RTW demo conclusions: a full summary

[Blodrast]

Most of us have seen the demo, and a lot of people have expressed their opinions on it. That's a great thing.
What this thread is trying to do is summarize all of them, in the hope that the CA guys will have a look at them and:

1. Feel good about the fact that people ARE appreciating a lot of the stuff they've given us with this demo, and that most people are enjoying it (to various degrees, of course).
2. Let them know what we'd like to see changed in the final release of the game, and the problems we think that the demo has (isn't that one of the major goals of a demo, besides marketing and increasing awareness of the game ?)

If I were to make a (perhaps not very successful) effort of summarizing all of it in a few words, it would sound like this:
"Absolutely great looks, effects and eye-candy, somewhat disappointing as far as the immersion feeling goes, and could be better in terms of customizability of the UI and gameplay".


This thread is merely trying to summarize everybody's opinions and put them in some orderly fashion, with the purpose of getting them better organized and all into one place, easier to read and grouped into logical (?) categories.
So credits go to all the people who have pointed out nice (as well as less-than-nice) things in the threads in the Colosseum.

Please use this thread to point out things I might have overlooked or left behind (or misrepresented), and I'll periodically edit this post to include them.


1. Graphics

- I think it's fair to say that almost everybody enjoyed the graphics: both the terrain and the unit details; night battles rock !
- the ability to zoom in and watch the battle is great.
- not sure if this belongs here, but the game seems to run pretty smoothly on even lower-than-minimum-requirements configurations...well done !
- if possible, a control for anisotropic filtering within the game would be very nice.


2. Animation

- melee looks really cool, almost everybody seems to love charges (the animation effects, although not necessarily the speed at which it's done and their scary effectiveness), and a lot of people also love elephants throwing soldiers in the air; most people were thrilled with the various animations.
- 'flying' units are bad, i.e. units running so fast they look like they're gliding over the battlefield (both inf and cav).
- reports of camera being "jerky" when selecting a unit


3. Sounds

- the spatial effects are really really cool, it's great that you hear them louder when the units are closer and fainter when they're away, and that they're also directional (you can tell _where_ that unit is with respect to your position). That's a big thumbs up from everybody !
- voices and accents are apparently a rather significant problem for quite a few people; most people were less than thrilled with them; perhaps there is time (and disposition) to tweak them a bit; many people suggested screams/orders in native languages (to the extent that is possible, of course)


4. Music

- again, there's no accounting for tastes; people seem to like the main menu music, but opinions vary with respect to the battle music; however, this is certainly just a small sample of the entire amount of music there will be in the final game, so it's hard to formulate a general opinion on the music based on the little we've heard so far.


5. User Interface

- valour better shown as figures, not chevrons
- fatigue should be shown in the unit icons; also ideally as figures/lines
- ability to resize/turn off the HUD and the minimap and the "commands" panel in the lower right corner
- when choosing MTW interface / RTW interface, it should be persistent (currently, you have to change it in-game, otherwise, even if you choose MTW in the main menu, and then start the game, the UI will be in RTW-style unless you press ESC during the game and change it...). But it's excellent that we do have a choice about it!
- also about the "Classic TW style" interface: it would be nice if it were fully consistent with the old one; people reported inconsistencies with respect to dragging to adjust unit spacing and depth, and moving your army while preserving formation.
- minimap: can we have the option of choosing between arrows and dots as back in MTW ? Too many big arrows together make a mess and you can't tell much from it, also it would be nice to be able to get unit info when hovering over them as in MTW.
- great customization of settings (audio/video/controls); perhaps some explanations for each setting would be helpful (esp. to new players) ;)
- possibly show morale in the unit icons as well ? it would be great to have it always available at a glance.
- big ugly pause box; a screenshot with that on it is worthless; much smaller and more discrete would allow us to take breathtaking screenshots of RTW ! ~:)
- speaking of screenshots: can we have an in-game screenshot key as before ?
- cool thing about rallying the troops; also nice that routing units' flags turn white, although the graphic effect itself is odd for some people (kinda intrusive).
- time compression handling from within the game (MTW time slider is missed ! ;) ); or at least have more notches of compressing time.
- Rally hotkey, please ? Also, general's cavalry should have both Wedge and Rally as special abilities (appearing available and working as well).
- a mouse (not camera) sensitivity/speed slider would be welcome
- since the game will have time of day settings, can we have that displayed as well during the battle, please ? It might be useful to know how long you have till sunset/dawn, etc.


6. Game aspect/balance

- speed: the ratio between the units' running speed and walking speed is too big; units walk a bit too fast, run _way_ too fast, and cavalry is like a maglev train.
- the melee speed is also a bit fast: units are killed at an amazing rate. Again, think of 'Commando' with 3.12 dead people / second. A lot of people feel like you don't really have time to do anything once the battle is engaged, and, at the rate the units are dying, it probably wouldn't make much of a difference anyway.
See the "Petition to reduce RTW speed" thread, and "Poll: RTW speed: reduce or not reduce ?" A solution would be an option to adjust speed.
This is definitely the biggest complaint people have, and most people have it.
- flaming arrows: quite controversial; in the end, it probably is a nice feature, and it is definitely great that we can turn them off !
- green arrows underneath units; a big no-no.
- space now shows dots/lines at destination, not the actual units; how can you tell which unit will end up where ? It was way better in MTW.
- speed (yup, it's that important)
- speed - related probably: charges against other fast units tend to be a clickfest; quite a feat to actually click on the right target if it's running at full speed.
- ability to turn off units repeating orders (big issue; lots of people annoyed by this)
- ability to turn off the advisor(s) (it's there ! this is a GOOD thing ;))
- routing units losing their key assignments (that's BAD)
- one unit can't belong to multiple groups (pity, why not ?)
- ctrl+1-0 for assigning groups, 1-0 for recalling them - great
- cut-scenes during battle: really cool, but only if you have the option of disabling them; they're definitely fun, but sometimes during a battle one would rather be focused on the battle itself, and dislike being interrupted to see (for the 1287-th time) how the enemy general is killed. But it's great that they're there, absolutely great ! (hoping for cut scenes in the campaign as well)
- barbarian units names: barbarian infantry, barbarian cavalry, barbarian skirmishers...please. ;)
- would be nice to have the factors influencing morale in the tool tip (e.g., in MTW: "worried about flanks", or "happy that flanks are protected", etc).
- info about a unit is more detailed as the unit is closer - very nice touch !
- not clear if some unit (elephants, sacred band cav) are overpowered or it is just an effect of the difference of valour between units.
- a more in-depth tutorial outlining some of the more advanced features (formations, unit depth, generally speaking "advanced" unit control). If that's already planned, that's great !
- exhausted units should not be able to "run" indefinitely (esp. heavily armoured ones); old STW/MTW system was much more realistic.


7. (Potential) Bugs

- ATI cards: the red glare experienced by some people, apparently due to projectiles (not necessarily flaming arrows)
- flaming arrows occasionally also cause weird effects
- spears of the Poeni infantry disappear (looks like the unit doesn't have spears);
- possible pursuit bug: units order to pursue/attack routing enemy just run along them instead of attacking them, OR going _past_ the chased unit and keeping ahead of it... (encountered by _many_ people) (see the 'Pursuit bug ?' thread)
- units trying to run away get stuck in enemy units' formations; instead of trying to change the direction in which they're routing, they just remain stuck.
- is music supposed to play throughout an entire battle ? a few people reported that it stopped in the middle of the battle.
- in the Trebia battle, a few units apparently got stuck in the river and stayed there for the duration of the battle.
- either the "Halt" command, or disabling "Fire At Will" should stop shooting archers from firing; right now, only moving the archers stops them from shooting.
- changing a unit's formation while it's marching makes it stop, change formation, but apparently not always continue moving; this used to happen in MTW, units resuming march after switching to the new formation.
- options from the main menu don't always seem to be carrying over to the in-game menus (e.g. "high quality shadows") (reported on Win98SE, ATI 9800 PRO, Catalyst 4.7 drivers).
- possibly suicidal enemy generals: reports claim that AI generals blindly charge into units, in a rather suicidal manner (this may be an issue for the demo only)
- perhaps some cavalry units should have "charge, back off, regroup, and then charge again" more of a priority than they currently have (another thing that may only be a demo issue)
- using phalanx in an intelligent way (when needed, break formation, change direction, regroup into formation again, rather than trying to rotate as a phalanx) (possibly yet another demo issue)
- units simply walking into the water and drowning: when AI missile units near a water shore, they keep advancing towards the bridge in a line, thus drowning a significant number of their ranks. To be clear: they are not falling off the bridge, they are advancing to provide missile protection for their troops/to fire at the enemy on the other shore, and instead of forming a narrow and long column to march on the bridge, or to stop at the water shore, they keep advancing straight into the water.
- less frequent than previous one, but apparently still a bug: routing units on a bridge just seem to die after a few seconds; they simply disappear (no, they don't fall into the water) as they were running.

