This. If you don't, the faction flags can be very similar and not distinguishable from each other. I've had battles between my faction (dark green, almost black flag) and the enemy (black flag) where once the flag gets frayed enough from unit damage it becomes impossible to tell them apart from simply the flag.
They will never be able to make a game where every customer is satisfied. Been playing TW since Shogun 1 and its about time we got some of these massive mechanic overhauls to a historical title. Ive been having a great time playing this last few weeks
0:52 "This game... has much better music than Rome 2's music, Rome 2 music had no character" Instantly turned off the review right there. I'm tired of people bashing Rome 2's soundtrack still to this day 11 years later. At least that soundtrack knew what it was going for - it had a theatrical, orchestral style throughout the whole game. The motif - right at the beginning on the main menu - hit hard in its message about how powerful the posterchild of the game was (i.e. the Romans), in that it was all-reaching Imperial civilization, and that was represented in its music rather well. That motif from the theme then repeats throughout a lot of the other tracks (e.g. it repeats in each culture's main battle tracks, as if the Romans are coming to fight them there and are experiencing their opponent's style of warfare slightly different which distorts their own theme, as their conquests have taken them across Europe and the Middle East). Its instrument choices are inspired from Hans Zimmer's choices for Gladiator as it is attempting to replicate a theatrical, Hollywood-style depiction of the ancient world - western instruments given a slightly eastern theme to them (i.e. orientalistic) with a few ancient instruments splattered in (e.g. duduk, cornu etc), so it maintains a degree of consistency throughout and you know what experience they're trying to go for regardless whether you think it was the right choice or not. Pharaoh's soundtrack on the other hand could have been placed into a low budget Netflix/Amazon Prime show and I wouldn't have been able to tell that it was from Pharaoh because it's so generic and cheap like those show's soundtracks are. It has such an identity crisis as this game's musical aesthetic and use of instruments is all over the place - the composer doesn't know what it should sound like; historical (couple of correct ancient Egyptian instruments in the ambient music), orientalist (random Arabic-sounding motifs from western instruments here and there) mixed with synthetic (glassy, distorted sounds on the theme song for absolutely no reason other than to try make it sound "cool", that's the way you know the composer has no idea what they're doing) and rock & roll (electric guitar during battles? Seriously? This isn't Command & Conquer) etc - it is all over the place and it's truly grating to my ears. In my opinion, it's possibly the worst TW soundtrack out there, and I have no idea why anyone would want to praise it when you've got a cacophony of ear rape and lack of consistency going on throughout the experience. It's like they tried to appease as wide of a range of player's musical tastes as possible, which is the worst thing you could possibly do. Make a choice that will appease the most likely person to enjoy this game's setting (i.e. in this case, the immersive movie / historical crowd), keep it simple (i.e. don't try to have totally different instruments from battle versus ambience) and stick to that. I truly hope they don't do this with their next historical titles, such as a potential Medieval 3 or Empire 2.
@@LinusLinothorax Did you read what I had to say above? Have you even listened to the latest soundtracks from the series? IMO the weakest TW soundtracks are now Pharaoh's, Troy's and Warhammer's by far - they're generic as fuck. Rome 2's I would agree is definitely not the best, but it's not the worst anymore.
@@jasoncarter5854 Didn't play Troy or Pharaoh, admittedly, so I can't talk about them. WH 1 is pretty lame too, I agree. WH 2 is a significant improval, while WH 3 is again slightly weaker, but still better than Rome 2 IMO.
Great review dude. As someone who also works a full-time job and goes to school full-time I really value what little free time I have to leisurely activities so I appreciate this review a lot.
This is a phenomenal review. (1) 2:28 the outpost system has arguably the best implementation of campaign structures external to the primary settlement; however, the forts blocking passage with a tiny host is laughable. Also, the auto-resolve is ludicrous and should be more forgiving so we don't have to waste leisure time on easy battles. This was a issue with offensive sieges in 3K. (2) I've read that people say charge collisions are awful in this game but you're footage at 7:46 looks incredible. The frontline of your spearmen, set into a defensive formation, get significantly pushed back against the charge of the heavy chariots, but ultimately stop the chariots in their tracks. Excluding Warhammer and 3K, the cavalry charges in past Total War games had a janky animation which would cause the horses to gallop in place as soon as they touched enemy units.
