Total War SP = one of the most aggravating SP

[Navaros]

so here i am in year 1261 as the Almohads.

every freaking 'turn i lose like 5 provinces to French Naval invasions. what bugs me the most is that i can not SEE where they're gonna be coming from and since i had no way to PLAN for this naval raping that i'm getting, my forces are thinly spread amonst the Castile/Aragon area as they were conquesting Toulouse and Aquitane etc.

i really really really REALLY am getting frustrated by this.

when i started playing as the Almohads i was not told: start making a strong navy ASAP, else you're guaranteed to get raped. nowhere does the manual convey this information.

i've been trying to make a strong navy for the longest time now, and it's not working. i never have enough money to build ships in all my seas.

there are very few games that have ever pissed me off more than Total War SP has. http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/gc-furious3.gif

makes me not wanna play any more at all.

if any of you can let me send you my year 1261 savegame and then show me what YOU are able to do with the situation, i'd like to see that.

[ChaosLord]

That does sound like an annoying setup, but not unexpected. Control of the seas(either everywhere or only around your own lands) is vital to nearly every faction. You get trade and security for your coastal provinces. Thats something you have to learn while playing though.

I do have a suggestion, build forces and keep them in your inland provinces(try hiring mercs) and use them to counterattack any naval provinces. Instead of trying to defend the many provinces just retreat to your forts/castles when they attack and counter with your built up forces. While you're doing that i'd recommend just aiming for the heart of the French to eliminate the source of your troubles.

Navy wise rather then try to fight the French with every little ship you produce gather them all in one sea until you have at least 8, then go through and destroy the small 1-2 ship groups the French probably have. This is just some general advice and some assumption on my part, so don't hold me to the exact letter of it.

I'm busy with other games or i'd take up your offer of the challenge but i'm sure theres others who would gladly.

[Powermonger]

In my current Danish game, I saw the French doing the same thing to the Spanish and English, huge stacks of blueberries just materialising out of nowhere and raping their enemies provinces. Made me glad to be controlling the high seas and allied with the French.

Although, when I recently came back to MTW after a long break, took me a little while to work out why I couldn't suddenly launch a sea raid on the treacherous Spaniards after they backstabbed me a few years earlier. I wanted to make them burn and suffer but couldn't drop my stacks on their provinces due to them blockading me. I wish a friendly/neutral blockade would show up as a orange colour when pressing V on the campaign map.

[octavian]

hey Navaros, is it just me, or are all your posts complaining about something in the game??? no offense, but there is a way to deal with it. its called learning through experience. i've had numerous problems, and im sure when other patrons were starting out, they did too. long story short, if you cant be positive, or come at these things with a good attitude, dont post.

ps check out the guides for some really great advice on different factions.

respectfully, octavian

edit:
link (http://www.totalwar.org/cgi-bin/forum/ikonboard.cgi?act=ST;f=15;t=17159)
link (http://www.totalwar.org/cgi-bin/forum/ikonboard.cgi?act=ST;f=15;t=17363)
link (http://www.totalwar.org/cgi-bin/forum/ikonboard.cgi?act=ST;f=15;t=17166)
link (http://www.totalwar.org/cgi-bin/forum/ikonboard.cgi?act=ST;f=15;t=16773)
link (http://www.totalwar.org/cgi-bin/forum/ikonboard.cgi?act=ST;f=15;t=17170)
these are a few threads i found in about two minutes of searching. there were others, some complaining about other things, but on the whole.......... obviously many of these are just plain and simple questions. however...........ok i've almost talked myself out of this............ nonetheless, i'll leave these links in to make my point

[Gregoshi]

To be fair, Navaros is 1) a self-admitted pessimistic, gloom & doom kinda person, 2) trying to learn a game quite different from anything else he's played and which has a manual of minimal use, and 3) fighting a few hardware/software issues with his PC that are most likely adding to his frustrations.

Navaros, maybe it would be best for you to start a new campaign. If you are still coming to grips with the strategic aspects of the game, why put yourself needless through a situation from which will be difficult to recover? Maybe once you improve your game you can return to this campaign and see if you can extract yourself the situation.

[Mouzafphaerre]

-
Octavian, sorry to disagree mate but I'll advocate Navaros' or any other's right to whine/rant when felt necessary. This is, I believe, one of the things that make a community forum (ORG) better than and superior over an official one (COM).

As for the recommendation part, I agree.

Now, back to Navaros' problem:

It may not be in the manual mate (I've never really read it myself) but you have to have the strongest navy, not the second, just the strongest, whichever faction you're playing. Else, you will be raped as you describe.

Think about it from the bright side. You can do the same, even worse, to your enemies once you have the best naval power.

Hth
_

[Navaros]

it gets me mad that the manual doesn't emphasize the point that you NEED A GREAT NAVY.

the VERY FIRST PAGE of the manual should have NOTHING except for one BIG BOLD WARNING:

IF YOU INTEND TO PLAY THE SINGLEPLAYER PORTION OF THIS GAME, YOU ABSOLUTELY ***MUST*** START BUILDING A NAVY RIGHT OFF THE BAT

had i found such a page in the manual, i wouldn't be so peeved about this. i'm guessing that 90% or more of people who ever play Total War probably have their first campaign wrecked by this exact same issue.

this problem is ESPECIALLY aggravating because i often can't navigate what few ships i do have to the seas of the enemy navy surrounding my coasts. before, someone said i need deepwater vessels. i have no idea what that means. right now i only have dhows. is there any way to get them around all my coasts? they simply won't move into certain seas where i NEED them to move. are dhows really so useless that i can't even USE the dhows i do have in any sort of helpful way? and if a sea is deepwater then how do i KNOW that by looking at the map?

[Phatose]

If it touches land, it's shallow water. If it doesn't, then it's deep water.

If you can't manage to select your own fleets and not the enemies, use the filters. X or C, one of them changes from show both to show only enemy or show only yours.

[SpencerH]

The manual is crap, but the guides found here and at many other sites are not. Why dont you read them then restart a new game?

BTW,

IF YOU INTEND TO PLAY THE SINGLEPLAYER PORTION OF THIS GAME, YOU ABSOLUTELY ***MUST*** START BUILDING A NAVY RIGHT OFF THE BAT

is patently untrue. Navies are useful and important in a variety of ways but not absolutely required. Try playing as the Poles or Hungarians.

