View Full Version : Your opinions on MTW 2, version 1.02
1.02 patch mainly addressed many SP issues and few MP ones. As far I've played-I've managed to play couple of matches, I would say that there is a difference.
I've not been seeking for any bugs as I do not have time for this, so others will mention how many bugs there still are.
- it seems that spears and pikes work well
- schiltrom formation doesn't seem to work imo
- heavy and light infantry do good work vs spears
- archers seems to have better effect now but far from desired
- cavalry is still very strong (people frequently using max 8 or 10 cav rule)
- AP units animation are working now
- hybrid units stop on the spot; javelin units don't start using javelins when
they could
- musketees (I have not tested them yet)
This is short and quick note. All other observations are welcome.
pike master
05-07-2007, 04:48
game is better balanced now than i thought it would be. cavalry are a no gooda against spearmen now which is perfect.
spearmen are perfect now. strong against cav and weak versus heavy infantry.
no more all cav armies i think. it seems that an all cav army will be a fools choice patch 1.2 or at least i hope so.
Wolf_Kyolic
05-07-2007, 10:49
Hehe everybody reported 1.0 to be perrrrrrrfectly balanced and sooooo bug free when the game was released and then a months later...Boom!!!...
Now I give it 2 weeks before people starting to moan about some ISSUES. ;)
But...Do not worry! 1.3 will fix it aaaaallllll!!!! In September! I mean it. Honestly. They are even gonna fix the lag with 1.3. :laugh4:
Hehe everybody reported 1.0 to be perrrrrrrfectly balanced and sooooo bug free when the game was released and then a months later...Boom!!!...
Now I give it 2 weeks before people starting to moan about some ISSUES. ;)
That's why I've made this post. I've mentioned first impressions without being too enthusiastic. To go in this process slowly. I'm not a player who would be searching for a bugs due the fact I don't have too much time on disposal. I'm waiting for comments of more people like Paolai, Elmo and others who have traveled long road in Total War series and have gathered a lot of experience during those days.
Lag indeed is still an issues (still it is better then it was before that), archers are still not as effective as many would like them to be, on the other hand spears and pikes seems to do their job. MTW 2 v1.02 compared to RTW/BI in my opinion is vastly improved.
Let me stress here that Shogun was exceptional same as it was MTW/VI but strangely Viking expansion despite most balanced era in MTW was not that popular.
Ok back to the topic. In RTW/BI lately you were winning with armies which were designed to win and in MTW 2 v1.02 you can win because of the way how you use your army and your victory is not altogether based on the units you have picked.
I don't want to mention more then that. Let's not be enthusiastic too much and take slow steps. Some are working hard to bring back some life:
http://www.clancommunityshield.net/website/
I'm convinced that TW MP when Shogun was established was unique community. Fragments of it remained and from them fresh community started to develop. As many times mentioned before I will do this once more. Shogun offered many excellent players and individuals and later followed by Medieval. Total War was a glue and nothing more then this. People come and go. That's the law of nature.RTW was not the only cause that people left. Some get tired and others had other issues in life which needed to be addressed. They can still come back later on.We can be nostalgic. Memories remain and we usually remember good old days which we are not going to enliven but we can look forward for new one. Post your opinions and observations.
I just played few games and it is too early for me to decide if now its a better game. First impression is that rushes are still too strong cause archers are too weak and spears kill rate is not good enough, but I have to play more games. I need at least about 2 weeks more.
YellowMelon
05-07-2007, 16:56
Palamedes (unoficially) told me that most of the balancing will be put into 1.3 (aka kingdoms). Also, for tournaments and such, Pala is making it so the game can be edited at any time and this version can be used by the tournaments ( I assume you would need a seperate install). So at least tournaments can work on their own balance schemes.
As for this patch, I have not played it yet because d2d version is not out yet. How I DO regret using d2d...
Wolf_Kyolic
05-07-2007, 17:31
Palamedes (unoficially) told me that most of the balancing will be put into 1.3 (aka kingdoms).
Yeeees, yeees!!! He told me too. Yeeeees!!! 6 months and we will have it all. Just 6 months left guys. Only 6 months more...
:laugh4:
Palamedes (unoficially) told me that most of the balancing will be put into 1.3 (aka kingdoms).
After the initial withdrawal of the patch, the whole month of April was available for balancing the v1.02 in addition to whatever time was available towards the end of the original 3 month patch period. Given the above statement, any expectation of a balanced MP game has to be put off until after the release of the expansion. And still there is no mention of addressing lag or the incompatibility of M2TW multiplayer with 32 bit Athlon cpu's.
Then again, the majority of the people playing Total War multiplayer these days are not interested in balanced gameplay. What they have clearly said is they want a gameplay where the winner is determined by which units are purchased.
After the initial withdrawal of the patch, the whole month of April was available for balancing the v1.02 in addition to whatever time was available towards the end of the original 3 month patch period.
Balancing would take months in testing time. Yes the patch was originally meant to be out in Feb and its now May, but as it was a series of successive delays they could never commit to adding in unit balancing given the delay it would me.
I've also chatted to Palamedes about it, he even worked on balancing with me for LTC 2.3, so play that if you want to see what me and him came up with.
guyfawkes5
05-07-2007, 17:42
Then again, the majority of the people playing Total War multiplayer these days are not interested in balanced gameplay. What they have clearly said is they want a gameplay where the winner is determined by which units are purchased.
If said statement is true, then the current multiplayer community is clearly :daisy: ... hence my puzzlement as to why :daisy: ?
Wolf_Kyolic
05-07-2007, 17:55
he even worked on balancing with me for LTC 2.3, so play that if you want to see what me and him came up with.
Mods did not work for the community in the past and the situation will be the same. You are dreaming if you expect everyone to play a mod instead of the original.
We need a decent balance for the official version and its not there in this patch and CA will NOT release 1.3 before 6 months and god knows how they will balance it, because it is an expansion. There will be many new units and the game won't be balanced again and then we will have to wait for 1.4 but then a new TW will be anounced and etc...Lmao! This was the last chance which is wasted away -carefully.
Mods did not work for the community in the past and the situation will be the same. You are dreaming if you expect everyone to play a mod instead of the original.
Of course i don't expect them to play the mod, but it features balancing done by the CA Oz dev working on rebalancing for 1.3 and Kingdoms, so it might give people an idea of what to expect in them.
We need a decent balance for the official version and its not there in this patch and CA will NOT release 1.3 before 6 months and god knows how they will balance it, because it is an expansion.
They balance it like they balance the main game, using .xls files and the different types of units(pikes, shield and sword, heavy cav etc.). Jason can balance things much better than i can as he has access to the .xls files and can make big changes more easily, but i'd expect to see rebalancing done in Kingdoms and 1.3, as Kingdoms will use the rebalance done for 1.3 for its unit balance.
Wolf_Kyolic
05-07-2007, 18:05
Of course i don't expect them to play the mod, but it features balancing done by the CA Oz dev working on rebalancing for 1.3 and Kingdoms, so it might give people an idea of what to expect in them.
They balance it like they balance the main game, using .xls files and the different types of units(pikes, shield and sword, heavy cav etc.). Jason can balance things much better than i can as he has access to the .xls files and can make big changes more easily, but i'd expect to see rebalancing done in Kingdoms and 1.3, as Kingdoms will use the rebalance done for 1.3 for its unit balance.
How about the new units of Kingdoms? New units=new imbalance. And we will need a new patch to fix that. I guess my son wil be playing the best TW ever when he is 17-18 years old.
I am not married yet! :)
How about the new units of Kingdoms? New units=new imbalance. And we will need a new patch to fix that. I guess my son wil be playing the best TW ever when he is 17-18 years old.
Well the new units will be given stats based on the new rebalance, it's not just some system where they randomly give stats to units, they have a system for assigning stats to a unit based on unit type, weapon used, how elite they are etc.
Wolf_Kyolic
05-07-2007, 18:24
it's not just some system where they randomly give stats to units, they have a system
That is why I am hopeless! :laugh4:
Balancing would take months in testing time. Yes the patch was originally meant to be out in Feb and its now May, but as it was a series of successive delays they could never commit to adding in unit balancing given the delay it would me.
Well that confirms what I suspected that balancing was never on the agenda for M2TW v1.02 just like it wasn't on the agenda for RTW v1.2 despite the presence of a highly talented community beta team which could have done it; most of whom joined that beta team because they had the expectation, as I did, that balancing would be part of the effort.
I've also chatted to Palamedes about it, he even worked on balancing with me for LTC 2.3, so play that if you want to see what me and him came up with.
I already play a statically and dynamically balanced mod of a Total War game, and the gameplay is not characteristically boring as some people claim. Yesterday we were able to play a 2v2 with huge units without lag except for the pauses that GameSpy has started causing recently. That's sixteen 120 man units for each player giving a total of 7680 men in the battle, and one of the players was using a cell phone modem connection!
I might try your LTC 2.3 if I can find M2TW dirt cheap since I can't justify paying the highest price of any Total War game for what I consider to be the worst or perhaps next to the worst game in the series. I will probably just wait for the v1.03 patch and then see what people say about M2TW MP. If they still have to use unit limits, then that's a big red flag as far as I'm concerned. Of course, nothing can be done about the inferior battle engine, but if it's not compared to the old battle engine it might do.
Well the new units will be given stats based on the new rebalance, it's not just some system where they randomly give stats to units, they have a system for assigning stats to a unit based on unit type, weapon used, how elite they are etc.
That's good to have a system, but in addition to that you should use feedback from actual multiplayer battles to fine tune it. That way the gameplay becomes something more than just figuring out the best units. I think that suggestion of making a separate era that emphasises playbalance and not a huge number of unit types and large number of factions is a good one. Then you don't have the monumental task of balancing all the units and factions. Those eras can be left as is for the majority of players who aren't interested in balanced gameplay.
