Big dissappointment [Archive]

CaPeFeAr

08-12-2001, 10:40

hc can be beaten.... i have won many times with jap armies... most using mongals are rushing... and all rushers can be beat... hc have weakneses... they can be beaten with a jap unit that costs less koku... the problem with monks was that there was no counter.. for less koku... in h2h... give it some time before u start scremaing imbalenced....

1. They must allow for all units vs all units.. if this is not done then online play will be more popular on the old server than new.

2. still cant tell if a timer is set on the game. what a joke. cant they read....

3. map upload feature... if a player wants to join a match and they dont have the map... then the host can send it to them at the start of match... this is how its done on many other online games. with this advanced map editor.. its a shame that we can only share maps through independent means.

4. still cant deleat names from the regestration....lol.....welcome to 10 million typo names again... and they complain about too many names being regestered...

5. why cant i scroll through a list of my regestered names and remembered passwords..

6. the online campaign will be a joke... imho the current setup is incompatibe to online campaigning...

7. music is nice... lol http://www.totalwar.org/ubb/biggrin.gif

http://home.ec.rr.com/fearfulways/nc/img2.gif (http://www.fearfulways.com)

[This message has been edited by CaPeFeAr (edited 08-12-2001).]

Lord Aeon

08-12-2001, 10:51

I agree. While i don't think that the game is perfect (what is?), i DO think it's too early to talk about balance. You cannot POSSIBLY have had the game for more than 3 days. IMO, no matter how much you've played it, that's simply not enough time to try out every conceiveable strategy against Mongol HC, or any other unit for that matter.

Like i already said, Mongol HC are SUPPOSED to be tough. Isn't that the whole point? That just about the only thing that kept Japan from being conquered was the divine wind? Then again, what do i know?

------------------
"You have offended my family, and you have offended a Shaolin temple."

kai

08-12-2001, 10:53

Where will you all learn to wait for reviews and impressions from other players about a game. Or just get the warez version. It's all over the net.
Then there won't be any reason to whine what the programmers did/didn't do because you'll know what the new game/addon is featuring.

Dark Phoenix

08-12-2001, 11:05

Well we dont like dickhead warez users and we have been waiting for the game for ages. The reviews that are out have gone from about 85% to 95%.

------------------
DoragonPhoenix of the Clan Doragon (http://clandragon2.homestead.com/Dragon01.html)

I am no hero I just like to hit people in the head. http://www.totalwar.org/ubb/tongue.gif

[This message has been edited by Dark Phoenix (edited 08-12-2001).]

Puzz3D

08-12-2001, 12:11

CapeFear,

You're right. The mongol cav cannot just rush you off the field like monks could because a decent YS unit can stand against them in hth. However, remember that the armour rating of YS has been reduced making them more vulnerable to ranged fire.

The speed of the mongol cav gives them the initiative. They can wait for an opening and then strike. I think once mongol tactics are refined the Japanese army is going to be relegated to camping on a hill or in a forest. Japanese cav cannot control the MHC.

I didn't try any low koku battles. The game may play very nicely at low koku since the MHC is a very expensive unit.

With regard to the timer, I don't understand why there are such short times of 5, 10 and even 15 min available. If the shortest time allowed was 20 min or so, it wouldn't be such a big issue.

MizuYuuki ~~~
Clan Takiyama ~~~

Algesan

08-12-2001, 12:39

So far, the only way I've beaten the Mongols in the campaign is to set up defensively using hills and woods. They sail up and in the initial assualt all my arrows get expended and the Koreans get blown away. While the MLC is routing and rallying, I run into the woods and the Mongols come up, expend their arrows and die to my spears and swords in the woods.

BTW, I have found an excellent use for Ashi Xbows. In hold formation and hold position, they occupy a MLC long enough for them to eat a YC in their flank. http://www.totalwar.org/ubb/smile.gif

[Won-Ton] Atlus

08-12-2001, 13:40

hehehehe, yes, watch your men carefully, for i am the NINJA MASTER!!!!! tell em elmo, tell em... muahahahahahahahahaha!!!! you should have seen it, i have killed the enemy general with ninjas almost EVERY GAME I PLAY!!! except the ones i drop on.

evilc

08-12-2001, 14:40

sounds to me like i might not be playing the mongols online, that is if i get it...

FearofFucy

08-12-2001, 14:56

Well we just did a mix armie 2 mongul and 2 japan armie on 1 side and 2 mongul and 2 japanies armie on the other. So it is possible. Dont ask me how we did it.

NinjaKilla

08-12-2001, 16:41

Just out of interest, for those of you who have the game, could you post your own review percentage here please?

This has gotten me worried... surely they can't have detroyed this lovely game... I'm probably over-reacting (at least I was when Harry Redknapp quit and everythings fine now...) http://www.totalwar.org/ubb/smile.gif

Edit: just seen the same subject here:
http://www.totalwar.org/ubb/Forum1/HTML/001702.html

[This message has been edited by NinjaKilla (edited 08-12-2001).]

Dark Phoenix

08-12-2001, 16:51

Actually from what I hav read is that West Ham are in the battle for relegation.

Well there is always the original online with added features or at least I hope there is.

------------------
DoragonPhoenix of the Clan Doragon (http://clandragon2.homestead.com/Dragon01.html)

I am no hero I just like to hit people in the head. :p

Target

08-12-2001, 17:16

Lots of unhappy people. http://www.totalwar.org/ubb/frown.gif

We do listen to you guys - we're not ignoring you. Virtually all of the features we put into the expansion pack are there because people asked for them. Units were rebalanced when people suggested they were too good or too rubbish - like I said in an earlier thread, if there's one unit on the battlefield that soundly thrashes all the other ones then people won't play the other ones, and the game isn' fun any more.

If you've got problems or issues, voice them. We do listen. It's not like we're trying to alienate our target "audience" and we don't stand on pedestals with a holier-than-thou attitude.

Got to thank MagyarKhans Cham for my new signature. http://www.totalwar.org/ubb/smile.gif

------------------
i even suspect Target is coming here to hype things up.

MagyarKhans Cham

08-12-2001, 17:47

hahah target, i challenge u to prove it different. if u make the promise of listening more often in here than perhaps i am willingly to hand u over a nice list in a month with our most wished features. but plz explain my Great Khan:

-why is even the simpliest things like the f1 screen not corrected?
-why cant we mix all units or at leats units within the race as we wishes with an option like "use what u like" when hosting the game
-why cant we set different koku for attacker and defender to balance the game ourselves
-why dont you and your humble bosses dont feel sorry for us since the campaign is left out and dont think of doing something in return?
-why werent the betatesters able to balance every unit for u. my Khan was ready to accept that job. he would even come to your office to help u.... at no cost ofcourse.

just a few things, comon babe hype me up about this http://www.totalwar.org/ubb/smile.gif

------------------

Quote Although the enemy moves fast, a mongol arrow will kill him at last[/QUOTE]

RageFury

08-12-2001, 18:01

Although if u think about it it makes sense for the mongol units to be so much stronger.

I mean in reality Cavalry run roughshod over infantry.

I mean take yari..on the initial charge of course the yari would slaughter quite a few horses if they were dug in...but once the cav is amongst them the Yari become uselsss and the cavalry kick ass

-Fury

NagaoKagetora

08-12-2001, 19:12

Well speaking as someone who has not got the mongol invasion yet I think I'll wait and see what the mhc is like for myself.

But I can't believe that Jap players are all the same colour and Mongol players are all the same colour in multiplayer games! http://www.totalwar.org/ubb/eek.gif http://www.totalwar.org/ubb/eek.gif I mean c'mon this has got to be one big practical joke!! please somebody tell me its a joke!!!! http://www.totalwar.org/ubb/eek.gif

Getting back to elm's original point...no jap v jap? or no mongol v mongol? in online? now I know this isn't a joke because I know elmo would never lie http://www.totalwar.org/ubb/tongue.gif ..... i wonder will my punny 56k modem be able to handle patch 1.13 cause it sounds like its gonna be HUGE!!!!! lol

KenchiKagetora

evilc

08-12-2001, 19:40

oh well, i can go play 1000 koku battles again because a mongol army could still only ahve 1 hev cav in it... yay

Tankdogg123

08-12-2001, 19:48

Well I can't see why we can't mix jap and mongol uints together in 1 army so we can have a mongol heavy cav and a japanese heavy cav working together side by side. Maybe this would not be right in a campaign game but in on-line battles it would bring much more variety to everyone's army and I think would make it more interesting as the different koku amounts and different cost of honour or whatever they have. just a thought.

Kraellin

08-12-2001, 21:50

since we dont have a log file reader for the game yet, i'll have to relay this by hand. i was saying to elmo that the mhc are too strong. he said, nah, they can be beat, you just have to take the right army to beat them...we played a game to test this.

elm took 8 ys and a mix of archers and xbows as the other 8. i forget what his daimyo was. i took a hc general and 4 hc and 4 lc. it was a 6k game. so, he had 16 units and i 9. i pumped up my hc units a bit on wpns and dropped the honor of my lc a bit to get koku for the hc. i could have taken more units, but i figured 9 was enough with the heavys pumped up.

now, i'm not as good a player as elm. i know this from past experience, so bear that in mind also.

i set the lc up in front of the heavy. 4 across for the light, 4 across for the hvy behind the light and then my general behind those. elm was set up facing squarely towards the other side. i purposely set up lopsided to my right.

i selected all units and walked my units to his left flank forcing him to adjust his long line setup in my direction. this gave me time to send in the lc and harry his flank. i sent 1 hc out to each of my flanks as blockers. the lc were set on skirmish, since this is how they work at their best.

elm got his missiles in place pretty fast, but i was there faster and was pounding one of his pretty badly. he brought his ys up and sent 1 out towards each hc. initially i started to back away and then i thought, well, let's just see. and this is when i started losing track a bit cause elm was much more aggressive than i thought he would be.

oh yes, elm also had at least 1 kensai. i never even saw this unit until it was sitting in the middle of a melee. lol.

elmo eventually trimmed me down and won the game. the score was 505 kills for elmo and 506 kills for me. in the initial battlefield report it reported for me 506 kills, 506 losses.

so, in review, 9 units vs 16 units, elm is a better player than me, i had an all cav army (which in stw was a real no-no for serious games). and this was played on totomi. and it was a near draw. draw your own conclusions. but also bear in mind that the real balancing in the xpack is very much now done with koku when it's mong vs japanese. the mongol units. i got 9 very strong units, but ran out of money. elm could take 16 with half as cav killers. i prolly could have tweaked the koku better and maybe gotten 10 or even 12 cav units but they would have been weaker units and i wanted see just how strong a cav army is at h2 with a few bonuses.

the lesson here is pretty obvious. if you play the japanese vs mongols and you play the japanese, you better bring lots of ys to the field and pump them up. all of elm's ys were h3, w3, a3. 3 is the highest you can pump up weapons and armor.

i have seen no way to play a 1v1 mong vs mong. however, in the setup i, in a 2v2 or more, i have seen where 1 army can be mong and 1 can be jap on the same team. i dont know if that holds true for both teams or if that was just a bug.

i have also seen a bug where during setup of multi the host initially picked mongol and then i arrived and the host wanted me to have mongol so he switched and i took mongol and when we went to pick our armies i was given the japanese units to pick from even though i had switched to mongol.

the raising and lowering of sea level in the editor works differently now than the old editor and whereas it's faster, they shld have kept the old way in there as well, as this allowed for tighter tweaking of the water level. it was more incremental and worked very well the old way. why change what works? the new is fine for larger changes, but why not allow for both methods?

not a bug, but just a wish list item...cut and paste within the editor. here's why. let's say i'm making a valley down the long run of the map and i raise the mountains on one side, which takes a while to do and now i want to do the other side with mountains as well. with a cut and paste i could just duplicate the mountains i already made on the one side and copy/paste them into the other side for the bulk work and then height edit them to make it not an exact duplicate of the other side. it would save a ton of work. a click-hold and drag that you dragged over your tiles to encompass however many tiles you wanted to copy and put them in a buffer/clipboard and then a key combo to paste them onto the map in another location would be nice. this maybe shld be its own mode with its own keys mapped out. it could also be done with textures, but this isnt as critical as with height.

bring back the rgb mode. i liked removing the haze when working on maps and then putting it back to see how things would look.

add a 'snow' texture. i want ice-capped mountains showing even when it's not winter.

how come you dont use masking and blending features in the maps? is it because of the way that tiles are recorded into a map? such features would make it much easier to blend tiles into each other without having to buffer the tiles with intermediary tiles and would thus make texture blending a much easier and more versatile thing.

also still on the wish list is water. water at varying heights. keep the sea level feature; that's fine, but add a texture (?) or something that would allow for mountain streams, waterfalls, sloping rivers, ponds and lakes at above sea level heights, etc.

and like models removed from textures, i'd like to see impassable removed from textures/height and made into its own editable feature. this one is a must. there is no other feature, when making a map, that requires more tweaking than the impassable zones. they almost never end up where i want them exactly. i do more re-edits on this than on any other feature. my mountain pass map in stw took 22 versions or so to get the impassable zones where i wanted them, and even then it wasnt EXACTLY where i wanted them. and that's just 22 separate versions. there were some save and reloads that werent saved as separate versions. i want to place the impassables where i want them placed and to be able to alter them separately. i'm not talking about obvious no-go areas like buildings and such; i'm talking about height/texture impassables.

well, i seem to be off on a tangent from the original post now. maybe i'll edit the map stuff out and put it in the mods section later on.

