/twg/ - Total War General

WAZZOCKS
_____U
_____T

Fights are faster and units break more easily, so that might be something to do with it.
Certainly in Atilla you can hold up thousands of guys with just a few spearwall spearmen in the right situations.

Why do you have to rationalise everything? Can't you just accept that they fixed mass in TWWH?

Err, sure. It doesn't make a difference to me how exactly they fixed it.

only thing I can see fixed is camera height
Can I get it back to attila levels of zoom I dont like the way it goes to whatever tactical view instead

Why does Total War push the meme that swords > spears?

Dark Elven Khainite assassins are better, there's just less of them.

because balance

its because this and the battles themselves are much smaller, so there are fewer units to blob

Because romans are the only relevant factor in that equation and spearfags are rightfully reviled

Because a game where everybody is a spearman would be boring

The sword is a more versatile weapon that is much more maneuverable and deadly in tight battles.
Once a spear formation breaks open, swordsmen reign supreme

Because swords should be used as a flanking force, not to pry open a tight spearwall

The problem is when swordsmen charge a spear phalanx or line of pikes from the front and still win, like in almost every recent TW.

Those swordsmen probably superior in quality to the spearmen.
My high quality spearmen never have an issue taking on charging infantry.

It depends on the formation youre using.

>a sword is more maneuverable
>a swors is more deadly

A sword is more maneuverable and deadly in tight battles.
How are you going to move a spear when bodies are pressing together.

>formation break
>speermann draw his schwert

what now?

He won't be as proficient in it as a proper swordsman.

Pull the spear back? You can hold the weapon differently you know. If space is an issue then thrusting weapons like the spear would be far more suited for the situation.

SUMMON THE ELECTOR COWS

There are people behind you. The spear is too fucking long to be used in a battle like that.

And why is that?

Something tells me this isnt bait.

Yeah, that's why spears were used all the time on medieval and ancient battlefields and nobody but the Romans employed the sword as the main arm of their armies.

And look how did they fare against the romans :^)

That already defeats the point that spears are somehow a better all around weapon

You can produce a shitton of spears and train a shitton of people to use them in much less time and resources spent than doing the same with swords

It takes years of instruction and training to master a weapon like the sword.
Spears were used all the time in medieval and ancient armies because they're fuckcheap and fuckeasy to make and even more fuckeasy to use.
You can tell a peasant to buy a spear or make one and poke the enemy.
Romans used swords because they were mostly fighting infantry and their armies were professionals, not levies.

Spears were used en masse because they were easier and cheaper to train and equip troops with, first and foremost. Logistics.

THE BEASTS SHALL RISE

#BanAssaultSpears
#NotAllBeasts

If Rome was so great how come America won WW1 & 2? Oh right, they were wiped out before they could even participate.

What is cheaper, a pointy stick or a metal sword?

I know this is bait Bob but I'm still getting triggered because I didn't expect it this time. Good job.

Then how come many spearmen (and archers, and other troops) had swords as their secondary weapon?

Daggers probably, not swords

Because inside their hearts they knew spears just wouldn't cut it

And because they weren't fanboy morons who thought a single weapons can cover every need on the field.

That's a knoif

No, swords.

I can't wait to tear down Beastmen with superior black powder weapons

wow that's a really old photograph

Because it's fucking true, the only benefit of the spear is that you can give it to an untrained pleb and he won't embarrass himself quite as much as he would with a sword.

WHAT HAPPENS TO THE FUCKING LORRY?????

I watched this for a minute waiting.

It's not an old photograph, colors weren't invented yet, retard.

proofs?
were you there?

That's late Middle Ages senpai
And well trained, well required English troops

Equipped*

But real life is just like an RPG. Archers can't have swords or armor, that's unbalanced!

>Retained Archers
>mid-14th to early 15th centuries
wew lad, you really goofed this one

If the gladius was so great why did the romans use the spatha as the sidearm and the spear as the weapon.

