Creative Assembly FAQ Message from the Shogun [Archive]

sik1977

06-24-2005, 17:13

1. Will any of the missing features from RTW, such as the Egyptian and Greek Walls (which are partially there in the data files), will be added back (or activated) in the original campaign?

2. (Related question) What improvements, if any, are planned for RTW main campaign, such as additional features and units, bug fixes (such as fixing the huge list of issues and bugs listed in the Ludus Magna Thread - excepting already released info on save/load issue), which will act as an added insentive for buying BI (e.g. VI added the reinforcements to the original campaign as well and was the main reason, for me, to get VI)?

3. Are there any plans or possibilities for adding a 'Stats Sheet' or something similar which can keep a track of total losses inflicted and incurred during the length of a given campaign, as well as other interesting statistics, such as the most successful General, Most kills by a Unit, Kill-to-loss ratios, etc. (IMO, it is a must for a serious strategy game)?

4. Will diplomacy in RTW and BI be improved, such that there are more diplomacy options, requests, responses, etc., available to factions (also please comment on any general improvement in AI's handling of dipomacy)?

5. I understand that for BI rebel uprisings will be changed to civil-wars like MTW, but what about RTW and its post patch 1.2 rebel brigands nuisance (i.e., too many rebels popping up every turn, which are no more then a nuisance and actually detract from actual and meaningful gameplay, as getting rid of them becomes a chore not a challenge), will it be improved or an option (perhaps a modable option) to exclude/reduce rebel brigands uprisings?

Thank you.

Duke John

06-24-2005, 17:14

Epistolary Richard

06-24-2005, 17:19

It's fallen to me, as the Shogun's Earthly Representative, to see if members of the .Org are interested in supplying questions to be answered on our weekly FAQ updates.
Hmmm... I think you can probably take that as a given. :grin:

You may have seen some of these before, but the thread on twc seems to have gotten a little sidetracked:

Question
Will you be releasing a list of the script and console commands that function with RTW and RTW:BI along with the parameters that they use? If not, what's your reason for not doing so?

Question
MikeB mentioned an auto-run feature that can be used to run a game without player intervention. This would be very useful for mod testing. Is there any way we can activate it now? If not, will we be able to in the future?

Question
There's a mention in the documentation of a file called available_ui_element_ids.txt
Can we please have a copy of it?

Question
I understand that you have been asked about whether the save/load prohibition could be lifted from campaign scripts - that is, a script activated from within the descr_strat file and you said it was not possible. That is not a problem for us as we now use show_me scripts activated through the advisor which do allow loading & saving while they're running and we have written scripts that work effectively when they are manually activated after a game has been reloaded. The difficulty we face is that there is no way of automatically running these show_me scripts (that we call background scripts) when the game is reloaded. Is there anything that can be done to help us?

If nothing can be done to auto-activate them could Guy please add another event called Reload that would activate when a game was loaded? Then at least we could trigger the advisor consistently at game start so that the player would always be reminded to reactivate the script.

Catiline

06-24-2005, 17:23

I'm notnoble, and by the end of the evening will not be upstanding with a bit of luck. I'll do my best to collate the questions however. What's the deadline?

mfberg

06-24-2005, 17:34

Will there be a battle speed bar (a la MTW) or just the current three speeds?
Will we still be able to stack multiple units into the same area to get the dreaded stack bonus or will there be a limit or limiting factor to the number of units/men in one area?
Will there be battle replays/campaign reviews?

mfberg

Epistolary Richard

06-24-2005, 17:37

There's no deadline, just whenever there's a worthwhile number. Similar threads on other sites weed out the questions that have already been asked and answered in previous instalments of the FAQ (http://p223.ezboard.com/fshoguntotalwarfrm7.showMessage?topicID=19529.topic).

player1

06-24-2005, 17:41

Hurray! ~:cheers:

Q:Are there any plans for making auto resolve sperate from regular difficulty settings?

To expand on this question:

Or better yet, why is currently autoresolve difficult tied to campaign difficuty?

It gives weird results. For example good Civ3 player wants to play RTW, and gets VH campaign (so AI is more developed) and Easy battles (since he doesn't play RTS).

Then to his horror, every autoresolved battles is losed badly, while doing same battle manaly gives easy wins, effectively inreasing micromanagemnt, since such player is forced to play every battle manualy, even against small patch of barbarians.

Using Battle Diff for autocalc instead seems more resonable, since if AI gets bonus in battle, it should in autoresolve too.
Doesn't it?

Althouhg having it as seperate slider could be good option too if you ask me (BI request).

Uesugi Kenshin

06-24-2005, 18:24

Q: Will BI allow mods to add more factions to vanilla RTW or just another campaign similar to what RTR did?

Q: How will religion and loyalty be represented in BI? It has been mentioned that they will be included, but will they be included a la MTW or in a new way?

Little Legioner

06-24-2005, 19:31

Yay! That's it :charge: ~:cheers: What a great news! Those are my questions!

They have discussed (133 replies 3,253 views - 06-24-05- PM 21.44) on my own created "Bad news from CA about Battles" topic.
https://forums.totalwar.org/vb/showthread.php?t=49485&page=1

- - -

Q. Will there be any improvement for battlespeed? Do you think lowering the speed of kill rate?

Q. Will there be an option for battlefields? Big / huge or or your preferred term for usage? or simply you'll make them big? (please do not dig my question) :embarassed:

Q. What do you think about to do for tightening the tactical deepness of the R: TW BI besides swimmable units and night battles?

Q. Will there be any improvement on geography in the game? River crossings, cliffs or valleys?

Q. Vanilla R: TW and BI will use the same 3D campaign map? or Will you create another map for the expansion... ( I preferred the same because any improvemets on map directly affects vanilla R: TW too)

Te Salutare
LL

Conqueror

06-24-2005, 19:59

Q: In RTW 1.2, attacking a faction that is allied to your protectorate will cause the protectorate to renounce it's status as a protectorate. Is this intentional? Could it be changed?