K.

------------------
I'm sorry, but i never apologize.

Puzz3D

08-12-2001, 22:14

You can play the Sengoku period STW in the new version online. All players then have Japanese armies just like the original STW. You get 3 new unit types: Kensai, Battlefield Ninja and Naginata Cavalry.

MizuYuuki ~~~
Clan Takiyama ~~~

UglyElmo

08-12-2001, 22:53

Yes, You can play the Sengoku period for a japanese vs japanese army. Kensai and Ninjas are included in this period. I was saying that it is impossible to play mongol vs mongol online as of now. To me the biggest unit that unbalances play and one that most have not spoke of is the Korean Skirmishers (Javelins). They must get in close to get within range of their javelins but when they do they kill an unbelievable amount of men in a short time. Your men don't rout now like with the muskets, instead they die!! http://www.totalwar.org/ubb/smile.gif Fortunately, like arrows they eventually run out. I am sure eventually that people will find ways to beat all of these units, just as we did with the monks and guns issue. It will just take a lot of thought. My biggest issue and one in which Magya stated as well, is with the inability to play mongol vs mongol online. That way if someone were to pick a mongol army you could counter him with same. Also, for online only, why did the developers not allow for the picking of all units whether mongol or not for a multiplayer game? All units should be available for choosing a mix of mongol/jap units. This is online play not an historically accurate reproduction of battle. This is the first and biggest issue in my opinion and not the Mongol Hvy Cav issue. If you are allowed to pick any unit in the game for your army, you may pick some MHC to offset any your opponent has and thus the game would be even again.

DragonCat

08-13-2001, 02:34

Agreed, biggest problem for online is no mongol vs mongol.

As I stated in another thread, I have both beaten the mongols and I have lost AS the mongols. So it is not a guarantee that you win with the mongols. However, you must choose your units very wisely and play your terrain very well as the japanese. One secret, Japanese cav does NOT beat Mongol cav.

The Japanese vs Japanese is fun since there are some new units- has no one mentioned the new Japanese Nag Cav at a cost of 450?

And bugger the campers. I beat one just today. Just takes patience and drawing on all the experience of 100's on online games.

All in all, I think the game is an improvement- and all of the things mentioned need to be addressed. But is it still playable and fun - you bet.

I am more worried if there are any cheats in the honor league. I've gotten myself up to 110 through hard effort (I haven't played only as Mongols LOL)- which is the highest I've seen so far. Course, there isn't a lot of competition yet- I'm just trying to get a head start before Maggy and others get on ;-)

------------------
DragonCat
"On the prowl . . . ."

ShadowKill

08-13-2001, 04:25

i WANTED TO POP IN ONE MORE TIME AND SAY SOMETHING:P

i have been playing the Add-on for the whole weekend now i have started to learn of the lil tricks and stuff in the game. After Much training in custom battles and in the online games(i played as mongols to see what others used against them) I have found that the mongols are not that hard to beat after all Just because of the Yari But a Honour 2 yari will not stand the charge of a MHC.

the men fight to the last man almost i kind of like that but then it also is diffrent from the old game so the old statagy of routing players is not a option...

Ok so my thought on this are changing a lil but i still would like to see the stuff we asked for so long ago applied in the game!!!!!
SHADELORD OUT!!!!!!!

------------------
Clan Shades
come by and give us a visit (http://www.geocities.com/shadesofshogun/index.html)
ShadeLord Shiba a member of clan shades

[Won-Ton] Atlus

08-13-2001, 08:51

ive been working on ways to defeat the mongol cavs, and so far i know this:

Kensais (suprisingly) seem to work pretty well, just like when put against normal cav units or any unit for that matter (save ninjas).

Yari Samurai work well, but are only truly effective with high honor and attack/armor.

Naginata seem to be useful against them, they last quite a long time in battle. i am still figuring out whether to put them in hold formation or not.

Naginata Cavalry are not even close to the skill of Mongol cavs. Since normally the Mongol cavs are deployed in large groups, the nag cavs are easily overwhelmed and do not last long. perhaps they would work if i pumped them up with armor and stuff, but i'll have to try that.

Ninjas aren't available in this era, but if they were... you could just bet theyd kick the mongol's a$$'s.

I beat the crap out of elmo with an almost all ninja army! http://www.totalwar.org/ubb/biggrin.gif hehehehe, like 8 or 9 ninja units and then some archers and nodachi. i just stuck those extra units on a hill and went and wasted elmo with my super ninja powers. hehehehe http://www.totalwar.org/ubb/smile.gif

Lord Aeon

08-13-2001, 09:07

Oops, wrong thread.

[This message has been edited by Lord Aeon (edited 08-13-2001).]

UglyElmo

08-13-2001, 09:58

Oh sure, just keep bringing that up Atlus!! LOL I have found a way to beat your ole ninja army now. :P That was my first game too, what an introduction to the Warlord game!! hehe

Koga No Goshi

08-13-2001, 10:05

Agreed, unless they either include the excluded Japanese units or allow for Mongol vs. Mongol armies (or why not allow both sides to pick ANY units? Mongol Cavalry, Ninja, Samurai Archers, Thunder Bombers, all in one army?) then comp games with the expansion will be completely a joke.

Why did they make such stupid restrictions anyway?

------------------
Koga no Goshi

"Nandai"
Since time began
the dead alone know peace.
Life is but melting snow.

Target

08-14-2001, 00:50

Think I'd better reply to MagyarKhans Cham before he's sarcastic at me.

-why is even the simpliest things like the f1 screen not corrected?

-why cant we set different koku for attacker and defender to balance the game ourselves

Oops. An oversight - nothing more than that.

-why cant we mix all units or at leats units within the race as we wishes with an option like "use what u like" when hosting the game

Well, there are 2 reasons actually. One is that we were trying to maintain a modicum of historical integrity, so mixing ancient and modern units seemed like something to avoid. Another is that there is a limit to the number of different types of unit sprites that can be displayed at once. Try and display them all at once and you'll overrun on the available texture pages.

Also, with the Mongols Invading, we were trying to suggest an outside force upsetting the status quo of Japan. Having Mongol Armies and Japanese armies fighting side by side - even in Multiplayer and Custom Battles - would have killed this notion, so we avoided it.

-why dont you and your humble bosses dont feel sorry for us since the campaign is left out and dont think of doing something in return?

We tried our best with the online campaign. Given enough time we probably would have cracked it, but time wasn't a luxury we had. In fact, we got into some sticky situations overrunning as much as we did trying to get the thing in the expansion pack.

-why werent the betatesters able to balance every unit for u. my Khan was ready to accept that job. he would even come to your office to help u.... at no cost of course.

Testing the game is a complex, tricky and occasionally tediously boring job. The testers get a massive amount of flak (from the programmers and the public ) but I think they did grand doing a job no-one in their right minds would accept.

Balancing is a tricky issue. We had to do a fair amount of tweaking in between patches for Shogun, and the situation hasn't really changed for Mongol Invasion. Unit strengths and weaknesses are a bit of an issue - we wanted the XP to be a challenge for people who had already played it. If you had soundly trounced the Mongol units, would your argument have been "why did they bother with the new units - they're a walkover." Still, if enough people complain about them, we'll change them.

[This message has been edited by Target (edited 08-13-2001).]

Puzz3D

08-14-2001, 01:37

Target,

It does make sense within the context of the campaign that Mongols would not be fighting Mongols or Japanese fighting Japanese in the early period. If the online campaign has to be written off, then that consideration wouldn't really apply anymore, and the game becomes purely a tactical exercise. Viewing it that way, then M vs M and J vs J in the early period makes sense. It's more like a chess match.

My own feeling is that there will be a lot of feedback asking for the Mongol Cav to be reined in quite a bit. Loading up on YS seems to be the only chance the Japanese player has of surviving the Mongol onslaught. Against a balanced Japanese army commanded by someone my equal, I'm dominating with the Mongols at 5000 koku. Lower koku may bring the game more into balance by effectively removing the Mongol Cav, much the way it does with monks in the standard game. I'm very pleased at your indication that the company is willing to make changes after some period of feedback.

I think the overall increase in morale so that units fight longer before routing was an excellent adjustment. All the units should be useful now, and the battles have greater tension. It makes the units in the original game seem fragile by comparision

MizuYuuki ~~~
Clan Takiyama ~~~

MagyarKhans Cham

08-14-2001, 01:42

hi Target, let me hype things up in here http://www.totalwar.org/ubb/smile.gif
-----------------------------------------
My Khan never intented to become your worst nightmare. i can even assure u he is a nice person, ur even still on his icq list and with all this love and understanding from him some time with the 2 of u will solve all things.

ok babe back to bussiness. it seems ur running a project so perhaps we must level with that and see the "patching" as our project, together with u.

a better look at your smart comments
---------------------------------------
"Oops. An oversight - nothing more than that."

does that mean it will be changed? and if so dont forget the autorout bug.
---------------------------------------
"Well, there are 2 reasons actually. One is that we were trying to maintain a modicum of historical integrity, so mixing ancient and modern units seemed like something to avoid. Another is that there is a limit to the number of different types of unit sprites that can be displayed at once. Try and display them all at once and you'll overrun on the available texture pages.

Also, with the Mongols Invading, we were trying to suggest an outside force upsetting the status quo of Japan. Having Mongol Armies and Japanese armies fighting side by side - even in Multiplayer and Custom Battles - would have killed this notion, so we avoided it."

But a simple mongol vs mongol could be done, i am sure
---------------------------------------------
"We tried our best with the online campaign. Given enough time we probably would have cracked it, but time wasn't a luxury we had. In fact, we got into some sticky situations overrunning as much as we did trying to get the thing in the expansion pack."

Accepted but the community has teh time to create campaigns on their own but they need some small things to do it nice.
---------------------------------------------
"Testing the game is a complex, tricky and occasionally tediously boring job. The testers get a massive amount of flak (from the programmers and the public ) but I think they did grand doing a job no-one in their right minds would accept."

I was never asked to test the balancing. Is there another group of betha-testers?
-------------------------------------------
"Still, if enough people complain about them, we'll change them."

Hmm cant we do it ourself with the file troopstat.txt? and if so will it work if all players involved use the same file?
--------------------------------------

ps Target u use the same icq-number as u did 1 year ago?

[This message has been edited by MagyarKhans Cham (edited 08-16-2001).]

[This message has been edited by MagyarKhans Cham (edited 08-16-2001).]

