Unfortunately, in my preview event, the battles were far, far, far too likely to turn into interminable slogs for me to get excited about the tactical side of Total War: Three Kingdoms. When it worked, it was fantastic, but it could sometimes take a little too long in a campaign to get there. Total Warhammer improved matters, especially with higher-level armies, but far too many of its early-game battles (especially with the Old World factions) ended up with several minutes of infantry slowly chasing down cheap archer units. The disastrous Rome 2 turned fights into rugby scrums, with little resembling formations or pacing. The latter has been an issue with Total War games, especially in recent years. The sweet spot tends to be fights that last 5 minutes to a quarter of an hour. But more importantly, they have to be satisfying, where the tactical decisions you make throughout continue to feel important, instead of just busywork - especially busywork that takes far too long. But it also needs to be snappy, as a campaign will have dozens if not hundreds of battles, so excess fighting turns into a slog. It needs to be tactical, where the player feels like their decisions matter but they’re not overwhelmed with choice in real time.
#Total war three kingdoms liu bei guide series#
The Total War series has almost always struggled with getting the balance of combat right.
Since the battles are usually the more important half, let’s start with them, and why I’m skeptical. So my experience with the first 30 turns of Total War: Three Kingdoms was surprising in that … for the first time, I thought that here, here was a Total War where the strategic layer was so superior to the tactical layer that it might be worth playing without the battles. Most of the time, that’s a solid grand strategy map with a great battle system, although there are odd exceptions like Rome 2, with a dull map and disastrously bad combat. In those 20 years of Total War, every single installment has had a strategic layer overshadowed by a tactical layer.
In most games that have a strategic-tactical component, like XCOM or even sports sims, the tactical component takes priority because it’s more exciting and immediate. The big differentiating reason to play Total War, from Shogun to Warhammer, has always been its battles - epic slugfests over bridges, brilliant cavalry charges to turn defeat into victory, or skillful use of terrain to force overwhelming enemies into Pyrrhic victories that win wars even if they lose battles. Second, have a best-in-class real-time tactical combat component. It’s gotta be good enough to not make the player lose motivation, but it’s not the primary reason that people play. First, have a solid, if possibly unexciting, strategic campaign mode that serves as a backbone, a foundation. Total War: Three Kingdoms doesn’t look like a huge change for the Total War series, but it might unintentionally be the most radical installment the series has ever had, in ways both exciting and annoying.Ĭreative Assembly’s Total War series is nearly 20 years old, roughly a dozen games in, and it’s always had strong formula. Did you miss a session from GamesBeat Summit Next 2022? All sessions are now available for viewing in our on-demand library.
0 kommentar(er)
