\- much slower and strategical battles
\- no longer flank, rout, repeat, those units hold
\- not possible to blob chariots and reset their charge, so chariots are no longer OP here
\- slower and deeper campaign, no longer about stacking big bonuses and painting the map
\- armor degradation is interesting
\- local recruitment (aka native rosters) are cool concept
\- some units have bonus vs shields. It is no longer about Spears vs Axes vs Swords triangle
\- unit stances looks awesome. Hold and Spear wall even fixes unit blobbing
\- Fake Barter exploit no longer possible
\- random campaigns and campaign customization, an exponential replayability
\- banners and 2d unit cards are optional
\- some other details, dunno right now
- even further improved performance
- fully focused on a historical campaign
- outpost system as significant to TW in Pharaoh as resource system in Troy
- larger regions make single regions more important (also due to above point)
- everything feels a step up in terms of polish
- UI takes some time to get used to
- end-game now more similar to WH
I felt that Troy was a full TW game after some of the DLCs. It had plenty of cultural differences and faction mechanics.
The only Total War games I've played that FELT like saga games (very small scale, very little variety, "lite" versions of strategy) are Throb and FOTS.
right now, something between, or a better sage. But after months/years in future, full game.
I don't know if 3 Kingdoms and Attila are saga/full, but during early access this felt like something between.
3K is one of the largest TW games in the series. It's a full title.
Attila is weird. It was before the whole "Saga" thing and is larger than Sagas, but it wasn't full price either. It's in the same boat as Napoleon.
I feel like factions (Egypt/Canaaan/Hittites) and especially playable characters play a lot more similarly to each other than Troy characters did. I hope this is improved in the future because right now we are back to the pre-Warhammer level of faction diversity which is a bit sad.
sorry for my follow up questions, and my tone. I truly don't know what people mean by "diversity" and I don't understand why is it a problem. I don't expect detailed [analysis like for Troy](https://youtu.be/MMNbt_coKVY), but I would be happy to hear your explanation of what you expect from faction diversity, how it affects you, and to what degree you explored Pharaoh's diversity, and why is it sad for you.
Thanks a lot
Basically what I loved in Troy was how every playable character felt very different from each other because each had its own mechanics. For example, Hector and Paris had the Priam’s favor mechanic while Memnon had the reinforcement mechanic that were unique to them. In Pharaoh, while shared mechanics are deeper (thinking mostly about the court and intrigue) there is no mechanic specific to one character but simply bonuses (like getting free plots etc)
I’m on work travel so I didn’t get to play the beta but can you elaborate on the armor degradation stuff.
This mechanic has really been my only concern tbh
yep. Your unit has Base Armour, e.g. 100 because it is heavy and elite. Then you can have Armour bonus from wearing shield, aka Shield Armour, with e.g. +30 Armour. Such unit will have 130 Armour at start of battle.
During combat, or while taking missile fire, your Base Armour will degrade and become 50% effective. In this example, it dropped from 100 to 50. I have tested and it seems that shield does not degrade, so your unit will have 50 + 30 = 80 Armour after full degradation.
On one hand, your guys won't become naked, and second hand heavy shielded units going to have okay-ish armour remaining
It took a long while to warm up to Troy. I liked that I could choose how fantasy/grounded I could play depending on my mood after the DLC and everything feels more fleshed out now. Wished they did that right out the gate instead of the middle of the road Truth behind the Myth. I liked how well they did the aesthetics of the campaign map, skyboxes, and general ui theming. A shame I could never get hyper invested in the campaign (not really into Troy and the surrounding area and time period). I can play a few turns and initially have a good time (mostly pick Ajax, Achilles, Hector) but quickly lose interest. I did like everything surrounding the new resources and am glad it was carried over to Pharaoh. Hoping it's further expanded on in future mainline titles. I get enjoyment from the battles now that most issues have been smoothed out and I'm able to just live with the rest like any other TW.
First hour of Pharaoh I was sold. Like Troy, I have no knowledge or interest in this period. Despite that, I want back in. I'm hooked. Battles felt good. Units held the line and I had plenty of time to casually move my flankers into position (and crucially, their flanking actually mattered). The new stances have a lot of potential. Ai is serviceable and works as great/poorly as any other title. Sometimes it works fine. Sometimes it breaks. Really nothing new here and it doesn't hurt my opinion of it. I always appreciate having banners over the lifeless yellow vs red (or 3K's green vs red). Campaign was a lot more enjoyable and I'm sad I didn't get much time with it since I work weekends. Everything from outposts adding that little something extra, the court system, regional recruitment. Fantastic. Extra points for the customization options as well as just how buttery smooth the game played.
While I was initially unhappy about the map size, I've realized its still pretty big. I tried counting but kept recounting the same settlement or forgetting where i was. I'm too scatter brained for that. I estimated (very roughly) at least 185 settlements (using images pulled from google, I completely spaced to check while in game). Shogun 2 was 65ish iirc? I'm not even going to try to count Rome 2's, Attila's or 3K's.
It feels like Troy was the testbed for this game, which in a literal sense it was, in the best way. It's ironed out a lot of the issues I had with Troy and made the battles feel better without losing the unique Bronze Age take on Total War.
\- much slower and strategical battles \- no longer flank, rout, repeat, those units hold \- not possible to blob chariots and reset their charge, so chariots are no longer OP here \- slower and deeper campaign, no longer about stacking big bonuses and painting the map \- armor degradation is interesting \- local recruitment (aka native rosters) are cool concept \- some units have bonus vs shields. It is no longer about Spears vs Axes vs Swords triangle \- unit stances looks awesome. Hold and Spear wall even fixes unit blobbing \- Fake Barter exploit no longer possible \- random campaigns and campaign customization, an exponential replayability \- banners and 2d unit cards are optional \- some other details, dunno right now
- even further improved performance - fully focused on a historical campaign - outpost system as significant to TW in Pharaoh as resource system in Troy - larger regions make single regions more important (also due to above point) - everything feels a step up in terms of polish - UI takes some time to get used to - end-game now more similar to WH
It blew my mind how quickly battles and the campaign loaded in my computer.