[octavian]

Quote[/b] (Gregoshi @ May 20 2004,03:44)]To be fair, Navaros is 1) a self-admitted pessimistic, gloom & doom kinda person, 2) trying to learn a game quite different from anything else he's played and which has a manual of minimal use, and 3) fighting a few hardware/software issues with his PC that are most likely adding to his frustrations.
ok, i hear ya greg my apoligies if i offended http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/wave.gif http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/wave.gif http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/wave.gif

[Navaros]

Quote[/b] (SpencerH @ May 20 2004,08:21)]The manual is crap, but the guides found here and at many other sites are not. Why dont you read them then restart a new game?
the problem with any forms of guides are that they are big and long and boring. when i read a guide, no one part of the guide is gonna impress itself on my memory moreso than the rest if i only read it once or twice.

reading a guide would only give me a general overview of the game. upon a casual reading, i would only really retain the parts of the guide that i was actively WONDERING ABOUT before the reading had begun. the rest would probably fall by the wayside of my brain.

ie: if i were to have read one of the guides here before i started playing Total War SP for the first time, i probably still would not have built a navy because the fact that i need to would not have jumped out at me. humans can only retain a certain amount of information that they read. to retain a lot of information requires study and memorization. it's not like i'd ever get in the mood to study & memorize a whole guide on how to play a game.

in fact i DID skim over frogbeastegg's newbie guide before i started playing Total War SP and having read that actually encouraged me NOT to make a navy because i read the part about trade routes and how he said trade was an unreliable source of income so i just thought screw making ships, i'll invest in ground troops then since trade is unreliable

little did i know that ships are fundamental to the game.

then there are all the many reviews i've read that said the naval combat is not played-out like the rest of the game, and comments from the devs themselves saying naval gameplay is 'abstracted'

all this too contributes to me, the new player, thinking: Navy? why should i bother?

my anger is fueled by all these things. like i was led (not necessarily intentionally) to believe that the Navy in Total War is an unnecessary and un-developed part of the game, got my hands dirty with many many hours of campaign play, and only then found out that the exact opposite of what i have been led to believe, is actually true.

[ChaosLord]

Did my advice not help your situation any Navaros? I believe you could get through this part of the game so long as you're strong enough to wipe the French out.

I also don't see why you're so torn up about the manual, its not a strategy guide, it just tells you how to do X and X. And if you don't feel like memorizing the guides on here and other sites just have one open while you play, Medieval:Total War doesn't mind alt-tabbing except when on the pre-battle screen.(at least for me). That way you can read as you play if you're unsure about something.

Learning is part of any game. You figure out what works and what doesn't work through play. And if you invested solely in troops don't you have enough to guard your coastal provinces? My first game I didn't build ships either, but I played the Danes and had my Viking hordes everywhere, even in the rear provinces. Also, for deep-water ships I think you need the second or third naval improvement assuming your faction has them, i'm not really familiar with the Alamohad navy.

Lastly, calm down, assuming that you like the game in general they'll be many more games to play and enjoy once you've gotten through this.

[octavian]

Quote[/b] ]the VERY FIRST PAGE of the manual should have NOTHING except for one BIG BOLD WARNING:

i would only really retain the parts of the guide that i was actively WONDERING ABOUT before the reading had begun. the rest would probably fall by the wayside of my brain.

just a question, whats the point of putting a warning in the manual if its just going to fall by the wayside. you say you want a comprehensive manual, then you say that it would be to boring to learn and remember.

respectfully octavian

[Tricky Lady]

Quote[/b] (Navaros @ May 20 2004,13:45)]i'm guessing that 90% or more of people who ever play Total War probably have their first campaign wrecked by this exact same issue.
Yessa. This happened to me in my first campaign. I've already reported this in another topic somewhere on the Org (I believe it was in a reply to a topic started by you, Navaros). I was playing the Byzantines, and was fighting off the Polish who invaded one of my northern provinces. I didn't pay mucho attention to the south of my realm, so I was really really http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/gc-stunned.gif when the Turkish invaded (iirc) 8 provinces at the same time. In one turn I lost Naples, Sicily, Greece, Cyprus, Rhodes, Crete and Nicaea. The only invasion I could beat off was their attempt to conquer Constantinople too. It was after this astonishing defeat that I started looking on the net to find out how you can avoid these kind of stupid situations. And that's how I found the org. Et voilà. Lesson learned. Didn't make the same mistake ever again (at least not on the same scale; it happened to me that I didn't rush enough to protect all my sea borders, and still got invaded).
So: build a navy, and when you declare war on a faction, make sure you handicap them by sinking as much of their ships as possible.

PS. frogbeastegg is not a guy http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif

[Gregoshi]

Navaros, you shouldn't expect to read a whole manual/guide and retain it all. You hit upon the right way to do it in your post - go read the sections of the guide/manual that have to do with the part of the game you are currently WONDERING ABOUT. Concentrate and master that part of the game and then move on to something else. Eventually you will have a good grasp of the game.

[HopAlongBunny]

The manual is crap; true enough http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/gc-yes.gif

The guides scattered here are very good though. The best method to learning this game is: play=>read=>play some more=>read some more. The game has a lot of different parts to it; mastering all of them takes time.

The naval game is crucial to a successful SP strategy. Now that you know that, try to recover your position in the present campaign or just start a new one...wiser and stronger http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/gc-party2.gif

[Seth Infinite]

Drastic circumstances require drastic methods.

I'm currently fighting the same problem. My glorious Turkish navy was destroyed in 3 years by the French and Byz. Stacks of French ships everywhere then they started invading N. Africa.

Well, several years earlier the Italians had pissed me off so I owned 3 regions in Europe with about 6K men. I have put 3K of them as a battle group and I'm raping the French. Toulouse, Brittany, Normandy, Flanders and there's more ahead. I'm not concerned with holding a region, just rape and pillage. My main targets are any shipyards.

This is one of the few times I have ever razed any regions but it is quite affective. The French have left N Africa to retake and rebuild Europe. I left nothing behind in those regions so they must start from scratch. This is giving me time to handle my other problems.