Myrddraal

06-24-2005, 20:08

My first question (and my second actually), not surprisingly, is based around modding and is quite important to me and a hell of a lot of modders:

1. Will we be able to add more factions (as in VI)?

2. Will you be releasing your campaign map editor? (We know you have one:wink:)

Lord Adherbal

06-24-2005, 20:16

quite some questions I see here have already been answered. I hope the person who will eventualy send them to the Shogun is well informed ? It would be silly to ask a lot of questions that we already know (don't want to look like we aren't paying attention, now do we ;))

Epistolary Richard

06-24-2005, 20:19

Yes, we've already got answers to some of these, I'll try and dig them out. If these are satisfactory or you want further clarification then please ask your question again.

ChaosLord
Q: Will any of the hardcoded modding limits (such as faction limit) be removed in BI or future expansions?

Q. Which things that are currently hardcoded do you plan on changing (e.g. number of men per unit, faction limit, number of factions that are controlled by the Senate?)
A.None. The way factions are managed is more flexible now, but that's something that most people won't notice. Actually, the Senate is gone in BI; by the late 300s they were no longer a significant force in Roman politics, so they won't be 'controlling' anyone.

Q: Is there any plans for a built-in mod management function with BI or future expansions?(Switching/unistalling mods and the like)

I'll handle this one, this already exists in vanilla RTW by using the -mymod command line, alternatively if you don't like that there's Vercingetorix's RMOD ModSwitcher which will switch between and combine compatible mods

BobTheTerrible, sik1977 & Uesugi Kenshin
Q: Will there be any additions to the vanilla campaign? i.e. Viking Invasion introduced new units etc, will there be anything of the sort for RTW?

1. Will any of the missing features from RTW, such as the Egyptian and Greek Walls (which are partially there in the data files), will be added back (or activated) in the original campaign?

2. (Related question) What improvements, if any, are planned for RTW main campaign, such as additional features and units, bug fixes (such as fixing the huge list of issues and bugs listed in the Ludus Magna Thread), which will act as an added insentive for buying BI (e.g. VI added the reinforcements to the original campaign as well and was the main reason, for me, to get VI)?

Q: Will BI allow mods to add more factions to vanilla RTW or just another campaign similar to what RTR did?

Again, I'll handle this one, this expansion pack isn't just adding a few things onto the vanilla campaign - it's changing the time period to the late Roman Empire. You can find more details about it here (http://www.totalwar.com/community/rtwbi.htm).

The Shogun _has_ however announced that there may be another patch for RTW in the works that may be released some time after the expansion pack.

A. Much I want to say this is now sorted and carved in stone, I can't. Please remember that expansion pack is in development and there is still much going on at the moment that I can't talk about for various reasons. I am prepared to say that it is certainly our intention to address the load/save issue in the expansion pack. "And what about a patch?" I hear you ask. Again I can't say this is set in stone but we hope to bring out a patch at roughly the same time as the expansion pack (in reality it will probably be few weeks later).
That's the state of play at the moment. When I know more, I'll make sure that you know more.

mfberg
Will there be battle replays/campaign reviews?

Q. Will we be able to save the replays for campaign battles again?
A. No. The underlying game code will not support this feature.

Uesugi Kenshin
Q: How will religion and loyalty be represented in BI? It has been mentioned that they will be included, but will they be included a la MTW or in a new way?

Q. . Is religion going to change at all? Since it will be a Christian Rome now, will they get new religious agents/ buildings?
A. Yes. Religion will be an important factor in BI. In 363 when the game starts Rome is techincally not Christian, by the way, as Julian the Apostate spent his reign suppressing the Christians and returning to pagan ways. His successors did re-establish Christianity as an official religion, but there's no absolute requirement for a player to do so. The technology tree alllows for pagan and Christian structures to be built, and even allows for different religious policies in different parts of your empire, if you wish.

Q. Will there be civil wars?
A. Yes. The rebellion mechanisms have changed to allow for rebellions to spread, and to allow for disloyal generals making a stab for ultimate power themselves.

Q. In addition to barbarian invasions, will we see signs of internal strife in the western empire with break-away empires such as the Imperium Galliarum.
A. Yes. And no. There are mechanisms in place to allow for rebellions to flare up into civil wars. We also have taken account of the rival Emperors that appeared from time to time, so a Roman faction may split and have more than one Emperor in being. The Gallic Empire is 100 years before the period of BI, so you won't see that happening. You might find that there is a breakaway faction in that area, though, if you don't keep an eye on the internal order of Rome as well as defending the borders.

Little Legioner
Q. Do you plan on having an option of making the battlefields bigger for campaign battles? Will there be an option for it? Big / huge or or your preferred term for usage?

Q. Will the battle model be :Fast battles, flat grounds, high kill rates, close armies, small map(with red line-Current RTW style) or: Long battles, non-flat grounds, slow kill rates, far armies, bigger map (without red line-old TW series style).
A.The basic battle game won't change that much; this is an expansion, not a re-imagining of RTW.

Myrddraal
1. Will we be able to add more factions (as in VI)?

Q. Which things that are currently hardcoded do you plan on changing (e.g. number of men per unit, faction limit, number of factions that are controlled by the Senate?)
A.None. The way factions are managed is more flexible now, but that's something that most people won't notice. Actually, the Senate is gone in BI; by the late 300s they were no longer a significant force in Roman politics, so they won't be 'controlling' anyone.

2. Will you be releasing your campaign map editor? (We know you have one)

Q. Will CA include Campaign Map Editor in expansion?
A. No. According to the bloke who wrote the campaign map editor, there are tools out there already that are actually jolly good.

InsaneApache

06-24-2005, 20:34

great news indeed..

now will you marry me and bear my children? ~D

well you get nowhere by not asking...as this thread has revealed.

cheers guys ~:cheers:

Red Harvest

06-24-2005, 20:35

Q: Will AI missile troops use their missiles on full range or at 2/3 range as in R:TW (1.1/1.2)?

Q: Will AI missile troops still charge my lines before their fellow melee infantry as opposed to actually using their missile weapons?

Q: Will AI generals continue to charge suicidely into my lines while the AI infantry tries to catch up?