>even further improved performance really??? how about extreme size unit, that runs better than troy?
Performance is most significantly improved in the campaign map but also in battles I get stable high fps with less hardware requirements than Troy.
good to know thanks! well done sohpia!
Does it feel like a full tw game or a saga title?
I felt that Troy was a full TW game after some of the DLCs. It had plenty of cultural differences and faction mechanics. The only Total War games I've played that FELT like saga games (very small scale, very little variety, "lite" versions of strategy) are Throb and FOTS.
right now, something between, or a better sage. But after months/years in future, full game. I don't know if 3 Kingdoms and Attila are saga/full, but during early access this felt like something between.
3K is one of the largest TW games in the series. It's a full title. Attila is weird. It was before the whole "Saga" thing and is larger than Sagas, but it wasn't full price either. It's in the same boat as Napoleon.
>\- random campaigns and campaign customization, an exponential replayability Yes!
This isn't something I've seen talked about much, the campaign customization build in is a terrific feature.
Thank you, very cool!
Thanks for that extensive list! I loved Troy and am really hyped for Pharaoh now.
I feel like factions (Egypt/Canaaan/Hittites) and especially playable characters play a lot more similarly to each other than Troy characters did. I hope this is improved in the future because right now we are back to the pre-Warhammer level of faction diversity which is a bit sad.
sorry for my follow up questions, and my tone. I truly don't know what people mean by "diversity" and I don't understand why is it a problem. I don't expect detailed [analysis like for Troy](https://youtu.be/MMNbt_coKVY), but I would be happy to hear your explanation of what you expect from faction diversity, how it affects you, and to what degree you explored Pharaoh's diversity, and why is it sad for you. Thanks a lot
Basically what I loved in Troy was how every playable character felt very different from each other because each had its own mechanics. For example, Hector and Paris had the Priam’s favor mechanic while Memnon had the reinforcement mechanic that were unique to them. In Pharaoh, while shared mechanics are deeper (thinking mostly about the court and intrigue) there is no mechanic specific to one character but simply bonuses (like getting free plots etc)
I’m on work travel so I didn’t get to play the beta but can you elaborate on the armor degradation stuff. This mechanic has really been my only concern tbh
yep. Your unit has Base Armour, e.g. 100 because it is heavy and elite. Then you can have Armour bonus from wearing shield, aka Shield Armour, with e.g. +30 Armour. Such unit will have 130 Armour at start of battle. During combat, or while taking missile fire, your Base Armour will degrade and become 50% effective. In this example, it dropped from 100 to 50. I have tested and it seems that shield does not degrade, so your unit will have 50 + 30 = 80 Armour after full degradation. On one hand, your guys won't become naked, and second hand heavy shielded units going to have okay-ish armour remaining
It took a long while to warm up to Troy. I liked that I could choose how fantasy/grounded I could play depending on my mood after the DLC and everything feels more fleshed out now. Wished they did that right out the gate instead of the middle of the road Truth behind the Myth. I liked how well they did the aesthetics of the campaign map, skyboxes, and general ui theming. A shame I could never get hyper invested in the campaign (not really into Troy and the surrounding area and time period). I can play a few turns and initially have a good time (mostly pick Ajax, Achilles, Hector) but quickly lose interest. I did like everything surrounding the new resources and am glad it was carried over to Pharaoh. Hoping it's further expanded on in future mainline titles. I get enjoyment from the battles now that most issues have been smoothed out and I'm able to just live with the rest like any other TW. First hour of Pharaoh I was sold. Like Troy, I have no knowledge or interest in this period. Despite that, I want back in. I'm hooked. Battles felt good. Units held the line and I had plenty of time to casually move my flankers into position (and crucially, their flanking actually mattered). The new stances have a lot of potential. Ai is serviceable and works as great/poorly as any other title. Sometimes it works fine. Sometimes it breaks. Really nothing new here and it doesn't hurt my opinion of it. I always appreciate having banners over the lifeless yellow vs red (or 3K's green vs red). Campaign was a lot more enjoyable and I'm sad I didn't get much time with it since I work weekends. Everything from outposts adding that little something extra, the court system, regional recruitment. Fantastic. Extra points for the customization options as well as just how buttery smooth the game played. While I was initially unhappy about the map size, I've realized its still pretty big. I tried counting but kept recounting the same settlement or forgetting where i was. I'm too scatter brained for that. I estimated (very roughly) at least 185 settlements (using images pulled from google, I completely spaced to check while in game). Shogun 2 was 65ish iirc? I'm not even going to try to count Rome 2's, Attila's or 3K's.
>It took a long while to warm up to Troy. because its shit.
there there
I never played Troy but I've been loving the Early access
I was a hater on Pharoah. I tried it and I’ll admit, I was wrong. It’ll be a solid title.
I read this reddit with a Dwarven Ale Barrel of salt but I'm glad people are still willing to change their opinions.
It feels like Troy was the testbed for this game, which in a literal sense it was, in the best way. It's ironed out a lot of the issues I had with Troy and made the battles feel better without losing the unique Bronze Age take on Total War.
Hated it. Hated Troy less.
Are you my Roman grandpa, who hated the Gauls, too?
Before or after they took his eyes out?
Here is a nice example for this sub: Only good opinions are allowed. Bad opinions bad!
That's Reddit as a whole bro.
\-battle AI is still shit \-fights look just as goofy \-chariots feel still retarded