Launcher Poll Results

[Caliban]

Hi all,

These results were sent to me by Wikiman. This is from the first few days of the launcher polls.

[Alexander the Pretty Good]

Some of the results were comforting, some scary.

If CA followed policy based on the plurality for each question, I would be scared.

[Yun Dog]

Man there are just som many tantelising morsells to be teased out of this. The bottom line is I think it confirms alot of what people have been saying.

MP just doesnt have the numbers

Few people are thinking of MP with these titiles

Mods are poorly recieved by the community (a tragedy....god save me from the great unwashed)

the Hardcore STW MTW vets are numerically insignificant

CA is pretty much responding to where the numbers are with a) its development of the game and b) its xpack

thats just a quick read - but Im sure this will give new life to those old tired arguments

"bring out yer dead"

threads that is

[Omisan]

I'm kind of surpised by the 33% wanting naval battles intead of improving the campaign and land battles.

[Didz]

I think the question that was missing from the poll was:

Would you like to be able to play the campaign game against other players?

As a result the MP results are a little bit scewed. I actually answered 'Not Interested' purely becuase I interpreted the question as related to the current MP battles option. What is quite clear is that a lot of people, myself included, have played MP battles once or twice but just not been interested in them beyond the novelty value.

More interesting is that 65% of players would like to at least try a Hotseat multiplayer campaign (I assumed that Hotseat could not be related to the battle game alone). Given the general bias against Hotseat games that would suggest that percentage interested in playing a multi-player campaign by other means would be much higher.

Personally, I woud be interested in the split between those wanting PBEM and those wanting an On-line Real Time campaign game.

[sapi]

Oh, and in case no one at CA's end has noticed, you can answer each question as many times as you want

[Magraev]

MP just doesnt have the numbers

the Hardcore STW MTW vets are numerically insignificant

I heartily agree with your first statement. MP'ers are loud but far between.

The second statement is obviously a mistake. over 50% have played STW - that is insignificant? 70% have played MTW (probably including the 50% that played STW). How do you figure that to be insignificant??!?

This speaks of a very large loyal fanbase, that (like me) have bought every item on offer. Well I didn't buy Alexander, but that's the exception.

[FactionHeir]

Oh, and in case no one at CA's end has noticed, you can answer each question as many times as you want

That's one of those times when you really wonder whether or not it would be nice to have a bot tdo that

Btw, I note the absence of an "I never played MP" option in the "Do you play multiplayer" question.
Also agree with the notion that there should be a question regarding "Would you like multiplayer campaigns where you can fight against your human opponent"
Hotseat is nice and all, but not fun if you gotta autoresolve. I don't see why LAN campaigns shouldn't be possible if Hotseat is.

Also, I'm surprised at the number of people voting that CA did best on M2TW so far. I wouldn't have expected that

Something else there should have been an answer for: The question "In the next total war game I would like CA to improve"
Where is the option "Not rush the game out of the door and minimize bugs!"? :p


From the looks of the question set up, CA is considering whether its profitable to release single small campaigns and the direction of their next (or next next) TW title.

[TinCow]

The second statement is obviously a mistake. over 50% have played STW - that is insignificant? 70% have played MTW (probably including the 50% that played STW). How do you figure that to be insignificant??!?

I think he was referring to the poll which asked which game was your favorite. Only 6.7% said STW and only 11.5% said MTW. Given that over 50% played STW and over 70% played MTW, that's a major statement. There are many people who repeatedly state that STW or MTW were the best versions of the TW games, yet the poll clearly shows that most people who played STW and MTW do not consider them to be the best games in the series.

[Cheetah]

I think he was referring to the poll which asked which game was your favorite. Only 6.7% said STW and only 11.5% said MTW. Given that over 50% played STW and over 70% played MTW, that's a major statement. There are many people who repeatedly state that STW or MTW were the best versions of the TW games, yet the poll clearly shows that most people who played STW and MTW do not consider them to be the best games in the series.

This is a bit misleading, though actually quite understandable based on the poll results. Namely most of the people (over 90%) were interested in the campaign an in this regard both RTW and MTW2 is a clear improvement over STW or MTW (at least most poeple would consider 3D campaig maps, agents, diplomacy, ect a clear improvement). Of course this tells nothing about the quality of the tactical battles, in fact had it been a question I am sure votes would have been more evenly dispersed.