Well that confirms what I suspected that balancing was never on the agenda for M2TW v1.02
I suspected it wasn't as well, CA probably wanted to use players feedback from the leaked/official 1.2 patch now the shield bug has been fixed.
That's good to have a system, but in addition to that you should use feedback from actual multiplayer battles to fine tune it. That way the gameplay becomes something more than just figuring out the best units. I think that suggestion of making a separate era that emphasises playbalance and not a huge number of unit types and large number of factions is a good one. Then you don't have the monumental task of balancing all the units and factions. Those eras can be left as is for the majority of players who aren't interested in balanced gameplay.
I know Jason got some Spanish clans, think Mordred was involved, to test the balancing for LTc 2.3, and it changed quite a bit from the early versions to the balance seen in 2.3.
Can we stay on topic? :focus: This discussion should be continued elsewhere.
I wonder why they do not changed the archers values in this patch, is it so difficult? Too much time to change 1 number?
I wonder why they do not changed the archers values in this patch, is it so difficult? Too much time to change 1 number?
If balancing tactical battles was not on the agenda for v1.02, then no changes would be allowed. Do SP players support that change? If they don't, then CA is unlikely to consider it for the v1.03.
I doubt they have a balance team. RTS developer without a balance team, rofl.
I doubt they have a balance team. RTS developer without a balance team, rofl.
Well you'd be wrong then wouldn't you, as they do.
pike master
05-09-2007, 03:48
as a mp i am grudgingly satisfied with the unit balance now.
as a single player i am disgusted with the unit balance.
Well you'd be wrong then wouldn't you, as they do.
Well I wonder then why they did not understand that archers needed better stats. Probably they have a balance team, but is the wrong one.
Wolf_Kyolic
05-09-2007, 10:21
CA balance team:
http://www.accessible-systems.com/media/image-fourblindpeople.jpg
If you turn around the archers value which they had in RTW/BI where archer unit could even win a melee against heavy inf and cav units (!?) you get their value in MTW 2 where their effect is so to speak negligible. Even if you manage to get them behind enemy lines they don't cause any real damage.
Desert archers and lbows (1 or 2 units per player) might be still useful in 3v3 matches because of their high values and even that is questionable.
Guys ....
i have stupid question
have you eaten all brains?
Now some of mine impressions ( I have played only 1 3vs3 and some 1vs1s so its just beginning)
Archers for me have good stats - their accuracy seems to be about 25% bigger.
With shield bug corrected heavy archers are now worth of buying. Yesterday I have seen
dismounted dvor (4 units val 1 ) who practically destroyed 2,75 pavs unit (0,25 were killed by my cav :P ). Dvor lost about 2 units. For me its well balance.
Many players now keep telling that horse archers are too strong. For me they are ideal now.
They are firing well when not into circle and behind enemy. Of course players who have never fought against horse archers started yelling.....
I noticed that mounted crossbows are quite powerful unit now - its good IMO. Now no one can tell that he lost because opponent had ha. Everyone have well , cheap ha with armour piercing.
Anyway if I remember well some of community members have tested RTW before its release.
What were results of these tests.
more impressions soon
KrooK
BTW: Kyolic if you want child - mother don't have to be your wife :)
BTW 2 - pavs are now nice unit. Defend 14 and armour piercing....
Welp it can be hard to make good use of Pavise crossbows and longbows or dismounted dvor archers if the enemy rushes you, and they are expensive, so you gotta always be prepared for that.. and if you do get rushed making good use of them is a must or you are pretty much boned.
pike master
05-09-2007, 14:06
i dont think rushing will be a large issue now but not inconceivable. there are still ways to rush someone but it will be twice as difficult now.
Well I wonder then why they did not understand that archers needed better stats. Probably they have a balance team, but is the wrong one.
They probably do, but as i said unit balancing wasn't on the cards for 1.2, so of course the stats won't be changed.
Well you'd be wrong then wouldn't you, as they do.
Community doesn't count.
@ kyolic, rofl.
Community doesn't count.
Who said anything about the community?
Your sarcasm detector is broken.
Please check out the results of these polls before you continue. I think it explains it all. (Not that we did not know it already.)
https://forums.totalwar.org/vb/showthread.php?t=84863
That 6.2% for M2 multiplayer looks like the death knell for Total War MP. If Creative Assembly really works at it with the help of the SP community, I'll bet they can get that down to under 5%.
Hosakawa Tito
05-09-2007, 23:25
As Cheetah has implied, not enough multi-player interest shown by this poll to warrant any effort to fix it.
[oR.osiris]
05-09-2007, 23:50
-two handed units get rolled by units with a shield
-Lancers that benefited from the shield bug are now underpowered because they get rolled by AP units
-turks are way overpriced and i laugh when people take them
-pikes seem to be a little more balanced now but the pike militia should be more than 150
two handed units get rolled by units with a shield
Lancers that benefited from the shield bug are now underpowered because they get rolled by AP units
Somehow this doesn't bothers me that much.
That 6.2% for M2 multiplayer looks like the death knell for Total War MP. If Creative Assembly really works at it with the help of the SP community, I'll bet they can get that down to under 5%.
If I'm not mistaken RageFury posted on STW forums that he did not find any other RTS comparable to TW series (at least not to that early one). In December expansion comes. XIII Century could be released at time as well. I will buy TW once more. Somehow I'm not interested in mmporg genre.
XIII seems to be entirely focused on battle. A short commentary on XIII century:
If you took the popular Total War strategy games, stripped out their overarching turn-based strategic layer, and kept the awesome real-time battles, the resulting game would look a lot like XIII Century: Death or Glory, a real-time tactical game from 1C and developer Unicorn Games Studios that's about the brutal era of medieval warfare.XIII Century is a game that's about battles, and nothing but battles.
And then there is sentence which does not sound promising to me:
The scale of the action is comparable to that of Rome or Medieval: Total War, as you can easily have hundreds, if not thousands, of units on the screen at one time. The visuals are sharp and detailed, and there are subtle variations between each man on the battlefield. If you like medieval warfare tactics, then XIII century is a game worth checking out when it ships.
Will it be all about graphic design again? I'm really wondering how game engine will be made. I will try this game for sure.
Orda Khan
05-11-2007, 14:31
I have given up on TW altogether. Too many disappointments buying each release in the vain hope that there will be any improvements. I won't be wasting any more money, I've wasted enough
.......Orda
tibilicus
05-11-2007, 15:27
I have given up on TW altogether. Too many disappointments buying each release in the vain hope that there will be any improvements. I won't be wasting any more money, I've wasted enough
.......Orda
Here! here!
Well said Orda!
YellowMelon
05-11-2007, 17:22
Ok first off...I dont think any of the MP community voted on this poll, or knew about it...
Second...I am a little worried at the Fantasy poll...I was wondering for a while what the next TW game would be, and I thought that they might go so low as make a fantasy game to cater to the larger gaming market, following games such as Warcraft etc. Please dear god...I do not want to see Fantasy TW ever come out...
In this case, FTW does not mean for the win
I doubt they'll do a fantasy game yet, there are still plenty of interesting periods in history they can cover before they ever need to do a fantasy game.
As Cheetah has implied, not enough multi-player interest shown by this poll to warrant any effort to fix it.
That's what happens when the multiplayer experience deteriorates. The low level of interest is an indication that multiplayer would have to be improved to restore interest.
Yes I didnt read through all of the questions, I thought it was just another joke by CA to make it look like they cared about the community. Now I think I shall spend a few minutes every day spamming votes favoring multiplayer.
pike master
05-11-2007, 19:10
its not exactly like mtw2 has 1500 games going at one time guys. its not made for multiplayer but CA has went to an unheard of effort to appease the mp folks in patch 1.2 regardless.
furthermore the poll does include a question as to how many times they have played mtw2 online. if everyone answers yes they have played over 50 games then im sure CA will move toward a mp gaming direction.
currently the buyer base is many times more for singleplayer than multiplayer i like historical accuracy and wish CA had made its previous titles more historically accurate then they are. but one fantasy game coming out isnt going to change their attempt for making historical games.
actually the split will appease to groups so CA can really concentrate on taking controversial spice units out of its history titles and vent it into the fantasy titles so the clients will get more of what they want.
currently the games are more historical but spiced up with some fantasy units.
im surprised CA is even showing any concern at all for the mp communty. you can jump on to halo and find upwards of close to a 1000 servers going at once and look how old the game is. the most ive seen on mtw2 at one time may have been 25 games. on rome i believe i saw up to 50 one time.
Wolf_Kyolic
05-11-2007, 19:28
Ok some maths:
CA sold around 1 000 000 copies of MTW2 till now. They sold more than 1 000 000 copies of RTW and BI. Let us say 2 500 000 copies in total after VI.
How many less copies would be sold if all the MP players had left the game and refused to buy a CA product? 1000?
2 500 000 - 1000= 2 499 000
So...
2 499 000 X 60 (assuming they sell each copy for 60$) = 149940000
When they loose 1000 customers they are still making a profit of 149 940 000$ from the game.
Now do you think they have ANY reason to care about MP? They DID spent their resources on graphics and AI and now this way, TW makes them earn millions of dollars. It is only us fools who have got emotional ties to the game. In fact it is an industry and by nailing the SP, CA guarantees not only to survive but they also guarantee to make millions by every new release of Total War which was developed by them.
But they are not such bad guys. If those poor old MP veterans want to play a weird version of game which does not make any sense for SP, CA is ready to throw in an employee to help them modding the game and play it that way isolated from the rest. So either be thankful and continue digging for the next TW release like the fool you are or move away. That is all.
If these words do not make enough sense, just check the maths above again. It is simple. Yet real.