On my last turn (last night) the Byz requested a cease fire so I can now concentrate on the GH (year 1237).

http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/gc-2thumbsup.gif

BTW: I always considered that 3K battle force as being doomed in the end, probably get trapped and destroyed. But, if they destroy enough of the French infrastructure I might try to take and hold England.

[genocidal tendencies]

navaros, if you're too lazy to either learn from your mistakes and improve as you play or read a guide, then perhaps you're playing the wrong game...

[Don Corleone]

The funny thing is, Navaros put a smiley in for the tone of the post http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/confused.gif

Navaros, first and foremost, I couldn't agree with you and eveveryone else, that the manual in many ways is more of a hindrance than a help. There's PLENTY of undocumented features and options that are better than what they did actually document. That being said, I also agree with whomever said a navy is not absolutely necessary, though it is helpful. You're basically experiencing a touch of realism, what many land powers experienced in that timeframe during the Middle AGes. Being able to pop in and deliver a blow and get out again via sea lanes is an incredible boon and one of the few reasons why Venice & Genoa remained indepdendent city states for as long as they did.

Now, maybe a few words of advice that will save you from having to build a huge navy if you don't want to (although, with the cash you make off of trade, you should seriously think about it). Identify all your provinces and sort them into three categories 1) those you could lose and as long as you take them back in a couple of turns, no skin off my nose 2) those you would be willing to fight for, even if it meant a Pythian victory (I think that's the right adjective), you win but the battle hurt you more than the enemy but at some point you could cut your losses and walk and then finally there's category 3) in order to continue to pursue your current goals using your current strategy, this province must not change hands, under any circumstances. It has been my view reading this board that entirely too many people put all their provinces in category 3, when in truth, there's only about 2 provinces per landmass (roughly modern nation size, Iberia, France, Germany) that fall into this category. Remember, this isn't ouch, losing this will sting. This is I lose this and I have to pack up the tents and try something else. Think Flanders, Venice, Constantinople....

Okay, once you've identified category 3 provinces, look at those that have a coastline and drop no fewer than 3 ships in each of them. If this means breaking trade routes or leaving valuable (but not other category 3 provinces) unprotected, than do it. If you don't have 3 ships for every sea square adjoining a category 3 province, start by looking which neutral parties have sea lanes to that province, but keep building.

Those sea-adjacent provinces which fit into category two can probably make do with just one ship. THey're really not there to fight, they're there to make certain you don't get any surprise attacks. If an enemy enters a sea square and has a sea lane behind him: 1) immediately move that ship towards the nearest fleet; 2) send reinforcements into that province on land and 3) launch a counterstrike of any form (send an emmissary to bribe an army, assasinate his 5 star general, whatever you can do).

Those sea adjacent provinces which are in category 1 shouldn't have any ships protecting their coast unless you have enough ships to cover everyone else. Now, this is a formula for a navy on a shoestring. You probably won't have more than 10-12 ships unless you yourself straddle seas to occupy different lands (which you SHOULD NOT be doing unless you have a proper navy). This should take the heat off at least for a little while and allow you to build up enough cash to put a decent navy when the time allows for it.

By the way, if you share a land border with somebody who decided to send the marines at you, LET THEM HAVE IT Odds are, the AI will pull back 80% of the invaders and you should be able to pummel the boys he leaves on the beach. Think about using some catapults to do this work, it's a great way to pump their valor up and get better accuracy out of them.

[Maychargewithoutorders]

I don't beleive in this 'the manual should tell you how to win the game' idea. I think that most games involve a certain learning curve (which at times can be very steep), but you can only learn from your mistakes and will make you better at the game.

The manual does tell you how fleets can be used:
Page 34 - Fleets

Quote[/b] ]Transporting armies -This means you can place fleets along your coastline to defend against naval invasions from both enemies and treacherous allies

There is a lot to learn in this game and can't be acheived in your first game alone, HopAlongBunny is too right read>play>read is the only way to overcome this. Please dont let this ruin your enjoyment of the game its just one (of many) aspects of the game which requires attention to detail.

[Obadiah]

Here's what I learned from the manual - whoa, there's a LOT to this game. So i played my first campaign on easy. Kind of like a super-tutorial. I could learn, play, make mistakes, be over-aggressive, adn still stay in the game. Got boring after 100 years, I never finished it. But I learned about navies, and lot's of other things

Ultimately, the game's a tiny bit like life: you simply AREN'T going to be taught all the lessons you need prior to needing them the first time. Its sometimes learn by doing, trial by fire. A bummer, I know, but there it is...

[Accounting Troll]

When I first got M:TW, I just got stuck it and I merely referred to the manual for the bits I got stuck on. I knew I was going to make lots of mistakes and get my butt kicked a few times, but I just thought of my first campaign as a way of learning the game.

One thing I learned was that the Danes are a good faction to pick in your first ever campaign. I just kept sending my Vikings straight into the middle of the German spearmen and urban militia http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/ht_charge.gif

[ah_dut]

A navy aint essential i've completed a game with little or no navy at all. As the poles in medmod i didn't have the money ortime to build a haalf decent navy. so let's guess what i do, conquer the steppes http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/bigthumb.gif i might be poor but i can outproduce the AI which anint always so smart. Besides if you attack me i can always raze and burn your country to the ground as war reparations http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/gc-jester.gif
So stop moaning, it's the best sp ever http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/cheers.gif

[Navaros]

Quote[/b] (Gregoshi @ May 20 2004,11:03)]Navaros, you shouldn't expect to read a whole manual/guide and retain it all. You hit upon the right way to do it in your post - go read the sections of the guide/manual that have to do with the part of the game you are currently WONDERING ABOUT. Concentrate and master that part of the game and then move on to something else. Eventually you will have a good grasp of the game.
the problem with that is that the INVESTMENT of many, many hours that i've made in my current campaign has been utterly wasted. i don't like having all my time/investment in a game wasted like that just because i didn't happen to understand one rule of the game that was not emphasized and made clear to me from the outset

@the guy who says the manual mentions navies: yes it does but there is no way i would have known to REMEMBER that point above all else; as the game requires. the manual does not say without a navy you are likely to lose 5 or more provinces every turn due to enemy naval attacks; as it should

[Cebrus]

The fact is that this game is complex and it does take some searching online and figuring out to get things straight. I had to lose three frustrating Shogun campaigns before i figured that one out and i still have not absorbed everything there is to know about Medieval. This is a natural part of such complex games. Experiment, look online, search the forums for any answers.