I dunno. It hits the bollard and gets fucked up I guess.

thank fug for night battles, I already fought a few 4v4 stack battles as the Alani against the Huns and while they are pretty fun, its just too much of a tiring clusterfuck to do repeatedly, besides this time I only have 2 stacks and a garrison vs 4 enemy stacks

This whole poor peasants armed with nothing but a stick meme needs to end, in 1100s britian every freeman was required own own a mail shirt, a helmet, a shield and a weapon of some sort. The richer peasants were also required to own a bow. A cheap sword sold for as little as 6 pence, or a day or two's wage for the average peasant. To put in perspective an axe for woodcutting costs 5 pence.

If swords are so great, why do modern rifles have attachments to turn them into spears rather than swords?

>youtube.com/watch?v=HxFgSmR0i3A

>In the history of Europe, the Middle Ages or medieval period lasted from the 5th to the 15th century.

What about hoplites with kopis or xiphos?

>not realizing you attach a small sword to the rifle

If spears are so great why do they need a sword at their end to be effective?

A bayonet basically is a sword. You can slash and stab, it has a decent reach, you can flip it around and slam people with the stock of the weapon, etc.

Also this. Swords are basically an evolution of the spear. They do the same shit.

How thick was the infantry blob that they only fired a few volleys and got 550 kills or are crossbows just that strong in Attila?

You can cut with a spear too. You can also bash people with the shaft.

>Slashing with a bayonet

wew lad

Muzzle thrust, buttstroke, butt smash and then swing down with your bayonet. BCCT taught in many militaries.

Because the average rifle is too long to adequately function as a sword handle.
Plus, bayonet types change with the standards of the time. Currently, we use knife bayonets, so you can stab or cut. In the late 19th century, sword bayonets were in vogue, and they turned rifles into less of a spear and more of a glaive.

Doing my first Attilla run as the Ebdanians. I decided to go full imperial mode, but it seems I've hit a rut now. My expansions south into spain is all but over, my main army destroyed by enemy forces down there, and the southern coastal city states declaring war on me. My expansion west is still strong, as I have two full stacks there, but the great number of barbar armies in the area that maintain full stacks has made the position dangerous, and every turn more of them declare war on me. To my own shame, my homeland is now home to quite a number of Geat stacks. They are not openly hostile, but raid constantly, and I lack the funds or time to build up my forces there, in the case that they attempt to do more than raid. What do?

Are there any good overhaul mods for Attila yet? Just about done with my current campaign and i want to try something new.

I miss burning
I just want to raid villages and burn everything

post wood elf qts

You can't burn villages because they don't exist anymore.

but elfs are for lewd, not for cute

I want to eat Vampire-chans butthole!

That's why I said swords and spears are the same thing essentially. They differ mostly in length.

I mean, throughout history you see people swapping between the sword and the spear. People used spears, then longer spears, then spears with shields, to short spears with shields.

Then they cut the spear length way down for use with the shield and it became a sword. And when cavalry began to rule the battlefield they switched back to spears, then very long swords, and finally firearms (which they still attach spear/sword tips to)

I'll post you one better.

No John, you ARE the barbars

Who taught this retard history?

Who else already bought beast men like a faggot?

Please educate us on the true history of sharp things on sticks, master historian

Waiting until the end of the week for pay and then yeah.

>How thick was the infantry blob
5 of my infantry units, and yes crossbows are incredibly strong in attila, especially when fired in the back

Which is your favourite faction in TW:WH?

Long two handed only swords are a meme and mostly ceremonial or used to inefficiently do tasks like pushing away pikes.

NAGASH WAS WEAK

Same here, gotta wait for money in my bank account then it's beast-o-clock.

He's not wrong tho.

SUMMON THE BEAST LORDS

I DID NOT CONSENT TO THIS POO

WE IZ GOBBOS

Greenskins

Since day 1 announcement.

GORTHOR WAS WEAK
WITNESS TRUE POOPOOPEEPEE

Firstly there wasn't a unified spear length. Different armies from different cultures were armed and fought differently, the Romans didn't "cut down their spears and turned them into swords", they adapted it (in sword form) from another culture and "very long swords" were never employed on a massive level like spears are.