View Full Version : Impressions of the demo?
edyzmedieval
02-24-2011, 19:47
I was wondering what your opinion of the demo was. I particularly wasn't very impressed and just felt as if it was a reskinned NTW with slightly better AI.
Thoughts?
Alexander the Pretty Good
02-24-2011, 22:58
nvm
Drunk Clown
02-25-2011, 00:00
Good enough to buy it. The price will drop to 25 euro's in no time here.
The pursueing of enemy units by cavalry went well; I didn't have to micro manage them (relieve).
My only real concern is the lack of different unit types, cos in Empire every faction had the same gunmen (yeah other colors but that don't count)
I'm not that bothered by the higher movement speed, it's just a thing to get used to.
Empire was boring.
PanzerJaeger
02-25-2011, 00:08
I was highly disappointed, particularly because I got the impression that this was going to be a sort of "back to basics" effort where the developers were really going to work on improving the battle engine. It was not, imho.
Good enough to buy it. The price will drop to 25 euro's in no time here.
The pursueing of enemy units by cavalry went well; I didn't have to micro manage them (relieve).
My only real concern is the lack of different unit types, cos in Empire every faction had the same gunmen (yeah other colors but that don't count)
I'm not that bothered by the higher movement speed, it's just a thing to get used to.
Empire was boring.
There are more units than one would think at first. Check the encyclopedia. There are different units with different stats: Takeda has better cavalry for example.
edyzmedieval
02-25-2011, 00:42
I was highly disappointed, particularly because I got the impression that this was going to be a sort of "back to basics" effort where the developers were really going to work on improving the battle engine. It was not, imho.
You echo my sentiments exactly.
It's the same old. TW needs a revolution. We've had evolutions, we need a whole new battle and campaign system.
You echo my sentiments exactly.
It's the same old. TW needs a revolution. We've had evolutions, we need a whole new battle and campaign system.
Then you are asking for a completely different game? I don't know what your are trying to or expect out of CA. Its engine has been rebuilt like 3 times from the ground up. The demo is like barely playable regrettably and almost everything is different in shogun 2 versus the original. The MP part is of the larger focus and its much needed.
Sorry, I am not trying to be overcritical here its just that I dont understand what you mean by "revolution".
I was wondering what your opinion of the demo was. I particularly wasn't very impressed and just felt as if it was a reskinned NTW with slightly better AI.
Thoughts?
The demo is what it is: a heavily shackled and scripted tour of the game. The battles move a bit too briskly and the lack of Anti-Aliasing is really annoying, but beyond that I'm not sure what you're talking about. Played with the Free-Campaign mod which unshackles both you and the AI and it was really fun, i even lost a couple games when I tried to go crazy DoW'ing everyone like I used to in ETW/NTW.
As far as engine is concerned the game moves and feels much more fluid than ETW/NTW ever did. Personally, i'm excited by the prospect of not having to wait three weeks for the AI to take its turn.
pevergreen
02-25-2011, 08:58
Sorry, I am not trying to be overcritical here its just that I dont understand what you mean by "revolution".
MTW to RTW. For battles, that was a revolution.
mehssively unimpressed so far by s2tw.
I've been a long time fan of TW games and every new game brings something fresh to the table that makes it worth the money.
I actually prefer the shortened battle durations, as I usually ended up auto-resolving in Empire for not wanting to take the time to fight myself. I just hope that battles don't become too rock-paper-scissors-like.
edyzmedieval
02-25-2011, 13:03
Then you are asking for a completely different game? I don't know what your are trying to or expect out of CA. Its engine has been rebuilt like 3 times from the ground up. The demo is like barely playable regrettably and almost everything is different in shogun 2 versus the original. The MP part is of the larger focus and its much needed.
Sorry, I am not trying to be overcritical here its just that I dont understand what you mean by "revolution".
I have high expectations of S2TW. They hyped it greatly and I thought they had some pride to make it really good, comparable to the original.
But it's not. It feels very much like ETW/NTW, and it's not really because of the engine. Look at STW and MTW, or RTW and M2TW. Despite being on improved versions of the same engine it felt much more different compared to the first iteration of the game.
CA, in my opinion, should stop releasing games by the belt every year. Focus, and create one mega game each two three years that will create a very very enjoyable experience. S2TW, albeit a demo, was not impressive at all. Good, with better AI, and representative of the Sengoku Jidai, but nowhere near the quality some of us have expected. Yes, you might say it's a demo, but the demo is a demonstration of the original game.
Chimpyang
02-25-2011, 16:53
Why the h#*! is everything so shiny? Someone went a little crazy with the bloom effects.
Gameplay wise, can't tell, the shinyness actually hinders my ability to pick out stuff on the battlefield.
Cecil XIX
02-25-2011, 17:54
MTW to RTW. For battles, that was a revolution.
mehssively unimpressed so far by s2tw.
I would say the revolution was the change in the campaign map, not the battles. TW battles have not fundamentally changed since Shogun 1.
Why the h#*! is everything so shiny? Someone went a little crazy with the bloom effects.
Gameplay wise, can't tell, the shinyness actually hinders my ability to pick out stuff on the battlefield.
If you don't like the HDR you can turn it off, it's in the video options.
The Blind King of Bohemia
02-25-2011, 18:52
I didn't have that high an expectation for the game anyway but nonetheless from what I have played so far I have enjoyed it. The unit speeds don't seem as insanely daft as Rome but the actual movement of the foot units at times looks kind of stupid, very clunky imo. Like the hostages they have added in diplomacy.
Prussian to the Iron
02-26-2011, 00:15
I was pretty pissed that the campaign only let me play one battle.