[Bhruic]

I really don't get that. The first time I run through any time of a TBS or even a RTS game, I tend to lose simply because I don't know what I'm doing. I don't consider that a waste of time investment, I consider it learning the game.

In your case, you ran into a specific situation that you should learn from. Especially for empires with extremely large water borders (every single province of Spain and North Africa is connected to the water, and therefore vulnerable), ships can be important to make sure you are protected. However, that's not the case for every empire. A lof of them tend to have many inland provinces, and therefore aren't nearly as vulnerable to shore landings. Thus, constructing a fleet early can be a waste of time and resources (unless trading, but that's another issue).

The point is, if you are fundamentally unwilling to consider time spent playing the game part of the learning experience, you are extremely unlikely to derive any satisfaction from playing this game. It requires you to learn how to play it before you can be successful.

Bh

[katank]

agreed, getting into a game is the interesting part.

BTW, there's always the flip side of a coin.

while there are more coastal borders to defend, there are less land borders.

this means better chokepoints and since you usually want a navy for trade anyhow, I prefer the north africa/Iberia for the choke points

[Navaros]

Quote[/b] (Bhruic @ May 20 2004,20:31)]I really don't get that. The first time I run through any time of a TBS or even a RTS game, I tend to lose simply because I don't know what I'm doing. I don't consider that a waste of time investment, I consider it learning the game.

In your case, you ran into a specific situation that you should learn from. Especially for empires with extremely large water borders (every single province of Spain and North Africa is connected to the water, and therefore vulnerable), ships can be important to make sure you are protected. However, that's not the case for every empire. A lof of them tend to have many inland provinces, and therefore aren't nearly as vulnerable to shore landings. Thus, constructing a fleet early can be a waste of time and resources (unless trading, but that's another issue).

The point is, if you are fundamentally unwilling to consider time spent playing the game part of the learning experience, you are extremely unlikely to derive any satisfaction from playing this game. It requires you to learn how to play it before you can be successful.

Bh
i don't mind losing in normal RTS games because then i can move onto the next game and with each game i am given a fresh slate with which to improve. there is no investment baggage attached.

in the case with Total War i am being forced to ABANDON many hours of hard-work that i've already done. that's where the difference is between Total War and other games.

i don't find anything interesting about learning a game. that process is just aggravating. i play games for one reason: to dominate. to be one of the very best. and above all else, to WIN at all costs. THAT is fun to me. IMO, losing is NEVER fun.

[English assassin]

One thing this thread shows for sure is I hope the whole naval side of things is fixed in RTW. Like the man says in my first game I didn't realise the importance of a navy either until I found the Almohads invading Scotland (and about 6 other provinces)direct from Grenada (How dumb was I, playing as the English, getting invaded by an armarda from Spain, and not having a navy, that's what I call really not learning from history http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/gc-wall.gif ). As it happened fighting off the hordes was a fun challenge but that's not the point.

The way it seems to me in real life is moving armies by sea can give you a huge (war winning) strategic advantage, but boy is it risky. Even before the enemy plays a part the weather alone can lose you whole fleets and all the armies in them. I'd like to see RTW keep the flexibility naval movement gives you but build back in a lot of the risk. Another thing is I think you can move way too big armies with way too few ships. One little ship in every sea area ought not to enable you to move 10,000 men from Norway to Egypt in one turn. There should be a limit, I don't know, maybe 200 or 300 men per ship per turn, so if you want to shift big armies you've either got to gather up your ships and build a more substantial link to the target, or feed the army across in relays and hope you can hang on while the reinforcements arrive.

I'd like naval combat to be a bit less broken too if CA are listening?

[Aymar de Bois Mauri]

Quote[/b] (Navaros @ May 20 2004,19:40)]
Quote[/b] (Gregoshi @ May 20 2004,11:03)]Navaros, you shouldn't expect to read a whole manual/guide and retain it all. You hit upon the right way to do it in your post - go read the sections of the guide/manual that have to do with the part of the game you are currently WONDERING ABOUT. Concentrate and master that part of the game and then move on to something else. Eventually you will have a good grasp of the game.
the problem with that is that the INVESTMENT of many, many hours that i've made in my current campaign has been utterly wasted. i don't like having all my time/investment in a game wasted like that just because i didn't happen to understand one rule of the game that was not emphasized and made clear to me from the outset

@the guy who says the manual mentions navies: yes it does but there is no way i would have known to REMEMBER that point above all else; as the game requires. the manual does not say without a navy you are likely to lose 5 or more provinces every turn due to enemy naval attacks; as it should
I can tell you something: I always read manuals, but I never learn to play the game with them. Manuals aren't made for you to learn how to play the game efectivelly, only to tell you how the game controls work. But that isn't bad. I always like surprises in ANY game (RTS, FPS, RPG, simulation, etc...), even bad ones (the first time I saw the Horde). The greatest part of the game itself, is getting yourself in the ropes and analysing what you did wrong. Then you can became deadlier.

BTW, when you've read that the navy battles were abstract, that doesn't mean they're useless. You've made the wrong interpretation. It means that in the navy battles, some factors aren't taken into consideration as is the case in the 3d army battles (valour, morale, tactical play, etc...).

[Schrodinger's Cat]

Quote[/b] (English assassin @ May 21 2004,12:16)]Another thing is I think you can move way too big armies with way too few ships. One little ship in every sea area ought not to enable you to move 10,000 men from Norway to Egypt in one turn. There should be a limit, I don't know, maybe 200 or 300 men per ship per turn, so if you want to shift big armies you've either got to gather up your ships and build a more substantial link to the target, or feed the army across in relays and hope you can hang on while the reinforcements arrive.
The ships on the campmap are combat vessels, not transports. The transports are just assumed to be available if the route is safe (guarded by ships), in the same way as merchant vessels. It's not terribly realistic, but it's not too bad, either.
I suppose it would be possible to lose an army, or part of one, to weather, but it's not that likely. Even the Armada would probably have landed semi-successfully without the English fleet harrying them, and by MTW terms they wouldn't have been able to launch the attack (broken sea lane).
Still, any naval improvements that CA make for Rome will be fine by me. http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/gc-jester.gif

@Navaros. I'm guessing you never played Shogun before Medieval? That was a help to me, as one of the main points that struck me when I started playing was the naval part, as it was new. Presumably, rightly or wrongly, CA were writing the manual at least partially for people familiar with Shogun.
That said, you shouldn't expect the manual to explicitly say YOU MUST BUILD SHIPS. That isn't what manuals do. The manual said, You can launch attacks by sea or whatever, so read between the lines. If you can, the AI can, so make sure they can't, either with ships or a defensive garrison.

