Strategic Vs Tactical

[RunAway!!]

Strategic as in empire building, Tactical as in battles.

Which of the two do you like best about MTW? I myself prefer the strategic; I've always enjoyed Sid Meier games, and MTW in many ways improves upon them, IMO. A nation's income is more player controlled; there's much more risk in diplomacy, and there's a lot more variables to combat. That being said, there's still room for a lot of improvement. It would be very nice if Expert difficulty was actually difficult; as it is, its all too easy to get a major trade route going, and then outproduce and destroy the rest of the world. Some of the supposedly expert AI's decisions are rather baffling; gotta love Denmark deciding to take on the world.

As far as tactical goes, I like it, but for me it gets tedious after awhile, especially when it comes down to watching your exhausted infantry chase horse archers with a general around a map. http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/rolleyes.gif Some of the battles are really fun, like castle assaults; and some are rather hilarious, I've had an army of around 2000 men wiped out by about 300; damn that 7 star general and his militia sergeants http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/mad.gif

[FesterShinetop]

What I like the most about this game is the combination One moment you are quietly pondering the map and the other moment you are leading your troups to battle Good stuff.

I wonder if there are players actually fighting ALL the battles during a campaign themselves? I only use to play the important (and maybe fun) battles and let the computer take care of the less spectaculair ones.

Seems to me if you decide to play all the battles during a campaign it will take a very looooong time to finish But I AM gonna try it once...

[Foreign Devil]

I would have to agree with you, I really enjoy the stategy portion of the game too. It's like risk. I love risk That said, I really enjoy the tactical battles as well. Without them, I wouldn't have bought the game.

So... in conclusion.... I guess I really like both parts. They complement each other nicely, IMO.

[NinjaKilla]

The strategic element in MTW is greatly improved from STW (where it was pretty much no-existant). Still there is still a way to go, although as yet there is no game that I know that does it better than MTW.

I play a lot of Battlground Waterloo / NIR / PTW by pbem. IMO this is the best tactical game out there, but what it really lacks is a strategic element (although some guys will build campaigns for a fee).

Heya Apache. Was that some of your recruits I bumped into today? Fanatics? I think they had a screw lose - great to see Insane doing good, though shame about Crow.

[FesterShinetop]

I am afraid I am innocent (actually I don't even know what your talking about, all I can give you is my rank and number http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/shock.gif )

[RabidMonkey]

Quote[/b] (Apache @ Dec. 07 2002,19:59)]I wonder if there are players actually fighting ALL the battles during a campaign themselves? I only use to play the important (and maybe fun) battles and let the computer take care of the less spectaculair ones.

Seems to me if you decide to play all the battles during a campaign it will take a very looooong time to finish But I AM gonna try it once...
I fight every single battle myself ( probably why i have yet to finish a single campaign yet ). I think this is because im a perfectionist and hate to think of a single man dying because of the AIs stupidity.

[FesterShinetop]

Hehehe, that's the spirit http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/smokin.gif Cool And how long have you been playing your campaign now? I WILL be doing this as well, but I am too curious about the rest of the game, so first I have to play with most of the factions through some campaigns and then I will be playing a "die hard" campaign

[NinjaKilla]

Quote[/b] (Apache @ Dec. 07 2002,20:15)]I am afraid I am innocent (actually I don't even know what your talking about, all I can give you is my rank and number http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/shock.gif )
You're InsaneApache right?

[FesterShinetop]

Wrong. Well, some people would propably argue about that insane part...

Guess you played someone online called InsaneApache? I never played MTW online. Plan to though. Maybe you can help me out, is it worth trying with a 56k modem? And do all you guys here just start out at Gamespy?

[NinjaKilla]

Yeah mosdef 56k modem is fine (although I'm having trouble right now). Don't bother installing Gamespy, just hit multiplayer in the Menu.

Make sure you get the patch - its on the front page of this site.

You may find this site useful for learning the new stats (although it also has the old ones):

http://www.totalwarassembly.com/waracademy.cfm?StatSet=v11

And yes there is an InsaneApache... no wonder you didnt have a clue what i was on about. http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/wink.gif

HF

[FesterShinetop]

Thanks. I just checked at Gamespy and indeed there was an insaneApache there Good to know it's possible to play with me old an' trusty 56k http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/mecry.gif

I will soon give it a try and propably get my ass kicked

Edited: I allready have it patched. And thanks for the link

[Alrowan]

Quote[/b] (Apache @ Dec. 07 2002,19:59)]I wonder if there are players actually fighting ALL the battles during a campaign themselves? I only use to play the important (and maybe fun) battles and let the computer take care of the less spectaculair ones.

Seems to me if you decide to play all the battles during a campaign it will take a very looooong time to finish But I AM gonna try it once...
yeah, i did start that once, but i got fed up after only conquering france in a month... its long and tough

[rasoforos]

how can strategic ( originating from 'stratos'=army) be 'empire building'? and tactic='more or less planing/ploting' mean army placing?

[RunAway!!]

Ok...being one that generally accepts terms for how I've seen them used, what my intent was...
Strategic, in what your overall strategy was, which is largely influenced by what you build and how you expand your empire more than how you command your army in battle. It applies the word army in that armies are what you use to achieve your strategic goals, provided you don't go for the massive trade empire and buy everyone out.
Tactical, in that in combat, while you may have an overall strategy, it is the individual tactics of each unit that fulfills said strategy, winning (or losing) the battle for you.
Offhand, I couldn't quote you an exact reference, but, at least for me, that has been the interpretation of the two terms.

