Micromanagement - too much of a chore in TW?

[seghillian]

I'm sure this issue must have been raised before but I can't find it although I do see some mention of it in the main hall.

First let me say what wonderful strategy games I think MTW and it's predecessor, STW are. MTW has raised the strategy element to new heights from STW (which I tended to win within a maximum of 15 years using a rush strategy and not training any agents at all.)

The only trouble is that it's unnecessarily difficult to get the best out of the strategy game for the following reasons IMHO.

1. Too many units.

All those bishops, agents, princesses, inquisitors, emissaries, spies. Pur-lease Why should I be dragging these around from 1 side of the map to the other? I may sue Activision for repetitive strain injury some day soon I'm sure this aspect of the game could be handled much differently. I'd rather abstract these characters out of the way and off the map. For goodness sake, surely I can send an emissary ANYWHERE in Europe in a single move when that move lasts for 12 whole months. I know transport in those days was slow - but hey - anyone could WALK across that map in 12 months I'd rather just have an option to allocate a certain amount of my budget to diplomatic activity in a turn. Depending on how much I allocate, I could approach any other leader(s) in the game and request some sort of agreement, including marriage - thus getting rid of the need for princesses and emissaries at a stroke. Similarly, I could be spending an amount for espionage and/or religious activity which would enable me to place spies, or bishops/inquisitors in designated provinces. I suggest I should be able to place them anywhere that could be reached without crossing enemy territory. There would be no actual figure to drag around - just an interactive pop-up screen to allocate the diplomatic/religious/espionage activity. The job would be so much simpler - AND regions would hopefully only need to train military units, with agents abstracted off the map, simplifying the process somewhat. Obviously there can still be the same pre-requisits in terms of buildings needed before certain types of activity are allowed - eg - churches needed in order to allocate bishops. Wouldn't this make life so much simpler?

2. User-unfriendly information screens.

OK - I've taken over a new province - and there's that silly scroll sitting on the map waiting to be dragged and dropped on a high acumen general. Where the hell do I find one? That's right - I have to right click on ALL of them. (I usually can never be bothered and drop it on the first 3-acumen guy I can find) How bizarre is that? At turn end I want a list of unallocated titles, and a list of generals showing all their details - loyalty, acumen, dread, location, unit type, any existing title, v&v's, and I want an ability to sort on any of the above - then a simple click on the selected general - and the job is done - should take seconds - and no danger of leaving a title unallocated as I was unaware a governor was killed in the last battle.

And what about managing the taxes/loyalty of all these provinces? Why do I have to scroll through every region one by one? I should be able to adjust tax on the income screen which shows all the provinces on the one sheet. It would be nice to set a global rate for all and just have to manage the exceptions individually.

3. Which units have I not moved yet?

I've built masses of new units (the empire is expanding&#33http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/wink.gif Where the hell are they? I have to hunt through all those castles and drag them out of hiding to get them to the front line Couldn't an unmoved unit maybe have a flag or some other marker showing it is still to be moved? Or maybe the system scrolls through yr units and allows you to move or pass or wait till later as you wish. (I recall Civilisation does this) Or maybe just show the new units at least, so you can bring them into the game.

I've just completed my latest game - Poland/Early/Expert/GA. Great game - but was getting so tedious for the reasons mentioned above. I play GA but tend to try for total victory anyway - GA is nice just to see the scores every 25 years. I had reached about 1196 and was offered the partial victory which I was happy to take as I was tiring of moving all those damned agents around (And I'm only talking bishops and my one emissary - if I had built spies and assassins I think I would have lost interest sooner). My max income was 59000f in one year. I'd like to have finished it and painted the whole map red - but the battle highlights were getting too separated by ages of tedium in between.

Sorry to ramble on. I love MTW despite the above gripes Do the rest of you agree or disagree that the strategy element could be so much simpler to handle, while still preserving, indeed enhancing, the strategic choices and dilemnas faced by the player?

[Gregoshi]

You bring up some very valid points. There is a topic somewhere here in the Entrance Hall (or is it the Main Hall?) that discusses these same points.

