a Lord played MTW2

[Lord Adherbal]

Lord Chretzel (from the Lordz modding team) says he played MTW2:

i played Medieval Total War 2 day before yesterday at the games convention. dont think this hasnt been released anywhere?

visually it really seems like the game is not far from done.
i think they are really testing on game balance.

picked the battles of agincourt and parma. i think they included two more in the preview.
animations doesnt seem to be finished yet as well. soldiers would move strangely slow. there was a unit of arkebusiers. they could change their formations while shooting, the first line would turn around and step back for the next line to come forward and shoot. but in slowmo. horrible to look at. and i dont remember about the reloading but altogether it looked odd, not very fluent.


basicly they put a lot more polys in vegetation. great variety of bushes and plants in different settings. it looked awesome.
the unit models and textures were looking fine. they made a great use of gloss maps
flags looked very nice. they are more important, because of the detail made it even harder for me to distinguish units.

but unit handling seemed to need some more work. maybe i had too many prosecco, but units were really hard to control. i felt like half of my clicks were ignored. surrounding the enemy seemed not to bring any advantage. knights moved slow and fought weak. i tried to rush into the enemy but some units would stop for no appearent reason before getting into melee.

don't wanna be pessimistic yet, but especially the "surrounding the enemy seemed not to bring any advantage" and "some units would stop for no appearent reason" sounds like major problems from the RTW engine that still not fixed?

[Ibn Munqidh]

I must say Im dissappointed, especially from the last paragraph from his writing. The arquebusiers, I really hope they can clean this up too.

Thanks fro posting Addy!

PS: Its old Overlord_63 here ;)

[Doug-Thompson]

More evidence that unit speed and meatcutter kill rates have been toned down.

[x-dANGEr]

Good news..

// They won't releast the game with such clear un-fluent gameplay.. So it will prolly be fixed.

[L'Impresario]

Those will be the days, when we 'll all be lamenting the loss of the awesome RTW gameplay and blaming CA's catering to ages over 80, slow motion movement and all...
They took a masterpiece and turned it into monopoly for inmates.

[CBR]

Well if half his clicks were ignored then the pc was choking when he played. But from the latests vids the overall speed has not been reduced, so I doubt the slow animations he is talking has anything to do about speed and killrate.


CBR

[professorspatula]

In one of those preview videos, you can also see some of the RTW issues weren't resolved, like the cavalry who failed to properly charge down a unit of infantry. At the end of the video, instead of charging straight through them, they turn and hit the end infantry man instead, the kind of nonsense that made chasing down routers in RTW annoying. Hopefully all these issues will be resolved before the game is released.

The final demo could be very telling if the battle engine is finalised for it. I can only remember playing the RTW one and thinking it must be a cut down/easy version of the full game, only to discover, no, the real thing is the same.

[Lord Adherbal]

I'm rather pessimistic that CA actualy went through the problems of the battle engine and fixed them. I bet they don't even consider most of these thing to be significant problems. And they might not be in SP were you win easily anyway, but they are very frustrating in MP games.

As always, the demo will have to convince me that I'm wrong. Or a full game review from a reliable TW vet.

[Duke John]

Or a full game review from a reliable TW vet.

That could be a problem, practically all of them seem to have the same attitude.
"You buy it."
"No, you buy it!"
"I am not even touching it before you!"

[edyzmedieval]

I'll buy it.

Like I care about initial playing, I care more about modding.

[Lord Zimoa of Flanders]

On a side note Lord Chretzel was also diappointed there were no CA/Sega
representatives, being able to answer some technical questions on the engine.

He was probably better technically baggaged than the guys showing off MTW2.

The MTW2 engine has great potential, I hope they look at some great suggestions and critic raised the last two years here within the community.

We just have to wait and see and pray a little...

LZoF

[Martok]

That could be a problem, practically all of them seem to have the same attitude.
"You buy it."
"No, you buy it!"
"I am not even touching it before you!"

Guilty as charged.

[econ21]

This was a good topic, but is starting to go off-topic fast and to veer into territory that is strictly off limits within the Org forums. I've deleted posts referring to that territory, so let's forget all about them and get back to the subject of the first post. Any more off-topic stuff, I'll lock the thread and start handing out warning points.

[Midnight]

This is disappointing news. Personally, I don't care about vegetation, beautiful units, etc, since I usually don't have the camera very close (otherwise I miss things on the battlefield). I'm not happy to hear that units sometimes still just stop dead for no reason, and if surrounding the enemy now does next to nothing...