[Cooperman]

The tactical side gets too boring after a while, sitting on a hill waiting for the AI's peasant reinforcements to arrive one at a time only to take one look at your army and run away isn't my idea of fun. I tend to fight only the decisive battles that could go either way. As long as I have a 4+ star general in charge of a stronger army than the AI I can let it auto-resolve with reasonable confidence of minimum casualties.

[Knight_Yellow]

Yeah i have and always will play every single battle for 1 reason, Prisoners he he ive noticed that if u have 1000 prissoners or more and u kill them then ur gen gets a lot of vices or in my case what i consider to be virtues like "scant mercy" and 1 that i cant remember but it gives u +3 dread with the first being + 1, so far ive started a new campaign as spanish and in my first battle my king got +5 dread ha ha ha.

[Ktonos]

As it has already said, its the combination that matters. The strategic part is not by any meaans equal to Civ or EUII, but it could easily stand alone (concidering that games like axis&allies did so). The tactical part is what makes the game unique though. I personaly have not ever seen so realistic tactical wargame and surely not a simiral battlesystem for pregunpowder wars. Searching my quite big game library the only game I can find with a good tactical system is the Great Battles of Alexander (turned base battles and awful str.map game though).

[CeeBod]

I always used to play all the battles in STW, and I do the same in MTW - I also have a tendency to check every province, and virtually every unit, every single year (Control freak) http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif

I haven't actually finished an MTW campaign yet, because of that, but I have just conquered 60% of europe in my current campaign. I might actually get around to installing the patch this year at this rate http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/smile.gif

[LovelyHaji]

I agree with you ceebod, i fight every battle and always have done. i don't even knoe how to switch autobuild on

[Lord of the Isles]

I fight all battles; since I consider the tactical game and the strategic game equally important it would seem like cheating not to fight them all. Well, except for breaking seiges with just a few defenders. I must admit that the auto-resolve for these gets fewer casualties than I would. http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/rolleyes.gif

As for the time this approach takes: I've only ever fiinished one game playing this way. I would guess it took me about 30 hours of real time, though it might have been longer - time kind of distorts when playing MTW. After the first week of experimenting, I've played Expert, GA, No Agents mod throughout. Have started around 15 campaigns with results: 1 won (reaching the limited win condition in GA - 2/3 of provinces controlled is it?), 2 lost/abandoned in good positions after my stupid King couldn't produce any heirs, another 2 given up pre-patch with corrupted savegames, and of the rest probably half abandoned due to boredom or patch coming out. The other 5 abandoned when I was being cuffed by the AI, three of them trying to play as Poland.

I've now realized that Poland on Expert is too tough for me, for the moment at least. I almost got to a winning position in one game, where the HRE was distracted by a long war with France and I managed to stay allied to the Byzantines who were on my Eastern borders. But when the Mongols invaded the stupid Russians ran from them into my territories and when the Byzantines joined in I was finished; Polish troops around 1240 just weren't up to beating Boyars or Byzantine's tough mix of BI, Varangians, and Kataphraktoi. That's my MTW Holy Grail now: to win as Poland, though I expect you need a lucky combination of distracted neighbours.

[Rosacrux]

I can't bother playing all the battles myself - too little time. I cannot possibly give gaiming more than one - one 1/2 hour a day, and even though MTW is the only one I play right now (ok, I try to get a grip on Arx Fatalis too, but I only play 1/2 hour session on that) if I try to play a whole GA campaign withot auto-resolving 90%+ of the battles (As I do now) it would take me a couple of months to finish just one campaign.

[A.Saturnus]

Auto-resolving isn`t cheating, you usually loose more (except in sieges). I play most of the battles, but some would just be boring, like 1500 high trained troops against 300 medium losers (like to run down the hopeless peasant rebellion, though http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif ). I like the changing between stategy and tactic. The round-based strategy is full of deep consideration of possibilities without haste and in tactic it`s "be quick or be dead" (if you don`t use pause)

[ToranagaSama]

Quote[/b] (Rosacrux @ Dec. 09 2002,09:28)]I can't bother playing all the battles myself - too little time. I cannot possibly give gaiming more than one - one 1/2 hour a day, and even though MTW is the only one I play right now (ok, I try to get a grip on Arx Fatalis too, but I only play 1/2 hour session on that) if I try to play a whole GA campaign withot auto-resolving 90%+ of the battles (As I do now) it would take me a couple of months to finish just one campaign.
I hear you

I still try to fight most of my battles, but find myself auto-resolving more than with STW.

I won't even touch MTW's CD unless I've, at least, got half a day available. I tried the play for an hour thing---DOESN'T WORK I mean...how long is an hour anyway in TW Time? http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/confused.gif

Girlfriend is going in a couple weeks for the weekend, how do we say Marthon Session? http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif

[FesterShinetop]

Man, every session is a marathon session with MTW http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/shock.gif

Before you know it you have been playing for 4 hours The worst part is after that you think: "My god, have I been playing for 4 hours allready... ? Wow, well... let's just finish this year and then I stop..." BAM Another 4 hours 'wasted' http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/tongue.gif

I have started another campaign as the Polish in which I planned to play all the battles. But I just can't be bothered with some of the small ones...

[woodsman22]

I am an old fashoned turn based strategy game player. I love the map. I wish that they would make one of the civil war in the united states. similar concept. The battles are fun but I am not as good at that part yet.

[rasoforos]

most of the people here showed a preference to one or the other aspect of the game. i sometimes play campaigns where i play every battle ( appart from sieges) , i ve played a couple of 'almost no battle' games to improve my grasp on how diplomacy works . however in average i ussually play about 80% of the battles ( it varies though)