Total War: Attila

 PC
  • Publisher: Sega
  • Release Date: Feb 17, 2015
User Score
7.4

Mixed or average reviews- based on 655 Ratings

User score distribution:
  1. Positive: 445 out of 655
  2. Mixed: 106 out of 655
  3. Negative: 104 out of 655

Review this game

  1. Your Score
    0 out of 10
    Rate this:
    • 10
    • 9
    • 8
    • 7
    • 6
    • 5
    • 4
    • 3
    • 2
    • 1
    • 0
    • 0
  1. Submit
  2. Check Spelling
view
per page
  1. TsarVadim
    Mar 26, 2015
    5
    This game is a modified version of Rome 2 plain and simple, with too much withheld to be sold off as microtransactions. That being said, when you are lucky enough to play the game on an optimized rig it looks great and the battles look amazing. However the game has broken mechanics like Diplomacy penalties way too early, overpowered small nations (we're talking 3 army stacks for a singleThis game is a modified version of Rome 2 plain and simple, with too much withheld to be sold off as microtransactions. That being said, when you are lucky enough to play the game on an optimized rig it looks great and the battles look amazing. However the game has broken mechanics like Diplomacy penalties way too early, overpowered small nations (we're talking 3 army stacks for a single settlement nation), and relentless AI attacking behavior that chases you through the fog of war, over enemy terrain, no matter what. Overall 5 for being fun for a couple campaign tries, and then not when you realize it's broken.

    Plus, **** 50 dollar games that swindle you with DLC.    … Expand
  2. Tubey
    Apr 20, 2015
    7
    Picked it up on sale after being disappointed (to say the least) with Rome 2.

    Thankfully. this isn't a broken mess like its' predecessor was - but it also lacks the spark of imagination that the series sorely needs as a whole. Don't get me wrong, a lot of this game can be applauded, as it has got rid of a lot of the flaws of Rome 2 and went back to basics, making it almost as good as    Picked it up on sale after being disappointed (to say the least) with Rome 2.

    Thankfully. this isn't a broken mess like its' predecessor was - but it also lacks the spark of imagination that the series sorely needs as a whole.

    Don't get me wrong, a lot of this game can be applauded, as it has got rid of a lot of the flaws of Rome 2 and went back to basics, making it almost as good as Shogun 2... but it just feels a bit lacking to me in innovation. It also feels that the difficulty has been artificially inflated - it's hard for the sake of being hard, rather than hard through any particular challenging strategy in the game.

    There's little to no "charm" in the title - whereas in the older Total War titles you could play your own story out, with your generals in the game feeling like they have a life and tale of their own... In Attila, there's none of that. It feels you're playing a well-tuned but soulless game that has become a by the numbers AAA strategy title that mimics what it did well in the past, rather than enhance those features.

