PDA

View Full Version : Creative Assembly STW/MTW Vets: Now that you've played the demo, any hope?



PanzerJaeger
02-22-2009, 21:14
This is primarily directed towards the guys who played STW/MTW and enjoyed that "chess" like style of play...

Puzz3D has explained in great detail what went wrong with RTW/MTW2 many times on this board so I won't go into it in detail. Needless to say, my biggest problem with those two games, among many, was that engagements between individual units ended too quickly to do much maneuvering. In the old games you could send units even of vastly different skill against each other, and while the outcome was certain, the fight would last long enough to go and do something on the other side of the map that might give you an advantage. In that environment of slower fighting and slower kill rates, there was far more room for strategy instead of hectic clicking and units breaking almost as soon as they hit - which I noticed quite a bit in the newer games.

Anyway, I was wondering if you thought there was any hope that MP could again become what it once was.

I noticed some potential good things - strong infantry with longer engagement times and more appropriate cav strengths & weaknesses.

I also noticed some issues that could really mess up the mp experience such as insta-rout grenadiers and a particularly lucky cannon shot that too out both of my artillery pieces en masse. :inquisitive:

And what of the naval aspect? I've only played the engagement 3 times and I cannot really tell yet if there is room for valid strategy or if its just about throwing your ships at each other and watching the pretty graphics.

tibilicus
02-22-2009, 21:27
. In that environment of slower fighting and slower kill rates, there was far more room for strategy instead of hectic clicking and units breaking almost as soon as they hit - which I noticed quite a bit in the newer games.




Welcome to the modern age of strategy gaming. Whilst I never played STW and only played MTW offline I can tell you from the demo that the "chess bored" style game play doesn't appear to be there.
The ability to move fast and react fast around the field is still key from what I picked up from the demo and micro managing, particularly in naval battles seems very prominent. .

That's my opinion though, others may agree/disagree..

Monk
02-22-2009, 22:15
The ability to move fast and react fast around the field is still key from what I picked up from the demo and micro managing, particularly in naval battles seems very prominent. .

That's my opinion though, others may agree/disagree..

I agree. Especially with the Naval battle. It felt (to me at least) very much a micro-manage fest rather than a tactical simulation. Which wasn't really a bad thing since I actually found it fun. The only thing that concerns me there is how much it will break down when we see fleets of 20 ships fighting, rather than of 6.


I also noticed some issues that could really mess up the mp experience such as insta-rout grenadiers and a particularly lucky cannon shot that too out both of my artillery pieces en masse.

Cannons are absurdly accurate right now, I noticed my own artillery was consistently sniped in every battle i fought. It gets old fast.

Kalle
02-22-2009, 23:43
Judging only from the demo of course but from what i saw there it is the best totalwar landbattle since mtw/vi.

Control, camera and speed of units feels so much better then rtw and mtwii. Overview is better aswell i think.

When I marched my inf up the enemy moved his troops as good as possible into a solid line and i did the same (and it seem it will be essential to have a line exactly as it was) taking shots at eachother. Thanks to the early stage of the battle I had a few spare units, moved them up on one flank and put the enemies flank under fire both from front and side, it took higher casulties, morale collapsed and so on. Im not saying it was a great military triumph for me but it shows manouver, flank and so on is important and the ai new this but just couldnt help it in this case. If ai had another regiment to throw in he would have had time to save his flank. Good I think.

On a side note i wanna add Speed and micromanagement was essential and vital in mtw and the shogun mod for mtw/vi (original shogun i didnt play) aswell. Control being so much better in those games helped a lot in making the game last longer.

If the rock, scissor, stone thing is there in ETW is hard to say though. I cant say for sure from only the demo.

I dont wanna say that other people should by the game but im buying it thats for sure.

Only hope now that the "infrastructure" (away with lag, connectionissues, bad ingame chat and so on) of mp will be good!

