LOTR - Shadows of Mordor

[Purple]

I have newer experienced what you say about archers my self. Although playing with the Nords and having access to huskarls with their shields the size of small houses probably has a lot to do with it. Yes, it's bloody but you can push your way into a castle just fine with huskarls. And once you do climb those walls there is little the enemy can do to stop you due to again, the huge shields and occasional throwing spear.

[PainRack]

Nonsense. I once led a force of more than 400 soldiers with Nord lords, along with my own elite Huscarl formation of more than 60 of them with Rhodok crossbows and Vaegir marksmen and a supporting knight contingent as support.

Throw them up against another heavy infantry force like the Nords, or the Rhodoks and it WILL get slaughtered. Even against the Vaegirs, you're still going to suffer heavy casualties. The only force that they won't suffer disproportionate losses from would be the Khergit as well as the new Sassanid force.

And even here, it can be iffy if your Nord lords aren't carrying a tier 3 army around in spades.

There ARE things you can do to suppress the enemy fire, including using intelligent control of the formation but the game gives what are entirely appropriate advantages to a supported heavy infantry unit, hiding behind walls with ranged support.


Its also funny you talk about Huscarls and their round shields, because their base protection is inadequate against the Rhodok crossbows. Hell, even the Swadian crossbows can shatter them as I once learned to my cost.And as for stopping you, yes they can. It depends on the castle design, but there are several designs where you're exposed to fire on the parquet from the keep while you're fending off an enemy infantry press at the front. Since your shield is on the right and they're firing from your left............. good game.

Its SUPPOSED to force you to use more intelligent controls and army design.

[Purple]

Nonsense. I once led a force of more than 400 soldiers with Nord lords, along with my own elite Huscarl formation of more than 60 of them with Rhodok crossbows and Vaegir marksmen and a supporting knight contingent as support.

Hm... I think that I have found why we disagree. We both use allies. But I usually don't tend to rely on allies as anything other than cannon fodder and don't consider their losses to count. As in, what I would describe as an attack by 60 men + fodder with 10 losses you would describe as an attack by 400 men with hundreds of losses.

Throw them up against another heavy infantry force like the Nords, or the Rhodoks and it WILL get slaughtered. Even against the Vaegirs, you're still going to suffer heavy casualties. The only force that they won't suffer disproportionate losses from would be the Khergit as well as the new Sassanid force.

From my experiance Vaegirs suck against archers because their elite units lack shields.

Its also funny you talk about Huscarls and their round shields, because their base protection is inadequate against the Rhodok crossbows. Hell, even the Swadian crossbows can shatter them as I once learned to my cost.

Oh yes, the Rhodok. The one enemy I absolutely dread to find behind castle walls. Swadiands are OK because they tend to have more mele troops in stock. But Rhodok... yea I don't even want to try and take their castles until I absolutely have to.

And as for stopping you, yes they can. It depends on the castle design, but there are several designs where you're exposed to fire on the parquet from the keep while you're fending off an enemy infantry press at the front. Since your shield is on the right and they're firing from your left............. good game.

Yea, I hate those. The usual solution I have found is to make sure your NPC heroes and your self are all trained in ranged combat. Than get them to find cover and shoot on the guys on the left.

This said, if you want an extra challenge check out the medieval Japan mod (what ever it's called). Can you say NO SHIELDS?

[TheFeniX]

Anyways, games looks pretty cool. Also kind of looks like an Assassins Creed playthrough.

For my part, I think that Shadow of Mordor looks pretty cool. Very “next-gen” graphically and mechanically, if it all looks and works according to plan.

On the other hand—and this “other hand” is getting more and more riled up lately—my curmudgeonly side worries that the Lord of the Rings IP is being badly watered down and mishandled by its current stewards. There is very little of Tolkien’s world here, just as there is increasingly little of it left in Peter Jackson’s films. Shadow of Mordor may take place in “Mordor” but it smacks of generic high-fantasy in many ways, including the fact that it’s all about fighting and killing and overt magical powers.

Which may be great for entertainment purposes, but maybe not so good when it comes to conveying what the original books and world were actually about.

Forbes kind of points out this is more a generic third-person ass-stabbing game, than an LOTR game with stealth and stabby mechanics. It's hard to not label LOTR as generic these days considering how many of it's themes pervade Fantasy in general.

I'm still keeping an eye on it myself. You just never know.