    You won't regret buying this as such if you're new to the series, but if you're an old hand you'll be hankering for Shogun 2 within a week.    … Expand
  3. zz77
    May 28, 2016
    7
    Attila is the game that Rome 2 was supposed to be. Probably it's the best game in Total War series. It looks perfect, game interface is well organized, and bugs are not disastrous. Attila doesn't add anything new to the Total War (plus CA's marketing policy is just annoying), but this game is very well done in conditions of current TW engine.
  4. Zorotama
    Feb 19, 2017
    7
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. It's should be best total war game to date, but lack of performance optimization, ai bugs(yes sometimes ai stuck during siege battle) and what the hell is hun they just spawn all the time it's illogical and annoying(although they can be destroyed after AD 425) that some game breaking that make this game little disappointing, the thing that i like in this game is family and court management, building management(yes it is challenging we must really thinking what we should build on our territory)… Expand
  5. MartinG4
    Jul 23, 2020
    5
    Battles are decided within 2 minutes. Success is down to trial and error as there is only one way you can win and that is exactly playing like CA intends you to do. Make one wrong step and start over again. The setting and some of the game mechanics are good but overall it's a rushed and abandoned game without any balance.
  6. supercagan
    Mar 21, 2015
    5
    I have played almost all total war games and this one is unfortunately one of the worst.
    -Game is horribly optimized. Even though I have a great system I still have a lot of freezes and low frame rates
    -Cheating AI - what is the point of hiding your army in a forest in Norway if the AI in Africe knows your exact location. All your moves are against an enemy that can see all the map. Not    I have played almost all total war games and this one is unfortunately one of the worst.
    -Game is horribly optimized. Even though I have a great system I still have a lot of freezes and low frame rates
    -Cheating AI - what is the point of hiding your army in a forest in Norway if the AI in Africe knows your exact location. All your moves are against an enemy that can see all the map. Not to mention a small faction with 1 settlement can afford to have 3 armies of 10 heavy knights where I cannot afford half of that with my 6 region kingdom...
    -It just feels very unattractive. I am used to playing strategy games with just numbers, hexagons and stick art as unit figures, but even with all these fancy 3d animations and graphics the game feels very boring after 2 days.
    -DLC fest: can you just add a few scenarios and content to your already overpriced game instead of coming up with more stuff we have to pay?    … Expand
  7. alQamar
    Feb 22, 2015
    7
    Attila is very likely to Barbarian Invasion an expansion of an original game, fielding a lot of advantageous updates.

    The difference between both are the price. While BI for Rome 1 was sold as an expansion, Attila is sold as an stand alone expansion quite full priced. Granted you can buy it for about 24 € outside Steam - and legal too - at a lower price Attila is worth it and works out.    Attila is very likely to Barbarian Invasion an expansion of an original game, fielding a lot of advantageous updates.

    The difference between both are the price. While BI for Rome 1 was sold as an expansion, Attila is sold as an stand alone expansion quite full priced. Granted you can buy it for about 24 € outside Steam - and legal too - at a lower price Attila is worth it and works out. What does not work out is the optimization.

    Attila is more demanding than Rome 2, but offers also better graphics, including MSAA, and more detailed units. While vanilla it looks like it is modded but it is not.

    Attila is Rome 2 2.5, without a year of patches. It is much better and whole, but still not worth a 8/10 that was given by the most of the reviewers.

    Rome 2 was about civilized scam, Attila is about barbarian scum. Armchair generals will love it. Also the multiplayer works much better and fluid.

    I can recommend a buy but not full priced. Look for legal alternatives instead and be prepared you have to lower the graphical settings even on high end computers.

    This all has a high price though: People with AMD processors (not graphics cards) will suffer a lot as they did in Rome 2, on quality settings or below Attila becomes barely playable. I am currently collecting results in the TWcenter benchmark thread.

    Warning: 7 DLCs are already reported on SteamDB.info, so get yourself ready for a DLC fest!

    +4 many "new" features that people wanted to have in Rome 2
    +1 better music but still repetitive
    +3 much better graphics, vanilla it looks like modded!
    +2 multiplayer has been improved alot, stability, chat and lot less lag, no slow motion units so far

    -2 on the flipside very high requirements, that are either very GPU limited even on HIGH-END computers (maximum quality preset or extreme preset and even quality preset) OR CPU limited on lower settings like performance and high performance
    -1 still severe lack of optimization for AMD CPUs, which now kills the game at all for people that have AMD processors.
    - to high priced as it contains a lot of features that were (intentionally) missing in Rome 2, 7 DLC listed and hidden zero day!

