My Honest Concerns About The Total War: Pharaoh Expansion Update
Vložit
- čas přidán 16. 06. 2024
- Today I want to talk a little more about the next and probably last major update to Total War Pharaoh because we know there are going to be loads of new cultures and factions, an expansion of the campaign map to cover these new areas to fully complete pretty much the Bronze Age world we were first promised, which is great! But this only ticks one of the boxes.
What I’d like to focus on today is what else I’d like to ideally see in this major update. Changes to core gameplay mechanics that are just too shallow and uninteresting to play, battle mechanics that do no favours to unit variety and others. I want to talk about what would need to happen to really consider Pharaoh worth purchasing and actually worth my limited hours of gaming.
Check out Instant Gaming to save money on your next video game purchase!
Get 50% off MANOR LORDS: www.instant-gaming.com/en/825...
Get 88% off TOTAL WAR: ATTILA: www.instant-gaming.com/en/570...
Instant Gaming’s Home Page: www.instant-gaming.com/?igr=T...
#TotalWar #Pharaoh #TotalWarPharaoh
Become a channel Member: / @theterminatorgaming
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Become a Patron: patreon.com/TheTerminatorDonate
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Buy me a coffee: www.buymeacoffee.com/thetermi
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Join the Termi Discord for Total War & Manor Lords chats, tournaments & more: / discord - Hry
Don't get me wrong, getting the full Bronze Age scope is still a massive win, but for me to really consider Pharaoh to be a fun, replayable game there needs to be some more done in the core foundation of the game. Let me know what you think below! Will you get the game now? Are you waiting for more information? Or is Pharaoh a total write off for you?
More of the same isn't enough for me. I wasn't interested, still not. But I am keeping an eye out... faction leaders that can die is, like, step one of what they needed to do, so if they announce more then I might reconsider. But it's really just a start.
I don't agree with you. I think it's a good TW. I'm a big fan of TW Rome 1 and 2 and I think that this game brings a lot of new things. I admit that it has its flaws but in this case let's not be hypocrites: Rome 2 despite the mods is horribly boring and not very diversified as for diplomacy it is non-existent. I admit that diplomacy deserves to be reworked on Pharaoh. But I had a lot of fun, I wasn't bored at all in my games compared to Rome 2. And above all, although I'm a big player of management games I agree to allow the ease of games for new players because I had to learn on my own how to play Rome 1 and the DEI mod on Rome 2. There are fewer and fewer new players on management games and I agree to bring a little freshness by the new generation.
I have not bought it yet because it just seemed way to limited in scope, even at the new $40 price point. However, I like Sophia and the effort they put into their games. I will buy it when it drops.
I got the game the day it released and played 200 hrs, it's a blast. I don't really care about yet another clumsy mortal empires experience with huge map and dozens of clone factions
@@Mexi1871 my biggest issue is the collision mechanics are trash and the AI is still horrible. This should have been fixed several games ago and CA continues to ignore the issue. I play for the battles. I hated warhammer and this is just more of that sloppy battle mechanics at work in the historical side of things now.
I’m perfectly fine with Troy and Mycenae being in the game. They exist and I like the what if options. Troy should have never been a game and we should have just had a Bronze Age game
Steongly agree
2:36
There is artistic evidence of cavalry combat (a rider with an axe trampling a human opponent) from 1400 B.C Egypt. There's also art depicting armed and armored riders in Mycenean Greece, though these riders are not depicted fighting, and may instead depict mounted infantry (men riding to battle, then dismounting to fight as heavy infantry).
Cavalry did not exist in the advanced, iron age form that is depicted in-game, but it did indeed exist. Most riders would have been without shields, using missile weapons like javelins and bows whilst not moving.
For more, see the paper "Horseback riding and Cavalry in Mycenaean Greece"
Good paper. Wasn't it also speculated that such mounted troops were used as scouts? Or am I confusing something again. XD
Unfortunately, the current maps of Total War are far too small for scouting to be of any real importance.
CEO of Creative Assembly here, will look into it
lol
could you look into empire 2? I promise I will buy full price ;)
Your other comments say otherwise. Liar
@@DeitritusFillamore no
Thanks
TBH, I have my hopes up. They are walking in the right direction
Their first mistake was choosing the Bronze Age
As an academic I loled at the Wikipedia references. Always check the original source, if you try to poke holes.