Kalle

CBR
02-23-2009, 01:30
I'll quote myself from the demo impression thread:

MTW run speed for normal/fast inf - ETW run speed for grenadier/line/light inf*
166/200 meters/minute - 180/200/225 meters/minute

MTW cav run speed for normal/light - ETW run speed for General and horse artillery/dragoons and hussars
333/400 meters minute - 450/600 meters/minute


Reaction time based on missile range versus run speed: In other words: how long it takes for a unit to run from max missile range into melee.

MTW (100 meter range)
Inf 36/30 seconds
Cav 18/15 seconds

ETW (70 meters - I use that as I assume most line inf will have 70 and only light inf will have 80)
Inf 23/21/19 seconds
Cav 9+/7 seconds

Of course there are rifle units that will increase the time by around 70%


*based on demo map so slight elevations can change the result a bit but there should be 3 classes of infantry speed.

Checked my M2TW test results and found that cavalry in ETW seems to have same speed. Infantry has had a reduction of about 10% and of course the slowest infantry type (heavy foot knights etc) in M2TW is not there in ETW

So what I worry about is how fast units can close in from max infantry missile range. Judging from the videos it seems light infantry is quickly eaten by cavalry and that heavy cavalry (or at least the best of them) apparently can be a threat to line infantry too.

I noticed the accuracy of my artillery was very good. But it was at a relatively short range and have not tried at max range. Did not check their fire rate.


CBR

RTKBarrett
02-23-2009, 02:03
This is primarily directed towards the guys who played STW/MTW and enjoyed that "chess" like style of play...

Puzz3D has explained in great detail what went wrong with RTW/MTW2 many times on this board so I won't go into it in detail. Needless to say, my biggest problem with those two games, among many, was that engagements between individual units ended too quickly to do much maneuvering. In the old games you could send units even of vastly different skill against each other, and while the outcome was certain, the fight would last long enough to go and do something on the other side of the map that might give you an advantage. In that environment of slower fighting and slower kill rates, there was far more room for strategy instead of hectic clicking and units breaking almost as soon as they hit - which I noticed quite a bit in the newer games.

Anyway, I was wondering if you thought there was any hope that MP could again become what it once was.

I noticed some potential good things - strong infantry with longer engagement times and more appropriate cav strengths & weaknesses.

I also noticed some issues that could really mess up the mp experience such as insta-rout grenadiers and a particularly lucky cannon shot that too out both of my artillery pieces en masse. :inquisitive:

And what of the naval aspect? I've only played the engagement 3 times and I cannot really tell yet if there is room for valid strategy or if its just about throwing your ships at each other and watching the pretty graphics.

Silly question as its on steam, it will be the biggest total war game ever by a massive margin mp wise...

Btw chess and rock,paper,scissors might suit u more than empires

t1master
02-23-2009, 02:54
i don't consider myself a vet, played a few games in my time, but can't tell you how fast my units ran, or their accuracy algorithm in the mud and rain... :book:

hope yes. the game reminds me of what the lordz did to mtw several years ago with the napoleon mod. it appears on first go to be a good gun oriented rts, much along the same lines as that mod. i'd like to be able to add more parameters than what we've got in the demo, and of course face an intelligent opponent.

haven't played the naval battle, but don't really have an inkling to...

ELITEofWARMANGINGERYBREADMEN88
02-23-2009, 17:57
I started playing VI online on a active basis almost 5 years ago next month (Early March 2004).


From what I remember from my old games then and ETW demo, I have hope. The Naval Battles though worry me. I don't think it's real... I don't know how to put it. I don't think they designed it well for Naval Battles.


Land battles though, Excellet! The only problem I got with it was what Panzaer said about the cannons. Similar thing happened to me also.


But I think It has hope and potenial. As good as STW/MTW? Proably not, but will it be up in there with them though, I like to think so! :crown:

RTKBarrett
02-23-2009, 20:18
I started playing VI online on a active basis almost 5 years ago next month (Early March 2004).


From what I remember from my old games then and ETW demo, I have hope. The Naval Battles though worry me. I don't think it's real... I don't know how to put it. I don't think they designed it well for Naval Battles.


Land battles though, Excellet! The only problem I got with it was what Panzaer said about the cannons. Similar thing happened to me also.