One word of advice: Trade definitely is worthwhile, at least at the start of a campaign. Yes, it's unreliable, but every turn that you have an unbroken trade route from the Baltic to the Holy Land is exceptionally friendly to your bank balance.

Schrodie's Cat

[Xiphias]

Quote[/b] (Navaros @ May 21 2004,01:40)]the problem with that is that the INVESTMENT of many, many hours that i've made in my current campaign has been utterly wasted. i don't like having all my time/investment in a game wasted like that just because i didn't happen to understand one rule of the game that was not emphasized and made clear to me from the outset

The problems is that the AI is dynamic. Sometimes ships aren't needed at all. If ships had been emphasised and you didn't need them that game then you might be complaining here about how the upkeep of a huge and uneeded navy has cripled you finacially.

I would recommend just putting that campaign to one side for a while and then come back to it when you've learned more about MTW. Just because you lack the experience to get yourself out of the situation now doesn't mean it's a complete loss.

[katank]

I never found navies to be useless the trade income and flexibility is so great.

also, crusades and jihads to distant lands are almost doomed without ship transports.

I really woudl like transport vessels with particular capacities and ability to intercept vessels and imprison armies in them as well as sinking and destroying armies in them.

being able to chase a particular ship across seas should be doable as is blockades to auto attack any enemy ships that moves into a sea zone or choice of fast ships to run blockades.

[Xiphias]

If you've just started the game then you might not realise it's important to build trading posts and ports in every province with trade goods so you'd only get a fraction of the profits.

[Shamus]

Wow. If you really feel that starting over has cost you that much, and hasn't functioned as a learning experience, then you might want to save yourself more time and anguish, and just quit the game right now. I think you have made it abundantly clear that you want to play a game that lays everything out for you in a few minutes, and requires little effort to learn.

As mentioned before, the manual isn't meant to be a strategy guide. It is meant to give you a very basic grasp of the way in which the game functions. As far as strategic finesse is concerned, that is something that you either have to figure out on your own (reading between the lines was mentioned, trial and error also works), or ask for help in a forum such as this.

I don't know of anyone here who picked up a copy of MTW and played a great game their first time around. It's a learning curve that adds a nice challenge to the game. I took at least three goes at it before I was really making good headway. Each time around I would read as I played, and often found that I had been making some drastic, or not so drastic mistakes, and would start over. Each time I would play better, and find more things that would raise questions for me.

To be honest, I don't understand how playing a game in which you are always dominating, can be any fun. I enjoy games in which the outcome of my survival is uncertain. When I come to a point in a game where I realize that there is no faction in the game who can still pose a serious threat to the safety of my own faction, I usually start a new game. Because of this I have only ever once finished a game (and then that was because I wanted to see how a game ended).

I don't think your mindset is a good match for this game, but that's just my opinion.

[Doug-Thompson]

You're just not a happy camper are you, Navaros?

Early on, you are supposed to:


Quote[/b] ]Get yourself a shipbuilder in Cordoba. You have a very long, very vulnerable coastline.
I make allies with Aragon and put one fleet each in the Gulf of Valencia and along the coast north of Spain ASAP. Now I'm safe from sea-borne invasion. Christian states can only attack me through Crusade if they march through Aragon. If Aragon conquers Navarre, so much the better.

You'll find this, and a lot more, in my very long-winded and quite exhaustive guide to the Almohads in the Guides forum. It's been there for weeks.

[Navaros]

Quote[/b] (Xiphias @ May 21 2004,12:32)]Feel free to send me your saved game and I'll see if I can get out of that situation. My e-mail is ********
i tried to email you my 1261 game but i don't use Outlook too much so i'm not sure if it worked. just posting this here as a backup plan in case you happened to not receive my email but if you end up emailing me back before getting to this post, then disregard this statement.

thx for trying to help

@the guy who said i'm just not a happy camper: that's right. takes quite a lot to impress me and i am of the opinion that the vast majority of the things in the Universe suck. it's like a quote from a good Transplants song, applies to me quite well: negative outlook? well that's how i'm living. and like he said: it's a wicked world we live in

Edit: removed Xiphias' email address - Gregoshi

[katank]

@Navaros, I personally like the learning curve and made tons of mistakes in my first games too.

I frankly think that MTW is about the best game in its genre that I came across and that's saying a lot.

Many would agree. The depth of a game is what allows you to enjoy it and get into it.

I never feel dejected if a campaign ends except when I really have done nothing wrong such as king dying without heirs which is just plain bad luck.

Otherwise, it's always a learning experience.

so cheer up http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/cheers.gif

[Xiphias]

I havn't got the e-mail at all. Although I can't log into my account via the web-based login so the provider may just be having a bit of trouble. I'll give it another few hours.

In the beginning the Universe was created. This has made a lot of people very angry and been widely regarded as a bad move.

[Bhruic]

After reading the majority of your posts, I'd have to join Shamus in the 'maybe you should move on' camp. To me, MTW is like Chess. The rules themselves are pretty simple, but the gameplay is quite complex. And while it's easy enough to pick up how to play, it's much more difficult to learn to play well. People play Chess for years before they get really good at it. And I don't think that if you asked them, they'd look back at their first games and consider them a 'waste of time' because they lost.

You just don't seem terribly interested in putting in the time to become good at the game.