The nemesis dialog is pretty easy to handle judging by the video. It's probably "last boss killed by = Fire," character says "you left my boss to burn!" ::queue fight scene::

[PainRack]

Nonsense. I once led a force of more than 400 soldiers with Nord lords, along with my own elite Huscarl formation of more than 60 of them with Rhodok crossbows and Vaegir marksmen and a supporting knight contingent as support.

Hm... I think that I have found why we disagree. We both use allies. But I usually don't tend to rely on allies as anything other than cannon fodder and don't consider their losses to count. As in, what I would describe as an attack by 60 men + fodder with 10 losses you would describe as an attack by 400 men with hundreds of losses.

So..... how did you take over a large town without using gimmicky tactics then? I mean, I do know there's the constant siege after 3 hours tactics, but that's not practical for a siege tower. Although you COULD make it such that a 100 man force smashed the enemy in the opening land battle before you used range troops....

From my experiance Vaegirs suck against archers because their elite units lack shields.

But their 2H axe is just what makes them semi viable against Huscarls. That and spam from marksman mean a straight 100 Huscarl charge still cripples you.


Note, we're not talking about being able to take over castles and towns. We're talking a bout the use of gimmicky tactics or stuff like shooting soldiers behind their shields. I mean, I don't think a large force of Huscarls overrunning a castle is gimmicky, but I can't make it work WITHOUT using gimmicky tactics.


Like I said. Warband did balance the game better than M&B. No more endless charges, you can get defeated in tournaments much easier now and a long laundry list. However, the game is such that you can't win sieges without using gimmicks.

[Purple]

So..... how did you take over a large town without using gimmicky tactics then? I mean, I do know there's the constant siege after 3 hours tactics, but that's not practical for a siege tower. Although you COULD make it such that a 100 man force smashed the enemy in the opening land battle before you used range troops....

I take the town exactly the same way you do. I use allied lords and their large armies. I just don't care how many troops said allied lords lose. They just don't even register as anything but cannon fodder to me. After all, what purpose is there to lords if not to die for their liege. Bottom line is, I have reserves.

As for the rest, my strategy for kingdom building is relatively simple. From the moment on I become a king I tend to take the 1 castle - 1 village route. That is to say I only hand each lord 1 castle and 1 village and claim the rest for my self. And I make an effort to ensure all my villages are the ones deep inside my lands where I can upgrade them more or less safely. Thus I generally have huge resources and can afford to field armies consisting entirely of huskarls. In my last war, I actually had something like 500 huskarls assembled out in the town nearest to my enemies border waiting for the moment I'd declare war. Than again, I do curently control all of Veigir, Swadian, Saranid and Kergit territory and am just now taking on the Rhodok...

But their 2H axe is just what makes them semi viable against Huscarls. That and spam from marksman mean a straight 100 Huscarl charge still cripples you.

Just do what I do and use a mobile huskarl reserve. As in, if your castle is under attack you rush in and reinforce it with your own huskarls.

Like I said. Warband did balance the game better than M&B. No more endless charges, you can get defeated in tournaments much easier now and a long laundry list. However, the game is such that you can't win sieges without using gimmicks.

I really don't see any need for anything more gimmicky than using allies as disposable cannon fodder. That's the best way to do it really. If you are extra worried, just arrive with a really small army of your own and let your allies absorb all the fighting. Than return with a large army to finish off what ever little is left.

[Alkaloid]

Honestly, I think a lot of the games problems would be solved with better combat AI. Unless you baby sit your troops light infantry will happily charge piecemeal into the enemies heavy cavalry or your single archer will stand in the middle of a field to face down and entire battalion of axemen. It occasionally has cool results, I once watched on of my huscarls with a two handed axe single handedly kill 30 swadian recruits after he got bounced up onto a siege ladder and they all spawned at once. They all tried to charge him single file while he charged down the ladder at them and he just got stuck on the ladder one shotting the poor bastards. It was awesome, but just stupid. Not one enemy archer out of the half dozen left fired at him and no one ran away. Was crazy.

Having things like infantry with shields have an option to advance at a steady pace and maintain their shield wall, or being able to pick where you deploy ladders and siege towers so you can order troops up different points of the wall at once would make a huge difference to sieges.

And if the enemy could do the same it might mean me, 40 odd nords, two dozen crossbowmen and 20 light cavalry can't defeat every army up to 500 strong in the field 99 times out of 100.