Q: Are attacking AI infantry capable of launching a single coordinated attack, instead of feeding me units piecemeal?

Q: Are AI cavalry still coded to immediately charge the players missile troops?

If you reduce the above questions to: Has the AI been improved? Then don't bother asking or answering and I won't bother buying BI.

Currently the AI cavalry charges my missile troops but are so outnumbered that they flee immediately after a short melee.
the AI missile troops either charge or shoot at 2/3 range allowing me either easily crush them easily in melee or crush them in a missile war as I start shooting at full range.
Then the AI infantry comes, one unit at a time, which are again outnumbered and thus flee after a short melee.
I am capable of winning battles without doing a single thing, simply because the AI is incapable of attacking coordinated.

:bow:

Ditto on Duke John's questions! Very important. Adding to the list

Q Will charging make more sense from a stats standpoint? There is currently an issue with charge bonus having a very minor impact, while armour level greatly influences the charge.

Q Will rank depth effect have a strong impact on spear unit performance? (Rank bonus?)

Q Will rank depth effect archery/slingers/etc? Slinging would be tough in anything but the shallowest formation. Rear archers should be ineffective or unable to fire.

Q Will distance attenuation be added (or made noticeable) to archer accuracy/effectiveness? Ditto for non-direct LOS archer fire.

Q Will the AI problem of reassembling its line at ~60 meters be addressed? (Back to cohesion/coordination.)

Q Will pushback figure in combat? As best I can tell pushback is not effecting casualties directly.

Q Will weather effects be amplified, both visual and combat? More reduction in archery in rain/snow/cold. Fire missiles not available (or at least mostly non-useful) in rain. Reduced archer range/effect in fog/heavy fog? Winds?

Q Will naval invasions require proportional numbers of boats?

Q Will weather effects in the sea make naval invasions/maintaining ships at sea historically challenging?

Q Will port blockades be based more on level of the port--such as proportion level of boats to port level, etc?

Divinus Arma

06-24-2005, 20:48

Q: What's the deal with not being to kill wardogs/hounds after their handlers have been killed? Can that be fixed?

This is a feature, not a bug. If someone kills you, does your pet die?

Mikeus Caesar

06-24-2005, 20:56

Hurrah! Nice to see CA taking interest in us again! we may be the Unofficial Total War site, but you still care! Anyways:

Q. Will we finally be able to merge Admirals? It is rather annoying, when you can merge all sorts of things together on land, but if an Admiral has just one star and he commands just one ship, and you want to put him in another navy, it's rather annoying.

Q. Will there be fantasy units? I can accpet a few fantasy units, but the amount that were in RTW was ridiculous. And will factions be historically accurate? After all, we've all come to love Egypt for it's wonderful accuracy...

Q. Will there be less rebellions? After all, it is impossible to control a city once it reaches 30000+, which is a tad unrealistic, considering real-life Rome had 1,000,000+ and they didn't decide to start rebelling.

Q. On the subject of rebellions, will they be more realistic? After all, i don't think your wonderful army of Spartan Hoplites and Cretan Archers would be kicked out of a city by a bunch of peasants would they? They'd make a stand in the city center, with all the marauding peasants trying to kill them and sack the Government buildings.

Red Harvest

06-24-2005, 20:56

This is a feature, not a bug. If someone kills you, does your pet die?

Yes, but if the owner's dog is in my yard chasing my cat, I target the dog and make short work of it. In RTW I don't have that option. There is the rub.

Divinus Arma

06-24-2005, 20:59

Will CA do a TW on the imperial gunpowder era? Please. Colonisation. Please. World map. Please.

BobTheTerrible

06-24-2005, 22:12

[i]Again, I'll handle this one, this expansion pack isn't just adding a few things onto the vanilla campaign - it's changing the time period to the late Roman Empire. You can find more details about it here (http://www.totalwar.com/community/rtwbi.htm).

I know that BI is adding a completely new campaign, that's obviously the point. In VI for MTW, they added not only the entirely new campaign, but also added a few new units to the regular, full European campaign. I'm going to assume the expansion pack lets us choose to play either the new expansion campaign or the 'old' vanilla campaign, much like MTW let us choose either the old MTW or the new VI. So my question is, will there be any additions to the vanilla campaign for the expansion, ie new units etc?

Epistolary Richard

06-24-2005, 22:20

Okay, maybe there will be. Hopefully the Shogun will give us a definitive answer :wink:

sik1977

06-25-2005, 01:03

Yes, we've already got answers to some of these, I'll try and dig them out. If these are satisfactory or you want further clarification then please ask your question again.

BobTheTerrible, sik1977 & Uesugi Kenshin
Q: Will there be any additions to the vanilla campaign? i.e. Viking Invasion introduced new units etc, will there be anything of the sort for RTW?

1. Will any of the missing features from RTW, such as the Egyptian and Greek Walls (which are partially there in the data files), will be added back (or activated) in the original campaign?

2. (Related question) What improvements, if any, are planned for RTW main campaign, such as additional features and units, bug fixes (such as fixing the huge list of issues and bugs listed in the Ludus Magna Thread), which will act as an added insentive for buying BI (e.g. VI added the reinforcements to the original campaign as well and was the main reason, for me, to get VI)?

Q: Will BI allow mods to add more factions to vanilla RTW or just another campaign similar to what RTR did?

Again, I'll handle this one, this expansion pack isn't just adding a few things onto the vanilla campaign - it's changing the time period to the late Roman Empire. You can find more details about it here (http://www.totalwar.com/community/rtwbi.htm).

The Shogun _has_ however announced that there may be another patch for RTW in the works that may be released some time after the expansion pack.

Thanks for trying to answer our questions from already released info in the FAQ. Unfortunatley, I feel whats already stated in the FAQ doesn't quite answer the question regarding any direct improvements to the original campaign, and if any, what. We already know about the possible fix to save/load ofcourse, but apart from that my question stands.

In case you manage to find appropriate answers for our questions, I will remove those questions from my post (maybe replace them with others).