That said, this update is massive. Sure many want even more, but we can also celebrate what we get :)
I want to recall that they mentioned in a live Q&A that new battle maps would be larger, they couldn't change the already established ones however.
They even used chatGPT to write the factions' descriptions in their official site😁
They even used chatGPT to write the factions' descriptions in their official site😁
I don’t think you did your homework before this video
Bronze Age collapse and Trojan war are currently understood to have happened within 10-20 years of each other, so it’s not far fetched at all to use the Homeric faction leaders at the same time as the beginning of the Bronze Age collapse.
No historian believes the Trojan War took place, as described by Homer. You need to do your homework.
@@davidstansbury9309 We know a conflict took place in the timespan of this game between the greeks and what we know as troy, as evidenced by the ruins of what we believe is troy having arrowheads and being burnt down, its definetly not as Homer described, but it is a very real war
@@davidstansbury9309 No one is suggesting that historians believe the Homeric version?
We know Troy was destroyed in the Bronze Age Collapse, and that there are no records of the real Mycenae or Trojan Kings. So I think it's completely fine to use the Homeric names.
And that is all they are using. The names. CA have even said that they not using the exact models from Troy, and are making them more realistic.
Achilles is not going to be a near immortal fighter. He is a man, with a name.
Not sure why people are getting upset over this.
No they’re not. To be fair we know nothing about it actually happening. We just think that by logical assosiation they happend relatively close to each other because of other evidence that MIGHT reference the trojan wars. De colapse is also not a single event. It might have been a period over a 100 years. Honestly I had to do a lot of research on this topic and i read a ton of papers and books for it, truth be told, most papers refere to the same archeological finda but interpet in different ways.
imhotep
imhotep
imhotep
Not CA biggest fan but the Mycenaean Greeks are contemporary to the bronze age complex and why not use characters from the Iliad as we do not definitely know the names of historical people. Cavalry are not historical but the cav mod on steam is great, adds a lot of flexibility.
You're complaining that Pharaohs mechanics aren't deep enough, problem is total war has never been a deep or overly complex game(s) the mechanics for all of them are fairly simple.
Nurgle's mechanics harkon back to Medieval 2
you are kind of pessimistic and negative about total war pharaoh and it’s update, high tides was good and the nuraghe aren’t exactly a reskin of forts like you said in your other videos. there was said the update would include new units for the existing factions and new mechanics as well. of the modern total war games pharaoh probably has the most depth and deep mechanics, it doesn’t beat rome 1 or med 2, but it is fine. the current problem is you don’t really have that many different feeling runs per faction, the same goes for most tw games, but especially because the factions are spaced in a way that means interaction is common, and different factions feel the same once they have conquered the same realms(for example: walwetes canaan is similar to irsu canaan and bay canaan and neither has many different options), you just grow into a set of realms and don’t move much further, because it would be overextending and then there isn’t a lot to do. in pharaoh you have to stick to a certain area, because supply lines weigh heavynot administration like in other games, but actual distance to supply your armies with units, because recruitment centers take long to build up, and also because you have to guard the area with your main armies, because if you have to divert a main garrisonlike force(for example a force in alashiya because it is so far from the others) you will be vulnerable to sea peoples, it is good that it matters, but it means you get stuck and don’t really conquer the map, also because there is no incentive, since territory is not that economically effecient, doesn’t get you victory points and often means more wars.
with a bigger map with more unique factions it will be fine
While I agree with some of your criticisms, I also think you're being a little too harsh on this game. Let's not forget that we've never had such a map expansion of the game in a total war game, and not only will the map be double its size, the patch will bring several new mechanics which will drastically change the game (the main one being dynasties). Yes, in an ideal world the game should have released with all of this, but alas that is not the case, and in the current circumstances making such changes to a game that everyone expected would not have a future is more than commendable. Imperator Rome took years to escape from the problems of its release version, Pharaoh TW will take less than a year to completely change the scale of the game, and let's not forget that after the upgrade TWP will have the largest map (in number of regions), and the largest number of faction choices in the history of the franchise.
On the other hand I agree that bringing cavalry was a strange choice which seems to exist to please people who complained that the TW formula does not work without cavalry, without realizing that the lighter units, and the War tanks assumed this role.
