Gamespot 'vote'

[maekh]

The total war series is ok but totally unplayable except in battle mode. i mean , turn based.... wtf

 

[Kell Neutan]

Its kind of funny. The Total War Series is really nothing like a Paradox game. They are fun, but I have NEVER played a game that can go head to head with a Paradox game regarding:

Historical Accuracy
Depth and Breadth of Gameplay
Support of games post-launch by the developers
Active boards and community

I could go on...

 

[peer-LAN]

So all this is just a publicity scam :rofl: , ok go on, don’t mind me
I played all the games Paradox and Creative Assembly released. I love them all but as many already explained they are very different.

Creative Assembly games are focused on tactical battles. I buy Total War games because I want to lead armies in battles (Find the weak spot in the enemy army, rally my troops), ambush enemy troops and use the terrain advantages my troops have.

Paradox games on the other hand focus on strategy and management. I buy Paradox games because I want to lead nations in wars and peace time prosperity (use diplomacy), encircle enemy armies (cut of their supplies) and use the economic advantages my country has (trade with other coutries).
I think you know where I’m going. So this is a fight between tactic and strategy.
Tactic:
1. An action calculated to achieve an end: maneuver, measure (often used in plural), move, procedure, step. See action/inaction.
2. A method of deploying troops and equipment in combat: maneuver, stratagem. See means.

Strategy:
(DOD) The art and science of developing and employing instruments of national power in a synchronized and integrated fashion to achieve theater, national, and/or multinational objectives.

So there is no reason to compare Total War with Europa Universalis because the games are different. Total War is the best tactical game and Europa Universalis the best strategic game.
If I were to choose which game is best anyway I would pick Total Wars because it has both a tactical game and a strategic game in it (better value even if the strategic game is a lot inferior to Europa Universalis). On the other hand, if I didn’t enjoy fighting tactical battles myself (but this is not the case) I would pick Europa Universalis.

 

[shaldon]

I think your doing a good job promoting EUIII Negru Vuda. I also think that someone in this thread owns you an apology.

Sorry Negru Vuda, I was merely referring to the potential foolishness of a like-for-like vote or comparison between the two games, they are very different, really

 

[Warspite]

Good to see EUIII get the attention it deserves. Can't wait to see the game next year. Not quite the anticipation I had in Jan 2001 waiting for the original EU but still a great game to look forward to.

 

[unmerged(20077)]

EU3 is not going to be a game of mediaeval warfare. The whole premise is wrong. It's as if this person had started a thread about Chariots of War vs. Close Combat...

 

[Negru Voda]

Sorry Negru Vuda, I was merely referring to the potential foolishness of a like-for-like vote or comparison between the two games, they are very different, really

No hard feelings

EU3 is not going to be a game of mediaeval warfare. The whole premise is wrong. It's as if this person had started a thread about Chariots of War vs. Close Combat...

When I first read about EUIII, the only thing I had to compare it to was Total War games...

When I posted the gamespot vote, I wanted to stimulate some response, and get an idea of what is EUIII, in relation to TW

I agree now, after much info gathering, that EU differs much from TW.
However, I liked the voting thing just to see what the general preferrence is between gamers? Is it tactical or indepth strategy?

Since EU and TW are both top at what they do, the vote is inderectly comparing what they do...

Anyway, it felt nice making some noise about EU

I guess the vote turned into a clash of game-types...

P.S: Has my vote been erased from the gamespot total war thingy?
.....TW must have been loosing really badly