Thank you once again for your great efforts and time in trying to identify answers to our questions.

professorspatula

06-25-2005, 02:19

Q. Will AI factions have additional defined characteristics at the start of the campaign? Currently AI factions just have basic and not terribly helpful building prefences (caesar, smith for example). What about another trait such as: 'xenophobic', 'aggressive', etc that gives them actual predisposed diplomatic and expansion traits from the off.

Q. Are there are any additional attributes that can be affixed to buildings? Can they give more negative and positive bonuses, and how about certain buildings giving specific (ie not all) units different morale and cost bonuses/penalties?

Q. Will screenshots actually work properly with the game with AA switched on? Not a problem for some people, or those using another screengrabber, but annoying for newer players who are confused when all their screenshots are black.

Q. Can we expect diplomacy to be improved? I'd especially like to see alliances to be of more value, with the added option of asking your ally not just to attack the enemy - but to attack a specific settlement. You could then show up at the targeted city in advance and wait for your ally to join in the siege. All allies currently seem to do is stab you in the back and attack you at every opportunity.

Divinus Arma

06-25-2005, 02:19

Yes, but if the owner's dog is in my yard chasing my cat, I target the dog and make short work of it. In RTW I don't have that option. There is the rub.

I see your point.

professorspatula

06-25-2005, 02:36

On the subject of wardogs: how about improving their ability to kill routers? They're useless. They just jump up and miss spectacularly. I've had peasants flee half the map with dogs biting at their heels, but always missing. Plain silliness. They don't jump far enough forward when chasing to ever kill any but the most tired of routers. I've seen worms on the battlefield trip up more fleeing troops than those dogs.

KSEG

06-25-2005, 07:24

Q.Will there be any new siege equipments?
Q.Will it be possible to use ladders against a wooden wall?
Q.Will it be possible to command more then 20 units?

Colovion

06-25-2005, 08:20

Q: Is Sega changing the current patch policy?

screwtype

06-25-2005, 08:46

Are there any plans or possibilities for adding a 'Stats Sheet' or something similar which can keep a track of total losses inflicted and incurred during the length of a given campaign, as well as other interesting statistics, such as the most successful General, Most kills by a Unit, Kill-to-loss ratios, etc.?

I'd like to endorse this suggestion. It shouldn't be that hard to implement and I'm sure that a great many RTW fans would love to have a feature like this - preferably with your statistics versus each faction separately, including number of battles fought and kill-loss ratios against each faction, as well as a grand total against all factions.

player1

06-25-2005, 08:51

Q:
Why is this thread not sticked? ~D

screwtype

06-25-2005, 08:57

Are attacking AI infantry capable of launching a single coordinated attack, instead of feeding me units piecemeal?

IMO, this is the single biggest issue with regard to the game, because it is the main reason for the lack of challenge in battles, and therefore the lack of challenge and interest overall.

Please CA give us co-ordinated attacks, or at least make it so that the AI keeps its troops closer together rather than attacking with them piecemeal because it makes the AI pathetically easy to beat and so the campaigns far too easy to win.

Revelation

06-25-2005, 09:33

On the subject of wardogs: how about improving their ability to kill routers? They're useless. They just jump up and miss spectacularly.

Or, on the other hand, is there any plans to remove these sort of "fantasy" units all together?

Lord Zimoa of Flanders

06-25-2005, 10:38

Q Will there ever be a Napoleonic Total War game and if not, could The Lordz get a licence agreement on the RTW game engine and source code and make one for you? ~:)

LZoF ~;)

Little Legioner

06-25-2005, 11:11

Little Legioner
Q. Do you plan on having an option of making the battlefields bigger for campaign battles? Will there be an option for it? Big / huge or or your preferred term for usage?

I knew that same question asked before mate. I opened CA's answers to discussion to fans and result was impressive. Many of them have disappointed from this situation and they wrote their opposing opinions. I don't want to bore you but just read examples:

Quite true. The kill rates are ludicrous and I spend 80% of my time on the battle map hunting routers. They really oughta fix infantry run speed too.

TW games are all about the 3D battles. (for me anyways) But a typical battle in RTW goes something like this. Setup, click start, enemy right in front, 30 seconds later it's all over.

Well even the kids don't like tiny featureless battlemaps.
And battles where the load and setup time takes longer,(well almost)
than the actual battle.

The Shogun said, "The basic battle game won't change that much; this is an expansion, not a re-imagining of RTW. " I would say that BI's 80 new units is a "re-imaging" of RTW. What's needed is a "re-balancing" which apparently isn't going to be done.

CA said that the Total War tactical features were intentionally diminished in RTW to cater to the younger market of players who they felt wouldn't grasp them. CA sought and got a T (teen) rating for RTW rather than the M (mature) rating of the previous games.

I could understand it if STW and MTW were critical successes but commercial failures so you felt you had to make the game more "accessible" but thats not the case, I know they both went to the top of the charts in the UK when they were released. Obviously I don't have the sales figures to compare for STW, MTW and RTW, but STW and MTW proved that there is a market for realistic strategy games. I can only echo what dgb said about exploiting your niche in the market.

I'll make the point again that I did earlier: RTW is much easier to like once you realize it is NOT an in depth strategy game. I think the deep strategy elements were removed by design not accident. The vast majority of casual gamers will be satisfied with eye candy and funky units like Head Hurlers and Incendiary Pigs.

I understand the point that "there's millions of threads on this already" but some people just started playing the game last month, last week, yesterday and are pointing out what THEY see as flaws for the very first time.

Interesting how 90% of the players point the same issues out...

Sorry i don't want to push so much but fans gave too much attention about "battles&battlefields" problem. I've picked up directly or in directly comments. I think that battlefield questions should ask again to CA. They should have to re-think about them. Just look at the given attention from fans to "Bad news from CA about Battles" topic.

If you find it not enough i promise i don't speak or ask anymore if you find enough they have really deserve to ask or clarify again.