[son of spam]

I had a big problem with the routing units. Most of the time, I couldn't tell my routing units from theirs because they all looked the same with their huge white flags.

Perhaps a white flag could pop up out of the unit next to the unit flag or something, but please retain the original unit coloring and the original unit flag.

EDIT: I just realized that the reason the routing units were white was because I was too zoomed out...whoops. :tomato:

[Ludens]

Great work, Blodrast. Especially that you also pointed out those things you liked best. That is the right way to critisize; you shouldn't just complain, but also point out what is right.

[Medieval Assassin]

Good list, it's probably alot easier for CA to see what we would enjoy to see, Don't get me wrong CA, this is a VERY GOOD GAME,

I haven't played it yet, but reports show, people can run this game on 750MHZ computers and computers with 8MB VIDEO CARDS! You did really good there.

[-Isapostolos-]

I hope CA reads this. Threads with names like these have been popping up in other places with other names and were turned into wine fests. I hope they take this one more seriously because you have made good points.

[Blodrast]

I sure hope CA does read this. It would be nice of them to drop us a post here if they did.

And the important thing is that they are not MY opinions: like I said, I gathered them from the threads in this forum, and I think that's exactly what makes them important: the fact that they're not just one person's opinions, but of a lot of the people on this board (sure, I have my own likes and disliked, but that's NOT what this thread is; I posted all the opinions I could find, even if I personally disagreed with them).
I will admit that I tried to make them look slightly more polite, occasionally ~:p

[Alexander the Pretty Good]

Great job, Blodrast! If CA makes half of the changes prescribed here (preferably the half I want done ~;) ), then Rome Total War could very well be the best game ever. Excellent!

~:cheers:

[The Marcher Lord]

The best and most rational summary I have seen so far! Lets hope the devs read it

[mambaman]

agreed-this is an A1 post Blodrast...but do the CA guys ever post here?

[Steppe Merc]

Put under bugs that in when I was playing the extened Trebia, when some units waded across the river, tthey got stuck, and stood in the water until I finished the game. Just one or two guys, taking a bath while the rest of their unit routs. ~:joker:

[Sjakihata]

from time to time you find a CA reply in a post. Not nearly enough of course, but still they read some of it. Maybe we should send a mail to CA with a link to this thread?

Good job Blodrast

[Blodrast]

SteppeMerc: noted and inserted.
Sjakihata and other people, incl. mods: if you think a more suggestive name should be given to the thread, I have nothing against that.
I agree about the mail, although not sure it's necessary (we can wait a couple of days).
But it were best if a mod/admin did it, IMO.

[Thoros of Myr]

Very good breakdown of the demo Blodrast and you are a man after my own heart, If I had made this list it would read just like yours, you have really captured all the important praises and criticisms :)

[Barkhorn1x]

Yes, excellent list.

Barkhorn.

[Spino]

I wholeheartedly agree with everything Blodrast has written. Well done!

I would also add a few things to his list.

5. User Interface

Compressed time - Time compression is handled poorly. First of all there are not enough 'notches' for compressed time. I guess I miss MTW's time compression slider too much. I see in the descr_shortcuts.txt file that there are hotkey slots for the time compression; pause, play, ffwd & ultraffwd. Great, but there's no way to set them from within the game! A few more compression speeds would also be welcome: Pause/1X/2X/4X/8X/16X

6. Game aspect/balance

Rally Feature- Forcing you to select your general before rallying the troops is a major pain in the ass. Pausing in SP battles to do this is fine but in MP games things are way too hectic, especially if you're in the middle of a tricky maneuver. Based upon the entries in the descr_shortcuts.txt file I see there is NO Rally hotkey! Rally has become a specialized function of a general unit. Please bring back the MTW method where you could use the Rally feature simply by selecting all your troops and then hitting the button or using the hotkey. Yes, I suppose you could macro your general and use the Rally function that way but with a 20 unit limit I can see people shying away from giving the commander an entire slot.

7. (Potential) Bugs

Mouse control/speed - The mouse controls are way too sluggish and insensitive for a time critical game like this. I've been playing the demo on a friend's rig (Athlon XP 3000 & Radeon 9200 128meg) and while the framerate is fine the mouse controls are not. Even when I pause the game and change the camera view to an empty portion of the map the mouse moves painfully slow. As a result selecting and controlling units, especially those in battle, becomes needlessly challenging. I can only imagine the pain this will cause in large battles, especially MP ones! My friend has an optical mouse that moves the cursor like a teflon coated bullet in other games so it's not the mouse or its scanning rate. PLEASE give us sliders for mouse sensitivity and mouse movement filters!!!

[Red Harvest]

Blodrast,

About the ATI card thing. You might try increasing the details. I'm using a 9800 Pro and maxed everything in the game (except left off AA) at 1280x960, and clicked the "glint" box. That cleared it up. I've not yet gone back and determined what is causing the orange triangles in the default settings, but I got it for about 2 seconds every time a volley of flaming arrows struck. After I maxed the graphics details the orange triangles disappeared completely.

Great post by the way!

[Leet Eriksson]

Very well done Blodrast, my only gripe with the game is the cheesy accents, hopefully CA will include the native languages, i just hope ~:p

[Red Harvest]

6. Game aspect/balance

Rally Feature- Forcing you to select your general before rallying the troops is a major pain in the ass. Pausing in SP battles to do this is fine but in MP games things are way too hectic, especially if you're in the middle of a tricky maneuver. Based upon the entries in the descr_shortcuts.txt file I see there is NO Rally hotkey! Rally has become a specialized function of a general unit. Please bring back the MTW method where you could use the Rally feature simply by selecting all your troops and then hitting the button or using the hotkey. Yes, I suppose you could macro your general and use the Rally function that way but with a 20 unit limit I can see people shying away from giving the commander an entire slot.



Spino, I haven't played with this much yet. But this actually makes more sense than MTW's method. It should take the physical intervention of an officer/general to rally most units. Yep, it's a pain in the butt, and won't matter if the fighting/movement speed is so high that you don't have time to do anything. Elite/disciplined units should rally on their own--but rank and file should not. I need to study the implementation of this a bit more.

[spacecadet]

5. User Interface

- valour better shown as figures, not chevrons
- fatigue should be shown in the unit icons; also ideally as figures/lines
- ability to resize/turn off the HUD and the minimap and the "commands" panel in the lower right corner
- when choosing MTW interface / RTW interface, it should be persistent (currently, you have to change it in-game, otherwise, even if you choose MTW in the main menu, and then start the game, the UI will be in RTW-style unless you press ESC during the game and change it...). But it's excellent that we do have a choice about it!
- minimap: can we have the option of choosing between arrows and dots as back in MTW ? Too many big arrows together make a mess and you can't tell much from it, also it would be nice to be able to get unit info when hovering over them as in MTW.
- great customization of settings (audio/video/controls); perhaps some explanations for each setting would be helpful (esp. to new players) ;)
- possibly show morale in the unit icons as well ? it would be great to have it always available at a glance.
- big ugly pause box; a screenshot with that on it is worthless.
- speaking of screenshots: can we have an in-game screenshot key as before ?
- cool thing about rallying the troops; also nice that routing units' flags turn white, although the graphic effect itself is odd for some people (kinda intrusive).


.

You forgot that the mouse speed is too slow, making it difficult to fast select units and, i think, making the game seem too fast for some people.

