View Full Version : MTW/VI tend to be an Arcade Game
well, me would interest what the most of u MPlayer think abotu this?
the only difference between Totalwar Series was always the "Moral-Aspect", now with the high moral and the highflorin games, we make the moral unimportant.
units hold forever, and if u rout a unit they can rallys within a few moments, i just see lots of chaos on the field and even if ur realy better as ur enemy, ur opponent still hurt u much.
so imo VI got a mass-game, have more mens somewhere and u win, it doesnt matter ifu move better or have a "tactic" as every unit can hold just too long. its like the units had 100 HP and they first run if the HP is gone.
i agree again, the game is better balanced at 15k but the moral and the gameplay got very bad.
koc
Brutal DLX
05-21-2003, 09:28
I don't think so.
why u dont think so? explain me plz
Brutal DLX
05-21-2003, 09:50
Because I think you are exaggerating by far. You can still choose the amount of florins you want to play with, less and you get less upgrades and thus your units will rout quicker, if you prefer that.
An arcade game is much much different. Anyone can jump into an arcade game and win right away, whereas in MTW or VI you get newbies who don't even know what specific units are good for.
The morale system is still there, and just because routing units rally doesn't mean it's a bad thing. They do rout in some stupid cases (like the currently discussed sphere of influence), so it's just fair that some of them regroup. Warfare isn't like "rout and then they run for good", you have to do the dirty part too, chasing and cutting them down, even though the games might take a little longer.
I agree that the morale factor is almost eliminated in high florin games. Actually I'm not sure if it is the morale, or just the 10 armor upgrades http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/wink.gif I think whether you play a tactful game or an arcade game, depends who you play against. I have played many times vs some historically literate players, who have used some historical formations, which though look very funny, actually worked. I have beaten some vets myself using some tactics they did not expect.
It is not always easy though to apply your tactics, as MTW does steer somewhat more towards a game, rather than a battle simulator. I'm not bothered with that because in MTW a complete newbie can beat a seasoned and hard core vet. I think that's ok, gives us more of a challenge.
I think that CA have diverged from the hard core STW approach, because they want the game to become more mainstream. It would be ideal if in RWT you had more settings which allowed you to play more as arcade or more as battle simulator, as you choose to.
I agree with Koc in one way and not in another i think.
I agree with morale being very important. The game would be shit without moralesystem. Without the moralefactor men would stand and fight till all on one side was dead - not fun at all and not proving any skills at all.
Hope that u feel i understand that point correctly koc http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/wink.gif
What i do not agree with is that the system right now is bad. I think that a better player can use his skill to rout an enemy away from the field. Of course there is the occasional battle where the noob/worse player might win but that is a way to make u work even harder and become even better i think.
True is also that many units rally easy and maybe this needs to be changed possibly with a minimum time limit within which the fleeing unit cant rally. But no drastic changes should be done i think. When the unit fleeing is somewhat away from the intense action they should start feeling a bit safer again and eventually rally. Especially if they reach a line with fresh friendly troops.
Doesnt the increase of morale in viking somewhat make it possible to hold off a massed enemy (head on) with fewer troops making it possible for u to swing round flanks and so on with ur other troops?
And i do think mistakes can be punished if one use the opportunity. Bring cav behind enemyline or draw out small enemyunits and the effects are usually the destruction of the enemy i think.
Kalle
spacecadet
05-21-2003, 10:27
Kocmoc
I also think you are exagerating if you think VI is a pick up and play arcade game. I do agree that MTW was a step back and made the game, for me at least a duller and more bland experience online. However, VI has improved the feel of the game a lot. Your post makes it sound like the changes that have been made are almost insignificant. The only steps back ive seen so far in VI are the greater chances of the game crashing, and the (so far) smaller numbers in the foyer and so difficulty in getting a good game going.
When i play, its tactics and skill that give wins, not staying put with high valour 100 man units. Stopping units from rallying and being a threat is a skill, not a problem. (ps i still find that around 13k feels much better...)
So, to sum up, the game isnt perfect but VI has made the game a whole lot better, not worse.
Space
http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/smokin.gif
The game would be more interesting if the majority of online players, came up with more original formations and tactics. Thus dropping the standard all units close, missile line, sword line, cav flanks approach.
VI is a lot better in gameplay.