    I rate Attila with a mild 7/10 and can still recommend the game without serious pain.    … Expand
  8. erdogfu96
    Feb 9, 2020
    6
    It were better than rome 2 but still unbaked bread. It's like beta game and unstable. I remember that the time I defeated hard pc(with full army). I had 3 cavalry units only. Game is sooooooo broken. And unplayable.
    Graphics:9/10
    Sounds: 8/10
    Gameplay: 3/10
    Story: 5/10
  9. mweagle
    Feb 20, 2015
    6
    The game is fine. If you played any TW game, you would feel right at home with the basics. Family free adds a layer of gameplay to which you can really optimize your people in power.
    Combat is fine, just like the other TW games, and the best thing: The AI isn't as dumb anymore. It now actually does things that makes sense.
    So why the 6? Simple, the game is very heavy. As in very    The game is fine. If you played any TW game, you would feel right at home with the basics. Family free adds a layer of gameplay to which you can really optimize your people in power.
    Combat is fine, just like the other TW games, and the best thing: The AI isn't as dumb anymore. It now actually does things that makes sense.

    So why the 6?

    Simple, the game is very heavy. As in very very heavy. I can play BF4 on 1080p, medium with a stable 125fps. But TW:A on low can't run higher than 60. This would not effect the grade too much, but the loading times are quite long. I didn't install this on my SSD, which I should have, and that resulted in loading times up to 20 seconds for a battle. In 2015, quite unacceptable.

    Now that is also not too bad and can be played with. What cannot be played with, it the unstability of the game. I have yet to finish a combat in real time, because every single combat, the game "stops working". I did every single thing to prevent this (googled it), I put every single setting to low. I basically prevented everything that could make the game crash. Once or a couple times is OK. That can happen. But from the 10 battles I tried, all 10 crashed. And battles in TW are not 2 minute clashes. They can take a long time. And to lose every single perfectly executed statagy to a consistent crash is the worst thing this game can do. And it does it.

    And before you think, "omg ur system suckz", I have never experienced more than 3 crashes in the first 30 hours of any other game, even the ones that are known for crashes. My system is better than the recommended system and I can play it above 60fps. Yet the crashes are gamebreaking.

    Would have been a 9 if not for these issues.    … Expand
  10. Lightbane
    Feb 17, 2015
    7
    I can't fully recommend the game as of yet, it still has too many bugs. The new algorithm they use with the battle auto-calculate needs adjustment, and they need to fix the lag and crashing. And the AI behaviour with just sacking settlements instead of sack&loot. Only uprisings seem to take cities. When they fix the AI issues this will be a solid 9/10
  11. Ciecieji
    Apr 21, 2015
    6
    In many important ways a step backwards for the series. Many incremental improvements as others have discussed but suffers from a few crippling design problems. 1) Corruption mechanic is completely broken making it nearly impossible to expand and dominate the map 2) AI has a slight movement bonus (may be difficulty dependent) meaning you have to surround them in order to corner themIn many important ways a step backwards for the series. Many incremental improvements as others have discussed but suffers from a few crippling design problems. 1) Corruption mechanic is completely broken making it nearly impossible to expand and dominate the map 2) AI has a slight movement bonus (may be difficulty dependent) meaning you have to surround them in order to corner them into a fight. If you don't do so they will kick around forever as "hordes". 3) Virtually impossible to tell when appointing a person to office will create an issue with others loyalties. I probably have 15 charters suffering from a loyalty penalty due to "subordinates promoted to a higher office" without any sense of a hierarchy in my political structure (non-family members show up in a slider to the left) 4) A great deal of issues telling the functional difference between units. 5) The encyclopedia is a virtual necessity due to the vast variations between cultures in terms of play mechanics, however it is neither a pleasure to browse or easy to find information in. One example, it reloads every time I want to look at different type of building (farms versus ports) making comparing building, recruitment or virtually any other option a tedious chore.
    I could continue to nitpick on small design decisions or mention a variety of overall improvements for the series, but at the end of the day the issues above made the game not a pleasure to play, and it is the only game in the series from the original Shogun game that I decided not to play to completion.    … Expand
  12. JamesBondX
    Jan 12, 2016
    7
    Re-reviewing now as I have gotten the fully patched version and it works well. The game is a lot better than Rome 2.