Also selecting the MTW UI. Even when switching it too true in the Preferences file, the UI doesnt fully represent the control you have over your army that STW and MTW gave you. While its at least nice to be able to left click again, dragging out formations to adjust unit spacing as well as depth doesnt work right, as well as trying to move your grouped army while keeping formation.
I hope that the MTW control option is still work in progress and will be fixed in the final game...

[frogbeastegg]

Excellent work, Blodrast. It certainly voices my main concerns better than my scattered, lack of sleep hampered, rushed ramblings.

Red Harvest, you managed to fix the ATI problem by maxing everything? I have a 9800 pro, 1280x1024 res with everything set to max and it's still there. I also enabled antistrophic filtering x8 in the ATI control panel. The red galre is still present. I've tried a few other settings (lower res, less advanced effects, no filtering) and there was no change to the glare. Interesting.

Which reminds me of another point:
Graphics options Can we have a control for antistrophic filtering inside the game please? RTW really benefits from this on my system but my other games don't, so having to rely on a universal override setting is not great.

[The_Emperor]

Excellent post Blodrast!

One other addition I for one miss from the previous two games... The Casualty ratio bar! That used to be extremely helpful in working out how well a battle was going, now it seems a lot harder to work out.

It would be great to have it back.

[Papewaio]

Emperor that ratio is above the speed buttons on the bottom left box.

Hover your mouse over it and you will get % displayed... just look for the blue/red bar.

[The_Emperor]

:wall: oh well its not as easy to see as it used to be... Make it bigger! ~:joker:

[Elmo]

Nice summary Blodrast. I think you forgot to mention the concerns about the size and placement of the Pause sign. Seems like just having a blinking icon in the VCR area would suffice.

Edit - The demo does a good job of showing off the flashy graphics. However IMO there should have been a small campaign included to highlight the new features in it if they were serious about providing something that showcased the whole game.

[Degtyarev14.5]

PLEASE give us sliders for mouse sensitivity and mouse movement filters!!!
Ummm... Spino, there are two, for camera movement speed and camera rotation speed. ~:dizzy:

Look under camera options. ~:)

A.

[ah_dut]

@FBE that's why i bought an fx 5600 xt, runs like a dream. and nvidia's drivers are better.
and yes even on low spec systems it works well ,all my family use nvidia so can't comment on the ati glitch. BTW what's up with the light speed movement of cav?
and OT i've been on the shanghai maglev, 431 km/ph and still don't feel fast so ur analogyy may need working on

[Akka]

GREAT post, Blodrast. It voices every single of my concerns about the game, and I simply have nothing to add.
I'm posting here just so that CA knows about the VERY SERIOUS shortcoming of the demo, that could really hamper it.

Because as for me, RTW was about to be bought, no question asked. But then I saw the demo, and honestly, I'm actually hesitating. The graphics are great, but immersion is what makes a game (at least this one), and immersion has taken a crippling shot with the arcade feeling of the game, and these AWFUL ENGLISH-SPEAKING UNITS ! A Roman/Carthaginian unit talking to me in english is definitely an horrible surprise to say the least...

[Lord of the Isles]

Also selecting the MTW UI. Even when switching it too true in the Preferences file, the UI doesnt fully represent the control you have over your army that STW and MTW gave you. While its at least nice to be able to left click again, dragging out formations to adjust unit spacing as well as depth doesnt work right, as well as trying to move your grouped army while keeping formation.
I hope that the MTW control option is still work in progress and will be fixed in the final game...

--insert obligatory and deserved thanks to blodrast--

I'd like to expand on spacecadet's point. I've found that the only way I can adjust formations using the Total War Controls setting is Control-LeftMouse and drag them out. In the Trebia battle however, I grouped 5 phalanx units and, with them selected, tried Control-LeftMouse and the pink dots that showed the new positions weren't in the line I'd dragged out, but were all relative to their current positions. I ungrouped them, selected all 5 and then got the behaviour I wanted. That seems like a bug to me.

Anyone know how to adjust unit facings? Alt-RightMouse was the traditional TW way but I can't seem to find an equivalent in the demo. Ditto with attempts to move a group to a new position and keep its current position/formations. In Trebia last night, I tried to move a group of 2 Sacred Band Cavalry to a new position. Ended up with another group also moving towards that point!

Maybe the attempt to use the old Controls is flawed anyway and I should just get used to the new style. I'll have to give it a go.

[Elmo]

...Maybe the attempt to use the old Controls is flawed anyway and I should just get used to the new style. I'll have to give it a go.

Sure would be nice if someone from CA stopped by here to sort out all the control and UI questions.

[Longasc]

You did not mention the somewhat worse camera controls of RTW.

[Spartiate]

Gentlemen and ladies you can be damn sure that CA HAVE stopped by to check up on what we have being saying but have no intention of addressing our concerns as i imagine a policey was formulated way back as to what market they were targeting this time.WE are not that market.They are not going to change too much with the game as they are predominantly after a younger clickfest orientated group.
The only bone they have thrown us is the modding kit as they are prettysure from reading these forums that we will mod whatever game they put out anyway.
Sorry about being so negative as i have always been in full support of CA before,but i have really lost hope after playing the demo.
~:mecry:

[Red Harvest]

@FBE that's why i bought an fx 5600 xt, runs like a dream. and nvidia's drivers are better.
and yes even on low spec systems it works well ,all my family use nvidia so can't comment on the ati glitch.

Oh please, I had far more problems with nvidia drivers back when I owned one than I have ever had with ATI drivers. I went through four sets of drivers before I found ONE that could run STW on a GF2. The driver myth is just that, a myth. There are differences, yes. There are things that each company does better with their drivers (or with their hardware design--that often gets incorrectly attributed to drivers.) Making blanket statements about them is a bad idea.

[Maeda Toshiie]

Uh, guys, going over to the .com and saying all this may be more effective. I know there are a lot of expert noobs there who saying that CA is god and the demo is all perfect and holy. However, CA is going to be reading a lot over there as well.

TW originally aimed to be a game that redefines strategy games. Now it steps off the path beaten its loyal fans to adopt styles of RTS out there. I had thought RTW should be setting the standards, NOT follow the standards of others.

Majority of the vets at the Org have many issues with the demo. Making yourself heard would be good for the future of the TW series. I really dont wish the only strategy game left that I respect and play to be ruined by noobs.

[Thoros of Myr]

frustration got the best of me - edited :knight:

[Lonewarrior]

I find that the original demo is a let down, but the mods that followed made it exiting.

[Maeda Toshiie]

Selling to the old crowd wouldnt earn money. Selling to the kiddies would earn. Simple laws of economics.

Kiddies dont care if the barbarian warchief has a "captain" rank. Or that the Romans use the captain rank for their commanders.

Kiddies want elephants, flaming pigs, head hurlers, druids and screaming women. They dont want to pin with spears and flank.

[Thoros of Myr]

frustration got the best of me - edited :knight:

[Servius]

Putting the mouse cursor to the side of the screen should strafe the camera, not rotate it as it currently does. MTW controls provided more options, go back to that control.

The angle of the camera and the zoom level should be seperated. I hate the default swooping camera crap. Make these two camera controls independent again as they were in MTW.

The units may need more color differentiation becaue when two units are engaged in melee it is often very hard to tell the proportion of one side's troops to the other.

Where's the Wedge formation for cavalry? I only see Loose and Tight.

Where's the Hold Formation option? I only see Skirmish and Engage at Will.

The Halt command doesn't order archers to stop shooting. Disabling Fire-at-Will doens't either. You have to move them to make them stop shooting. That's dumb.

The mouse cursor moves very sluggishly across the screen. Not the camera movement speed, the cursor movement speed.

[Jeanne d'arc]

People seem to forget that its still only a demo , the developers have a good months time to make small adjustments before the actual release, i am sure they will fix some issue's listed there.One thing i can say is that from seeing this demo i know that the full game will be ace!

[CBR]

Where's the Wedge formation for cavalry? I only see Loose and Tight.

Where's the Hold Formation option? I only see Skirmish and Engage at Will.


In the left corner you will find the wedge for most cav units. Same place as all special formations the units have: fire arrows for archers, rally for general, cantabrian circle for Numidians etc

The Guard Mode seems to be both hold position and formation in one command.