UglyElmo

08-14-2001, 02:39

Target, historical accuracy is ok for the single player campaign game, but when you are fighting in multiplayer the most fair thing is to let the players decide which type of army they want to play, so that mongol vs mongol is fine as well as japanese vs japanese. Historical context would only be significant if the online campaign had been completed. From your tone about the online campaign it seems that it will NEVER be made due to difficulties in programming. This is the first time that anyone has admitted the campaign will probably never happen and only after everyone has bought the xpack already. Your company/publisher should not make promises it cannot keep. If there is one change that needs be made then make it to where you can have mongol vs mongol armies and japanese vs japanese. Then it will be fair for both sides in a battle because if it is found that one is better than the other both players have the option of picking the stronger army. Good luck and keep in touch, hopefully a lot more than you have in the past. http://www.totalwar.org/ubb/smile.gif

Obake

08-14-2001, 02:50

Target,

I have to agree with Magyar, Cham and Elmark on this one. Strictly from a community led campaign (such as Magy's) Korea may be and is incorporated.

It would be incredibly fun for those Clan's with Korea as their homebase to be able to simulate the in-fighting that took place prior to Ghengiz becoming the great Khan and attacking Japan. The only way that could happen would be with Mongol's being able to fight against Mongol's.

Under Magyar's current system, Clan's based in Korea must fight with Sengoku armies which is historically out of place in a community run campaign. There is also the possibility that Hideyoshi's campaign into Korea could be simulated with Mongol troops playing the part of the Koreans (I haven't looked at the Hideyoshi mini-campaign so that may already have been incorporated).

These options, along with others that are being presented could be offered to the community as "compensation" for the online campaign being shelved (not to mention increasing replay value in online).

------------------
Obake

I warned you, but did you listen? Ohh, no...it's just a harmless little bunny, isn't it?

Puzz3D

08-14-2001, 03:26

MagyarKhans Cham,

If there is a wide consensus that unit adjustments have to be made, then it is preferable that the developer do it in a patch. That way everyone who owns the game gets the fix.

ShadowKill

08-14-2001, 03:30

i just wanted to pop in again AND SAY

THE COLORS CHANGE THE COLORS

------------------
Clan Shades
come by and give us a visit (http://www.geocities.com/shadesofshogun/index.html)
ShadeLord Shiba a member of clan shades

Nelson

08-14-2001, 04:12

I must play several campaigns before I can assert that units are unbalanced or overpowered. This is how 90% of people play the game after all. So far I have only had time to defend Japan for a few years. I chose the Japanese first because I didn't know much about the Mongol units yet and thought "Well, neither did the 13th century Japanese! I'll have to learn the hard way!". No Mongol unit, including the MHC, seem overpowerful in the context of the campaign thus far.

For anyone who has used Mongols online this issue has already popped up which once again proves that this game is seen in a very different light by, to borrow Puzz3D's accurate phrase, the online "tactical exercize" folks and the solo campaign masses. I myself don't care if the Mongols can fight one another or not but I would encourage CA to allow the option for anyone who does. What the hell? There are never too many options and battles are fun however anyone wants to fight them. http://www.totalwar.org/ubb/biggrin.gif

What I would not like to see is a premature move to nerf the Mongols that would hobble them in single player where they seem to have a tough row to hoe IMO. If they really turn out to dominate online then make them much more expensive. Their cost is not an object in the campaign.

ShadowKill

08-14-2001, 05:17

Target

I myself ONLY play online. and the concern with the campaign itself I do not care about. So i speak solely on a Online battle point of view same as magy i think. you say:
---------------------------------------------
-why cant we mix all units or at leats units within the race as we wishes with an option like "use what u like" when hosting the game
---------------------------------------------

Well, there are 2 reasons actually. One is that we were trying to maintain a modicum of historical integrity, so mixing ancient and modern units seemed like something to avoid. Another is that there is a limit to the number of different types of unit sprites that can be displayed at once. Try and display them all at once and you'll overrun on the available texture pages.

Also, with the Mongols Invading, we were trying to suggest an outside force upsetting the status quo of Japan. Having Mongol Armies and Japanese armies fighting side by side - even in Multiplayer and Custom Battles - would have killed this notion, so we avoided it.
---------------------------------------------

Well i for one do not really care about the integrity of the history of the game when it conflicts with the overall enjoyment of Online battles. I see no reson to stop at LEAST a option like a FANTACY ERA to be able to pick whatever unit's you want.

Now the thing about the unit sprites if what you are saying is true then it sounds as if you are hyping up your next totalwar game up a lil to much concidering you have relesed post saying we will have ALOT more units to use . and from what you just said this then would not be possible to have that many units on the field at once.

After all we are only talking about adding 6 more units on top of what we can have now. Is that to much to ask for

Your's truely
ShadeLord/Shadowkill Loyal player since the days of the demo. And future ruler of the world http://www.totalwar.org/ubb/smile.gif

------------------
Clan Shades
come by and give us a visit (http://www.geocities.com/shadesofshogun/index.html)
ShadeLord Shiba a member of clan shades

MagyarKhans Cham

08-14-2001, 06:05

hi lord, a free advice on my personal title.

hu your last statement is rather rash. My i help u remember my Great Khan himself killed the unstoppable Shadowkill in his attempt to rule the world. Just submit to my Khan and your clan will prosper in the future.

Erado San

08-14-2001, 06:15

Lord,

Target is right about the amount of units available and the amount of texture graphics needed.

Why else do so many configure there system so carefully (read about 500 posts in tech) and especially adjust their AGP aperture (the other 500 posts in tech)?

If they loaded even more textures we'd all be somewhere else now, because it simply would only run on 64 Mb video cards and 256 Mb pc's

Target

08-15-2001, 04:50

First up, CA regards feedback with the utmost importance - the only way we're going to make games that people want to play is by those people telling us what they want ( and yes, all you cynics out there - it is so we can improve sales. It's a business, after all ). So, even if you think we don't so anything with it, keep the feedback coming. CA people do read this, y'know.

Magyar: The testing is done in house at Creative Assembly and at Electronic Arts. Games hardly ever get beta tested outside of the developer/publisher because of the monumental breach of security that is just asking to happen. No marketing maverick wants his makr-or-break account appearing all over the Internet six months before the due release date, so a tight lid is kept on things. If you want to test Total War, try to get a job in the EA or CA testing departments - it's the only way it's going to happen, matey.

Oh, and no I don't use that ICQ account any more. When Shogun first got release last year, my ICQ account got completely flamed so I started a new one. That's also why I haven't been around for a while - I take abuse so personally http://www.totalwar.org/ubb/smile.gif

Elmo Believe me, we didn't drop the multiplayer campaign lightly. We tried our damn'dest to get it all up and running for the expansion pack but it was simply eating up time and resources and our final final deadline was coming up too quickly for us to get it out of the door. There were loads of regrets, but it would have been nothing compared to something nasty happening to the company if we'd failed to release the XP.

Yeah, I'll stick around a bit longer. I have a lot thicker skin than I did last year.

Obake Well, like I say. Get enough of a concensus on a particular issue and it'll probably get changed, matey.

Nelson So, hang on. Is the problem that the Mongols are only overpowered in the Multiplayer Battles and not the single player campaign? And is this the same case for the new Japanese units? Would leaving the stats the same but increasing the cost of the Mongol units in MP be a favourable fix? Does everyone agree/disagree with this?

Shadowkill Before you all go over the top about how I keep hyping all the games we produce - I'm not. I'm just a programmer. I don't market or sell the things, I just try to fill them with bugs. I'm only around here on the forums because I'm genuinely curious about what people think of the games I help write - I'm not here because anyone tells me to be here.

Er... I don't think I've ever said anything about Crusader - mainly because no-one has ever asked me anything about it. If we find a way to squeeze in the extra unit to make "fantasy" Shogun a reality, we'll do it. If we can't, but we decide to go for an all-against-all option anyway, get ready for the fact that, in the engine's current state, some compromises would have to be made with the units you can select.

Erado Thanks for sticking up for me matey.

[This message has been edited by Target (edited 08-14-2001).]

ShadowKill

08-15-2001, 05:10

hmmm Ok fine fine i will be nice again dang i was really getting into the complaining patron thing to. http://www.totalwar.org/ubb/smile.gif So if it happens all the better

BUT work on the colors of the allys do you know how much a pain in the butt it is to have you and your ally the same color? http://www.totalwar.org/ubb/tongue.gif

Ok im done

------------------
Clan Shades
come by and give us a visit (http://www.geocities.com/shadesofshogun/index.html)
ShadeLord Shiba a member of clan shades

DantepX

08-15-2001, 05:25

May I ask you a question Target? I haven't got the new expansion but I have version 1.2 of Shogun. Is there going to be a patch for us players of the old version to upgrade? I seem to remember promises of a free patch to improve certain aspects of play.

MagyarKhans Cham

08-15-2001, 05:37

oh well my Khan was a betatester to test the balancing stuff and not the driver compatibilities. i will talk with erado about it and see what advice he give my Khan.

i noticed the whole morale system is changes as well. i see 4 units attacking an average archer units and they hold till teh last 10 men. that aint Sun Tzu matey. That is a gods miracle http://www.totalwar.org/ubb/smile.gif

perhaps teh armies are balanced according to the rock scissors paper thing but the units according to each other and the combatsystem aint... it seems like playing with morale off in the original version, so unitgambling seems more important than skill...

My Khan plays with a cracked version (I found somewhere to please him) for now so he cant play online, but when he has a valid version he will summarize his online findings. I hope teh statements here are wrong.

Good day

Algesan

08-15-2001, 05:55

Target,
Yep, keep thickening the skin if you stay here. Posting in public makes you, er, umm, a target. http://www.totalwar.org/ubb/smile.gif

As for the MHC, I would say the problem is in MP not SP. I think the most MHC I have had in a campaign was 9 and 4 of those were still trying to march to the front as I finished off the Japanese.

Also, is the MP game a dead issue? Or something that will keep being messed with?

Zen Blade

08-15-2001, 06:27

Hey Target,

As you are only responding here... just want you to know... GREAT WORK on the single player. I may put up a thread a bit later after I have more free time.

Although I have not gone online yet (and don't plan to anytime soon unless asked and a time is set up in advance), I think some people are over reacting.

First, Magyar is a god with cav.... of course he is going to kick everyone's ass with the Mongol cav...

Second, I remember when the original first came out... THERE WAS NOT much competition at first b/c people didn't know how to use the units.

Third, Mongol cav counters: Archers with spearman support. Up the spearman honor/armor. (this is my first hunch).
Mongol range units have shorter range... This makes them vulnerable twice over... they lose head to head with archers/cav archers at a distance and when close up they will only be able to get a volley or two off before going hand to hand... and if they fire while melee is going, they will kill their own as well.
Another possible mongol cav counter: I don't know relative kokus for upgrades and units and all... but... a unit of spearman (slightly buffed up) + a unit of ninja or a kensai going h-to-h (with slightly reduced honor) should be able to take down a mongol cav unit. Spearman attack front, ninja/kensai attack rear/flank. Best part of this is the sneakiness of the ninja+ their quickness... (they have cav speed).

However, I personally really like to use cav in multiplayer (I am impatient and like the speed, even if I can't always handle it). I'm not as good as Mag or koc with the cav, but Cav SHOULD be the most impressive unit in these armies b/c historically they were.

-well, let me know if you guys figure anything out in multiplayer.

btw, Sengoku campaign is looking good. However, I will have a few comments/recommendations for Target+Co. (very simple ones)
the first...
1) Mori heir Takamoto... was taken off, while Yoshinari was left on... This is backwards (right Seal?)
2) "double heirs" in later campaign (1580)... start as Imagawa or Uesugi... there is a "double" of some heirs... one where the heir is a general, the other with the exact same name, but without heir symbol.

again, good work overall Target

-Zen Blade

------------------
Zen Blade Asai
Red Devil
Last of the RSG
Clan Tenki Council-Unity, Retired
SHS Core Member

MagyarKhans Cham

08-15-2001, 07:12

thx zen for the kind words but as far as i can see it mhcav slaughter jhc with a way to big difference.

i saw my khan train as jap vs mong and bought for both sides kinda historical based armies like mongols 1hcav gen h3 2 hcav h2 6lcav h1 and 5 korean h0 so 15 units vs
jap 16 units (5 spears included) and everytime the the japs (as me) were wasted (green bar at 30-35% max)

even when i was seeeking a bump getting sspears vs horses and so on it didnt made a real difference. besides the units being too strong teh units fight now till almost the last man standing. so trying to rout the enemy is useless, it almost wont happen.

for me the whole aspect of Sun Tzu is gone... and the realism of teh Mongols too. it was unrivaled horsedarchery combined with discipline and brilliant generalship who did the trick. In shogun a blind rush does it as well... unless the enemy uses a wall of spears.