    The only bothersome things are a few things CA didn't think of, or purposely left out. I have a feeling they're testing a lot of new things in Attila, things that don't quite make sense. Like there's no way to not get a decrease in integrity when deciding what to do with    Re-reviewing now as I have gotten the fully patched version and it works well. The game is a lot better than Rome 2.

    The only bothersome things are a few things CA didn't think of, or purposely left out. I have a feeling they're testing a lot of new things in Attila, things that don't quite make sense. Like there's no way to not get a decrease in integrity when deciding what to do with prisoners.

    There are some unique units, but not enough, and older units get replaced, even though you might want the cheaper versions for a sort of "home guard" army.

    Optimization isn't perfect either, it seems to take a lot of resources when too many units are in one battle, but that is rather hard to fix.

    Another problem is the ever lasting "Agent spam" by AI factions. That and the fact that single territory AI factions, or small AI factions seem to get a lot of cheats to support armies, agents and whatnot.

    Diplomacy is okay, though it gets ridiculously hard to get people to agree to some thing that will be beneficial to them mostly. Oh, and there's no way to threaten factions. So if you're Attila, you can't really threaten people to give you money or trade.

    Some units also have issues with damage and things, armor doesn't really seem to do all that much. But the main complaint must be for slingers. They shoot rocks, and they shred most units, and are really cheap.

    Some DLCs seem kind of rushed and cheap, like the recent Age of Charlemagne. However it is still quite fun.

    Overall, Total War Attila is an enjoyable game for me now. I've racked up many hours, it's far from the best Total War game ever, but it's more on point than that of Rome 2.    … Expand
  13. neigenoire
    Apr 19, 2015
    7
    Attila Total War is a polished and improved version of Rome 2. At least in most areas.

    Positive: (+)Visually pleasant (+)No more of the bland and boring Rome 2 UI (+)Building and unit cards no longer generic and confusing (+)40 unit cards fit in a single row (+)Battles are overall fun (+)Cavalry charges are more impactful and don't look as bad as in Rome 2 (+)Flaming torches are    Attila Total War is a polished and improved version of Rome 2. At least in most areas.

    Positive:
    (+)Visually pleasant
    (+)No more of the bland and boring Rome 2 UI
    (+)Building and unit cards no longer generic and confusing
    (+)40 unit cards fit in a single row
    (+)Battles are overall fun
    (+)Cavalry charges are more impactful and don't look as bad as in Rome 2
    (+)Flaming torches are gone
    (+)Walled settlements look great, any town can be upgraded to have walls
    (+)Battle AI is more aggressive on flanking
    (+)Return of the family tree with some cool options, like assassinate your own subjects, even your faction leader, and appoint whatever heir you want
    (+)Politics are easier to understand and manage
    (+)City building and food system makes sense and is interesting to fiddle with

