MP Wishlist @ .COM [Archive]

Stig

05-18-2007, 00:31

Aye, the activiness on .coms MP section shows how much people can be bothered with MP.
Now there are 2 kinds of players. The die-hards and the casual players.
Since we now have something as a mod switch you can easely balance units for yourselves and you can easely make maps, while still being able to play against other players. Look at how the Lordz have reskinned the menus of the game for their NTW2, why can't that be done for the lobby? You can easely have a modswitch so you will still be able to play the noobs (as some of you will put it) while you can also play eachother in a balanced game.

CA won't change this game anymore, it's finished, with a bit of luck they will do something in Kingdoms. Best you can do is hope for the new game.

Gawain of Orkeny

05-18-2007, 01:25

To be honest I ask my self why dont the community some how make there own patch.

Exactly. Ive said the same. Look at eh Mizus and the Celtis with their mods. Can a patch be so hard to make? Maybe we should seek the help of the Lordz?

Puzz3D

05-18-2007, 03:52

There is another patch coming for M2TW, so working on a mod for MP is wasted effort right now. Once the final patch is released, a mod could be done, but even if it's good most players won't use a mod in MP. The vanilla MP game has to achieve a high enough quality for a community to form around it.

The separate unit stat for MP idea was partially implemented in MTW/VI, but it wasn't utilized in the vanilla game. Creative Assembly is simply unwilling to put in the required effort to make a balanced game for MP. It takes a lot of man hours to balance this game because it's an iterative process, and it requires a lot of iterations.

TosaInu

05-18-2007, 07:05

Ah but you cant taunt computers or rub it in. Nor brag to them of beating them .:beam: Much more satisfaction in beating a fellow human being. Or is that just me?

Of course you can taunt computers, there's even a physical factor. Overdo it and Skynet will strike back.

But seriously, it's not about what's important for you, me or him, duke it out and then just stick to one way (you are saying the same by asking for 2 exes, that would for once eliminate the need to make SP<->MP concessions/sacrifices). Some people fancy SP, others MP and some like both. I don't think that (many) dedicated SP gamers would actively work on improving MP, but taunting that part of the game is not going to improve MP either (that refers to bold statements like 'MP is the future' and 'SP is a dumbed down game against a chip').

Fenix7

05-18-2007, 09:40

Future is on MP not on SP. It is up to them if they want this to realize or not.

With this sentence as harsh as it might be I did not want to claim that making SP game is a waste of time. What I wanted to stress is that focusing on MP would not be a bad thing to do. After all how much has MP feature progressed since STW? Do we have excellent and profound campaign available to be played on MP? Do we even have a campaign to be played on MP?

Best you can do is hope for the new game.
My point exactly. We can ''hope''. Hoping for 4 more Years that things will change?

Since we now have something as a mod switch you can easely balance units for yourselves and you can easely make maps, while still being able to play against other players. Look at how the Lordz have reskinned the menus of the game for their NTW2, why can't that be done for the lobby? You can easely have a modswitch so you will still be able to play the noobs (as some of you will put it) while you can also play eachother in a balanced game.

There is not many who can do that. There is not many who have time for this. A patch like NTW 2 takes a lot of time to be made. There is not many who will continue doing this --> Lordz moved to different game engine. You can read why they have decided for doing this.

No need to put multiplayer focused individuals into the peril again. Die-hards or the casual players. They both enjoy good MP.

I've always tried to find out good point and not just pointing out what should have been done. MTW 2 with 1.2 patch is not that bad. Actually is quit good but there are those thiny little things which makes something good. There is lag which should be solved, there is instability during the game which should be solved, there are minor balanced issues which should be solved..looking forward that all this will come with Kingdoms and a lot more like MP campaign and as you mentioned an option from the side of CA that moding TW engine would become a lot more easier as it was in the past.

They did good job with MTW 2 and 1.2 patch now we can move forward and Kingdoms will be decisive.

Goalie

05-18-2007, 18:20

:wall: @ the .com

I am now banned from the .com because I implied that because a certain member (no names mentioned here, because I know he is registered here) said that the admins should have absolute and uquestionable power his views could be considered, by definition fascist or authoritarian. In fact, by banning me because I implied this is, simply proves my point even more. Its a real shame that the .com and CA have such fragile psyches.:no:

Stig

05-18-2007, 18:37

No need to repeat here what you said to me on .com

Goalie

05-18-2007, 18:54

Why not? I think I am free to post my opinion here, as the .org does not have your beloved autocratic like system here. I was not insulting anyone, I was simply making a statement.

guyfawkes5

05-18-2007, 21:28

... the .org does not have your beloved autocratic like system here.
Heh.

pike master

05-19-2007, 07:41

i tried to warn goalie. i suppose he found out the hard way.:no:

Hosakawa Tito

05-19-2007, 13:24

Let's get back on topic please. No need to bring a dispute from another forum here.

Wolf_Kyolic

05-19-2007, 14:18

It seems many people think that a MTW2 MP mod is a good idea. Well then go make a MTW mod for RTW. It lags less at least. ;)

Stig

05-19-2007, 14:34

It seems many people think that a MTW2 MP mod is a good idea. Well then go make a MTW mod for RTW. It lags less at least. ;)
Ever heard of the Chivalry TW mod?

Wolf_Kyolic

05-19-2007, 15:43

Ever heard of the Chivalry TW mod?

I was a beta tester. :)

It is much better than MTW2.

Fenix7

05-20-2007, 21:30

Ever heard of the Chivalry TW mod?

Adherbal was making that mod (he founded it) and I was part of the people who tested any played that mod. Later he joined to Lordz team and they released excellent NTW 2 mod one year ago. Yet it takes time before mod is completed.

Where is Chivalry mod now? Let me guess. Probably it is quit popular among SP players. Ok nothing wrong with this if this is the case and how many MP ''representatives'' are playing it? I'm wondering what might be the case for this. Maybe because mod was finished when MTW 2 was released?

I would prefer to see more defined facts in next expansion that MP will be changed to the better. Some of this facts can be spotted in MTW 2 v1.2 when compared to RTW/BI. Let's see what Kingdoms will have to offer.

TosaInu

05-21-2007, 11:58

I'm wondering what might be the case for this. Maybe because mod was finished when MTW 2 was released?

There are many reasons for this.

One of the problems with mods, especially for MP, is that it takes very long to make. Again many reasons for that. When it's finished it has to get accepted, another multiple reason for failure. Not impossible though.

It's hard for gamers to create a MP mod and get it accepted/used. It's also hard for CA to ship a MP game that's tweaked perfectly. You either have to work together with the MP scene during development (let them peek in your kitchen, have a sufficient large group to cover all, make MP a standalone exe to minimise sacrifices/consessions with SP and even then) or you have to make a layer between the rigid vanilla game and a mod.