YellowMelon
05-11-2007, 19:51
And if they can cater to a MP audience imagine how much more money they would make. If they want money, invest in MP, and turn that 1000 into 100 000 and make more money.
Every RTS being made caters to MP, I wonder why? Coh, SupCom, C&C all have good online platforms, are they missing something CA isnt?
Hosakawa Tito
05-11-2007, 19:58
That's what happens when the multiplayer experience deteriorates. The low level of interest is an indication that multiplayer would have to be improved to restore interest.
I agree. Apathy from the many disappointments for MP'ers more than likely are also reflected by the polls low MP-interest numbers. It's a shame. You MP fans are better off buying/renting your own servers and playing the modded version/versions. Or finding another game...
YellowMelon
05-11-2007, 20:02
Its difficult...there is some force that binds us to TW. Its an emotional connection as Kyo put it.
CA keeps promising and promising and we fall into the trap. Hopefully Pala will follow through with what he told me regarding tournament mods that he will work on, meaning all competetive players will have their own version to compete on full of balances and such
but we have been fooled in the past...
pike master
05-12-2007, 00:05
the dilemma is that total war mp junkies like us are a minority elite. most people get into other types of online games. its not a bad thing there is just not very many people who get into playing a game like this in mp as we do. recruiting a freindly community is an excellent step to fostering more people who want to play.
instead of posting no noobs allowed games you should invite novice players into your games and teach them some introductory methods that will help and encourage them. in first person shooters and warcraft people put up with a lot of abuse. i dont. thats why i like total war is because if you act respectful hopefully you will be respected.
this has nothing to do with respect through your skill but how you conduct yourself on all lobbies and forums. i can only speak for myself and not for those who do not see it this way.
to encourage a community when it is a small fanbase you have to look at the battles and competitions this way. if everyone can keep it clean and respect one another and enjoy the battles, win or lose, to me everyone wins.
everyone wins:yes:
YellowMelon
05-12-2007, 00:46
I agree, sometimes I really wish the community was larger, but at the same time its really nice to know everyone and such. Usually I try and show newbies what to do in games, but far too often I see players such as Trixter who just go crazy at people in the lobbies and really make it an unenjoyable environment. I hoped the .org would be a good place to build up a MP community from the bottom up, but alas it seems everyone here is about SP not MP :shame:
guyfawkes5
05-12-2007, 01:14
To be fair I think Mech has hit the nail on the head. The current stagnation is more due to the attitude among a vocal minority in the community rather than the .org being biased towards the campaign portion of the game. If you want the community to grow and prosper, start in the lobby rather than the forums.
In my experience there are almost innumerable amounts of players who venture into the multiplayer lobby once out of curiousity and don't return due to the lack of hospitality and functionability (varying from a simple lack of help to outright abuse). The infunctionability of the lobby may be out of our hands, but certainly the aforementioned 'no noobs allowed' games and other aggressive acts of elitism are not.
Simple things like advising obvious newbies, being curtious, and maintaining a friendly atmosphere are the bedrock of most multiplayer communities. I'd recommend that we co-ordinate our activities in the lobby as well as in the forums, although I will admit there is only so much we can do with the cardboard cut-out lobby we're stuck with now.
Wolf_Kyolic
05-12-2007, 07:35
instead of posting no noobs allowed games you should invite novice players into your games and teach them some introductory methods that will help and encourage them. in first person shooters and warcraft people put up with a lot of abuse. i dont. thats why i like total war is because if you act respectful hopefully you will be respected.
During MTW I and VI, we did used to let them in late night 4v4 games and teach them necessary stuff during the game. The ones with attitude and respect used to find a chance to join the rematches and sooner or later they used to become a part of the community. But yes...This was only during late night games where we failed to fill in 8 veteran players. Normally they would not be allowed in where both teams had enough known players already. :shrug:
And if they can cater to a MP audience imagine how much more money they would make. If they want money, invest in MP, and turn that 1000 into 100 000 and make more money.
Every RTS being made caters to MP, I wonder why? Coh, SupCom, C&C all have good online platforms, are they missing something CA isnt?
Well said.
OK I did more tests.
Sadly range bug is definitely not corrected. It makes pavs wery useful unit vs ha. It means that horse archers shouldn't be limited into 3vs3 - pavs have 4-6 times better range than ha.
And if they can cater to a MP audience imagine how much more money they would make. If they want money, invest in MP, and turn that 1000 into 100 000 and make more money.
Every RTS being made caters to MP, I wonder why? Coh, SupCom, C&C all have good online platforms, are they missing something CA isnt?
my point exactly...
Wolf_Kyolic
05-12-2007, 15:43
are they missing something CA isnt?
Yes. They are missing lack of coding skills.
|Heerbann|_Di3Hard
05-12-2007, 18:11
Yes. They are missing lack of coding skills.
RTW was the first tw 3D engine. They haven't had any experience in programming 3D engines and TW. The RTW engine was working, but I guess it is very difficult to balance the units in that engine. They invested alot of money in the RTW engine. The engine had to be reused. The second problem. New games must have a brillant graphics. Many gamers have a 8800GT and other strong hardware. The engine was extended and maybe through that extensions it was more difficult to balance the game. Only a new engine would bring back the old MTW VI feeling back.
But today is MTW VI day. The people come back and that is nice :) I don't need 100 noob players, that wants a TW C&C, if I can play with 40 good players. I know them. No spammers or other rude persons. It is a small and very honourable community.
M2TW rest in peace :D
Wolf_Kyolic
05-12-2007, 18:36
No spammers or other rude persons. It is a small and very honourable community.
Yes. I have been there...for a while...
MTW 2 v1.02 does not feel that bad thought. It is similar to MTW for example still flanking issues remain. When you flank you opponent his units endure and it happens that you lose on the end.
I have given up on TW altogether. Too many disappointments buying each release in the vain hope that there will be any improvements. I won't be wasting any more money, I've wasted enough
I will decide after the expansion pack is released. XIII might surprise us after all.
pike master
05-13-2007, 05:49
im thinking xiii death and glory will be aimed at a mp community. just a hunch because it seems more focused on battles and not diplomacy and empire building.
|Heerbann|_Di3Hard
05-13-2007, 09:15
im thinking xiii death and glory will be aimed at a mp community. just a hunch because it seems more focused on battles and not diplomacy and empire building.
I have never read about a mp mode for XIII Centuri. I watch the game some years.:wall:
http://gry.o2.pl/publicystyka_special/?co=pokaz&id=40
"Klecha (Gry.o2.pl): Thanks that you agree to explain us something about game in short interview. Can you describe XIII Century: Death or Glory in a few words?
Nikolay Matijchuk (1C Company & Unicorn Games Studio): Dzień dobry! Speaking briefly I would describe XIII Century as a tactical strategy game dedicated to military history of Medieval Europe. In other words one can describe our game as a grand and rough play about the XIII Century where all the leading parts belong to the player.
Klecha (Gry.o2.pl): What can you tell us about the storyline in the game?
Nikolay Matijchuk (1C & UGS): The storyline is pretty simple and it was done according to our goal, which is to show the most famous and tactically interesting European battles of the XIII century. During three campaigns we would like to show battles representing three great Medieval military cultures: classic west-european, bitty and original Russian military tradition and inimitable art of war of the Mongols.
Klecha (Gry.o2.pl): How did the team come up with the idea of XIII Century: Death or Glory?
Nikolay Matijchuk (1C & UGS): Our main aim was to show the fascinating beauty of a real medieval battle, all its tactical varieties. This and interest in military history led to the situation when we decided to create this game. In this game we've concentrated on the war and its tactical part - battles. We have intentionally decided to put away all the politics and economics and diplomacy. One should keep in mind that in the past all these factors led to multiple wars. This is the reason why we decided no to stew players with all these things, but to put him directly on the battlefield, before the main battle of the war starts. We really think that the players will appreciate that.
Klecha (Gry.o2.pl): What can you tell us about the playable sides?
Nikolay Matijchuk (1C & UGS): One will have an opportunity to play for the English, French, Germans, Mongols and Russians. By choosing one of these factions as playable one will have to take several important aspects into account. There are three different unique military traditions - European, Russian and Mongolian. This includes armory and weapons, types of tactics and other war maneuvers peculiar for armies of different nations.
Our second aim was to show the most significant battles of the 13th century as precise and detailed as possible.
Klecha (Gry.o2.pl): So what kinds of locations and settings will be seen in the game?
Nikolay Matijchuk (1C & UGS): Maps that we have created for our missions depict real landscape and weather conditions of historical battles. Since several dozens of battles represented in the game took place in different parts of Europe, players will have a chance to see all the variety of landscapes: from stony Mediterranean hills to endless eastern European heaths, from plain forests of northern Russia to mountain valleys of Wales.
As for the settings one will see adopted to the game but maximally realistic conditions, participants, landscape and circumstances of that battle. While working on settings we also took into account different types of details, including armory, weaponry, realism and atmosphere of the battle. Each mission of the game will confirm that.
Klecha (Gry.o2.pl): Please tell us in few words about types of missions that we have to beat?
Nikolay Matijchuk (1C & UGS): Missions will be very diverse and this is determined by the peculiarities of the battles that we chosen for the campaigns. One of the key features of each battle is the landscape and the aims that enemies have. In one case this might be a fight on flat terrain where one fully uses the advantage of knights, in the other, on complex terrain, one would rather choose a right defensive position instead of assault. Take for example the battle of Lincoln. Players will have to defeat the enemy on the streets of a town and then besiege the citadel. Another example is the battle of Bouvines. Open space of the battlefield gives a lot of space for tactical maneuver, outflanking and gives an opportunity to involve a lot of troops in the battle. Players will not feel bored anyway. There will be a lot of different missions with original maps, of peculiarities and their own aims.
