Also a valid strategy to complete provinces is to wait for villages to rebel, because AI struggles with public order. I do admit the game feels easy, because due to the recruitment system and undefended villages, you can easily destabilize the AI with a good pre-emptive strike. ToB introduced some nice features regarding building system and recruitment, which are hated in ToB, yet praised in 3K, even though all my criticism for 3K is pretty much things they changed compared to ToB. Siege maps modelled after excavations are just an icing on a cake. It's a piece about Brittain, made by a studio in UK and it shows in tons of tiny details, how much effort and love went into it. internal politics in ToB is much clearer and unlike Attila, you get some useful traits sometimes. Attila is simply too obfuscated with tons of annoying features (annoying for me, YMMV). I found it to be an improvement over Attila in terms of playability all around. Plenty of artistic style, good playability and great performance. Personally, I think it's one of the best games in the series. So it didn't satisfy those people who it was aimed for and the rest was happily playing WH2. You'll be seeing germanic hearthguard in all three games. However, the setting of the game is fairly similar to the previous titles, such as Attila, AoC and partly R2. It was released right after the start of WH2 to appease people complaining about too much focus on fantasy. In my opinion it was a game that came at wrong time with wrong focus.
0 kommentar(er)