Regards, ~:grouphug:

Epistolary Richard

06-25-2005, 11:29

I doubt you'll get the answer you want, but there's no harm in asking the question again if you think you'll get more detail out of it :beam:

Little Legioner

06-25-2005, 11:34

I doubt you'll get the answer you want, but there's no harm in asking the question again if you think you'll get more detail out of it :beam:

Agreed and granted my master :bow:

Puzz3D

06-25-2005, 13:22

Some game features are too much work to change. Unfortunately, the players don't see the game until all the design decisions have been made. At that point, only things which are relatively easy to change are going to have a chance of being changed.

Just to give one example: over the 4 years prior to RTW, I don't recall a single player asking for faster movement speed or faster combat resolution. When the RTW demo was released, the running speeds were 50% faster than they were in the previous game engine and the combat speed was much faster as well. I wonder how that happened since no one in the player community was asking for a speedup. In addition, a unit's movement speeds are no longer controlable from the unit stat file as it was in the previous games. It's controlled by the animation skeleton, which is a lot of work to change. So, it was very important to make a good decision on gamespeed in the beginning because for practical purposes it's set in stone in RTW. Sorry but I don't see how it can be reasoned that faster movement + faster combat + more unts = better control. To me it's not logical unless somewhere along the way CA decided that control and coordination of the many units in the army wasn't very important to the gameplay.

Currently, there is no way for the players to provide input when it could make a difference on important design decisions. The feedback players gave during STW/MTW over the previous 4 years doesn't seem to have made much difference in RTW which might be because CA said they used two different design teams for each game engine.

Duke John

06-25-2005, 13:59

I wonder how that happened since no one in the player community was asking for a speedup. In addition, a unit's movement speeds are no longer controlable from the unit stat file as it was in the previous games. It's controlled by the animation skeleton, which is a lot of work to change.
Actually I would have been willing to fix that in one day if asked. Instead I only see people complainging about it. Now I have Sengoku Jidai to worry about, but I am sure that there is an animator somewhere who could reduce running speeds; it's a piece of cake.

player1

06-25-2005, 14:09

Or, on the other hand, is there any plans to remove these sort of "fantasy" units all together?

I guess this question will be answered with:
What fantasy units. I see no orcs and dragons, or any other fantasy creature in RTW.

To get the right answer you need a clear question, otherwise you get answer as that in FAQ about "infantry behaving like cavalry" question.

Proper question would have term "unhistoric" instead of "fantasy", and have several examples to catch the meaning.

IceTorque

06-25-2005, 14:12

Re: Running speeds.

Is it just me or do they seem to only move too quickly when either skirmishing or routing.

Red Harvest

06-25-2005, 19:30

Actually I would have been willing to fix that in one day if asked. Instead I only see people complainging about it. Now I have Sengoku Jidai to worry about, but I am sure that there is an animator somewhere who could reduce running speeds; it's a piece of cake.

I've thought the same as well. I've heard CA imply that it would be too difficult to change. I just don't see that. Instead, it looks like they didn't want to alter the animations, even for BI apparently. Admittedly, it will take some rebalancing of other effects to make things look right when zoomed in. It will also have some gameplay aspects. It is the sort of thing that should be done if the full context of combat kill rates and archery rebalance.

There is a terrain speed adjuster. And there is some other speed control going on which is tied to fatigue. Not sure how many levels of fatigue speed there are. I would go into my observations on this...but it has been a several months since I've even had RTW installed so it would likely be jumbled.

Skirmishers tend to use the fast skirmisher skeleton (seem to recall their being a "normal" and "fast" version of each skeleton.) Those are really quick. One of my bigger disappointment in movements speeds was having only two increments for cavalry and chariots.

The issue some have with routing is that usually your pursuing forces are fatigued while the routed forces might or not be fatigued (units that were on defense, and broke rapidly, won't be fatigued.) I don't see this as a problem. Footsore units won't be able to easily chase down men fleeing for their lives, that is in historical context.

The Hun

06-25-2005, 21:25

Q: Will there be units of each faction available as mercenaries. This was mixed up times with Romans using Huns to fight Huns and Goths in each army etc. I would hope to see mercenary units of any faction available to highest bidder

Puzz3D

06-25-2005, 21:26

Actually I would have been willing to fix that in one day if asked. Instead I only see people complainging about it. Now I have Sengoku Jidai to worry about, but I am sure that there is an animator somewhere who could reduce running speeds; it's a piece of cake.
I don't think CA will use anything produced by a non-employee. During the RTW v1.2 beta, I pointed them to the person who had generated all of the missing glowmap templates which make silvery metal reflective and CA apparently didn't have time to complete. There was no response from them.

Colovion

06-26-2005, 00:19

I don't think CA will use anything produced by a non-employee. During the RTW v1.2 beta, I pointed them to the person who had generated all of the missing glowmap templates which make silvery metal reflective and CA apparently didn't have time to complete. There was no response from them.

It would be nice if CA half-supported mods like that. Little additions which they would post a link to on their main site (which needs a revamping) and they would make clear that they don't support the mods to their game, and post a link to the thread the mod is attributed to. So much potential.

Viking

06-26-2005, 21:14

I know that BI is adding a completely new campaign, that's obviously the point.

Q: Will the campaign map have expanded since vanilla; for example, will my own home country Norway be on the map?

Jambo

06-28-2005, 12:03

Q: How will the AI be tweaked to improve its siege assaults? Currently, it's nigh impossible for the AI to take a stone-walled city.

Q: How has diplomacy been improved? For me it seems to work fine at the start of each campaign, but then quickly descends into a case of all AI against the human. This effectively means diplomacy becomes pointless... Maybe having a "how much would it cost to accept this..." (e.g. CivIII) button on the diplomacy screen so the human has an idea of what it will take to get an acceptance? Currently it's awfully deflating and time-consuming trying to get anything useful from diplomacy.

Q: Related to the above, will the AI actually use their Military Access on the campaign map to perform joint wars. Will the human and AI factions be able to attain military access more easily?

Q: Will more information and stats be included for the family members? For example, how they die, individual win/loss ratio, their achievements, all to help personalise them more. Likewise will there be more info/stats included for all factions - most successful general, most aggressive general, etc?