Edit: and I keep having problems with right/left! I mean right corner ffs ~:mad:


CBR

[Blodrast]

thanks for the input (and encouragement), everybody ~:)
Spino: inserted your issues; I took the liberty of moving the rally hotkey issue into the UI section, hope you don't mind too much ;)
Edit: but then I removed the mouse movement stuff; do the sliders suggested by Arseclown after your post do the job ?

RedHarvest: thank you for the tip; unfortunately, that was not among the things I have personally noticed about the game, but other people's complaints; so I can't test that myself, but everyone with ATI cards who experienced problems, please let us know if RedHarvest's suggestions help or not.

spacecadet: you're right, it's been added now as per Spino's suggestion (the last one).
I've also added your suggestion about full compliance with the old MTW/STW interface regarding unit control.

frogbeastegg: duly noted and added. not sure it belongs in the Graphics section though, but since I can't make up my mind for a better place, I put it there as you suggested ~;)

Elmo: it's there, it's there!

big ugly pause box; a screenshot with that on it is worthless.
ok, i'll add a note about its placement too (it only mentions size).
I agree with your point that it would have been nice to see some of the campaign stuff, but I'm afraid it's too late for that...

ah_dut

and OT i've been on the shanghai maglev, 431 km/ph and still don't feel fast so ur analogyy may need working on
Heh, quite possible; I've never been on a maglev, it was really just a figure of speech; I guess I was just trying to point out how sometimes they seem to glide over the land, and the maglev was the first thing that came to mind ~:) But you may be right, it's probably not the best choice of words.

Longasc

You did not mention the somewhat worse camera controls of RTW.
Errm, could you be a bit more specific please ? What do you mean by worse ?
Worse as in key assignments or relative key placement ? Worse as in not smooth enough movement ? And movement of what: camera, mouse ?

Maeda Toshiie: agreed @ posting this at the .com as well.
I could do it myself, but it would have more chances of being noticed if someone with more weight did it (admin, mod or at least an older member on the .com board). I'm afraid that my posting it there (can i even post in the most adequate forum as a new member ?) will not help our cause; it will just get lost among a bunch of other threads... if you have any suggestions, feel free to speak up ;)

Servius1234
Your first two options I believe are already included, in the statement about full consistency with the old MTW-style controls.
Wedge formation: IIRC, the cav has wedge formation as a special ability now; so they can still form wedge; haven't tried to see if infantry can (not that you'd want to do that too often), but cav sure can (at least some cav; we don't yet know if that goes for all the cav in the game).
Hold Formation: i don't know about this; are we sure there's not another way to make them hold formation ? did anybody check this ?
Edit: ok, see CBR's post about Hold Formation; I really don't know if there is more to it than that... (i.e. do units always preserve their formation while marching now ? maybe some units (spears) do, but others don't ? You'd think that at least the roman legions should march in order anyway.)).
Agree with you upon the archers issue: they should stop shooting with halt; moving them is not a natural way to fix that. I added that to the list.

Alexander the Pretty Good: noted and inserted.

Thank you very much for the feedback and support, everybody ~:)

[Elmo]

People seem to forget that its still only a demo , the developers have a good months time to make small adjustments before the actual release...

If the game is going to be on the shelf in a month it has probably gone gold already or will any minute now. Changes, if any, would have to be in a patch. IOW don't hold your breath. :sleeping:

[Tamur]

People seem to forget that its still only a demo , the developers have a good months time to make small adjustments before the actual release

Well said... public demos merely public demos. Drawing conclusions about the company, the product, and the state of the world in general based on a single demo is a bit beyond what probably ought to be concluded.

Tamur

[Alexander the Pretty Good]

Blodrast - don't forget to add about how changing a unit's formation while it is moving causes the unit to stop to change and it doesn't start moving again! That was a small but powerful feature available in MTW/STW - especially with cavalry!

Still, great work. CA, please read this and either fix it or tell us it has/shall be fixed!

[Blodrast]

--insert obligatory and deserved thanks to blodrast--

I'd like to expand on spacecadet's point. I've found that the only way I can adjust formations using the Total War Controls setting is Control-LeftMouse and drag them out. In the Trebia battle however, I grouped 5 phalanx units and, with them selected, tried Control-LeftMouse and the pink dots that showed the new positions weren't in the line I'd dragged out, but were all relative to their current positions. I ungrouped them, selected all 5 and then got the behaviour I wanted. That seems like a bug to me.

Anyone know how to adjust unit facings? Alt-RightMouse was the traditional TW way but I can't seem to find an equivalent in the demo. Ditto with attempts to move a group to a new position and keep its current position/formations. In Trebia last night, I tried to move a group of 2 Sacred Band Cavalry to a new position. Ended up with another group also moving towards that point!

Maybe the attempt to use the old Controls is flawed anyway and I should just get used to the new style. I'll have to give it a go.

ok, i can't test this now, but from what i can remember, i think selecting the unit and then dragging with LMB or RMB (don't remember), reorients the men in that unit
(LMB/RMB = left/right mouse button)

[Red Harvest]

Frogbeastegg and Blodrast,

I am having some difficulty nailing down the oddity with flashing orange triangles on ATI cards. I had it with the default options in 32 bit and 1024x768 and then I had it appear once with higher 1200 and higher detail settings, then I changed settings a bit and it disappeared. I couldn't get it to occur again no matter what I changed--including reboots between. I'm running 4.7 Cats with 98SE at the moment. When if first happened and was bad I noticed "reflections/glints" was disabled in the battle menu, even though I had enabled it in the main menu video options. I also turned up all effects other than anti-aliasing in main menu. One thing I am sure of is that the main menu video options don't always carry over into the battle menu options. In particular I notice the "high quality shadows" are often unchecked in the battle menu, although checked in the main menu. There seems to be some sort of bug in the game interface for these vid settings. I can only conclude that it is an initialization problem that occurs intermittently. It could be driver related, but the mismatch in game settings suggests it is the application at fault. I can't seem to cause or eliminate the problem systematically, so I'm stumped at the moment.

[Blodrast]

thank you, Red Harvest.
I added to the list your point about options from the main menu not carrying over to the in-game menu.
I'm afraid I can't help with the ATI cards; as I said, I don't have access to one myself.

[Red Harvest]

UI Issue-

Charging can be a bit difficult, particularly trying to issue the command against fast moving/running units. The second part of the click is often not on the target unit because they moved... (Reminds me of one of those joke survey boxes where the answer check box moves around when you try to press it.) There is something odd about the "feel" of issuing attack vs. charge. I have to look at the unit box to figure out which one I ended up issuing. I don't have this problem in MTW/VI.

Tutorial-

I think they will need a much more in depth movement/formation tutorial. Honestly though, I never fully mastered MTW's movements. I have gotten very good with a set of tools, but several folks here have mentioned things like chainging facing that I have always done using mouse drags (which can be very tricky and time consuming.) I don't remember them in the tutorials. It might make sense to have an "advanced movement/formation" tutorial.

[Servius]

Bloodrast, cool, thanks bud.

About the Wedge, it seems I was in error. The reason I couldn't find it was because I was trying to apply it to Caesar's command unit in the Tuturial. If Commander units that are also cavalry only get Rally and not Wedge too, I think that should change.

Bloodrast, unless I've missed something a second time, please add: "Allow Commander cavalary units to have the Rally AND Wedge special abilities" or something like that.

[Blodrast]

Red Harvest: noted and added.

Servius1234:valid point. added it.

Thank you for the comments, guys.

[Spino]

Ummm... Spino, there are two, for camera movement speed and camera rotation speed. ~:dizzy:

Look under camera options. ~:)

A.

No no no! I am referring to the mouse speed, NOT the camera speed! When I speak of mouse speed I am referring to the responsiveness and movement rate of the mouse controlled cursor while playing the game. It really is slower than it should be.


Spino: inserted your issues; I took the liberty of moving the rally hotkey issue into the UI section, hope you don't mind too much ;)
Edit: but then I removed the mouse movement stuff; do the sliders suggested by Arseclown after your post do the job ?

Thanks Blodrast, but the mouse movement and slider stuff I mentioned in the above text is completely separate from the camera options. I'm sure you've seen the mouse settings and sliders I'm talking about in other computer games, especially 3D shooters.

