What do you guys think of the Age Of Charlemagne campaign? I personally like it but it feels a little "lackluster" and easy af. It's more about administration since a lot of the factions seem to be on the defensive side.Or maybe i'm just a pussy, i only play on hard difficulty.
It feels weird. The developers were really given a free hand to be creative and try out all kinds of new stuff. It's the only Total War game I can think of, where your name and flag changes, when you are powerful enough. The only other game to do this was Shogun 2, when you became the Shogunate or the Vanguard of the Imperials or Shogunites. You also for the first time had a building system, where substantial bonuses were given to regions that surround a region with such a building. You even had a war exhaustion system, which was a very basic and didn't take into account raiding, war or casualties, but simply time spent at war.It's kinda sad that historical games were completely abandoned after this.
Another game ruined by the piss filter
>>2384978I was bothered by the relative lack of faction diversity Everyone basically has equivalent units that performs the same with only 1 or 2 actually unique units per faction, which are only of marginal value. You basically play as the Norse, the Avars or as everyone else.The campaign economy was designed around retards ignoring the mechanics, which means if you actually manage the mechanics you generate infinite money off of only your core settlements and can just print stacks and autoresolve even on Legendary.I think it really suffers from late stage CA multiplayer syndrome where faction rosters are designed around symmetry for online battles rather than being designed around the inherent asymmetry of the campaign map, and that makes the campaign map feel bland, imbalanced and easy despite there being some very good design choices nestled in. Basically like Napoleon.
>>2384978Mercia is fucking wtf were CA thinking listing it as an "easy" start, it's at least at most a medium/normal start you're basically at war with like 3 to 4 factions and have to play the map like the Grand campaign.
>>2384978>early medieval soldier clad in gambesonI assumed that earliest evidence of it is high medieval. But then again, roman sub armalis was probably a gambeson, so I guess it probably was a thing for a long time, from iron age maybe. Maybe earlier.
>>2386540>It's the only Total War game I can think of, where your name and flag changes, when you are powerful enough. The only other game to do this was Shogun 2Three Kingdoms does it too, for the record
>>2386661>Start safe and cozy on an island>Dominate all your weaker neighbours on said island>Now control entire unassailable island with enough settlements to support an endgame economy>Invade and conquer Europe at your leisure.It's arguably the easiest start in the whole campaign.
>>2386777so does Thrones of Britannia
>>2387306Caliphate is easier imo,the other Iberian factions can't manage for shit and don't attack you THAT much, it's especially easy since you can get chummy with your muslim neighbours and due to Charlemagne diplomacy being arguably more reasonable than GC diplomacy they'll basically stick with you till the end. Asturias is easily maneuverable in field battles since it's got the desert faction balance where you hammer and anvil with light cav and mostly shitty infantry early on.
>>2384978I liked it. I feel like it inspired ToB which I liked as well. Equipping leaders inspired Warhammer and Troy me thinks. The Last Roman had timed fetch quests and no real indicator of what could be done with Roman hordes and it was only fun for me for like 2 play throughs. I think the art work was kino af. It is textbook DLC, what I judge other games off of. In terms of easy I thought the Celts Culture pack was game breaking. I would relocate my capital to Carthago Nova just for a challenge on legendary setting. Attila and AoC had the best artwork of any game I have ever played.