But I think It has hope and potenial. As good as STW/MTW? Proably not, but will it be up in there with them though, I like to think so! :crown:

I thought u played shogun?

ELITEofWARMANGINGERYBREADMEN88
02-23-2009, 20:22
I logged on it once, that was all. I was alround briefly in 2000/2001, I rember MagyarKhan's Cham person, but that was it.


I played Samurai Warlords Mod for VI also, maybe you got mistaken with that? :crown:

RTKBarrett
02-23-2009, 21:20
No because u always used to talk about shogun as if u were there since it began... nvm ;)

Crazed Rabbit
02-24-2009, 00:41
Silly question as its on steam, it will be the biggest total war game ever by a massive margin mp wise...

Btw chess and rock,paper,scissors might suit u more than empires

We're talking about quality here, not quantity. Or rather, is the pace of the battle similar to MTW 1 & Shogun, where you could fight a battle at a deliberate pace and not have to frantically click and react almost like a FPS?

As to PJ's question; I don't know. It's better than RTW for sure, but I found myself having to move quickly. I think it could be slowed down and benefit.

We really should just see what values the NTW1 mod had and copy them over.

CR

pevergreen
02-24-2009, 13:09
There are 4v4 maps, but they are purely available for multiplayer.

OH PHEW.

Sir Beane
02-24-2009, 13:17
OH PHEW.

If there are 4 vs. 4 maps then why on earth are they not included in Singleplayer as well? I really don't understand the reasoning behind that decision.

pevergreen
02-24-2009, 13:20
Ah, modding will fix that. :laugh4:

It doesnt make sense, but hey. :shrug:

tibilicus
02-24-2009, 15:00
If there are 4 vs. 4 maps then why on earth are they not included in Singleplayer as well? I really don't understand the reasoning behind that decision.


Cos MP players are mint and we deserve more maps than SP people who fail to see the light and come and play MP with us. ~;)

In all seriousness though probably just bad initiative by CA.

CBR
02-24-2009, 15:03
Could be because PC's cant handle 7 AI armies. Having 140 AI controlled units seemed to stress PC's in RTW too and with "better" AI in ETW it might just be too much.


CBR

tibilicus
02-24-2009, 15:06
Could be because PC's cant handle 7 AI armies. Having 140 AI controlled units seemed to stress PC's in RTW too and with "better" AI in ETW it might just be too much.


CBR


That makes sense. For some odd reason this engine seems very demanding and in the single player forums there's getting a lot of people mentioning the long load times.

I guess it's a price you pay for a bigger and better game engine though.

Jack Lusted
02-24-2009, 15:07
Could be because PC's cant handle 7 AI armies. Having 140 AI controlled units seemed to stress PC's in RTW too and with "better" AI in ETW it might just be too much.


CBR

Bingo, that is the reason 4v4 maps are MP only and are meant to be played by 8 humans.

tibilicus
02-24-2009, 15:12
Bingo, that is the reason 4v4 maps are MP only and are meant to be played by 8 humans.

Will there also be a drop in performance for MP then if the game still has to render all the units on the screen even though you're not the one controlling them or will it be optimized in some way so that it wont be an issue?

Jack Lusted
02-24-2009, 15:16
Will there also be a drop in performance for MP then if the game still has to render all the units on the screen even though you're not the one controlling them or will it be optimized in some way so that it wont be an issue?

You'll get better perofrmance than if it was 1 human and 7 AIs as there are no AI calculations going on in an all human game.

tibilicus
02-24-2009, 15:18
You'll get better perofrmance than if it was 1 human and 7 AIs as there are no AI calculations going on in an all human game.

Ah, I get what your saying. Therefore any drop in performance will be down to how good peoples PC's can handle the game and not the way in which the game engine works.

Thanks for the speedy reply.

Jack Lusted
02-24-2009, 15:21
Ah, I get what your saying. Therefore any drop in performance will be down to how good peoples PC's can handle the game and not the way in which the game engine works.

Thanks for the speedy reply.

Yes exactly.