Klecha (Gry.o2.pl): What kinds of units and building will be seen in XIII Century: Death or Glory?
Nikolay Matijchuk (1C & UGS): We have a lot of different units which shows Medieval European (and not only European armies) to the full extent. It will also allow showing the peculiarities and differences in armory and weaponry. European knights and sergeants, palatine guards and boyars, Mongolian shooters, Welsh archers and Italian crossbowmen - all of them and even more troops with axes, clubs, javelins, etc. In addition to this we have a big variety of siege equipment (trebuchet, rams, siege towers, etc.). All this together gives you an impression of what XIII Century units are.
As for the buildings, our game has everything for modeling a mission - from a castle (stone or wooden) till a bridge or a fence. All buildings, including ones which are not crucial from the tactical point of view, are nor just decorations, but can be used for war purposes.
Klecha (Gry.o2.pl): Approximately how many hours of play will the single player take? What about replayability?
Nikolay Matijchuk (1C & UGS): There will be approximately 30-40 hours of gameplay in our game. One will be able to complete each mission several times, because they are non-linear. During a successful mission completion a player will hardly use all the tactical tricks and possibilities granted by the game. This means that after a player completes a mission or the game he or she might as well return back and replay some missions or campaigns. One will probably try to outflank an enemy not through that forest as he or she did last time, but round that hill over there. This might be a better solution. And for example start an attack with mounted sergeants instead of unmounted swordsmen. Moreover the opportunity itself to play the battle of Bouvines or the battle of Falkirk as you wish will generate a lot of questions like "What if…?". And players will be able to find answers to these questions while playing the missions again.
Klecha (Gry.o2.pl): What can you tell us about multiplayer options? Do you give some editor tools for players?
Nikolay Matijchuk (1C & UGS): We still haven't carried out the final decision regarding multiplayer. As for the tools players will get rich opportunities in creating a map of almost any historical battle or make an absolutely new battle invented by himself.
Klecha (Gry.o2.pl): What elements of gameplay you are planning to put into game that you think are unique and important?
Nikolay Matijchuk (1C & UGS): First of all let me start with a special feature that we really like to boast of. This is the landscape. In most of historical war games landscape is just a part of the scenery. Either heavy knights or light infantry cross it equally successful. This impoverishes gameplay and makes it less interesting for players. Our battlefield is far from being flat and easy for movement. If you take some other games - a hill in them will also be a regular passable surface. We have three-dimensional (in the gameplay meaning) hills. By all means such a realistic territory seriously influences the course of a battle and we use it.
This completely "playable" environment generates another interesting feature of our game - path finding. Having acquired a new task to get to a certain point on the map a squad is able to independently choose the best way to do it - going round heavy-going or impassable spots.
Another thing we are really proud of is the realistic battle system. Each unit is being influenced by about 80 different parameters and characteristics. This allows the game to reconstruct a medieval battle on the level of separate units and big squads, which makes in more interesting from the gameplay point of view. This is also being done with the help of realistic animation which depicts the battle system. Unit-to-unit animations might show you how this fight will end - from the level of single units up to the army level.
One will have an opportunity to test our gameplay as soon as the game is launched :)
Klecha (Gry.o2.pl): What are some of the more important features of the XIII Century: Death or Glory engine?
Nikolay Matijchuk (1C & UGS): The engine of our game is a powerful creature which we managed to tame. And now it is able to do everything for you to enjoy the game. For example the graphics part of the engine is capable of rendering realistic sunsets and dawns, rains and snowstorms, dull and sunny days. But our main pride is not this.
The engine has all the necessary functions to create complicated and dynamic game process. The detail level and game mechanics gave us a clue how flexible and multifunctional should game designer tools be. As a result we have a real monster which will, I'm sure, do a good job for several years and will let us create historical battles of any period and any complexity.
Klecha (Gry.o2.pl): What are the system requirements likely to be?
Nikolay Matijchuk (1C & UGS): There will not be anything very special about the system requirements of the game. It is still a little early to talk about exact requirements, but I'm sure that there will be all necessary settings in the game for it to run on both high- and middle-end PCs.
Klecha (Gry.o2.pl): At the moment, what is the current status on the game's progress and when will it be released to stores?
Nikolay Matijchuk (1C & UGS): We are currently working getting close to alpha stage. We plan to release the game by the end of 2006.
Klecha (Gry.o2.pl): Can you tell us about some game projects that you plan to do in the future?
Nikolay Matijchuk (1C & UGS): We can definitely say that the next project will be with a big portion of strategy in it. Will it be a sequel to XIII Century or not is still a secret.
Klecha (Gry.o2.pl): Thanks for your time :) Is there anything else you would like to tell our readers?
Nikolay Matijchuk (1C & UGS): Thanks for the questions and interest in our game! See you in autumn!"
Any new opinions about overall MTW 2 gameplay? It seems that archers can be useful in team matches sometimes, musketeers are still very effective, lag and unstable games are something you ''have to get used too'' and best is to play ''all era'' to have best balance.
CeltiberoMordred
05-18-2007, 13:14
Any new opinions about overall MTW 2 gameplay? It seems that archers can be useful in team matches sometimes, musketeers are still very effective, lag and unstable games are something you ''have to get used too'' and best is to play ''all era'' to have best balance.
Yes. Upgrades should be forbidden.
well, what i can see is, many old people who are dissapointed. Not just since a short time, no...since months or years now.
I still dont understand why u cant accept the facts, wellknown facts.
U know hoe CA works, nothing changed since 2000. So i dont get this.... u complain over an over again about the same problems.
Stop playing the game if u dont like, stop trolling here and stop repeating the negativ input u give over and over again. Accept it and play the game like it is or move on and find a better game u like more.
I myself would love a better TW game, no doubt, but we wont get it. So i decided long time ago to stop playing this game.
anyway, apart the balancing issues, they didnt fix lag and thats surely the most annoying problem ;)
The argument about CA making cash and/or not making cash with MPlayer is an old shoo, it gets pulled out again and again... Im sure they did market researches how big the potential is for these kind of games with the TW game style.
I presonal cant imagin, these 100.000 online player, sorry, the TW online gaming doesnt bring enought fun for a big market to get played online. There are too many other online games out which offer tons of more fun than some static battles.
Times changed, today are things possible, which warent 7 years ago. With the current stage of MMOOgs (not all like these kind of games), with the arcade games (which turned more and more in tactical games) and shooter .....
There is just a marginal room for games like TW. U could notice the dumping down of the game with each single version. It had an serious effect, more SPlayer. The game goes a good way, if u look at it from the finanziell side.
So like it is right now, any other game has potential, they can with better computer increase the performence, while TW cant. The battles are battles and the only thing i can think about is better grafix. I hope u get the hint....
TW kind of games fade away, they cant improve the gameplay, since its the same always....
mars
TW kind of games fade away, they cant improve the gameplay, since its the same always....
It's not the same. They degraded the battlefield gameplay. I don't see Creative Assembly advertising that they degraded the gameplay. They say they improved it, but relative to what? Certainly not relative to the high standard they set in 2000. What they had back in 2000 for tactical gameplay was interesting enough to be played indefinitely in MP, and it worked better over a modem connection than the latest game does over a high speed connection. Good battlefield playbalance enhances the SP gameplay as well. Where else are you going to get this information if not at the org?
It's not the same. They degraded the battlefield gameplay. I don't see Creative Assembly advertising that they degraded the gameplay. They say they improved it, but relative to what? Certainly not relative to the high standard they set in 2000. What they had back in 2000 for tactical gameplay was interesting enough to be played indefinitely in MP, and it worked better over a modem connection than the latest game does over a high speed connection. Good battlefield playbalance enhances the SP gameplay as well. Where else are you going to get this information if not at the org?
Without a doubt, ur right.
But do u really think anyone of the SPlayer (thats what this game aim for) care a second for lag in MP?
The big splits and imbalances, which are problems in MP, are needed the same time for SP, since they reflect the new stage of ur building.
...aka, new units has to be better...thatss logical.
The 95% of the buyer are not caring for the lag in MP, they dont care for the imbalances, most of them play the game for the campaign and wanna build something up. I bet 80% or more do autoresolve the battles anyway. So please, realize that writing on the org doesnt have the smallest effect.
Infact, many modder have a "job" coz the game is considered as "bad", so they can actual go and balance it more. IF the game would be top balanced, the modder had less to do. So the problems give people something to do.
About 2000, oldtimer will always agree that the game was a lot better, u hardly can compare that with the current game. But thats life, times move on and people leave. Community changed a lot and the game get the community it deserve...
Its okay, there are people who enjoy the game like it is now. Great. U and me dont enjoy it, we dont even play ;) So all i can say is, Good Luck with the other TW versions, maybe someday CA brings a crazy game like STW out again. Im sure many would love this, but till this day, we both check the forums from time to time. Puzz, old friend, ur full of anger, it hurts me to see a nice inteleligent guy, who did imense work for this game beeing in such a bad mood ;)
Get over it, u wont change anything by repeating the same over and over again. It is like it is and it isnt in our might to change important things.
Play other games, find something what fits ur liking....i did it and for me its just the old memories which bring me back to these places. I wont touch a TW game again, but still i like the community, at least some people and whats left of the old glory days....
Mars
Apologies for this post, its entirely OT as i don't own M2, and thus don't play M2 MP.
I played STW and MTW SP almost from release - i had no internet connection in those days though and so had no idea about the "inner workings" of the game or any other piece of information - probably like many others. Sometime after VI was released i started lurking the forums until finally much later on (more than two years) i joined actively.
When RTW came out i bought it and played it for a long while in SP (totally for almost 2 years) although the game "wasn't exactly the same" to me, particularly the battles.