Q: Will there be a Hall of Fame, so scores and successes or failures of campaigns can be recorded?

Q: Will the AI use fords/bridges and choke points to defend their territory better?

Q: Will the current double-awarding of the battlefield VnV's from non-autoresolved battles be corrected in BI?

Q: Will the AI take better care of its family members?

Q: What improvements will the original campaign receive?

Q: On the battlefield, will the AI be better equipped with the following:
Keeping its phalanx units in formation?
Not charging its skirmishers and archers suicidally into hand to hand for no reason?
Waiting until its infantry have engaged before charging its cavalry?
Not suicidally charging its general in siege assaults when the gates are preopened?
Issues with ladders getting stuck in sieges being fixed?

Q: On the campaign map, will the AI be better equipped to organise its forces to conduct multiple-stack battles? Conducting all troop movement before entering the battle phases for instance. Lining up its troop stacks all around a city before assaulting/besieging and multiple stacks being able to beseige!

Regards

NihilisticCow

06-28-2005, 12:17

Q. Will the exploits that mar multiplayer gaming, e.g. cavalry spamming/stacking be dealt with? (a long with potential, though rare, ones like the phalanx push through exploit)

Q. Will/has multiplayer game balance been looked at? Both between factions, as some like Egypt and Rome are very powerful with no real weaknesses, where as others such as Gaul and Thrace are unplayably weak, and within factions, e.g. anti-cavalry infantry is not sufficiently effective versus heavy cavalry.

The Hun

06-28-2005, 17:52

Q: Will there be extra historical battles?

Q: Will there be realistic chance to fight battles with allies? For example it would be nice to fight coordinated battles with allies against a common enemy. Being able to summon support or offer it would add much to campaign enjoyment.

Uesugi Kenshin

06-28-2005, 21:08

Will players be able to "force" units to use their secondary weapons? As of now units don't always whip out their secondary weapons as quickly as I like, for example the Cataphracts who sometimes don't take them out at all.

IceTorque

06-28-2005, 21:23

Jambo

06-29-2005, 09:25

IceTorque, he may be talking about the AI. Think the AI never uses alternative attack.

When's the deadline for this thread? It seems to have stagnated a little...

J

Captain Fishpants

06-29-2005, 10:32

When's the deadline for this thread? It seems to have stagnated a little...

J

There isn't a deadline as such from our end. What we're hoping for is that a single person here will take it upon themselves to collect all the questions into one place, eliminate duplicates, and then we can get answers together for you all.

Nelson very kindly used his moderator status to sticky this thread, but we still need an editor!

Anyway, good questions so far and please keep them coming. ~:)

Epistolary Richard

06-29-2005, 11:21

Moderator Catiline has already kindly volunteered.

I'm notnoble, and by the end of the evening will not be upstanding with a bit of luck. I'll do my best to collate the questions however.

Uesugi Kenshin

06-29-2005, 21:02

Using alt+click doesn't actually really force them to use their other weapon. For example when my Cataphracts are in battle I want to be able to yell at them to whip out their handy maces right after the charge, but in large multi-unit skirmishes if too many of the men are far back in the line of units they won't. This often happens in cramped siege assaults.

C= Cataphract clump from forced group
E= Enemy troop clump
F= Friendly non-forced clump

CCCFFFFFFFFCCFFFCCFFFCCEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE

So as you may be able to see the cataphract unit is too spread out so the rear units (who are in charge range or closing to charge range, but held up by friendlies) stop the front soldiers from taking out their maces.

sunsmountain

06-29-2005, 23:29

KSEG

06-30-2005, 04:32

Will it be possible to assign more then 240 units per uniy?

Epistolary Richard

06-30-2005, 08:20

Question
In RTW the game crashes to desktop when a Rebel army disembarks from a ship, does the same thing occur in the expansion pack? I realise that the slave faction is not supposed to be playable, however I find it very interesting to play as it poses some unique challenges, can this issue also be addressed in the patch for the original RTW as well?

screwtype

07-01-2005, 09:43

Not many replies to this thread are there? I guess most of us have moved on from RTW by now. I had a lot of suggestions at one stage but it's so long since I played the game I just can't remember what I'd like to see changed.

Anyhow, here's one I thought of today. If you assault a city and lose the battle due to the timer running out I don't think the siege should be broken. The siege should only be broken if your army is actually routed off the map.

Also, it would be nice if you could decide whether or not to have the timer on at the start of *every* battle, because most of the time I'm happy to have the timer on but for some major assaults on cities I'd prefer to have it off. I don't want to fight a huge, long battle only to have to fight it all again because some lone spearman I missed pops back into the city square a few seconds before the timer runs down.

Which reminds me of a third suggestion. I think after you take the city square in a siege assault, enemy units should no longer rout to the city square, they should rout off the battlefield.

screwtype

07-01-2005, 10:22

Here's another suggestion I've made numerous times which I probably have little hope of seeing implemented but there's no harm trying I guess.

I'd really like to see a strategic movement option in the game. It's really silly that armies can only march about one province in a six month turn. Not only silly, but it slows down the action and makes the game more tedious.

My suggestion has been simply that an army should be able to move, say, six provinces per turn provided that army does not start in, or move into, a contested province at any time during its move (a contested province being one which contains an enemy army).

This would enable both you and the AI to move your armies around much quicker, but not so quickly as to alter to a great degree the game dynamics. For example it would take 3 to 5 turns to move out of an enemy contested province into another enemy controlled province - 1 or 2 turns to move out of the province, 1 turn to use strategic movement to move 6 provinces, and another 1 or 2 turns to march into another enemy controlled province. So you wouldn't be able to switch too quickly from one battlefront to another.

Also it would also encourage the use of reserves - armies held away from the borders which you could march relatively quickly to any point on your border - paralleling real life tactics. These are not original ideas BTW - they are well established wargame rules which emulate the difficulties in disengaging and re-engaging with the enemy. I think they'd work very well in a game like RTW, and also make much more likely the possibility of those large "decisive" battles which were a feature of the earlier games but which don't occur very often with RTW due to the much larger and more detailed campaign map. It makes sense with the new style map to facilitate the movement of armies in this way.

