsonscrazybed

thinking about your ugly face
Dec 16, 2007
1,654
0
41
Pulsifer said:
Thanks for pointing it out, and thanks for the appreciation! I'm working on an additional review for the expansion pack, Kingdoms. If you have any input, I'd love to discuss it here.

Pulsifer
If you send me a final draft before you post it in my mail I'll look it over and send you feedback.
 

Angrywyvern

New member
Sep 30, 2008
98
0
0
I never liked that game, it kind of plays like the only option is war, which isn't very historic. All that matter is killing everything and everyone and taking their towns. There needs to be a more peaceful way to win, and I don't want a peaceful way to take over the world. I want my country and I'm happy. Maybe this is why I liked black and white. Also, I didn't like peggle. XD
 

ianuam

New member
Aug 28, 2008
271
0
0
As much as i love this game, one major major problem that i have come across with the steam version, at least, is the bugs. Took me about a week to get it running, and now it crashes whenever i try to send a crusade to Jerusalem and want to pass through Italy. From what i hear i am not alone in these experiences. Surely that should be made absolutely clear before anyone buys it. Good review though :)
 

LewsTherin

New member
Jun 22, 2008
2,443
0
0
wilsonscrazybed post=326.52861.368295 said:
Great review, I enjoyed reading it. Having logged more time in this game than any other world domination title, I would have to say that this game is pure bliss for people who like to micromanage.

** Light Spoiler**
You might want to talk briefly about the inevitable gameplay bog down that happens midgame while you're managing a bunch of fronts while the Mongols invade... twice...
** End Spoiler**

You could also mention that there is no multiplayer for the campaign mode. That will be a big issue for many people, myself included.

Overall a good job, great to see some people put effort into their reviews.
I just finished up a crusade as they knocked on my door...with 3 full armies with generals with maxed out command >.<

I <3 this game.
 

Zac_Dai

New member
Oct 21, 2008
1,092
0
0
Angrywyvern post=326.52861.831071 said:
I never liked that game, it kind of plays like the only option is war, which isn't very historic. All that matter is killing everything and everyone and taking their towns. There needs to be a more peaceful way to win, and I don't want a peaceful way to take over the world. I want my country and I'm happy. Maybe this is why I liked black and white. Also, I didn't like peggle. XD
Thats cool and its why the Civilization games are good. But I think its unfair to judge a game series called Total War by its lack of peaceful gameplay options. You're right about the historical accuracy of all out war in this period but then it was mostly accurate for the Rome and Shogun games in the series.

As for the review, I liked it, gives a good idea to people new to the Total War series of what the games about and if it would appeal to them.

Personally though I felt this was the worse entry in the entire series and I find its only enjoyable if use some of the excellent mods made by the community.
 

runtheplacered

New member
Oct 31, 2007
1,472
0
0
I absolutely loved Rome Total War, but what killed M2TW for me was the horrible AI. In fact, CA admits that the AI is pretty nonsensical and are making that a big criteria for their next game, Empire: Total War.

Even mods like Stainless steel couldn't really help me, as they would go from not making sense in one way, to not making sense in a totally different way. It's hard to feel like you're conquering the world, when the world is lead by a bunch of idiots who don't know their head from their ass.

But, that is a big plus side to the TW series. They are highly modifiable.

I think you'll find that after trying a few mods, you'll understand why vanilla M2TW is practically unplayable. But even the best of mods can't make this game shine as it probably should. I really feel, however, that CA wants to learn from their mistakes and make Empire: Total War their masterpiece. Time will tell.

I would have to agree with Zac_Dai. This is definitely the worst one of the series, so far.
 

Pernese

New member
Oct 25, 2008
15
0
0
One of the things that bugged me about TW2 was the cavalry charges. The seemed to lack power, especially when compared to Rome. In Rome, a cavalry charge against non-spear infantry would send men flying, as it should be. In TW2, the cavalry charge just sort of stopped at the front line, and the knights started hacking away.