The results though makes me wonder about two questions:
1, The clear novelty of TW series are the tactical battles (there are many empire building games with better diplomacy, more depth, etc). Yet, most people are interested in the campaign. Why?

2, People almost constantly complain about the weakness of the tactical AI. Many people would regard it as the weakest part of the TW series at the moment. Most people voted to spend more time playing the battles than the campaign map. Yet more than half of the voters voted to improve the campaign, and a only a small minority interested in MP where arguably you can find the very best opponents and can have a lot more challanging battles than you can ever have against the AI. Why is that that people spend their time playing SP battles, constantly complain about the AI, and yet not interested in MP?

[Shahed]

Hi Caliban,

Thank you very much posting. Could you please repost that image using another service ? Bandwidth exceeded for that one.

Many thanks in advance.

..and Thank you all at CA for a great game !

[crpcarrot]

I think he was referring to the poll which asked which game was your favorite. Only 6.7% said STW and only 11.5% said MTW. Given that over 50% played STW and over 70% played MTW, that's a major statement. There are many people who repeatedly state that STW or MTW were the best versions of the TW games, yet the poll clearly shows that most people who played STW and MTW do not consider them to be the best games in the series.

if this same question was asked b4 M2TW i think you would have seen how many TW fans were really upset. I thnk CA have done really well with M2TW the battles really are interesting and the seiges are great. but before M2TW and atch i would have answered that same question MTW. during RTW CA lost me as a cutomer i never bought any of the expansions and wasnt even going to buy M2 but did sine i got it really cheap. and i'm glad to see that CA has turned things around.

I voted M2 as my fav game

[TinCow]

The results though makes me wonder about two questions:
1, The clear novelty of TW series are the tactical battles (there are many empire building games with better diplomacy, more depth, etc). Yet, most people are interested in the campaign. Why?

2, People almost constantly complain about the weakness of the tactical AI. Many people would regard it as the weakest part of the TW series at the moment. Most people voted to spend more time playing the battles than the campaign map. Yet more than half of the voters voted to improve the campaign, and a only a small minority interested in MP where arguably you can find the very best opponents and can have a lot more challanging battles than you can ever have against the AI. Why is that that people spend their time playing SP battles, constantly complain about the AI, and yet not interested in MP?

I can only speak for myself, but I find MP battles meaningless. I am a lot more interested in battles when I have trained the armies myself, when the general is someone that I value, and where the battle results have implications beyond winning or losing. In MP, there's only winning or losing. In SP, Pyhrric victories can occur and you can also have defeats that you are proud of. I would be playing MP constantly if it was possible in the campaign, but it simply holds no interest for me when it's restricted to single battles.

[frogbeastegg]

Why is that that people spend their time playing SP battles, constantly complain about the AI, and yet not interested in MP?

Because we want to play SP

I've tried MP. While it may have upped the challenge level (debatable; it depends heavily on the others in the game) it severely cut back the convenience. Waiting around in the lobby is not my idea of fun; I'd rather be playing the game. I also want to play when I want, for as long as I want. When other people enter the equation this becomes harder, as you need to wait for enough people to fill a game and dropping out midway isn't polite.

I'm not so keen on the people aspect of it either. If you get the wrong people in the game then it's no fun at all. RTW’s cav horde spammers, 1337 speakers, obnoxious people, those who take it all too seriously and forget it is meant to be fun ... Gah! For every nice person I met there were more I was not so fond of.

Individual battles don't truly interest me. I like my campaigns. That's the ultimate reason why I don't play MP. Would I play a MP campaign if there was one? No, never. I don't want the hassle of trying to find decent people to play with. Again, I want to play when I like for as long as I like, not just when all the others can. I want to play in my preferred style; I like steady, slow games, not rush and crush conquest fests. I want to be able to dump the campaign if and when it becomes boring for me, not to feel obliged to play to the bitter end for the sake of others. Having someone rushing would make the game less enjoyable for me, just as my slower style of play would make it dull for others who don't share my preference.

There are things which can be done in SP which would be tedious in MP. Conquering the entire world map, for example. All fine and good for the player who is winning and able to pull that off, but what about the others?

I'll take better AI over better MP any day. SP will always be my priority and preference.