Secondly, I'd like to see a return to the system where sea units can move any distance on the map in a turn. Once again to add realistic limits to ground units utilizing sea movement, just make it so that a sea unit can't move any further in a turn once it has taken on board ground units in that turn. That means it will take at least two turns to move any ground unit by sea.

Sea units should be subject to a possibility of interception in any sea zone into which they move which contains enemy sea units, with surviving ships being returned to where they began the turn if they lose the battle.

Rules like this might also encourage players to defend their coastal zones with shipping.

Oh, and although the Shogun has already said there will be no stacking limits to ground units in ships, I'd encourage him to reconsider. It really is stupid that you can move gigantic armies on a single ship. I think each ship should be limited to carrying 2 ground units. These limitations should at least apply when you are mounting a seaborne invasion of an enemy province, if not at other times.

sapi

07-02-2005, 08:37

3. Are there any plans or possibilities for adding a 'Stats Sheet' or something similar which can keep a track of total losses inflicted and incurred during the length of a given campaign, as well as other interesting statistics, such as the most successful General, Most kills by a Unit, Kill-to-loss ratios, etc. (IMO, it is a must for a serious strategy game)?

[/begs]

Jambo

07-03-2005, 11:00

Hi Catiline,

Can we get these compiled now?

Cheers

Jambo

07-08-2005, 10:06

anyone?

player1

07-08-2005, 10:29

I second the request.
Question don't mean anything if not sent.

Catiline

07-08-2005, 11:04

I'll do it over the weekend

econ21

07-08-2005, 11:20

One question I'd like to see answered is what is the formula that generates kill probabilities in close combat from combatants' attack and defence stats. We were told in MTW, told that it has changed beyond all recognition in RTW but have never been told the new formula. It does not have to include only the modifiers, but just some basic information about what the stats imply would be interesting.

A second question is whether there is any chance of being given an excel file similar to the one provided with MTW that showed where unit stats came from (based on tables for armour, weapons, troop quality, fudge factors etc).

Any constructive response to these two questions would be useful for the Ludus Magna.

Catiline

07-08-2005, 11:25

Actually that was quicker then I thought. I've compiled a list and am about to send it to Captain Fishpants...

I'll keep you posted

Jambo

07-08-2005, 13:48

GReat, thanks for that Catiline. :D

The_Doctor

07-08-2005, 19:57

One very important question that has not been asked:

Can cavalry be dismounted before battles, especially seiges?

sunsmountain

07-10-2005, 03:17

@Martinus, dont worry, that one has been asked...

Lord Adherbal

07-20-2005, 17:18

hmm, got a question too:

in Multiplayer, will players be able to choose between playing the BI "era" or the original RTW era ? If yes, can modders add new/more "eras" ?

Duke John

07-20-2005, 21:04

Q: Will we be able to add a lingering smoke effect when firing a missile weapon?
We can add lingering smoke effects when the bullet hits the target, but the current code doesn't allow it when the bullet is shot. It would greatly enhance any mod with gunfire.

I will buy BI two times if you add it :grin:

gardibolt

08-03-2005, 18:28

Q: Will the patch and/or BI deal with the bug that prevents you from uninstalling and reinstalling 1.2 without mucking around and manually deleting things in the registry?

Mongoose

08-03-2005, 22:39

@Martinus, dont worry, that one has been asked...

The answer is "No" :bigcry:

sunsmountain

08-04-2005, 20:02

1. Will the glossy textures made by B_O_L_T and others be complete in BI?

http://www.twcenter.net/downloads/db/?mod=73

2. Will all units have sprites/models in order to have optimal performance?

3. Will the bugs pointed out by player1 be fixed?

4. Can you set the time during custom battles, if night battles are an option?

5. AI, AI, AI. No BI without better AI. Please? The individual units behave on their own instead of as a team. Archers fire too late, generals charge, phalanxes split up and select their individual targets breaking up the line; barbarians & heavy infantry behave relatively well, but rarely try to actively flank.

Ludens

08-05-2005, 14:01

I have a few questions about the patch-policy under Sega.

Q- What can we expect from the 1.3 patch for vanilla R:TW? Will it include the improvements made to AI and unit-balance in BI or will it only fix load- and charge issues?

Q- Will there be further patches for vanilla R:TW after BI?

Q- How many patches do you plan on releasing for BI?

sunsmountain

08-05-2005, 14:06

Will it be possible to assign more then 240 units per uniy?
The answer is no. Some design decisions have already been made, i believe a 300 soldiers/unit MAX, or even already at 240. More tends to crash Rome at startup.

edyzmedieval

08-05-2005, 14:07

I also have some questions.

Q - Does CA plan to help modders by helping them on their mods?!

Q - Why do you have to hardcode some parts of the game?!

Barbarossa82

08-05-2005, 14:30

Q - now that we have been told that BI will incorporate some patching to the original Imperial campaign, can we be told whether or not this will involve mending/improving the Marius Reform event to allow non-Roman factions to trigger their own general upgrades, rather than waiting for a Roman faction to fulfil the criteria?

Princeps

08-06-2005, 07:00

I wish a medium (30-35 cities) campaign for the old imperial campaign. The short campaign (15 cities) is too short and the long campaign (50 cities) is too long.

Refnulf von Holland

08-08-2005, 01:43

Hi guys, I have a few questions I hope that they have not been asked yet.

Q. Has the square beach effect that started poping up in the 1.2 patch been improved or fixed in BI expansion?

Q. There are some new features that appear in the Demo, the bubbles when a unit swims and a sparkle effect that appears on a unit when it levels up in valor. Will there be a option to disable these features?

Q. Will there ever be blood in a totalwar game, or a least the ability for the mods to add it fully.

Thanks guys

Shaun

08-13-2005, 01:32

Q- i heard that putting the right files in to the campaign folder adds a new campaign, can you tell me more please?