[Lord Adherbal]

if surrounding the enemy now does next to nothing...

in RTW it gives a morale penalty, but no combat penalty (or one that is so small that it has no effect). The result is that unless the surrounded unit routs, it will not suffer from being surrounded by weaker units. If it could beat the 2 weaker units in a head-on attack, it'll beat them even faster when they try to surround it.

[Puzz3D]

Posted at the Total War Forums by the player who played the demo.

The Demo Battles were very very easy to win and i have to say the combat is pretty fast , even infantry combat.....

....Mark Sutherns , Marketing Manager from Creative Assembly said for him personally Total Realism is very impressive but impossible to do it by themselves because its pointed to hardcore players and CA wants to reach all types of players but it's are great work that you did and he hopes that the fans of Medieval 2 will do something for this game aswell.

I think this says it all. Creative Assembly is continuing down the path they started with RTW. If that doesn't please you, you must be a hardcore player. Wait for the SP mods a year or so down the road, and hope at least one of them improves the gameplay enough that you find it worth playing. For multiplayer, I'm putting my effort into Samurai Wars.

[CBR]

All combat is based on individual soldiers fighting. If they turn towards the threat there wont be any special flank/rear modifier for the attacker. That has been the case in all total war games.

But RTW soldiers sense danger and turn towards it and that wasnt really the case in STW/MTW until after enemy impact.


CBR

[Lord Adherbal]

then the modding support AND the combat engine had better been excellent cos I'm not gonna bother modding with buggy tools and a flawed engine again.

[Lord Adherbal]

All combat is based on individual soldiers fighting. If they turn towards the threat there wont be any special flank/rear modifier for the attacker. That has been the case in all total war games.

hm I always had the feeling most units started "losing (badly)" once they became surrounded, while they would be "winning (easily)" when attacking in one direction only.

How can a man still fight at 100% effeciency when he's "wavering" by the knowledge that the enemy is all around him. Not to mension how important of the support from deeper ranks was in infantry combat.

[Little Legioner]

The Demo Battles were very very easy to win and i have to say the combat is pretty fast , even infantry combat.....

....Mark Sutherns , Marketing Manager from Creative Assembly said for him personally Total Realism is very impressive but impossible to do it by themselves because its pointed to hardcore players and CA wants to reach all types of players but it's are great work that you did and he hopes that the fans of Medieval 2 will do something for this game aswell.

This is a disaster, then

Just imagine a person who wants to reach all types of person at any cost. You can't do that if you are man of principle.

While the CA was acting like that they are completely erasing personality and extraordinary style of TW series. Infact, willingly they make the game simply ordinary. Excuse my words but they aimed on not making the best but money.

I remember tons of realism mods in RTW! I don't remember RTW as a complete game. RTW was a cripple game which needs a mod staff for walking.

[x-dANGEr]

in RTW it gives a morale penalty, but no combat penalty (or one that is so small that it has no effect). The result is that unless the surrounded unit routs, it will not suffer from being surrounded by weaker units. If it could beat the 2 weaker units in a head-on attack, it'll beat them even faster when they try to surround it.

Isn't the fact that the Defence Skill or the Shield ratios aren't counted for attacks from the back enough..

[Little Legioner]

I'll buy it.

Like I care about initial playing, I care more about modding.

Then, we should pay much more money compared to CA?

Total Realism is very impressive but impossible to do it by themselves because its pointed to hardcore players and CA wants to reach all types of players but it's are great work that you did and he hopes that the fans of Medieval 2 will do something for this game aswell.

We do you fix they say simply. Isn't it? "Do something" yes modders do something. Thanks to god we have talented modders to "do something".

CA made me a pessimist person. Shortly i'm dying to learn that whats were so wrong in older series? What was wrong in STW and MTW? They were'nt able to reach "all types of players" ? They were financialy a failure? So, what?

[The Blind King of Bohemia]

There are probably alot more things to be ironed out before the release. Just because the AI is bad at Agincourt doesn't mean anything. All this pessimism about the game is gettting really old and really boring me now

[Lord Adherbal]

Isn't the fact that the Defence Skill or the Shield ratios aren't counted for attacks from the back enough..

which only matters if the unit is 1 rank deep, or when the soldiers haven't turned around yet before their are charged in the back.

[CBR]

A unit hit in the flank or rear would have much higher loss rate. Some soldiers didnt have time to turn before getting hit and then the next rank of soldiers could be hit that then had to run because they by default are facing forward.