That is sliders, toggles and a full configuration that allows to tweak the whole feeling. There's a lot more between morale on and off.

It partly runs into the same problem: a community or part thereoff has to reach some sort of consensus about when the game plays right. If there's a will to do that, it can at least be achieved within a few hours or weeks, rather than years. It can be done step by step too as you simply have to push a slider a notch more or less (yeah, it plays better now) rather than having to tweak a mod and all hassle surrounding that ('no I don't have the latest version' or installation went wrong, to list just a few).

You can even get CA/site/(part) of community rubber stamped, CRC'ed profiles to have 'official' tournaments.

It's important to have all aspects of the game available for tweak and mod. And not have some hardcoded modifier that cripples gameplay (if the flankbonus was just 1 point more, then it would rock).

It should also be easier to synchronise the MP players in case a mod is required. There are many 'competing' MP games that have an optional autodownload for a mod. If it's possible to install a 10 mb RO (UT derivative) map on the fly, can't a 300 kb textfile to describe the TW game being transferred?
Of course you need CRC and other safety measures.

Making the game more flexible like this, also means that CA only has to fix bugs. Instead of having an upset community because one or more values are 1 degree off (no I'm not ridiculing it) which proves to be an almost never ending story, because gameplay issues do not always pop-up at once.

YellowMelon

05-22-2007, 16:07

Chivalry was quite fun, I tried to get it into the MPers heads when I ran CWB, but nobody was paying it any notice :(

Puzz3D

05-22-2007, 17:35

It's important to have all aspects of the game available for tweak and mod.
Creative Assembly rejected this idea with the reasoning that it would make the game too confusing for new players.

TosaInu

05-22-2007, 18:07

Hello Puzz3D,

Default configuration. Edit it via advanced or load a pre-made profile.

Mars

05-24-2007, 15:00

Agreed. Future is on MP not on SP. It is up to them if they want this to realize or not. I will purchase expansion when released in December. If there would be no improvements for MP I will understand this as ignorance and only memories on Total War series will remain.

No, no and no.

TW Kind of games has no MP future! The battles itself cant provide enought entertainment! Back in 2000 the battles was something new, but times changed and if u consider that the mecanics got dumped down a lot, the whole game changed more to a funny setup-pic-click-some game.

If u take the current game i miss a lot deep gameplay....im not goin deeper in this...

So right now people who wanna have battles online vs other player suely go and play the new starcraft II or many play Wc3....
The online market for TW is small and will never ever change, unless they change the gamestyle completly and than it wouldnt be TW anymore.

I know that CA and back in the days EA made market researches about the MP market with their game and the result was glassclear!
There wont be any focus on MP.

The phrase, that the future of of gaming lay in the onlinemarket is an old shoo... Its tiresome. While its true for certain game types, for TW kind of games it isnt!

Mars

Stuperman

05-24-2007, 15:55

Ah but you cant taunt computers or rub it in. Nor brag to them of beating them .:beam: Much more satisfaction in beating a fellow human being. Or is that just me?

True, but MP is limited in it's own way, you can't develop your generals or armies, there is no lead up to or aftermath of, your battles.

The emphasis is more on tactics (where to position/when to move individual regiments, flanking, trying to get archers to the left and back of your enemy) than strategy (where to move whole armies, risking leaving a Front open while you attack).

I personally get more enjoyment out of successfully managing a blossoming empire than winning individual battles.

I don't play MP at all really, but I imagine that bridge battles are much less frequent in MP than in SP.

What I want is some type of officially supported hotseat mod, I think a mp campaign would add a really cool dimention to the game, especially if more than 2 players could join (Byzantium, Danes, and Spain fighting for control of northen Italy, how could that not be fun). The best way to do it IMO would be to have all non-AI players to have thier turns one after the other. At the end of a turn you'd be prompted to input an e-mail addy that the CPU would use to send the game file to the next player. PvP battle could be Auto-calced or fought through the std MP mode, it's takle some commitment on the part of players, but if people can play WOW for hours at a time I wouldn't think it'd be a huge problem.

p.s. sorry for thread jacking

Mars

05-24-2007, 16:24

Online campaigns are tiresome and completly useless.

People here want the battles first, they dont want the strategical part.

So if u speak about MP campaigns, the problem comes with the point where 1 of the player involved think he lost...

What now? U need a backupsystem for the player who dont want to continue playing a game where he just play more battles and know that he lost.

In chess u draw u king and say gg.... game over.

What u do in TW, u would need an AI to take over player who leave the campagin. Not to mention the crazy amount of time such a campaing will take.

How long u play a SP campaign? 40 hours? 60? more?
Now add 3-5 more people and imagin the crazy time u need.... nah.

Online games are devided in:

1. short time games, like egoshooter or arcade/action games, what u always can notice is the production overload (point u reached the 100%) its also determind by the resourcces which ends at some point (games like WC3 or SC)

Ego shooter is based on the area and or to rach a certain goal, but for sure, each time the gametime is clearly limited to something below 30 min for a single game.

Note: Average gametime on WC is below 12 mins.

2. Longterm games, in most cases some MMOGs, where u build up a character

3. let me mention browser games, some are pretty longterm based as well, but still the mainidea is to have limited time where u visit these kind of games...

I remember some campagins we organised back in STW/MI times, with lots of work and many clans involved, the ammount of time u did need was just too much. The main ideas was great but with time u could see the problems ;)

Anyway, Campaing online will find a handfull player, but u wont see a huge community.

the real battles are too simple, it is too limited for a big market. And even its dumped like hell, the system is still too complex....
Look at normal arcade games, there are units with stats, some special abbis and than some can shoot, other melee and in the end u also have some AOE....still, 90% of the units target 1 single other unit and u "mass" up many times and try to outplay synergies....

TW like it is now, is still complex, but the battle itself has nothing to provide apart units who fight each other and at some point, u won or lost....

I could imagin stuff like, Fog of war, this would kinda introduce units who has to scout. There should me much more room for fatique differences...

I imagin a very big map with many areas, and u just introduce battlegrps where the goal is to reach a certain country on that map an u won one "war".

To not let newbs lose the front maps, u could introduce ranks for player and u need a certain rank to be allowed to attack on a front map....

Well, there has to be more stuff introduced to the current battle system to make it interesting for more player.

koc

Gawain of Orkeny

05-24-2007, 17:38

True, but MP is limited in it's own way, you can't develop your generals or armies, there is no lead up to or aftermath of, your battles.
The emphasis is more on tactics (where to position/when to move individual regiments, flanking, trying to get archers to the left and back of your enemy) than strategy (where to move whole armies, risking leaving a Front open while you attack).

