MTW and M2TW

[Peasant Phill]

I've asked this question in the Citadel, but as most of the people there haven't seriously played MTW I'm not sure if they will be able to give a decent answer.

I've upgraded my PC but as a result I can't play MTW anymore (which I have been enjoying for years now). I thought by myself that this would be a good time to 'upgrade' my TW-game as wel. As most of you here, it's the challenge and the gameplay I enjoy more than the graphical presentation.

So, in your experience with both MTW and M2TW, what configuration (M2TW + patches + expansionpack + mod) comes the closest to MTW in the challenge it poses. Is it good enough to buy or will I just be disapointed?

[Raz]

Ooph, here we've got those that haven't seriously played M2TW, so I'm not sure if we can give a decent answer.
Jokes. ~:joker:

In all seriousness though, most mods for M2TW aim to provide a more challenging game. Try the Vanilla Mod if you want to stick close to the original M2TW. Otherwise you could try Stainless Steel or Lands to Conquer. If you feel you want a longer game, you could also try The Long Road. Some of these mods may require the expansion, so if your thinking of getting M2TW + Expansion, include mod compatibility somewhere in the equation.

Hope that helps, and hopefully you'll enjoy M2TW more than I did (Honestly, I didn't really get much fun out of it). :thumbsup:

Edit: I guess what you could do is if you don't like the game all too much (even with a mod or two) you could always return it and say that it was a birthday present etc. and the game didn't work. :wink2:

[Csargo]

M2TW was a total disappoint for me. Even with mods and patches it still didn't play how it should have. I've played both games pretty seriously, but imho MTW is the better game. I never got my monies worth out of M2TW. It all comes down to what you like and honestly I curse the day I bought that game. :wall:

[Roark]

I've played a few dozen rounds of campaign and a couple of battles within M2TW, but before I actually purchase it, I'm waiting for that magic patch which makes it as playable and challenging as MTW.

I suspect I'll be waiting a looong time.

[Martok]

To be honest, my knowledge & experience with Medieval 2 is rather limited. I've not played any of the mods, nor have I played the game with Kingdoms installed. I can only comment on vanilla M2TW, and even there I've not played it that extensively.

My feelings are that it recaptures a fair bit of the flavor & atmosphere that Rome lacked, but it doesn't truly compare to MTW (much less Shogun). The AI is....better than its predecessor, but still displays a certain degree of incompetence -- the combat AI is now at least okay, but the campaign AI is terrible at economics and teching up properly. Diplomacy is still broken, but then it's not that great in MTW either. I will admit that I find the religious aspects are somewhat improved (IMHO) -- only the Papacy can train/dispatch Inquisitors now, which helps, and I've found that maneuvering for votes in Papal elections is actually rather enjoyable. The battle UI in Medieval 2 is generally a bit easier to use than its predecessor, and cities/castles don't need to be micromanaged anymore than they do in MTW.

Gah! I could go on, but the bottom line (from my perspective) is this: M2TW is a decent game. Not great -- not on the level of MTW or Shogun -- but it's still probably better than most.

[Peasant Phill]

Thanks for the replies but they don't make the decision any easier. I knew M2TW wouldn't match up to MTW but what I've read from you guys and in the Citadel is just scary.

I've read that M2TW+kingdoms+Stainless Steel is the way to go if you want to make it a bit more challenging.
Or I could just wait for ETW but with the trend of the last few games I don't really have high hopes.

[Ciaran]

Well, it´s not a particularly easy question to answer. I suppose both games have their strengths and weaknesses. Yes, the strategic AI of M2TW makes foolish decisions, but then again, if I´m entirely honest I can´t say the MTW one is better. I can´t even count the numerous times when factions, which I had reduced to one province still stubbornly refused a ceasefire, or long time allies won´t accept marriage proposals. It´s still the battlefield that´s my main gripe, the combat mechanism of MTW is still superior (the simple numerical rank bonus for spears and pikes instead of spearwall or phalanx, for example, or the ability to dismount cavalry at my discretion; not to mention the fact that seemingly it matters which kind of animation a unit has to decide the combat results - an absolute horror in my opinion, stats should be everything). I like the M2TW sieges, though, it´s the single one aspect where I consider it the best gamne of the series (not that they couldn´t be even better if I could dismount my cavalry in the deployment phase of a siege...).

[Peasant Phill]

Well, it´s not a particularly easy question to answer. I suppose both games have their strengths and weaknesses. Yes, the strategic AI of M2TW makes foolish decisions, but then again, if I´m entirely honest I can´t say the MTW one is better. I can´t even count the numerous times when factions, which I had reduced to one province still stubbornly refused a ceasefire, or long time allies won´t accept marriage proposals. It´s still the battlefield that´s my main gripe, the combat mechanism of MTW is still superior (the simple numerical rank bonus for spears and pikes instead of spearwall or phalanx, for example, or the ability to dismount cavalry at my discretion; not to mention the fact that seemingly it matters which kind of animation a unit has to decide the combat results - an absolute horror in my opinion, stats should be everything). I like the M2TW sieges, though, it´s the single one aspect where I consider it the best gamne of the series (not that they couldn´t be even better if I could dismount my cavalry in the deployment phase of a siege...).

You're entirely right that the MTW AI made very foolish decisions on the world map but due to the worldmap being far simpler it could still make for more than just a little challenge.

Does the animation make the result to randomn?

[Ciaran]

No, actually, more to the contrary. According to everything I´ve read, it leads not to random, but unexpected results, if you just compare the stats of two units.

I agree on the part with the campaign map. On that note, I also find the more abstract map of MTW far more immersive than the campaign map of RTW or M2TW. The latter just don´t manage to convey the feeling of actually sitting at a royal council, deciding the grand strategy for the next year.

[Peasant Phill]

No, actually, more to the contrary. According to everything I´ve read, it leads not to random, but unexpected results, if you just compare the stats of two units.

I agree on the part with the campaign map. On that note, I also find the more abstract map of MTW far more immersive than the campaign map of RTW or M2TW. The latter just don´t manage to convey the feeling of actually sitting at a royal council, deciding the grand strategy for the next year.

So a stronger unit, statwise, will almost always win against a weaker unit (all things being equal) but they'll suffer more or less casaulties than you would expect when compairing their stats?

I actually like the freedom the RTW/M2TW map gives as long as the AI can handle it.

[seireikhaan]

I've been playing M2 some lately, and I'd sum up the comparison like this:

MTW- Easy to learn, hard to master.

M2TW- Hard to learn, easy to master.

One thing that has been bugging me eternally in my current campaign with the Moors(:inquisitive: Moors? Really? C'mon, its not that hard to figure out they were properly called the Almoravids), is that I've been battling 6 different full stack armies sent at Tunis, crushing them with a camel/camel gunner army in North Africa with roughly 200 casualties total.

Another thing that bugs me is that guns are overpowered for the most part. They fire in rain, for one thing. :inquisitive: And for another thing, the guns seem to have far too much range.

Anyways, its been fairly fun playing SS 4.1 and Broken Crescent, but I frankly can't possibly imagine trying to play vanilla.