And I realized that I will have to wait until I get a new computer before I get this game.
That being said, it was eh. But then again, all I got to play was that one giant battle where you get betrayed, and a small, not-even battle with rebels on the campaign thing.
Also the encyclopedia didnt work for me :(
The TW:S2 demo leaves me a bit helpless. Firstly I'm really astonished that my four to two year old system (Intel Core 2 D 2,4 GHz, 3 MB RAM, NVidia GF 8800 GTX) can manage the game on high settings without problems.
I cannot judge the two most important factors, CAI and BAI, from the demo. Let's wait and see. But I don't like the graphics. That does not mean that the technique is bad. I'm not a graphics fan, I can't even judge about it. It means that the overall impression of the battle scenes for me is a little bit "gaudy". Shiny little maniacs with swords running all over the field with speed of light. I don't have the feeling to be on a battlefield that I have in E:TW. Combined with the fact that hooks and ropes for instant castle occupation are in the game (most hated feature in E:TW for me) and that I'm unfortunately not that much interested in Sengoku period history (would have preferred an all Asia setting from 1100 to 1600 perhaps), I will probably skip the title like N:TW which I also didn't buy. Or at least wait till the high speed soldiers will be changed by modders.
Edit: on the campaign map I am a little bit annoyed about the unit info cards, especially the childish pictures of the soldiers. Shall reflect Japanese style probably, but should have been done better with more exact drawings and view of the whole body.
Drunk Clown
02-26-2011, 10:41
Firstly I'm really astonished that my four to two year old system (Intel Core 2 D 2,4 GHz, 3 MB RAM, NVidia GF 8800 GTX)
Are you sure you can run this game with only 3 MB RAM? :P
Firstly I'm really astonished that my four to two year old system (Intel Core 2 D 2,4 GHz, 3 MB RAM, NVidia GF 8800 GTX) can manage the game on high settings without problems.
I know what you mean. My comp has only seen a few maitenence upgrades in the last few years, and it runs S2 way better than it ever ran ETW/NTW. There must have been some serious optimization concerns addressed in the engine since that time. Huge points to CA for the work done there, no doubt.
edyzmedieval
02-26-2011, 13:05
I know what you mean. My comp has only seen a few maitenence upgrades in the last few years, and it runs S2 way better than it ever ran ETW/NTW. There must have been some serious optimization concerns addressed in the engine since that time. Huge points to CA for the work done there, no doubt.
Very true. At least from this part they get a big thumbs up from me.
Prussian to the Iron
02-26-2011, 13:15
I know what you mean. My comp has only seen a few maitenence upgrades in the last few years, and it runs S2 way better than it ever ran ETW/NTW. There must have been some serious optimization concerns addressed in the engine since that time. Huge points to CA for the work done there, no doubt.
Something must be different for you guys then, because my computer is only about 1 1/2 years old and I cannot run this game lag-free. Runs ETW on fairly high settings no problem, but this game it can't. *shrug*
Crazed Rabbit
02-27-2011, 06:19
I, too, have been impressed by how well it runs. Though the shine off some of the units is too much. Also, the 3d portraits of units/agents on the campaign map seem really low resolution and have no AA. The diplomacy screen 3d characters are also weirdly poor graphics.
In the first historical battle, the 1600 betrayal one, the battle seemed to move very fast. No time for deliberation or much strategy a la MTW. :sad:
The tutorial is a bit of a joke - it's so scripted and tightly controlled that you can't get a feel for the campaign. And only being able to fight 3 battles? What good reason could they have for that?
Couldn't really get a feel for the AI.
CR
Gregoshi
02-27-2011, 06:29
I played just the campaign part earlier this week, but skipped the battles. Today I tried the battles. In short, it was a disaster. I had little to no control over the army and formations were non-existent. Part of the problem was just trying to follow the steps from the advisor. It wasn't bad until the last half of the second battle when things started to unravel. I was having problems with camera control selecting units and clicking properly to get my units to do what I wanted them to do. I felt like a drunken taisho commanding a Chinese fire drill (yet the scripted battle still let me win). All attempts to form a battle line resulted in more chaos - kind of funny looking back on it but very frustrating at the time. I'm going to have to make some control adjustments or just practice getting used to the command and control that are the default.
The castle siege was more of the same, except I was intimidated by the huge castle - very intimidated. In addition to horrible control issues, I had not a clue how to approach the assault or use the new units. The cannons ran out of ammo before the front gate was destroyed and with that, the only real plan I had for the battle. Chokosabe bodies littered the ground in front of the castle gate. At least my ninjas bled all over the ground inside the castle - cleaning up that mess oughta teach the enemy a lesson.
Anyway, it was not a very pleasant experience on the battlefield. At this point I hesitate to even attempt the historical battle until I can exercise some manner of control over an army. Back to the class room for me.
Aside from the above, I was very pleased with the pace of movement and combat. Movement felt natural, not rushed, giving me plenty of time to panic as I attempted to futilely introduce some organization to the mob, er, army. Likewise with combat, it was drawn out long enough for me to not only panic at the flanking moves the AI made, but also allow me time to wish really, really hard that my units would just move where I want them on their own without me having to attempt giving an order. All in all, I'm pleased with the mechanics. :thumbsup:
Drunk Clown
02-27-2011, 11:14
I find it strange that I had (apparently one of the few) no problems with the gamespeed, then again I started with Rome.
That people have no time to react is only the first couple of times you play it. You'll learn to react faster. I mean my brother plays CoH and he can react fast as ****! If I try that game I fail miserably, but hey, I haven't put the time in it to learn it. Same goes for S2:TW, just play it a little longer, before saying OMG IT'S TOO FAST I CAN'T USE TACTICS. I know this because I hated M2:TW when I first played it; later loved it. Same goes for E:TW.