Thank you! It was one in the works for a while! Totally agree that the outpost system is a good feature, a lot like empire tw’s town feature. Would have liked to see a bit more variety maybe. And yeah the unit collision seems to be better, but you’ll always have the weird looking bug where the front line models clash, and the rest of the unit stops dead in their tracks. Haven’t seen much of it, but it’s definitely lurking around!
Great video the only question that torments me is who are those people that dislike it. What is the reason for the dislikes, can someone explain it to me?
7:47 what in the hell is this charge physics ? Chariot are even glitching and merging in one another after bonking on ennemy shields, looks ridiculous where are the epic charge in this game ? why units, shields and spear handles are glitching into enemies during fighting ? Missile infantry and throwing weapons also looks like shit projectiles seems to deasappear after impact.. And why some folks says it's one of the best historical with those awfull looking battles ?
i like lethality but it renders armor and shields almost nonexistent ull get ur elite melee unit on shield wall formation completely shreded on seconds by pretty much anything it just encourages me to keep having low tier melee units just to shield the barrage of cheap projectiles with high lethality through the whole campaign cause theres no point tbh
I have seen my men get shredded in defensive formation by missiles, it’s a difficult one to balance. Maybe they’ll increase the value of shields in a new update
It doesnt really work like that because even if u uncheck it the balance of the game is based on lethality wich its gonna make it even slower than the pre-patched game if u disable it
It depends on the scenario of course, I’ve found that the smaller the unit, the more the Ai tends to group up, which is understandable. The battle in my video is mostly to show the strength of formations
@@realtomic Some of it is personal preference. I play zoomed right in and don't have to press space. As you say, that makes it harder, but I enjoy the challenge. TW games look good up close and bad zoomed out .I can't even watch You tubers play it like that. Not having a go at you, just explaining that the garish icons aren't a problem for my play style: zoomed in.
The amount of men per unit even on extreme is pitiful, medieval 1's max unti size was 200 for infantry. I don't remember cavalry's max unit size it might have been 100 whixh is 10 more than dynasties,.
That's a bit of an old complaint. The two has completely different game engines. Thanks to Medieval 1's less detailed graphics, they can field bigger unit and more units without causing frame drop. Newer total wars are different. They rely on a more detailed units, this is very heavy and will cause a large amount of frame drops if there's too many units on the field.
@@cyfertea8707 i understand and agree but also this isnt medieval 1 and i think 200 men units are very supportable officially, i play with 400 men units in attilla stably...i think they can do bigger units for dynasties thats officially supported just my thoughts
@@Alistan0_o Sure. Shogun Total War: Mongol Invasion Rome Total War: Barbarian Invasion (and Alexander) Medieval Total War Kingdoms But I have played nearly every Total War game to date. I do really like the Chinese setting yes and while TW Pharaoh was very interesting, the map felt incredibly large, it had some of my own ideas that I floated to CA via forums in the past (region native units, resource upkeep rather than just gold, more region specific unique buildings). I will refer to events in the Records (Historical) mode, as I despise the Fantasy nonsense mode, it was ridiculous, but it did make me want to play Dynasty Warriors lol It still lacks what TW Three Kingdoms had: Which is a greater sense of being a monarch, ruling over land and vassals. While you can create vassals in TW Pharaoh by becoming king (or pharaoh) you cannot create vassals by granting land to unlanded nobles (or non-nobles). Like being able to reward one of your generals with a province (or a collection of provinces) to guard an area of your empire) is something you can do in TW Three Kingdoms. There are plots within TW Pharaoh, but these are very limited. In TW Three Kingdoms these plots are quite interesting and more detailed, that can have greater affects. You can even engage your personal council of ministers to certain intrigues. Pharaoh and Three Kingdoms had similar combat, though admittedly Pharaoh has superior combat AI, or at least updated. Unit variety in Pharaoh is also superior. Unfortunately CA continues to fail with the Chariots getting stuck in lines rather than ramming through them (but at least they got the dying to spears/pikes Very Quickly right). The Cavalry (Shock cavalry in particular) of TW Three Kingdoms is superior by far. Mounted Archer is horrible in both (not as fun or as useful as TW Attila). Three Kingdoms had a very impressive Economy system that if destruction was happening (sacking, razing of settlements, etc) refugees would begin to flood into neighbouring provinces to grant instability and population growth). Taxation was adjustable to encourage economic growth or yield "tax harvests" when your kingdoms' economy was strong enough. Production of specialty ancillaries like unique armours, weapons, mounts, etc was really cool too. "edit". I forgot to mention that the population (refugees or native growth) had a significant impact on your economy, meaning that more population = more tax and production, so it was beneficial to the kingdom. Pharaoh has some good things (with the unique buildings, but it feels a little simplified (you cannot adjust taxes). It used the same bland, simplified taxation and economic systems as Warhammer, which was lame and boring.... though the need to Barter for the resources (when you are lacking) was an excellent idea to encourage trade and relations. I thought that was excellent. And these were all Half Baked systems (for TW Three Kingdoms) but they were still the best of any Total War.