For me the mcav must be just slightly superior over japanese, teh archesr must be superior in range, targetting, speed and number of bullets. outshooting and the flanking stuff should bring a victory.

Although we didnt went online yet, i just dont hope the game is fuckedupinfavor of teh build&rush arcadetype gamers... the ones who didnt need a campaign after all.

Good luck

Alastair

08-15-2001, 07:30

If the JHC is so crappy compared to MHC, then MAKE THE COSTS DIFFERENT!! http://www.totalwar.org/ubb/rolleyes.gif

[Won-Ton] Atlus

08-15-2001, 07:52

*whispers* you guys! Creative assembley has infiltrated our forum! i think it is Target... we must evacuate immediatly!

Moving on to more important matters... I thoroughly enjoyed the expansion target! they are just whiners! ya damn whiners! you know who you are... *shakes fist* the mongol cav isn't invincible, it just requires skill and a good army to defeat them! Ive almost defeated a mongol army (in a low koku game) with 5 kensais (distractions more like it, they died pretty quick) and 2 super powered yari sam units! i didn't quite win, but i beat the crap out of the other guy and ended up getting like 5 times as many kills as him! And elmo, you want to try beating my "special occasion" ninja army? you dont stand a chance against the.... NINJAAAA MASTAAA!!!!! muahahahahahahahahahaha! http://www.totalwar.org/ubb/biggrin.gif

Lord Aeon

08-15-2001, 09:29

I think that too much is being made of this whole MHC thing. So much so that i think i'll make a new thread about it.

------------------
"You have offended my family, and you have offended a Shaolin temple."

TakeshidaSo

08-15-2001, 23:39

MHC is extra-heavy because they had armored horses and Jap cav didnt. MHC are lance armed and get spear bonus's over "other cavalry weapons" armed Jap cav. MHC have a morale advantage. It seems clear to me they should easily defeat JHC with these advantages. MHC are reported as 40% of their army make-up. Although that ratio might not apply to an amphibious invasion, it isnt relevant to the "what-if" parameters we're working with. I dont see how limited testing from people who are also unfamiliar with the games features can be taken too seriously at this early date. I really doubt that I need to caution against immediate "fixes", as possibly premature. So I'll recommend caution with regard to establishing fixed opinions about the need for certain "fixes". There is no need for you to make quick decisions, when those decisions cant yet be based on well-rounded thoroughly informed comparisons. There is also not a large enough group of opinions, that can be bounced off of each other, to be relied upon. The squeekiest wheel is not always the one that needs the grease. (maybe it is, after all)

[This message has been edited by TakeshidaSo (edited 08-22-2001).]

Obake

08-16-2001, 00:28

Target (and this is addressed to you in only the most general sense as you have become by default our "direct link" to the development team at CA),

First and foremost, I haven't yet offered up my praise and thanks to you for your presence here and I am sure that everyone else at the Dojo would agree with that. How fortunate we are that your skin has grown thicker in the last year.

Quote Originally posted by Target:
Obake Well, like I say. Get enough of a concensus on a particular issue and it'll probably get changed, matey.[/QUOTE]

My guess is that once MI is in everyones hands and Erado gets another Question Time up and running, we'll have that concensus.

In the meantime, you responded to Nelson's post as follows:

Quote Nelson So, hang on. Is the problem that the Mongols are only overpowered in the Multiplayer Battles and not the single player campaign? And is this the same case for the new Japanese units? Would leaving the stats the same but increasing the cost of the Mongol units in MP be a favourable fix? Does everyone agree/disagree with this?[/QUOTE]

I didn't get a chance to catch up on this thread until this morning (my time) and I wanted to throw my two-cents worth in on this point. First and foremost, I agree with virtually all of Nelson's post. While I play online, I am also very fond of the SP campaigns as well. As of last night I have completed both sides of the Mongol campaign. I think your idea of bumping up the costs of the Mongol Cav for online play is the simplest solution as I believe they are VERY WELL BALANCED in the campaign. Changing the stats for the units may balance things out in online play, but it will ruin the campaign as it stands now and make playing as the Japanese pointless.

I stated on the review thread what I saw as being the main issue when playing as Mongols in the campaign:

Quote Originally posted by Obake:
From what I can tell the AI needs to be focused more on upgrading their infrastructure (ie. Farms and Mines to generate substantial amounts of koku along with Castle/Swordsmith/Armory upgrades to provide the quality of troops needed to beat the Mongols). From what I've seen so far as the Mongols, I keep running into hordes of easily beatable troops rather than the fewer numbers of difficult to beat troops I had as the Samurai.

When I played as the Japanese, I split my koku about 50/50, 60/40 in favor of infrastructure upgrades until I had at least enough to build 2/2 NC/HC/Yari/Nags. At that point I shifted to a 60/40 split in favor of troop building and was able to overwhelm the Mongols with superior quality and numbers. If the AI did the same, the Mongol campaign would be much harder to beat. (Hint Hint Target) Maybe they do that on Hard/Expert but I haven't gotten there yet. I'll let ya know.[/QUOTE]

The long version of a short story is that the AI's prioritization of task needs to be re-worked a bit. Reducing the stats for the Mongol troops will only serve to make it a walk-over for the Japanese and not the challenge that it is now.

I had also suggested on a third thread that everything could be left as is, but eliminate the ability of online Mongol players to upgrade their weapons and armor. This capability is not available to the Mongols in the campaign and serves quite well as a balancer, why not do the same online?

Anyway, that should be more than enough for everyone to chew on for a while so I'll just shut up now. http://www.totalwar.org/ubb/wink.gif

------------------
Obake

I warned you, but did you listen? Ohh, no...it's just a harmless little bunny, isn't it?

MagyarKhans Cham

08-16-2001, 01:41

no obake i think restricting things like u suggested is just an easy way to "balance" the thing. we need more than that....

OR

the troopsstat.txt file changes also works for online play, causing an out of sync error if both dont have the same values...

OR

balance the units into a more realistic prespective. A mongol Hcav warrior dont kill 3-5 japanese hcav of the same costs. thats ridicoulous.

ofcourse eventually we all have the game, we play online and we will see what we need. but sadly like monks and muskets. they are way to strong compared with naginate and it wasnt changed. so let us sit and PRAY...

------------------
[QUOTE]I gallop messages around, dont track me I can bring war as well/QUOTE]

UglyElmo

08-16-2001, 02:12

Magyarkhan, you are right about the morale issue being changed for units. Ashigaru rushes in low koku games will destroy any army with less number of units do to attrition. You will have more then double, triple the kills yet lose because your men cannot rout the enemy army. The ashigaru fight to almost the last man and this will be seen as very common soon in low koku games I am afraid. The game as it stands is very arcadish/consolish, it seems the either EA or Dreamtime decided that to increase the appeal of the Shogun game that they should "dumb down" the morale issue and make it like the more successful titles of Red Alert2 etc . . . Thus for me, the online game is less than the old Shogun game. Also, consensus does not matter here, because the many issues discussed in the past on the Q&A threads were never addressed. Even the simple things that you pointed out earlier. If Target really wanted to go forth and make this game better he would offer up the changes that could be swiftly/more easily made (since he is one of th programmers) so that we could get a "consensus" to see if this is what the players want.

Target

08-16-2001, 02:22

http://www.totalwar.org/ubb/smile.gif I wasn't fishing for compliments, guys, but thanks for your kind words.

Shadowkill OK, I'm beginning to take the hint here. You all think that the whole Mongols vs Hojo "them 'n' us" idea was really stupid in multiplayer - you live and learn. Well, you live anyway.

DantePX I can't give you any definates on patches and when they'll be out but this doesn't mean we're not going to do it. Sorry matey, but I don't schedule the work I just do it. As far as I know, it's still on, if that gives you any reassurances at all.

Magyar Yeah, the Mongols hold it together for a lot longer than the Japanese units normally do. We reasoned that only the most hardedened warriors are likely to get sent across the ocean to do battle with Hojo, but it's a moot point if the game is unbalanced.

I hope you'll get your Khan a proper copy of the game at some point. I need to pay off my mortgage, so every copy helps.1

Algesan The unit balancing (stats wise) would have to happen across the board, so it'd affect the single-player as well as the multiplayer games. If it's a case of adjusting costs, that's a lot easier to do.

Multiplayer campaign? I think that's been put on the backburner for the time being. We're only a (quite) small team and there's a lot of concentration on Crusader at the moment.

Zen_Blade Cheers for the compliments - I'll pass them along to the rest of the dev-team.

I'll check out the heirs thingy - that sounds like a bug I thought we'd fixed. If I may take the piss and treat you like a tester for a moment - if you see a duplicate heir, try bribing the one that's not an heir and see what happens. If it's what I'm thinking of, the game will to pot or the heir will switch sides as well.

Everyone from Magyar's next post down to TakashidoSo Well, the patch will be at least a few weeks away, so you have plenty of time to decide if the Mongols need to be hobbled in some way, and not just made more expensive.

Obake Thanks matey. The armour/weapons upgrade idea is a sound one - definately well worth considering. The AI could always do with updating because it's kind of a one trick show. The AI may be a challenge to beat if you're new to the game, but once you know how it thinks and how it's going to react in certain situations, it becomes a pushover. e.g. When the computer detects Geisha on the map, virtually all production goes onto Ninja building, leaving it susceptable to army invasions because troop replenishment becomes a secondary priority.

Having said that, if we can make the game more fun to play, then any suggestions as to how to improve the AI will be welcomed with open arms. Now we've taken out the AI reliance on cheating, it has to rely on it's brain.

Thanks for the comments lads (and ladies, if there are any present). Keep them coming.

Right. I'm off to see Rush Hour 2.

UglyElmo

08-16-2001, 02:22

Target, please offer up some changes that could be made quickly and with minimal effort so that we players may get a consensus of which are good and which we do not neccessarily want. Here are a few suggestions:

1. Allow for mongol vs mongol multiplayer games.

2. Adjust the values for Mongol Hvy Cav downward.

3. Explain how the issue of morale has been changed so that units now do not rout until almost the last man. Even with Rear Flanking by high honor troops.

4. How may we/you change this morale/routing issue to reflect the playability of the older Shogun game.

We do thank you for the time, but unfortunately you work with a larger company who does not really care about the gamers and has proven it over and over again in many games besides yours. If it wasn't for a few of you dedicated people who really cared about the game then we would never have gotten the v1.12 patch to make the older game play better. We thank you for this and please be honest in your reply . . If you are not going to be given any time to fix some of these issues then we would like to know, so that we will not waste our time trying to make this a better game. Too much time has been wasted in the past on this with little effect. Thanks again Target,

Obake

08-16-2001, 03:09

Cham,

I wasn't attempting to provide the easy way out to the issues we are facing with the Mongols as they stand right now. My main intent was to echo Nelson and ensure that any changes that are made won't upset the delicate balance that exists in the campaign. Modifying the battle statistics for the MHC and possibly also the MLC would also be reflected in the campaign game and would unneccessarily unbalance the campaign in the favor of the Japanese, which would require re-balancing of the Japanese units, and so on.

Although I do agree that there are definite issues related to the Mongol Cav (speed in particular), if there is going to be any re-balancing, it should be in the form of raising the statistics on the Japanese Cavalry, and the JHC in particular.

I like the fact that the troopstat.txt file is now available to us, but modifying it for use in online play is going to open up a Pandora's box of problems that I would rather avoid if possible. Those who want to do so for SP and Custom games.....have at it.