Btw, can't you turn off the shinyness? (Bloom) So, if you can, how's that a problem? :S
And how come you can't make formations? I can (at least in the second and third battle)
Now the castle siege; I also didn't see an opening, but atleast my cannon broke the damn gate. But first I had my Shinobi and thought, after hearing the advisor, that they could infiltrate the castle very easily and thus I sent them to the castle centre. First I noticed that they could hide themselves about everywhere, then I started moving them around and thought (seeing how the ran/walked) they hide too when they move (or stay low). So I sent them and they got stomped by archers. Now I'm asking myself how are shinobi effective if they can't walk in silence? It was really a worthless unit, they also died very quick in hand-to-hand combat. So what's the point letting them climb up and capture the centre if they can't even hold out against Ashigaru.
After the painful defeat of my shinobi, I wanted to make a mass attack; attacking them from all sides. Ashigaru trough the gate, samurai swordsmen plus the bow hero and the general to the left side of the castle, horsies to the right side (dismounted) and archers supporting the ashigaru (I left the monks behind, stupid).
Result: Samurai swordsmen died, horsies died, ashigaru fared pretty well although sustaining heavy casualties, archers stayed a bit more alive, and didn't want to risk my general. So after the samurai failed I sent my monks in and they beat the living **** out of those archers (don't understand why they had matchlock). Luckily I had a lucky shot with my cannons which killed a cavalry unit for 1/3, which probably helped. And soon after my monks had beaten the archers I won, although I should have died. Strange thing too was that the balance of the power in the upper right corner was in favor of me even though I sustained heavy casualties in comparison with the enemy.
Also those points on the map are lame (archery dojo, farmhouse, Buddhist temple).
My only concern so far is the originality of the troops between different clans. I know the Takeda (I believe) have better Cavalry, but only the word Takeda has been put in front of the standard names, which is utterly lame.
My only concern so far is the originality of the troops between different clans. I know the Takeda (I believe) have better Cavalry, but only the word Takeda has been put in front of the standard names, which is utterly lame.
Then suggest a better option... This is Japan were talking about, not Europe. Different clans had different preferences over army composition, but any diversity or originality that the developers might implement, would mostly be made up. Unless we go to the Empire/Napoleon solution of having unique units you can only have one/couple of.
Drunk Clown
02-27-2011, 14:54
Then suggest a better option... This is Japan were talking about, not Europe. Different clans had different preferences over army composition, but any diversity or originality that the developers might implement, would mostly be made up. Unless we go to the Empire/Napoleon solution of having unique units you can only have one/couple of.
I have no knowledge of Japan whatsoever. Still without the noticeable difference I find it very hard to make the choice of choosing a clan. In previous Total War games my choice was based on recruitment of different units between different factions (e.g. I played Russia a lot in M2TW due to the Cossack units and the Boyar sons). But now, I have no idea which clan to pick because to me there's no big difference between the clans other than the location.
quadalpha
02-27-2011, 15:18
I don't understand how the second tutorial battle is giving people problems. You just chew through the monks in the forest and flank your cav to the left like the guy tells you to, right?
Drunk Clown
02-27-2011, 15:25
I don't understand how the second tutorial battle is giving people problems. You just chew through the monks in the forest and flank your cav to the left like the guy tells you to, right?
It's the third.
The tutorial is a bit of a joke - it's so scripted and tightly controlled that you can't get a feel for the campaign. And only being able to fight 3 battles? What good reason could they have for that?
It being a demo and a beginner's tutorial of all things? Sounds like a pretty good reason to me.
Gregoshi
02-27-2011, 16:43
I don't understand how the second tutorial battle is giving people problems. You just chew through the monks in the forest and flank your cav to the left like the guy tells you to, right?
I personally just wasn't getting the UI (user interface). There are enough differences from STW that I couldn't wrap my mind around it on the first go-round. For example, A and D are strafe left/right and I was mentally thinking rotate left/right. That messed me up a bit. I know Q and E to rotate, but I was expecting A/D so I'd naturally go to those keys when I wanted to rotate - then I'd remember and switch. Also, I'd select 2-3 units and then attempt to draw/drag out a formation for them at a location and the units would get de-selected - I had no problem in doing this with a single unit though. It was a series of issues like this that lead to frustration during the battle and clear thinking when out the window - like stopping all movement and consult help screen and UI control set-up before I continued.
In that second battle with my army in disarray, when I saw the monks in the forest, my cav units were right in front of them when the advisor said to send the naginata after them. I used the cav anyway, since the naginata where just too far way. By the time the cav finished routing the monk/guns, 1) I had lost track of the enemy cav coming around my left (again frustration and panic distracted), and 2) one of my cav was way off to my right near the edge of the map. It is not that the second battle was hard, it was just my inability to handle the UI. This problem followed through with the castle battle as well.
The problems I had with the demo were all squarely sitting in my lap, not the demo's.
NagatsukaShumi
02-27-2011, 17:19
I have no knowledge of Japan whatsoever. Still without the noticeable difference I find it very hard to make the choice of choosing a clan. In previous Total War games my choice was based on recruitment of different units between different factions (e.g. I played Russia a lot in M2TW due to the Cossack units and the Boyar sons). But now, I have no idea which clan to pick because to me there's no big difference between the clans other than the location.
I suspect that before you pick the clans there will be a "blurb" telling you about them and what their specialities are, if not it will undoubtedly be posted via a guide on the Org.
Shogun is more about proving your the master of Japan above all others with more or less the same resources at your disposal, rather than Europe which is vast and allows hundreds of cultures.