[Blodrast]

Spino: gotcha. fixed.

Oh, and btw, it just occurred to me: a good way of making sure that CA gets to see this thread would be to stickify it - until it's been noticed (that _is_ the purpose of this thread, is it not ?)
Of course there is no point in keeping it sticky after 2-3 weeks - at that point it would certainly be too late to make any changes in the final release anyway.

Edit: ofc you can also change the title if you think that would have a better chance of catching their eyes.

[Alexander the Pretty Good]

Sticky it and start a thread that says "CA DEVELOPERS: READ THIS" and make a link to this thread. That might get their attention :saint:

That or storm thier offices. ~D

[Spino]

Spino, I haven't played with this much yet. But this actually makes more sense than MTW's method. It should take the physical intervention of an officer/general to rally most units. Yep, it's a pain in the butt, and won't matter if the fighting/movement speed is so high that you don't have time to do anything. Elite/disciplined units should rally on their own--but rank and file should not. I need to study the implementation of this a bit more.

It is an even greater pain in the butt since you cannot hotkey group a single unit! I tried making my general unit hotkey Group #1 and the game will not accept it! So basically in the middle of combat you may instantly command groups of normal units but in order to access your general and command him to rally the troops you either have to use the mouse in order to select your general unit or cycle through each individual unit with the keys in order. This means precious time is lost before you can directly control the general, let alone rally the troops.

On a different note I've also noticed that 'Exhausted' troops can run! No more trudging about as in MTW. In RTW exhausted infantry units can run at a respectable speed and for a looooong time, almost indefinitely! I played the modded training battle as the Gauls and had a Tired unit of Gaulish archers chased all around the map by an Exhausted unit of Triarii! In all that armor the only thing with two legs an exhausted unit of Triarii should be able to catch is a dead man! C'mon CA, give us a break!

[Spino]

Spino: gotcha. fixed.

Oh, and btw, it just occurred to me: a good way of making sure that CA gets to see this thread would be to stickify it - until it's been noticed (that _is_ the purpose of this thread, is it not ?)
Of course there is no point in keeping it sticky after 2-3 weeks - at that point it would certainly be too late to make any changes in the final release anyway.

Edit: ofc you can also change the title if you think that would have a better chance of catching their eyes.

Thanks again Blodrast! ~:wave:

[Medieval Assassin]

If not already noted:
Whyis it that when an elephant smashes into a line, 15 people fly 10 feet above the elephant, wouldn't they get pushed aside or get knocked down...Why would they fly straight up?

[Thoros of Myr]

Why can footsoldiers no longer form a wedge?

Why do I now have to make my entire army a group to use the group formations? This was not so in MTW.

[Degtyarev14.5]

No no no! I am referring to the mouse speed, NOT the camera speed! When I speak of mouse speed I am referring to the responsiveness and movement rate of the mouse controlled cursor while playing the game. It really is slower than it should be.

Aahh, I see. Okay, point taken. CA, bring on the slider! ~D

But I'd like to make a clarification: you would like to see a slider that controls the rate of movement of the mouse cursor across the screen. Meanwhile, some have complained that the mouse cursor moves sluggishly, and only after a delay. Here we have two separate and unrelated, although superficially similar, issues.

The noted sluggishness is indicative of a struggling system. I found the same whenever I turned all the graphics settings to highest in Battlefield 1942, when I was running an obsolescent GeForce 4 MX 440. Spino's request is a perfectly valid one; however to eradicate mouse delay and general unresponsiveness, people are going to need to either upgrade their systems, or turn down their graphics settings. ~:(

I'm sorry, I don't like to be the bearer of bad news, but...

A.

[Oleander Ardens]

Good points here..

Talking about gameplay: I too miss the wedge. Not because it was a good battleformation for infantry, but because it allowed you to move through small gaps, giving the whole formation a more narrow front.

Perhaps CA could add a column for all units. No battle malus or bonus beside the fact that it is vulnerable and can move better and swiftly through gaps, making it easier to use some sound tactics...


Cheers

OA

[Rosacrux]

If not already noted:
Whyis it that when an elephant smashes into a line, 15 people fly 10 feet above the elephant, wouldn't they get pushed aside or get knocked down...Why would they fly straight up?

eye candy, assasin.

W00t, watch da Romanz dude, up the air! W00t! They fly, dude! Coooool! Elies rockz dude :tomato: :tomato: :tomato:

[CBR]

I have always missed the column, not just for one unts but for groups to make faster marching.

I wanted units to have the ability of more than one special formation but I guess thats hoping for too much..


CBR

[SpencerH]

I tried maxing out all the video options and check boxes (except for the screen resolution) while paused in the battle and I did not have the strobe effects.

radeon 9800 128

[Spino]

Got another one for you Blodrast...

6. Game aspect/balance

- Exhausted units should not be able to run indefinitely, especially if they're packing alot of armor. Simply ridiculous. Bring back the old system where exhausted units can only run for a very short distance before walking again. This has been observed by others and mentioned in other threads but I feel it deserves a spot on your list.

[Red Harvest]

Blodrast,

Since the game is going to have time of day and duration settings, we need to add to the UI: Add time of day display to the GUI. We should know what time of day it is. The changes in lighting at different times of the day can be a bit subtle in the game. Presently all I see in the display is the duration timer (this can be enabled by modding), no time of day.

[King Azzole]

Got another one for you Blodrast...

6. Game aspect/balance

- Exhausted units should not be able to run indefinitely, especially if they're packing alot of armor. Simply ridiculous. Bring back the old system where exhausted units can only run for a very short distance before walking again. This has been observed by others and mentioned in other threads but I feel it deserves a spot on your list.

Jesus christ can you please reduce your signature size? I cant even read whats in your damn post cause its blinding. Dont be such a New Yorker... :tomato:

[Blodrast]

RedHarvest, Spino: added them.

Man, there's something weird going on with the board. It doesn't always show me threads with new posts anymore...wth. I'll post in the Watchtower.

[Colovion]

Everything in the list is perfect.

After playing the demo I thought "crap, this game is going to suck" and basically gave up being excited about it after I'd indulged myself int he graphics a few times. There's so many things they need to fix and the way they're treating their fans doesn't make me think that they're going to pay attention to us. I knew this game was too good to be true. They'll just make it easier to mod and leave it as it is and tell us to do what we want.

If CA does these changes though, I'll have new faith in their PR dept.

Oh and if there were a few main things i'd change it would be:

1) The killing speed and movement speed of units.

2) The ability to totally use the old interface - the new one is too Warcraft and not enough strategy.

3) Have some voice actors that have some talent, and if possible, at least guess the correct accents instead of using some random French guy for the Cartheginians. ~:rolleyes:

[Spino]

Bumpity BUMP!!! ~:p

[cugel]

None of you have mentioned the worst aspects of the UI: What happened to F5, F6 and F7?!!! In MTW we could get rid of all that screen clutter and play without the unit cards at the bottom of the screen the kill ratio & stuff at the top!

And that annoying screen at the left (you know the F5 screen that shows where on the map you are). Is there a way to get rid of it?

Also why are the unit cards so small. Can we get rid of them?

And what happened to F1 which displayed the valor and morale bonuses???

DAMN!

I really don't understand this! Shouldn't we have the ability to go easily go full screen and back again! ~:argue:

Why should the user interface take a STEP BACKWARD! I could see not improving it, BUT MAKING IT WORSE????

The mouse speed problems are also a pain. I'm getting better used to directing my mouse but I hate having to wait for the thing to register (with the game paused too).

Gamespeed: I agree this is a problem.

~:mad:

I'm not a happy camper at this point. I suppose I'll wait and check out the game, but I ain't buying it at this point. Not until a lot of this stuff gets fixed. I'm not holding my breath either that we'll get major interface fixes in the patch (if there is one). This game seems to need about 3 months of solid work on the basics!

Oh, well, the MTW: Middle Earth Mod should be ready to roll soon! I'll probably be doing some more work on that instead. Wait till you see the artwork on that! It'll blow your minds. I kid you not!

~:cool:

[The_Emperor]

I agree with Cugel.

I regularly hid parts of the interface I didn't like in MTW and STW... It was a great feature and very good for taking screen shots ot getting a good look at the action.