All i can say is that it was the MP "oldtimers" ' posts that revealed to me why the new game "didn't feel right", and slowly i also begun to understand what parameters x, y and z meant for the gameplay, for what kind of taste this or that type of gameplay is aimed, why it is preferred over the other etc etc.
In that respect the "newer" largely SP community provided endless amounts of misleading and erroneous information - much like it did when M2 came out ("I miss RTW cavalry charges, the blobbing penalty is silly/unrealistic etc etc"). Posters other than mostly veteran MP players were either unable or unwilling to analyse the game through the viewpoint of some sort of objective benchmark IMO.
In short - and judging from my personal experience, i doubt that the community would be better off if there is no more criticism from the point of view of its most experienced members, that are no others than MP players for the most part. It is through this criticism that "newer" players - particularly SP players - can hear and potentially learn more in depth about TW games as the discussions revolves around analysis of the games and the parameters that influence it.
Most people posting in the SP forums, give only impressions on the games as they can't/didn't spent large amounts of time playing them at a competitive level, which means that their criteria tend to be other than gameplay usually or not very well expressed usually when concerning gameplay.
I was for many years an SP player only, and after trying MP (in MTW), all i can say is no matter how convenient and good for imaginative boons SP is - it misses the rare almost wild joy of an MP confrontation. TW MP battles are unique in that seeing good players do it the whole feels more like ballet rather than war. Its a balancing act in space and time - and its a beautiful one.
MP Veterans can tell at a glance what is good and what is not for the gameplay way more objectively most of the time and also explain why to the rest of us and in fact to CA too. Moreover they can do so in a concrete, simple manner including feasible suggestions for improving it. A large part SP player suggetions can be taken care of through simple home modding.
It would be bad news to my ears at least, if the community turned uni-opinion because "we can't change anything - and so let it go and play some other game" as this will make the community litterally unable to realise what is going on, and sail with whatever wind is blowing.
Its helpful, i believe to the TW community and (also) to CA alike - that veteran MP players stay on as active members one way or another. It is no accident that CA keeps promising things for them too (remember the blogs for M2? "just like Shogun and Medieval") and that it tries to "include them" in the new games. As to CA's intentions and success upon the last two - that's entirely another matter.
Many Thanks
Noir
Gawain of Orkeny
05-21-2007, 16:40
And here I am using turks with 8 to 12 archers and still winning. I guess they dont work LOL. Same with Tims. The dual units are quite good. In fact Im really starting to enjoy this game and cant wait for the expansion. If its as good as VI the original MTW expansion I will be overjoyed.
And here I am using turks with 8 to 12 archers and still winning. I guess they dont work LOL.
And maybe you're the better player. You have to do objective testing to determine if a unit is balanced properly.
The dual units are quite good.
Dual units are problematic because they reduce the complexity of the tactical gameplay. To see this carry it further and visualize a unit that embodies three capabilities. Such a unit would be the only unit type needed.
In fact Im really starting to enjoy this game and cant wait for the expansion. If its as good as VI the original MTW expansion I will be overjoyed.
MTW/VI is not well balanced since it only has a two component tactical gameplay. Spears and shooters are both inadequate leaving cav and swords as the two important components.
Look what has been posted at .com:
http://shoguntotalwar.yuku.com/topic/16495/t/Multiplayer-Feedback.html
A multiplayer feedback thread, so i'd suggest al you mpers go over there and post your hearts out as they're actively asking for your feedback.
To Mars, Noir and Lusted. Despite we went off topic few times, this topic was not made to criticize MTW 2 or CA in first place but to get different opinions on MTW 2 v1.2 gameplay - to share different experiences regarding game engine.
Look what has been posted at .com:
http://shoguntotalwar.yuku.com/topic...-Feedback.html
A multiplayer feedback thread, so i'd suggest al you mpers go over there and post your hearts out as they're actively asking for your feedback.
Thanks for the link Lusted.
And one more which is also posted on this forums.
http://www.medievalmpmayhem.com/
|Heerbann|_Di3Hard
05-26-2007, 08:43
Stop playing the game if u dont like, stop trolling here and stop repeating the negativ input u give over and over again. Accept it and play the game like it is or move on and find a better game u like more.
Before CA released the game, they said, that it will be a very good multiplayer experience. Well balanced like mtw vi. They did so many for the mp mode bla bla bla .... Many "old" players have bought the game because of these lies. I had to sell the game with losses. And I think the others should now know the truth. If they had said, we are not interested in the ****ing mp guys and It is rome 2 with many new bugs, I had never bought the game and I wouldn't have any problem. But these ****ing marketing lies are ............!
But that was really really the LAST mistake regarding CA and SEGA!
Wolf_Kyolic
05-26-2007, 11:32
Before CA released the game, they said, that it will be a very good multiplayer experience. Well balanced like mtw vi. They did so many for the mp mode bla bla bla .... Many "old" players have bought the game because of these lies. I had to sell the game with losses. And I think the others should now know the truth. If they had said, we are not interested in the ****ing mp guys and It is rome 2 with many new bugs, I had never bought the game and I wouldn't have any problem. But these ****ing marketing lies are ............!
But that was really really the LAST mistake regarding CA and SEGA!
I stated above. We FOOLS have got emotional ties to the game and therefore we are ready to believe in such promises and ESPECIALLY when we see that one of the community members is included in the team and it is particularly him who is making the promises (even creating blogs and announcing stuff there and etc), we have no other chance left but trusting them. But...
Well nevermind...It is just a video game in the end. In the past it was more than that. It really was. But now I don't think there is much people left feeling like that. Unfortunatly I do not interpret the game as something special anymore.
Gawain of Orkeny
05-26-2007, 13:48
Many "old" players have bought the game because of these lies.
When I first got MTW2 and logged on I was so pleasantly surprised. I saw old players I hadnt seen in years. Not a few of them but lots of them Fears Uglys FFs and many more. I think there maybe 20 or 30 old vets I know now still playing. Its a sad thing. Not including all those Celtis they seem to have taken a relish to the game.
Without a doubt, ur right.
But do u really think anyone of the SPlayer (thats what this game aim for) care a second for lag in MP?
The big splits and imbalances, which are problems in MP, are needed the same time for SP, since they reflect the new stage of ur building.
...aka, new units has to be better...thatss logical.
The 95% of the buyer are not caring for the lag in MP, they dont care for the imbalances, most of them play the game for the campaign and wanna build something up. I bet 80% or more do autoresolve the battles anyway. So please, realize that writing on the org doesnt have the smallest effect.
Infact, many modder have a "job" coz the game is considered as "bad", so they can actual go and balance it more. IF the game would be top balanced, the modder had less to do. So the problems give people something to do.
About 2000, oldtimer will always agree that the game was a lot better, u hardly can compare that with the current game. But thats life, times move on and people leave. Community changed a lot and the game get the community it deserve...
Its okay, there are people who enjoy the game like it is now. Great. U and me dont enjoy it, we dont even play ;) So all i can say is, Good Luck with the other TW versions, maybe someday CA brings a crazy game like STW out again. Im sure many would love this, but till this day, we both check the forums from time to time. Puzz, old friend, ur full of anger, it hurts me to see a nice inteleligent guy, who did imense work for this game beeing in such a bad mood ;)
Get over it, u wont change anything by repeating the same over and over again. It is like it is and it isnt in our might to change important things.
Play other games, find something what fits ur liking....i did it and for me its just the old memories which bring me back to these places. I wont touch a TW game again, but still i like the community, at least some people and whats left of the old glory days....
Mars
Oh demn vet alert!!
I hate being blunt:daisy: *Then don't be* (Hosa)
Kyolic you right man I will play these games come hell or high water, they are awesome, theres just something about em that keeps me coming back... and the guys who have been playing since the "golden age" (lmao!!!) and don't play anymore I dont get why :daisy: :daisy: :daisy: :daisy: because the here and now MP community is whats up, we are trying to do something about it, check out the MMM forums and the CCS, nobody gives :daisy: how long :daisy: :daisy: :daisy: :daisy:
I like RTW/BI and I also like M2TW after the patch, couldn't stand it before but now it's more than playable, all they gotta do IMO is fix the lag online, let us change the weather and you have a good MP.
Gawain of Orkeny
05-26-2007, 17:48
Oh demn vet alert!!
I hate being blunt *Then don't be* (Hosa)
Kyolic you right man I will play these games come hell or high water, they are awesome, theres just something about em that keeps me coming back... and the guys who have been playing since the "golden age" (lmao!!!) and don't play anymore I dont get why because the here and now MP community is whats up, we are trying to do something about it, check out the MMM forums and the CCS, nobody gives how long
I like RTW/BI and I also like M2TW after the patch, couldn't stand it before but now it's more than playable, all they gotta do IMO is fix the lag online, let us change the weather and you have a good MP.
Today 12:48
I think your being way to rough on us old guys. Also it seems you dont know what you missed if you started with RTW if thats the case. The games have gone down in realistic play but improved in graphics for the most part since I started playing these games. I hated RTW so much I returned it. The fact that my pc wouldnt run it right sure was a big factor I have to admit.
I remember waitn years for RTW. We were promised it would be MTW only better. Well it was not. It was in fact play wise a step backwrds. Better they improved VI by giving it 20 units and better graphics was what most of us thought at the time.
I like you however love these mp games so I went and bought MTW2. I dont think its as good play wise as STW (ive only played the mod) or VI but it sure looks better and playes well enough to make it enjoyable at least for me,
After 6 years of broken promises you cant blame some here for being cynical.
Wolf_Kyolic
05-27-2007, 10:42
let us change the weather and you have a good MP.
woaw! cool.
As far as im concerned, I just keep hoping for a great mp-part in the next TW-game. At least CA now listen to the community (some say they only pretend :2thumbsup: ). We shall see....