Bh

[motorhead]

Quote[/b] (Navaros May 21 2004 @ 06:33)]i play games for one reason: to dominate. to be one of the very best. and above all else, to WIN at all costs. THAT is fun to me. IMO, losing is NEVER fun.
play tic-tac-toe with a 5-year old and whoop his sorry @ss every single game. Give him a smackdown and teach that little baby who's NUMBER ONE BABY http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/gc-2thumbsup.gif

also, anyone who refers to song lyrics for their outlook needs to get out more and live life. just my .02 http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/ht_charge.gif

[Navaros]

Quote[/b] (Bhruic @ May 21 2004,20:54)]After reading the majority of your posts, I'd have to join Shamus in the 'maybe you should move on' camp. To me, MTW is like Chess. The rules themselves are pretty simple, but the gameplay is quite complex. And while it's easy enough to pick up how to play, it's much more difficult to learn to play well. People play Chess for years before they get really good at it. And I don't think that if you asked them, they'd look back at their first games and consider them a 'waste of time' because they lost.

You just don't seem terribly interested in putting in the time to become good at the game.

Bh
well from my current perspective, i am on the fence about whether i wanna put the time in to learning Total War or not

i see lots of guys on this site saying that Total War is a deep game but i have not found that to be the case at all. i have found Total War to offer very shallow, basic gameplay

granted right now i probably suck compared to an MP veteran; but still i feel i have enough of a grasp of the basics to know that there's really not much to it; at least not when compared to my fave RTS. maybe i've been jaded by the fact that i've played such a masterpiece of an RTS that to then move on from that to something less great, which Total War is, means there is no possible way i can ever appreciate Total War as much as you guys do.

i know some of you are thinking why not just keep playing the game you like and the reason i do not is because the community for that game is 100% absolutely dead thx to EA Games abandoning it. there are almost no players ever online (maybe 5 online at the same time at a VERY busy night). that game hasn't been competitive for someone of my skill level for many years since all the leet players left long ago. it's a very tragic story, actually. http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/gc-toff.gif

i'm looking for something new to move onto and learn and master. gotta play SOMETHING. i'm really on the fence of if Total War is the thing i should invest all that time/energy into mastering.

i hate the WarCraft 3 interface. don't like WarCraft 3 as a game. in fact, it could almost be said that i hate WarCraft 3 entirely. unfortunately most RTS games use that kind of interface so i probably wouldn't like most of the other games in the genre currently either.

i don't hate Total War - well maybe i hate the SP portion somewhat but i find the MP portion to be tolerable (for me to say that is quite a compliment to Total War, i suppose http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif )

hope i didn't bore you all too much with my conundrum. perhaps now some of you have a better idea of why i haven't moved on already from Total War.

if you only take away one thing from this post, take away this: EA Games is evil. Boycott EA.

[Bhruic]

Different opinions, I guess. I haven't found a single RTS game that is even close to as good as the TW series. They basically come down to being nothing more than twitchy resource gathering games.

But generally the people that like that sort of game don't tend to like slower-paced, more indepth games like TW (and other TBS games). To each his own.

Bh

[Gregoshi]

Food for thought folks: if everybody thought as we do about the TW games, there'd be 100,000 gamers online playing MTW every night. We're a little short on that number, aren't we? http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/wink.gif

At least Navaros is giving it a try. Besides, we got a near compliment out of him, so let's be happy with that. http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/gc-happy2.gif

About the dominate/win-at-all-costs perspective, with such a goal, you run the risk of playing yourself right out of the game. If victory is a foregone conclusion in every battle, why bother playing? I know a TW player who played so much and got so good, there was no longer a challenge playing. He got bored and drifted away from the community. A loss gives value to victory. Being good is a worthy goal. Anything more is self-destructive to your interest in the game...for most people, at least. http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/gc-smile.gif

[Bhruic]

Oh, sure, that was my point. The TW games aren't for everyone. Just like there are games and genres that I don't care for, I know a lot of people don't like TBS, or TW type games. But for the same reason that I don't go to forums for gamestyles I don't like and complain, I'm simply suggesting the other people return the favour.

Giving it a try is good and all, but if you don't like it, then you don't like it. Time to check out a new game and see if you like that one.

Bh

[Ragss]

Didnt read the replies, but your first campaign is a garaunteed bomb, unless you have 1337 (thats moron speak for elite) totalwar instincts.

[Navaros]

Quote[/b] (Bhruic @ May 22 2004,02:45)]Giving it a try is good and all, but if you don't like it, then you don't like it. Time to check out a new game and see if you like that one.
yeah thats what i do but so far i've never found anything that even comes close to matching the skilled, competitive gameplay offered by my fave RTS. i do not think such a product is on the market.

that's what sucks about all games. eventually every game dies (except for phenoms like Counter-Strike) and veterans are forced to forsake their true love because no players are left. it's a very disturbing side effect of the human condition. people always want something new just for the sake of having something new even if the old thing is a million times better. they abandon old things just because they are old. would be nice if instead, people weren't so obsessed as a species in having new just for the sake of new and hence stuck around old games en masse to keep the communities strong for all-time.

i really like the sidebar/Westwood interface type of games. unfortunately it seems EA killed that interface style for good when they murdered Westwood Studios.

the Westwood RTS interface was the most intuitive and easy-to-use of any RTS games out there. compared to that, the Blizzard-type interface sucks IMO

Total War interface is better than the Blizzard interface, but then again you don't have as many commands at your disposal in Total War. tho IMO the Westwood interface is also better than the Total War interface. anyhow at least i don't hate Total War as much as i hate WarCraft 3.

since there are no games out there right now to meet my RTS needs, i am forced to try to make myself like games which i don't love right off the bat. gotta occupy my recreation time somehow. i figure i'll struggle with Total War some more for a while before passing a final verdict of if it's worth for me to play or not

[zelda12]

I just love naval warfare. I have lots of fun dropping a 20k army very far away from me say on the other side of the map somewhere around constantinople. I then proceed to do the european tour trashing provices as I go pocketing the cas for destroying buildings as I go. Course I got excommunicated and lost in the end but it was very fun. http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/gc-2thumbsup.gif http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/gc-2thumbsup.gif http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/gc-2thumbsup.gif http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/gc-2thumbsup.gif

[Colovion]

As you can see, this is my first post. I read the majority of this thread. THe reason why is because I just finally got into M:TW and love it. I was going along nicely in 1170's as the English. I had pushed Poland and all of the Eastern cultures out of Europe and had the Almohads contained to Toulouse and Aquitaine (sp?). I started invading Spain. It was going as well as any war could - steady. SUddenly Wales was invaded and Scotland rebels.

