View Full Version : No excuse to not buy a classic.
So I was thinking about TW and how the series progressed when I realized something. I have never played STW-MI. Ever! I bought the original STW and played up to 1.12 but never upgraded and got the expansion, it was something I always felt kinda bad about but never something I felt strongly enough to change. That's when I saw this (http://www.amazon.com/Shogun-Total-Mongol-Invasion-Expansion-pc/dp/B0000CFU9U/ref=sr_1_5?ie=UTF8&s=videogames&qid=1234947120&sr=1-5).
While browsing around looking at deals on the Empire Total war SF ed, i saw Shogun: Warlord Ed(includes original game and expansion), for under 20 dollars! It didn't surprise me when I thought about it, the game's been out 8+ years, but with a price so low there was no way I could pass it up. I splurged on one day delivery and sometime Thursday I'll receive my copy. :2thumbsup:
For all you vets of the TW era who got in during RTW or MTW, if you never played STW this is a great chance to grab up the title that started it all for a really low price. The graphics aren't flashy, but it's a great buy. :yes:
May the enemy flee in terror from your Mongol Horde, may your powder be dry and may the terrain always be favourable.
:bow:
AggonyDuck
02-18-2009, 12:11
It's a great game, if your computer can run it.
So I was thinking about TW and how the series progressed when I realized something. I have never played STW-MI. Ever! I bought the original STW and played up to 1.12 but never upgraded and got the expansion, it was something I always felt kinda bad about but never something I felt strongly enough to change.
The Warlord Edition is poorly balanced.
Krasturak
02-19-2009, 08:43
Hey, Yuuki, didn't you make a re-balance version for MI?
If you could post a link, that might embellish your opinion posted above.
Hey, Yuuki, didn't you make a re-balance version for MI?
If you could post a link, that might embellish your opinion posted above.
You can show mathematically that Warlords Edition was poorly balanced, and I am referring to the v1.2 re-balance version. However, it isn't just my opinion because, within one month of release, online participation dropped from over 100 players and increasing on weekends to only 35 players. The re-balance only brought participation up to 45 on weekends, and that number remained static until shortly before MTW was released. I can't post a link because I personally kept track of these participation numbers for myself at the time since I was involved in the re-balance effort and wanted a measure of its success. In addition to that, the SP campaign was harder in the original STW v1.12 than it was in the Warlords Edition.
Togakure
02-19-2009, 16:53
One very nice thing about the Warlord edition is that there are several new campaign scenarios (starting in 1530, 1550, 1580 and the Mongol Invasion), which add a lot of interesting playtime to the original game.
I enjoyed WE very much, both SP and MP. It has differences that have been viewed as cons, but I think it's really a matter of personal taste. The troop stat can be modded if you find the balance not to your liking.
After hundreds of hours of playing the original version, I obtained WE and never looked back except for a few comparison tests. I found WE to be better suited for my tastes overall, and a few glaring issues with the original (the endgame "Hojo hordes" issue in particular) were fixed.
***
In regard to the whole MP community thing, my understanding was that folks could still log in and play the original version online, in addition to WE. Why didn't those who didn't like the WE balance just go back to playing original? Perhaps there was more to why the numbers dropped than just the mass disapproval of the new version.
No, AFAIK once the new version was out the servers began running it, this meant that MP players had to move on to the new version. Puzz3D will correct me if I'm wrong.
Togakure
02-19-2009, 19:13
Heh, actually yes. That wasn't really a question, Asai Nagamasa/Caravel, and I'll be happy to correct you (I am formerly Togakure O'Jonin). Yuuki is undeniably knowledgeable about such things, but there are others with experience and knowledge here.
On the official STW server at the time that I was active almost daily in MP (2003-2005), I know that if two players had the same version of STW, be it original 1.xx or WE/MI 1.0x and one created a game, the other could see it and join it. It was possible to play either on the server, just as it's possible to play both vanilla MTW and VI on the same official server now. You can still do this on a fakeserver.
Masamune,
Sorry, I didn't realise you were referring to fakeservers, must have misunderstood your post then...
:bow:
R'as al Ghul
02-19-2009, 20:42
Hi Nagamasa,
I think Masamune is saying that as long as two players have the same version (which one doesn't matter, mods also work) they can play a game, whether they are on the official server or on the fakeserver doesn't matter. That's also my experience.