Wolf_Kyolic
05-29-2007, 09:54
shhh
something disturbs you?
ELITEofWARMANGINGERYBREADMEN88
06-01-2007, 15:10
When I first got MTW2 and logged on I was so pleasantly surprised. I saw old players I hadnt seen in years. Not a few of them but lots of them Fears Uglys FFs and many more. I think there maybe 20 or 30 old vets I know now still playing. Its a sad thing. Not including all those Celtis they seem to have taken a relish to the game.
Me to. I had firewall ploblems at start, but I came on few days after, and saw old vets, like MagyarKhan,Kuorgange (dunno why I can't spell his name lol), Kanuni, Another Grey Wolf member, my old friend Relok.... You get my point. I just think, I also fell for the lies CA told us about MTW2, and that not a suprise since I only been doing MP since Early 2004 on VI. but to see older vets trying out the game, and leaving, makes me sick. I know some vets play the MP still, and that's fine, keep the MP going, but you know, why you think I can't stand playing MP anymore? just doesn't have that "feel" to it like STW:MI or MTW:VI had or even Samurai Warlords Beta8
Wolf_Kyolic
06-03-2007, 11:22
just doesn't have that "feel" to it like STW:MI
Ye...Warman remembers those days very well...Although...He was 5 years old by then. :laugh4:
ELITEofWARMANGINGERYBREADMEN88
06-03-2007, 15:11
Ye...Warman remembers those days very well...Although...He was 5 years old by then. :laugh4:
I was actually 8, playing SP every day :laugh4: ,I should have just stuck with VI:laugh4:
Though I was tempted to join the MP ranks of STW< but never got around to it back then. big mistake me thinks for me :yes:
Before CA released the game, they said, that it will be a very good multiplayer experience. Well balanced like mtw vi. They did so many for the mp mode bla bla bla .... Many "old" players have bought the game because of these lies. I had to sell the game with losses. And I think the others should now know the truth. If they had said, we are not interested in the ****ing mp guys and It is rome 2 with many new bugs, I had never bought the game and I wouldn't have any problem. But these ****ing marketing lies are ............!
But that was really really the LAST mistake regarding CA and SEGA!
People really dont get it. In deep respect of all the Mplayer, but with like 3% of the whole sales, this is just.....gah!
If u really bought the last games, ur fault!
I playtested it and after that i decided since RTW, to not buy it.
CA did lie in the one or the other way since STW, STW came out with a announced Online Campaign... If u didnt learn it by now, i dont know.
But this all isnt the point! Its only about, do u like the current TW game or not. If not, u come alond here and make some emotional posts abotu the good old time... i dont see the use of complain over and over again.
The major SP market, thats where CA earns the money, doesnt care for this MPlayer stuff at all. U can cry u can describe how crap it is, but u wont change anything. Noone who plan to buy a CA game goes to the ORG and check MP forum to decide, if hes buying the game or not.
Mars
U can cry u can describe how crap it is, but u wont change anything. Noone who plan to buy a CA game goes to the ORG and check MP forum to decide, if hes buying the game or not.
Some of the old players come back here to check the status.
Here's the status:
The multiplayer game is a tactical extravaganza with finishing moves that will make your eyes pop. Don't worry about the lag because there are plans to attempt to fix that in the next game, but you have to realize that the code base is huge which makes finding the cause of a problem like looking for a needle in a haystack.
Puzz3D,
Mate you know I respect your knowledge of this game and your contribution to this community. But in a few threads on here you've been a fairly vocal detractor against M2TW (as have I). Having admited you dont own a copy of the game!. Im just going to say this, and please dont take offence. I dont think you should be commenting in M2TW threads unless you at least own a copy of M2TW... because at the moment your behaviour in similar to the definition of a troll.
I at least bought a copy and played a few games online so I could feel justified in having an opinion on the MP forum. The game is what it is, its not going to be drastically altered or improved, and I doubt you are suddenly going to buy a copy. So why flog the dead horse? I would not see a problem with posting how much better MTW is compared to M2 in the MTW forum, or posting in threads about the next title. But its getting a little like a broken record dude, Im sorry but I dont think you should be bagging a game based on the hearsay of others. Its the whole customers right to complain thing.. but your not a customer. Given the game is as it is I dont think theres anything positive to be gained by giving it a flogging at every opportunity. Or if you are wanting to give it a flogging - then buy a copy at the least or keep the critiques out of the M2TW forums. Please make as many constructive comments as you wish from your knowledge of past games.
Kocmoc,
strength and honour
with respect :bow:
Yun
Gawain of Orkeny
06-12-2007, 02:57
The game is better than VI is some ways but worse in most. The graphics go along way in making it enjoyable. Like any general If your units dont perform as designed or ordered either find others to fill the role or find out what the unit is good for. The patch in general has improved things but now it seems archers are almost useless unless mandated by rules. It also seems that cav limit rules are needed as well. With the right rules the game can play much like VI. But we should not have to resort to that. Hopefully things will continue to improve with the expansion.
If I knew of a better game like this I would play it. And remember my new PC wont play VI. Plus theres still enough of us old guys there to make it fun.
Wolf_Kyolic
06-15-2007, 19:26
Hopefully things will continue to improve with the expansion.
Nope.
There will be a huge f..k up in terms of balance and stuff and people will start begging for a patch. The "patch" will come after 6 months and it will solve half of the problems. Then people will start begging for an other patch and CA will be good enough to give them an other patch after an other 6 months (1 year in total) and by then, the new TW would be announced as well and people will start dreaming that it will be the "ultimate" tw ever. When it is released...
Return back to start of the above paragraph if you want to know what will happen when that next tw will be released.
Gawain of Orkeny
06-15-2007, 21:29
Return back to start of the above paragraph if you want to know what will happen when that next tw will be released.
Tell me about it. I came here when MTW 1st started. Then along came VI and i said to myslef this is great. Then they started announcing what RTW was going to be like. I remember how psyched up everyone here got and it went on for over a year. Then the game comes out and its a step backwards. Its seems this is the way they do things. I still think they would be better off perfecting one game before moving on to the next. Instead none ever gets perfected or even close.
ELITEofWARMANGINGERYBREADMEN88
06-18-2007, 23:29
Puzz3D,
Mate you know I respect your knowledge of this game and your contribution to this community. But in a few threads on here you've been a fairly vocal detractor against M2TW (as have I). Having admited you dont own a copy of the game!. Im just going to say this, and please dont take offence. I dont think you should be commenting in M2TW threads unless you at least own a copy of M2TW... because at the moment your behaviour in similar to the definition of a troll.
I at least bought a copy and played a few games online so I could feel justified in having an opinion on the MP forum. The game is what it is, its not going to be drastically altered or improved, and I doubt you are suddenly going to buy a copy. So why flog the dead horse? I would not see a problem with posting how much better MTW is compared to M2 in the MTW forum, or posting in threads about the next title. But its getting a little like a broken record dude, Im sorry but I dont think you should be bagging a game based on the hearsay of others. Its the whole customers right to complain thing.. but your not a customer. Given the game is as it is I dont think theres anything positive to be gained by giving it a flogging at every opportunity. Or if you are wanting to give it a flogging - then buy a copy at the least or keep the critiques out of the M2TW forums. Please make as many constructive comments as you wish from your knowledge of past games.
Kocmoc,
strength and honour
with respect :bow:
Yun
Because Imo, if you read my post on the MTW:VI/MT2W Thread, I don't believe he needs a MTW2 copy to tell us whenter or not it's trash.He been here long enough to dedice rather or not a TW game is good or not, rather he plays it or not.
you could always argue about me. I orginally thought RTW was going to be great, only to play it for a year, and hated it, only staying to try to expand BHC.
Grey_Fox
06-18-2007, 23:50
Puzz is a psychic? :idea2:
So that explains how he's able to judge games without playing them!
Thanks for clearing that up Warman! ~:thumb:
Gawain of Orkeny
06-19-2007, 01:19
Puzz is a psychic?
No he is experienced and smart enough to know what he is talking about. I dont see many "vets" here arguing the points he makes? If you could combine the graphics of MTW2 with VI and then balance the units a little better you would have a great game. I never played STW but I have played all the others though only RTW for a few days. I thought that was the end of new TW games for me.
In the case of MTW2 the 20 units per player and addition of new units and graphics were enough to make me give it a try. Heck I only had to spend $1500 on a new pc :laugh4: Just about the only thing I used my old pc for was MTW/VI. Now I have to admit that VI is IMO still a better game as far as being realistic and having control. But lets remember in real battle troops didnt always jump when ordered for a number of reasons. Also it wasnt so easy to send them. These guys have no cell phones or walkie talkies or radios.
My point is for me at least there is enough good things in MTW2 to make it enjoyable. Again with the right rules and players its very reminicent of VI. Im having fun and thats all I care about. Other than making it more fun by trying to make it better. If it has limitations so be it. But we can still strive for improvement.
ELITEofWARMANGINGERYBREADMEN88
06-19-2007, 03:15
Puzz is a psychic? :idea2:
So that explains how he's able to judge games without playing them!
Thanks for clearing that up Warman! ~:thumb:
Um No. He is Expericed enough to make a decsion about this. He been here longer then alot of people (including us 2), so oblious,, like I said, he knows what MTW2 without needing to play it. I don't actually see anyone here arguing the point he can make, argeeing with Garwain. He is just posting his opinion, no need for people to jump on him.
Some call us CA fanboys, but I know what you are
:daisy:
Puzz will have been around for say 7 years, as that's how old these games are. And he's allowed to judge MTW2 on that.