ELITEofWARMANGINGERYBREADMEN88
02-24-2009, 18:13
However, I do like to know Jack, how extacly is the ranking system set up? Is it going to be a STW Ranking system or a RTW-GS Style Ladder system thingy?

LittleGrizzly
02-25-2009, 01:48
Early reaction seems slightly positive... there is hope!

I quite enjoyed my musket battles back in shogun and mi, the rest of my units hardly counted i was determined to win that gun battle.. back before i could use units like Cavarly archers (not that i was like magyarkhan with them) and the like...

I will come back to the topic when early multiplayer gets going.... if it half as good as shogun mp ill be there in a flash!

tgi01
02-25-2009, 22:34
Its pretty simple actually, get all of your all friends add them to your steam friends list
get a headset to be able to agree on rules in advance then play ...

Will the game have inbalances - thats for sure ( I ve noticed the far to accurate cannons that some1 was mentioning myself ) , and so on .. but the main thing is that it will be much easier to communicate
agree upon rules and play with any1 you want to play with ...

I ve got the game on pre-order so will be playing it from day 1 ....

So get steam and get used to the interface asap :book: ...

TGI

donbatti
02-26-2009, 00:25
looking good atleast
going to buy it and hope for the good ol days.. maybe to much to ask heh

oh and hi to all "old" friends :D

miniwally
02-28-2009, 16:56
you can voice chat on steam etw?

Mars
03-02-2009, 16:32
This is primarily directed towards the guys who played STW/MTW and enjoyed that "chess" like style of play...

Puzz3D has explained in great detail what went wrong with RTW/MTW2 many times on this board so I won't go into it in detail. Needless to say, my biggest problem with those two games, among many, was that engagements between individual units ended too quickly to do much maneuvering. In the old games you could send units even of vastly different skill against each other, and while the outcome was certain, the fight would last long enough to go and do something on the other side of the map that might give you an advantage. In that environment of slower fighting and slower kill rates, there was far more room for strategy instead of hectic clicking and units breaking almost as soon as they hit - which I noticed quite a bit in the newer games.

Anyway, I was wondering if you thought there was any hope that MP could again become what it once was.

I noticed some potential good things - strong infantry with longer engagement times and more appropriate cav strengths & weaknesses.

I also noticed some issues that could really mess up the mp experience such as insta-rout grenadiers and a particularly lucky cannon shot that too out both of my artillery pieces en masse. :inquisitive:

And what of the naval aspect? I've only played the engagement 3 times and I cannot really tell yet if there is room for valid strategy or if its just about throwing your ships at each other and watching the pretty graphics.


Hey Panza ;)


from what i saw and could read... i doubt that this is even close to STW/MTW. Its another hybrid of "click-faster-win-faster" and "ensure-to-not-think-much" game.

Hard to say, it looks nice, yes, grafics are pretty good.
Tactical gameplay is average (note, i dont say crap), i once again will playtest it, but once again, i doubt its a game worth to spent much time on (and yes, im talking about MP).


I see insane speed, as CBR already posted... from my pov its actual pretty hard to really outmaneuver someone, i see frontal clashing and hardly any good moves. U simply have no time to have 3-4 hotspots in a fight and controlling each of it.

STW/MTW u could "block" sides and certain spots, gaining time, and push on other spots...this timemovement to overwight is almost impossible.


Koc

UglyandHasty
03-02-2009, 21:59
I prefer to wait and see, i wont judge the game based on the demo. Graphics look good, but its not a factor for a good mp game(in my book). I guess i'll rout soon enough...

RTKBarrett
03-03-2009, 00:29
Then get quicker? lol..

t1master
03-03-2009, 01:08
it's fast kocmoc, but i don't think it's as bad as m2 or rome were. it plays, imo very similar to lordz ntw, which was a mod of mtw with guns and arty that behave alot like this game does. four or so years old...:laugh4:

Mars
03-03-2009, 10:54
Well, i did answer to the initial question of Panzer.

And if u red properly u could noticed, that i said "(note, i dont say its crap)".