@@Chonobataar I agree with much of the praise for the improved economy, diplomacy, and campaign depth, but as a Total War veteran, battles have always been my priority. I'm particularly curious about a veteran's perspective on the evolution of combat-are you satisfied with the current mechanics? For me, Medieval 2 remains the pinnacle of battle design. Later titles, in my opinion, sped up combat, shifting focus from tactical positioning to micro-management, while Warhammer introduced hero-centric warfare
@@Alistan0_o My preference differs. I'm 50/50. I love to develop my people and watch them prosper... at the same time, I enjoy to raze my enemy's settlements, execute his generals, destroy his families and ruin his world. I actually find the battles of Rome 2 were my favourite so far. Pharaoh is still very decent and Three Kingdoms both look better, but the pace of Rome 2's battles was better. Units were tougher and felt Medium-Heavy in the grind against each other and manuvering skirmish troops (or cavalry) to flanks felt far more satisfying. Parthian Cavalry for example literally felt like moving ancient tanks, and to hear them all roar as they charge into the fray, shattering enemy lines as they hit their mark... truly amazing. I don't actually like micromanagement, but rather enjoy historical ways: Battle line, wall grind and flanks. If we keep having to switch to eveeeeeery single unit just to make sure they aren't standing around like mental patients, we kind of miss the actions of the warriors in the main part of the battle, which I like to watch.
aesthetically, it was superior, but the combat mechanics & resource management were jank, there were entirely useless provinces to capture that would only be a drain on your resources, sword users were always outclassed by axes and catapults completely rendered everything else obsolete once you acquired them with a tactician general and 30% more ammunition, provided you had a small contingent to guard them, plus every cavalry unit functioned as a cataphract even when charging head-on into spear troops they decimated the field in most battles, you almost didn't need foot soldiers all-together until late game where they stood more of their own ground but by that point your armies are already made up of catapults, cavalry and a couple axe users.
I think you can distinguish your units and the enemy's in battles by enabling the red/green UI indicators from the menu in battle
This. If you don't, the faction flags can be very similar and not distinguishable from each other. I've had battles between my faction (dark green, almost black flag) and the enemy (black flag) where once the flag gets frayed enough from unit damage it becomes impossible to tell them apart from simply the flag.
I’ll check this out, thank you 🙏
They will never be able to make a game where every customer is satisfied. Been playing TW since Shogun 1 and its about time we got some of these massive mechanic overhauls to a historical title. Ive been having a great time playing this last few weeks
@@colinaylward9455 same been having a blast. Hoping they come out with cool mods soon. Shogun2 and pharaoh dynasties are in my top 3 so far
Shogun 2 was solid - basic rock, paper, scissors mechanics with top notch graphics of its time… AND a mp system that has not been done since!