I also agree with both you and my Ugly brother regarding the new morale effects. While it can be fun initially, over the long haul it will wear very thin. I'm going to echo Elmarks request for some additional information on how the morale was changed and why.

To Target,

Shadowkill/ShadeLord will be the first to admit that he is a horrible speller and not always the clearest with what he is trying to say. Given that, I don't believe that the whole "them 'n' us" idea was stupid, but there needs to be a way for us to differentiate who's troops belong to whom. That does not exist when playing Mongol v. Samurai now.

The problem comes in when you start playing 3x3 and 4x4 games. Units will tend to get mixed up during combat and there is no easy way to tell which units are yours and which are your allies. In a tight game, instantaneous troop recognition can easily mean the difference between victory and defeat! Perhaps different shading for the various allies on each side. The other point I would like to make on that is that the Mongol v. Hojo idea for online was a good one. We as a group however are very demanding in our desires and believe that we should also be able to pick whichever army we want. Some would go so far as to allow intermixing of troop types (mixing Mongol and Japanese) and that I disagree with.

I'd also like to address the AI with the Japanese compared to my efforts in drving the Mongols back in to the sea. My initial efforts were focused on improving the koku yields in the most productive provinces (Hitachi, Dewa, Omi, Sanuki etc) and upgrading the swordsmiths and armories in those provinces that had them. My goal was to spend upto 75% of my annual revenue on this course until I was producing Naginata and Naginata Cav with at least a 2/2 bonus. At that point my high koku provinces were producing at 160% normal on average. By using this strategy, I was producing upgraded NC and Na between 1275 and 1280. At that point I shifted my focus to troop production while continuing to upgrade my Dojo's to get the 3/3 bonus. I was averaging a minimum of 12,000 koku per harvest.

The AI on the other hand never fielded HC or NC and only 2 Na's (it was 1285 and the last year of the game before I ran into a single one). The AI did however field a couple of Emissaries (?).

If the AI could be re-tasked to spend say 60% of it's annual revenue on infrastructure upgrades (half of that on improving harvests and building mines/ports and the other half on existing swordsmith/armory dojo upgrades followed by new castle/dojo construction in areas that will allow for an armory especially) and the balance on troop construction. (Whew, that's a mouthful)

After about 1270-75 (maybe earlier even) the AI should reverse the distribution of koku with about 60-70% going into troop construction (focusing on the more powerful units that can be supplemented by the existing lower end troops) and the balance continuing the process of upgrades. I would also suggest that there be a rule inserted if there isn't already that would have the AI attempt to ensure that there was always a minimum % Yari troops within the overall army composition.

Hope this helps now that I've written yet another novel. If you'd be interested in some additional detail and suggestions I can be reached through the E-mail in my profile.

[This message has been edited by Obake (edited 08-15-2001).]

jskirwin@yahoo.com

08-16-2001, 03:31

I initially was avoiding this thread as I've spent the past five days or so playing the game and making up my own mind.

I've played the Mongol and 1530 campaigns as Hojo/Shimazu in Expert modes and have put in roughly 25 hours of gameplay so far. I'll admit that I started the 1530 campaign after the Khan sent reinforcements and opened up a Horde size can of "Whoop-ass" on me. I've since been spending alot of time learning from the others around here how to handle these bad-boys.

That said, there seems to be some concern with how imbalanced the new units are. No surprise since EA and CA have gone from a handful of testers to hundreds of serious gamers. No programmer really knows how an app is going to handle until it's rolled into production and the Stupid Users get their mitts on the thing.

Personally, I'm glad the game is a challenge because I know from my history studies that Japan had absolutely NO CHANCE against the Mongols had they crossed the Japan Sea in numbers. At the time Japan was simply too weak and divided to put up anything beyond token resistance to the well-organized, trained and experienced Mongol troops.

As for being a disappointment - what do you freaking expect? This game is light years beyond anything out there. As I used to say about Star Trek, a bad ST episode easily trumped anything else that was on TV. This game is not damaged. The expansion pack has made playability easier (I love the general flags on the units), the new campaigns are challenging, and maybe the overpowered MHC are the new Monks of the game - but so what? For $20 I am having a blast.

The wait is almost over for you guys in Europe. All I can say is buy the thing; there are worse ways of spending 30 Euros.

------------------
The Buddha is a gyoza. If you find the Buddha, eat him.

Puzz3D

08-16-2001, 04:08

TheDaimyo has posted that changing the TroopStat file does not work for online play even if all players have the same file. My testing on this was limited to LAN play and single player. So, Pandora's box is closed for the moment.

With the single player campaign apparently well balanced, then any weakening of the Mongol cavalry would have to be compensated by a strengthening of the Korean infantry to maintain the overall strength of the Mongol army. You would still want the Mongol cav to have an advantage over Japanese cav. The TroopStat file could be used as a tool to try different adjustments to the Mongols in the single player campaign by anyone willing to put in the necessary time. You could then have people playtest the new rebalanced army in LAN play against other humans. Morale can be adjusted in TroopStat as well, and, if you made equal downward shifts for all units, you might be able to come up with a finetuned overall morale shift where the units didn't run away too quickly or stick around too long. Then submit those modifications to CA/DT, and see what they think.

Zen Blade

08-16-2001, 04:12

No prob Target.

You guys DRAMATICALLY improved the Sengoku campaign in my opinion to the point that it is fun instead of boring to play past the first 10 years.

Also, Target, I have no problem "beta testing" for you whether it be potential bugs or otherwise. And I hope you ask me to do so again in the future. (will check heir thing when I get home.)

also, Target... wouldn't it be easy to change taisho names in the coding? (especially starting ones?) for example... The two Mori's could be switched quickly, as well as the double heir bug.

-Zen Blade

------------------
Zen Blade Asai
Red Devil
Last of the RSG
Clan Tenki Council-Unity, Retired
SHS Core Member

TakeshidaSo

08-16-2001, 04:41

I would worry more about statements that the morale effects seem to now be completely unreal; that surrounded units dont rout, or that Ashi at normal honor will fight to the death. The fact that Extra-Heavy Lance armed higher morale cavalry can easily defeat other units in the game doesnt bother me at all. Talk about changing unit balance; either weakening MHC, or strengthening JHC, seems to be ridiculous when you consider that the morale system you may be testing in could be flawed. Is the morale setting turned off? How much difference could there be if it were? I still hope that any fixes do not come prematurely. Try to think about baseball, or whatever helps to take your mind off of it.

Kraellin

08-16-2001, 04:47

well, i've gotta say that i over-reacted at first too about mongol heavy cav. i thought they were way too strong as well...until elm, yuuki and swoosh kicked my butt all over the place with the japanese. so i wouldnt change a single unit stat for now, not even the costs. players have different skills, they take different units, they spend the koku in different ways, the variables are incredible when you start thinking about it. in one game i play as mongols as totally decimate someone, in the next i play the mongols and get my butt kicked all over the place. i wouldnt change a single stat.

mongols vs mongols in multi...absolutely! i really wanna see a mong vs mong in king on the hill. what i dont quite understand is if the textures on the sprites are a limiter then why is it we can play mong vs jap but cant mix the two in one army...this doesnt pan out to my way of thinkin. it's got to be similar to the way the map models work with textures. if you can already have ALL the units in a game of jap vs mong, then why cant you have all of those same units in a total mixed army? the textures are already loaded for those units, so who cares texture wise if they're mixed and matched in one army? well, save for those that arent utilized in that era, of course.

'almost' every complaint i've heard so far comes down to one single issue....options. and particularly for multi games. we want options. i said this months ago, just give us options and WE'LL make the game we want, be it historical, fantasy, quasi-historical or whatever. and before you idiots that only scan and dont duplicate a message....i said 'almost'. and this includes the whole mhc issue of power and the morale issue, and the balancing issue, the ranged fire and number of arrows issue, ad infinitum. it also includes issues i have with the new editor. why only one castle allowed on a map? why not allow editing of starting postions? why force the defender into the castle (ok, that one i'll almost concede, cause of the reinforcements thing). why not allow a simpler impassable zone edit that isnt tied to grade and texture? why cant i have the game for free? (just thought i'd slip that one in ;). oh yes, and this one surprised me...there's no ffa (free for all) mode in online play! options, options, options!

now, since target has been a REALLY good sport by answering some of our questions, i'd just like to say. i'm impressed, target. i like the game. we've had some really wild king on the hill games with 2v2 and 3v3. this is just too much fun! ;) the assasinate the general is pretty cool, with ninjas and kensai really being important in this one. capture the honjin somewhat surprised me since i thought there would only be one maku per team and not one for each player. i havent even tried halve the army yet. the mongols are impressive. the ninja and kensai and bombers are very good also. those bombers are quite a trick to use. i think so far i've blown up more friendlies than enemy ;)

overall, i think it was well worth the price of admission and like i've said in other posts, you only hear whining in a great game...cause there aint nobody playin the poor ones long enough.

btw, guys and gals, the troopstats mod doesnt work in multi, only lan and single. go look at the mods posts for more info.

edit: well, open mouth, insert foot. the mods DO work on the troopstats file in online play. seems the daimyo made some faulty tests or something, cause yuuki and i tested it last night and it does work. you CAN modify that file and have it work, providing everyone's troopstats file matches up....sweet!

nice job, ca! i really do hope there's enough time and resources available to continue supporting both stw and xp as well as crusaders. i've seen too many good games fall by the wayside because a company decided to 'move on' or 'didnt have the resources' to continue support.

and thanks, target, the void of information from ea/di/ca was starting to get irritating. perhaps you shld ask for a raise, since yer also now ca's pr man ;)

K.

------------------
I'm sorry, but i never apologize.

[This message has been edited by Kraellin (edited 08-16-2001).]

TakeshidaSo

08-16-2001, 06:13

If we need to decide whether or not the MHC need to be hobbled in addition to becoming more expensive, then it sounds like a given that they will at least be that. So if they are more expensive its because they have superior arms and morale to the JHC. If they didnt then they shouldnt be more expensive. The same rule applies to MLC vs. CA, if they have superior armor and morale then they should be more expensive. I would suggest a 12.5% increase for each more costly feature, or 25% higher total cost for Mongol vs. their Japanese cavalry counterparts. Perhaps a similar review of other Mongol units is needed, I am too uneducated to know. This could possibly be tested by allowing JHC the 25% cost in upgrades, but an even number of units. With the current morale situation an uneven number of units wouldnt be a very good test. Without even a cracked copy, I can only await whatever intelligence I can gleem. Please dont try to falsify data, however, as this is how heads end up on plates.

Kurando

08-16-2001, 06:55

I agree K2: whatever CA/DT is paying Target it ain't enough!

..

I guess I can only echo ShadowKill's sentiments by saying that I am mostly interested in the MP version of S:TW now + playing the multiplayer game is so different from playing the single-player game that they can not be approached by the designers as being one-and-the-same.

In the case of MI what is a fair and (for the most part) historically accurate balance in SP puts the MP game completely askew. I'm not saying that there aren't players that can't do well with the Hojo units, but in a straight-up fight between two players of equal skill the Mongols seem to win the vast majority of the time.

..

One other thing I wanted to bring up is that even though Naginata's are some of the most interesting troops in the game very few serious players ever use them in MP; the reason: there are too expensive.

As it stands if I am facing a guy who took nags I automatically know that he is new + I was really hoping that you would drop the price of this unit to 350 or 375 so that these defensive wonders could be brought into the MP experience (they would add a lot to the game).

..

Oh yeah, one last thing: the fact that muskets can now fire in the rain has made foot archers totally obsolete in MP; no one in their right mind would pay 300 for archers when a 175 musket can do the job better and with no risk of failure because of the weather. I don't know how to fix this exactly; the only thing I can think of is to make muskets slower, and make archers more formitable in there role as back-up melee troops.

MagyarKhans Cham

08-16-2001, 08:14

my god, i like the comments but as i learned from a year online our "community" will never reach consencus on whatever aspect http://www.totalwar.org/ubb/frown.gif

in my simple job of delivering messages in devotion of my Great Khan i noticed that Target just missed Elmos post about the morale thing... before we can start thinking about some rebalancing we must know IF and WHY the morale thing is being changed.
please explain...

