Jump to content

Thorfinn the Shallow Minded

Community Members
  • Content Count

    842
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    8

Thorfinn the Shallow Minded last won the day on April 1

Thorfinn the Shallow Minded had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

583 Excellent

2 Followers

About Thorfinn the Shallow Minded

  • Rank
    Centurio

Contact Methods

  • Website URL
    http://

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    Minnesota

Recent Profile Visitors

3.191 profile views
  1. While I have played a bit of multiplayer, I never tried competing on a high level and almost definitely made subpar choices when it came to strategy, and I was hoping that some of the higher level players would share their playstyles, whether it be about a single faction or just general rule of thumb. Thanks.
  2. In a game where women take eight seconds to be born, I think that a few mechanical changes would make nomads feel organic enough, accurate or not.
  3. I checked out some footage; definitely it's more on the visible side of things. Could you give a numerical comparison of what percentage of a difference in speed Delenda Est has?
  4. The other approach would be altering the arrow's initial velocity. At maximum range, when not accounting for differences in elevation with the target, archers should always use a 45 degree angle. This angle can change as the target gets closer.
  5. I'd just like to make a humble suggestion that arrows and javelins should arc more when launched. I won't make any claim regarding the angle archers historically used, but in general, I prefer that aesthetic since the projectiles are easier to see, and they do not clip through as many buildings and units, breaking the visual immersion.
  6. For all technical purposes, the Athenian faction does represent itself both during the Persian and Peloponnesian Wars given the fact that Pericles is represented as a hero.
  7. For some of the navy based heroes, maybe being able to train a flagship specifically for them would be a fun option.
  8. I wonder if Porus would be an appropriate addition despite his being a king before the formation of the Maurya Empire. He would make a fun historic rival to Alexander.
  9. The solution here seems obvious: spearmen/pikemen should be able to disable rams about as well as swordsmen.
  10. I think that you might be mistaking Agis III with Agis IV, who was famous for attempting a series of reforms; likewise, as such, wouldn't he be better served being equipped with equipment to match the pikemen in that case?
  11. A few thoughts regarding your concepts: Ionian revolt is an annoyingly situational. I would rather recommend something based around his colonial efforts in Thrace, making Civic Centres cheaper. For Iphicrates, I would propose giving ranged infantry (particularly peltasts) better melee armour instead of movement speed; it's hard to exactly say what his reforms specifically did, but improving their performance in melee fights is a generally accepted theory. I'd propose that Themistocles' Naval Architect technology be renamed 'Wooden Walls' in reference to the oracle. Other than that, it woul
  12. Xenophon was hardly patriotic and seems like a poor choice due to that. For Carthage, I think that a naval hero such as Hanno the Navigator would be a brilliant option. Regarding Socrates, while I don't want to undermine his importance as an intellectual figure (or military one), it would seem better to feature others such as Cimon or his father Miltiades. Athens could easily represent the philosophic schools with an academy structure.
  13. Well Total War has never really advertised itself as a historically accurate series. Take Rome Total War's disgraceful approach to Spartans, head throwers, berserkers, and Roman ninjas. This take has some glaring issues with the skull headresses, but the armour and such look no worse to me than most any other Total War Game. If the game was an effort to be historically accurate, I'd say that the experience might be a bit disappointing.
  14. Aside from an approach that seems a bit backwards to me, there are some strange generalisations made about each civilisation. The Persians were a force to be reckoned with, but they were easily defeated by a collection of city-states and had to heavily rely on Greek mercenaries to have a decent force of infantry. The Macedonians were well and good, but the other successor states are just as much based on similar tactics as them. You can say that the Seleucids kept on getting beaten up, but there were many enemies around them and general instability; what makes a successor state 'failed' is
  15. Agreed. People should keep their mouses out of frame when posting screenshots. In seriousness, that is a bit much. To paraphrase John Cleese: "What did the Romans do to them?"
×
×
  • Create New...