That's not to say I don't care about MP at all. I'd like to see the battle side of it working to a high standard. I used to play VI and the earlier versions of RTW with a nice group of people; if M2TW was good enough they might come back and [FF]frogbeastegg would join them for the occasional game.


EDIT: Forgot to say that SP can throw up loads of varied battle scenarios. In MP you don't have battered armies, or badly outnumbered ones, or ones filled with low quality units because your faction is bankrupt and can't raise a new army filled with better units, or ones led by a mad general, or ...

[Doug-Thompson]

Hi all,

These results were sent to me by Wikiman. This is from the first few days of the launcher polls.

Hmm. All I can see is "imagehosting.com: Bandwidth limit exceeded."

[econ21]

The clear novelty of TW series are the tactical battles (there are many empire building games with better diplomacy, more depth, etc). Yet, most people are interested in the campaign. Why?

Interesting question - I agree with Tincow and frogbeastegg, the answer is that the campaign gives meaning to the battles. What I really enjoy are the amazing battles, which as you say are the novelty and comparative advantage of TW over other titles. But I only can be motivated to play the battles if they are part of an over-arcing campaign, where they matter.

Forget about MP for a moment, as there is the social side and other sides to that, but think about the SP historical battles. They generally provide a better challenge than SP campaign battles and can be more realistic, but still they hold zero interest to me. They just seem a little pointless. Most hardcore wargames also seem rather like this - offering standalone battles or at best linked scenarios. The beauty of TW is embedding the awesome battles within an open campaign, with a real economic and strategic layer as well as increasing diplomatic and role-playing features.

I good analogy might be with a TV series, whether people like standalone stories (one per episode) or a long over-arching plot that spans the entire series. I find the 45 minute standalone format can often be rather limiting and lead to something rather trite, whereas my imagination can be caught by the 5 year story arc of Bablyon 5 or Lost's planned 6 year story arc that really lets you get caught up with the story and plot.

[TB666]

I never liked to play MP. Single-player campaign is the best.
Like Tincow said, we use generals that means something to us, armies we have trained and fought with thus creating a bond.
In MP there is none of that.

[HoreTore]

Oh, and in case no one at CA's end has noticed, you can answer each question as many times as you want

Are you completely sure they don't screen the answers through an IP-check?

1, The clear novelty of TW series are the tactical battles (there are many empire building games with better diplomacy, more depth, etc). Yet, most people are interested in the campaign. Why?

Not true. The great thing about TW, is that it COMBINES the two. You can have better empire builders, and you can have better battle games(a lot of them for the musket age). But you won't find a game combining the two in a better way. So, we want both, not just one of them!

[FactionHeir]

Doing it via IP isn't gonna help. They ought to do it via CDkey

[Vlad Tzepes]

Hmm. All I can see is "imagehosting.com: Bandwidth limit exceeded."

Me too. Am I missing something?

[HoreTore]

Doing it via IP isn't gonna help. They ought to do it via CDkey

Imagine what would happen if that leaked.

[Caliban]

I asked Wikiman to add multiplayer campaign option to "What feature do you want most of all.." :)

I think the question that was missing from the poll was:

Would you like to be able to play the campaign game against other players?

As a result the MP results are a little bit scewed. I actually answered 'Not Interested' purely becuase I interpreted the question as related to the current MP battles option. What is quite clear is that a lot of people, myself included, have played MP battles once or twice but just not been interested in them beyond the novelty value.

More interesting is that 65% of players would like to at least try a Hotseat multiplayer campaign (I assumed that Hotseat could not be related to the battle game alone). Given the general bias against Hotseat games that would suggest that percentage interested in playing a multi-player campaign by other means would be much higher.

Personally, I woud be interested in the split between those wanting PBEM and those wanting an On-line Real Time campaign game.

[Yun Dog]

I think he was referring to the poll which asked which game was your favorite. Only 6.7% said STW and only 11.5% said MTW. Given that over 50% played STW and over 70% played MTW, that's a major statement. There are many people who repeatedly state that STW or MTW were the best versions of the TW games, yet the poll clearly shows that most people who played STW and MTW do not consider them to be the best games in the series.