R'as
R'as,
Yes I had gathered that. I had thought that Masamune was referring to the official servers.
:bow:
Hi Nagamasa,
I think Masamune is saying that as long as two players have the same version (which one doesn't matter, mods also work) they can play a game, whether they are on the official server or on the fakeserver doesn't matter. That's also my experience.
R'as
R'as al Ghul
02-19-2009, 21:11
I had thought that Masamune was referring to the official servers.
:bow:
He was.... I'm confused.:dizzy2:
:bow:
Togakure
02-19-2009, 21:27
Hehehe ... ah, conversations on the internet. Sometimes they can be so confusing.
Yeah, on both fakeservers and official TW servers, basically any version can be played. The requirement is that all players wanting to join a hosted game must have the exact same version as the host to join. Otherwise, a message is displayed saying "incompatible version" or something like that. Same goes for the map hosted; if a player doesn't have the hosted map in his installed map set, a "cannot join: message is displayed. Hope that clears things up.
Hey there R'as! Glad to see you around. Hope everything is going well now.
And sorry Asai if I sounded snippy; sometimes I still come across wrong, even when I re-read my posts several times before posting.
Creative Assembly changed the port number for each game. So, if you had STW you didn't see WE/MI games and vica versa. There were even different online rating sites for STW and WE/MI, and a player's rating appeared next to his name in the WE/MI foyer whereas it wasn't shown in STW. Only a few players, such as the Bear clan, stayed with STW while most moved to WE/MI. Most of the players that moved to WE/MI left rather than return to STW because the online community would remain drastically reduced in number since new players would naturally get the new game. WE/MI destroyed the STW community. It was inevitable. Most players move to the newer game regardless of whether it's better or worse. So, you have to hope that the new game is better than the old game or else you are stuck playing the inferior game, and the whole time you are playing the inferior game you remember the better experience of playing the better game.
Togakure
02-19-2009, 23:20
Sad, but true. I've never understood that. I'd rather play an older, better game that I like with a small group of friends, than a newer, crappier version of that game with the greater public. Meh, that's why I never played RTW, M2TW and probably won't try ETW, and would still play STW, MTW/VI, and mods like SamWars, SP or online. Running against the grain, as usual.
Masa,
You are right about the Hojo Horde problem in STW v1.12 which I solve by playing a faction within striking distance of Hojo. That limits which factions I can play, but it gains the advantage of playing against the slightly better STW v1.12 tactical AI than the WE/MI v1.02 tactical AI. I also don't have to contend with the unbalanced units such as kensai that were added to WE/MI. Yes you can remove those added units, but very few people who buy WE/MI will bother to do that. The biggest problem in WE/MI is the imbalance of the guns. Muskets are relatively cheap in WE/MI at 250 koku, but so powerful that they should be the most expensive unit in the game. They cost 175 koku in STW but are also much weaker, and they don't shoot in the rain which is actually a mistake but a fortuitous one for the gameplay.
At the time, I paid $30 for STW and it was the best game I ever bought. I paid $40 for WE/MI, and was extremely disappointed that I had to pay more for a game that was inferior in tactical playbalance. Creative Assembly ripped off the American market by refusing to sell the MI expansion (which cost $15) in the USA. STW had unprecedented playbalance for such a complex tactical game, and I thought each subsequent installment released by Creative Assembly would be even better in that regard. However, they not only couldn't maintain the playbalance in subsequent releases, they intentionally relegated tactical playbalance to a low priority. Well, that kills the gameplay experience for me since, being a high rated chess player (chess being an extremely well balanced game with deep tactical play), I'm aware of nuances in the quality of the tactical gameplay.
Togakure
02-20-2009, 08:38
I hear ya, Puzz. I did that too in original--took the Hojo out so they couldn't horde. Usually had to take out the Uesugi too as they horded sometimes also.
The most attractive MI/WE feature for me is the added campaign scenarios. I really, really enjoy those. If I get bored of one, I move to another; it added a whole lotta game time for me.
Early on I used guns when playing Single Player WE/MI and yes, they are powerful and cheap. But after the first year of playing I'd had my fill and stopped using them pretty much, preferring to field archers instead. It's too easy to route the AI with guns, and I prefer a faster, more active and aggressive battle (heh). I really don't like to sit and shoot much (though admittedly sometimes it's necessary, particularly in MP against good shooters like that dratted gun lover CBR, gah!).