"I Bought Total War Pharaoh Dynasties So You Don't Have To" i had to and this this my new number 1 total war game. Simply amazing
0:52
"This game... has much better music than Rome 2's music, Rome 2 music had no character"
Instantly turned off the review right there. I'm tired of people bashing Rome 2's soundtrack still to this day 11 years later. At least that soundtrack knew what it was going for - it had a theatrical, orchestral style throughout the whole game. The motif - right at the beginning on the main menu - hit hard in its message about how powerful the posterchild of the game was (i.e. the Romans), in that it was all-reaching Imperial civilization, and that was represented in its music rather well. That motif from the theme then repeats throughout a lot of the other tracks (e.g. it repeats in each culture's main battle tracks, as if the Romans are coming to fight them there and are experiencing their opponent's style of warfare slightly different which distorts their own theme, as their conquests have taken them across Europe and the Middle East). Its instrument choices are inspired from Hans Zimmer's choices for Gladiator as it is attempting to replicate a theatrical, Hollywood-style depiction of the ancient world - western instruments given a slightly eastern theme to them (i.e. orientalistic) with a few ancient instruments splattered in (e.g. duduk, cornu etc), so it maintains a degree of consistency throughout and you know what experience they're trying to go for regardless whether you think it was the right choice or not.
Pharaoh's soundtrack on the other hand could have been placed into a low budget Netflix/Amazon Prime show and I wouldn't have been able to tell that it was from Pharaoh because it's so generic and cheap like those show's soundtracks are. It has such an identity crisis as this game's musical aesthetic and use of instruments is all over the place - the composer doesn't know what it should sound like; historical (couple of correct ancient Egyptian instruments in the ambient music), orientalist (random Arabic-sounding motifs from western instruments here and there) mixed with synthetic (glassy, distorted sounds on the theme song for absolutely no reason other than to try make it sound "cool", that's the way you know the composer has no idea what they're doing) and rock & roll (electric guitar during battles? Seriously? This isn't Command & Conquer) etc - it is all over the place and it's truly grating to my ears. In my opinion, it's possibly the worst TW soundtrack out there, and I have no idea why anyone would want to praise it when you've got a cacophony of ear rape and lack of consistency going on throughout the experience. It's like they tried to appease as wide of a range of player's musical tastes as possible, which is the worst thing you could possibly do. Make a choice that will appease the most likely person to enjoy this game's setting (i.e. in this case, the immersive movie / historical crowd), keep it simple (i.e. don't try to have totally different instruments from battle versus ambience) and stick to that. I truly hope they don't do this with their next historical titles, such as a potential Medieval 3 or Empire 2.
Rome 2's soundtrack was ass. Easily the weakest in the series after Empire.
@@LinusLinothorax Did you read what I had to say above? Have you even listened to the latest soundtracks from the series? IMO the weakest TW soundtracks are now Pharaoh's, Troy's and Warhammer's by far - they're generic as fuck. Rome 2's I would agree is definitely not the best, but it's not the worst anymore.
@@jasoncarter5854 Didn't play Troy or Pharaoh, admittedly, so I can't talk about them. WH 1 is pretty lame too, I agree. WH 2 is a significant improval, while WH 3 is again slightly weaker, but still better than Rome 2 IMO.
I'm an avid player of TW Rome2 and I still wouldn't call R2's soundtrack to be great. Pharao's is better.
Rome 2 sucks mate, just let it died
Great review dude. As someone who also works a full-time job and goes to school full-time I really value what little free time I have to leisurely activities so I appreciate this review a lot.
I'd say that the number of soldiers per unit is logical, since battles in the bronze age were not as big as, for example, classical antiquity battles
This is a good point, although it is hard to know either way what sizes units we’re due to lack of historical knowledge, but I take your point 👍
@@realtomic lose weight tubby
This is a phenomenal review. (1) 2:28 the outpost system has arguably the best implementation of campaign structures external to the primary settlement; however, the forts blocking passage with a tiny host is laughable. Also, the auto-resolve is ludicrous and should be more forgiving so we don't have to waste leisure time on easy battles. This was a issue with offensive sieges in 3K.