[Ludens]

BUMP

Shouldn't this be stickyfied? It would be better if we keep all the issues in one place.

[ah_dut]

true, the colloseum is very cluttered with this sort of stuff at the mo.

[sdrga]

Hi Folks:

Don't let my "Member Since" status fool you: I haven't been a regular poster here for a long time for no other reason than life has unfortunately had the nerve to get in the way of my gaming! How DARE it?

Anyway, I'm a regular poster over at the .Com forums and I hope to become more regular here. I wanted to let you know that I think the CA folks spend as much if not more time here than they do over at .Com. I don't see posts from devs over there like I do here. I'd be very shocked if they hadn't looked at this thread. I wouldn't expect them to post here even if they had read it meticulously. Put yourself in their shoes: what do they have to gain by that?

There are, however, some areas of .Com that are frequented more often by devs than others and I will post a link to this thread entitled "CA: Most Rational & Non-hysterical Issues List". This is just some superb work here and my hat is off to all the major participants.

On the issue of the infamous ATI "starburst" effect, the consensus over on the Tech Support thread at .Com is that it is sporadic, difficult to replicate consistently, prevalent on most ATI Radeon boards (mine is also a 9800Pro 128MB and I had a 9600 do the same thing). It's also the consensus that CA has taken note and will have it fixed prior to release: it's just too widely reported and affects too many users to ignore.

Anyway, glad to be back on the .Org after a two year absense, and I hope to continue to make an ongoing contribution. On the .Com side, I'm usually to be found these days on the totally useless but totally obsessive "Official RTW release date speculation thread"

See ya,

sdrga

[V2]

Great thread! First I must say I am as concerned as many after having learned of the demo yesterday and done nothing but played it since then. Can we keep this list going and perhaps make it an official sticky? The more cohesive community concerns are represented the easier it will be for devs to wade through the muck. Just a thought.

I agree with much of whats been said here. I would like to add two issues which I feel fit nicely with this list and by extension touch on an issue raised by many. This might be a bit long but I am trying to be as clear as possible. Here they are..

1: ---> edit: nevermind on this point. I found more key binding options. The rest below still stands! Sorry everyone.

2: ---> I've tried every mode and camera setup in the game and there is simply nothing that works for me. Here is my perfect setup...

2a: - W,A,S,D (strafe L+R, forward, back) -This is covered with current options. Easy enough for me, the most common setup for navigating a 3D game along with #2b. Camera speed slider included, thank you CA!

2b: - Mouselook (viewpoint left, right, up, down) -Now this cant be "on" all the time like in a FPS because we need the mouse cursor nearly as much as we need to move. So, for me the ideal solution is to simply have Mouselook active only when im holding down my key of choice (Right Mouse Button). Holding it down gives me the freedom of movement only seen in the best FPS games. Releasing it gives me my cursor. Advantage #1 is not having to use "screen edge" movement or rotation thus keeping your cursor closer to the action. Advantage #2 you're not confined to a single rotation speed as you are with screen edge or keyboard rotation.

2c: - Left mouse button option (Unit selection, Unit movement, Attack, AND Formation + Facing) Its easier to quickly double left click than double right. This opens up the interface for the above described mouselook.

I do think M:TW had a form of mouselook like what I described above but the implementation wasn't very smooth at all. I only looked up and down with it because rotation was jittery. This leads me into an issue raised by many concerning the demo.

3: ---> The mouse speed issue. Mouse input accuracy is terrible. Sure we need a speed slider and perhaps a filter but this doesn't change poor utilization within the software itself. The TW games have never been the finest on this point and would never pass on any professional or competitive FPS/RTS level. You can feel it even on the menu screen by contrast from the windows desktop. There is latency and a seemingly slow as mud sampling rate. Its honestly really bad and needs to be improved.

In the hopes of a great game!
V2

[Blodrast]

Actually, we've been monitoring comments on the demo here and at the .com forums quite closely. But thanks for pointing out the thread.

This is from a reply from Captain Fishpants to a PM that I took the liberty to send him. By this time, anyway, you've surely noticed that CA has already posted in several threads here at the Org. So we can rest assured that our issues, both good and bad, have been at least noticed, and, to the extent that it's possible, will be addressed.

Thank you for linking to this at the .com, too, sdrga.
so let's just keep the faith for a couple more weeks ~:)

[Medieval Assassin]

I just run the game like a dream on supppppper low specs.

190mb of ram
500mhz p3
64 mb card.

GREAT JOB NO LAG!!!!!!!

[ah_dut]

good to see old members coming back to this board, and Medieval Assasain, u are a lucky bugger, it doesn't run that well on my 2.4 ghz 512 ddr 2700 5600xt comp, i'm aware it isn't so cutting edge, but it's mine and i like it, however, i wouldn't call it 'runs like a dream.'

[Spino]

Here's a few more... I suppose they could be filed under 'Bugs'...

AI

- Enemy generals are back to their old, suicidal pre-MTW:VI patched selves. After countless custom battles I've noticed that enemy generals are more interested in frontally charging your troops and fighting to the death than looking for an exposed flank to charge or even sitting back and waiting a bit before engaging. Given that general units are now weaker than in STW & MTW the need for them to better pick and choose their fights is critical! In fact, now that I think about it I cannot recall a single battle where the enemy general survived!

- Cavalry AI - Perhaps it's just me but I've noticed that enemy cavalry doesn't seem to be as interested in charging, withdrawing and regrouping and then recharging your troops as it was in patched versions of MTW:VI. Why was it done away with?

- Retreat AI - Maybe certain AI routines have been crippled or disabled for the sake of the demo but enemy units are not withdrawing from battle when they should. When the battle's conclusion is no longer in doubt enemy units that either haven't been routed or have been routed and rallied remain on the field and do not retreat off the map unless routed once more. Too many times I've massacred the enemy army only to have to use my remaining cavalry to find and rout the remaining units too stupid to figure out when run away and live to fight another day. Once again, this seemed to work better in MTW:VI, why was it changed? Perhaps the demo battles are considered by the AI to be 'back against the wall' fight to the death affairs for both sides?

- Phalanx movement - The AI does not quite grasp the nuances of the phalanx. For basic stuff it's fine however it doesn't quite know to turn it off, readjust the formation to a different direction and then turn it back on for optimal effect. I had a situation where most units had left the field except for a depleted Poeni Infantry in phalanx formation unit and a few of my roman legionaries as well as my General's unit. The only unit near the Poeni Infantry was my General's cavalry unit. I was toying with them and galloped my general's unit behind the phalanx, forcing them to change their facing. Rather than simply disabling the the phalanx and turning rapidly to face my cavalry the Poeni infantry did some crazy maneuver where it was creeping towards my cavalry while turning in the process. It looked odd, almost as if the unit was resembling the locomotive behavior of an amoeba.

[Daevyll]

Enemy generals are back to their old, suicidal pre-MTW:VI patched selves. After countless custom battles I've noticed that enemy generals are more interested in frontally charging your troops and fighting to the death than looking for an exposed flank to charge or even sitting back and waiting a bit before engaging. Given that general units are now weaker than in STW & MTW the need for them to better pick and choose their fights is critical! In fact, now that I think about it I cannot recall a single battle where the enemy general survived!


This is quite a major issue, because besides the impact it has in the tactical game it will also make the game far too easy at the strategical level.
If the AI persists in throwing away its experienced generals, that will leave it with only novice leaders after a few turns, and far too easy to beat.

[Blodrast]

Hmm, Spino, from what you're saying I gather you've been playing mods.
Remember that the AI's for the demo are pretty much hard-coded; the carthaginians may appear stupid in many aspects simply because they don't rely on a fully-fledged AI; even the romans probably don't have one, although they do have some scripted actions they will follow no matter what, which should make up for the lack of the full AI (at least in part).

How many and which of the things you mentioned apply to the original demo ?
IIRC, it was pretty clearly stated and agreed upon that in the demo the AI is simply following a script, nothing fancy or subtle. Since carthaginians are meant to be played by the human, they probably rely on a very infantile AI, and don't make the best of choices...