My campaigns are usually finished long before muskets are available if I start in 1530 (though I'm not nearly as fast as some of these guys who can finish in less than ten game years). Even in the later campaigns I don't often use them unless I decide to play a turtling gun game for kicks (which is rare). I do sometimes use an arquebusier paired with a yari ahsigaru unit and shinobi as garrison because they are cheap, and also sometimes to bolster numbers at a key choke point to discourage attack. But when it comes to a battle, I don't usually select them, and if I do, it's never more than two units. I prefer archers even for bridge battles because their range is superior. Tactics make up for the limited ammo.
Did you find the AI building a lot of guns in WE/MI? I don't see a lot of them in my games, and by the time they show up, they're munchies for my ravenous cavalry. The AI seems to build a ton of archers, YS, monks, and some YC and CA in my games.
In regard to the "fantasy" units, I don't build kensai, and in the majority of the games I've played, neither does the AI. In one scenario, I do use battlefield ninja--1580 Tokugawa, because that faction starts with nine units of them. I group them all together without any other type of unit and use them as a special ops raiding force. The Tokugawa are pinched at the start of that campaign and require careful management and timing to be successful unless the AI does some crazy things with the other factions. I use the ninja in that campaign to raid and draw armies, and to sack provinces for much-needed koku. The AI very rarely builds them, so that's not a big problem as i see it.
I train geishas only to counter the threat of AI geishas. Nowadays the AI rarely gets to that point; we've taken out the opposition before they can develop the infrastructure necessary.
The one MI/WE unit I do use frequently is the Naginata Cav, probably because I got so used to using them in MP. In SP, I don't use them exclusively over Yari Cav, tending to mix in one or two units as reserve for running down routing infantry, with YC and a CA or two for skirmishing and flanking.
I think a good point to make here is that, despite it's weaknesses, a player can adjust his game to compensate for them and still get some great entertainment out of WE/MI, just as you did to handle the horde issue.
CA's emphasis on glitz, overwhelming, unnecessary detail, and distracting variety over solid tactical war-gaming is the primary reason why I haven't bought or played any of it's games after MTW/VI. The shibumi of STW was lost. My imagination is not so weak that I need pretty graphics to stimulate it; I need solid, balanced tactical play in order to enjoy the game. The graphics in STW and MTW/VI were and still are plenty fine for me. I, too, am sorely disappointed in CA's direction, but ... they went where the money is. They didn't get mine, but so many others eat that pretty stuff up. I think a lot of players just want that eye candy and the rush of feeling powerful and skillful. That the game play actually requires much skill or offers much diversity in tactics and strategy is not an issue for today's average gamer, I think.
I paid about $60 for the two versions. I would guess conservatively that I've played 2000 hours of STW since it came out. Considering the cost per hour of entertainment that's quite a bargain in my book, when I stop and think about what I've paid to watch films, over half of which weren't worth the money or time spent. All in all I'm very happy with what I got for my $60.
ReluctantSamurai
02-23-2009, 21:09
Puzz....I agree with the spirit of what you are saying, to the extent of modifying troop stats to be as close as they can to the original version. But not having the original version to compare the WE edition to, my opinion is probably of limited value in that respect.
But what Masamune has to say holds true for me.......I've gotten many, many hours of enjoyment out of STW/WE and it was well worth the money I payed for it.
I think the addition of the fantasy units makes for a fun diversion when one gets tired of the same-old, same-old...........I don't normally play with kensei or bfn, and even when playing a 'serious' campaign, I only make judicious use of things like muskets and Nag Cav. They make up only a small portion of my armies in nearly every campaign except for the late Oda Campaign.
All-in-all, if anyone asked me for my opinion to buy or not to buy WE, I'd give them a thumbs up.
Just my 2cents..........
Creative Assembly ripped off the American market by refusing to sell the MI expansion (which cost $15) in the USA.
I didn't know that. So MI was not sold at all in the US? :thumbsdown:
Gregoshi
02-24-2009, 00:02
I didn't know that. So MI was not sold at all in the US? :thumbsdown:
Yes it was. I bought a copy at Electronics Boutique (Gamestop nowadays), I think, right when it came out. However, it must not have been available for very long before they went to the WE because I can't recall ever seeing MI on the shelves very much at the time.
