>>36334
I played 1 and 2, they are really the same game. The campaigns themselves have some differences but much of the unit rooster difference is just cosmetic essentially, there really isn't much difference in how the units handle, even with the giant and flying units. One giant unit is essentially the same as any other. Whereas in Medieval 2 there is much more of a difference in how Pikes and Halberds handle as opposed to spearmen and spearmen are different to swordsman and then muskets behave differently than crossbows. Even though they are all in War-hammer they have a few buffs and debuffs but they don't actually play that differently. Even in Shogun 2, yes all nations have the same rooster but the units still act differently from each other, you would not use a pike ashigaru unit like a yari samurai unit or a musket unit like a bow unit.

In Shogun 2 they at least pretend to try and hold a formation, not just run at you from the start and morph into a blob. The battles don't turn anywhere near as messy either with units in Warhammer breaking, coming back, breaking coming back and the battles turning into a mess.

>Hide your units in the forest or send them on the walls, or put them right in front of the wall where towers can't shoot them. The only problem remaining is that your artillery is also getting shot.

That's not really satisfactory and steel ends up with them being shot on the way to the walls or if their is no forest or no blind spot. Plus I don't like how narrow the frontage is, it limits what I can do. Like much of the game it seems like it was deliberately made to be simplified and streamlined(such as units like I mentioned earlier).

>How is Empire TW not your least favourites?

Ahh, I forgot about that one...