I suspect that before you pick the clans there will be a "blurb" telling you about them and what their specialities are, if not it will undoubtedly be posted via a guide on the Org.
Not only that, but the game comes with its own encyclopedia (the entirety of which is in the demo) wherein each Clan has its own article. Strengths, weaknesses and a little history are all given for you. Some clans, like the Chokosabe, can recruit much better archers than others. This not only encourages a ranged play-style, but also a much heavier focus on the archery arts (technology).
If you play to your clans strength, not only in army composition but also in tech research, you can easily turn minor strengths into powerful advantages through the course of a campaign. I would assume this was the intention behind the design.
Prussian to the Iron
02-27-2011, 19:46
am i the only one who is still unable to use the encyclopedia? all i get is a black window where im assuming it would be.
antisocialmunky
02-27-2011, 21:39
It flashes black for me but works after a few seconds.
Crazed Rabbit
02-27-2011, 21:55
It being a demo and a beginner's tutorial of all things? Sounds like a pretty good reason to me.
A good reason for the tight scripting and guiding for the tutorial, yes. For the demo I don't see the point of limiting battles.
CR
If you cannot load the encyclopedia from within the demo, try from outside the demo using any internet browser. I found the encyclopedia files at
Steam\steamapps\common\total war shogun 2 demo\data\encyclopedia
The encyclopedia pages are HTML documents, just open one with a browser of your choice. From there you can access whatever you want.
am i the only one who is still unable to use the encyclopedia? all i get is a black window where im assuming it would be.
mine takes a good 20 secs to load sometimes until then its just a black screen be paitent and see if it loads after a while.
edit : also they just cant win can they. with previous demos people complained that they could never try out the camp map, so finally they put the campaign in the demo in a limited way. and people complain that its too limited. the demo is designed to wet your appetite, they clearly stated the reasons why it was so limited. Yes it sucks you can only play the historical battle and the 3 campaign battles. but if they had put all the battles in the demo would have been like 15gig and tbh who wants that. While alot of people have no internet limits there are some of us who do still have monthly data usage limits that we dont want to exceed with 1 game. thats the main reason i didnt buy online. i could have saved myself like 30$ if i preordered on steam, but i cant use half my data usage in one download.
i also find it funny that people complain that the ai is too slow to react and you have too much time etc etc in previous games. then complain that these battles are too fast paced. just further reinforces what i orignally said which is they just cant win.
what it comes down to is that the demo is exactly that, a demo. it isnt the final realease version, its desiged to give us a little bit of everything so we can get an idea what teh game is like. could they have done it better? yes. does it have bugs? yes.
all in all im impressed with the demo. its enjoyable and i think with the freeplay mod you can have a quite challenging little campaign.
Swoosh So
02-28-2011, 08:13
I was highly disappointed, particularly because I got the impression that this was going to be a sort of "back to basics" effort where the developers were really going to work on improving the battle engine. It was not, imho.
Nah thats just what the community wanted :) Who listens to that lot?
pevergreen
02-28-2011, 08:21
Nah thats just what the community wanted :) Who listens to that lot?
Hah!
So true.
We complain, they eventually fix, we complain more.
Deadly cycle.
well, there are surely different understandings about what a good TW is. Some are always disappointed. Its about to make the majority happy,
and exactly this i see in the current S2 game. I dont say its perfect, it isnt, but its a good basement, something i didnt saw in many earlyer TW versions.
Now to the demo. Its just a demo, hard to judge. Lets split this a bit in a few points.
1. TW and new things.
TW is TW. You will have a campaign and you will have battles to fight. There is very limited room for huge improvements.
(now i have to be carful not to leak infos....) The engine is from NTW, nothing wrong with it. It works good and a big problem,
the buggy maps, is solved.
There are new things like the skilltree for the gen or the campaign. Its new, its not fundamentally new, but it spice it up.
After all, TW wont change dramatically, the game is like it is and people love it.
2. New Player and the "focus" on MP.
Well, thats another story. The whole system can only work, if there is a minimum on player, if we dont reach that certain amount, we will be in trouble. The matchmaking wont really work and people have a lot of trouble to get opponents around their skilllvl.
Highrated player hardly will enjoy rolling over new player.
The entry into TW is hard. The learning-curve is very low at start, usually the learning-curve is a lot higher, if you look at other games.
People need some little victories at start.
3. Demo. Its hard to judge from the demo. The armies are not balanced, to get a first feeling its good, much more is not possible.
I repeat myself. Unitspeed is fine, there could be some adjustments, still, the first feeling is fine.
There are many points. What i expect from some of you are real points, just a rent without any exact info whats wrong or what you dont like, doesnt help anyone.
This TW game is the first game since many years i really like. There is much work to do, but this feels really good.
The engine is good, it was already good with NTW ( i dont like NTW, its not my era...). Many of the annoying bugs are sorted, maps really work good, which was a big spoiler in NTW for me.
Koc
one thing i do want to ask, any1 else who is playing free play mod think techs are researched way too fast? im sure i was getting a tech every 2-3 turns, maybe i was just imagining it but if not hoping its a bug with something that prob wasnt spose to be in the demo (i think in the demo your only told to research like 2 techs)
as to free playing in the demo, it shows alot of promise, the white guys on the island (sago?) smashed the green guys (the myioshi?) with whom i was also at war, and then the green guys sued for peace with me cos they had been soo badly beaten. i built up some armies and sent them into the white guys lands only to be greeted by huge full stacks defending their towns :S i promptly got my but kicked and had to run for my life! haha. im impressed and enjoying it :)
pevergreen
02-28-2011, 10:17
one thing i do want to ask, any1 else who is playing free play mod think techs are researched way too fast? im sure i was getting a tech every 2-3 turns, maybe i was just imagining it but if not hoping its a bug with something that prob wasnt spose to be in the demo (i think in the demo your only told to research like 2 techs)
I was playing and getting times of like 8 turns for tier 3, 5/6 turns for tier 2.