Yes it was. I bought a copy at Electronics Boutique (Gamestop nowadays), I think, right when it came out. However, it must not have been available for very long before they went to the WE because I can't recall ever seeing MI on the shelves very much at the time.
I remember MI was pulled from retail shelves very quickly, it became impossible to find a short time after it was released.
I didn't know that. So MI was not sold at all in the US? :thumbsdown:
At the very least, it almost certainly wasn't sold in South Dakota or Minnesota. I visited nearly 20 different game stores in the 2 weeks following MI's release looking for it -- in both Sioux Falls, SD, and all over southern Minnesota (including Mankato, Willmar, Rochester, and Minneapolis-St. Paul) -- and didn't find a single copy. I ended up having to wait until WE was released. :thumbsdown:
I never saw the MI add-on in the Boston area. I remember paying $40 for WE/MI at Electronics Boutique, and thinking at the time "I'm paying $40 for an add-on when I only paided $30 for the original game.".
SHOGUN TOTAL WAR GOLD EDITION is not the original SHOGUN.
While browsing around looking at deals on the Empire Total war SF ed, i saw Shogun: Warlord Ed(includes original game and expansion), for under 20 dollars!
The Warlord Edition does not contain the original game, and there is no way to restore the original gameplay using the Warlord Edition. The strategic and tactical AI is optimized for the original STW not for the Warlord Edition. There are changes in Warlord Edition at the strategic and tactical levels that the AI is not adapted to handle, and the result is that the AI is a significanty weaker opponent in Warlord Edition than it was in original STW.
the result is that the AI is a significanty weaker opponent in Warlord Edition than it was in original STW.
This is very true. I remember that I started this old thread (https://forums.totalwar.org/vb/showthread.php?t=77560) due to this very issue. The number of people having to play STW/WE(MI) on expert is evidence enough of this also. Personally I sill play with the tweaked stats from that thread on hard difficulty and it makes all the difference.
:bow:
Togakure
02-26-2009, 16:46
Sounds interesting. Wonder how I missed all this back when it was originally posted. Guess it was when I was away from the Org/gaming for a while.
I fired up WE last night for the first time in ages, thinking I might start a campaign report since some prominent reporters here will be diverting to ETW and there was still interest in more reports. But the battles were just too easy, even on Expert, and I got bored quickly.
I'll have to try this. Hopefully these modifications will make the battles against the AI more challenging/entertaining.
Hopefully these modifications will make the battles against the AI more challenging/entertaining.
You'll still get a better challenge with the original STW v1.12 campaign. The reason being that the AI clans can build infrastructure and train units at the maximum rate while you, the player, have to divide your resources between building and training. I started an STW v1.12 Takeda campaign (normal difficulty) last night, and within 6 years the choice between infrastructure and training has already become problematic. I desperately need Takeda Shingen to come of age so that I can engage the AI clans and reduce the size of their armies and take away some of their infrastructure. As I recall, you have to win battles consistently inflicting at least a 2:1 casualty ratio to keep pace. You can't sit back and not attack. You have to risk counterattack by a neutral clan. Making allies reduces a clan's inclination to attack you, so this is an important consideration.
Originally posted by Puzz3D
You'll still get a better challenge with the original STW v1.12 campaign. The reason being that the AI clans can build infrastructure and train units at the maximum rate while you, the player, have to divide your resources between building and training. I started an STW v1.12 Takeda campaign (normal difficulty) last night, and within 6 years the choice between infrastructure and training has already become problematic. I desperately need Takeda Shingen to come of age so that I can engage the AI clans and reduce the size of their armies and take away some of their infrastructure. As I recall, you have to win battles consistently inflicting at least a 2:1 casualty ratio to keep pace. You can't sit back and not attack. You have to risk counterattack by a neutral clan. Making allies reduces a clan's inclination to attack you, so this is an important consideration.
Indeed - There are other reasons too why 1.12 is better strategically.
Firstly that there is no manual pillaging or disbanding so the player cannot "live off" the land (there is still autopillage but does not return you cash - its still very important though because it slows the AI army builds and production infrastructures builds). You also cannot optmise your economy versus the standing army - say if you have built too many armies early you cannot get rid of them and the maintenance cost that goes with them to get the better units (Naginata/teppo/HC) - you are stuck with the early units until you either increase profit (that requires investing funds) or burning the early stacks by making war.