Yes thankyou TinCow, I shouldve elaborated - but you nailed it
RTW a whopping 90% of respondants and 77%'s favourite was M2 or RTW

and almost 70% believe the titles are getting better - to me this is all the confirmation CA need to keep doing what they are doing and not to listen to the vocal detractors - I include myself amongst them

There was an impression amongst the 'grognards' (is that what they are called? - vets cant be used it encompasses 4 generations now) that RTW was the worst, but the numbers tell a different story.

I agree Econ that polls aint polls and often how you ask a question can be as important - and the multiple voting etc - but I think the numbers look like a reasonable sample of the TW buying public

and I agree with the others that the reason people are hooked on campaign yet the battles is because a battle only becomes significant in the context of the bigger picture - as there is nothing like this on MP anymore - even in the form of a ladder competition - then the battles on MP have no significance

looking at that further - the "have you ever played online" question didnt have a null or no option - 50% had played 'Once' - this says to me they came they saw - it was ordinary/ it was gamespy - they left

maybe it was lag or poor interface or the only context being bragging rights with a bunch of people you dont know... meh .. says to me their first M2TW online experience was so horrible they ran screaming. Then most said they just werent interested... but does this go back to the lack of context or setting for the battles in MP.

As an amusing aside we had 5% pacificts playing a Total War game - I find this warmongering trend amongst pacificts very concerning - and I hold TW and CA responsible for converting these nice fluffy pink pacificts into a wild bezerker blood thirsty mob !!!

Im going to go out on a limb here and say I think the numbers for online campaign will be almost identical to those for hotseat - some hardcore TW lovers want it more than sex (which they probably havent had in a very long time ) and the rest of the masses are like - meh! I know this is upsetting as I am one the aforementioned..but again when it comes to a commercial product we are all slaves to the will of the great unwashed!!

Naval battles - played it in Imperial Glory - naval battles are a game in themselves - tacked on to this or any other game they will be lame - sorry - let it go - and push for someone to make a Master and Commander game - or go back to pirates - HAR!!!

40-50% had never played a mod, with EB out and others MTW XL I could go on - sorry that means 40% of TW consumers are lamers and its surprising they even know how to turn their computer on to play M2TW.

Interesting there was a spread on the total war fantasy - but a clear majority saying yes which I think goes someway to the disappearance of much of the need for historical content and accuracy in the games - and it may diminish still further - which would be a pity - but can be modded back in, which is encouraging.

Finally 80% believed CA were listening which if you bothered to read alot of the post over at the .com, you would feel was not the case, again a vocal minority.

disclaimer - not intending to hurt anyones feeling its all a bit tongue in cheek - please read it thus.

[PutCashIn]

6.3% CD Key issues, blame Windoze (I did, I feel better for it too).

[PutCashIn]

P.S. 41% would play Hotseat, thats the girl/friend component talking CA, ignore at your own peril.

[Yun Dog]

P.S. 41% would play Hotseat, thats the girl/friend component talking CA, ignore at your own peril.

call


personally Im happy my wife has no interest in TW

I mean whats going to happen when you put one of her citys to the sword

tears and 'no sex for you' *in soup nazi voice

[Foz]

call


personally Im happy my wife has no interest in TW

I mean whats going to happen when you put one of her citys to the sword

tears and 'no sex for you' *in soup nazi voice

Right... but will you care??? I mean, come on... you just put one of her cities to the sword! Tears and sex be damned, you'll be walking on air for at least a week.

[Magraev]

Look at the bright side:

Help your wife/girlfriend out of a sticky situation and you might get very lucky

The clarifications above made the insignificant STW-vets statement more understandable. I believe that STW was great compared to other games of that time, but it really doesn't stand up well to MTW2 or even RTW. No argument there.

Still many fans go way back, and their (our) loyalty is maintained only by keeping up the good work (talking to you CA!).

[Didz]

Divorce solves so many gaming problems, now I just need to do something about work.

Personally, I voted for Hotseat mode because my children and I like to play games together that way. Mostly CIV4 and Heroes of Might and Magic but something like MTW2 which we all play seperately anyway would be awesome.

[sapi]

One other thing to keep in mind is that the people who voted on this poll are those who had downloaded the leaked 1.2 patch and thus are much more likely to be STW-playing TW addicts than the general populace...

The 'unofficialness' of the patch the data was gathered from would also have decreased the number of MP players who answered...