Patch for VI

[LadyAnn]

Folks, from the experiences we got in the past, we would have at most 1 patch and will have to live with it forever (until RTW comes out).

So, I would like to suggest we play-test the VI for an extensive amount of time, even modding some stats ourselves and play test them. Then we will try to ask the devs to make a patch.

But if we jump on it too early, there are always false perception at the beginning and premature patch only means making things worst. Fixing 1 thing may have implication at 10 other things, and it wont be good.

I take an example of the organ gun. If we complaint that it is too ineffective, it might be changed to too powerful. And we would have to play organs all the time, or ban them.

Annie

[Stormer]

HERE HERE

i agree you trying to tell me the organ gun aint cracked up to what its suppose to be GRR http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/angry.gif

[Shahed]

Echo.

[CBR]

We are most likely not getting a patch anyway heh...

But the organ gun range is clearly an error

CBR

[longjohn2]

I'll admit the organ gun range is an error, but I did test and balance it the way it is, so if you change the projectile velocity, you may increase its power to an undesirable extent.
I never expected it to be particularly useful in MP, though it might have some use as an ambush weapon. However, in SP when you camping in the corner beset by ai hordes, I expect it'll come in very handy.

[Magyar Khan]

i propose we get 2 patches this time since TW rome will most likely be delayed some months and u cant expect us to wait 3 montsh for the first and final patch.

i just read pc zone uk versiona nd its clear CA is doing big business, so no bullshitting here about not having resources as being a small compagny.

[baz]

so what exactly will be the deal with patche(s) for VI, it is not like we ask for big changes and i would think activision would expect (like other games) to have some after sale support to deal with .. http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/wink.gif

[Knight_Yellow]

how bout more units?

scottish get 1 unike unit thats been in the game all the time.

bugger that for a luagh

[Kocmoc]

i agree with ann,

but we deserve more than 1 patch
the other point is, who here to some statsworking?
mizus and some other guys, but when u saw mizus did realy work with the community?

from time to time they bring a small info and "complain" about that "we" are dont use theyr gifts.IMO they do a very nice work (we dont agree all the time but in many points we do) so i would love to see, if we all could work more together and bring some "patches" ourself. I would like to help in any aspects and im sure our clan will support such inofficial patch, other clans will do this as well.
Just let us be with u and dont go alone all the time, and sometime it would help if u would agree about some compromises.

in this way


koc

[Magyar Khan]

patch 1.15 is still available for download http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/wink.gif

[baz]

i agree with kocmoc, although it seems you guys dont agree what you say is pretty similar .. imo the most important point is giving the like of longjohn2 the facts in black and white of what our opinions are .. then if we can agree to some points we can all stand behind these points in order for them to be implemented http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/smile.gif

[Dionysus9]

I think we should wait to demand a patch until most of the MP community moves over to VI (assuming that happens).

However, a few things strike me as needing attention already:

1) The Irish...no archers? All short range missile? Do we really want/need an all-rush faction?

2) Lag? VI seems to lag a bit more than MTW...more along the lines of MI/WE... I was impressed that MTW cut lag out virtually altogether, but now it seems to be back. I'm talking about lag in 1v1's Ouch. Too early to say what is causing it or if its widespread.

3) Vikings lack effective cav. and anti-cav. Ok, this is probably part of the game design, but lemme give you a hint-- if you are facing Vikings take some pumped up cav and you should be fine.

These are just initial impressions, who knows what I'll think in a week.

And thanks, longjohn, for your candid admission re: mistakes. That type of integrity is rare in this day and age (and especially in this industry, methinks). Kudos 2 u.

Overall, I'm refreshed by the new "feel" of combat in VI. For some reason all my VI battles degenerate into a brutal mess. I like it.

[Puzz3D]

If we are ever going to work together as a community to try and develop a multiplayer stat for MTW, now would be the time to do it since Vikings is just released and we will have at least a 9 month run until RTW. As Tosa pointed out, Vikings gives us the possibility of making a stat that is a one time install and no stat swapping required because you can now have separate unit_prod files that you access just by choosing the era when you host. I think it's important that no swapping is required to get a large number of players using it. I also think it's important that this custom stat not drastically change the gameplay. If it's too extreme, some players will reject it.

The key to this no swap idea is not changing the projectiles file because you can only have one of them. You can adjust the effectiveness of ranged units with the amount of ammo, the unit size and the target's armor. You can raise morale so that the game is playable at 5000 florins per player without the easy routing you get now. Playing at 5000 florins limits upgrades and loading up on all elite units. It's a big task, but, over time as feedback from battles comes in, this custom stat should get better and better. Then 4 or 5 months from now, when people are getting tired of the regular Viking Invasion MP game, this custom stat will be ready to take players the rest of the way until RTW.