However, I can understand why the game decided to use Homeric characters, yes it would have been super cool to have real historical characters, but the problem is that we know absolutely no king, or individual from this era, we don't even have a mention of a name without context, and Homer's characters are super charismatic and were completely associated with this era. For the ancient Greeks Agamemnon and Odysseus were real historical figures, even if the exploits described by Homer remained debatable, and even today no serious historian can affirm categorically that these characters are entirely fictitious, and even if this is the case they were inspired by real people. Yeah this choice isn't perfect, but I think it's more interesting than inventing an entirely fictional character.
The only Homeric character I didn't want to see return is Memnon as the leader of the Kushite faction, Memnon is so obvious as a character created by Greeks who knew absolutely nothing about Kushite culture, even his name means nothing. authentic.
Sorry for the gigantic comment, not only am I an Egyptologist, I'm also a big fan of Homer's books, so I love talking about this period
I agree with you, the game will bring a lot of things and solve certain problems even if personally I appreciated my experience in the game. What I liked in the game is the freedom given to the players none of my games were similar and being able to choose how to do your campaign was really a refreshing thing compared to the old TW which were too rigid in their mechanics.
pretty much only total war for me now, i got 300 hours in pharaoh and 3000 in wh3
I do believe that the diplomacy should be more complex and stating all the systems are not complex enough is wild, considering it seems to be more complex than any other game besides for 3k. Plus it’s a free update man that’s adding in a lot never seen before
At this point, I'm fine with ahistorical cavalry and factions. It's going to be a long wait before we get a decent historical TW and whatever CA can do to make this semi-decent, I'm ok with.
Too negative, I think. It's not that I disagree with everything you said, but those games you love were niche at best. CA is a division of a publicly traded company. They don't have the luxury of making niche games.
The Egyptian trade Legacy show be default to all factions, one of the bests mechanics of the game.
Im really into this. I will probably buy the game when they release this expansion
One of the two battles Egypt engaged with the Sea Peoples in was a naval battle. The core of the historical Bronze Age was international trade by sea, from the British Isles to India. The idea that naval battles would be ahistorical is just itself not accurate.
*Naval Landing Battle.
@GermanOlle Sea Peoples attempted a landing in the Delta and were pushed back. Ramesses intercepted them on the water as they were trying to retreat back into the Mediterranean, and drove the survivors back to shore where they surrendered.
The problem is that people today don't know what naval battles looked like in those days
@vojkangavric3957 I don't think combat between ships would change much whether it was 1200bc, 100bc, 1000ad, etc until we got to Gunpowder. There's only so much you can do when the best ranged weapon is a bow.
@@kielweiss3606 Well, naval ram, boarding bridges, war machines on ships, Rome2 already had all of that. Of course, that doesn't work for Pharaoh; what's left is, as you've already described: long-range combat and boarding combat.
The video was great besides what you said about Mycenae and Troy. The Trojan War was real, not as we know it through Homer but Mycenae and Troy were real places. I don’t see the problem
I already expected the game would die after the High Tide dlc and I was happy enough with the content offered for 40€. The fact that we are getting this despite the abysmal player numbers is a miracle itself
To be fair I understand that CA is not talking about gameplay mechanic right now.
The update is supposed to come at best, at the end of summer. What it means is that communication is still in early stage.
Yes they are only talking about the new map and factions and not about mechanics. But why ?
Because 90% of the people targeted by this update doesn't care about those mechanics... Because they don't even know that these exist ! They've never played the game before and for cause, they've not even baught it.
I would not be surprised about it, the communication for immortal empire was very much like this.
I am excited since they're finally filling out the maps with the necessary cultures, I just hope some mod support can help fill in more of the gaps as well too and bring out more interesting cultures for battles. Would love to go earlier and see Sumerians or Minoans.
Look at that - TheTerminator pushing out another negative review! Who’d have seen that one coming? 😂
Going strong with Total War Attila and all the steam medieval overhaul mods like Anno Domini 919. I also own "free" version of Attila just in case CA try to pull some BS update that might break steam version. I fully own the game now. Same for Shogun 2.
i would like it if they added the entire total war troy campaign with all of its factions and scoop to total war pharaoh
If they were to take the Rome one mechanics and apply it to the game it would of been a master piece
CA: more is better
What's left of the playerbase: more is just more...