Seondly the buildings costs and build times are twice as much as in WE - this means that every decision you make (particularly early ones) is crucial to the course of the game and your survival. In WE with the smallbuild times and the cheap buildings - building order and building decisions are far less critical - the strategic game is more forgiving as a result and the signigicance of strategic choices and long term strategic vision more blurred - you end up building everything by mid game almost.
However, despite those, v1.12 strategic gameplay is unpopular with rushers and with SP enthusiasts -the very rigor that defines strategy is felt as "lack of good pace" from the first group as they are bored without a constant stream of attacking battles and as "lack of depth" by the second group as they feel restricted by the lack of toy options in the campaign.
Overall the strategic game design in the original wasnt bad. Even the geisha has its place as it makes a hedgehog/last ditch/turtle strategy viable (if another clan has the clear advantage in terms of income and armies can still fight a delay action and try to hit them with the Geisha). Agreed however that it should have been a league less lethal - definitely get killed when fails and have success chances on Daimyos similar to those that Ninjas get on Taishos. Good design - bad implementation imho.
The aspect that is really poorly designed is port transport - it should have been implemented with a transport cost that would be proportional to the distance of the jump and the number of troops transported. As it was implemented it kills off the logistical part of the game in the mid/late game.
Port raiding should have been made impossible its the only clear cheat that that game engine allows.
Bribing with diplomats its also an SP players only addition - from a strategy game design point of view its a bad choice - for example in v1.0 that the emmissaries cannot bribe when all clans are gone you still need to defeat the rebels - in WE you can force them to retreat in castle by attacking with superstacks and then bribe them. In other words the developer instead of making the rebel faction more of a challenge - it made it more of a chore.
Another minor element of WE that was wrong was the command stars banner. It makes emmissaries really superfluous - everyone can see what kind of general he is facing - when in 1.0-1.12 you need to actively scan enemy borders to see what is coming to you.
Similarly the game could benefit by making say the regional loyalty unseen and substitute insight into this information by small shinobi messages.
Additionally guns, shinobies, ninjas, emmissaries could appear in the map rather than recruited andtheir number be tied to the number of buildings they depend on (this approach thankfully is being employed in ETW i read). This would make the agent game more elegant and less bloated - no more shinobi spamming.
Teppos similarly could be "acquired" by trading posts sparingly say teppos enough to man one unit per 4 trading posts. This would make up for the AIs inefficient use and render battles after the advent of teppos as critical as before teppos arrive on the scene. It would also make the gun factory strategically important (it would support say guns for 3 teppo units).
Diplomacy as you mention is meant as a buying time option - and when needed is crucial. This is the only diplomacy that was meaningful in all TW games - yet sadly the developer used the same model and the same AI with it in situations that it didnt apply like Medieval Europe and Classical Antiquity.
Port raiding should have been made impossible its the only clear cheat that that game engine allows.
As I recall, the AI never makes amphibious invasions in STW v1.12. The player can refrain as well thus effectively eliminating them, which is how I always played the campaign. I am guilty of shinobi spamming. I was desperate.
Some players did claim that they could blitz the map and win in a short time, and IIRC there was a screen shot posted showing a quick win. I can't remember any of the details of how it was accomplished.
Of all people, you as an mp player should know that if an option is available people will use it. My dream strategy game is one that the engine does not allow any exploits. Chess comes close as the only "exploit" is that someone has to move first. Actually chess as a turn based game has a saddle-point* by game theory - however the game is so complex that they cannot calculate if the sadle-point is white wins, draw or black wins (altough the last is unlikely).
*that is simply speaking there is an optimal play-counterplay result.
Togakure
02-27-2009, 22:38
Some very good points made above, some great ideas about how things could work better. Nice.
Personally, I think it's a game strength for a player to have options, rather than be forced to play a certain way in order to succeed. A player can abide by self-imposed restrictions if some of the new features aren't to taste. Not all changes can be overcome this way, but some can. Examples of restrictions that I often use are: no turtling, no use of ports by troops, no geishas, no unit seppuku, no chevauchee, and self-imposed building limits. This allows players to choose, to a degree, what kind of game they want, instead of their general strategy being pretty much dictated if they want a shot at victory.
The spending advantage that the AI clans have in original was a real put off for me. Yep, it created pressure from the get go and made it quite challenging, but every game was like this, and for me, it got old after a while (a long while, granted). The hordes that resulted in original, time and time again, were a big downer for me.