(2) I've read that people say charge collisions are awful in this game but you're footage at 7:46 looks incredible. The frontline of your spearmen, set into a defensive formation, get significantly pushed back against the charge of the heavy chariots, but ultimately stop the chariots in their tracks. Excluding Warhammer and 3K, the cavalry charges in past Total War games had a janky animation which would cause the horses to gallop in place as soon as they touched enemy units.
Thank you! It was one in the works for a while! Totally agree that the outpost system is a good feature, a lot like empire tw’s town feature. Would have liked to see a bit more variety maybe.
And yeah the unit collision seems to be better, but you’ll always have the weird looking bug where the front line models clash, and the rest of the unit stops dead in their tracks. Haven’t seen much of it, but it’s definitely lurking around!
😂 a review for people who don’t have a ton of time… who have jobs!!! I’m now a subscriber
Amazing 😆
Great video the only question that torments me is who are those people that dislike it. What is the reason for the dislikes, can someone explain it to me?
I didn’t know funny British microwave society man had a channep
7:47 what in the hell is this charge physics ? Chariot are even glitching and merging in one another after bonking on ennemy shields, looks ridiculous where are the epic charge in this game ? why units, shields and spear handles are glitching into enemies during fighting ? Missile infantry and throwing weapons also looks like shit projectiles seems to deasappear after impact..
And why some folks says it's one of the best historical with those awfull looking battles ?
i like lethality but it renders armor and shields almost nonexistent ull get ur elite melee unit on shield wall formation completely shreded on seconds by pretty much anything it just encourages me to keep having low tier melee units just to shield the barrage of cheap projectiles with high lethality through the whole campaign cause theres no point tbh
You can download longer land batles, Will nerf a lot and balance range units, it l🎉ooks like Átilla With the mod, batles Will also play diferent
I have seen my men get shredded in defensive formation by missiles, it’s a difficult one to balance. Maybe they’ll increase the value of shields in a new update
@@seidyn9439 does the AI keep spaming range units with the mod?
You can disable lethality with the click of a button under battle options
It doesnt really work like that because even if u uncheck it the balance of the game is based on lethality wich its gonna make it even slower than the pre-patched game if u disable it
I played on normal size units and they don't seem blob up like they do in your vid
It depends on the scenario of course, I’ve found that the smaller the unit, the more the Ai tends to group up, which is understandable. The battle in my video is mostly to show the strength of formations
@@realtomic Some of it is personal preference. I play zoomed right in and don't have to press space. As you say, that makes it harder, but I enjoy the challenge.
TW games look good up close and bad zoomed out .I can't even watch You tubers play it like that.
Not having a go at you, just explaining that the garish icons aren't a problem for my play style: zoomed in.
Pharaoh Dynasties is a splendid game
Yes buy it people
Anyone that want to Coop with me?
Git gud bruh
The amount of men per unit even on extreme is pitiful, medieval 1's max unti size was 200 for infantry. I don't remember cavalry's max unit size it might have been 100 whixh is 10 more than dynasties,.
Couldn’t agree more - I’m sure they’ll be a mod to upscale the game, even if it does unbalance it somewhat!
That's a bit of an old complaint. The two has completely different game engines. Thanks to Medieval 1's less detailed graphics, they can field bigger unit and more units without causing frame drop. Newer total wars are different. They rely on a more detailed units, this is very heavy and will cause a large amount of frame drops if there's too many units on the field.
@@cyfertea8707 i understand and agree but also this isnt medieval 1 and i think 200 men units are very supportable officially, i play with 400 men units in attilla stably...i think they can do bigger units for dynasties thats officially supported just my thoughts
TW Three Kingdoms is superior, it was the best Total War by far.
I'm very curious why you think so
1) Please write the first 3 total war games you played
2) Maybe you really like the Chinese setting?
@@Alistan0_o Sure.
Shogun Total War: Mongol Invasion
Rome Total War: Barbarian Invasion (and Alexander)
Medieval Total War Kingdoms
But I have played nearly every Total War game to date.