Exactly it gets right to the action :laugh4:

I personally get more enjoyment out of successfully managing a blossoming empire than winning individual battles.

Thats why we have two communities. I always loved games like Civilization. I loved MTW sp. I beat it three times and then went online. Ive never played an sp TW game since that day. I get far more satisfaction being part of a clan and fighting for the championship of the world against real people than some AI on a computer for control of my own computerland.

PS we have tried online camps many times and as Mars says when peeps start to loose they drop out AND ITS GAME OVER.

additional PS :)

[QUOTE]Ah but you cant taunt computers or rub it in. Nor brag to them of beating them . Much more satisfaction in beating a fellow human being. Or is that just me?[QUOTE]

This was a joke. I dont taunt players in mp. I dont brag either.

Puzz3D

05-24-2007, 20:24

True, but MP is limited in it's own way, you can't develop your generals or armies, there is no lead up to or aftermath of, your battles.
You are the general and you develop your skills to a higher and higher level. The game needs tactical depth to allow that continual improving of your game. The game needs balance so that a wide variety of armies are used rather than one best army type dominating the gameplay. There is lead up and aftermath because you are in a social setting. The lead up is arranging matches, making alliances with other clans, recruiting clan members, training and talking to people. The aftermath is analyzing the battle, offering a rematch and gaining the respect of other players.

The emphasis is more on tactics (where to position/when to move individual regiments, flanking, trying to get archers to the left and back of your enemy) than strategy (where to move whole armies, risking leaving a Front open while you attack).
The emphasis is on tactics, and that's why there is so much disappointment when the tactics are dumbed down just because tactics aren't as important to the SP player. The SP game certainly isn't hurt by good tactical depth in the battles. Also, better graphics hurts MP when it causes lag, and zooming in to watch the men fight is a luxury MP players can't afford. Finishing moves add no value to MP.

There is strategy in the battles, just as there is in chess, in the making of a battle plan. You must have that strategic planning to create the tactical opportunities. In team games, the strategic element is even more important. You can also have different game styles such as capture the flag which involves both offensive and defensive strategy.

I personally get more enjoyment out of successfully managing a blossoming empire than winning individual battles.
I like tactical games, and at one time Total War was the best real time tactical game available. Total War MP used to be on the level of chess as a game (It even had a chess style ranking system), but that's not the case anymore.

I don't play MP at all really, but I imagine that bridge battles are much less frequent in MP than in SP.
Bridge battles are a waste of time in MP because they are one sided and offer almost no maneuvering. No one has ever figured out how much to handicap the defender in a bridge battle, and you would certainly have to do that to even the odds of winning.

What I want is some type of officially supported hotseat mod, I think a mp campaign would add a really cool dimention to the game, especially if more than 2 players could join (Byzantium, Danes, and Spain fighting for control of northen Italy, how could that not be fun). The best way to do it IMO would be to have all non-AI players to have thier turns one after the other. At the end of a turn you'd be prompted to input an e-mail addy that the CPU would use to send the game file to the next player. PvP battle could be Auto-calced or fought through the std MP mode, it's takle some commitment on the part of players, but if people can play WOW for hours at a time I wouldn't think it'd be a huge problem.

I don't want to commit to something like a campaign that's going to take a long time to play. At the same time, I remember playing a 13 hour session of one battle after another in STW. STW had very well paced battles that lasted about 20 minutes. MTW had those slow firing xbows that extended the average battle to 40 minutes. That would be ok if somthing was happening most of the time, but it wasn't. Rather than achieving the sustained excitement that consecutive 20 minute battles offered in STW, you had periods of bordom introduced to the MP experience in MTW. Even with that problem, I played over 5000 MP battles in MTW. Magyar Khan had well over 10,000 MP battles played in STW, and I don't know how many in MTW.

Gawain of Orkeny

05-24-2007, 20:44

Magyar Khan had well over 10,000 MP battles played in STW, and I don't know how many in MTW.

Wow too bad i missed STW. I think Im around 25000 to 30000 mp games in MTW/VI :help: Of course Im including a few hundred MTW2 games. :laugh4:

Puzz3D

05-25-2007, 12:40

I think Im around 25000 to 30000 mp games in MTW/VI
And you don't notice the imbalance?

Ser Clegane

05-25-2007, 13:21

Wow too bad i missed STW. I think Im around 25000 to 30000 mp games in MTW/VI :help: Of course Im including a few hundred MTW2 games. :laugh4:

Sorry to drop in (as a non-MP-player), but even if a game takes only 30min - instead of the 40min that Puzz3D mentioned - that would translate into playing 4-5 years of playing 8 hours each and every day
:jawdrop:

You certainly got your money's worth out of MTW/VI, Gawain

Hosakawa Tito

05-25-2007, 13:57

Now, if you could only figure out how to get paid for doing it...that'd be da bomb!:laugh4: how to make TW work for me...

Gawain of Orkeny

05-25-2007, 14:28

And you don't notice the imbalance?

Of course I do. Ive complained that spears are almost useless since Ive started playing. Ive learned to live with it :laugh4:

Sorry to drop in (as a non-MP-player), but even if a game takes only 30min - instead of the 40min that Puzz3D mentioned - that would translate into playing 4-5 years of playing 8 hours each and every day

That it does. Hows this, I once went 19 months without missing a single day of playing. I would average 8 to 10 hours a day. Many a time playing 16 or 17 hours a day on weekends . Once I was hiy by a car and taken to the hospital during that period. I was pretty badly hurt and spent about 12 hours there. They medicated me up and sent me home. As soon as i got there I went online:help: I didnt do so good in the condition I was in.:laugh4:

Until MTW2 came out MTW/VI was the only game I ever played for over 4 years.

Yes Ive certainly gotten my monies worth from it and am continuing to do so.

Puzz3D

05-25-2007, 15:35

Of course I do. Ive complained that spears are almost useless since Ive started playing. Ive learned to live with it :laugh4:
That's what I thought, and I don't see anything funny about it. I'm not going to compromise my standards to suit the lowered standard that Creative Assembly has adopted since their first game. I wasted my time trying to help Creative Assembly improve their game except that the old engine was developed to the point where you can make good mods using that engine. I spent about nine months of my time on their beta teams putting in about 40 hours a week, and that was on top of working a full time job.

Gawain of Orkeny

05-25-2007, 17:30

That's what I thought, and I don't see anything funny about it

Well it was still the best game I ever played. In fact to me it still is not counting NTW and the STW and recon mods. If I didnt keep my sense of humor I like you would be disgusted. Then again I never put in the time and effort you did trying to fix these things. You know I repect You the Mizu clan for all the great things youve done for this community and MTW/VI in particular. I still dont know why no one can fix spears. How hard can it be? Its seems to me that they work better now in MTW2 than in VI.