I thought that I was doing something wrong and read the online Guides - I change some of my strategies and carry on. Now it's the late 1180's and I'm being invaded left right and center. If I had more of a temper I would be posting this, and not Navaros; but I found The Org BECAUSE of my qualms with the naval invasions. Now I hope that I can retake Flanders and a number of other countries as the Almohads are hounding me in Mercia, Wessex and just after I have retaken Scotland they invade there as well http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/mecry.gif

I am about ready to just start a new campaign instead of trying to save this one - it seems like the Almohads are too rich for me to fight against. http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/frown.gif

[katank]

don't give up colovion, raid them back.

where are their homelands exactly?

if you have naval superiority, crusade or hit north africa and southern iberia and suddenly all their production and cash goes down the drain.

@navaros, what's the RTS game that you like so much? I'm curious to know. Perhaps I shoudl also give it a spin if it's so great.

[Xiphias]

Sounds like one of the C&C games, IIRC they were by westwood.

I've got your situation under control. I think the problem was that you were trying to do too much with too little.

Basically what I did was lose a few outlying provinces first (Aquatine, sinai, egypt and cyrencia) so I had less to defend and then made peace with Eygpt. I recaptured Tunisia soon after the civil war had claimed it but I left Navarre and Aragon rebel until I had delt with the french.

I then let the french have what provinces I couldn't fend them off in (Cordoba and later portugal) while I built like mad so I could get some decent infantry (peasents are awful and urban milita are only useful against other cheap troops - not good ones like chivalric men-at-arms). I set my africa provinces to building ships too.

Once I had a few stacks of decent infantry and stacks of three Baggalas in each are protecting most of spain I retook Portugal and Cordoba and once I had broken the siege on the castles I got the french king to agree to a ceasefire.

I saved the game and have just quit from it. The situation seems relitively stable now. I wouldn't try to invade egypt but taking southern france may be an option. Personally I would build up provinces for better troops and trading routes for lots of money.

The new savegame is http://www.zen23686.zen.co.uk/TheAlmohads1287.cpg

If anyone else wants it and if Navaros gives permission I can put the original one up there too.

Oh and can one of the moderators remove the quote in Navaros' post that has my e-mail in it? I'd rather not have it up there for spambots to grab.

[Gregoshi]

Email address removed.

[Colovion]

Yeah see - I did what Navaros did - I read the guides, saw the really important things and took them to heart - read the manual through, looked at the tech tree and all the time from everything it seemed like the naval part of the game was a secondary concern so I never dealt with it - I am now in 1188 and JUST built a Shipwright .... just to have the province taken over by the Almohads.... http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/gc-confused.gif

[katank]

you sound like the opposite of what I do.

any coastal/islands I have is tower, borderfort, fort, keep, shipwright.

I will build maybe 20% farms and/or spearmaker/bowyer for defense inbetween but it's more or less straight for ships.

always pays off big time.

it's funny how I can quickly outmass even itlaians/sicilians/byz soon and have unsurpassed naval dominanace everywhere.

raiding enemy factions everywhere is fun and so are florins pouring in from trade. http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/tongue.gif

[Colovion]

Yeah - I think I expanded too quickly. What do you think:

1180's and almost into Spain, Nortern Italy border, East as far as Poland and all of Scandinavia..... http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/confused.gif should I have waited longer to expand?

[katank]

nope.

that's pretty slow (by my rushing standards)

taking over the world by 1150-1160 is quite doable.

just go for navies and don't focus on land forces.

[Colovion]

Gah - yea I have NO navy.... http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/gc-confused.gif

I don't know if I can recoup my losses because they're invading all of England and my forces a spread pretty thin - maybe I don't have enough money coming in - all taxes on normal except for Scotland which is on Very Low. Then again this is my first campaign so I don't know everything that is the best to build...

[GeoRElrod]

Quote[/b] (Colovion @ May 22 2004,16:14)]Gah - yea I have NO navy....
I don't know if I can recoup my losses because they're invading all of England and my forces a spread pretty thin
I was in a similar situation when I was playing the French. I did not invest much money in a navy (one of my first campaigns) and I got spanked by the Sicilians because of that. All of the sudden hoards of Sicilian armies came out of nowhere. I lost that game... but I stuck around until the king was executed.

[Colovion]

Well I played another hour of my campaign and now Im sure that I can't recover. The Almohads have me up against a wall - invading every Naval province every turn and coming through France too strong for my battered army. Germany reformed, so did Spain - the ALmohads put the Spanish down quickly but the Germans are in two of my Provinces now with about 2K troops - with the Almohads invading and sacking Wessex and Flanders, Normandy and so on.... well I don't have even a Province that CAN build a Navy let alone stand a chance against theirs - not working, I guess I have to start over.... http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/gc-embarassed.gif

I understand what Navaros is talking about with the invested time being annoying to lose - but it's only lost if you stop playing the game..... or that's what I tell myself...

[Colovion]

PS - Any suggestions on a good faction to try out next?

[Navaros]

Xiphias thx for helping me out. i'll check out your work.

you certainly have my permission to post my savegame on your site. i'm all for givng as many people as possible a kick at the can cuz the more people who try to fix the situation - the more potential i have for learning from a diverse base of solutions (providing there are in fact a diverse base of solutions to my problem)

[Xiphias]

The original saved game is http://www.zen23686.zen.co.uk/TheAlmohads1261.cpg

All the factions have their own strengths and weaknesses. The byzantines are probably good for learning what to build since their tech tree isn't too twisty and they have good units and heirs in early and high.

If you've got viking invasion then the Danish may be worth a try too since they get the strong viking units and have a defensible position (provided you build a navy of course ;)) with lots of rebel provinces nearby.

[katank]

try the Byz or the Spanish.

both get very strong heirs and good unit roster.

Byz have so many unique units and a combo of byz inf, treb archers led by a katank heir can take care of just about anything in early.