It will be moddable if nothing else :shrug:
I was playing and getting times of like 8 turns for tier 3, 5/6 turns for tier 2.
It will be moddable if nothing else :shrug:
yea it says 8 turns but im sure it was only taking like 2-3 lol
Drunk Clown
02-28-2011, 17:39
I agree that there's too much complaining about this demo; like something minor: "the horses are waaaaaay to big!!!". Which of course ruins the gameplay ...:no:
I mean come on! Is that such a big problem? Do you want guys on ****ing fat ponies? I'd rather have some epic big warhorses than lame ponies.
Or when people play the demo/game for an hour and are immediately convinced they won't buy/play it.... just because they aren't used to it:inquisitive:. If I would play Call of Duty (:no:) I suck too and have a KDR of 0,1. But I don't blame the game of my failure, instead I pick the game up again and practice enough to not suck. If I would have quited playing a game after every time I ragequited a game session I would have wasted at least € 500.- ! And every time I don't give up on a game and play it long enough to get accustomed I love the game (unless it's really **** but I don't buy ****).
NagatsukaShumi
02-28-2011, 17:46
The problem with TWs (and a ton of other popular games) is that the developers must cater to a wide audience. The veterans who played the originals when sales were far lower will always fail "disappointed" as the games are much different to the originals, the newcomers will feel bemused at the little nods to the veterans (like picking the setting in the first place). CA can't please everybody so there will always be murmurings of discontent.
However, game-killing bugs are a problem they can fix for everybody which are justifiably criticised, its little things like "I don't like the era, its stupid" or "all the units are the same and the drawings are stupid" which are pointless, you'll either love the samurai civil war setting and the beautiful artwork or you won't.
You echo my sentiments exactly.
It's the same old. TW needs a revolution. We've had evolutions, we need a whole new battle and campaign system.
No it doesn't. Revolutions tend to be targeting the mass paying audience, in this case - 14 year olds with great computers and with a desire to play oversimplified crap. The TW series is very successful because of the system it has perfected over the years. If it ain't broke - don't fix it! Just make better looking and more realistic (AI wise, economics wise, logsitics wise etc.) versions of MTW and RTW and I'd be happy, and most of the other older fans as well. If you want revolutionary you have to look to the MMORPG scene as that's the new "hot" thing everyone's investing in. Games likre the TW series, Thief 2, HOMM3 etc. will remain classics and the best that can be done with them is for them to be remade and improved without the core concept changing.
The Black Ship
03-01-2011, 00:27
One thing I noticed while playing the free play mod was the AI isn't afraid to use ashis. The large armies being created contain a preponderance of ashigaru yari and archers with (usually) only sword samurai units. As Knoddy says, it can be quite effective against an opponent (like me) that insists on using samurai only armies. 1500 vs 750 doesn't work.
In my opinion, anyone making a buy/no buy decision based off this demo is crazy. The battles we're allowed to play cannot tell us if the game's AI works better than previous TW games.
I'll let you fence sitters know...I went ahead and pre-ordered weeks ago simply because I like the era, and wanted to encourage companies to do more games. I'm hoping for the best.
IMO, ashigaru (both yari and bow) are pretty good and much cheaper than samurai. They are more cost effective for large standing army.
In my opinion, anyone making a buy/no buy decision based off this demo is crazy. The battles we're allowed to play cannot tell us if the game's AI works better than previous TW games.
Not crazy, just being conservative. RTW, M2TW (+ Kingdoms), I learned my lesson. I have not preorder any game since. There are 2 most important factors that influence my game-buying decision: 1) Honest, in depth review which effectively point out the features that make the game worth buying. 2) First impression on the demo. Is it the type of game I want? Will it run on my machines? So far, there hasn't been many good, honest review on S2TW. The demo fell a bit short. The newer features since RTW that I didn't like. Other features aren't highly interesting (well, not much could have been done in the demo anyway). I was hoping for something that will draw me back to TW series. The demo only runs on one of my 3 machines.
The final verdict: I'll wait until S2TW proves that it could beat STW/MTW to claim the time slot.
Forward Observer
03-01-2011, 22:20
I liked the demo well enough that I will still pre-order the game. Being a TW fan, I would have done so anyway, and it would have had to have been pretty bad for me not to.
I was very disappointed with the problems that plagued Empire at release, but since this game is using essentially the same game engine and is more focused as Napoleon was, I have my hopes that it will be a more finished product this time around.
There's a few minor things I could quible about---like troops movement commands seeming to default to run, requiring an additional command change back to walk, or trying to get accustomed to minor camera and command control changes, but nothing I can't adapt or get used to.
On a related note, here's a tip that worked for me in the siege battle. Do not use the cannons to batter down the first gate, but instead use them to take out the one main arrow tower just to the right of the gate. This effectively eliminates the one constant and nagging source of arrow fire raining down on any of your troops as they approach the outer wall.
Since all your troops can scale walls, you really don't need the gate for access anyway. Besides, once you control the level the gate is automatically opened. You have more archers than the enemy plus you can resupply them if you take the village structure to the right front of your starting position, so eliminating this tower early gives you superiority in ranged weapon fire.
Of course I still lost archers trading arrows with the enemy, but having that tower out of the way simply made the first level of the fortress much easier to take with fewer losses.
The enemy general unit also kept running around on the first level, so they had completely routed from my missile fire before I had hardly stormed the same level. The battle was pretty much a given from that point on.