As always my Hats off to you :2thumbsup:

TosaInu

05-26-2007, 16:47

Hello Gawain of Orkeny,

That's quite something.

Spears were quite powerful in the original MTW 1.0. To the point that both SP and MP players were not happy with it.
MTW 1.0 was a spearsgame.

Of course many tweaks were proposed in the forums (ranging from cost to attack). In the patch, too many tweaks were suddenly implemented and the balance shifted from over- to underpowered. Weak spears -> cavalry and swords game.

Bulletproof balancing of TW games is a huge effort. And realisticaly, it takes months to really balance a stat for good online play, I doubt that any software developer can pull that off.

What I noticed from being involved with stats/mods, is that you sometimes know what to do, but fail to get that to work because of limitations in the engine (or worse: having to make consessions because of SP). That makes it an even longer project.

What the developers can do, and we can not, is provide a solid MP frame. Indirect rather than direct support. Seperating MP from SP (same product though like Soldier of Fortune) is a good start.

pike master

05-27-2007, 09:43

the error in peoples thinking on the updated spear performance is too assume that the schiltrom is the toughest anti-cav formation when in fact a thin line only two deep with guard mode on using armored seargeants will defeat most heavy cavalry. in other words assuming a formation close to what most are doing with pike units.

once the charge and are stopped by the line of spears switch to attack and wreak havoc with the horses. when they pull back reform which can be done quicker than any spearwall or schiltrom and reface the cav.

you can usually defeat cav despite repeated charges with this technique.

TosaInu

05-27-2007, 09:50

Gawain of Orkeny

05-27-2007, 17:04

Spears were quite powerful in the original MTW 1.0. To the point that both SP and MP players were not happy with it.
MTW 1.0 was a spearsgame.

Yes before the patch. I remember i loved taking Chiv Sarges back when faction almost had alans. How is it they went to far and could never go back? That was long ago.

when in fact a thin line only two deep with guard mode on using armored seargeants will defeat most heavy cavalry. in other words assuming a formation close to what most are doing with pike units.

Only two deep? I guess there are no rank bonuses like in VI? Does this work vs swords? How deep vs swords? You could make an awfully long spear wall with 4-6 spear units like that.

TosaInu

05-27-2007, 23:37

Hello Gawain of Orkeny,

There was only one patch for MTW.

LongJohn asked for VI MP tweaks and something was done for spears. I think it was the general +2 morale that was expected to have quite some effect already. The swipebug made fixing cavalry urgent in the VI patch, which was also the only patch.

Gawain of Orkeny

05-27-2007, 23:51

Gah . OK I meant pre patch. Back when you were lucky to get two complete games in a night. That people complain about the lag and drops in MTW2 seems quite funny to me in comparison. I was just lazy in my post Sorry. I agree with all you said.

Puzz3D

05-28-2007, 14:34

MTW had severe network instability, and it was corrected within 2 months. RTW also had the same problem, and that got corrected in 5 months. M2TW has the same problem, and at 6 months it's still not corrected. There does appear to be a downward trend.

TosaInu

05-28-2007, 16:30

MTW had 1 patch, VI had 1 patch, RTW (pre X-pack release) had 1 patch. M2TW has two big patches now. An upward trend?

Edit: it even had a pseudo official public beta. :thumbsup:

Gawain of Orkeny

05-28-2007, 17:47

MTW had severe network instability, and it was corrected within 2 months

Well looking back that was the longest two months of my life then.:laugh4: It seemed to last for ever .

MTW had 1 patch, VI had 1 patch, RTW (pre X-pack release) had 1 patch. M2TW has two big patches now. An upward trend?

Now the question is will there be another before the expansion? Would it be better to stick with this title and keep improving it than trying to come up with another new TW game?

TosaInu

05-28-2007, 18:52

Now the question is will there be another before the expansion? Would it be better to stick with this title and keep improving it than trying to come up with another new TW game?

Hello Gawain of Orkeny,

I do not know, sorry. The Sega (http://www.sega.com/games/game_temp.php?game=med2kingdoms) site lists August 2007 as release date. I doubt we'll see a 3rd patch before that. I think there will be a 1.3 to make M2TW online compatible with Kingdoms. So, no 3rd patch before release. But, that's just me.

It would be -for MP, but maybe also for SP- a nice thing if this took a slightly different route. MP is a lot of fun, and there's still a lot to do with gamemodes. I understand that content is something that sells, but I'ld rather see some more polishing of the engine, expanding the options and ensuring that this not too big community had means to stick together, even though they do different things.

It's basically the same game from the same developer, roughly attracting the same fanbase (whether you like a given title or not). All titles are played, by the same kind of people, yet each has to use his own lobby. The small base is confined to individual islands.

It's a dutch daydream perhaps and I'm sure it can't be done with what has been released so far (unless you find a moneyforest). MP is a lobby for likeminded to chat, arrange battles and then a game starts which is some sort of chess using graphics and rules. Those graphics and rules change and you can add new options, but it's always that (anything computer is dynamically changing 1 to 0 and vice versa, so nothing bad about it).

The gamedeveloper updates his engine, adds features, modes, graphics, units. Most will have to be purchased, but there can be some free files too. If only patches to ensure the coremodules continue working. I have 'STW' with old features, perhaps it's updated a bit, you have 'M3TW', but we are in the same foyer and not 1,000 cybermiles apart from each other. You can decide to have a game with me, as you also happen to have the required modules to play 'STW'. No rebooting or swapping required.
We can also plug in a free fanmade mod and play that. No rebooting, no swapping, no pulling hairs to make it work. The mod is written for an older version, but that's no problem as the core handles all, after all it's a chess game with graphics and rules.

:elephant:

Gawain of Orkeny

05-28-2007, 21:32

after all it's a chess game with graphics and rules.

Thats all I ask for :laugh4:

TosaInu

05-28-2007, 21:46

:)

Don't really know how to put it in other words.

Gawain of Orkeny

05-29-2007, 00:28

Well to me the graphics in VI were and still are perfectly fine as long as the game play is good. So theres not that much work to be done :laugh4:

TosaInu

05-29-2007, 10:29

Hello Gawain of Orkeny,

I think there's an performance argument to go from 2D to 3D. Graphic cards can do more work on the units, 2D is more a CPU job. Not sure whether this is relative, absolute or even true. Of course, the units in RTW/M2TW are more detailed so the benefit is gone anyway?