    Negative:
    (-)Poor optimization, low performance especially on AMD side
    (-)Some things are still counter-intuitive in the UI
    (-)Unit stats are still too cumbersome to read and compare between units
    (-)Unit status still crammed into a single blinking icon
    (-)Unit flags replaced with generic red and yellow squares
    (-)Battles need balancing, for example phalanxes are not deadly enough, you can charge right into them without worries, the low-ish morale makes otherwise lengthy melee engagements end prematurely which also causes battles to be rather short
    (-)Still no optional Guard mode
    (-)Overall units still feel a bit weightless and collisions tend to end abruptly, it is too easy to disengage from melee
    (-)Towers collapse instead of being captured in sieges. Don't understand why capturing them was removed...
    (-)Battle AI is still bad overall, battles lack real challenge unless played on high difficulties where the AI gets stats buffs
    (-)The same battle system as in Rome 2 - units have more than 1 health point (up to several hundred for certain units) and can get hit multiple times before dying. Therefore, when you first attack a unit, it will "absorb" the incoming damage until it actually becomes vulnerable (health is brought down to low values). This sometimes makes for some awkward and unnatural situations where a cavalry charge will cause no casualties or missiles will take a few volleys before they start inflicting damage. Defending is based on two stats - melee defense and armor, none of which block a set amount of damage but are rather based on a chance to completely avoid the damage (in the case of melee defense) and a CHANCE to block a certain amount of damage, which can be anything from 0% to 100% depending on stats (in the case of armour). There needs to be a hard cap for high armour that always blocks a certain amount of damage. There is no such cap in this game and that is why things like Testudo and Cataphracts are not as powerful against missiles as they should be - because there is usually some normal damage and AP damage hitting them no matter what. You can up the useless armour stat to 10000, they will still get chopped up by missiles due to their AP damage. This is somewhat balanced out with the unnatural health system. Still I feel like the old system was overall better and more consistent and easier to balance. More complex doesn't always equal better and this is one of those cases.
    (-)Ultimately the politics system still doesn't add that much to the game. When your empire grows large enough at some point managing your subjects becomes convoluted and bothersome and you no longer care as much. Having several characters with identical names doesn't help in this regard as well and it happens way too often in some of my campaigns.
    (-)Overall the difficulty of campaign is still low
    (-)Campaign AI is extremely passive - never sieges your towns, never resettles desolate regions, never presents big enough threats, large empires never form to hinder your progress, by turn 50 you're the strongest faction but the rest of the map is still fragmented and weak.
    (-)Campaign AI doesn't know when to use razing properly. It gets abused way too much.
    (-)No option to trade regions in diplomacy.
    (-)When your empire gets large enough, you begin to suffer a diplomatic penalty with almost all factions from being a "Great power", which is annoying because it makes it very difficult to keep good relations with your puppet states or allies, and in higher difficulties you need to constantly bribe them to keep them in check which can be very tedious. It's not as effective as Realm Divide and therefore not as fun or challenging. It just adds to the tedium without accomplishing anything meaningful.
    (-)Long loading screen and turn times.
    (-)Campaign variety seems unimpressive, there are the Eastern tribes, the Romans, the Northmen and the rest of the world is Germanic. This will be mended with DLCs, no doubt.

    Verdict:
    If they fix performance and the AI (both seem unlikely at this stage), this game will be a solid 9/10. For now, as things stand, I give it 7/10 which is generous enough.    … Expand
  14. northernlad
    May 13, 2015
    5
    rome 2 rehashed very average game creative assembly have gone two steps backwards since shogun 2 which was a great game the only light on the horizon is warhammer.
  15. ElCaballero
    Feb 7, 2016
    6
    There is no wallls... is stupid. Battles are very fast, that is stupid. Too many unnecessary micromanagement. Better that Rome 2 but worse that Med II and Rome 1.
  16. KiwiTracker
    Apr 15, 2015
    6
    Eh... Nothing memorable. This gets a 6 because it fixed everything that was wrong in Rome II. It's not full of bugs, the family tree is back, the AI is improved significantly, and the city building/specialization is what it should be. Additionally the actual combat is really fun. The improved AI really makes you think, but the improved pathing and unit AI makes even harrowing situationsEh... Nothing memorable. This gets a 6 because it fixed everything that was wrong in Rome II. It's not full of bugs, the family tree is back, the AI is improved significantly, and the city building/specialization is what it should be. Additionally the actual combat is really fun. The improved AI really makes you think, but the improved pathing and unit AI makes even harrowing situations beatable; just difficult, and rightly so.

    Unfortunately what holds this game back is the worst sin of them all. It's boring. After logging many, many hours (400+) in Rome II once it was patched to perfection, this game is just, boring. 75% of the factions feel EXACTLY THE SAME. Unless you are the Huns, or the Romans, every faction feels the same. And the fact that this game has launched with 6 factions just means you are already severely limited in your experience. I want to add that the Roman soldiers even look like everyone else, especially in early game. Isn't the Roman Empire supposed to have peaked? They should not look and feel like the Visigoths. But they do.