I have seen units that fought for some time, even when totally surrounded, simply because they didnt take that many losses at first and all the men who had an opponent had turned to face them them.

In RTW that just happens more often as soldiers dont have to have an opponent attacking them before turning towards him.

How can a man still fight at 100% effeciency when he's "wavering" by the knowledge that the enemy is all around him. Not to mension how important of the support from deeper ranks was in infantry combat.

A square/column formation should be able to fight properly even though its surrounded and that is pretty historical too. Of course there is always a danger that parts of the unit would fall back a bit if combat goes badly, and the unit overall would be too compressed.

But historically a unit surprised by an enemy coming in from the rear would most likely rout even before impact. Even if the rear ranks managed to turn around they would overall not be of the same fighting quality as the front ranks of the unit.

AFAIK pike units went into a dense formation (half the normal width per man) when facing cavalry and used 4 ranks of pikes, so that would mean a formation of 8 ranks were needed to face cavalry with maximum/optimal number of pikes.


CBR

[Lord Adherbal]

A square/column formation should be able to fight properly even though its surrounded and that is pretty historical too. Of course there is always a danger that parts of the unit would fall back a bit if combat goes badly, and the unit overall would be too compressed.

that only counts when they have spears, pikes or bajonets and when it faces cavalry. Squares repelled cavalry because horses would refuse to walk into the hedge of sharp points, and the horsemen would not be able to reach the enemy with their swords.

The only accounts of squares being broken by cavalry is when they either broke before contact, or when the muskets were disabled by rainy weather and enemy lancers would ride up to the square and stab their way through the line of infantry - whose bajonets could not outreach the lance.


Remember how the romans were slaughtered at Cannae. If they didn't "receive a combat penalty" from the panic that spread then how would so few carthaginian soldiers with worse equipment ever be able to slaughter so much romans.

Aslong as a strong unit can attack the enemy head on they can push forward and grind through the enemy. But when they are suddenly attacked in the back, the rear ranks can nolonger give support to that forward movement. Any attempt to move forward in a certain direction will open up the formation allowing individual men to become surrounded and killed easily. Add to that the fear from the knowledge that there is no way to retreat to anymore, soldiers will be much less focused on attacking but only about staying alife.

[Puzz3D]

Isn't the fact that the Defence Skill or the Shield ratios aren't counted for attacks from the back enough..

For individual combat yes, but for unit level combat RTW isn't playing like STW/MTW. I happened to be running some tests in Samurai Wars last night, and I had to confront a YC (yari cav) with an NC (naginata cav). The YC will defeat the NC frontally. I think an NC in hold formation can last about 1 minute vs a YC. The YC had the NC down to half strength while it had lost only 10%. However, I had a CA (cav archer) at 60% strength nearby. If I had thrown that CA into the melee frontally I would have lost, but I maneuvered the CA around and hit the YC from the back. The 90% strength YC routed. In STW/MTW, a rear attack gets a 350% combat bonus or a 500% combat bonus if charged in the rear for a couple of combat cycles. This coupled with the morale penalty associated with rear attack tripped the YC into a rout.

The system is balanced so that a rear attack with a unit that would loose frontally can rout a strong unit if the strong unit is already engaged. A rear attack by itself will rout a relatively weak unit. You can get this gameplay in STW/MTW while still having the units stand and fight for a relatively long time when only engaged frontally. That's what sets up the ablility to carry out these flanking meneuvers, and you can do it multiple times during a battle. We spent long time making sure this kind of gameplay worked in Samurai Wars for MTW/VI.

[The Spartan (Returns)]

well CA is still working on it right?

[Lord Adherbal]

well CA is still working on it right?

they are still working on parts of the game, yes. But the believe that they would fix the problems of the RTW demo is what led many to buy RTW and be disappointed. I rather complain now, giving CA more time to decide whether these problems need to be fixed or not. But considering they didn't fix it after the RTW demo, patches and BI expansion I don't have much hope they're gonna fix it now.

[Puzz3D]

Well it's interesting because in an interview he gave more than a week ago Bob Smith said the game was finished and they were just tweaking it. Player 753 who just played the demo said the game seemed to be about 70% completed and that it crashed a lot because parts were unfinished. There may not be a whole lot of time to spend on AI programming once the unfinished pieces are really finished.

If you want to be a paying beta tester then buy the game when it first comes out, give feedback and hope CA can fix the major issues in the first patch.