Well I've been on this earth for 19 years so I can say that the high council of the Inuit :daisy: and should be replaced
CeltiberoMordred
06-19-2007, 09:55
I'm playing STW since 2000, and STW MP since 2001. I've been playing every TW title, every TW patch, and the impoverishment of the product has gone clearly down in multiplayer mode. Even the AI in single player is worse with each TW release.
I purchased my M2TW and I am agree with Puzz 90%, as well as many other vets. He is not alone in his statements: at least when he posts, he is posting for me too.
Regards.
Well spoken Mordred but you better watch out, before you know it you will be;
considered trolling by someone who cant stand a game he had no part in making being critizised,
ancient relik of no use by an angry youngster,
strawmanarguementer by a superficial academic
and above all you will be noticed and the mods will prolly be called in to act upon you by the trollhater... :juggle2: :laugh4:
Best regards to Celtiberos
/Kalle
The people who are trolling are the people who say something about something without knowing what they are talking about
And I give nothing about what "vets" think, they're nothing better than me
I never called M2TW trash, and liking or not liking the game isn't the issue. I'm interested in hearing how it plays since the v1.02 patch, and how many players are in the lobby on weekends.
And I give nothing about what "vets" think, they're nothing better than me
Nobody is better than you:yes:
:laugh4:
ELITEofWARMANGINGERYBREADMEN88
06-19-2007, 14:47
Some call us CA fanboys, but I know what you are
:daisy:
Puzz will have been around for say 7 years, as that's how old these games are. And he's allowed to judge MTW2 on that.
Well I've been on this earth for 19 years so I can say that the high council of the Inuit :daisy: and should be replaced
No Stig Sorry, I think you the :daisy: one speaking here.Really sad.
Because when you got players who played from Every TW game, every TW patch,etc..
It's not hard for them to realize MP is going down.
I'm done with this Argument. This is so idoitc that people:daisy: can't sit down and :daisy: and let people post their opinions.
I never said that Puzz can't post his opinion. All I say is that he would do better buying the game as he has no idea what he is talking about.
And even tho you're done with it I bet you will reply
Grey_Fox
06-19-2007, 15:27
I'm not going to sit here and be silent while a person who hasn't even touched MTW2 complains about it. I don't mind if people complain so long as they own it or have played it - they've seen it first hand.
Puzz has done neither, he's only going on others' opinions, so I have no idea why he's posting in the MTW2 forums. His past experiences and opinions regarding this game mean absolutely nothing to me.
Gawain of Orkeny
06-19-2007, 16:57
I'm not going to sit here and be silent while a person who hasn't even touched MTW2 complains about it. I don't mind if people complain so long as they own it or have played it - they've seen it first hand.
Did you play STW and MTW online? If not how do you know his points are not valid?
Puzz has done neither, he's only going on others' opinions, so I have no idea why he's posting in the MTW2 forums. His past experiences and opinions regarding this game mean absolutely nothing to me.
Then why are you upset? :dizzy2:
Look he is correct in everything he says. Thats the really sad part. Again you dont hear any of us old farts disagreeing . Its not because were some cabal of ancient warriors. The name of this thread is Your opinions on MTW 2, version 1.02. You dont have to play it to have an opinion on it. Though I do agree it certainly helps:laugh4: But in this case I bow to Puzz's wisdom. I just wish he would be more constructive. But I cant blame him after all the promises CA gave us over the years. Im just glad I enjoy the game. Lets stop the petty bickering. Its not good for anyone.
Grey_Fox
06-19-2007, 17:09
Did you play STW and MTW online? If not how do you know his points are not valid?
Don't be daft Gawain, of course I have. I've played you often enough in VI, and a couple of times in NTW.
Puzz's 'wisdom'? He's hung up over a silly little game and can't get over it. I've bought games before I didn't like. You know what I did? I either sold them or boxed them up in the attic. I did not hang around complaining about how bad it is and how the makers are so mean and nasty and bad at their jobs.
But that's what Puzz is doing. I'm not upset over it, I just think he's being pathetic.
You dont have to play it to have an opinion on it.
But you do in order to have an informed opinion on it. I had a pretty open mind on NTW before I played it, but then found it just wasn't my cup of tea.
Gawain of Orkeny
06-19-2007, 17:26
on't be daft Gawain, of course I have. I've played you often enough in VI, and a couple of times in NTW.
Then you know he is right. Personally NTW is still my favorite.
Puzz's 'wisdom'? He's hung up over a silly little game and can't get over it
No hes not. Just like the rest of us he believed that TW games would get better. Who would have imagined they would get worse? I mean certainly some things have improved but game play certainly isnt one of them. At least not in mp. I dont play sp so I have no opinion :laugh4:
I've bought games before I didn't like. You know what I did? I either sold them or boxed them up in the attic. I did not hang around complaining about how bad it is and how the makers are so mean and nasty and bad at their jobs.
Thats what I did with RTW. I agree he may over do it.:laugh4: We get the point. No use beating a dead horse. Thats why I started the other thread.
But you do in order to have an informed opinion on it. I had a pretty open mind on NTW before I played it, but then found it just wasn't my cup of tea.
If he were wrong you would have a point.
Well spoken Mordred but you better watch out, before you know it you will be;
considered trolling by someone who cant stand a game he had no part in making being critizised,
ancient relik of no use by an angry youngster,
strawmanarguementer by a superficial academic
and above all you will be noticed and the mods will prolly be called in to act upon you by the trollhater... :juggle2: :laugh4:
Best regards to Celtiberos
/Kalle
boo hoo cry me a river
well being a trollhater is better than being a troll i guess
Thanks for making Elmos point by the way about how people who say they like M2TW are called retarded, and are shouted down by all the negative nellies - and this is tolerated in this forum.
You dont like the game - throw it in the bin and goodbye then
have you left yet????
Gawain of Orkeny
06-20-2007, 03:12
Thanks for making Elmos point by the way about how people who say they like M2TW are called retarded, and are shouted down by all the negative nellies - and this is tolerated in this forum.
I dont think I or we have been shouted down. Why do you continue in this hostile vein? Its over lets stay on topic. Do you want to continue with a pissing contest? Are you interested in making the game better or just making your point?
I dont think I or we have been shouted down. Why do you continue in this hostile vein? Its over lets stay on topic. Do you want to continue with a pissing contest? Are you interested in making the game better or just making your point?
fair enough
Orda Khan
06-20-2007, 09:44
At last!!!!
....Orda
How many players are in the M2TW foyer on weekends, and is the number stable, increasing or decreasing?
I doubt anyone wants to count that.
I think 100 max is a good guess tho, never counted it.
Gawain of Orkeny
06-20-2007, 17:47
Its pretty stable . Lets not forget either that summer is the slow time of the year here usually. The game seems more popular in Europe than here. Tons of Italians, French and Poles :laugh4: Its the only way they ever get to win a war:hide:
I doubt anyone wants to count that.
I think 100 max is a good guess tho, never counted it.
I suppose it's the network performance that's holding it back. Both STW and MTW exceeded 100 on weekends on much lower sales.
Now just the network performances, it's the quality the GameSpy Beta servers demand, and the "slowness of our internet connections and computers". This game seriously needs good internet and computers to play, and most don't have that (hell I heard people trying to use dial-up). GameSpy as an instrument is good, it works for many games, but MTW2 and RTW use Beta versions, which demand more and are more instable.
RTW used to have 160 players in the weekends, this has only got 100 players on MP. Even tho the game sold well, I guess the hardcore players (like yourself) are walking away, but than if I were CA I wouldn't mind losing 60 more players, it ain't that much if you're talking about millions of dollars.
Wolf_Kyolic
06-20-2007, 20:38
I suppose it's the network performance that's holding it back. Both STW and MTW exceeded 100 on weekends on much lower sales.
I was told that MTW II had sold about 1 500 000 copies. 1 500 000 buyers and only 100 of them are online. lol?
I was told that MTW II had sold about 1 500 000 copies. 1 500 000 buyers and only 100 of them are online. lol?
At the same time.
But still let's take the best possible scenario:
It takes about 1 hour to complete a game (from entering the lobby, setting up to exiting the lobby again).
And lets say everyone only plays 1 game per week (some play loads, some only come online once).
That's 1x24x7x100=16800
And I think that's a good estimate for the amount of MP players.
that's 1% of all the players!!!
The thing that holds people back from playing is the required GameSpy account, you can't make it ingame (as with every other game), you need to quit the game, start some dodgy site and hope it works.
Next to that many enter their CD-key wrong, and that puts them off it.
Gawain of Orkeny
06-20-2007, 22:10
Id say there are in general more people on than used to be on in VI. When I first got the game I identified over 4000 players in 3 weeks. Since I reinstalled MTW2 2 months ago Ive only recognized 2500. This is not a good sign.
t1master
06-20-2007, 22:39
about a week ago i spent well near two hours online in the lobby, and managed to get one game in. drops, desyncs, ghost games etc. i dont' have that sorta time to spend online anymore, and two hours for one game is not worth the effort.
the connection problems need to be ironed out before one can really even delve into the gameplay and balance issues.
that
Gawain of Orkeny
06-20-2007, 23:23
about a week ago i spent well near two hours online in the lobby, and managed to get one game in. drops, desyncs, ghost games etc. i dont' have that sorta time to spend online anymore, and two hours for one game is not worth the effort.
the connection problems need to be ironed out before one can really even delve into the gameplay and balance issues.
This is the main issue IMHO. I cant tell you how many times I had like an hour or so to spare and said to mylself let me play MTW2. First I have to find a game worth playing. None of this 20k per player for me thank you very much. Next I have to hope they will let me play. Us Aggonies all having skipped RTW seems to have reduced us to Noob status. This however is improving. :laugh4:
Now you sit in the game 10 or 15 min waiting for everyone to join. It seems the longer you sit there the more chance there is your game will crash. Finally you have a full game and it says game halted.