An entry level system could run a 4v4 @ 200 unitsize in MTW without lag. If it were the same computer and game, but using 3D graphics of the same size and quality, it could be 4v4 @ 400, because the graphics card can be put to work, relieving the CPU. Again, that's one of the illusions in my head.

If above is true, you could perhaps also have a 6V6 @200 (I know it doesn't equal 4v4 @ 400, but another bottleneck may kick in when adding units rather than men). So, there's a gameplay benefit. One day we'll play 100v100 and control one unit each :jumping:

True, people are still playing the older titles and having/try to have fun with it. Gamespy still offers a lobby for MTV and VI, but that is about all support you get for the older titles. I know that's how things are with software, but you're left on an island with a few likeminded. Bad luck if your shiny new hardware or OS doesn't support it anymore. Bad luck when others move on to another place to play an updated version of the same game from the same developer.

Gawain of Orkeny

05-29-2007, 13:23

Bad luck if your shiny new hardware or OS doesn't support it anymore. Bad luck when others move on to another place to play an updated version of the same game from the same developer.

Tell me about it. My new 8800GTS wont run VI lol.

TosaInu

05-29-2007, 15:19

Tell me about it. My new 8800GTS wont run VI lol.

A pity.

How did you solve? Run VI on another PC or add a 2nd gfx in the same box?

Gawain of Orkeny

05-29-2007, 22:27

Different pc.

guyfawkes5

05-30-2007, 11:24

Quoted for the .org's benefit:

Hi guys

Thanks for all the feedback. Keep it up, but keep it constructive. If you can, describe clearly what the issue is and why.
As others on this thread have so clearly and concisely said, the more specific, coherent and defined the feedback is, the more likely we can evaluate it properly.

We are aware there are technical issues with MP that need addressing and although I can't answer for CA-OZ (I'm sure the OZ guys are doing work for Kingdoms), we here at CA-UK are most definitely looking at trying to resolve as many issues as we can, as a matter of course, for the next big TW title. We are actually at this time working on the next, full, TW title and we're rebuilding the MP section from the foundations up. There were a number of unfortunate limitations that the Rome and Med2 engines placed on us that should, fingers crossed, be less of an issue this time around. How well much we manage to fit in is still subject to the slings and arrows of outrageous games development, but we really are going for it. :2thumbsup:

As I mentioned to Toxic elsewhere, we have a very, very big list of new features, bug fixes and game improvements. Anyway to quote myself and save my fingers for work:

"Unfortunately, despite us having an amazing bunch of people working long and hard on producing a world class game, there just aren't enough hours in the day or the infinite amount of time we would like to do all the work we would like. This has meant that inevitably some game features have, in the past, had to take a back seat to others. ~:mecry: This isn't what we want or ever have ever intended, but game software development has a terrible capacity to throw curveballs out of left field. Often, they hit you on the back of the head when you're looking the other way. ~:dizzy:"

So guys please dont dispare but be aware that rebuilding code isnt a "quick fix". It takes time. But we hope you will think its worth it. "Total War: Fast As A Shark 2 - Yeah Baby!" will blow your minds.

Puzz3D

05-30-2007, 16:14

So they are going to put more effort into MP for the title after Kingdoms, and that's where the suggestions in the wishlist might be implimented. I'm glad I didn't purchase M2TW.

Lusted

05-30-2007, 16:18

I thought it sounded like they were getting feedback so they can work on mp for the next game, probably not enough time left until Kingdoms is released to really improve M2 mp.

Noir

05-30-2007, 17:38

Just scrolling through the forums lately, i ran into an interesting post by Elmarkofear (https://forums.totalwar.org/vb/showthread.php?p=1438282#post1438282). Part of it reads:

Originally posted by Elmarkofear
Being positive has never had any effect on encouraging CA to help the MP community, or even give us a small amount of consideration. As stated above, many of us were very positive, and supportive of CA and loved the MP community and gameplay. However, we soon found, and it was also stated several times by CA, that MP is not as important as the SP campaign and that MP was just an afterthought and not the main concern of the developers. Knowing this, how could anyone remain positive and think it would have any effect on CA's decision to ignore the MP community?

Many Thanks

Noir

TosaInu

05-30-2007, 18:04

Bits of data are not included. It's unfair to blame it on CA alone.

Puzz3D

05-31-2007, 18:44

The design of the battle engine has been acknowledged by CA to be placing a limitation on network performance. This is why they are going to start from scratch designing the multiplayer component for the next game after the Kingdoms add-on which will be using a 3rd generation battle engine. Due to the way CA is divided into divisions which work independently on Total War titles, the battle engine doesn't go through a process of continual refinement from one generation to the next which is why we saw problems that had been solved in the 1st generation engine reappear in the 2nd generation engine.

pike master

06-01-2007, 16:27

1st and 2nd generation?

1st warhammer shadow of the horned rat
2nd warhammer dark omen
3rd shogun
4th mtw/vi
5th rome total war
6th medieval 2

anyone with any knowledge of morale based game history knows its family tree.:book:

Puzz3D

06-01-2007, 17:39

There have only been 2 generations of the Total War battle engine. The 1st was STW/MTW, and the 2nd was RTW/M2TW. Within each generation there was improvement, but not across the two generations. The 2nd generation engine is inferior to the 1st generation engine, and this has been demonstrated through objective testing by myself and others.

Gawain of Orkeny

06-01-2007, 21:52

Was War hammer on the PS by the same people. I liked that game but the units were so hard to control.

TosaInu

06-01-2007, 22:00

Did CA make Warhammer?

Gawain of Orkeny

06-01-2007, 22:13

It says NAMCO here (http://www.gamespot.com/pc/strategy/warhammer/index.html)

Warhammer for the PS2 was developed by Kuju Entertainment Ltd.,

LINK (http://videogames.yahoo.com/gamemain?cid=1951015687&tab=&page=0&eid=-1)

pike master

06-02-2007, 05:59

total war is the bastard son of the warhammer games.

a generation is a continuance of a line. therefore each game that continues the line and adds to the original idea is a generation.

you cant argue with a hillbilly redneck.

TosaInu

06-02-2007, 10:57

It's all binary to me.

ElmarkOFear

06-02-2007, 12:21

Sid Meier's Gettysburg! game was the first RTS game I ran across that used Morale as one of the major determinants of success. I think it is probably the original, or close to it.

Gotta love ole Sid.

Gawain of Orkeny

06-02-2007, 14:27

I loved Pirates. IN fact I still play the latest edition. The land battles are far better now,

ElmOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOooooooooooooooooooooo

ElmarkOFear

06-03-2007, 05:20

Howdy Gawain of Orkeny :) Long time no see.

BTW: It's properly done like this:

ElmOoOooOoOoOooOoooOOo! hehe Think of it as a combination of Elm and MoOoOoOOo! the cry of the madcow.

Gawain of Orkeny

06-03-2007, 06:09

Have you tried MTW2 since the patch. We miss you there. Goat is always asking for you.:laugh4: Stop in and say hello sometime.

Orda Khan

06-03-2007, 09:59

we're rebuilding the MP section from the foundations up.
Oh cool, that means MP will be great :laugh4:

probably not enough time left until Kingdoms is released to really improve M2 mp.
How much time is needed? I thought with any product series the idea would be continual improvement. So far that's seven years

.........Orda

Puzz3D

06-03-2007, 11:44

How much time is needed? I thought with any product series the idea would be continual improvement. So far that's seven years.
Seven years and the result is a worse battle engine and worse network performance. It works worse over broadband than the older game worked over dial-up with the same number of men on the battlefield.

Gawain of Orkeny

06-03-2007, 13:47

It works worse over broadband than the older game worked over dial-up with the same number of men on the battlefield.

Wrong we have to use small units :laugh4: In NTW we could use 200 man units.

I have to say though that a few times Ive gotten in 3 on 3s with all good PCs and connections and the game flies. In fact its too fast.

ElmarkOFear

06-03-2007, 14:24

Gawain: I was on the night before last for the first time since the patch release. It took me awhile to finally get the patch to allow me to play online. :) Typical CA patch code.

The patch was a big improvement to gameplay and a lot of those infantry units now have a major role in deciding the outcome of the battles. All-in-all, it was a fun experience and I will enjoy testing all the unit vs. unit and formation stuff.

Ole Goat and myself, played two 2v2 games and lost both, so we still "have it". Our routing skillz are 2 L33T! :laugh4:

PS: I'm surprised you still hang around here amongst all these non-M2 veteran curmudgeons who have made it their mission to see to it the .org continues in its decline as a place to enjoy discussing the latest TW MP game. :hijacked:

I stop by every once in awhile, but it's beginning to smell like a retirement home around here and I hear it's not healthy to stick around in such depressing environments for any length of time.

Those who are amongst this grumpy group, might consider registering with the International Antiquities Preservation Society or join the National .Org Federation of Ubiquitous Nonproliferation-ists ("NO-FUN" for short) . . . . or possibly an animal rights activist group and petition to be placed on the endangered species list. :croc:

Puzz3D

06-03-2007, 15:09

Some players will accept inferior gameplay and poorer performance and claim that it isn't worse it's just different. M2TW is worse than the 1st generation battle engine in both tactical depth and performance. It's obvious by reading the posts of players that have the game. Even Creative Assembly has said that the network performance of M2TW is compromised by the design.

ElmarkOFear

06-04-2007, 01:52

:magnify: Hey Gawain! I think I just spotted another member of the endangered species :daisy: I was speaking of earlier . . .

I will be online tonight around 9 pm eastern to play, so if you have some time, feel free to join one of my games.

Whacker

06-04-2007, 06:30

It's important to have all aspects of the game available for tweak and mod. And not have some hardcoded modifier that cripples gameplay (if the flankbonus was just 1 point more, then it would rock).

Creative Assembly rejected this idea with the reasoning that it would make the game too confusing for new players.

Just a small point/clarification. CA 'seems' to have rejected this based on 1. they view it as 'giving away the keys to their kingdom' to quote a dear nemesis of mine, and 2. statements made about how 'big their code base is'. I say seems because of the clear direction they are taking with the franchises and multiple statements made by devs in the past.

The day the TW games are as moddable as id Software engines and Valve's source engine, I'll cease and desist all of my harsh criticisms, and I imagine most of the rest of us will to, because we'll be literally able to fix anything short of rendering, audo, and low level netcode ourselves.

:balloon2:

Puzz3D

06-04-2007, 16:08

Just a small point/clarification. CA 'seems' to have rejected this based on 1. they view it as 'giving away the keys to their kingdom' to quote a dear nemesis of mine, and 2. statements made about how 'big their code base is'. I say seems because of the clear direction they are taking with the franchises and multiple statements made by devs in the past.
It was clearly stated by LongJohn shortly after MTW was released that morale, fatigue and ammo would not have more than the on/off settings because it would be confusing to new players. I think he was in favor of providing multiple settings for those parameters because he even told us that fatigue rate had not been optimized for the larger maps in MTW and he agreed that the optimal morale level in a team game was not the same as in a 1v1 and he agreed that the effectiveness of archers was incorrect. However, when he asked CA about implimenting the change they said no. In fact, with RTW what had previously been independent on/off adjustments of each of those three parameters was condensed into a single on/off switch for all three. So, you can see a design philosophy of making the game easier for new players starting to take effect. You could already see it in MTW with the randomized weather, and lack of optimization of morale, fatigue and ranged unit effectiveness.

With RTW, a curtain of secrecy came down over the battle engine supposedly to protect CA's commercial interests, but months later after players ran tests it became apparent that the battle engine had been simplified in tactical depth, and this simplification process has continuted into M2TW. The network performance has also deteriorated. At least in RTW v1.2, the network problems were mostly solved, but after a massive 5 month patch effort in M2TW v1.2, there has been no improvement in network performance. So, I would conclude that the code base is indeed too big for them to handle now, and it's apparently getting bigger.

Whacker

06-04-2007, 17:49

It was clearly stated by LongJohn shortly after MTW was released that morale, fatigue and ammo would not have more than the on/off settings because it would be confusing to new players. I think he was in favor of providing multiple settings for those parameters because he even told us that fatigue rate had not been optimized for the larger maps in MTW and he agreed that the optimal morale level in a team game was not the same as in a 1v1 and he agreed that the effectiveness of archers was incorrect. However, when he asked CA about implimenting the change they said no. In fact, with RTW what had previously been independent on/off adjustments of each of those three parameters was condensed into a single on/off switch for all three. So, you can see a design philosophy of making the game easier for new players starting to take effect. You could already see it in MTW with the randomized weather, and lack of optimization of morale, fatigue and ranged unit effectiveness.

With RTW, a curtain of secrecy came down over the battle engine supposedly to protect CA's commercial interests, but months later after players ran tests it became apparent that the battle engine had been simplified in tactical depth, and this simplification process has continuted into M2TW. The network performance has also deteriorated. At least in RTW v1.2, the network problems were mostly solved, but after a massive 5 month patch effort in M2TW v1.2, there has been no improvement in network performance. So, I would conclude that the code base is indeed too big for them to handle now, and it's apparently getting bigger.

I wasn't aware that it was firmly stated, but I believe you. I fully agree with your assessment, and it's sad in a number of ways. I just can't help but constantly ~:rolleyes: every time the modding argument comes up and someone will always invariably A> state that the game is indeed 'supremely moddable and I just don't know what I'm talking about' or B> try and make excuses for why it really isn't, yet that's one of the major selling points. This is also further indicative of the validity of the 'dumbing down' argument that's pervading the game industry right now. Given the backlash that I'm seeing universally, I firmly believe that regular gamers want choices and streamlining, not simplification. Was thinking last night about how nice it would be if we had much more control over the situation in custom and multiplayer battles. Being able to deplete units to represent a settlement that's been besieged for awhile. Pre-damaging walls and towers. Simulating a successful spy infiltration. Etc etc etc. A shame really. Sincerely hope CA is listening and makes some good choices down the road, I've been with them since the beginning but am ready to leave next round if they don't get back to their roots. I know there are quite a few other 'old timers' that have already 'left', I guess this is just nearing my personal breaking point.

/shrug

Have a good afternoon folks :balloon2:

YellowMelon

06-11-2007, 04:51

I'm a little confused as to why people who don't even have the game are commenting on a thread designed to enhance the game. Furthermore, they are not even being constructive to the thread and to the prospect of enhancing the game. Im sorry the game doesn't meet your standards, but why are you pursuing threads in a gaming forum where you not only don't have the game, but have no intention of purchasing it? Aren't forums supposed to enhance the community not isolate it?

guyfawkes5

06-11-2007, 13:18

Oh now Melon, you know we're allowed say that... :wall:

Puzz3D

06-11-2007, 15:12

Im sorry the game doesn't meet your standards, but why are you pursuing threads in a gaming forum where you not only don't have the game, but have no intention of purchasing it? Aren't forums supposed to enhance the community not isolate it?
It's not my standards that the game no longer meets. It's the standard set years ago by CA that it no longer meets. I think players should be aware of that instead of letting statements such as, "the gameplay is going to be a tactical extravaganza" or "one gameplay isn't better than another; it's just different", go unchallenged.

The official MP Wishlist thread at .com is damage control to offset public criticism of the multiplayer game. CA doesn't need players to tell them what's wrong with MP. CA knows damn well what's wrong with it.

I'll purchase the game when CA demonstrates that they are really interested in improving the standard of play.

Gawain of Orkeny

06-12-2007, 03:35

I'll purchase the game when CA demonstrates that they are really interested in improving the standard of play.

One more reason I hope they do soon. Would love to see you and the rest of the Mizus return. In fact it would have many returning just like when it first came out. Word seems to spread quickly among the old clans.

And then theres the lobby. The mess there can be laid at the feet of the players although the lobby in VI was more user friendly IMO. The thing is there was an actual air of chivalry in the old lobby. And again that has to do with the players and nothing else.

pike master

06-12-2007, 05:07

since i went to newer rig im quite impressed by the games graphics and the multiplayer games run smooth when i host large games but i still have problems joining others games. its my modem/router thats the culprit.

however a freind of mine has unspecified error when he tries to join games

another clan member has nat failure problems

still another has the same gaming problem i have.

less than half of my peeps are trouble free on mp.

i tried to to run dmz.
a broadband connection that was supposed to bypass the router.
forwarded all the ports i know to forward.

are there generic dsl modems people can buy off the shelf? maybe if i can get a modem without a router built in i could get the problem fixed.

it is incredible the graphics im getting now and i can use them on multiplayer without turning them down and still get smooth performance.

shadows, bloom and reflections really bring out the 3d models very well.

Gawain of Orkeny

06-12-2007, 05:31

however a freind of mine has unspecified error when he tries to join games

another clan member has nat failure problems

still another has the same gaming problem i have.

less than half of my peeps are trouble free on mp.

Do they all have good PCs and connections? Its strange but on my last PC with the E6400 and 7950gt I would drop from games once in a while with an unspecified error . Never could figure it out. Ive found that if everyone has a good PC and connection the game runs too fast and rushing is the only way to win.

Ghost of Rom

06-12-2007, 05:33

I was getting the nat translation error quite often until I installed a router that was equipped with nat. Have not seen the error since.

BTW CA improved fatigue in MTW2, seems very natural and true to life now.

pike master

06-12-2007, 13:19

do you have to use the dsl modem/router from your provider or can you buy an off the shelf modem without router?

Ghost of Rom

06-13-2007, 03:41

Just make sure your router has all the features you need ie cable or dsl, nat, mac spoofing, etc. My paticular isp uses the mac address of the modem they provide to connect to my pc. Spoofing mac addresses and nat translation are fairly common features on routers these days...and not at all difficult to set up.
Good luck with it Mech! ~:cheers:

Mars

06-13-2007, 15:53

One more reason I hope they do soon. Would love to see you and the rest of the Mizus return. In fact it would have many returning just like when it first came out. Word seems to spread quickly among the old clans.

And then theres the lobby. The mess there can be laid at the feet of the players although the lobby in VI was more user friendly IMO. The thing is there was an actual air of chivalry in the old lobby. And again that has to do with the players and nothing else.

While i have contact to many of the socalled Oldtimers ;) Im sure, that many wont come back, even if the game would fit our style better again.

Like u can say, i dont say the current game is bad, for some it is and for other not.

The problem is, i mentioned that already, that the basic mecanics didnt changed from 2000 to now! U still have an army, u still got some opponents and u still have all the factors around, hills, trees, fatique, shooter, melee, cav....

While other games improve more and more, simply as the better computer allow a lot more things now. STW in 2000 was already a top product, there were a few things which could have been improved, but nothing what the performence of these computer at this time would had limited or not allowed.

TW is stuck, this said... I doubt many of the older guys will come back, no matter if the game gets a lot better or not.

I like to look forward and not backward all the time. Im sure, once a different TW game which fits my liking, i gonna play 1 or 2 days in the week a few games, but i doubt i ever again will play with the same intensity i did back in STW. There are many other games, which are awesome.

Blizzard announced the Starcaft II.... hell, this game will have more tactical deepness as any of the latest TW games ever had.

@ Elmo

Yo man :D i played geddys with mag some evenings, its pretty old game, all i remember are slow movement and a lot less speed than i was used to from STW...

Back to topic.

Wishlist ;)

the com is far from interesting, i know people who was wellknown in the community and left as mod the com forum...

I just can agree with puzz, CA know what the problems are, if they want they could change a lot, what would satisfy like 5000 Mplayer.....

There lay the problem again, they had to spent endless cash to solve the problems for just a handfull customer.

I wish a game based on the engin we had with STW, the great bonusses, the routingpoints, the penatlys.... the whole feeling.

Now add, some improvements like:

fog of war - introduce new kind of units = scouts
Fatique points on the map, points where ur units can regain fatique

just think outa the box, if u limit these points, u would have tactical points where u have to fight about, there wouldnt be attacker/defender anymore, unless someone sit on such a point :D

Ammo reload points..

Unitrefreshing on Kaserns maybe

Rankbonusses for player, like u win 1000 games, and u gain a special unit, not too big bonusses, just some small....like a scoutunit with some increased speed.

There are tons of systems, how u can make the basic game more interesting, not just for people who already play it, also for new people who never player a TW game online before.

But first ofc, CA need an own server! the current system is terrible. Not to mention the lag or the computer u need to play this game properly.

Mars

YellowMelon

06-13-2007, 16:43

fog of war - introduce new kind of units = scouts

If they every fix the mouse3 bug where you can get around restricted camera it will be fine.

One other thing I think they need to implement is the ability to capture unused artillery or siege equip. So many times I see it just sitting there and I go..why not steal it? Maybe an engineer type unit with versatile abilities.

Gawain of Orkeny

06-13-2007, 17:43

One other thing I think they need to implement is the ability to capture unused artillery or siege equip. So many times I see it just sitting there and I go..why not steal it? Maybe an engineer type unit with versatile abilities.

In real battles couldnt just about anybody fire a cannon? I mean in the civil war they always turned the captured batteries on the enemy and they didnt use arty men to do it. I would think one well trained man in charge would suffice. So you being able to detach or reassign a unit or part of a unit for this task may be a good idea.

Yun Dog

06-14-2007, 02:28

While i have contact to many of the socalled Oldtimers ;) Im sure, that many wont come back, even if the game would fit our style better again.

Like u can say, i dont say the current game is bad, for some it is and for other not.

The problem is, i mentioned that already, that the basic mecanics didnt changed from 2000 to now! U still have an army, u still got some opponents and u still have all the factors around, hills, trees, fatique, shooter, melee, cav....

While other games improve more and more, simply as the better computer allow a lot more things now. STW in 2000 was already a top product, there were a few things which could have been improved, but nothing what the performence of these computer at this time would had limited or not allowed.

TW is stuck, this said... I doubt many of the older guys will come back, no matter if the game gets a lot better or not.

I like to look forward and not backward all the time. Im sure, once a different TW game which fits my liking, i gonna play 1 or 2 days in the week a few games, but i doubt i ever again will play with the same intensity i did back in STW. There are many other games, which are awesome.

Blizzard announced the Starcaft II.... hell, this game will have more tactical deepness as any of the latest TW games ever had.

@ Elmo

Yo man :D i played geddys with mag some evenings, its pretty old game, all i remember are slow movement and a lot less speed than i was used to from STW...

Back to topic.

Wishlist ;)

the com is far from interesting, i know people who was wellknown in the community and left as mod the com forum...

I just can agree with puzz, CA know what the problems are, if they want they could change a lot, what would satisfy like 5000 Mplayer.....

There lay the problem again, they had to spent endless cash to solve the problems for just a handfull customer.

I wish a game based on the engin we had with STW, the great bonusses, the routingpoints, the penatlys.... the whole feeling.

Now add, some improvements like:

fog of war - introduce new kind of units = scouts
Fatique points on the map, points where ur units can regain fatique

just think outa the box, if u limit these points, u would have tactical points where u have to fight about, there wouldnt be attacker/defender anymore, unless someone sit on such a point :D

Ammo reload points..

Unitrefreshing on Kaserns maybe

Rankbonusses for player, like u win 1000 games, and u gain a special unit, not too big bonusses, just some small....like a scoutunit with some increased speed.

There are tons of systems, how u can make the basic game more interesting, not just for people who already play it, also for new people who never player a TW game online before.

But first ofc, CA need an own server! the current system is terrible. Not to mention the lag or the computer u need to play this game properly.

Mars

Some great ideas there Koc,

I agree I mean look at BF2, just add some medals and you'll have people hooked till they get all the virtual medals at least - I mean gaining medals for heroic victories is right up TWs alley, and to the people who say pfft who would want virtual medals - well clearly looking at BF2 - a :daisy: load of people - you could get cav/inf/ranged you name it, and then yeh some very small unlocks that give just a small tac advantage...

bottom line is these things havent been thought of at CA cause they dont care to think of them... other than graphics the game itself in its entirity has regressed.

Mars

06-15-2007, 10:03

Some great ideas there Koc,

I agree I mean look at BF2, just add some medals and you'll have people hooked till they get all the virtual medals at least - I mean gaining medals for heroic victories is right up TWs alley, and to the people who say pfft who would want virtual medals - well clearly looking at BF2 - a :daisy: load of people - you could get cav/inf/ranged you name it, and then yeh some very small unlocks that give just a small tac advantage...

bottom line is these things havent been thought of at CA cause they dont care to think of them... other than graphics the game itself in its entirity has regressed.

well, ur right ofc ;)

But it was a "wishlist" ;)

In all the years, we had many ideas, most was good some was superb. Im not the guy, who is able to say what is easy to implent and what is a problem...i leave that to people who are smarter than me...

I just know that the current TW idea is old. Leave out the current engin and the current game, i speak about the generall idea of TW.

Imo u have to go around and look at other games and take some of these ideas and make it ur own kinda. Fog of war is nothing new, but it could be some more spice in this game.

The medails, u call it, u can gain ranks, u can get some special units and u will see much more people hugged to the game, yes...thats the whole point.

The current game has 1 very weak point and thats the completly missed competition! I miss the laddersyestem, it had its problem, but the basic idea was insane good.

Get Tourneys up, made on own CA server... There has to be some kind of "must play battles", means if u wanna gain a certain unit or rank u have to win a certain map 5 times as attacker....just example, but u can see the point.

Force people to play certain army setups, make em play certain maps...

There is a huge potential in this game, i dont really care about the socalled "imbalances" this can be changed, once this is done the whole game is only about the entertaining factor. People leave this game much easyer, since they cant find any challange.

There has to be goals, like in any other good game.

Mag and me made so many nice questlines back in STW, we used a mod to analize/count the stats and made u play 7 games in a row, where one of us played the defender and "u" (or whoever) had to attack and win without many losses....than we counted all 7 battles and u got an overall score...

We had bridge battle, we had also a castle battle. It was hard to get the armybalance right, but it was hella fun and a great challange.

Just an example... but u see the big point.

PLaying only "battles" where u won or lose, but noone can really compare how good ur is against human nature. We wanna compare, we wanna /flex and brag and we wanna be best!

Ofc we also want to have fun, but u need to fulfill the basics to get people love the game...

Anyway, CA cant even fix lag after 6 months... There hardly ever will be any improvements concerning online play within CA ;)

MArs