I can't find any information as to when would the new content drop?
which total war titles are worthy of your attention?
CEO & CFO of CA here, I will make sure to add this to the list of things we will never look into
I Wish Total War Pharaoh Would Come To Consoles
Hi CEO here, great video. Keep it up!
Agree with everything especially map size. They claimed HUGE maps while i recently retried med 2 (mod) and attila and was shocked how big those battle maps compared to pharaoh hahah. In pharaoh maps are actually as small as possible, if they would be smaller, archers with max range would should enemy from the start.
Off topic, have you tried Field of Glory Kingdoms? It has some really good ideas, but also a lot of room for mechanic improvements.
Here is a story happend yesterday:
A particulaly cold Morning, grandma had gone outside tend to her garden, i too went outside to realize and warn the peaple that there was a Mamangava(bug)[invasive Species damn the Dutch who brought them here]grandma was stung by it the pain was insurmountable not as bad as a Tarantula Hawk anyways, fortunatly she knew of a natural cure Aloi Vera(plant) she got better.
Did i miss it in the video or will they not change the faction names to something else than just a character name?
Some of them will change apparently
My concern has been that some vocal minority have been hyping this up really hard when we should be cautious about what's done with this update. Would be a great shame if this ends up being one of those big updates that end up being the last, like with any TW game - just to wrap things up.
I'm excited for the update but in my mind there's no question it's the last lol. I'm shocked Pharaoh is even getting anything at all tbh. Game was a total flop. CA abandons their games like a dad going to the store for milk & cigarettes, it's what they've been doing since Empire Total War. They treat the series like it's Call of Duty or something.
I can’t wait to sack the city of Babylon as Egypt ❤
It's all going to be free I don't see an issue
Last thing I have heard and read was that there is no plan to make battle maps bigger (which sounded definitive and which is a shame). But that information might be outdated. As you said: it will take a lot more than a map expansion for me to go and buy/invest gaming time in that game. Well hope dies last. On the other hand: it's dying for some years now :D Great video as always 👍
New maps will be larger. They can’t change the existing maps per the live Q and A they did.
@@emanuelalfred1565 Well that sounds to me more like "only custom maps" (for example the siege map for babylon etc.) will be larger. If battle maps in general would be larger, there would be no reason at all to not make the old battle maps (I am talking about those type of land battle maps, that are automatically generated, depending on where on the campaign map you are) bigger, for that would mean, that the engine is in general compatible with bigger maps.
@@maximilianhaas2052They stated in a QnA that none of the campaign battle maps in Pharaoh are randomly generated. They are all bespoke maps. They’ve also said that maps made for the new regions added to the campaign map will be larger.
Horses were always planned. There was a trait for scaring horses at launch.
Yeah I agree with the other comments. You really should have done more research for the stuff you want to claim isn't historical.
Pharaoh need better Stances! czcams.com/video/qOctTRlJvbc/video.html
Innovating this feature will improve battles like never before.
Whats the price of that expansion?
it is free
@@Empowerless thanks. Thats great
I just bought this game a few days ago as steam reviews have gone up steadily. Despite it having some cool stuff - all playing it has done has pushed me back into warhammer III. And I don’t even like fantasy or know the lore.
Very good, stay critical.
I wasn't really hooked on Pharo to begin with. Maybe new cultures will be nice but I don't really like bronze age. Tho Troy was really fun but still. I'd rather have Med 3
i just want medieval 3 or shogun 2
This is all obviously just painting the cracks and extending the shitty wall.... The cracks will show through the entire thing soon enough
Personally, i like the resource dominated diplomacy of troy. Its the game itself thats hard to enjoy long term. I dont expect much out of bronze age diplomacy, complex foreign relations policies wasnt any ancient cultures forté.
mycenae and troy are welcome additions to the game to hell with the pedantic need for historical accuracy in an era we barely know due to loss of records and sudden societal collapse we know both existed but HOW they existed is probably never going to be known so CA doing this is fine be me. cavalry is not catering assyria is believed to have developed cavalry long before it was first recorded just as naval combat probably happened for centuries before Ramesses III recorded his battle against the sea people. at any rate i understand your point and i do agree on us having to be critical but complaining about new FREE content based on flimsy personal belief of how the bronze age world SHOULD be according to you is one of the reason we historical fans get so much flak by the rest of the community
Terminator the afflicted.