1) Regarding the agents, only build the bare minimum or none at all. Is there a need for an army of assassins?

2) Excellent point that others have mentioned too.

3) This is another good one and one I don't recall being mentioned either.

One encouraging thing is that the CA folks to read these (and some other) forums and collect ideas such as these. We've also seen some of the suggestions made make it into subsequent games - another very good sign. Each version of the TW games gets some nice improvements over the previous one.

[Hobot]

Yeah I agree with you completely dude. In fact I usually give up on my campaigns when it becomes rather obvious that I'm going to win, since moving stuff around and managing a huge empire in general is so damned tedious. Despite this, I also love MTW http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/smile.gif

[mystic brew]

which is why I think you'll find that a lot of people tend to play the early era most often.

These early years are when an empire is at it's most fragile, and thus most exciting...

[Skidrowpunk]

I agree completely. After a while it gets quite annoying to move around 14 armies at the same time. Another thing that's annoying is all the small, small details you have to take care of, i.e. upgrade 20% of something here and 40% of something there. And as Gergoshi said, each version of TW gets some nice improvements and I think that RTW will take care of this issue and concentrate on what's fun instead of what's boring.

[MrWhipple]

A lot of what you mentioned can be delegated to the computer.
Tax levels, assigning titles, building buildings, units and agents, can all be set to auto manage by clicking on the big grey arrow to the right of the mini map. Take your pick do as little or as much as you like.

[el_slapper]

Anyways, Agents are USEFUL in numbers, especially spies & assassins(for swarm kill, costly but efficient). And an agent pool, from wich you'd send people in mission directly, rather than from the main map, would be really handy. A newly created agent would go there, as would one agent after a successful mission.

IMHO, if it is legitimate to make armies slow, single individuals can go muuuuuuuuch faster. That simple agent pool - that could be the current agent list, just that some agents would not be anywhere - would allow easier & more realistic management.

Technically, what happens? You create an agent, he does NOT appear on the map, only on the list. You select it on the list, then drag it on the target, as usual. Then everything as usual once the mission is done. Then back to the pool. For static mission, as spying, simply drag it to the province - where he stays.

[seghillian]

Thanks for the responses folks. It seems many agree that a lot of micromanagement is over the top in this game. I felt it was in STW too, though nowhere near as bad, as that game was simpler. I felt sure they would come up with a better system for MTW.

I know that a number of the activities I mention can be delegated to the computer, but that's not really the point is it? For example, I may wish to award a particularly rebellious province title to a high dread rather than a high acumen general. And do you really trust the computer to do these jobs OK for you? Most people seem to think the AI sucks so I must admit I'd rather manage my own strategy

I do hope these issues are addressed in RTW, which looks set to become an awesome game judging by the progress of it's two illustrious predecessors.

[King John II]

The micromanagement is much less than in, say, Civ2 or Civ3. But I agree there is a fair bit.

But if, like me, you like a fast pace to the game the answer is to cut back the amount of micromanagement you do as the number of provinces gets beyond 30 or 40.

I can see this will irritate the perfectionist. It is irksome to leave lots of governers in place after they all start taking a cut. But it does not put the win in jeopardy so does it matter that it might take a year or two longer or be achieved with a final treasury which is a bit lower? Similarly with units. OK it is satisfying to maintain a minimum number. But it doesn't really matter if the empire gets a bit cluttered with overlooked units late on.

I certainly enjoy the early years more than the late ones. But that is no different to other turn based strategy games.

[Makedi]

I cannot answer the first 2 questions as ive palyed 2 games of STW WE but the 3rd i might be able to help you with.

On my first game (shimazu 1530) i realized the same thing. My solution was to allocate certain areas to the production of units. You may not get as much units per turn, but all the units are easier to find and you can always allocate more areas to the production of units as needed. As your empire grows your 'unit camps' can continue to change.

This way your troops are quickly at the front line, easy to find and if a certain province is good at building a certain type of unit the you could just constantly churn out that specific unit(s).

hope it helps

Makedi