King Arthur 2 - I played it briefly and let me know your thoughts.

I originally wanted to wait until it was officially playable before downloading it, but I couldn’t hold it back, so I downloaded it. Let me share your thoughts.

It should be said that the overall impression of King Arthur 2 is still good, although I only fought one battle.

Looking at the forum, the biggest problem everyone mentioned is the optimization of this game. However, I personally think it is okay. It seems that it will be a little slower when reading the text, and it seems to be nothing special at other times. Feeling stuck.

To explain, I recently changed to a new laptop, Lenovo Y471A, i3-2350M, and the graphics card is amd radeon hd 6730m. The effect is set to high, and I didn’t check how many frames there were. Anyway, the game just feels smooth.

Then let me talk about my feelings about the content of the game. I have also completed Shogun 2 (original version). Personal feelings:

In the combat part, King Arthur 2 is still not as good as Shogun 2, and the character movements are not as good. Note that the effect of cavalry charging is not very good, and the effect of charging archers is not that good (I don’t know if it is a problem with my operation); in the first generation, the archers were too bad, but this generation feels more balanced. , but it is still slightly stronger (at least I feel that my soldiers were not shot to death so much, my archer shot 2 arrows at the beginning and was closed~~~). In terms of hero skills, they feel better than Shogun 2. I was hit by the enemy with lightning 2-3 times~~~ It seems that the enemy can teleport or something. My hero seems to have a poisoning skill, and I have used it on the enemy several times. In the shogunate, the skill seems to be rallying, sitting in the middle of the army, etc. I feel that King Arthur's is richer, and the combined use of skills should be more tactical. In terms of morale, Shogun 2 should be the winner. It seems to me that Arthur has no concept of morale. He just beats them until they are all gone. In this regard, Shogun is better. Sometimes, relying on high morale units, you can hit the opponent's morale with less. Shengduo, Arthur seems to be not good at this. Moreover, Shogun 2 also has naval battles, but Arthur seems to have none (not sure, don’t blame me if I’m wrong). Overall, Shogun 2 should be better in terms of combat.

In addition to combat, the shogunate has scientific and technological research, Buddhist and Christian faith choices. Arthur has moral and religious choices, so each has his own merits. The Shogunate has units such as assassins and monks, but Arthur doesn't seem to have them. However, Arthur's mission system is still better than the Shogunate. In addition, King Arthur has magical units. Although there are not many, I feel that this is also an attractive place. Bar.

In general, I feel that King Arthur and the entire site series should be considered to have their own merits, and I can’t say who is better or worse. If you like the whole site series, you can also try King Arthur; if you like King Arthur, you can also try the whole site. However, judging from the reactions on the forum, King Arthur’s optimization should be a bit poor.

In addition, the English language seems too painful, and the selected tasks at the back are all selected randomly. If you can't understand this game, it seems impossible to play. This is why I will stop after fighting. reason.