I was considering buying this game on Steam's summer sale but your critics convinced not to buy it.
Enjoyed your video! You certainly expressed some valid concerns! In a perfect world, CA probably would address most if not all of them however given what the upcoming major update does bring to the table, I think we need to appreciate what we are getting and for FREE no less! I have held off buying Pharaoh thus far but I think if this update lives up to what I have been seeing thus far, I will be taking a chance on the game as I do love this time period in history. As always I will be looking forward to your review of the update once it is live before making a final purchasing decision, Terminator, as I do certainly value your opinions on total war games. Keep up the great work! PS: Any idea when the update will go into the game?
Never got the “unit diversity” thing. It really hasn’t changed much, even in Warhammer. The only new addition to it was proper flying units and hybrid units. We’ve had large monstrous units in the way of elephants for literal decades lol. Whether it goes fast or slow, it’s still “scary unit that is good at charging and damage, countered by spears”
They can get rapid machine gun like reload speeds based on Theban artwork depicting the Lars Anderson draw which would spice game unit variety up
@@HistoricalWeapons see, that’s what I’d say is most accurate. “Unit variety”
The “variety” coming from how each one looks, it’s stats, animations, etc.
warhammers unit “diversity” is mildly better but not by much with the addition of flying and hybrid units, but it has the best variety of any total war game.
So, what, low damage, rapid fire archers then? I mean I haven’t touched pharoah as it looked like another 3K to me. By which I mean “it’s a new historical guys!” Says CA *it’s clearly more tilted towards a more fantastical style*
Never gonna forgive them for that. Was interested in 3K when they said it’s a historical game but then it became clear it was *not* a historical title and I just felt lied to.
Absolutely.
Adding more content to an already flawed game wont fix those flaws.
The update is good though, the increased scope of the game will attract players and modders.
My hope is in mods tbh, for Pharaoh to become what it shouldve been in the first place.
Concerns huh? Thats new
Thank you man. Not sure it's the right niche but if anyone's into Bronze Age warfare and seeks historical advice on the subject I strongly recommend Schwerpunkt's videos series. The guy is not just a military historian but he modded TW titles. It would be great to start having conversations from CZcams about what a real strategy game like this deserves to be. Keep up with the great work
Schwerpunkt doesnt believe in citing sources and has a blatant political agenda that he's trying to shove down the viewers throat. Also, his videos are way too long and come out way too often to be quality. A lot of criticism of him you can find on r/askhistorians and similar
No Ea-Nasir = Not worthy
(Just kidding)
@TheTerminator Map expansion is always at the bottom of the list for me ... if the core is bad all it does is just 'provides' more of the repetition of that bad design, In WH's case for example :
* fighting the same LL again and again cause immortality.
* fighting in the same maps, cause CA barely created a few and even they don't cache well on the IE map (no choke/bridge battles in the Empire).
* fighting against the same generic AI that either charges heads on or waits be out maneuvered (have CA heard about skirmishing even as a defensive force?).
* fighting with the same design flaws such as ass ladders, bad tower placement/coverage, and lack of counters or tools for both players and AI to deal with unique threats (flying/single entites).
* fighting the same garrisons, cause CA couldn't bother adjusting the garrisons based on buildings (beside the dedicated one) to make at least a farming settlement different than one that is dedicated for recruitment.
* having the same carbon copies of generals leading the armies, without unique personalities that evolve according to their roles and experiences - its just a set of select the best buffs and GG.
And so on ... new TW doesn't allow for story telling sandbox, it just a glorified experience that is crafted for casuals who play a few hours and move on since all of what I mentioned is only felt once you play TW for longer than the first few turns(early campaign). This is why it was so baffling for me to see people (including you) so enthusiastic for just more factions and map ... it's more of the same. The reason WH's late game is so bad isn't because its lacking unique factions, it's lacking a reason to go and encounter them - features like the the 'Trade Nodes', 'Trade ships' and 'Sea lanes' were amazing in Empire TW cause they gave a way to play as a sea empire, that built its strength not just on conquering.