[Spino]

Hmm, Spino, from what you're saying I gather you've been playing mods.
Remember that the AI's for the demo are pretty much hard-coded; the carthaginians may appear stupid in many aspects simply because they don't rely on a fully-fledged AI; even the romans probably don't have one, although they do have some scripted actions they will follow no matter what, which should make up for the lack of the full AI (at least in part).

How many and which of the things you mentioned apply to the original demo ?
IIRC, it was pretty clearly stated and agreed upon that in the demo the AI is simply following a script, nothing fancy or subtle. Since carthaginians are meant to be played by the human, they probably rely on a very infantile AI, and don't make the best of choices...

Yes Blodrast, the demo battles are scripted... to a point. But I'm not talking about the default demo battles. I've played tons of custom battles with varying forces (Julii vs. Gaul, Senate vs. Julii, Gaul vs. Carthage, Carthage vs. The Senate & Gaul, etc., etc.) on numerous maps (using the mods you can fight on all kinds of different maps, not just the Tutorial and Trebia battlefields) and the AI doesn't exhibit any kind of scripted behavior that I can detect. If the Tutorial and Trebia scripts were still in effect the armies would be following the same marching patterns and whatnot that they do in the demo's default battles but they don't. I've even seen the attacking AI split its forces to take on my smaller Carthaginian army and the similarly sized one controlled by my Gaulish ally! Once the battle begins the first thing you notice is the AI carrying out its attack or defense strategy based upon your position and the available terrain. Based upon my experiences I believe the AI was acting unfettered by any pre-generated scripts. Hell, I've even noticed the AI on defense making the same mistakes it did in previous Total War games by constantly shuffling its units back and forth up to the last minute, even when you haven't changed your axis of attack!

But I sincerely hope you are right and the AI was crippled for the demo's sake but it wasn't then veteran Total War gamers are going to be in for a rude shock. It is my observation that the tactical AI actually seems worse than it was in the last patched version of MTW:VI. This is NOT a good thing.

The only thing that will persuade me to believe otherwise is a developer posting in this thread explaining how the demo's AI differs from that found on the retail release version (which, by the way, is on the verge of going gold).

[Colovion]

sticky this please?

Chreshian Aarcherss has a point...

[Jambo]

2: ---> I've tried every mode and camera setup in the game and there is simply nothing that works for me. Here is my perfect setup...

2b: - Mouselook (viewpoint left, right, up, down) -Now this cant be "on" all the time like in a FPS because we need the mouse cursor nearly as much as we need to move. So, for me the ideal solution is to simply have Mouselook active only when im holding down my key of choice (Right Mouse Button). Holding it down gives me the freedom of movement only seen in the best FPS games. Releasing it gives me my cursor. Advantage #1 is not having to use "screen edge" movement or rotation thus keeping your cursor closer to the action. Advantage #2 you're not confined to a single rotation speed as you are with screen edge or keyboard rotation.


Hi V2,

This also was something that deeply bothered me, however, I'm pleased to say I can help you with this. If you go into the preferences.txt file in the Rome Demo folder you should find one fo the lines that goes something like this:

CLASSIC CONTROLS:FALSE

Change this to TRUE and your rmb will then act as a mouselook when held down.

Happy dayz :D

[Colovion]

notice how the screen edge mouse camera movement is flawed in that you can barely strafe anymore - it's like the bottom 5% of the screen, not the bottom 50% of the screen that is used to strafe. Using the old controls are useless when they aren't even the old controls.

[Medieval Assassin]

WOAH, This could be a VERY BIG BUG! I was modding a round a little with a nice mod maker ( From Lord Bloody Gore ) I was useing the Romans Vs the Guals on the tourial map, I attack over the bridge and got about 100m from the bridge when That battle went horrible, so I feel back what units I could by clicking on the other side of the bridge, why I sacrifice 1-2 units to hold them off, LO AND BEHOLD! The units I clicked to go on the bridge, ran fast as they could, missed the bridge and all dissipeared into the water... aobut 200 men drown... This has happened more then once, any one else encounter?

[V2]

Hi V2,

This also was something that deeply bothered me, however, I'm pleased to say I can help you with this. If you go into the preferences.txt file in the Rome Demo folder you should find one fo the lines that goes something like this:

CLASSIC CONTROLS:FALSE

Change this to TRUE and your rmb will then act as a mouselook when held down.

Happy dayz :D

Hi Jambo. Thanks for trying to help but this mode in R:TW is completely broken. Atleast in M:TW you didnt lose functionality when using it, as jittery and useless as it was. In R:TW its smoother in operation but with a loss of critical functionality. Try it out if you havent its broken! :)

First, you can no longer set facing and formation depth.. oops BIG problem (this is why I outlined a "left click option" above). Next when you click and hold the right mouse BTN you can look around BUT your camera movement keys no longer function. You get stuck in that single location mouselooking.. really lame.

Its as if CA have no experience with 3D environment games and the standard movement system they all employ. It would work with either RTS or TW camera styles. The difference would be if you look down and move forward with the RTS style camera your perspective would remain at the same height. In TW camera mode you would have 3 dimensions of freedom and looking down + moving forward would cause you to lower your perspective.

Movement and Strafe keys should remain active even when holding down the mouselook key so you can easily move around the battlefield in a fluid manner.

I really hope they get this right!
V2

[Blodrast]

Hmm, well, since the game is/should be going gold soon, we can probably close this thread. If the things you guys mentioned were to be addressed, I'm sure they must have been addressed by now. Once the game is gold, these things will most likely not get changed.

At any rate, everybody posting in this thread, you gave absolutely great feedback, so thank you very much for that, and let's hope we see a full version with all the things we wanted in it !

Keep your fingers crossed, and in the meantime, have a ~:cheers:

Edit: it will sure be useful to keep the thread around, just in case some of the problems don't get fixed and find their place in a patch.

[Colovion]

I shall have that beer tonight.

If these things aren't adressed right away... well let's just say I hope there is a patch that remedies some...

[d6veteran]

The demo was a dissapointment.

This is a great list -- I agree with everything updated to the first post.

RTW is going to be a fun game but I fear it will also be full of frustration for us TW veterans and historical wargaming fans. In my opinion CA has been billing this game as a tactical battle simulator and at the same time dumbing down many aspects to appeal to the masses (it's like they want there cake and eat it too).

Or maybe as someone pointed out they are just assuming the 'grognard' community will mod it?

Not sure if this bothers anyone else, but while zooming in is very cool and looks great, I was bummed to see my legionnaires hacking and slashing in a loose melee with their short swords instead of maintaining a firm shield wall and thrusting. The Roman war machine was a methodical and disciplined killing formation of Legionnaires and I was really hoping to see that in the engine.

I was thrown off by the speed issue when I first played the demo ... after playing tons of modded battles I am not convinced it will be as big of an issue as I originally suspected. Nevertheless, why take out the speed slider and make the base speed slow. Variable speed is pretty standard fare for all flavors of RTS games.

I greatly dislike the white routing banners.

Again, great list. Hopefully the game will be highly moddable.

[Kraxis]

I'm surprised that people actually complain that the units don't speak their native languages...

Tell me, how did the Iberians say "Advance?" Or how about a Scythian "Shoot"? Or even better, what about a Numidian "Charge"? Even a Cathagenian "Engage"... Anyone who can tell me? No? And why not? Because we don't know what their languages were... No written language (for most of them) = no local history = no certain knowledge of their current state = no knowledge of their langauge.
The result would be that we would get latin (which we don't know for sure how was pronounced), greek, celtic, germanic, egyptian and a number of perhapses.

No, the languages are impossible. Accents could be better though, but I don't find the carthies speak with a french accent at all. And Creshian Archerss... Well tell me how they should say it.

[Praylak]

I support all the suggested tweaks listed here. But I fear it's more than just tweaks that are being asked and required. That in itself is an indication of the direction they have chose for this game. Sure, you can argue that this is "only the demo", or "we'll get our patch by early next year", but I smell some upsetting brand of coffee when I play this demo. I appreciate and respect those that are optimistic, and I do hope your right. I personally can't handle another.. Lords of the Realm 3, StarFleet Command 3, or MOO3 inquisition. If you were there, you know what I'm saying. Quite depressing.

What is it with the number 3? It must mean "curse it" in some ancient dialect. Ya know, like how the number 4 means death in chinese. Or was it Japanese?