Cheers
I have conquered all the provinces on the map :). It was quite cool. :)
Can't wait to try the full game :D.
Justy_SG
03-02-2011, 17:51
not so good impression for me but i wish the multi improve & chat lounge come back, me will still buy it :)
because it is Total War.
On a related note, here's a tip that worked for me in the siege battle. Do not use the cannons to batter down the first gate, but instead use them to take out the one main arrow tower just to the right of the gate. This effectively eliminates the one constant and nagging source of arrow fire raining down on any of your troops as they approach the outer wall.
Forward Observer fires for effect! No surprise there!
On my first siege battle the battery was out of ammunition before I had even surveyed the dispositions. Being used to Empires endless shot I thought the guns were broken in the demo. I have since learned to quickly redirect the guns as soon as the battle begins. I've found that there is ammo enough to wreck two towers and the front gate. Capturing the buildings however did not rearm the battery. The capture point was too far away I guess.
I haven't tried buring the towers with fire arrows but that works according to other posts I have read.
originally posted by Swoosh So
Nah thats just what the community wanted :) Who listens to that lot?
What about your impressions, Swoosh?
My Steamgames work, but not the TWS2 demo, I can't download a new copy either?
edyzmedieval
03-04-2011, 03:00
My Steamgames work, but not the TWS2 demo, I can't download a new copy either?
Delete the S2TW demo and reinstall again. If not, reinstall Steam, there's always issues with corrupted profile files that don't show games in the library and prevent some others from running properly.
well i clocked up nearly 21 hours on the demo and the All factions Playable mod,
i love the new skill trees, they add more depths without adding millions of useless units ! Hopefully this means the game is gone back to its roots :) The atmosphere in game is just like stw was :) awesome !!! the new multi player options coop etc.. i am looking forward too:)
ps: and after 10years i hope they fixed the rout bug from stw lol
Delete the S2TW demo and reinstall again. If not, reinstall Steam, there's always issues with corrupted profile files that don't show games in the library and prevent some others from running properly.
I uninstalled and instaled again, that fixed it. Had to download all those gigs again: good thing I'm not having 5 kbs anymore.
well i clocked up nearly 21 hours on the demo and the All factions Playable mod,
i love the new skill trees, they add more depths without adding millions of useless units ! Hopefully this means the game is gone back to its roots :) The atmosphere in game is just like stw was :) awesome !!! the new multi player options coop etc.. i am looking forward too:)
ps: and after 10years i hope they fixed the rout bug from stw lol
I'm up to about 10 hours myself. Amazed at two things: How varied the response to the demo has been and two, how fun I'm finding it. Here I thought i was jaded into never enjoying a vanilla gameplay experience again. :laugh4:
phonicsmonkey
03-06-2011, 12:43
My very first impressions are:
I have just played the tutorial campaign so far but I liked it. The battles were very easy but I'm hoping that's because of the scripting and the fact that your units are far superior (don't want to put the customer off by letting them lose a battle, eh?).
It seems to have the best features from Empire but simplified (eg. the tech tree and the economy and trade system). I like the new agents. All in all it looks like it could be a very replayable game in both SP and in terms of multiplayer campaigns (my real joy in life).
I'm going to use the unlock mod now and also try the custom and historical battle released by the same guy.
Oh, and it looks beautiful.
Indeed phonics monkey, it looks and it also sounds beautiful (Jeff Van Dyke rocks). In this regard its really and unambiguously well done and worthy of the original game.
Liberator
03-09-2011, 01:55
I played the demo unlocked and I liked it in general; but I had preordered anyway :cowboy:
BUT I really don't like that they took over the economic system of Empire,
there is just no point in
- trade agreements ( Why don't do trade with any allied/neutral nation? The Sengoku period was not the GATT/WTO period we know today )
- towns outside the stronghold [Without even militia units] ( While stupid :furious3: AI is not capable to depoly armies/ attack reasonable, all it does is raiding towns... just ANNOYING!)
Oh old Medieval, you were the highlight of the TW Series, but my grafic card can not handle you ... RIP ... SEGA/ Creative Assemby, BRING IT BACK!!!
http://images.yuku.com/image/pjpeg/b94259a530d8817f93cf659b7e7f8c934cf9358.pjpg
ah good old Medieval Total War. the one in the series i played the most followed by Rome. On my old Hdd i had Screenies of every faction in control of the whole map muhahahah even the minors who start with 1 province XD. i remember the days of fighting off 20+ full stacks of Alomahads. i used to raid their land down in spain to hamper their growth lol.
While stupid AI is not capable to depoly armies/ attack reasonable, all it does is raiding towns... just ANNOYING!
I really hope that it will only be in the demo. It's the main reason I lost interest in TW series since RTW (I play some, but not as much as STW/MTW).
As I play the free play demo, I can't help but keep wondering whether AI is cheating.
- Almost every time I hire an agent, an enemy agent just walk over and kill him (even before he's fully active). How did AI know? AI agents seem to know the exact winning odd and have never lost an agent in all attack attempt.
- AI ships seem to have very long range and they know exactly where my ships are. They appear from nowhere, attack my ships and disappear.
- Similarly, AI seem to know the location and the strength of my army. Since, I rarely have any agent alive for more than 2 turns, I can't tell if AI have any spy walking head of their army or within my territory.
I hope that I just have a very long streak of bad luck.
I hope that I just have a very long streak of bad luck.
What I've found out is that it's very hard to keep new agents alive after certain point in the game, freshly trained metsuke/monk don't stand a chance against rank 3 or above agents.