Target... my Khan was one of your betatestdummies and was promised a real copy, even before it was in the stores, nothing seen yet. So a timely crack seems not valid, but an eye for an eye i would say. Many servants in the empire (read community) worked hard for this game and i hate seeing dissapointed UGLY http://www.totalwar.org/ubb/smile.gif people
----------------------------------------
perfectly stated what i think by uglyelmo
---------------------------------------
Magyarkhan, you are right about the morale issue being changed for units. Ashigaru rushes in low koku games will destroy any army with less number of units do to attrition. You will have more then double, triple the kills yet lose because your men cannot rout the enemy army. The ashigaru fight to almost the last man and this will be seen as very common soon in low koku games I am afraid. The game as it stands is very arcadish/consolish, it seems the either EA or Dreamtime decided that to increase the appeal of the Shogun game that they should "dumb down" the morale issue and make it like the more successful titles of Red Alert2 etc . . . Thus for me, the online game is less than the old Shogun game. Also, consensus does not matter here, because the many issues discussed in the past on the Q&A threads were never addressed. Even the simple things that you pointed out earlier. If Target really wanted to go forth and make this game better he would offer up the changes that could be swiftly/more easily made (since he is one of th programmers) so that we could get a "consensus" to see if this is what the players want.
------------------------------------------
Look at that post Target, the true meaning must keep u occupied in your sleep. The wargamers love the game and wont accept it to be a fantasy arcade game of the buy&rush type.
------------------------------------------

A small team focussing on Crusaders just alerts my 6th sense. It tells me we get probably one patch, somewhere in late octobre and thats it... and to avoid the most valuable things are left out due to "the focussing" or just some "mindslipping" my Khan has decided to help you.

Listen, i may sound negative but your CA/EA didnt show any "community spirit". we are promised many things (patch & campaign), we waited long for many things and we were even promised regular communication... even a positive man like my Khan seems worried.

Perhaps u can tell your marketing guys that an healthy, mature and active community could be used as advertising as well.

PS from my Khan "ur a lucky man that i cant write in my native language. i would have used some smart poetry to steal your heart

yours, maggy"

------------------
Quote I gallop messages around, dont track me I can bring war as well[/QUOTE]

Swoosh So

08-16-2001, 09:05

Hmm plzz dont touch the mongol h cav i find them too easy ive played 6 games v the mongols of varying koku and never lost!!! not to newbie players but exp player like kraellin and tigeroctavian if the mongol hcav are modified they will be too easy and mongol army will be useless 1 thing i would say is the MORALE issue its quite worrying i was disgusted at the way it works now and i refuse to play a game over 3500 koku so that morale comes into play h0 units now seem to have just more morale than the h2 ones did in ver 1.12 so low koku seems the way to go unfortunately unless they reduce unit morale, fights are almost pathetic at honor2 in fact i dont see much point upgrading honor at all btw krae those ys that beat your h2 mongol h cav and octavians were h1 with weapon and armor upgrades i figured if honor isent a factor spend the koku on weapons and armor and ive never been beaten since, target i cant stress enough the need to reduce troop morale it has totally ruined the online experience to a slug fest ihit u u hit me lets wait and see who wins , i almost choked as octavian flanked me with mongol light cav and charged my h2 crossbows in the rear they were in sklirmish so ran forward into the main battle still being attacked in the rear and i had enough time to move a nodachi unit from 1 side of my fighting line to the other to charge his light cav, my crossbows never even wavered they should have routed its plain and simple, btw these games were 6000 koku i think versus the mongols so to get a decent morale effect we have to play low koku which menas we cant really use the armor and weapon upgrades such a waste, just reducing morale would make it sooo much better, yes we hear so much about mongol h cav being too powerful but if anyone doubts it take a mongol h cav h2 and a honor 1 ys with all weapon and armour and u will win 20-30 losses max japanese victory. anyway besides all that ninja i absolutely adore so much fun and adds so much to the battles, kensai are fun too and arent too powerfull at all but hard for enemy to see amist battle and can hold a flanking unit for a long time b4 dying so well done on those units, i think generally im pleased with all the units, and the single player mode is great, but imo the morale issue HAS to be changed.

BTW target thanks for coming on and listening to our opinions on your product, you have given us your cake and weve eaten it (delicious btw) but now we want cherys on top!! :-)

Swoooooooosh of grey wolves

Lord Aeon

08-16-2001, 10:08

LOL, i really respect your opinions, and you make some nice points - all of which i agree with. But...

The button is called "period" and it is located up and to the right of your space bar. http://www.totalwar.org/ubb/wink.gif j/t

------------------
"You have offended my family, and you have offended a Shaolin temple."

Puzz3D

08-16-2001, 11:15

I've just tried a 1v1 online game between Kraellin and myself with a modified YS unit, and it worked! We both increased the defensive factor from 2 to 3 for the YS unit type. We engaged these units without any trouble. We had a bunch of other units on the field as well. I'm not sure exactly what test The Daimyo ran which didn't work for him.

MizuYuuki ~~~
Clan Takiyama ~~~

Zen Blade

08-16-2001, 12:13

TARGET,

Did the test...
Played as Oda (1580) b/c of higher revenue. Took a number of years to track down the Uesugi Kagekatsu double, but did... then bribed him... worked fine... then he fought against the Uesugi, did fine. Now he is mine at Rank 2 and the Uesugi daimyo is still Uesugi Kagekatsu. No game crash or anything.
Wasn't able to do it against the Tokugawa since the double is in the same stack as the heir and the heir can't be bribed.

-Zen Blade

------------------
Zen Blade Asai
Red Devil
Last of the RSG
Clan Tenki Council-Unity, Retired
SHS Core Member

Katsuchiyo

08-16-2001, 13:39

Thanks Ugly Elmo and MagyarKahn. Until now no one else had posted concerns about the morale change. It is a concern that honour 2 units now fight until almost the last man. Please discuss this issue Target. I do not like it because:
1. Battles require less skill.
2. It is not realistic.
3. It removes the tension I feel when my men are in melee and could rout at any moment ie it is less fun.

It now seems honour 2 is the same as the old honour 6 or maybe more. Perhaps a new topic on this subject is required.

Kraellin

08-16-2001, 19:24

yes, i think we can dump the whole issue about mongol heavy cav being too strong. elmo, yuuki and swoosh have all trounced me soundly by simply taking ys with weapon and armor upgrades. so, sun tzu was right again, know thyself and know thy enemy.

as for morale, i hate to admit it, but it does seem a bit too easy now and has changed the nature of the game, but i wouldnt want to go back completely to the old style either. swoosh suggested to me online that it might be better if it was about half way between stw and current xpack and reluctantly i have to agree. i sorta like that my guns will actually skirmish now instead of bolting for the door, but it does remove a lot of the tactics of the game by having honor raised this much and i 'think' it would work by tweaking it down a notch. just dont go back to stw mode morale; cause i thought that was way too easy to rout. so something inbetween might well be the answer.

now, since there seems to be some concensus that we're never going to have a concensus, lemme add this note here; yuuki has been testing stat changes. and we can, so far, change some of them. more testing is still needed, but one of the ones that can be changed is morale! folks, we may not even need a patch to get what we want as far as morale and balancing. we may be able to do it ourselves! and if this is the case, then ca has done a brilliant thing both in allowing for mods and taking the responsibility for change off their own backs and putting it on ours. smart move, target ;)

if indeed we can modify most or all of the stats of the game, then di/ca/ea dont need to do a single thing for the patch except actual bug fixes and maybe a few other features that dont involve stats, like allowing mong vs mong in multi.

and folks, you can be absolutely correct about wanting what you want and needing what you need, but absolutely wrong in how you communicate this. remember, a thorn is nothing but a pain, does little good, and tends to get removed and forgotten. nuff said?

K.

------------------
I'm sorry, but i never apologize.

Algesan

08-16-2001, 19:59

Cham, I can think of a lot of reasons why a MP campaign cannot be done. It really depends on how they coded the game originally. Too much rebuilding involves reinventing the wheel and introduces new bugs to be stomped.

OTOH, the same people who want MP STW, will want MP CTW, so Target & Co. can keep working on the subject, because if they design for it with CTW using a similar engine, it should be relatively easy to find the way to the fix in normal development.

Methabaron

08-16-2001, 20:05

Hmmm,

It is amazing how feedback from developers come just by accident... sigh.

The mere fact that target is posting here only out of HIS innate curiosity (about people's reaction's to the games he helps program) and not because an official developer policy of constant direct communication with the online communty makes me really sad.

Do not get me wrong. More of the likes of Target's feedback is one of the things the community more urgently needs. If it had just been proposed, enforced and performed by his managers it would be even more a good sign that their managers are trully commited to the online community. But alas, it is just him, out of his own curiosity, nothing else.

Hopefully Target will be able to persuade his team, superiors and colleagues on the ways of the online community.

Sorry guys, someone had to keep the hard line. Let me be the one.

http://www.totalwar.org/ubb/wink.gif

Metha

------------------
"Whenever you find yourself on the side of the majority, it's time to pause and reflect."

ShadowKill

08-16-2001, 20:55

OBAKE

Thanks m8 hehe i know people who have not known me for a long time never understand what i am getting at. I just HOPE some of you old guys can decipher what i am tring to say http://www.totalwar.org/ubb/tongue.gif

I am glad you all are bringing up the MORAL Issue this i did not really pay attention to untill my second day online and i really feel a loss to the game now that my men do not run.(before i was sitting on the edge of my seat shouting curses at my men for running away IT WAS INTENSE. Now they fight down to the last few men i don't need to zoom back and forth to keep my men in check they never run even when put in a place that they should be running.

Now the mongol heavey cav well i actully was hyping up them a lil in some of the treads hoping to get people to use them I had already found them to be easy to kill http://www.totalwar.org/ubb/smile.gif. ahh alls fair in love and war hehe.

Now the thing with the colors YES this is a thing that needs to be changed for ONLINE play not because of the whole (us VS them) thing just because they are hard to tell who owns what. I DO like it in the single player game it fits in but not online.

Target
Just to let you know i really have had fun playing the game it is not a bad game But like anything there are some things that need fine tuning. NOW as to weather they get fixed or not will be up to your crew to handle. WE as a community can help you guys in fixing it.
Now these words you should pass on to the TEAM The whole community wishes you the best in the making of the crusaders BUT things are still unattended here So before you run off to the next mission do finish the last one. I would hate to see you all get a reputation like that of the AGE OF SAIL 2 makers http://www.totalwar.org/ubb/smile.gif

------------------
Clan Shades
come by and give us a visit (http://www.geocities.com/shadesofshogun/index.html)
ShadeLord Shiba a member of clan shades

Puzz3D

08-16-2001, 21:15

Kraellin,

I think it would be preferable to have the developer make whatever changes are desired, and then everyone who owns the game gets them when they patch. In the mean time, the ability to customize things can be used to generate some really good feedback to the developer about exactly how various changes affect the gameplay. If the players are willing to compromise on what they want changed, then a whole new default parameter set could be presented to the developer. I think you want as many people involved in this as possible to give the final proposal as much weight as possible.

Concerning the mongol cavalry: If the Japanese player can win by taking all yari infantry, then that means too much of the Mongol/Korean strength is in the cavalry. Some of that strength should be shifted to the infantry. If all the Japanese player needs is yari infantry, then why even have other Japanese units to pick from? I'm speaking about online play here.

I don't quite understand the upwards morale shift. There was always plenty of headroom on that morale scale since you started with honor 2 units, and could go all the way up to honor 9 with more koku, but you only have two steps going down to honor 0. Shifting things up by default has just made the lower end of the scale unavailable. It has reduced the importance of morale in the battles.

MizuYuuki ~~~
Clan Takiyama ~~~

Magyar Khan

08-16-2001, 21:30

wow guys this is what i mean constructiv posting....

Obake

08-16-2001, 22:31

WHOA!

