Which Total War game might be best for a newbie?

[Smellincoffee]

I've long been curious about the Total War series, and am particularly interested in the Medieval, Roman, and modernish (Empire, Napoleon) games. I know if I get into the series I'll probably pass on Empire, given the exceptionally poor reviews, but between the two Medieval games and the Roman game, which has the easiest learning curve? I've never played a game like it, though I am familiar with Civilization III, Age of Kings, and Sid Meier's Gettysburg. My fondness for the latter game is why I want to try this Total War series, because I like the scale of it. I understand the series has both action and strategic elements. I've tried watching some LP's to get a feel for the game, but I haven't any yet which explain the game to the uninitiated. Do any of the series have tutorials to explain the basics of battle, of the value of placing particular troops in certain areas, that sort of thing?

 

[schlaufuchs]

If you don't mind graphics: M1TW: VI in my opinion was the peak of the franchise. Otherwise, RTW is probably the most popular.

 

[Andulias]

Rome: Total War is considered the best, but the recent Shogun 2: Total War is great as well, and would be a good starting point for a newbie

 

[shadowplay]

I started with Medieval II, progressed to Rome, Empire, Shogun 2, and now Napoleon. I'm going to refrain from commenting on Napoleon as I've only just started playing it.

1. Medieval II - I think this would be my recommendation for a starting point. Lots of variety in the factons you can control, and if you've never played a Total War game before, I think you'll be pretty impressed by the graphics and scope of the battles. If you're not the type to be bothered by some historical inaccuracies, you will probably love this game. There are also some fantastic mods for it.
2. Rome - Similar to Medieval II, but with more primative graphics and (IMO) less variety, due to the focus on, well, Rome. Still a fantastic game overall. Again, great mods for this one.
3. Shogun 2 - lots of fun and pretty to look at, but lacking variety. I haven't played any of the expansion packs, however, which appear to address that. A good game, but I wouldn't recommend this one as a starting point unless you're really into Japan.
x. Empire - don't even bother. The game was basically released and never finished, and is buggy to the point it isn't even worth playing, unless you really enjoy frustration.

 

[Ajidica]

Rome is pretty fun, plus there are some outstanding mods for it once you pick up the Barbarian Invasion expansion pack.

 

[Dachs]

Rome is pretty fun, plus there are some outstanding mods for it once you pick up the Barbarian Invasion expansion pack.

And even before.

 

[Smellincoffee]

Thanks for the feedback so far. Is Medieval II significantly different from the original?

And do any of these games have a tutorial to introduce players to basic movements and so on?

 

[shadowplay]

All the titles I mentioned come with good tutorials that will show you the basics.

 

[Smellincoffee]

Excellent! Does Medieval II require the installation of Steam or internet activation? (My extreme dislike for those features is why I prefer playing older games. )

 

[Atticus]

I played RTW -> M2TW -> ETW.

ETW was the only one that required Steam.

I didn't find ETW at all bad. However the transition from RTW to M2TW wasn't that nice, since I didn't like the graphics of the latter. On the other hand, my PC was substandard then too. M2TW looked like having more possibilities though, since in RTW Rome is a bit overpowered, I think.

RTW has imo superior style to the other games: it's loading pictures and music are astonishing. If you're planning a week of isolation just playing, it's a perfect game for that!

 

[Dachs]

RTW is the only Total War game that has mods to make it passably historically accurate and/or fun. Unmodded RTW is worse than M2TW.

 

[schlaufuchs]

RTW is the only Total War game that has mods to make it passably historically accurate and/or fun. Unmodded RTW is worse than M2TW.

Meh, I never really enjoyed the feel of M2TW. I think it gets duller more quickly than RTW as well. Vanilla BI>>M2TW with Kingdoms.

@SmellinCoffee: yes there is a big difference. The graphics are very different and the feel of it is different. I think the tactical aspects of M1 are deeper than M2. I also like the way they cover the strategic map more in M1 than M2. It's more Risk-life, but I think that lends itself better to this style of game. I think overall M1 is more difficult than M2; I think it's one of the hardest games in the series, which offers more replayability. There's a good deal of variety in the units across the factions and playing faction to faction is actually more of an experience than M2, in my opinion. Also Viking Invasion is probably my favorite scenario of all the iterations I've played.

That being said, there can be no comparison to RTW with EB. Simply the best.

 

[Ajidica]

Unmodded RTW is worse than M2TW.

Hey, I had great fun slaughtering Seleucids with "The Mummy's Revenge" Egyptian phalanxes and chariots, thank you very much!

 

[Joecoolyo]

When I started with total war, I went Medieval II, Empire, Napoleon, and then Shogun 2. All of which I recommend (save for Empire, which I never really got into all that much, Napoleon was Empire with all the bad taken out).

I think that's a pretty decent path, if you don't mind older graphics you can probably squeeze Rome in there, though I never played that one so I can't comment.

 

[Cheezy the Wiz]

Hey, I had great fun slaughtering Seleucids with "The Mummy's Revenge" Egyptian phalanxes and chariots, thank you very much!

The most horrendous part was the three Roman factions. While it made for interesting gameplay, it made anyone with vague historical knowledge of the era tear their hair out.

 

[Atticus]

I could swallow it, but hoped that it had contained some political aspects too (the senate floor and popularity amongst people weren't that much).

I liked the overpowered Brits, who every time conquered the whole Northern Europe if you didn't first.

 

[Dachs]

Four Roman factions.

And the only countries that got units that were even close to Roman ones, statistically, were countries that were allowed to build "imitation legionaries". You know, because that was totally a thing.

 

[Maniacal]

I absolutely hated the split up Roman factions, it was a terrible idea for the grand campaign and the main reason why I started looking for mods for RTW. EB is amazing, and RTW2 isn't going to be worth buying if it doesn't have excellent mod support for someone to make a similar mod.

 

[Cheezy the Wiz]

Four Roman factions.

Erm, yes.

And the only countries that got units that were even close to Roman ones, statistically, were countries that were allowed to build "imitation legionaries". You know, because that was totally a thing.

Didn't the Seleucids organize some legionary-like units after Magnesia? And Appian mentions Mithridates VI equipping soldiers and organizing them into cohorts "in the Italian fashion." In addition, Tacitus mentioned Tacfarinas' army as being "armed in the Roman fashion." So they were evidently a "thing." Not a big thing, but then they weren't much of a "thing" in the game, either. I saw them fielded maybe twice, before I stopped playing Vanilla RTW.

 

[Dachs]

Didn't the Seleucids organize some legionary-like units after Magnesia? And Appian mentions Mithridates VI equipping soldiers and organizing them into cohorts "in the Italian fashion." In addition, Tacitus mentioned Tacfarinas' army as being "armed in the Roman fashion." So they were evidently a "thing." Not a big thing, but then they weren't much of a "thing" in the game, either. I saw them fielded maybe twice, before I stopped playing Vanilla RTW.

Roman chauvinism failed to understand native developments in Hellenistic tactics and armament and tended to portray all developments as reactions to the (supposedly superior) Roman way of doing things. Thureophoroi were in fact older than the notion of the legionary, and thorakitai were largely a development of that. It would be foolish to say that the appearance of Rome did not play any role whatsoever in the Seleukid and Makedonian arms developments of the second century, but it would be a greater error to describe such units as merely imitation legionaries.