[Kraxis]

Coming back from experimenting with the demo I have observed a few things I didn't know or had noticed before.

I decided to test out a number of bridge battles as both carthies and romans against the gauls.

The first thing I noticed was how people fell off the bridge as soon as they routed. Nice... Maybe too many but still highly cool.

Then I tested with elephants (I mean come on, a nice long lane filled with enemies that can go nowhere). It was an absolute slaughter. The gauls never even got close to getting across. The elephants ran through the first three units and then bogged down, and then it happened, they panicked... That just made them much worse as they panicked in the gauls direction. 9 elephants plowed down hundreds, tossed dusins and threw even more off the bridge, absolutely precious. They alone routed the entire gaul army (save three units). When I did it the second time the gauls managed to kill a number of them before they panicked and one elephant got stuck (the bodies of the dead elephants kept it in place).

That one elephant gave me a precious look onto how a panicking elephant acts. The mahout sits there and bangs the elephant in the head as if trying to force his will into its head... COOL!!!

But I also noticed that the units sometimes kill themselves when trying to charge onto the bridge. In fact almost an entire unit of Warband archers comitted suicide trying to halt me as Romans. They ran into the river and vanished... A few got to the bridge and instantly routed as the others vanished. A few of my poenis and sacred band inf did much the same thing, but luckily not with the same disasterous results.
Definately not cool!!!

So add to the list, cool small details, fix 'suicide at bridge'.

[Blodrast]

Medieval Assassin: units falling off bridges and drowning is not a bug, but a feature. Seriously, now ;) They told us about it in several inverviews, and that is supposed to happen that way. Now I don't know to what extent this should be happenning, but I do know that units are supposed to fall off bridges and drown (which is pretty cool, imho). But to get back to the point, I don't think we should put it in the bugs section, since it's a feature ~;)
Thank you for mentioning it, though.

Spino: added the AI issues you signaled; let's hope they are merely due to the possibly crippled/incomplete demo AI.

cugel: we have already posted that we'd like a more customizable UI, including the possibility to turn on/off various things on screen; also the ability to make screen captures from within the game.


Hmm, can you guys elaborate on the units drowning issues ? I haven't experienced them myself yet; even though units falling off bridges and drowning IS supposed to be a feature, the AI should be somewhat careful not to just throw its units into the water. Can you tell whether the AI's actions were perfectly logical, but perhaps the problem was some lack of synchronization or coordination between various troops ? Or perhaps its plan was good, but other factors (you) intervened and it couldn't stop them in time, or something like that ?
The point is to figure out whether it's a feature, or a feature that wasn't tested carefully enough, and in enough circumstances.

[Nelson]

CA has been billing this game as a tactical battle simulator


This is what the game is for many of us it's true, and certainly what many of us want, but AFAIK CA has NEVER said that Rome is any sort of simulation. Quite the contrary. It's a nudge, nudge, wink, wink sort of thing.

The "sim" word connotes complexity and threatens to take a game into the Land of Modest Sales. (The Sims being the exception :wink:)

[d6veteran]

This is what the game is for many of us it's true, and certainly what many of us want, but AFAIK CA has NEVER said that Rome is any sort of simulation. Quite the contrary. It's a nudge, nudge, wink, wink sort of thing.



The E3 developer interviews clearly represented the game as a realistic simulation of ancient warfare. Nevermind all the press surrounding the TV shows Time Commanders and Decisive Battles.

[Kraxis]

Hmm, can you guys elaborate on the units drowning issues ? I haven't experienced them myself yet; even though units falling off bridges and drowning IS supposed to be a feature, the AI should be somewhat careful not to just throw its units into the water. Can you tell whether the AI's actions were perfectly logical, but perhaps the problem was some lack of synchronization or coordination between various troops ? Or perhaps its plan was good, but other factors (you) intervened and it couldn't stop them in time, or something like that ?
The point is to figure out whether it's a feature, or a feature that wasn't tested carefully enough, and in enough circumstances.

The best way for you to see it is by playing a bridgebattle with plenty of troops. By the time you have beaten your way towards th enemy shore his archers and skirmishers will come to the rescue... Well your rescue it is. The archers will normally line the shore so when they attack your unit they have to advance perpendicular to the bridgehead, but not fully. They will advance in a direct line towards your unit, meaning some of the men will march into the water and die.
I have now seen this with practially every unit in the demo, I only need the general now.
This is horrible.

Another bug I have found is even worse.
It also includes bridges. It happes when a unit routs on the bridge, I have now seen many times a unit simply die. Every single man in the unit that routs run about 20 meters and then they all fall over dead. NO FUN! I want to kill them. Experienced on my own troops when I tried tp push a unit of Sacred Band inf away with my 4 units of Warbands. Of the 720 troops I sent at them, only 6 (from the same unit) returned to tell the tale. While the Sacred Band is powerful and the Warbands aren't exactly heavy hitters, such losses were impossible as the Warbands had an escape route.

[Blodrast]

:goes Aah !:
thank you, Kraxis.

So it's not that they are _falling_ into the water from the bridge, it's that they are simply _walking_ into the water ?!? man, that is really stupid then...
I'll add that to the first post. Thank you for pointing it out and explaining it.

uhm, I must be tired or something, but I'm not sure I understood the second one.
So when routing on a bridge, they run and fall into the water like dummies ?? without any obvious reason (like, I don't know, being followed by a significant unit of cavalry forcing them to jump into the water: think of the last desperate charge of the defenders of Hornburg on the narrow ledge, when they came out and were throwing all the orcs in the chasm...)

[Medieval Assassin]

They don't fall off the bridge, like in STW and MTW if you ordered a unit to cross a bridge you click on the other side, they would line up and cross the bridge, No, no no, here they just run in a straight line and vanish, I've seen it every other game


----------------| |---------------------
..BRIDGE->........| |
______________| |__________________




./ \
.|
XX CORPS
.|
XXXX ................+++
XXXX.................( In oppose to moving here
XXXX..................then crossing, they assume
XXXX..................a staright line into the river and all die...... ALL)

And they all die, in medieval they would stack in front of the bridge, apperntly they dont here... :S

[d6veteran]

You should wrap your diagram of sorts in a code block so it stay formatted how you intended.

[Medieval Assassin]

How?

[Kraxis]

uhm, I must be tired or something, but I'm not sure I understood the second one.
So when routing on a bridge, they run and fall into the water like dummies ?? without any obvious reason (like, I don't know, being followed by a significant unit of cavalry forcing them to jump into the water: think of the last desperate charge of the defenders of Hornburg on the narrow ledge, when they came out and were throwing all the orcs in the chasm...)

Heh, that is entirely understandable...I dudnt understand it myself and I was watching it. ~:confused:
What happens is not that they jump into the water, that is cool, if somewhat stupid.
No, they rout and at some point they all just die. They fall over and die all at once. That is quite strange when you watch it. I couldn't understand what was going on when my Warbands at first slowly dribbled away (men falling into the river and getting caught by the enemy) then suddenly the entire unit vanished from my unitlist. ~:confused: ~:confused:
Now, I'm looking for it more closely, it doesn't happen nearly as much as the 'Suicide-by-Bridge', but it happens. I can only say you should try to play a couple of battles with some Sacred Bands protecting the bridge and some weak attackers trying to take it.
2 SBs (the 2nd is only there to take over if the first somehow managed to get itself into trouble) vs 6 Warbands should be good.

[Blodrast]

ok, now I think I got it. hmm, it's really weird. :dizzy2:
man, that makes no sense at all... I suppose nothing similar happens when they rout on land, right ? And they die because they all fall/jump into the water (for reasons unknown), they don't die _on_ the bridge, right ?

[Kraxis]

No, they die where they run (stand is such as bad word to use ~;) ), that is the wierd part. I could to an extent understand if they said to themselves "guys, lets end this, you don't look exactly pleasing from the rear."

[Blodrast]

heh, oki, that clears it up. thanks for the clarifications. It's been added to the list. ~:)

[Alexander the Pretty Good]

"And Alex said, 'Let there be bump', and there was bump. And Alex saw that it was good, and on the seventh word, he rested".

Now let's see how many of these issues were addressed satisfactorily in the final release.