In the end the question stand: Do u want to play a quick game, where the win or loss is based on ur clickspeed? or Do u want to play a game, where the tactical movement and momentum is more important. People brought up the "chess" factor many times.

I played WC3, SC and there u know what u get, click faster, win faster.
If TW becomes another clickfeast, than i would rather wait for SC2, than play TW ;)

It should be different, and the tactical momentum should be the focus, not the amount of clicks per min.



I did love this game, coz i could slowy outplay my opponent, many times i had 1v1´s which took 1-2 hours. It was really chesslike. In the end u was down to 2 fatique bars, by just moving slowly, pushin here and there, press a bit, push ur opponent to the point u want him.


Yes, lets see how its goin, its always hard, and if u want, unfair, to judge something before its even there. I myself playtested any TW game and most of the mods. We got a dumped down version and i doubt this TW version will be any better.
To see people writing
Then get quicker? lol.., just illustrate the problem.
(since my english isnt the best as well, doesnt u mean: "Then become quicker?!?")

Koc

Nobunaga
03-03-2009, 12:11
I played WC3, SC and there u know what u get, click faster, win faster

why does everybody here say that :S

wc3 and sc are not about about clicking fast (am not saying that good micro doesn't help)... hell some pros have 100 apm and they win... Actually strategic depth in wc3 and sc exceeds that of all the TW series combined... they are even giving a sc course at Berkeley University...

The most important factor in games like wc3 and sc is good decision making, adaptation, scouting, macro, micro, and game knowledge... not clicking fast...

RTKBarrett
03-03-2009, 13:03
Well, i did answer to the initial question of Panzer.

And if u red properly u could noticed, that i said "(note, i dont say its crap)".


In the end the question stand: Do u want to play a quick game, where the win or loss is based on ur clickspeed? or Do u want to play a game, where the tactical movement and momentum is more important. People brought up the "chess" factor many times.

I played WC3, SC and there u know what u get, click faster, win faster.
If TW becomes another clickfeast, than i would rather wait for SC2, than play TW ;)

It should be different, and the tactical momentum should be the focus, not the amount of clicks per min.



I did love this game, coz i could slowy outplay my opponent, many times i had 1v1´s which took 1-2 hours. It was really chesslike. In the end u was down to 2 fatique bars, by just moving slowly, pushin here and there, press a bit, push ur opponent to the point u want him.


Yes, lets see how its goin, its always hard, and if u want, unfair, to judge something before its even there. I myself playtested any TW game and most of the mods. We got a dumped down version and i doubt this TW version will be any better.
To see people writing , just illustrate the problem.
(since my english isnt the best as well, doesnt u mean: "Then become quicker?!?")

Koc

The strategy elements are still there, ofc they are, but u just have to be quicker... and please dont question my english.

Im well aware of how shogun was played and to be honest times have changed, if u cant adapt then sad times for you.

Mars
03-03-2009, 13:14
well, u miss the point clearly. This tread has a topic and my answers was towards it, simple.
While you are just pointing out, that u got skill and other who are not fast enought, maybe im too old :D, lack skill.

Its not about me or someone else beeing too slow to click, its simple about the fact, that ETW is quite fast and therefore needs fast clicking. I hope this was more understandable now.


About ur english, as i said, im also quite bad and i really like it, if people point out my grammar mistakes, since it is the only way to improve.

Anyway, this tread got a topic with a clear question, lets try to stick to it :beam

About the strategy elements. I have doubts that the elements are "still" there. Roots of it maybe, but it got changed a lot. Its a long road from STW to ETW, if u want take rome and M2TW, where grafics clearly effected mechanics, which lead in wellknown problems. Its no secret, that a lot got dumped down, so people actual are "able" to play the game till a certain extend.

I personal dont have problems with highspeed gaming, there is no problem, ETW is different than STW, the momentum moved away from tactical deepness. There is lack of deepness and situational reaction. A lot of bonusses got dumped many years ago already, this wont come back.

What i try to say is, that we as human, even with very quick reaction, have limits, which result in a max of clicking per min. Lets assume u got 150 cpm, but have a fight goin which needs 300 cpm...