Reducing build time and cost was a big change. Personally, I like the faster pace and reduced costs, but recognize the impact on game play when a turtle/build/late-game explosion approach is employed. Some enjoy this, so I think it's a good change, but I prefer not to play this way--primarily because it affects army balance in battles. Honor and upgrade levels are all over the place, from base to ridiculously powerful. I manage this by limiting my infrastructure and constantly expanding. I don't really have much choice if I'm constantly pushing, taking calculated risks, and utilizing available resources to their limits. This kind of pace usually results in building only a few Large Castles and the buildings/troops they enable, except for perhaps a Fortress eventually in my home province. It also limits what the AI ends up building, to a degree. When playing like this, I very rarely see Geishas, or Kensai or Battlefield Ninja that weren't present at the beginning of the game, and rarely see many guns unless playing a later campaign. The option to turtle and build a lot is there for players who enjoy that style of game. But I can play my way too, and still have a good game. The game pleases a larger audience, which I think is a good thing. Heh, what bugs me is when a larger audience is targeted at the expense of a smaller base of devoted fans ... but that's another subject.
Taking advantage of spoils can be a good or bad thing depending on the campaign and clan being played. In the 1580 Tokugawa campaign for example, attempting to emulate the purported patience of Ieyasu, I wait a lot and play a much more "respond decisively to opportunities that present themselves" kind of game rather than my more typical steady expansion. Given the starting position, income is a big challenge. Playing this way against the strong, tech'd-up opposition present in this campaign requires judicious use of spoils income and careful diplomacy until sufficient expansion is achieved. It's one of my favorite, more challenging campaigns.
It's interesting that the considerable advantage of AI spending in original is sometimes viewed as a feature that makes the game better and more challenging, while being able to raid via port is often viewed as a "cheat." Having options is a good thing; if players don't like a feature, they can choose not to use it. The AI spending advantage cannot be changed and has a huge impact on the game. I think this is a far more serious issue. Being able to adjust AI spending levels (like in the Civ series) would be an improvement, providing players with a choice.
I have the original Shogun sitting right here, but haven't played it since getting WE that I can remember. Some of its characteristics described in recent posts are bringing back foggy memories of when I played original STW religiously from the time it was released to the time WE came out, in Total Rapture. I really should make it a point to play it again, to re-familiarize myself with its strengths and weaknesses.
Sasaki Kojiro
02-27-2009, 23:07
The addition of the 1530, 1550, and 1580 campaigns is what makes WE shine. The rebels and ronin are pacifists in the original and in the sengoku campaign, and thus pushovers. In the period campaigns they will band together and attack you full force. When I go back to original shogun I also notice some missing features--shift to see how unhappy your provinces are, the greater ability to merge units, the ability to choose which troops you start with when you have a large army, reinforcements not coming in on one section of the map, the ability for ninja's to infiltrate a castle under seige. And of course the old version lacks the mongols, the historical campaigns, and the fun new units.
I think the people waxing on about how much more challenging the original shogun was are simply remembering back when they weren't as good at the game. Let's face it, an army of 7 h2 archers, 7 h2 yari samurai, and 2 h2 yari cavalry will wipe out multi stack AI armies every time, at 10-1 or 20-1 ratios no matter which version you are playing. The AI doesn't protect its general, doesn't use archers effectively, and doesn't build armies of quality troops. It's like shooting fish in a barrel.
The AI doesn't protect its general, doesn't use archers effectively, and doesn't build armies of quality troops. It's like shooting fish in a barrel.
True. These are good excuses not to buy a classic. It's still the best AI that Creative Assembly has ever produced (excepting the tactical AI in MTW/VI which is better if you don't include artillery), and it's matched to the game features better in STW v1.12 than it is in Warlords Edition. The STW v1.12 campaign is harder because the AI doesn't have a limit on the amount of money it can spend. The AI cannot spend into deficit in Warlords Edition, but that doesn't mean the AI knows how to manage its money. It doesn't know how to manage its economy under this new condition. There were other features introduced in Warlords Edition that the AI doesn't handle such as disbanding units. Did you ever see the AI disband a unit? I haven't. On the tactical side, the guns which are 300% the firepower of the guns in STW v1.12 make shooting those "fish in a barrel" a lot easier.