The stability issues, game connection time etc...are worse than in 1.1
well i think koc is "exaggerating to get his point across of playing with the same morale as MTW
it seems in VI that a unit with morale 6 on the f1 screen has the same morale as a unit with 8 on the mtw f1 screen, so in mtw when i looked at my f1 screen i was used to seeing 6-10 morale levels, in general of course factions varied with diff armies, but you should expect to see morale leveles of around 4-8 in VI nb. this is a very general statement.
as a consequence a florin level somewhere between 10-13k seems to give the equivalent morale in VI to MTW, what koc is saying is if games are played above this florin level the morale becomes less important and more like an arcade game .. basically the msg is play the game like space stated at a lower florin level http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/smile.gif
im starting to agree here.. the morale boost has foced me to look into more alternatives.. its not right that a celtic warrior charge should do so much as to to even rouse an enemy. The prolonged fights take a lot of emphasis off what is origianlly a strong hit, as opposed to the level of armour
this cause 1 more problem, the game is balanced for 15k, fi u go less than 15k, the cav becomes stronger and spears weaker. this is the prob of the game we play, its fine wit h15k but less nice with 12k....
koc
Agree with Koc.
There is definately something not 'right' with morale, perhaps i just need to get used to it, but more than a few times ive had full units held up by 5-10 men, which just seems wrong, and has cost me a couple of games.
The bigger the unit the better, it seems, even when matchups and flanking go your way, the person with more troops (not units), no matter the quality, seems to have a considerable advantage.
Now wait a minute , does anyone here even play arcade games at all http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/tongue.gif ?
FPS -s does require a lot of skill and training just a completely different kind of skill than strategy games as MTW, skills based more on reflexes reaction times and knowing maps ...
The level of fast clicking skill required in the laggy TW games is very very low and anyone can do it ....
Quote[/b] ]An arcade game is much much different. Anyone can jump into an arcade game and win right away
Just provoke any 8-12 years old you know to an XBOX / PS2 match and that anyone can win theory will go away pretty fast... http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/joker.gif
Yes faction / unit selection has too much to do with the outcome of a 1 vs 1 ( use same faction or max 2 ) , but it only has very little to do with the outcome of larger games ...
And stop calling this an arcade game ....
TGI
tgi, i have problems to understand u.
i didnt said, its an arcade game i said it tends to become an arcade. I played around 600 WC3 battles...so i know something about arcade games i guess.
arcade is about untis wich never rout and fight till the death u have many ways to counter ur enemys.
in Totalwar, we have also many ways to counter armys, but just a few works good. so what can counter a cav right now?
dont tell me the pretty slow spears or this swiss (60) or halberders, before they arrive the cav the fight is over or the cav is away
anyway, the only difference is..... yeah baby, the moral and that u can rout units but if units nearly fight till the death, than the moral isnt realy around, yes u stil lcan rout but just as ur units fought close to the death.
thatswhy i say, the moral is nearly away and than ther is not much difference between this game and a arcade game.
koc
maybe all 60 men units could be a solution
Quote[/b] ]i didnt said, its an arcade game i said it tends to become an arcade. I played around 600 WC3 battles...so i know something about arcade games i guess.
Now WC3 is NOT an arcade game its a strategy game so is chess ( and chess doesnt have a morale system either ... http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/tongue.gif ).... I didnt even bothered playing WC3 online ( nice graphics though )
Arcade games are from pacman to spaceinvaders to pinball and super mario brothers .... ( just search the net for arcade and see what you find )
Yes spears suck bigtime and cavalry can only be countered with more cavalry or maybe camels on a flat map ...BUT it doesnt make the game an arcade game ...
TGI
PS: Edited for typos as usual ...
lol tgi
m8 go and and search and maybe read some advertise and u will notice that WC3 ia an arcade game, like C&C ...dune and some other....
it seems u dont understand what i write.....but dont worry that happend a lot....so its more my prob as urs....
thx to the guys who can understand what i wrote http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/wink.gif
koc
Maybe this question should be in another topic, but since the issues discussed somehow connect through the gamebalance thing which seems to be the key issue, I post it here.
The question regards these new units that some people want (maybe I do to, i dont know yet) - I.e. the fast much improved (vs cav) spearman unit and the fast cavkiller cav.
Wouldnt these units only make it even easier for very skilled players to kill off not so skilled players? It is allready possibel for skilled players to kill off not good players cav with using cav of their own or some sort of polearm unit. Or is it to costly to do it as the things are in the game now, what do u think?
And wouldnt horsearchers need to be even faster and the other light cav too, if they are to be useful.
Maybe if light cav, like alan mercaneries, was able to deal with the anticav cav it would be good?
As for now i think knights and heavy cav should be the kings of the battlefield as they actually were during the period though there existed weapons aginst them. But these weapons do also exist in the game and i think maybe is not good to create units that would kill knights very easily - especially very fast ones?
What do u guys think?
And please if u feel i dont understand, then try explain instead of other remarks http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/wink.gif , my mind isnt set on this issue yet, I just want a little debate.
