/v/ - Video Games

Rome and Medieval, because Europe+MENA have more interesting history than Chingchong land.

Rome easily beats it for having the most fun historical context. Aside from the 3 Roman houses, every faction is completely different and it's a new puzzle figuring out how to best beat them.

>>15717399

Not to mention the many fantastic mods it has that fixes the historical inaccuracies.

'Europa Barbarorum' is for the true history autist interested in the time period.

IMO they stop becoming fun once you've taken over a good chunk of territory and become unstoppable. I still finished at least one campaign in all except for Napoleon Shogun2 and FoTS. FoTS was fun and the artillery is diamonds but I lost interest when I developed artillery and had an unstoppable army.

Most people really like Med2 with Stainless Steel although I've found it to be a little bit bitchy with modern systems and resolutions.

Attila is actually decent and the time period is less cookie-cutter than what you usually see. Stay away from Napoleon and Empire, people claim those are "fixed with mods" but that's simply not true.

>>15717418

how's atilla with the ancient empires? i kind of want the post-shogun 2 unit combat but the ancient time period

>>15717424

I didn't follow the development of Ancient Empires much but it seems to be very high quality. The various mechanics they introduced feel a bit niggerrigged though.

Here's the list for total war games:

Great tier:

Rome 1

Medieval 2

Shogun 2

Good tier:

Napoleon

Deeply flawed tier:

Empire

Warhammer (WH autists will tell you differently)

Rome 2, Attila

Can't run unless you run x16 instruction sets:

Medieval

Shogun

>>15717443

>tier shit

I want to call you a massive faggot but for once someone actually put the games in the right order. I'll let you off with being off by one