I'd also like to point out that CBR is modifying his MP Wars custom stat to be compatible with Vikings, and he plans to add Western wars and Eastern Wars to the already existing Italian Wars and Crusader Wars components of MP Wars. Since MP Wars is played at essentially valor 0, its gameplay is going to benefit from the removal of the battlefield upgrades in Viking Invasion. The learning curve of MP Wars is much shorter than MTW because the unit types and factions for each component are very limited, and upgrading is primarily accomplished by taking a larger version of the same unit which is clearly visible to all on the battlefield so you are not guessing about weapon and armor upgrades.

No doubt Viking Invasion is better balanced than MTW v1.1, but probably can be improved upon with the access to parameter files that CA has provided. I would be willing to work towards this goal. As long as this custom stat doesn't negate most of what players have learned about playing the Viking Invasion regular game it will be more widely accepted. I say this because it takes a big investment of time to learn so many units. If the stat is really good, players won't want to go back to the regular game. Of course, players who just want to beat up on newbies won't be very interested in custom stats since the newbies won't have the custom stat.

[theKyl]

Good point Ann

For now I am quite happy with VI, the (MP) morale is CLEARLY better. Let's first play and not complain about a game that we don't even know yet.

http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/wave.gif

[1dread1lahll]

I agree with An, dont be in a hurry for a 'fix' patch as many 'errors' will remain undiscovered if it is demanded too soon. Dont expect two patches; you may hope for two but you better expect no-more than one. If you want a job done right, take your time and do it right. I suggest we begin to compile the 'fixes' we request.
Ill start... Byz inf still too good, should cost 275 floins?
Spears were made too weak in 1.1, reduce their cost.
Plz feel free to add to the list of hoped for 'fixes'....

[Crandaeolon]

I haven't played VI yet, but are the Byz Inf still really that unbalanced? 275f sounds too much to me, that would make v3 Byz Inf cost 1351 florins, substantially more than v3 CMAA (1229f) or v4 Militia Sergeants (1253f), probably the most common melee infantry in 15k 1.1 games.

v3 Byz inf w/ (current) base price of 200 costs 983 florins.
v3 Byz inf w/ base price of 225f would be 1105f,
v3 Byz inf w/ base price of 250f would be 1228f.

IMO we should try to decide just how good we want Byz inf to be. Yes, they are an unhistorical unit and all that, but the Byzantines are going to need them if we want to keep the Byz a worthwhile faction.

The 200 florins we have now gives Byz Inf an advantage compared to other inf, no doubt about that. 225 would lessen the advantage but there would still _be_ an advantage. 250 would probably remove that advantage, while 275 would cause Byz Inf to be at a disadvantage compared to other infantry. I think I'd vote for 225, but others probably have more educated opinions... http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/smile.gif

[MF_Ivan]

Leave em as they are, I dont understand you people. Every faction has their own advantages and when playing you should try to utilize your own faction's advantage while neutralizing your opponents.

If we make decisions like this, then where is that unique identity with every faction? I mean who would want to play with the same units over and over, only to have different colors for different players? Oh wait that was STW... never mind I guess things dont change...

[RTKLamorak]

I agree with lahll that we should not EXPECT more than one patch, as from past experiences this seems a safe assumption. However it does amaze me how CA goes about patching their games. surely for mabye a month or two after release we should get regular (mabye fortnightly) patches, fixing a small, but important number of MP problems. Most games do this.. battlefiled 1942 for example had a patch out BEFORE the release date for all bugs found between completion and shipping, and then regularly aftert taht. now thats damn good imo SP fixes should wait for a "main" patche as things like typos or missing pictures e.t.c are unimportant really, as it doesnt decrease the popularity/emjoyment of sp like these problems do in MP. With minimal playtesting im sure CA could have identified this ridiculous "out of sync" business when someone drops.. or even quits a VI multi game. A patch fixing just that would take so little time, and increase peoples enjoyment of the game signficatly. so sooo basic it seems to me, i am confused as to why CA take this unique approach to patching games.. only ever expect one patch. well the objectivity has been lost from this post now, and i seem to be ranting so il stop here http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/smile.gif but that still doesnt relieve my frustration at this. I waited an hour to get a working 4v4 on VI yesterday, and on the third try everyone was able to actually deploy (hooray) and someone quit when we sweeped across the right side and game goes out of sync for everyone http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/frown.gif . its just not on IMO for what has already been described as an expensive patch to have such BLATANT problems as this. Surely with just one single playtest of a multi game in VI, this problem would have been identified. I am happy with the moral/balacne fixes in general but things like this almost remove the extra enjoyment i get from these fixes. .....sighs

[Magyar Khan]

some people will defend CA that they have low resources to create an extra patch, i am going to think that some of them are just too arrogan"* to accept their game(design) contains flaws.

*arrogant people recognize each other fairly quick http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/wink.gif