AI ships don't have any longer range than you do (unless they have better tech), but AI seems to know where there are ships/troops, without that ability AI would be extremely weak.
edyzmedieval
03-13-2011, 00:47
I don't think CA will ever come close with the genius that MTW was.
I don't think CA will ever come close with the genius that MTW was.
Sorry sir, i didn't mean to step on your lawn.
OUT4BLOOD
03-13-2011, 00:57
I don't think CA will ever come close with the genius that MTW was.
Was MTW the first TW game you played?
Gregoshi
03-13-2011, 02:19
Sorry sir, i didn't mean to step on your lawn.
:laugh4: We'll give you a quarter if you mow it.
edyzmedieval
03-13-2011, 02:57
Sorry sir, i didn't mean to step on your lawn.
You want some fries with that while you mow it? ~;)
Was MTW the first TW game you played?
I started with the original, and played extensively. STW was gold, but I find that MTW improved almost everything of the original while providing a huge space and multitude of cultures. Plus the incredible atmosphere.
OUT4BLOOD
03-13-2011, 03:32
Are you more of a singleplayer enthusiast? I find it hard to see how MTW was an improvement on STW multiplayer
edyzmedieval
03-13-2011, 12:42
Are you more of a singleplayer enthusiast? I find it hard to see how MTW was an improvement on STW multiplayer
Yes, I play mainly singleplayer. MTW MP wasn't that much of a difference over STW, I agree, but it's the SP that concerns me the most.
For me STW was better for the single player experience than MTW (I never liked turns to be a full year, it feels so wrong). MTW and especially VI were better for what they offered MP, maybe not out of the box.
MTW battle engine was better. Cavalry charge was broken in STW iirc but in MTW it works.
It was the unit/roster balance that was lacking mostly, and they affected gameplay. STW had a one up in that.
Swoosh So
03-13-2011, 19:00
What about your impressions, Swoosh?
I havent played the demo :O but i am buying the game.
See nothing, fear nothing, i see.
Very wise of you :)
OUT4BLOOD
03-13-2011, 19:37
Cavalry charge was broken in STW iirc
how?
This is off topic, hence reply in spoilers:
According to posts by LongJohn2 CA's battle engine programmer and from the strategy guide of MTW, charge involved momentum the unit has accumulated by running towards the enemy that gave a pushback effect against the charged unit and allowed every charging man to make immediate strikes at any enemy man he contacted until the momentum was lost, and in the case of cavalry versus infantry also gave a significant morale penalty.
https://forums.totalwar.org/vb/showthread.php?75233-How-the-Combat-System-Works
Charge (from the Strategy Guide):
Clicking on an enemy unit causes your unit to go to charge speed once it gets close to the enemy unit. It takes 2 or 3 seconds to reach maximum charge speed (presumably from walking speed). A charging soldier makes immediate strikes against all opponents he contacts. Each time he fights a little momentum is lost. When sufficient momentum is lost, the charge ends and the soldier looses the charge bonus. (Note: we know now that running speed is above the momentum threshold for charge bonus. So, men moving at full running speed get the charge bonus if they contact enemy men.)
Pushback:
In an attack, the striker has a chance of pushing back his opponent which gives him a strong combat bonus on the next strike. Factors affecting the chance of pushback are: kill chance, advantage in supporting ranks, mounted vs foot. Charging cavalry always pushes back any foot soldier who is not facing him with a spear, pike or polearm. (Note: v1.1 patch altered spear, pike and polearm pushback so that charging cavalry has a chance to pushback these men even when they are facing the charging cavalryman.)
http://shoguntotalwar.yuku.com/topic/1701/Medieval-TotalWar-Numerology?page=1
Cavalry vs infantry
longjohn2 - Programmer
UK Posted: Oct. 02 2002,19:28
-----------------------------------------------
One point that none of you mention is that Medieval knights routinely got off their horses to fight on foot. Surely a foolish strategy if infantry can be bowled over as easily as some of you suggest.
I've modelled the game on the assumption that cavalry cannot break into a close packed infantry force, provided that the infantry keep their nerve. Therefore when cavalry first hit infantry, the infantry recieves a big morale minus, and will often break immediately. If this doesn't happen then it depends on the relative quality of the cavalry and infantry, whether or not the cavalry can force their way into the formation. If they do, it's likely they'll win as the infantry unit will continue to get large morale penalties for losing to cavalry.
If they don't break in, the cavalry and break off, and have another go.
The game depicts spear pikes and polearms as being extra effective against cavalry, but this is largely a game simplification for the wider market. In reality I don't think it mattered that much what the infantry were armed with. Greek hoplites, Roman Legionaries, and Saxon huscarles could all defeat cavalry charges.
In terms of momentum, cavalry will always force back non spear infantry, unless the infantry are able to make a succesful strike on the cavalry. Thus it's the quality of the infantry that's the deciding factor. You could rationalise this saying that it's the bold stance ( or lack of ) of the infantry that determines how much the cavalryman really goes for the charge, and how much he pulls up at the last moment.
This info was given for the MTW/VI engine, but its basically the same engine and i think the same programmer, and so presumably the mechanic was intended to work this way or thereabouts in STW as well.
I am not certain which of the described/intended mechanics did not work properly in the original STW (v1.0 to 1.12), but it was possible to tell by the casualty rates on impact and the charged unit behaviour upon impact. It seemed as the "momentum" of the unit performing the charge was not unloaded on the receiving unit hence maybe the additional charged combat cycles per man were not given, but don't take my word for it :)
I think that in MI there was an effort to make cavalry faster and more effective, but i don't think the charge mehanic was fixed to work fully as intended till MTW.