Looks like we've got a topic on GD to rival the "Shameless" and "Babiest Babe" threads over at OT!

Haven't heard from Target today, I'm guessing that he's suffering from overload. Either that or he decided to see Rush Hour II again. http://www.totalwar.org/ubb/smile.gif

One item that hasn't been mentioned yet is some of the positive effects that morale is providing. I played the Mongol mini-campaign last night and saw something that I had never seen before and although it was irritating, I quite enjoyed it. The morale level on my MHC Taisho was "Impetuous" for the greater part of the battle as I held him back (have to keep him alive in order to win). When I finally did choose to engage him, he went for the nearest unit to him, regardless of where I wanted him to go. During the battle I had sent him over on my left flank to support some KS units engaged with YS. Once that had been accomplished I needed him over on the right flank where some MLC was having a tough time with a unit of YS backed up by SA's. I chose to move him across behind my center line in order to get him there ASAP. To my amazement, about half-way across the unit wheeled to the left and attacked a unit of AX (Ashi X-bow). Needless to say, I wasn't very happy as my MLC were in dire straights on the far right, but I was incredibly pleased to see that being "Impetuous" actually means something now. I can only hope that I continue to see this happening as I play.

To everyone who is posting here, I am in complete agreement with Magy with regards to the quality of the posts on this thread. It has been a long time since there has been a thread of such worth on this, or any other forum. Keep it up!

------------------
Obake

I warned you, but did you listen? Ohh, no...it's just a harmless little bunny, isn't it?

DoCToR

08-16-2001, 22:40

Maybe Target has gone to see "Running Away and Buggering Off 2" http://www.totalwar.org/ubb/wink.gif

Liked that news Obake, nice to see some positive aspects too... http://www.totalwar.org/ubb/smile.gif

Has anyone tried reducing the morale/honour values of all the units by the same amount to see if that makes any improvements/vast differences to when or whether units rout?

??

DOc Aka Jamie

TakeshidaSo

08-16-2001, 23:41

In WRG miniature rules, once a unit became Impetous, it had to move towards and charge the nearest enemy, and is a very good addition for this game. The new morale structure may have ruined this expansion, and I doubt whether they will fix that. I never had a problem with the morale structure of the old game, and I agreed entirely with how it worked. The proof is that many players used low honor units in high koku games, and this wouldnt have happened if the units were routing too easily. The comments of "why are my men running away" was not about a poor game design. If low koku games are all that are playable now, and thus upgrades are made unavailable, then the value as a multi-player game is ridiculously reduced. Any argument for a stronger morale structure than the one used in STW must confront the fact that very high koku games, or with Morale off, were not commonly played. In fact, many people continued to play low koku games. This may have been a way to reduce the number of units, or amount of cavalry involved, and thus reduce the difficulties confronting their generalship. But there should be limits to how far you can go to protect your deficiency as a commander. With any change to STW's morale system, you remove the need for a Morale, or a Fatigue, setting to strengthen your units. With any change from STW you reduce the difference between players abilities to such an extent that its ridiculous. Its already very easy to become a decent defender, because of the strength of positions, ordered formations, and the requirement only to react. But with MI's morale structure, what is the point of formulating any plan with more difficulty than a simple frontal assault? I admit that tactics like fients and lures to get enemy units out of position can still be used, but that doesnt answer the question of what morale effects that should also have. This commentary deserves to be here, under this topic.

MagyarKhans Cham

08-17-2001, 05:32

bumpie

[Won-Ton] Atlus

08-17-2001, 08:53

i thoroughly enjoyed the game target, i didn't notice anything wrong with the f1 screen other than having to click f1 twice, but that doesn't really matter. i think that you vastly improved apon the original and i haven't had any problems whatsoever. Thanks for making this for us.

KumaRatta Yamamoto

08-17-2001, 18:02

Takeshidaso: How about using those nice bigger maps a bit more (terrain features) by splitting your army, laying traps, ambushes, skirmishing, using misdirections, attacking from different sides. Doesn't that add to the tactical possibilities?

All these we're kind of impossible because of morale easy routing, all units had to stay together in one group.

08-17-2001, 18:06

Quote Originally posted by KumaRatta Yamamoto:
splitting your army, laying traps, ambushes, skirmishing, using misdirections, attacking from different sides. Doesn't that add to the tactical possibilities?
[/QUOTE]

haha, it sure does, one little detail is that by the time you split your army and lay a trap your army is Very Tired http://www.totalwar.org/ubb/biggrin.gif

------------------
I'm a man... I can change... If I have to...
...I guess...

Magyar Khan

08-17-2001, 19:03

and laying ambushes means splitting up your armie so that must be well considered.

TakeshidaSo

08-18-2001, 00:14

I'm not complaining about every feature, and I'm not going to offset serious flaws with other good points the expansion has. I stated, and gave an example, that tactics can still be used. I also said that bringing up that point doesnt answer the question of what the morale effects should be. You think that dividing your force is a good thing, even though piecemeal attacks are the worst tactical blunder there is. You think the only reason an army stays formed together is to support a "shaky" morale structure. I disagree. Detached forces are usually lost because they are overwhelmed. Most people keep their forces together so they are within supporting distance of each other, and so their detachments arent attacked by the whole of the enemy force. This doesnt mean that indirect approaches, or ambushes by detached forces, were never used successfully. Nearby friendly supporting units played a supremely important role in the overall morale of an army, and its unrealistic to an unacceptable degree, to assume that altering this fact improves playability. Playability includes a balance between realism and difficulty. Online players are welcome to correct me from the impression I have, that the Morale structure has been weakened to a point where only the lowest end of the spectrum may accurately reflect a realistic system. There are no comments so far that would suggest otherwise.

[This message has been edited by TakeshidaSo (edited 08-19-2001).]

Polar

08-18-2001, 05:26

Of course you can split your army with the old STW! I have seen some of the very best players doing that.

If you consider the historical reality, only the brilliant generals have the ability to send troops to accomplish complex missions.

Good general always care about what his men thinks and the level of their moral, not just ordering them to do whatever he likes.

If some one has his units running all over the place without any care, or someone rushes with all his units in a pile and get surrounded, don't you think he should lose the battle?

Dont you think it would be unrealistic if he can win the battle that way, or even when he loses, his men are willing to fight for him untill they all die when their general dont care about their lives at all?

------------------
Polar the ugly

Kraellin

08-18-2001, 22:07

ok, i'm just gonna think outloud here. yuuki has been doing a lot of tests with the stats of units. what he's reported to me is that he believes the overall morale of units was raised by 10 to 12 points. that means all units were raised that much, he believes. i tend to agree that it seems to be about 10 or so.

now, i had to wonder why they'd make such a radical change and here's some thoughts on what they 'may' have been thinking, and please, this is just my speculation and not necessarily what the dev guys were thinking.

perhaps they raised everything to try and handle the rout bug somewhat...higher morale would mean less routing in general and therefore fewer instances of the rout bug showing up...i dunno, but there do seem to be fewer instances of the true rout bug showing.

there are now units that almost BEG to be detached, tactically sound or not, a battlefield ninja works best in ambush and operating separate to the main army. but, why not just raise that unit's morale and not the whole array of units?

mongol light cav on skirmish will skirmish clear across the map and back when being chased and not rout. heck, this is what they're best at. they also need a higher morale to do this, but again, why the whole array being raised?

mongol armies, as reported by some players in here, are supposed to historically be more disciplined that their japanese counterparts. it would seem that raising overall morale of the mongol units would be an easy way to represent this...tougher to rout. yet again, why raise all units by 10 points or so?

kensai...does that one really need explaining? if yer gonna have a big ugly fighter with incredible stats in everything but morale, what good is he if he routs at the first nick of a blade or arrow? i mean, this guy is SUPPOSED to be able to stand in the middle of 4, 60 men units and hold his ground for a while. that's what he does best.

so, if we've got some units, particularly the mongols, that have a higher morale, what happens when you face those units against ones that dont have that morale level?

i also wonder if this stuff was tested by the play testers online or did they just test it in single player? that would explain a few things. was there even a server up during playtest where they could test it online? and that may be the answer to all this, that it wasnt tested in multi or tested by folks that play multi. but surely they tested it on a lan, in lan mode.

in the absence of actual definitive answers we tend to rely on speculation as truth. we also tend to dub in answers that may not be answers at all.

what yuuki and i decided was that we shld test a mod of the troopstats file where we lower the 'honor' (read: morale) value of ALL units and see what happens online. would the mongol vs japanese game play the way stw did or would things be too far out of whack for some reason. it's hard to balance the game from within the forum here. what we need is some actual solid testing for some actual solid answers. the rest is all speculation and hot air.

those that wish to help on this shld prolly contact yuuki (puzz3d) in the mod's section, by email or icq or online.

me, i'm going back to maps...much safer ;)

K.

------------------
I'm sorry, but i never apologize.

Yoshistune

08-18-2001, 22:32

Hey ShadowKill how do you get that icon?
http://www.totalwar.org/ubb/shade.gif

------------------
"Nothing is impossible for those who have a strong will."

"Wanting a fish to eat when standing on a lakeshore is not as useful as leaving the lake to make a net." §

Yoshistune

08-18-2001, 22:37

Quote Originally posted by Dark Phoenix:
Well we dont like dickhead warez users and we have been waiting for the game for ages. The reviews that are out have gone from about 85% to 95%.

[/QUOTE]What's Warez?

------------------
"Nothing is impossible for those who have a strong will."

"Wanting a fish to eat when standing on a lakeshore is not as useful as leaving the lake to make a net." §

celtiberoijontychi

08-19-2001, 02:08

If there's going to be a patch, please wait until the europeans get and test the the game too!

BTW, since the Warlord Edition still has no releas date in Europe, it cuold be possible to have the patch included in it.

KumaRatta Yamamoto

08-19-2001, 04:22

Originally posted by TakeshidaSo:
...I also said that bringing up that point doesnt answer the question of what the morale effects should be...
_____________________________________________

The morale effect have less an effect now, and i personnally like it. For example, The guns and the gun bug (firing THROUGH friendly units to rout an opponents unit in melee) do not have the same "deadly" army routing effect now. Now that was "cheesy" "unrealistic" tactics , Right?
(hey but i did used them also http://www.totalwar.org/ubb/smile.gif)

As for "splitting up" the army for ambushes, traps, hiding, guerrilla/skirmish tactics etc.. NOT being a valid tactic? C'mon what are battlefield ninja's are for, or cav. archers, or MLC, why do more units now have a morale bonus of +8.

For you realism seems to be a very important factor. That's cool with me.

But for ME replay value equalls Difficulty, variety and FUN. If i can now do something different , than try to flank, try to flank, try to flank, BECAUSE of the lesser morale effect, i'm happy with that.

If i want realism , i won't play a "GAME", i will enlist. Anything else is baseless speculation (mind you i enjoy baseless speculation http://www.totalwar.org/ubb/biggrin.gif).

JD: Yeah your right in some aspect if i am the attacker, not if i am the defender. Are these posts entertaining or what? http://www.totalwar.org/ubb/biggrin.gif

[This message has been edited by KumaRatta Yamamoto (edited 08-18-2001).]

MagyarKhans Cham

08-19-2001, 05:29

kuma u should know i am on your tail to balance your statements

just that u know it...

KumaRatta Yamamoto

08-19-2001, 08:50

EEEEKKKKKKKKK!!!!!! http://www.totalwar.org/ubb/biggrin.gif

I would run away from your cav Magyar, but i can't anymore because of this new morale setting thing? Have you heard about it? http://www.totalwar.org/ubb/smile.gif

TakeshidaSo

08-19-2001, 14:47

You could turn off the Morale setting in STW and play without worrying about creating negative morale modifiers for your men. I cant turn ON morale in MI so that the units act in a realistic regard to the possibility of cummulative negative morale effects. Maybe the best argument against MI's new morale system is that you think it's ok as the starting point. The "new" MI system was available all along with all the options from higher koku to Morale or Fatigue being off. Guns were just as effective as any missile unit at combined arms effecting a units morale, they were just more effective the closer you got to them. It's bugged because of friendly fire effects. The problems you have with others being able to appreciate the STW morale system, isnt because you couldnt "improve" it with a few settings, it's because the people who want to simulate STW's starting point cant do it now.