It doesn't serve the player's interests to point them to an inferior version of the game by way of an official link to a commercial site selling the game when the better designed version is still available. Since when has the org made an official determination that Warlords Edition is the better version of the game?
Sasaki Kojiro
02-28-2009, 19:26
It doesn't serve the player's interests to point them to an inferior version of the game by way of an official link to a commercial site selling the game when the better designed version is still available. Since when has the org made an official determination that Warlords Edition is the better version of the game?
:laugh4: I like it better and I'm hardly going to censor all links to the WE to try and get people to buy the original. Don't take the "no excuse..." in the title too personally, we haven't decided to make the purchase mandatory for all orgah's. Not yet at least :smash:
Sasaki Kojiro
03-01-2009, 19:52
Here's a thread for debating whcih total war game you think is the best:
https://forums.totalwar.org/vb/showthread.php?t=112809
By "classic" I was referring to STW in general. Had i known it would have caused such a stir I would have never made the post in the first place. I was only attempting to highlight that people who have never played it, really shouldn't let the chance slip by since it's so cheap now days.
Well it's all a matter of comparisons? If WE was 100 times better than RTW then it must be a good game? right? :beam:
If you were exiled to a cave in the mountains for 10 years and could choose only one of these games with no mods and no internet:
1) STW/MI (WE)
2) RTW
3) M2TW
I'm pretty sure of what most of you (STW/MTW players) would go for.
:bow:
Togakure
03-01-2009, 23:53
By "classic" I was referring to STW in general. Had i known it would have caused such a stir I would have never made the post in the first place. I was only attempting to highlight that people who have never played it, really shouldn't let the chance slip by since it's so cheap now days.
I don't think the results of your thread are negative. It led to a discussion; various viewpoints were put forward. Readers have perspectives and options. It's a good thing in my book.
Discussions tangent, and tangents can be very interesting, and revealing. Should thread discussions be linear, stick rigorously to subject, without deviation? There's a place for that I guess, but I often find that kind of discussion boring. But ... that's just me.
Why does it seem negative? Individuals will argue back and forth, defend their positions, sometimes allow themselves to be offended. Some take pleasure in being contentious for whatever reasons; others are simply contentious by nature, for whatever reasons. It isn't anyone's fault; it's just our nature. I enjoyed reading the various perspectives, and contemplating how those perspectives came to be in those who offered them. A good thing (to me, at least :smile:).
I don't think the results of your thread are negative.
You don't understand what happened today. The results are extremely negative.
Well it's all a matter of comparisons?
Apparently, I'm not going to be allowed to make comparisons.
Togakure
03-02-2009, 00:41
Ah, I see. Apparently I missed a significant development here. But I see a thread in the Throne Room. I'll redirect my attention there, and to MSN.
Hello,
The frontpage contained Amazon links to about every TW title ever published. Of course, there are re-releases and special editions and such and if every one had to be linked the list would be much much longer. However, STW, MI, WE, MTW, VI, RTW, BI, Alex, M2TW, Kingdoms and ETW were all listed including some special editions. It was a long list and part of the work on the frontpage was to clean the cluttering up a bit.
So, I changed the huge list on the frontpage to one link that loads a new page in the center that provides some sort of quick pick list (I recall STW alone has some 15 different blends). Picking collection boxes is easy and usually the most economic choice (STW Gold costs about $10, STW classic twice as much). As it also concerns the Dojo, I included the Amazon link here and added some others about books. The ETW forum has a link to buy ETW, the Monastery some about history books.
Adding links to other Amazon products including other TW titles/shipments can be done. It's not a top priority for me though. Firstly because there are many other things on the todo list. Secondly because once a user links in to Amazon he'll find other options. Thirdly because members can post here about cons and pros of versions. Afaik, installing MTW Gold is not the same as having MTW classic, some RTW shipments are patched already, I'm sure some prefer RTW 1.0 over anything else, meaning he needs another link. We're back at square one again and a huge list has to be added.
In no way do we/I support only one version or limit the choice to only one product: what you buy or not buy, what you play or not play is your choice. Voicing your opinion about products is fine, but grant each other some air. Some like STW 1.0, others like RTW 1.3, others look forward to ETW 1.0 or the expansionpack for that. Have fun.
Hello,
I think the main ones are covered now: http://www.totalwar.org/links/BuyTW.shtml The Platinum editions, limited editions and such are not included.
vBulletin® v3.7.1, Copyright ©2000-2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.