    The only other thing I can say about this game is it is really heavy, and has some issues running at a smooth frame rate. Even with a more than adequate machine (I far exceed the recommended specs) this game looks clunky and feels slow.

    Basically this game breaks immersion at every turn. Unless you play as the Huns. Wait until this game goes on a fire sale, you will be glad you did.    … Expand
  17. Aky03gamer
    Jun 13, 2015
    6
    IS A "COPY AND PASTE" OF HIS ANTECESOR, and you can pass this if the game didn't had this details: BAD OPTIMIZATION, is a very unoptimized game and even if you play "GTA V" in Ultra, you will play this game (with a Nvidia GeForce gtx 760 4GB) in high or even medium, and the second and the detail that i HATE more is this: IF YOU WANT TO ENJOY THE GAME, BUY ALL THE DLC!!
    it could be an    IS A "COPY AND PASTE" OF HIS ANTECESOR, and you can pass this if the game didn't had this details: BAD OPTIMIZATION, is a very unoptimized game and even if you play "GTA V" in Ultra, you will play this game (with a Nvidia GeForce gtx 760 4GB) in high or even medium, and the second and the detail that i HATE more is this: IF YOU WANT TO ENJOY THE GAME, BUY ALL THE DLC!!
    it could be an excellent game, but if The Creative Assembly makes more total war like this, this saga will dissapear very,very soon    … Expand
  18. maxster47
    Jun 12, 2015
    5
    I really tried not to buy into the hype of this game but at the last minute I pre-ordered it on steam. Unfortunately I was right to be skeptical. I've found rome 1 and every tw game since to be quite enjoy-able. I keep reading reviews saying it is just a rome 2 re-hash but I disagree. This game has serious OP cavalry and pathetic arty units (lack of ammunition and power). The missile unitsI really tried not to buy into the hype of this game but at the last minute I pre-ordered it on steam. Unfortunately I was right to be skeptical. I've found rome 1 and every tw game since to be quite enjoy-able. I keep reading reviews saying it is just a rome 2 re-hash but I disagree. This game has serious OP cavalry and pathetic arty units (lack of ammunition and power). The missile units are decent is you can manage to keep them from dying or retreating (like all other units).The infantry units are total push overs for the most part, especially at the beginning of a campaign. That leads me to my next point, your men die waaaaay to fast and route waaaaay too soon, making for really short battles (especially compared to other TW games).Speaking of campaigns, I just can't bring myself to follow through a campaign with Attila, no matter how hard I try, It feels like more of a burden than a pleasure. It's not too hard for my skill level, I just don't have fun with this game. The campaign gameplay and graphics are why I'm giving this game a 5 instead of a 1-3 rating.… Expand
  19. SirHusson
    Apr 27, 2021
    7
    Pretty good, Modern ish take on Rome but yeah the best Rome game would be Rome total war remastered
  20. Yaav13
    May 9, 2022
    7
    My truthful honorable incorruptible conclusive rating of this considered game: 7.

Awards & Rankings

69
#69 Best PC Game of 2015
33
#33 Most Discussed PC Game of 2015
50
#50 Most Shared PC Game of 2015

Critic Reviews

All reviews »
Metascore
80

Generally favorable reviews - based on 66 Critic Reviews

Critic score distribution:
  1. Positive: 52 out of 66
  2. Mixed: 14 out of 66
  3. Negative: 0 out of 66
  1. Gaming Nexus
    May 21, 2015
    88
    For the uninitiated, Total War: Attila does a good enough job introducing a very detailed world and mechanics.
    Read full review
  2. Riot Pixels
    Apr 19, 2015
    68
    Creative Assembly needs to put extra effort into the making of the upcoming Total War: Warhammer so as not to lose the last vestiges of the studio’s credibility.
    Read full review
  3. Games Master UK
    Apr 9, 2015
    91
    Like the man himself, Attila is brutal, unforgiving and complex, and all the better for it. A triumph. [April 2015, p.68]
See all critic reviews »