I do really like the Chinese setting yes and while TW Pharaoh was very interesting, the map felt incredibly large, it had some of my own ideas that I floated to CA via forums in the past (region native units, resource upkeep rather than just gold, more region specific unique buildings). I will refer to events in the Records (Historical) mode, as I despise the Fantasy nonsense mode, it was ridiculous, but it did make me want to play Dynasty Warriors lol
It still lacks what TW Three Kingdoms had: Which is a greater sense of being a monarch, ruling over land and vassals. While you can create vassals in TW Pharaoh by becoming king (or pharaoh) you cannot create vassals by granting land to unlanded nobles (or non-nobles). Like being able to reward one of your generals with a province (or a collection of provinces) to guard an area of your empire) is something you can do in TW Three Kingdoms.
There are plots within TW Pharaoh, but these are very limited. In TW Three Kingdoms these plots are quite interesting and more detailed, that can have greater affects. You can even engage your personal council of ministers to certain intrigues.
Pharaoh and Three Kingdoms had similar combat, though admittedly Pharaoh has superior combat AI, or at least updated. Unit variety in Pharaoh is also superior. Unfortunately CA continues to fail with the Chariots getting stuck in lines rather than ramming through them (but at least they got the dying to spears/pikes Very Quickly right). The Cavalry (Shock cavalry in particular) of TW Three Kingdoms is superior by far. Mounted Archer is horrible in both (not as fun or as useful as TW Attila).
Three Kingdoms had a very impressive Economy system that if destruction was happening (sacking, razing of settlements, etc) refugees would begin to flood into neighbouring provinces to grant instability and population growth). Taxation was adjustable to encourage economic growth or yield "tax harvests" when your kingdoms' economy was strong enough. Production of specialty ancillaries like unique armours, weapons, mounts, etc was really cool too. "edit". I forgot to mention that the population (refugees or native growth) had a significant impact on your economy, meaning that more population = more tax and production, so it was beneficial to the kingdom.
Pharaoh has some good things (with the unique buildings, but it feels a little simplified (you cannot adjust taxes). It used the same bland, simplified taxation and economic systems as Warhammer, which was lame and boring.... though the need to Barter for the resources (when you are lacking) was an excellent idea to encourage trade and relations. I thought that was excellent.
And these were all Half Baked systems (for TW Three Kingdoms) but they were still the best of any Total War.
@@Chonobataar I agree with much of the praise for the improved economy, diplomacy, and campaign depth, but as a Total War veteran, battles have always been my priority. I'm particularly curious about a veteran's perspective on the evolution of combat-are you satisfied with the current mechanics? For me, Medieval 2 remains the pinnacle of battle design. Later titles, in my opinion, sped up combat, shifting focus from tactical positioning to micro-management, while Warhammer introduced hero-centric warfare
@@Alistan0_o My preference differs. I'm 50/50. I love to develop my people and watch them prosper... at the same time, I enjoy to raze my enemy's settlements, execute his generals, destroy his families and ruin his world.
I actually find the battles of Rome 2 were my favourite so far. Pharaoh is still very decent and Three Kingdoms both look better, but the pace of Rome 2's battles was better. Units were tougher and felt Medium-Heavy in the grind against each other and manuvering skirmish troops (or cavalry) to flanks felt far more satisfying. Parthian Cavalry for example literally felt like moving ancient tanks, and to hear them all roar as they charge into the fray, shattering enemy lines as they hit their mark... truly amazing.
I don't actually like micromanagement, but rather enjoy historical ways: Battle line, wall grind and flanks. If we keep having to switch to eveeeeeery single unit just to make sure they aren't standing around like mental patients, we kind of miss the actions of the warriors in the main part of the battle, which I like to watch.
aesthetically, it was superior, but the combat mechanics & resource management were jank, there were entirely useless provinces to capture that would only be a drain on your resources, sword users were always outclassed by axes and catapults completely rendered everything else obsolete once you acquired them with a tactician general and 30% more ammunition, provided you had a small contingent to guard them, plus every cavalry unit functioned as a cataphract even when charging head-on into spear troops they decimated the field in most battles, you almost didn't need foot soldiers all-together until late game where they stood more of their own ground but by that point your armies are already made up of catapults, cavalry and a couple axe users.