Now everyone has to leave . Then rehost and rejoin. Someone always has to go because this is like the third game this has happened to them in a row and their out of time. So now were back waiting to fill the game.
If were lucky it starts this time. Well you get to the battlefield anyway but one guy dosent make it. Thats right back to the lobby again. Someone else now has to go. Your right back where you started from. To make a long story short the next thing you know your out of time and have to go and are lucky if you got a game in. There is nothing more frustrating . It always makes me think twice before I log on.
ONe more time tho. I never played sp other than custom battles and I was like oh my this is awful fast. You dont see that speed hardly ever in mp other than in 1 vs 1. But Ive seen it in 3 on 3s in mp. But everyone has to have real good equipment and connections.
How about instead of trying to give everyone a rating we just give a star or something to those of us who can play this thing balls to the wall like me :laugh4:
pike master
06-21-2007, 04:33
im using an intel 3.46 ghz, 2048 gig ram, 8500gt nvidia by bfg and my game plays immaculate on single player and does an excellent job of playing a 3v3 game providing that one of the connection issues doesnt pop up.
i would wish there would be just a little bit of assistance from sega. it would go a long way to solving the issues. i think they have used a network code that requires ports that are not the best for packets to flow through.
Gawain of Orkeny
06-21-2007, 04:42
im using an intel 3.46 ghz, 2048 gig ram, 8500gt nvidia by bfg and my game plays immaculate on single player
If you have cable or good dsl i guess you would rate a star too then :laugh4:
At least all of us with good stuff could find each other. The game runs at the speed of the weakest link.
Yup and that´s the problem, loads of people don´t realise they can´t play this game on High Graphics and try multiplayer.
Next to that for a good experience you need a 5mb line, now here in Holland such costs only 10 euro´s a month, but I heard that in other countries 5mb is like the maximum you can get.
Not to speak of playing with people from other continents. It´s near to impossible to play with someone from a different continent, but how am I supposed to know someone comes from another continent?
Wolf_Kyolic
06-21-2007, 09:49
Now you sit in the game 10 or 15 min waiting for everyone to join. It seems the longer you sit there the more chance there is your game will crash. Finally you have a full game and it says game halted.
Now everyone has to leave . Then rehost and rejoin. Someone always has to go because this is like the third game this has happened to them in a row and their out of time. So now were back waiting to fill the game.
If were lucky it starts this time. Well you get to the battlefield anyway but one guy dosent make it. Thats right back to the lobby again. Someone else now has to go. Your right back where you started from. To make a long story short the next thing you know your out of time and have to go and are lucky if you got a game in. There is nothing more frustrating . It always makes me think twice before I log on.
Now what is the reason for this? ~:confused:
Could it be stupid coding? ~:rolleyes:
Hmm... http://www.darkhardware.com/phpbb/images/smiles/icon_detective.gif
I guess so. :2cents:
Orda Khan
06-21-2007, 12:16
It's an example of deteriorated multiplay, just for once I'd like game developers to come clean and tell it like it is
.....Orda
Chaos Cornelius lucius
06-22-2007, 08:57
Yup and that´s the problem, loads of people don´t realise they can´t play this game on High Graphics and try multiplayer.
Next to that for a good experience you need a 5mb line, now here in Holland such costs only 10 euro´s a month, but I heard that in other countries 5mb is like the maximum you can get.
Not to speak of playing with people from other continents. It´s near to impossible to play with someone from a different continent, but how am I supposed to know someone comes from another continent?
I'm playing with a 2.8 intel dual core, 2mb of ram and a 7300 Geforce, and I have no probs playing SP on high graphics. I turn them down to low for MP, and I have a 1.5mb connection, but I very rarely get a game without lag, mostly serious lag. I have heard that the optics cables from Australia are somewhat crowded tho. Any other aussie players have problems, or is it just my distance from the exchange?.
I love playing MTW2 online but the problems Gawain has so ably illustrated means I very rarely play it now as I have neither the time nor the inclination to sit around for an hour trying to get a game and then having it crash as soon as you get to the field.
I may have to dig out my old copy of VI and join the 'friday nighters', that is if I can remember how to play it that is:laugh4:
Yeah, its funny. The CD key crap is still around, the problems with it kept same... and the GS registration is still tiresome and too complex for new player.
The best we ever had was at the EA times, where it was very easy to get online as new player.
A peak in MI we had was 240-260 in some evening, STW was 100 in the early days, later we was mostly around 50-70 player. 90% of them was always the same.
The game itself is designed to be played as SP, the campaing is the mainreason people buy it. It doest surprise me that only a few hundred are getting online.
Anyway, i want to mention a very important point, in STW/MI there was a ladder, this ladder kinda made many people play 1v1. This did lead to a lot of played games. U always found a poor sheep who joined ur game ;)
Right now its surely 95% of all games are teamgames, coz u can hide behind ur buddy, if something goes wrong.
Ofc, this problems doesnt jsut appear now, they was also around the other TW games. Nothin new, CA never did change it and never will, accept it.
Mars
10 euros a month for a 5 mb line in Holland?
http://www.adsl.nl
15 euros is the cheapest for 5120/1024, but only for a 2 years contract. I question how good that line is. 20-40 euros/month is a more common pricetag. XS4ALL Basic ADSL 6000/768 39,95.
guyfawkes5
06-22-2007, 11:23
Actually I find the opposite to be true, that the majority of games in the lobby are 1v1s. I base this on personal experience and the fact that 1v1s tend to take less time and are less prone to lag, thus attracting people who have trouble with GS.
10 euros a month for a 5 mb line in Holland?
Always get the advertisements which gives you a solid price for a year than have it another year and switch over.
Essent advertised 10mb for 10 euro's last week
Gawain of Orkeny
06-22-2007, 13:41
Actually I find the opposite to be true, that the majority of games in the lobby are 1v1s. I base this on personal experience and the fact that 1v1s tend to take less time and are less prone to lag, thus attracting people who have trouble with GS.
Mp really isnt about 1 on 1s. Who would need a clan then? I never play one on one. You dont even use the same armies. Its rush rush rush. The reason you see so many 1 on 1s now is because its hard to play anything bigger. LOL.
In STW, 1v1 was popular because there was a rating system built into the MP game which gave each player a ranking relative to all the other players based on their last 30 battles. You could go to a website and lookup a player's rating. There was also a top 100 list, and you could get information on who the opponents were in a battle. Clans also achieved a ranking, and team games contributed to the clan ranking. Players could choose to play competitive games which were rated or friendly games which were not rated.
guyfawkes5
06-22-2007, 17:57
Mp really isnt about 1 on 1s. Who would need a clan then? I never play one on one. You dont even use the same armies. Its rush rush rush. The reason you see so many 1 on 1s now is because its hard to play anything bigger. LOL.
I fully agree with you mate... although seeing as I pretty much said exactly what you did in regards as to why we see so many 1v1s, why did you quote me and not the poster beforehand? :laugh4:
ELITEofWARMANGINGERYBREADMEN88
06-23-2007, 02:19
In STW, 1v1 was popular because there was a rating system built into the MP game which gave each player a ranking relative to all the other players based on their last 30 battles. You could go to a website and lookup a player's rating. There was also a top 100 list, and you could get information on who the opponents were in a battle. Clans also achieved a ranking, and team games contributed to the clan ranking. Players could choose to play competitive games which were rated or friendly games which were not rated.
That why I tried to push (mostly privately) for a ranking system for MT2W,so It can bring back some of that feel. Sadly, I guess 1 person can't make much differnece.
ArmaEtLorica_Mongoclint
06-24-2007, 12:18
Well, for my two cents, as everyone has been waiting with baited breath to hear.
I pretty much fall in line with everything Gawain has had to say. (Although I don't know if I can say that now after your slight on the Poles. My clannies may not take that lightly :sweatdrop: )
I think the bottom line is that MTW II with the new patch is fun to play, but there are improvements (that have been mentioned by many) that would certainly improve the game. I love the variety of units (not available in STW) and the ability to combine the armies of different nations into unique killing combinations. (Not really available in MTW VI as only the most skilled players could make a competitive team out of the non-pav crossbow supplied factions.)
I threw out RTW, but I think anyone who likes the TotalWar system is missing out by not giving this game a try. As for people online, it seems better than MTW VI and as people tire of the SP version, I think we will get more.
If you need a good game Gawain, just check for me or clannies online and join us. I think one of the problems now is that clans don't know each other as well and even though there are a lot of clan players online, it's hard to start a game with people you don't know.
Mongo
ArmaEtLorica_Mongoclint
06-24-2007, 12:27
Oh, and my hope for the next title, (again the baited breath, I know) STW II, with the variety of factions and units available now on MTW II, but without the lag issues.
pike master
06-25-2007, 04:08
Fareast Asian And Shogun 2 total war.
F.A.A.S. 2
fast as a shark 2 :laugh4:
Jack Lusted
06-25-2007, 10:07
The code name is Fast As Shark 2: Yeah Baby!
Kobal2fr
06-25-2007, 10:28
Now I'm having flashes of "2 Fast, 2 Furious : Total War". I'm in severe sleep deprivation, that might explain the visions of souped-up race cars (with neons) ploughing tracks in Ashigaru units :laugh3:
The code name is Fast As Shark 2: Yeah Baby!
Someone seriously had nothing to do when he thought of that name
pike master
06-26-2007, 18:12
Future Age Shogun 2: Yoshi's babies:laugh4:
Gawain of Orkeny
06-27-2007, 00:49
Starship Samurai
Swoosh So
06-28-2007, 22:30
Plays too slow online for me and units seem unresponsive, i love the long road campaign single player 1.02 and the battles dont lag offline.
I must admit 1 thing - polish cav charges are devastating.
vBulletin® v3.7.1, Copyright ©2000-2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.