Byz cav, lancers, pronoai, varangians are just icing on the cake.

knocking out Turks and Eggy can reduce borders significantly and give a triangle of Const, Georgia, Egypt to defend.

they also have a crack at naval dominance due to ability to produce ships at the beginning of the game as well as invasion of Sicily which cripples a naval rival and gives another ship province.

the Spanish are powerful due to position.

Iberia is really rich and after takign out the Aragonese and Almos, you get 3 easily defensible chokepoints.

you can also build a chapterhouse at the beginning of the game and do ca crusade run across north africa all the way to the holy land.

navy is of course a must for any faciton but those two especially.

[Navaros]

Quote[/b] (katank @ May 22 2004,10:56)]@navaros, what's the RTS game that you like so much? I'm curious to know. Perhaps I shoudl also give it a spin if it's so great.
game is Emperor: Battle for Dune. you can read more about why IMO it is a superior game to Total War here:

http://www.totalwar.org/cgi-bin....e;st=25 (http://www.totalwar.org/cgi-bin/forum/ikonboard.cgi?act=ST;f=15;t=18094;hl=dune;st=25)


although unfortunately i can't really recommend a new purchase of the game at this point in time for the following reasons:

1. game is totally dead. almost zero MP players so you won't have the opportunity to develop your skills vs. real hardcore power gamers like you would have if you had gotten into it when the game was active.

2. it's a real bitch to get the game working on XP. you need a special FTP patch from Westwood (separate from and in addition to the normal 1.09 patch that is necessary for online play) and have to perform a special sort of installation. else it won't work in XP. for this very reason, EA has stopped selling the game in North America as of 2002 or so. their Tech Support was getting too many complaints of the game not working in XP. so they figured rather than make the installation work-around known to new customers, they'd just stop selling the game so people don't complain about it any more. of course since you know me from here i could always provide instructions on how to do the XP installation http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/bigthumb.gif but most people buying the game now will end up demanding a refund simply cuz they can't get it working on XP, as the XP patch /special install requirement for the game is not well-publicsized at all.

3. singleplayer campaigns are not that great: the strength of this game is multiplayer vs. real humans (yet there's almost no humans left who play http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/frown.gif ). you get lots of really entertaining FMV to tell the story in the beginning of SP, but soon those FMV start dropping-out and you start to miss them. the campaign map of the game is nowhere on par with Total War. the enemy AI, like in most games, sucks. even a lousy player will be able to annihilate the computer AI once he has a basic understanding of the game. if you're just getting it for singleplayer play, you'll be disappointed. if you're getting it for multiplayer play too, you'll be disappointed since there's no competition and very few skilled players who are around to train you (takes several months of practice/training to develop your skills to a professional level in this game)

all that said, if you do end up getting the game even so and need pointers on how to crush anything it can throw at you, i'm your man.

[Xiphias]

Did you ever play a game called Total Annihilation?

[Navaros]

Quote[/b] (Xiphias @ May 22 2004,22:43)]Did you ever play a game called Total Annihilation?
i recently purchased it after hearing rave reviews from everyone

i played about 5 minutes into the first campaign, then stopped. right off the bat i noticed that there were lots of pathfinding bugs (units got stuck/went the wrong way after being given a move command) in Total Annihilation. my fave RTS has lots of pathfinding bugs too, so i'm used to accomodating that as much as possible. however, i know it's a major pain having to deal with pathfinding bugs so i don't really have a vested interest in getting to learn a whole bunch of new pathfinding bugs and how to accomodate them. especially since Total Annihilation uses a 2D landscape which is not what i'm used to (my fave RTS is fully 3D).

i also was very disappointed at the unit SIZE in Total Annihilation. by size, i mean the visual represenation of how large they are on my screen. all my units in Total Annihilation were practically microscopic. that made me much less interested in the game.

i might re-visit Total Annihilation some time when i'm really bored, but i have no great desire to.

[Colovion]

@ katank

I've started my Byz campaign - I've loving it. http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/bigthumb.gif

Just one question from a n00b - how do you set up fleets? Do you just have to have a ship in each ocean province? I want to setup trade routes as well - is that only on the ocean or can you do that on land too? Probably the most annoying thing about the Byz is that they start off with only one province that can build anything - it's a slower beginning than the English that's for sure - but I like it. http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/wacko.gif

[Daveybaby]

Land based trade routes dont really exist in a useful sense. A land-locked province with a trading post can only trade with its direct neighbours, whereas a coastal province can (potentially) trade with EVERY OTHER coastal province in the game. http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif

To get a trade route from coastal province X to coastal province Y you need to have an unbroken chain of fleets in all of the ocean squares between them. Just have one ship per fleet to start with because this allows you to extend your trade routes further. However beware that single ship fleets are very vulnerable to attack.

If someone with a sizeable fleet declares war on you, the first thing you should do is bunch nearby ships together into larger fleets (of at least 3 or 4 ships) and protect your own shores as a priority. Try to always pick fights with smaller enemy fleets (i.e. a stack of 3 vs a single enemy ship) and you will soon start to get some good leaders for your fleets. The number of stars that the captain of your fleet has is also very important to the outcome of battles. If you have 2 ships with 2 star captains in the same fleet, and another fleet with a no-star captain, then swap one of the 2 star ships over to the other fleet.


@Navaros:
If youre primarily an RTS fan then i can understand why you arent getting on with total war - cos in general i hate 'traditional' RTS but love total war.

Its a shame you missed the boat on total annihilation - it really is the best RTS ever made by humanity (if you find the units too small by the way, just run the game at a lower resolution). Yes, the SP campaign does suck - skirmish and MP is where its at. Also there has been an *incredible* amount of work done in modding the game - from thousands of new units and maps and graphical mods, all the way through to new AI's which are so hard they will give you a nosebleed.

I sincerely suggest you give TA another try at some point - have a search on the web for fan sites and you will see just how much stuff is out there for it even now. Of course what you should *really* do is learn to love MTW - if you do you will wonder what you ever saw in such repetetive, shallow RTS games.

[Colovion]

Yeah I actually figured out the fleet thing on my own, but thanks anyway. I'm ruling right now - just mopping up the Egyptians before invading the steppes and forging a navy to help destroy the Almohads and making for the Pillars of Hercules. http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/gc-2thumbsup.gif