Exactly there the game becomes interesting, now u can say, that this is fine, since mistakes have to be done... ofcourse. My point is here: If those mistakes are welcome, than the game lose tactical momentum. Some might call it skill, i call it better clicking, more cpm.
In the end u can have a masterbrain of tactical wargaming, who just get a 50 cpm out.

Hes losing since he isnt able to fullfill his idea of the fight.

Now dont get me wrong, the game itself (has nothing to do with you or me) has to decide (and did this already), if it want more tactical gameplay, where u have more time to get ur idea/tactic on the battlefield or more pace/reaction.

There has to be a middle way, if its too slow u will see endless counters...



To the point, u can win 100 out of 100 vs a genius, just coz he has not ur reaction and clicking "skills". And ofcourse, thats the game, play it or play it not.

Koc


PS: I spoke with Paolai and Mord this morning, mord gave me this link

http://www.totalwar.com/empire/gallery/videos.php

Its really funny, they have a guy working on the "AI"... one person ;)


I agree with Paolai, at it current state it will be hard to rush, the game got moved more into some start missle-duell. Its interesting and clearly better than Rome/m2tw.

CBR
03-03-2009, 14:16
Of course people can play faster but that means less time for communicating with team or handling units sent off to a flank to help an ally etc. The faster it gets the more the decision cycle is about quick and simple choices.

The demo only had the front rank firing and apparently up to three ranks can fire in the game. No idea how that is gonna work in MP as there appears to be several eras to pick from. Some who have modded the demo talks of devastating firepower with such options enabled. Tomorrow we will find out what that really means.


CBR

PanzerJaeger
03-03-2009, 15:18
Hey Koc. Good to see you around here. :beam:

I really look forward to your and CBR's playtests with the full game (not sure if you're getting it on release or not). Although, after reading some of the things CBR mentioned, I think the writing is already on the wall. :shame:



The strategy elements are still there, ofc they are, but u just have to be quicker... and please dont question my english.

Im well aware of how shogun was played and to be honest times have changed, if u cant adapt then sad times for you.

Why are you skulking around this thread, which is obviously not directed toward you?

If you think RTW/M2TW gameplay was some sort of progression, then that's great. It surely makes winning games easier when you lower the IQ level. I think the current state of the MP community speaks to that issue fairly definitively.

RTKBarrett
03-03-2009, 19:13
Point out where i said rtw and mtw2 were a progression, i have not. Thanks.

Swoosh So
03-05-2009, 18:52
Point is i dont see any hope for this game without a chat lobby, and it gives a clear indication as to cas thinking on the multiplayer front, its an absolute disgrace to release a mp game with no chat lobby completely pathetic, ca have really gone and screwed over the mp community with this one no matter if the online game is good or not.

Mtw2 will be the last ca game i ever buy, they just dont produce good multiplayer games anymore since mtw1, theres 2 years of :daisy: support coming for multiplayer maybe they will include a chat lobby in a patch LOL!

Seriously using another word for feces gives a warning now at the org?

Let me edit it so its politically correct then.

Theres two years of absolutely terrible support which will be as bad as :daisy: coming for multiplayer.

Dictionary definition of what i said

1. excrement; feces.
2. an act of defecating; evacuation.
3. diarrhea.
4. Slang. pretense, lies, exaggeration, or nonsense.
5. Slang. something inferior or worthless.
6. Slang. a selfish, mean, or otherwise contemptible person.
7. Slang. narcotic drugs, esp. heroin or marijuana.
8. Slang. possessions, equipment, mementos, etc.; stuff.

kinda hits the nail on the head with ca multiplayer support.

Andres
03-05-2009, 19:10
Hmmm...

It seems like this thread has gone down the path of analysing ones skils in the English language, discussion of vocabulary on the subject of excrement, questioning the supposed IQ level of the MP community, baiting and using bad language.

Therefore locked.

Feel free to open a new thread on the same subject however, but let's try to keep it a bit more constructive and civilised.

Thank you for all useful contributions.

:bow: