MP stats discussion.

[ToranagaSama]

Even though, I'm not a Tactical MP freak, I just want to say to GilJaySmith and the CA crew,

THANK YOU for being a part of this forum

Despite seeming an ungrateful offending lot, we are truly MOST happy with the creation called Total War. It is a game which we LOVE. I don't believe love is too strong a word to describe the connection we TW fans have with the game.

I know it may be difficult to view our, often extreme, responses to the hits and misses of your creative efforts as anything but disparaging, but, please, be aware that, even though, there may be a few truly abrassive dolts among us (,one of which posted above; and perhaps myself may be included), the VAST majority of us, despite our whinnings, pleadings, demandings, and sometimes over-the-top admonishments, love you CA guys

Please don't view us as offensive, abrassive, idiots, but as whiny little children running and jumping around their mother's apron strings, begging, pleading, and demanding, more and better. It's not OUR fault that mom is such a good cook.

It is all a result of the LOVE we have for that which YOU created which makes us behave the way we do at times. JRock, is an extreme example of this. If he didn't love the game he "probably" wouldn't act in such a way (, though his case might be borderline and a good dose of gene therapy may be in order, hehehe).

Keep in mind that if you had created a piece of crap game, no one would care, but, CA, you didn't. You created something truly great.

We are not like "rock" fans who give their idols undying adulation (and blowjobs), but more like your "spoiled" children. We can be a Total PITA, but the bottom line is we Love TW and we Love CA. We are as much your creation as any line of TW code. So, just like any parent, admonish us when necessary, as you so amptly did above, reward us when we do the right thing, but whatever the case, DON'T stop talking to us

Our whinnings and beratements are just a part of TW love, Tough Love maybe, love nonetheless

Now, let's all make nice and keep posting. To the CA folks who've stopped, please come back.

------------
BTW, ToranagaSama WANTS HIS C-MP

[Alrowan]

hmm... im still getting used to the changes, but shock cav are almost unstopable, perhaps a slight tweak there, and also make archers 10% better

[Paolai]

the main problem still remain for me: less armor or better arrows. I think that the better and the stronger units have to have less armour like monks in MI with the 1.03 (very strong unit but vulnerabile by missiles)

[GilJaysmith]

Quote[/b] (+DOC+ @ Nov. 11 2002,05:37)]One very vital addition would be to make the SP and MP stats set separate so as one could play and mod the SP to hearts content while the MP stats remained constant. THis would save the constant problem of restarting MTW and restoring the original stats every time many want to play online.

This reminds me: TosaInu (I think?) asked us to add some kind of option to allow the stats to be reloaded without having to restart the game. This is now in the patch: if you add -reload to the game command line, the unit and projectile stats will be reloaded each time you start or join an MP game, instead of just the once when you load MTW. So you should be able to play a game, muse over the results, edit the stats files, then play another game and pick up those changes instantly.

Gil ~ CA

[Ithaskar Fëarindel]

Well said Toranaga-Sama.

[barocca]

about CD key verification,

There are NO key generators for the Total War Series of games available from the underground,
Why?
because the code for the key verification is not in the executable.

If it was it would have been cracked and piracy of the TW series would be rampant,
No commercial encryption method is unbreakable.

Thus if you see someone online they have a legit' copy of the game, because you can't get past the verification without having a genuine key.

This is sound commercial sense especially for an emerging company like CA.
We cannot criticise them for having a centralised server, no key verification method is safe if it is part of the shipped code.

What we can do is point out any errors we find, and the more politely we do so, and the more effort we put into stating precisely what happens, when it happens and how to replicate what happens, the more likely we will get a fix for it.

Abusing CA and the staff from CA will get us nowhere.


To GilJay, Target, EatColdSteel, Longjohn and company
Guys, we love the game,
how many people play a game 2 years down the track?

Many of us here have been part of this community from day one, you don't get people hanging around and contributing week in week out for 2 years and then some if they don't enjoy the game.

They (and I) am here because we love playing these games, we enjoy the challenge you have given us of competing online in real time.

Many understand precisely why we use central servers, and accept that such a system has occasional risks, downtime and the like.
I have yet to see Gamespy down for 7 days straight, hell i haven't even seen Gamespy down for 24 hours.
Yet the EA servers would often fall over and be down for many days at a stretch, come back for a few days and then fold again.

I think some here do not appreciate the reliability of GameSpy in that regard.


GilJay, Target, EatColdSteel, Longjohn and company don't give up on some 4000(and growing) registered members of this forum just because a few, (and a very few at that), express their personal frustration with aspects of the game in a bitter and misguided manner.

The TW series is a great set of games, those who complain bitterly do so mainly because they want to see them perfect in every regard.
(( i make No apologies for them, merely state they say the things they do because they too love the game, if they didn't they would not bother to be here, they are just less patient and far less diplomatic than most ))

To All,
There is a time and a place to scream like spoilt children,
The Org is Not the place.
We have a patch forum (the dungeon) where you can raise issues with the patch,
BUT venting your spleen at the developers is not part of that process.

Barocca

[Mithrandir]

Quote[/b] (barocca @ Nov. 11 2002,11:17)]about CD key verification,

There are NO key generators for the Total War Series of games available from the underground,
Why?
because the code for the key verification is not in the executable.

If it was it would have been cracked and piracy of the TW series would be rampant,
No commercial encryption method is unbreakable.

Thus if you see someone online they have a legit' copy of the game, because you can't get past the verification without having a genuine key.

This is sound commercial sense especially for an emerging company like CA.
We cannot criticise them for having a centralised server, no key verification method is safe if it is part of the shipped code.

What we can do is point out any errors we find, and the more politely we do so, and the more effort we put into stating precisely what happens, when it happens and how to replicate what happens, the more likely we will get a fix for it.

Abusing CA and the staff from CA will get us nowhere.


To GilJay, Target, EatColdSteel, Longjohn and company
Guys, we love the game,
how many people play a game 2 years down the track?

Many of us here have been part of this community from day one, you don't get people hanging around and contributing week in week out for 2 years and then some if they don't enjoy the game.

They (and I) am here because we love playing these games, we enjoy the challenge you have given us of competing online in real time.

Many understand precisely why we use central servers, and accept that such a system has occasional risks, downtime and the like.
I have yet to see Gamespy down for 7 days straight, hell i haven't even seen Gamespy down for 24 hours.
Yet the EA servers would often fall over and be down for many days at a stretch, come back for a few days and then fold again.

I think some here do not appreciate the reliability of GameSpy in that regard.


GilJay, Target, EatColdSteel, Longjohn and company don't give up on some 4000(and growing) registered members of this forum just because a few, (and a very few at that), express their personal frustration with aspects of the game in a bitter and misguided manner.

The TW series is a great set of games, those who complain bitterly do so mainly because they want to see them perfect in every regard.
(( i make No apologies for them, merely state they say the things they do because they too love the game, if they didn't they would not bother to be here, they are just less patient and far less diplomatic than most ))

To All,
There is a time and a place to scream like spoilt children,
The Org is Not the place.
We have a patch forum (the dungeon) where you can raise issues with the patch,
BUT venting your spleen at the developers is not part of that process.

Barocca

Yes, I, and I know many with me appreciate it a lot that you guys are investing so much (spare) time into the community and helping out in all sorts of ways.

Thanks

-Mithrandir-

[Orda Khan]

At the end of the day CA admitted that MP was a minor part of the game as far as they were concerned. That been said is it any wonder the MP game is so bad? I bought the game mainly for MP, so where does that leave me? £29.99 worse off
But it says you can play this on the internet.......
Quote : "Epic multiplayer warfare with 8-player online battles" : Unquote.
Sorry but that tells me that I can take part in "epic" MP battles, which is not the case; which is why people complain. What on earth do you expect them to do, sit quietly in the corner until CA finally sorts it out? Remain loyal to a game that won't do what it says it will?
Come off it Gil you really sound like you got your heart on your sleeve. This is the 21st Century, wake up and smell the coffee. This is what you get today mate. If I work my nuts off I'm told I am just doing what I'm employed to do but drop a clanger and I know all about it. It's the same for us all mate don't take it so personally.

I am sure JRock was posting out of sheer frustration as have many others, he paid over the cash so as far as I'm concerned he has every right to an opinion.

Oh and from your closing remark are we to assume that CA has turned its back on this fansite?

You really can't expect to go through life without being criticised, that is something we all have to learn to live with

........Orda

[Puzz3D]

Oh Boy Thanks for getting that -reload included GilJay This make a big difference in convenience of switching in alternate stats, and makes it much more likely that players would be willing to use an alternate stat.

I agree with DOC's points, and would add that raising morale will have the practical effect of making all the morale penalties, which are of a fixed magnitude, seem smaller. It's not really doing that, but moving everything further away from the rout point with make it seem like it is because you'll have to accumulate more penalties before you rout. Adding too much morale, as the +12 morale you get from the morale off option, essentially removes morale from the tactics because you can't accumulate enough penalties to rout until your unit is almost annihilated.

Valor cost is now 70%. This is good because it prevents cheap units from becoming stronger than more expensive units, and you can use the valor upgrade without causing major unit imbalances. I would suggest using the valor upgrade to overcome the low morale of the typical infantry unit which will make them better able to stand against cav. I've played a few 15K games and they played better than 10K games. I'm going to play more games in the 15K - 20K range and see how they go.

I would ask players who are going to quit to rout their units before they leave the battle. Otherwise, your units have to be routed one by one by the opponents before the game will end. Also, don't quit big battles before you're sure the game is lost. Very often you can rally a few units, link up with your allies and continue fighting.

[Kocmoc]

Quote[/b] (+DOC+ @ Nov. 11 2002,05:26)]Ok, i voted as i don't care, simply because you didn't give an option for a "wait till we try the patch for a few weeks". Anyway here are a few of my opinions:

1. Hill bonuses.
Difficult one this one. Basically, according to Puzz, hill bonuses are there although they aren't as pronounced as in STW. IF you restore hill bonuses to STW levels then all that happens is everyone plays the flat maps only, anyone that picks a hilly map and defends is viewed as dishonourable.
Leave them as they are and people will freely use all the maps and defending up a hill is viewed as more acceptable.
There are still hill bonuses, one can shoot further from the top of a hill and there is a slight advantage to the troops attacking from with the height advantage ....+2 morale?
So, taking all these into account, i'd leave this as it is.

2. General +2 morale.
Yup, absolutely, i've been hoping for this to be added from the very beginning. Otherwise it becomes a necessity to play high florin games. AT the moment chain routing can be a problem and battles can become a bit of a "who can cause the first unit to rout wins" affair.
Only prblem with this could be if this were translated into SP meaning that the AI's high morale troops like knights may never flee. Enemy Kings, heirs and top generals will therefore always fight ot the death.... not a desirable outcome. We want to encourage the AI to look after is Kings, heirs and top generals.

3. Morale penalties.
Linked to 2 above, maybe the morale penalties are too pronounced or indeed their area of affect to large? Not sure on this though as i didn't program the game and don't delve into the game mechanics as much as many do here.
On this note i think some here have studied the game's mechanics to such an extent that they know exactly how to beat someone by manipulating these morale penalties. The average gamer won't understand these and therefore will always succumb to the pros using these tactics.
Nothing wrong with this, but it'll probably explain why you find it very hard to ever lose.

Play with people you know and like (and trust) and you'll enjoy most experiences, as long as you don't drop. Unfortunately, there will always be rushers and poor gamesmanship, plus with >100 units there will probably always be some imbalance.

Regards

Quote[/b] ]Ok, i voted as i don't care, simply because you didn't give an option for a "wait till we try the patch for a few weeks". Anyway here are a few of my opinions:

this is what i mean, some needs some weeks some just some days, tell me arrogant but i needed 2 days and i told u what we see now
and it come more and more player who agree with me (not at all but at the most points)

Quote[/b] ]On this note i think some here have studied the game's mechanics to such an extent that they know exactly how to beat someone by manipulating these morale penalties.

look, ofcourse some dont know how and why it exactly work this way, but they get a feeling, so they know they have to move "this" unit in this way and they get "this" result. so yes, they cant explain the mecanics but they know what to do, i can explain the mecanics and i can tell u that the circles are too big, i said this months ago already.
u can easy notice in battles that unit rout just coz some enemy units are around, u dont need to fight this unit. U can rout full units without charging
a +2 moral would help, maybe it would solve the whole problem (this we gonna test this week)

still the cirlces exist and will cause routs where u will ask urself "why the hell my army run away?".

i disagree with this hillbonusses and it just show again, that someone has an opinion and many agree without thinking.
Yes, now we can play some higher hill and u dont get a big penalty if u figh uphill, well...so we can say we have an 2D game now, its not important to use hills in this game anymore.
but it was the greatest point in this game, it was 3D now this point got reduced to near zero

ofcourse, we had some problems in stw, but it was a hell of fun to "work" about 1 hour to kick a camper from his hill

i absolut agree, that u cant balance 100 units.

if we go and make missles stronger (this is the only way) than some units will get hard penaltys, think about the fanatics with 1 armour....

we ccant lower the armour of some units, just coze some of this special units who get bonusses vs armoured units wont get bonusses if the armour of the enemy units isnt about 5.

so we are in a dilemma,....what we gonna do?
its a nice option this bonusses vs armoured units

and i wont destroy it, so we can lower the armour of the units, it just go about themissles.....they need more power/reloadtime/accuracy.....

so i go and give the fanatics more armour so they dont get so hard slaughtered by the missles....its just an example what we need to think about.

an nice example is, helbardiers or gallowglasses vs this lancers....ther u can very good see what happens if a unit with bonusses fight vs high armoured units.

this things make this game fun, counter units wich are worth the money if u can use them wise....

i posted many many ideas at this forum, and i dont got some good reaction, where i would say..."ha nice, someone agree with me" ...mostly i just faced ignorance and the most didnta greed with me, i think the problem is, that i exploit the system very fast and many others need just more time....but now we face many disapointed players and they gets more and more, so went to work for a "fast solution" and i hope that i get some support ....ofcourse i do mistakes too and many of this post are very usefull, coz they show me other opinions and at this way i can change my opinion and think again about several ideas.

@gil

i respect ur work and the work of the other devs and if im disapointed i tell my opinion i dont kiss asses

if i see john post about missles and that they can shoot cav, thatswhy they did cav more valuable....so i just can laugh and say.... "this shows u dont know the unit well" (this post/tread got deleted, or i dont can find it)
so what we need is more support from u devs, and concret statments what u could change in what a time. i know ur bussy i know we are just 90%, but we dont want so many changes....the stats we can change our own....jsut this circles and the fatique ..... im not a programmer but i doubt this cause many problems.

so it would be very helpfull if u could give us some more support at this matter
mag and me offer already to come to london to meet u if it could help or whatever, we want to make this game more fun.
lets give it a longlivity.

thx for any effort

ur juniorKoc

[Dionysus9]

Hill bonuses need to be increased. If people want to play without hill bonuses, then they can play on flat maps. If defending on a hill is seen as dishonorable then give the attacker less florins. I like to attack up hills and against decent hill bonuses, esp. against new players.

Morale-- I don't know what the patch changed, but now my Valor 3 spears run as soon as an enemy unit rounds the flank. Never mind that I have 2 units to counter it, the spears still run before the flanker can even get at them. This is frustrating. If you pay for good troops they should fight until they are actually struck by flanking units.

As far as spears/cav goes, I don't have too much opinion. I've had some sucess killing lots of cavalry with cav/spear combos.

Bacchus

[Kraellin]

gil,

very nice. but one question on these command line options. we've seen several of these listed now; is it possible to use more than one of these command line options at a time and if so, what is the format for putting in more than one at a time?

K.

[Puzz3D]

OrdaKhan,

Are you still unable to play MTW MP after installing the v1.1 patch? Most people are able to play. I know your ISP connection is below par. It's true that some people won't be able to get it to work. There is no way GilJaysmith and company can make the game work with every possible computer configuration and ISP connection. At some point the user has to take action to correct their end of things.

[barocca]

Quote[/b] ]posted by Orda Khan
At the end of the day CA admitted that MP was a minor part of the game as far as they were concerned

Less than 10% of people who buy the game play online,
that's a fact. That is not caused by bugs or "faults",
thats the way people play. I have numerous MP/Internet games, i ONLY play TW online. You can't expect any company to spend a fortune for less than 10% of the audience.

Quote[/b] ]posted by Orda Khan
Quote : "Epic multiplayer warfare with 8-player online battles" : Unquote.
Sorry but that tells me that I can take part in "epic" MP battles, which is not the case

Then I suggest you check your system configuration, because i have a lousy system, below the minimum listed specs for the game, and I can play online just fine.

Quote[/b] ]posted by Orda Khan
What on earth do you expect them to do, sit quietly in the corner until CA finally sorts it out?

If there is a problem list it in the proper place and in the proper manner.
Calling decisions a "joke" and "narrow minded" without knowing why the decision was made is designed to cause offence.

Quote[/b] ]posted by Orda Khan
Oh and from your closing remark are we to assume that CA has turned its back on this fansite?

Perhaps the developers are just weary of the endless bitching, especially as much of it insulting.
Would you continue to work at your company if everything you tried to solve a problem was criticised in such an insulting and rude manner?

The Developers work their butts off to fix as many problems as they can, to bring us new features and capabilities, no beta testing program on the planet will find all the bugs in any piece of software, live testing finds the bugs, and patches rectify them.
But if insult those who make the patches...well, why should they bother?

I have seen plenty of mission critical software which performed flawlessy in testing, fail in the real world.

The best we can do is list and define the bugs as precisely as possible,
The worst thing we can do is piss the developers off so much they just will not be interested in hearing about them.

Barocca

[Puzz3D]

Kocmoc,

As far as I can see, the range of the morale influence circles is the same as it was in STW. How can it be a problem in MTW and not in STW? Do you want the circles to be smaller as a way of compensating for penalties that you think are too large? I don't see how flanking can be the problem. It's only -2 morale points on a scale of over -20 points you need to rout a unit of level 6 morale.

If you want a suggestion on archers, try making the accurracy a little better and maybe more arrows. You won't get the effectiveness you want on the first try. First you get it in the ballpark, and then fine tune it. However, if you are going to make a change to overall morale level, get that in there early in the testing since it affects everything.

[Kocmoc]

thx puzz,

i said it in my post, maybe the +2moral will already fix the circle problem.

Thanks for ur input it realy helps me


koc

[Orda Khan]

Ok guys first off I was stating facts as have been posted in these forums. I did not say that CA should spend more on multiplay Barocca because I realise the facts you pointed out, I was simply repeating what we've been told by CA.

As for my system specs, they are just fine thanks. I'm not one of those lucky enough to be on cable or ADSL, I'm on 56k, but I believe the majority of us are? I have enquired about my connection, which currently averages 46.6. It seems there are a lot of people with slower connections. As for my ISP, the only problem I have here is that I will time out after 2 hours. No problem so long as you don't forget the time and get dropped mid battle.

And talking of 4v4 battles, funny enough I took part in three of these on Shogun Mongol Invasion last night.

Yes some of us are criticised, abused, call it what you like regularly. Have you ever been made to feel that you are totally worthless, that you have nothing to offer, yet at the same time your experience was being called on to train up new people? Been there guys but unfortunately for some of us, alternative employment is not that easy to find so yes I am still there taking the crap on a regular basis. People are selfish these days and they want their demands met (not me personally I don't really care) and they will criticise when they are not and criticism generally tends towards offense. I'm just surprised at the reaction.

My post was not meant to cause offense but yet it has..??
There you go

........Orda

[Jemasze Toda]

My greetings to all

A problem for me to respond to this very interesting topic is simply that i -unlike Koc and some other vets- still have not exploited the system after the release of the patch very well if at all
From my point of view the patch and the changes which resulted from it need still more practice, but that may be only because i am a bit slower to grasp things than others.

Secondly i am more of an intuitive player. Believe it or not: I almost never look at the stats or the logfiles or anything else of that sort.
I field an army which i deem worth the try and watch how it works in battle, i know nothing about morale-penalties -2 or areas in which the penalties occur.
When i find a unit and/or army shows some nice strenghtes and some less desired weaknesses i choose it ( or leave it) according to my own observations and those of my friends. I see my opponents use interesting tactics and adapt to them or fail to do so.

But i don't want to bore you more than necessary with my own little doings so i return to the subject of the patch now:

As i see it there are indeed a couple of bugs, mistakes, misbalances and shortcomings of the game, even after the patch, so much is plain even to a statistical and technical illiterate as me.... as they are:

1. The relative weakness of the archers and especially the
horse-archers. It would be nice and a major boost to the
tactical aspect of the game if they were a bit stronger
aka have a improved accuracy/ power against armour and a
better price/value balance.
From my point of view the cav-archer should be
A LOT cheaper than they are, maybe only 100 or 150 That
may sound too cheap but with current effectivness this
low costs would make them more of a bargain...no need for
such drastic changes in price when the horse-archers
increase in effectiveness though.

2. The still ( although improved a bit) extreme fatigue of
light cav. While it is fine that heavy cav tire quite
fast light cav should be able for a longer time to run
around and annoy the enemy. Maybe fatique as a whole
should be lessened a bit for the sake of smoother end-
games in 3v3 or 4v4.

3. In order to improve the ability to counter rushes some
units like handgunners, arquebusiers and maybe even
crossbows/ arbas or certain archers should have a
devastating effect on a very(&#33 short range so that
those units could be used as counter against ill-led
head-on rushes. I am not sure about this but it may at
least be worth a try.

I do not have any answers to issues as too low hill-bonusses, too large morale-impact areas and so on due to the fact that i for one cannot see the need of an urgent fix of them.
For example if you get heavily flanked by your enemy it seems ok for me that even whole units who have had no fighting so far run like hell because of the morale impact on them.
In MTW you are most of the times able to rally at least some units again so the battle doesn't necessarily need to be over when your line breaks. I admit that this might not work in games below 10.000 Florins but i hardly play them anyway so again i can't comment on that.
Too often i hear people complain about their units routing out of nowwhere while its crystal clear that their opponent brought his cav in their back and/or has a general major advantage due to flanking and similar battlesituations.

To come to a conclusion, i personally would still advise to wait a bit more and play some more battles before we claim the patch a total failure. Of course it is NOT perfect but did anybody expect it to be?
As many others said we won't ever have a fully balanced game but on the other hand nothing should stop us from trying to get one
So feel free to complain, whine, moan and argue but be aware that when it comes to the core of any game its mostly up to ourselfes to get a wonderful gameplay despite all the undeniable shortcomings of the system.
Yesterday my good friend ELITEofManstein ( ) played a 1v1 against Paolai and he might agree with me that this WAS a very enjoyable tactical battle... Why? Because we both wanted to have one
Understand what i mean?

yours Jemasze alias TheFool

[MagyarKhans Cham]

GilJay may i point out that in previous versions developers have come here telling us that things will improve in the future.
The only thing i see is that it aint worse, neither better than in previous releases. so your words here do fine but u and your buddies have to proof them yet.

no further comments from me between the bOrganised people...

[FasT]

Keep up the good work i think we just maybe be gettin somewhere.......
I just hope the Dev's will give u that little bit more supportand this matter................

[Dionysus9]

Yuuki,

Are you sure the morale system hasn't been changed in the patch (beyond the obvious effects of more costly troops). My men just seem to run faster... Is it a boost to morale penalties from being charged by cav? Or am I just imagining things?

Horsearchers-- I agree they need to be made more effective. At this point I could care less about historic accuracy-- as many MP'ers would agree-- rich and well developed tactical opportunities are more important than slavish devotion to what we "think" is historically accurate. I would imagine that for every historical scholar who says horsearchers had no effectiveness in medieval times, we could find one who says they ruled the battlefield.

As the Horsearcher stands now, they can safely be ignored. I just let them plink away until they are out of ammo. Horsearchers shouldn't be able to stand up to arb/crossbow fire (and they cant), but they should be able to cause some serious damage if they are flank-firing on a stationary unit without fullplate armor (which they cant). At the very least horsearchers should be decimating light cav (cav w/o heavy barding), and they arent. An arrow or two should stop a horse, if not the rider.

[ToranagaSama]

MagyarKhans Cham,

Please correct me if I'm wrong, but English is not your primary language, correct?

In that light, let me say that while your ability to write and communicate in English is VERY good considering its not your primary language; BUT even considering such achievement, it must be pointed out to you that to communicate in another language precisely AND to convey your intention accurately, in addition, to doing so diplomatically takes an extreme degree of expertise.

Your post have NOT exhibited such expertise.

It that respect, I'd like to point out to you that your post often come across as, short, abrassive and insulting.

This may or may not be your intention, but if it is not, then I suggest that you take MUCH greater care in formulating your future posts. If you are not sure or may think that a sentence you formulate does not "accurately" convey your intention, I suggest you state just that Ask for guidence in conveying your point(s) accurately. I'm sure most everyone here and especially the mods will be happy to aid you.

Your posts, as they are now, are NOT "inviting" for CA to respond to and as such, I don't believe, are helpful to the community.

[Puzz3D]

OrdaKhan,

I see a lot of 5 to 10 second pauses in WE/MI battles with you. Something it going on there that is outside of the game. Your connection speed may be ok, but there are interruptions on that connection. I still don't understand if you can connect to the MTW server and play a battle. Can you?

[longjohn2]

I haven't had a chance to play the patched version on line yet, but I'll make a few general observations.

I'm a bit surprised by the complaints about hill bonuses, as I didn't deliberately change anything. As far as I know they're the same as before, and the same as the original STW. The terrain's generally a bit flatter in MTW though. It's always a possibility that a bug crept through testing though . If that's the case I apologise.

I also don't think I changed anything to do with morale ( except the cost of valour upgrades ). It is possible to rout full strength units without engaging them but they have to be in pretty bad situation for this to occur. For instance unsupported and surrounded by large enemy forces. Frankly this doesn't seem unreasonable to me.

On the subject of archers, I should point out that they're an early period unit. If you want a game with effective archers, play in the early period. Complaining about their effectiveness vs Lancers is unreasonable.

It is maybe true that horse archer armies aren't as effective as some of them were historically this. I think this is because the limited size of the battlefield doesn't reflect the limitless open terrains where horse archer armies were effective. This may disappoint some of you Mongol Fetishists, but I'm not too worried by this. I don't think playing against hordes of horse archers you can't catch would be that much fun for the average (ie casual) player.

I'm a little surprised to hear the game has become about cav rushes. I didn't think the changes I made were that dramatic. Just shows that these things are finely balanced. Still even so, I think it's an improvement on the pre patch game. Better for a game called Medieval to be dominated by Knights than by upgraded spearmen.

I think the game needs to reflect the history of the game to a fair extent. If we try to make it into some sort of hyperthetical perfectly balanced game where all arms are equal, then we can only ever make one game. There'd have been no point to MTW because it would just have been STW with different sprites.

Anyway I'll try to get online sometime this week, and see for myself.

[Jemasze Toda]

Longjohn,

concerning the horsearcher:
Its not about getting ALL horsearcher armies running around on MTW-battlefields. As it is now you almost NEVER see a single horsie or if you see them they are near useless (even for flanking) I understand your point of view but in actual online-gaming reality it would be very nice to have somewhat effective cav-archers in order to increase the tactical aspect.
In good old STW there was a simple solution to prevent horsearchers from dominating the battlefields on their own:
The Yari-cav

So balancing of speed of certain light cav would make that problem rather easily a non-existent one...hehe
And by the way: Fielding a strong horsearcher army is one of the most difficult things you can try ( even in STW&#33
If you don't believe me...check it out yourself

Thanks for posting, Longjohn

yours Jemasze alias TheFool

[+DOC+]

Longjohn a lot of what you say here i agree with wholeheartedly.

"Better to have a game called Medieval dominated by cavalry than poumped up spear units"

Absolutely, these knights now induce the fear that they should. On battlefield they are my main concern, whereas previously they'd been little more than an irritation and an enemy army full of spears was scary.

About horse archers:
I have to admit i do find these guys very irritating, partly because no cav can catch them and my idea of a medieval battle is not about chasing horse archers about a map. Horse crossbows are more useful, but i like them how they are.

The only thing i'd maybe do with the longbow, shortbow and mounted bow from the projectiles.txt file is to increase the lethality of these a little. I now have the longbow at 0.8, shortbow and mounted bow at 0.7. Previously they used to be 0.63 for all three.

But frankly the crux of the matter is some STW vets want MTW to be a bigger better version of STW with the same principles and same game mechanics. MTW is not STW and therefore should stand out as being different. IMHO it does just that.

[MagyarKhans Cham]

Well written Toranaga, I must apologise. i am a simple messenger, loyal to our Great Khan, Khan of Khans but i am allowed to express my own ideas as well.

I also dont see why people care so much how i write things, i represent only myself. 1 single sole in this massive online experience. but i am willingly to learn from u, i am open minded.

And as long i stay within the bOrg rules i expect being able to post here. I am just balancing some of the posts here. If people post teh game totally suck than i will reply it doesnt and vice versa. I criticize posts if needed i will stimulate others.

I expect the bOrg representatives to warn me when i step out of line. And i dont believe that thsi place is made only for nice people with a continous happy view on things that are going on.

(looks around for his horse....)

[TosaInu]

Konnichiwa,

I wouldn't care about bORG rules, just read the ORG Forum Rules which you agreed to when signing up. The link to those rules is on top of every page.

[Polar]

Agree with longjohn and doc. I enjoyed 1.0, and I enjoy 1.1 now. Although there are a few things that needs a little tweaking, but the main combat system is fine as it is. We bought the game designed by the devs, so we play the game how the devs wanted it to be. This is a whole new game, not a shogun mod.

The cavalry rush problem is not because cavalry are too strong, it's due too the spear's low moral can't stand cavalry's charge bonus and moral penalty. If the the spear units dont run in the first few seconds, they will beat the cavs, it just takes longer in the patch. Playing at higher florin like 15k-20k will solve most of the moral problems. Also dont expect too much from the basic spearmen, they SHOULD lose to elite knights.

[Puzz3D]

LongJohn,

Spears suffer more pushback from cav, spears are more expensive, valor upgrades are more expensive and mounted knights are less expensive. All these factors are combining to affect spear/cav balance dramatically. A v2 Order Foot costs a little less than a v0 mounted knight in v1.0. However in v1.1, a v1 Order Foot costs a little more than a v0 mounted knight. So in v1.1 MP, the Order Foot has essentially lost 2 combat points, lost 2 morale points and suffers the pushback. The Order Foot would still beat the mounted knight if it would stand and fight, but it routs due to increased casualties which lowers an already lowered morale since you are fielding them at v1 rather than v2 in 10K florin games. While I think we are better this way than we were in v1.0 with the spear dominating the battles, it's possible that the spear/cav balance was shifted more than necessary. The original base cost of spears could be reinstated, and the cost of the knights raised slightly. This wouldn't affect SP at all.

That's not saying that 16 cav will beat 8 spears, 4 cav and 4 ranged in 1v1 at 10K florins because I have been able to beat 16 late period, Spanish cav with that army. However, in big 3v3 and 4v4 battles a cav army can swiftly move to effect a double team. A slow infantry ally of the player getting double teamed can't respond quickly enough at the current morale levels because his double teamed ally routs too quickly. Basically, it means you have to take a lot of cav yourself to respond to this threat.

I don't see any alternative now except to play the big MP games at 15K to 20K florins each to avoid these quick routs and make a predominately infantry army a viable alternative to a cav dominated army. The 70% cost of the valor upgrade will prevent cheap units from becoming stronger than more expensive units, so balance should be retained at this higher florin level. All non-knight infantry units will stand and fight longer with the valor upgrades that you can afford at the higher florins. You can combine this with playing early period to get rid of the heavy cav completely if desired. I think it's worth a try. The few battles I've have at 15K played better to my mind.

Unfortunatly, playing with morale off adds +12 morale to all units which basically removes morale as a consideration in battle. It would have been nice if the boost had been made a more modest +6 which would then allow playing at lower florins without the easy routing. When units stand and fight longer, maneuver and advantageous unit matchups become more important in determining victory. Even though the spears in v1.0 were very predominant, they were a slow killing unit which allowed plenty of time for maneuver. The cav isn't like that. Cav kills fast, and a 10K v1.1 battle is usually over fast as a result of that.

Small changes can have big consequences on the battles because of the complicated way all of the factors interact and the ability of human players to take advantage of those changes and emphasis their effect.