If it ends up offering just map expansion and no massive improvements on the core, I wouldn't bother touch the game - I will give credit for the Sofia team who seems to actively try to listen to the community (the new battle maps will be larger - but not the old ones cause budget) but it seems like they got screwed by the main team, which is a huge shame.
you're absolutely right...everything it's dust in the wind for fouls
What we need? Medieval 3 with better battle animation in attila/rome 2 style.
if the full package isnt 30 when its out i will be arrgh mateying it
I don’t like the way the arrows look when they’re flying in the air. It looks too Arcadie. The arrows look nicer in Atilla
I have a question to you (and the commnuity): Is phararo worth a second playtrough or is "Age of Bronze" the better wayt to enjoy the bronze age?
Honestly if you read books about the LBA you cannot create a historical game since it's very difficult to actually know enough. They can have a lot of creative freedom. I still hope there's a reason to buy this game at some point in the future.
Good job telling the truth ! my point exactly the lack of content is the least problem of this game ! The Battles are so arcade and bad that just dont enjoy playing them. In older games Rome 2 for example i cant wait to go into battle to play it . Its immersive , atmospheric, more realistic animations , and love seing voley of arrows or javelins insta kill first row of the army.
My dad is the owner/CEO of total war. I will look into this.👍
Well .. I’m the Deputy Assistant to the cousin (twice removed on my mother’s side) .. to the CEO of CA. I’ll look into it
Like I said before, its good that CA is "trying" to listen to the community but thats about it. They're just "trying" to really. At this point, I only have faith that the modders, as usual, will make the game playable and bearable that might only make me end up buying the game in the first place. Though, if that would be the case, I would rather patiently wait for the Age of Bronze team to update their mod with all the complete factions of the Late Bronze Age and whatever mechanics they'll be adding along the way.
Love the Age of Bronze mod but the problem will be: Rome 2 campaign map cannot be heavily modded. We will not see any new city battle maps, regions and provinces and the campaign map will be far too small to represent the Bronze Age of the Middle East properly and in detail.
The community tool Caime (for campaign map modding) is only compatible with Attila and later.
It needs the historic factions of the period, like ISRAEL !
The Kingdom of Israel wasn't a thing in 1200 BC. That would be the same as asking whether one could play the Franks in the main campaign (272 BC) of Rome2.
@@GermanOlle The faction of Israel most certainly was. There was no “kingdom” of the Peleset, Tjeker, Libu, etc etc ad naseum.. to claim artificial parameters for inclusion is a strawman
Hahaha :D
Never been this early. Cheers
Perfect analysis
Expanding the map wont save the game.Pharaoh is boring.Battles are dull,AI is worse than ToB and constant invasions are making the campaign mroe challenging but insanely annoying
Pharaoh is not a perfect game like any other total war. But for a game that came out at the end of last year and costs 40€, I think it offers a lot. Today, no developer will want to sell a game that gives you more and costs less than Pharaoh. I have played Pharaoh a lot, as well as Rome 2, Attila, Shogun 2 and others and I think I can say that the game is very good and worth paying for. And people need to create their own opinion and not listen to what some Terminator tells them, who would find fault with CA whatever they do.
ROME 3 + MED 3 or China interesting
China happened already, maybe Total War: Great Khan?
I hope all factions have cavalry and stronger chariots. Without it the Battles are not as interesting
No, they won't. Only the Assyrians get cavalry (actually 200 years too early). For quick flanking we have units with the Trait Charger; as a shock cavalry alternative we have the chariots. And even stronger chariots? They can wipe everything out if you use them correctly.
@@GermanOlle i understand your point but a game needs to BE fun. And i say this as an history addict
@@joaomaciel1234 But why do mounted riders (for all factions) add to the fun of the game?
The same tactical role is now taken on by other foot soldiers; strategy and tactics (quick flanking, putting ranged fighters in trouble) have changed almost nothing. The peculiarities of the respective eras are what make Total War interesting; unfortunately, Pharaoh TW definitely suffers in other areas (e.g. sieges, sea battles, superficial bronze-tin trade).
Absolutely based, especially about battles
Dont know why CA have removed historical factions like Israel, Edom and Ammon but included semi-mythical and fringe factions?
If I'm going too play a bronze age total war it's the mod for Rome 2 that's for sure
What Pharaoh needs is it magically transforming into Medieval 3
I feel like a lot of their problem came from the fact that they chose to make a Bronze Age era game. While the history is interesting, the battles are the same sloughing match every time, there are no navel battles because it’s a historical, the trade system can either be to complex or ahistorical. Had they made a Mediaeval 3 or Rome 3, They would have a lot to work with. Hell, they could have made it in some other period like 1830s, just the Bronze Age doesn’t quite work for Total War.
I hope that people who boought troy get a discount on Pharaoh because with this troy is kinda a waste of money now except for the mythos dlc
If CA listened to their fans in the first place, then Pharoah would have never existed. Fans have been begging for sequels to Medieval and Empire. Also, the fans who wanted a new experience definitely weren't talking about the bronze age. They wanted a pike and shot game, age of Victoria, or at least something that felt different from previous Total Wars. The truth is that TW Pharoah shouldn't exist. The Bronze Age is interesting to read about and to watch documentaries on, but the Bronze age doesn't have the map diversity or unit diversity to make it a good game without making it extremely non-historical. TW Pharoah is a physical manifestation of everything wrong with CA.
I hate to Say it but it's suck
I'd rather have 2 playable factions for each Major cultures rather than abundant minor factions.
The lack of unit diversity and melee blobbing is the real killer. If we need to have horses and more options here then so be it
The kind of "historical" of this game is ridiculous. It looks (and in fact it is) a gore compendium of cheap plastic USA Halloween costumes that have nothing to do with historical items.
And there is not excuse in a supposed "lack of documentation" as for this period (of around 100 years) you have some of the largest evidence for military in the area (pictorical and written)...
So do not call this historical. Please. It is pure USA orientalistic cheap bad fantasy. Nothing more. It is BAD. Just that. And even that is too much.
Not to speak about adding fantasy factions (Homeric) to a "supposed" historical scenario.
By the way. Naval battles would be historical and easy.
Just make the only battleable provinces coast, with a few provinces as channels from 3 major sailing routes.
Well, I'm partly with you. Troops like the Medjai of Ramses and other elite troops with those exaggerated shields could actually come from a Hollywood film adaptation; less would actually be better here. Unfortunately, Total War has always struggled with this; it's not for nothing that the biggest total conversion mods for the older games are mostly historical ones like "Stainless Steel" (Med2), "Divide et Impera" (R2), "Perdita Europa+ Fall of the Eagle"(Attila), "Shieldwall" (ToB), "Imperium Surrectum"(R1 Rem), "Total Realism" (R1) or "Europa Barbarorum" R1).
I just hope that we get some kind of DeI mod for Pharaoh...
@@GermanOlle totally agree, but in this case, at least compared to Rome and Attila, they went fully turbo into plastic.
Also even the lesser units are pretty inaccurate, from infantry 1500 years out of date to leather star wars rangcor keeper armors 😂.
And the colours, holly molly. The electric and purple blue of some Egyptian. What the hell were they thinking?
Even the chariots look more like a wheeled pijama than like a chariot (specially that truck shape they have, not related at all to any chariot of the period or even ever existing).
When I look at their work in the units, my eyes seriously cry, are worse than onions.
nothing for this game. cl0wn assembly should start to make empire total war 2 with realistic city and ports and also medieval 3 which starts in 12th century
So what I am hearing here is that we may be going from a boring, flawed game with a small map to a boring, flawed game with a big map.
I got no concern because I am not buying that garbage. I didn't buy the base game either.
god your a biased towards the old total wars, its unbearable. Unsubbed
Medieval Total War III or nothing.
I hope CA will leave this shit as soon as possible and get back to make real TW games. TW: Attila is the last true historical game and should be the starting point for the next one.
to not exist
CA itself went full homo sapiens while making bronze age game lol cant even to more than what they used to do. Couldve guessed after what they did with rome 1 and just "remaster" it.
Booo, ca, booo
Imagine not liking hundreds of units just fighting in narrow areas without proper morale, armour, experience with dogshit ai and thats just the battles. When you get to campaign map you press some buttons to make sure your army doesn't die from starvation and trade some resources and build insert generic building that has very low impact on your campaign. Cant imagine why people cant enjoy a b-tier game for 50$ with horrible combat and horrible campaign, good thing they made it a bigger garbage pile aka expanded map and more factions :O xD. Just have to say from what I saw when people played this game prerelease was the same as the release, terrible combat, no realism and boring campaigns.
it needs to be renamed in medieval 3 and add medieval civs and castles🤣🤣
Egypt is the most boring historical timeline ever