KumaRatta Yamamoto

08-20-2001, 00:54

Originally posted by TakeshidaSo:
...The problems you have with others being able to appreciate the STW morale system, isnt because you couldnt "improve" it with a few settings, it's because the people who want to simulate STW's starting point cant do it now.
_____________________________________________

No, the problem i have is with the argument of "realism" to change the actual settings. The "cumulative morale effect" in STW was not more, nor less "realist" than the one in MI. If you check out my posts in this tread:
http://www.totalwar.org/ubb/Forum1/HTML/001782-3.html

You will find that i have accepted that the morale settings should be carefully and seriously tested in order to find a common ground for the small but very active and honorable hardcore MP players and the majority of part time MP players , who prefer the SP campaign (that is very well balanced right now). Everyone should have fun, i can agree with that.

I have yielded to the argument of MP players that don't have any fun with the new settings and feel like they have less options. That i can appreciate. I can't agree about the "reality" argument because it is basically false and overblown.

May i ask you how many MP games that you have played with the new MI?

Roman Totale XVII

08-20-2001, 02:14

OK, just my own personal opinion on the MHC which some may disagree with.
1)Don't lower their effectiveness except for a speed reduction. Those ponies are carrying alot of iron-ware.
2)Increase their cost considerably.
3)Restore some degree of the old morale system. Of course this will make the MHC even more effective hence the cost hike. But then that's as it should be; lance armed MHC were murderous...

I'm a bit dismayed to hear about 'impetuous' Mongol Cav. The Mongols were renowned for their discipline and command communications. Any Mongol commander who disobeyed orders to go haring off on some mad charge was likely to find his head on a platter. Now 13thC Samurai on the other hand...

TakeshidaSo

08-20-2001, 03:00

If you havent survived combat in a unit of closely formed men standing in the open, fighting with short ranged, or hand to hand weaponry that suffered heavy casualties, or very many at one time, or more than twice as many as they give, or saw nearby friendly units panicking, or saw commanding officers killed, or found enemy close to your flank and rear, or received heavy fire as well as a close-in assault, or sustained losses from a flanking force that couldnt be countered, or had unit formation lost; then you can only conduct a rhetorical debate. Unit cohesion was of paramount importance to its members. By raising these points repeatedly I've tried to remind about the importance of these effects on your decisions to run or stand. When that close formation your in begins to waver noticeably, and you begin to "feel" defeat is inevitable, its only a matter of fact; that as soon as some of the men begin to run that there is an unimaginable pull on the remaining men to get away too. History suggests that even very well trained units, fighting in this time period, would rout under the right accumulation of negative morale modifiers. They did so repeatedly. Historical examples of unit behavior in ancient armies should be considered primarily relevant in a historical battle simulator. The fact that realism is out of place is your opinion. Your concern about realism not being of importance with a "historical" battle simulation is confusing, and for the most part you never try to argue that you have a better rhetorical approach. The fact that strict realism has to allow some flexibility for playability's sake is agreed with. STW did allow for considerable flexibility to strict realism. But the main arguments for improving STW was to weaken the monks, remove the effect of "stacked" movement commands on morale, and to give flat trajectory weapons friendly fire effects. The consensus was that morale effects were handled very well. People who complained about their armies routing too easy were generally accepted as people who needed to better understand these effects, or better conduct assessments of their battlefield actions. Units with lowered honor or in Low koku games should not be considered in this debate, even though many people still used them in higher koku games. Many other people refused to use Ashi, or Guns, that didnt have their honor improved. There was a real difficulty imposed on handling low honored low moraled and less well trained units. This was accepted as how it should be. It's also accepted that this is how it cant be now. There arent any good arguments that MI is more realistic. The fact that flexibility has been lost is agreed by everyone. Everyone who at first argued that they wanted to keep the MI morale system, now only wants to keep as much of it as possible. The original arguments about MHC being too strong were probably more about how ridiculous it seemed for even high moraled extra-heavy cavalry to fight to the last man against yari sams. What about the game balance of a SP campaign where you dont even have to fight the tactical battles on expert to win as the Mongols? Where normal is too easy to bother with? The AI is no where near as good as a half-trained human, and shouldnt be able to win on your behalf so easily. Maybe you could consider whether or not the introduction of a different army, to face the Japs, was more than the developers could accurately portray. MP and SP should both use a tactical engine thats challenging, because of what your not able to get away with. You are welcome to discuss any MI gameplay examples you wish to, just as many people have.

MagyarKhans Cham

08-20-2001, 05:12

i am still a fan of takes posts, sadly i cant post in here in my own native language.

take made a good suggestion, perhaps we should have a button like "old shogun morale"
in the morale of/on option screen.

Algesan

08-20-2001, 08:00

Take,
The ability to win on Expert with the Mongols using AutoCalc is mainly a function of using the stupidity of the AI against itself. Instead of forming kampgruppes to hunt down my marauders, it tries to surround me with single units. In the meantime, I'm able to eliminate the infrastructure the Hojo's need for defense and eventually gain enough reinforcements to overwhelm the main Hojo armies pinning my main armies.

Kocmoc

08-20-2001, 23:59

DAMN,

mag this is it!!

give us a button!!!!

wich turn old shogun moral on or off.

this must be easy....

koc

Puzz3D

08-21-2001, 03:10

Takeshida,

My feeling that the MHC is too strong is based on it's ability to kill 3 units of JHC and still be at 1/2 strength or better. MHC is rated at att/def = 4/4. JHC is rated at 2/6. These units should be about equal if those numbers are accurate. I don't think it's necessary to have such dramatic differences in strength between the units to have good gameplay. A difference of 1 point in attack or defense makes a significant difference in gameplay. For instance, if you took 1 point off the attack value of warrior monks then JHC beats the monk, and it drops into it's proper place cost wise between no-dachi and heavy cav. I have this idea that a small change like that would remove the monk rush as a viable tactic, and have a big impact on online play.
---------

Concerning morale: Dropping morale by 4 points on everything definitely brings morale back into the picture without returning fully to the old STW feel. Other things start showing up: like the low morale of the Korean units. With everything reduced by 4, I was able to run off the Korean infantry in a custom battle leaving the Mongol cavalry to fight alone. The Japanese spearmen can then just methodically hunt down the cav. A human commander would probably be able to compensate for the low Korean morale much better than the ai does, and do a better job of keeping them on the field fighting.

MizuYuuki

Nelson

08-21-2001, 03:54

Lowering morale across the board would hurt the Mongols far more than the Japanese in a solo campaign. The Hojo can compensate with strategic assets that the Mongols don't have. I believe morale is the way it is because it must be for the Mongol campaigns to work.

Perhaps morale settings could somehow be variable between the SP and MP games.

KumaRatta Yamamoto

08-21-2001, 11:01

TakeshidaSo: Please give me an example of an historic Japanese battle in the Sengoku period, we're a complete army routed (even fresh units that haven't seen battle yet) because of ONE unit getting flanked routing through the army, causing ALL UNITS to flee off the battlefield (while maybe only one or two units are pursuing them without the ability to rally). I would then gladly yield to your realism argument.

TakeshidaSo

08-21-2001, 23:28

Kuma, I cant help but think your playing too many low koku games. Lets remember that even with the STW morale system, there was recent talk of a 1000 koku tourney, and that Low koku games are commonly played. Thats when I saw the kind of ridiculous routing you continue to refer to, where many low honor and low morale units were employed. Your examples arent clear enough to debate, because you might very well be referring to a low koku game where low honor monks were allowed to rout over the rest of an Ashi majority army. I dont want to get into an argument about examples that cant be stated or countered with any real degree of scientific certainty. I can only give my opinions about "realism", which have not been what you are attributing to me. I never was a fan of low koku games, I started at 3000 koku, like many did, and went up from there. But I played all kinds of games and they were all interesting. MI games have disappointed me so far. I'm still hopeful that this will change, because there are good things to work with. The fact that low koku games are still very popular has never been responded to, and your the most likely person to do so. The fact that higher koku games, or games with Morale\Fatigue turned off, werent very common hasnt been discussed much either. Surely there are reasons why these points are ignored? It was possible before, to rout and rally, to halt a pursuit so that more could rally, and fight an entirely new engagement. Now I see only H0 low morale units routing with more than a few survivors. What if MHC didnt fight to the last man when in a bad situation? Many times, historically and game related, cavalry would rally and again be a serious factor. I think its reasonable for men see the potential to reform and try again, because thats always been practiced and prepared for. Thats not likely to occur in MI anywhere near as often as it did in STW. It sounds like our experiences with STW are from two totally different spheres. My understanding of historical examples, of the scholarly debates regarding them, as well as the experience of WRG ancient miniatures rules, have also led me to conclusions that are obviously different from yours. We can at least agree that the MI Morale system is very, maybe radically, different to STW's. I am glad you accept that the options are more limited than they were in STW, and that people diserve to have as many as they had before.

TakeshidaSo

08-23-2001, 05:38

Does anyone, who has good referrance material, want to provide information on numbers of troops engaged, and losses incurred, for any battle of the period? My only source refers to the Battle of Sekigahara, and says that the coalition against Ieyasu fielded 120,000 men, and lost 40,000. It doesnt say exactly what happened to the other 80,000 men, my guess is they ran away. They're probably all dead now though.

Polar

08-23-2001, 06:38

The Sekigahara battle in 1600? Thats a good example. A taisho of the western army defected. The western front line was winning slightly, but the defected taisho hit them from flank, caused the whole army to route. The great general Shimazu Yoshihiro didnt engage in the battle, but he led his 500 samurai troop to withdraw through Tokugawa's front line, less than 50 men returned home.

------------------
Polar the ugly

TakeshidaSo

08-24-2001, 00:30

The battle is a good example of realistic morale effects, or of routing unit behavior? Did Shimazu withdraw thru Ieyasu's front line, or have to cut his way thru it because he was surrounded? It sounds like at least somebody engaged him. A 500 man unit that he commanded, or his entire command? Is the coalition's strength and losses reported any differently in your source? The only other data my source provided was that Ieyasu's army was 70,000 strong, no losses were given.

caesarq

08-24-2001, 02:08

You guys that are complaining about
Mongol Invasion being unbalanced are full of it. If you charge heavy cavalry vs heavy cavalry, of course the Momgols will win. That's their specialty. Read the Mongol history included with the game and maybe you'll get the idea. However, I can slaughter MHC will some decent Yari Samurai and good positioning.

TakeshidaSo

08-24-2001, 07:17

I agree, MHC have Yari bonus and superior morale over JHC, and YS can defeat MHC at a cost savings. I have questions about whether CA should have reduced YS armor by 1 pt., and SA defense by 1 pt.(the two main units that oppose the Mongols in the SP campaign), and then raised the entire morale system because the Japanese couldnt stand up to the Mongols. It's also very difficult to accurately test relative balance when only low honor low moraled units appear to rout before they suffer 85% or higher casualties.

TakeshidaSo

08-27-2001, 03:35

I was curious about the impetuous units that were mentioned here in this thread. It's true that even low moraled, but H0, units like YS(who have inherent morale of 2) are impetuous, if they have friends on their flanks, and higher morale H0 units are very often impetuous. Of course, that may be understandable, considering it seems to be established by customer tests that MI's morale has been raised by a large degree. However, this is the only report we've had so far about a unit actually behaving in a realistically impetuous manner. If this realistic behavior is really possible, what on earth would it take to make it occur. I mean, morale has been raised so much that you see H0 units listed as impetuous all the time, and many games have now seen higher honor units being involved. So maybe impetuous is just a morale description, and not meant to provoke the kind of realism that was referred to here. In STW, I thought I had noticed impetuous behavior, by units who were pursuing and would refuse to accept orders to stop; nearly always WM. Who knows for sure, I cant read the developers minds. Since they rarely seem to have the time, and are easily persuaded to lose the interest, we may never know the answers to interesting game related questions like this one.