The point has been mentioned by players. One of them was Puzz3D, who was i believe part of CA testing teams during the time. You can find a reference to this here:
https://forums.totalwar.org/vb/showthread.php?77560-The-old-unit-stats
Originally posted by Puzz3D
You could give HC a bit more offensive punch by shifting a combat point from defense to melee making it a 3/5 (melee/defend) instead of the original 2/6. HC were supposed to defeat warrior monks decisively in STW v1.12, but they didn't because the charge bonus didn't work properly. Moving one combat point from defend to attack should help them.
I recall that it was explained more in detail in a few other discussions, but i unfortunately don't remember the exact posts.
The MTW engine was with MI, the best by far. There was always problems and there will always be bugs or exploits, but if you compare the today NTW engine with what we had back in 2003.... playwise from a MP-POV, the current NTW engine is not half as good. The gameplay is terrible, penalties doesnt work, flanking and rearing means next to nothing.... Today its more about you general and the last little momentum are all those cavs people move around.
Today people think your a good player, if you move some cavs behind the enemy to start charging in once the melee move it.
You dont see any good flanking or maneuver with melee. The only thing are cavs running. The charge is broken, missles are broken and hard to use.
Flanking, rearing, outnumbering... its all almost pointless. Its done to frontal clashes with some little cavmaneuver and a shotout before.
I wont stop repeating it, the engine is good in general, the game has huge potential. But what we saw in NTW and in the demo, is showing us, that many oldtimer wont get what they want. Alone the general and his effects creating highly clustered armies, with very low flanking maneuver.
As long units doesnt get real moral problems, if flanked and reared badly.... You get it, you dont run in and outnumber a flank to rout it quick.
As long your general is alife, your units will fight almost till death, as long they are not heavily fatigued.
MTW engine was pretty good, its always important to mention, that we had very smart guys from the MP-community working in the beta. We cant honor people like Puzz enough, they did an amazing job!
antisocialmunky
03-14-2011, 14:31
The MTW engine was with MI, the best by far. There was always problems and there will always be bugs or exploits, but if you compare the today NTW engine with what we had back in 2003.... playwise from a MP-POV, the current NTW engine is not half as good. The gameplay is terrible, penalties doesnt work, flanking and rearing means next to nothing.... Today its more about you general and the last little momentum are all those cavs people move around.
Today people think your a good player, if you move some cavs behind the enemy to start charging in once the melee move it.
You dont see any good flanking or maneuver with melee. The only thing are cavs running. The charge is broken, missles are broken and hard to use.
Flanking, rearing, outnumbering... its all almost pointless. Its done to frontal clashes with some little cavmaneuver and a shotout before.
I wont stop repeating it, the engine is good in general, the game has huge potential. But what we saw in NTW and in the demo, is showing us, that many oldtimer wont get what they want. Alone the general and his effects creating highly clustered armies, with very low flanking maneuver.
As long units doesnt get real moral problems, if flanked and reared badly.... You get it, you dont run in and outnumber a flank to rout it quick.
As long your general is alife, your units will fight almost till death, as long they are not heavily fatigued.
MTW engine was pretty good, its always important to mention, that we had very smart guys from the MP-community working in the beta. We cant honor people like Puzz enough, they did an amazing job!
Yeah, that's a somewhat true trend with subsequent iterations of TW. The charge mechanics are really annoying, either unrealistic or overpowered. It becomes worse when you slow down combat. Then when the cav charge, its incredibly hard to kill cavalry before they withdraw to charge...
That you can get your cav out after a charge (so easy) and than just recharge again, is ridiculous.
We had that problem once in STW and it got sorted. You still could get your cav out somehow, but you lost a lot of mens doin this.
From a cinematic POV its surely a lot better to see units not too much clustered in their formation. From a gameplay POV its a nightmare. Units are splattered all over the place and you need some good amount of time to get them ordered again. Thats what i called Bubble-Gum and AMP call it:"rubber-band" units.
You can test it yourself in the demo, on the left side you have cavs, move them into the center and than charge a bit, if you move em out before they hit something the cav will be spread a lot. Than drag the unit somewhere back and watch it. I call it "cavdance" sometimes it takes up to 12 seconds.
Now try to charge something before it did regroup and also with regroup. It makes sense, yes, but it cuts down the gameplay a lot.
The units should be a lot more clustered themselves to ensure a better movement.
You can do another test in the middle, at start units come along. Just go outa the woods and push your units in, make sure they fight more or less in one Spot.
After a few secs you will see some heavily mixed up bunch of mens. You cant tell, which direction units look (you might know, while you send em in), you cant tell where which unit stands. Again, its maybe more realistic and some historic lover might like it, but if you want gameplay its not good.
You can see many of this in NTW or also in the demo, there is no secret, anything is obvious.
crpcarrot
03-15-2011, 13:03
I am a fan STW and MTW had lost of faith in CA on the subequent releases. didnt even buy Napolean. but i must sa i was very pleasently suprised by the demo. i dont know how scripted it is but the campaign and battle maps looked and felt quite great. and i loved the Japanese flavour to evertyhing. msot suprising was that my PC (C2D 4gb Ram 8800GTX) ran the demo better than it ran ETW.
well ahve to wait and see the reviews for the full game ebfore i pay any of my money on TW
ICantSpellDawg
03-17-2011, 18:59
I was wondering what your opinion of the demo was. I particularly wasn't very impressed and just felt as if it was a reskinned NTW with slightly better AI.
Thoughts?
Perfect quote. Waste of time and money at its current price, unless you love the time period or hate your money. I'll wait until it goes under $10 in the next 6 months. Pretty artwork though - a re-skinned Napoleon.
vBulletin® v3.7.1, Copyright ©2000-2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.