Kalle
good questions kalle
i will try to answer it.
first u mix again some historcal fews with this gameplay, we need to agree about that this is a game and the many aspects of this game are not historical correct.
CBR did post many of this backround infos....
As we want all the same, a game wich we can enjoy and where u as a better play should win vs the weak players.
this anticav-cav or such a spearunit, would endeed help the skilled player to kill a bad player much faster.
thastwhy i sugessted this units, we need a harder punishment for mistakes....if u look in history http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/wink.gif and we both know thats a game .... but if we do it.... than think about what would be happen if 40 horses run into some long spears...... in this game we easy can proof what will happen ur cav lose 2 mens and than u can very easy retreat ur cav, even if u let ur cav figth the spearunits, the cav fight for ever.
i think its clear what i mean. still u cant create extrem routs and u wont be able to kill a compelt army much more faster, but look at the tactical aspects....
u need to think about ur knights, where to move and u need to watch more the enemy units....as there are units wich can eat ur knights now.
to the cavarcher, no they dont need to be faster as this anticav-cav, they should also counter this cavarcher.
they brougth a game with.....10.000 fighting mens on the battlefiels about 100 different specific units..... well, where are the specific units? and how much diff untis we realy use?
this 2 units will be specific and they will do theyr job and nothing else.
koc
Crandaeolon
05-21-2003, 17:12
I agree with Koc and others in that some of the bonuses could be better thought of, but the idea of a fast cav unit that could easily kill other cav sounds a bit silly IMO. Ok, it's just a game, but it's still based on history, not fantasy
Just some more contrast to the existing system would do the trick IMO. Double the rank bonuses for spears, make camels run a bit faster, some new light or medium cav with AP to fight knights etc...
Sounds like the +2 morale to all units in MP was not a very good modification, perhaps +2 to spears only would have been better.
I don't think it's good to be able to kill a whole army and loose almost no men yourself.
Crand,
Actually, the +2 morale does nothing. You could always get this effect in MTW v1.1 by playing at 25k. BTW, what we have now in VI v2.0 is most likely it. I'm a bit amused by the people who assume there will be a patch. Unless there is some really serious bug that shows up in VI, there won't be any futher patches. We have to face the fact that, despite all the players here who agree that spears are too weak in MP, we didn't make a strong enough case to get even a price adjustment on them.
The Dragon
05-21-2003, 17:21
how about playing at 15k with only armour and weapon upgrades??no valor
ive just come back from 2 10k florin games, one in Vikng era one in early
the viking game was less balanced, favouring cav more. The morale tends to be just a little too low. 12k should be more than enough for viking era
early era was perfect, there wasnt an overabundance on heavy cav, horse achers worked great (a 2v2) and even when i got semi doubled i held off nearly long enough, but broke as i should have, if it was any more florins i think i could have held till my ally helped. 10k is definatly my choice for early
Quote[/b] ]lol tgi
m8 go and and search and maybe read some advertise and u will notice that WC3 ia an arcade game, like C&C ...dune and some other....
it seems u dont understand what i write.....but dont worry that happend a lot....so its more my prob as urs....
thx to the guys who can understand what i wrote
Kocmoc
Real time strategy is real time strategy arcade is arcade and warcraft 3 is real time strategy , but feel free to post any link that classifies WC3 as an arcade game.
Gamespot classifying WC3 as RTS (http://www.gamespot.com/pc/strategy/warcraft3reignofchaos/review.html)
Gamerankings.com classifying WC3 as RPG / RTS (http://www.gamerankings.com/htmlpages3/3292.asp)
Gamesdomain thinks its an RTS too ... (http://gamesdomain.co.uk/gdreview/zones/reviews/pc/jun02/war3_rev.html)
And please do not resort to personal remarks.
TGI
Alrowan,
I played a 10k 4v4 viking era game and the mass routing, hitting ctr A and R a 100 times, exhausted units, chasing units from one end of the map to the other and units scattered all over a huge map were all present in the game.
WC3?
thats called resource managment
MTW?
thats called strategy
Quote[/b] (Puzz3D @ May 22 2003,03:48)]Alrowan,
I played a 10k 4v4 viking era game and the mass routing, hitting ctr A and R a 100 times, exhausted units, chasing units from one end of the map to the other and units scattered all over a huge map were all present in the game.
thats why i suggested 12k http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/wink.gif
I have a suspicion that the unit costs and unit morale in viking era require a slightly higher florin level to get gameplay that's similar to early, high and late eras. I haven't looked at the stats. I'm just going by the viking era battles that I've been involved in from 10k to 15k.
Crandaeolon
05-21-2003, 17:58
Quote[/b] ]Unless there is some really serious bug that shows up in VI, there won't be any futher patches.
That quit-crash bug sounds pretty serious IMO... I heard there are some oddities in SP too.
Quote[/b] ] despite all the players here who agree that spears are too weak in MP, we didn't make a strong enough case to get even a price adjustment on them.
Hm, I think the devs just don't know their game well enough in practice. Fans know the game much better... which isn't very surprising. Fandom is like that. http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/tongue.gif
Losfalos
05-21-2003, 18:03
An okay example imho is AlmohadsvsFrench recorded battle file in the files archive of total.org.
No matter how much morale you gave the french, the Almohads tactically outmanoeuvered him. Both armies were evenly matched (i think) and the french had the advantage in defence. It was also on lush terrain.
So morale does not always determine the game.
However, what you can do is have both players set up their armies and then do a mandatory SWAP of army specs so that the other side is FORCED to use the army you composed.
Be kind
Well.. I guess some of not most people know what I want when it comes to historical accuracy :-)
Yes this game is not completely historical accurate and I can understand the idea behind these 2 new units.
But Im not really in favor of adding more fantasy units to this game. The ones we have now are already spoiling the game enough IMO.
Having such clear anti-cav units will just make army selection even more important and enough people have complained about that "problem"
I like to play medieval warfare and that cant even be put down to just one era with one set of units as tactics and units available changed through time.
Now I know that when words like "history" or "realistic" comes up some people get all kinds of images: Its boring, its only peasants, its only knights, its not balanced etc etc. But I know it can be both fun and balanced while still keeping to the historical setting.
Thats just my opinion of course but I dont need fantasy units to improve the balance, gameplay or skill of this game. A lot of things can be changed to improve the game..all of them historical.
Should you be able to win against someone and have less losses doing it compared to now? well yes a bit perhaps. One problem with units fighting forever is caused by their elite status I think. In STW/MI most units were elite except the ashigaru. In MTW spears and missile are not elite while cav and men at arms are. Swiss armoured pikes are elite too. If it was something more like STW/MI we should see more units/armies running.
Counters against cav..well actually missile is a very nice counter. But CA has made the knights too much armoured IMO in the way they have just added armour together. It doesnt reflect the unarmoured horse that good.
Horse archers is already now a nice counter against cav. I know from my mod (in Crusader Wars era) that you dont want to just send out your knights alone without thinking as they can get shot to pieces if not careful. And of course lighter cav are faster than the heavy ones. Most cav in MTW has same speed even if they dont have that much armour. So its not that easy to outmanever them and make a hit and run in flank or rear.
In my Italian Wars era both pikes and halberds have better charge factor and if you are not careful with your cav you can lose them quickly. Halberds are also faster than pikes.
Well just a few examples on how things can be improved without the use of fantasy units.
CBR
Louis de la Ferte Ste Colombe
05-21-2003, 18:34
Quote[/b] (Alrowan @ May 21 2003,11:51)]
Quote[/b] (Puzz3D @ May 22 2003,03:48)]Alrowan,
I played a 10k 4v4 viking era game and the mass routing, hitting ctr A and R a 100 times, exhausted units, chasing units from one end of the map to the other and units scattered all over a huge map were all present in the game.
thats why i suggested 12k http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/wink.gif
http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/confused.gif
So basically, we got to choose between "rout and rally" game at lw fl and "die till the last" game at high fl with little middle ground?
It's going to be difficult to balance because players can allocate fl as they want between their unit. And the minute all their unit (but missile / HA) are above say 4/6 morale and out of the 'rout easily' zone, all the extra fl are going to be pumped into a few steroid units which will gain 'die till the last' ability.
Spears don't make good steroid units, hence the feeling that 'they don't work and are the weak part of RPS' or the feeling, at lower fl, that 'they rout too easily'.
Do we need a steroid spear? I wonder if CA has not tried that into the new units (but failed IMO)...
It's just not worth pumping up spears. Price reduction might help.
I kind of agree with crandaleon idea of +2 for spears (I think that was nearly my only contribution to the VI change
thread; +2 to spears only not to everybody).
But... But, on the other hand sword need to win vs spears, and I am half convinced that swords do not kill spears as much as they rout them. So swords need some kind of morale 'superiority' over spear whether it is in number or in quality (elite), or in inflicting a morale penalty to spears.
Well eventually, http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/confused.gif
Louis the Simurgh,
PS; alrowan, if it's rout and rally and not rout and bye... maybe it's still too high... On the other hand I agree and I am convinced that 'good' fl levels are differents according to the era you play in.
A very good post CBR, well if you were not around I may have had to type a lot more http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/wink.gif . Thankfully since you are I need reiterate no more than this.
If the game does stick to some reasonable historical accuracy, it would be much more FUN to play. Historical battles were not boring to the contrary are very interesting. Clearly, as I have repeated numerous times, NOT enough historical research has gone into this game. You really should have to think about sending your heavy Knights, out against 2 units of Turcomans. The Knights should get outrun ,outmaneuvered, tackled and taken apart one piece at a time.
I'm not for adding any more fantasy units into the game either. It's ridiculous enough as it is. The less skilled players should have a chance against more seasoned players.
Adding units just to ensure a supremacy of the elite is not in everyone's favor, just in the favor of a few.
The tone of this post is direct, but no insult or injury is meant to any party. I love this game and all the MP-ers who make it fun.
http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/smile.gif http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/pat.gif http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/wave.gif
the problem is....amp would say ..."u know a shit"....that u jsut know not much and its realy hard to explain some guys the problems if they cant even control theyr army right
so PUMPED UP units dont realy help in low florin games, the problem here is again, some guys just know not much about this game but write and act as they know all of the game.
or why the hell we played with h0 units in the 1k games in mi?
holy crap some just know nothing
now go back and test it damnit, and dont jsut speak as u jsut dont know it, or who played 1k games and saw the mecanic of this games?
lol
some act as they where the best and know it all, but go online and u beat them 10 times in a row, now what say this?
i offered them to play with less florin and they can use theyr pumped untis, WOW...where they are? show me plz how this Great "tactic" works, as it dont work, it never did work and it wont work now....
so plz be realistic and dont speak abut something u know nothing
koc
Magyar Khan
05-21-2003, 18:43
i am only interested in a good set of units which offer all tactical elements where each unit is balanced ton teh other./ pick about 15-20 units and adjust stats whats needed.
Morale is still important i think.... however now you need also the staying power to reap the benefits of it... It takes more time now before an unit rout...
Flanking is still important.... it gives a morale advantage, which - i agree - does not mean the enemy unit will rout right away... Eventhough it does not result in a just as fast rout as it did in MTW (And I am still undecided which is best), it is still a morale advantage...
Besides morale advantage, you will gain a combat stat advantage too. I am not sure by how much the flankers combat bonus rises and by how much the flanked combat bonus decreases, but there is a combat advantage for the flanker...
Assuming both armies are using exactly the same armies consisting of 1 type of swordsmen with the same stats each, to make things simpler to explain...
If both armies simply rush towards each other, then yes its simply chance.... however if one unit flanks another one... just one... then the flanked unit will rout... yes not right away... But thanks to the flanking bonus it will have superior combat stats and thus will kill faster than it receives casualties... which means that the flanked unit gets more and more morale penalties and that combined with the morale penalty it got just for being flanked... it will break... Now this takes more time than in MTW, so staying power as well as unit matchs play a big role in VI next to morale. In MTW all you had to do was to get one or two units behind the enemy army to win.... even one from the flanks was more than enough if it was a chiv knight... In fact it was even more worse... But no need to discuss that.
Now... Getting one or two units behind enemy army isnt enough anymore (for some reason many call that being outmanouvred.... i just call it being outclicked)... In order to win now you need to either outkill your opponent (very risky yes and too long).... or micro manage the main combat by making use of reserves, pay close attention to match ups.... lots of things actually...
It is hard to explain actually... But simplistic said... if you got a main line of 6 swords facing a similiar line of 6 swords... Then you may want to try to get into combat with say 2 of these drawing 3 of your enemy in combat while keeping the other 4 close enough so your 2 fighting units dont suffer morale penalties of being outnumbered... The manouvring part of the game still continues... Its up to you what you do with your 4 main battle line units vs his 3 main battle line units... and the rest of both armies http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/wink.gif
No I am not saying I am good in this, personally i find the double and single battle formations fighting style common in MTW much easier to use...eventhough i always tried to stay away from it...
Perhaps Staying Power and Unit Stats play a slightly too big role now compered to the morale role, for me it is too early still to judge that.... But I am convinced that the difference between these two roles are lower now than they were in MTW where morale reigned. And thus in my eyes more fairer... and an improvement to the former situation.
Yes you can still outmanouvre your opponent and you still can rout them.... but the benefits are not instantinous... It is meaningless without staying power or a continueing serie of flanking moves or both, time will tell if that certain move you made was a good one tactically or not... Flanking just for the flanking itself wont work.... Especially if you have deployed very wide and end up on your enemy's army's flank by 'outmanouvring' them... Your units on the flank are simply too far away to make an impact. So yes you have outmanouvred your opponent that way, good job... But you have no staying power and no local superiority...
Hmmm i hate it when dinner gets in between a post... at the time i started making it, this thread was still on its first page....
Anyways... to answer your question directly kocmoc...
No I do not think morale got unimportant in VI... But yes the role the morale aspect plays in the game got decreased, simply because the roles of other aspects got increased... like unit stats and unit match ups...
Now perhaps the roles the unit stat and unit match up aspects of the game may each individually carry a bigger influence than the morale aspect in VI at 15K, I dunno yet, too early... and I doubt I can ever determine that perfectly accurate since im not a statitician....
But what I do know is that I do not want to go back to where morale is the only thing what matters like in MTW 15K games...
Hey Kocmoc,
The pumped unit thing that you say doesn't work just happened to me in a 10k viking era game recently. So, do I believe you or what I saw happen in a game? I'm not interested in playing this low morale fast rout game that you want to play.
Quote[/b] (Kocmoc @ May 21 2003,18:43)]so plz be realistic and dont speak abut something u know nothing
Kannst du vielicht bischen erklaren ? Ich verstehe garnichts von diene post.
Tempiic,
The combat advantage for flanking is large. It's 5 points added to the attack (melee) value which means a 250% increase in chance to kill. From the rear it's 7 points added to the attack which is a 350% increase.
*useless reply cos yuuki changed his*
Kalle:
Quote[/b] ]True is also that many units rally easy and maybe this needs to be changed possibly with a minimum time limit within which the fleeing unit cant rally. But no drastic changes should be done i think. When the unit fleeing is somewhat away from the intense action they should start feeling a bit safer again and eventually rally. Especially if they reach a line with fresh friendly troops.
Hmmm, I think that it's the way that it is has been working for now. If you pursue the routing unit, it usually doesn't rally, unless it gets out the influence of the enemy or finds allies to cover him. Of course, if you pursue several enemy units with a single foot unit, some of the enemies rally after they get somewhat far away from the pursuer.
Well Alioven, what i ment, was of course, that a slight increase in difficulty of rallying a unit could be good. Im not sure though.
Kalle
Quote[/b] (Alrowan @ May 21 2003,18:49)]WC3?
thats called resource managment
MTW?
thats called strategy
Actually both are strategy games...
The difference is that WC3 focus mainly on the economical managment while TW simply does not.
To each their own. Just dont say one game does not require skill and another does not.... *shrugs*
Louis de la Ferte Ste Colombe
05-21-2003, 20:27
Quote[/b] (Kocmoc @ May 21 2003,12:43)]the problem is....amp would say ..."u know a shit"....that u jsut know not much and its realy hard to explain some guys the problems if they cant even control theyr army right
so PUMPED UP units dont realy help in low florin games, the problem here is again, some guys just know not much about this game but write and act as they know all of the game.
If you are speaking about steroid pump unit...
You may not have noticed but I AM NOT speaking about lw fl game.
I dislike to quote myself, but what I think is happening is; players put their money into their h2h units until they reach around 6 morale, then they grow more selective in their upgrade and all additional money is going into selected steroid units.
Where does that relate to low fl game?
In low fl you are not likely to reach morale 6 across the board, and you end up with quick rout and rally problem. Agreed I don't know if it make sense to have pumped units in those settings.
With higher fl, everybody got the minimum (6) morale and a few units grow some extra muscle very selectively, changing the RPS, hence abberation with a few units fighting till they die.
Kocmoc, you have much more experience than me, and I am sure you can beat me 100 times in a row, "eyes closed", as we say in French, and you must be aware of plenty of things I don't know about.
But that does not mean I like to be trashed for something you misread, misunderstood and that I have not actually written. I WAS NOT SPEAKING OF PUMPED UNITS IN LOW FL GAME. Sorry if I was not clear in previous post.
http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/argue.gif
Louis,
Louis,
He may have been talking to me. It all started becaus I related an experience I had in a 10k viking era game last weekend, and I unfortunatly don't have a replay. I choose my army as though it was a 15k game, but when I realized I didn't have enough florins, I simply took off upgrades evenly across my inf. When I went into battle my opponent had fewer but significanty better inf thanI did. Since is was a 4v4 and I was in an interior position, I had to fight straight ahead. When a couple of my units lost their matchup my whole army routed.
Now this is causing some severe reaction from Kocmoc because I said I didn't like playing this way. In other words, I'm not supporting his proposal to make 10k the new standard. I think it's premature to set the standard. Play the game for a while first because once a standard gets established we will be stuck with it.
Orda Khan
05-22-2003, 00:38
15k is just fine
.....Orda
ok, im tempted to post my replays, in fact i will. Both are 2v2, and in both the superior general won
im not the biggest fan of the rout game, but it is quite challenge, keeping your units holding by a hair while you wait for that unit to flank them. It opens up more oppertunities.
then again, i do like the higher floring games, mainly in 4v4 and such though, but in 1v1 and 2v2 i prefer low florin
2 10k battles (http://www.totalwar.org/Downloads/Mtw_Uploads/MTWrecords/10kgamesVI.zip)
enjoy them
Dionysus9
05-22-2003, 04:24
Well, what I think will end up happening is there will be 2 camps developing. One who plays around 10k and one who plays 15k and above. I'm not saying there will be a definite split in the community--just some people will play more 15k games and some will play more 10k games. 2 camps of players.
After several months of this we will be able to tell which florin amount is the best. How you ask?
Whichever florin amount requires the most skill will produce the better players--and those better players will be able to play at either florin amount and win regularly against the other camp of players.
I personally think it is 10k, but I could be wrong.
Whichever florin amount requires the most skill is the best in my opinion. When you play a game that requires more skill, your skill improves overall--regardless of the florin amount you might be playing at in any single game.
So, lets just play what we want and see where it gets us.
Dion,
I don't think it's as easy as you say to jump between 10k and 15k. That's like jumping between 15k and 25k in v1.1. The game plays quite differently at those two extremes. I tried another VI 12k high era game last night and while most of the players in the game said is was ok, I had the same troubles that I've had in all my 12k games so far. Although a couple of my inf units fought well, most ran away. Right now my theory for why is that when I cut 3k off of my 15k army, I'm not making the cuts in the right places. I'm taking it all off the inf, and I think this is leaving me with an army that performs poorly relative to the other armies on the field. Incidentally, nobody in that game said they liked 12k better than 15k and two said they liked 15k better.
ELITEofGAZOZ
05-22-2003, 12:15
@Bachus count me as camp 3: I prefer 12500 fl http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/smile.gif
I spent some time re-working my MTW 15k high era armies to 12k VI armies. By limiting myself to the same subset of units I used in MTW, I have two armies which maintain the same high level of morale as I had in MTW at 15k. In addition to that, the armor on all the inf units is better which will reduce the effectiveness of archery and possibly the rate of casualties depending on what units are encountered. Now I will see how 12k VI plays using these armies.
Dionysus9
05-22-2003, 20:02
Time will tell. It seems like the major criticism of the 10k army is that it "runs too easily"...meaning that if, by chance, your opponent can rout one or two of your units then the game is lost. So, the criticism is essentially that a 10k game involves too much chance and not enough skill.
Similarly, the criticisms I'm hearing about 15k games are that the units are too strong/brave and that victory is left to chance. So, the criticisim is essentially that a 15k game involves too much chance and not enough skill.
Now, I understand we may be talking about different types of skill--and perhaps we are really talking about unit selection skills-- but the bottom line in my mind is this:
The more tactical skill that is required to achieve victory, the better. Either 10k or 15k games require more tactical skill. Over time, playing the florin amount that requires more skill will increase my skill level. The expereince and skill that I build will translate to the other florin amount--provided my unit selection skills are at an equal level for each florin amount.
So, I'm going to keep training at 10k. I really find 15k games easier than 10k games. 10k is challenging for me and my mistakes are punished. 15k is less challenging and my mistakes are often forgiven.
Ultimately I guess this just comes down to an issue of style. Some people have a style that favors a certain florin amount. So be it.
Div Hunter
05-23-2003, 02:08
Did kocmoc lose to an 'inferior' player after being hit by a rallied unit that he forgot to chase or something?
Changing to different florin levels doesn't change the tactics as mach as you all winge about. If both teams have the same amount of fl to spend it still all comes down to army selection and the tactics on the field. What I think would solve this is if you could see the weapon and armour upgrades on units like you can the valour by looking at the little flags. This would mean that people wouldn't get confused about their units getting killed by what you thought were inferior ones.
Also units rallying is fine if there's noone chasing they rally farily quickly depending on circumstances and their quality. This is realistic IMO especially if a fair number of the unit are left. If all your army buggered off after just one or two units began to rout what a shit game that would be. All you would see then is a steriod unit hitting hard and quickly routing one enemy unit and then the game would be over in 1min or less - pure crap but seems to be kocmoc's ideal scenario.
All you wingers should either shut up or do something about it yourselves - geez there are more innovative 12 yr olds in other gaming communities http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/rolleyes.gif It seems many just want STW back - well then go play it instead and stop complaining I know it's been said but it's been said for a REASON. Many also seem to want an ideal game where noone can ever beat them because of their 'great skills' - grow up
I am in no way saying that I am all mighty in fact I have a LONG way to go. But I am so sick of the contradictory complaining it really grates on my nerves.
Have a nice day http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/smile.gif
spelling http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/rolleyes.gif
ElmarkOFear
05-23-2003, 03:26
The obvious reason for changing VI is that DIV_Hunter and Alrowan trounced me last night in several games We can't have this Everybody knows what a GREAT players I am Right? Right? **ONLY SOUND HEARD IS CRICKETS CHIRPING** Well a pox on you all http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/smile.gif
There now that I got that out of my system . . hehe
HUNTER: I do not have a problem of units rallying in VI like they do, but when they rout thru your army and gain the flank and can rally so close that your army chain routs do to an immediate flank penalty, I have to stop and wonder. I think units should do the obvious thing and rout away from the units that are killing them, which would be back towards where most of their friendly units are or away from the enemy units that routed them. It is a small bug, in the way the game handles the rout in all directions, but a most annoying one. Unfortunately, I cannot use that excuse in our games since my men did not win a single unit battle in a few of those games. :P
Just wait til tonight pal. I will bring my ElmoHead all missile late period army and then you will be sorry hehe
Great games and catch you tonight.
Div Hunter
05-23-2003, 05:27
I agree that that particular occurance is rather odd, I think I have that replay around somewhere I'll have to go through my numerous non-descriptly named replays and try and find it http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/dizzy.gif They usually do rout away from the unit that routed them first and then secondly consider other enemy units. Maybe they had got turned around and they were actually fleeing away according to that unit but still very odd none the less. And that your units routed because of it, well that's just rotten luck. Although as I recall I was then flanked by the viking army that had been attacking you.... http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/mecry.gif it happens.
ErikJansen
05-23-2003, 11:14
Div:
Quote[/b] ]What I think would solve this is if you could see the weapon and armour upgrades on units like you can the valour by looking at the little flags. This would mean that people wouldn't get confused about their units getting killed by what you thought were inferior ones.
Oh please nonono http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/wink.gif
This is one of the great uncertainties left in the game, allows you to play tricky http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/tongue.gif
Crandaeolon
05-23-2003, 11:50
You're right Elmo, that rally-behind-enemy lines thing sounds very weird indeed, but can you honestly say that it has been a problem in _many_ of your games and not just a piece of freak luck?
Hm I havent seen much of that..or at least been too busy noticing it. What type of unit was it Elmo..and what valour?
CBR
Div Hunter
05-23-2003, 12:21
Quote[/b] (ErikJansen @ May 23 2003,15:14)]Oh please nonono http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/wink.gif
This is one of the great uncertainties left in the game, allows you to play tricky http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/tongue.gif
Fair enough, I'm just too lazy to read log files ect http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/wacko.gif
i agree with vandal... those things would shit me... i always get upgrades on high morale units like that... its a good trick to use
ElmarkOFear
05-23-2003, 20:22
I am not sure what kind of unit it was or at what valour, I will have to look thru my logfiles to find it. It was not during our matches Hunter. http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/smile.gif It was actually against UglyRyu where i had the high ground on side of map and was winning most of my battles until this unit routed thru mine and rallied behind me. This was the first time I have noticed this, but I will watch when I play to see if this happens again and will save the replay this time. I believe it is a rare occurence, but I have not been looking for it until today.
t1master
05-23-2003, 21:11
Quote[/b] (ElmarkOFear @ May 22 2003,21:26)]The obvious reason for changing VI is that DIV_Hunter and Alrowan trounced me last night in several games We can't have this Everybody knows what a GREAT players I am Right? Right? **ONLY SOUND HEARD IS CRICKETS CHIRPING** Well a pox on you all http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/smile.gif
yeah elmo, alrowan's dirty, shirtless celts wiped me out in each game... i think al should only be allowed 5K when playin against uglys... http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif
i don't mind the routing and regrouping, and the battle spreading all over the field, suits my style of unorganized play. but some of the chain routes are very annoying, especially when i'm the cause of them...;)
cheers for the good games though alrowan and dev, and the mizus http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/wave.gif
ElmarkOFear
05-24-2003, 07:21
LOL T1. I dont mind chasing units, but when they can rout thru my guys, then rally close enough to get an immediate flank bonus it is enough to make me cry I have enough problems winning without defeated units rallying within my flank. http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/smile.gif Talk about taking it up the rear LOL OUCH@@
ErikJansen
05-24-2003, 20:17
Quote[/b] (ElmarkOFear @ May 24 2003,01:21)]I have enough problems winning without defeated units rallying within my flank. http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/smile.gif Talk about taking it up the rear LOL OUCH@@
http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/joker.gif http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/joker.gif http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/joker.gif
LOL @ Elmo http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif
Tho just a gut feeling, to gain enough morale to rally this unit must have been quite the high valor type. Gazi like since it rallied within enemy influence....
vBulletin® v3.7.1, Copyright ©2000-2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.