SomeNick

08-15-2005, 00:37

Haven't had time to read all the posts but here's my 2c worth. Q's and Critiques :)

Love the game btw :)

Q1. Will there be some sort of modification to the time it takes for units to reassume new orders? I lose way too much cavalry to phalanxes :(

Q2. The mouse speed in the game should have some sort of option to modify it in game menu. I've been playing RTW for 6 months with a very poor mouse speed :O I have a good pc but...

Q3. A map editor like in MTW ? That'd be fun :)

Q4. Some sort of option on multiplayer server to restrict the spamming of cavalry etc. Maybe an optional setting of a maximum for unit type and for allowing/disallowing seige weapons that could be viewed in the game server list. Bet a lot more would play then.

Q5. I saw on the official Total War site new units being offered for download. However there is only one and can't find any others released if any. Is there a link to these units? The spartan one looks very cool btw :)

Q6. Might sound a bit trivial but could there be some way of altering the colour scheme of the standard factions. Parthian pink is a bit jaded. heh. It would make the battles a lot more realistic looking too. I mean this as an option in the game. I know a mod could do it, but I'm just pointing it out as a purchaser of 2 games in Total War series, who has trouble with mods. (fantastic as they are)

Q7. I know there was a post on the shogun forum about flame affecting terrain costing to much pc resources but could it be added as an option in game menu? It'd be kinda cool seeing a forest alight with infantry getting trapped.

Q8. Could there be a custom faction option where u can create ur own army types from the ones available for fun.

That's it for now. Thanks for reading. Once again some may seem trivial but I haven't had the time to read the other posts so sorry for double posting etc.

I'll read the rest later and maybe post a few more q's, critiques and suggestions in 1 more post.

Brother Victor!

Epistolary Richard

08-17-2005, 15:55

Okay, this is from the last FAQ:

Q: The one faction I'm most excited about in the demo is supposed to be unplayable. I was so looking forward to fighting off the saxons and saving the native britains from thier enventual absorbtion by the saxons. Will the Romano-British be playable as easily as the unplayable factions in the RTW?

A: We did debate about making them a playable faction, but they could only be said to exist from around 410AD (when the Emperor Honorius sent them a "Dear Brits... don't bother me... yours sincerely..." letter when they asked for help). With a starting date of 363 for the campaign we would have been pushed to include them so early - and it would have weakened the Western Romans inappropriately. As the Romano-British are an emerging faction (controlled by code to emerge when a certain set of conditions has been met), its not simply a case of making them playable in the same way that you would a faction in RTW. In the not-too-distant future we plan to make a Romano-British save game available for download.

Question
This code of which you speak (the code that controls the emergence of the Romano-British and other emergent factions) will this be editable :medievalcheers: or will it be hard-coded ~:mecry: ?

Meneldil

08-17-2005, 16:03

Are the 21 new factions really new, or just edited vanilla faction ? If they are new, can they be added to a same campaign (that would have 42 factions ?)

player1

08-17-2005, 23:41

Q: There is a "feature" in RTW, which enables you to retrain experienced units without loss of average experince level of the men in the unit.

Was this intentional, since I remember in earlier games, that retraining of experienced units could result in loss of average experience level, due to watering unit down with fresh rectuits?
I think it was even mentioned in manual or somewhere.

Will this "feature" stay in BI, or will it be removed or even tweaked (like higher cost for retraining of experienced units)?

Camp Freddie

08-18-2005, 13:18

Just to add to Player1's question, "Have experience awards from battle been tweaked at all?"

Getting experience upgrades from battle seemed really unpredictable in Vanilla RTW. A unit that got several hundred kills could get no bonuses, while a unit that sat outside the city walls and hardly fought/didn't fight could somehow get an upgrade.
It was hardly a big problem, but experience awards could definately be improved.
To build up an experienced force, I ended up just retraining whichever random unit got an upgrade, rather than trying to keep battle hardened units alive.

Veresov

08-24-2005, 00:30

Hello,

(a) Will the load/save issue with RTW that many ppl have complained about be addressed differently?

(b) Will the battle AI be improved in the expansion?

(c) Will BI be more challenging than RTW?

Thank you so kindly,

Veresov

screwtype

08-25-2005, 14:08

Hello,
(a) Will the load/save issue with RTW that many ppl have complained about be addressed differently?
(b) Will the battle AI be improved in the expansion?
(c) Will BI be more challenging than RTW?

a - yes.
b- yes.
c - hope so!

screwtype

08-25-2005, 14:15

Just to add to Player1's question, "Have experience awards from battle been tweaked at all?" It was hardly a big problem, but experience awards could definately be improved.

I third the motion. Experience points seemed to be rewarded totally at random in RTW, which detracted quite a bit from the sense of enjoyment and achievement for me.

Also, as I documented in another thread some months ago, the cost of rebuilding units in RTW is all screwed up, with some units with the same experience/weapon/armour upgrade costing far more to rebuild than others of the same type. Has this been fixed?

Steppe Merc

08-25-2005, 17:41

I second Meneldil's question.

Steppe Merc

08-26-2005, 23:21

Will the new features (nomadic factions, night battles, whatever) be able to be incorprated in a mod using the original RTW campaign?

Steppe Merc

08-27-2005, 16:35

Will any new BI potraits be available for use in a mod using the original RTW campaign?

rebelscum

09-03-2005, 14:03

Willl the expansion fix current bugs, nerfs and stupid stuff in RTW? Or just give us more of the same.
~:)

TB666

09-03-2005, 14:07

Willl the expansion fix current bugs, nerfs and stupid stuff in RTW? Or just give us more of the same.
~:)
Yes it will, it has been answered many times before.
If it will add new bugs I guess we will have to wait and see.

Revolting Friendship

09-22-2005, 15:53

I must second a request for a definate anwser on the faction limit, since we haven't gotten one yet(to my knowledge), 20 or 21 factions doesn't cut it.

Lord Adherbal

09-22-2005, 15:58

I think "no hardcoded limits have been changed" pretty much covers that question.

player1

09-22-2005, 16:01

I haven't read it that way:

Q. will there be harcored limits as with R:TW?

A. Yes, Barbarian Invasion is an expansion, not a complete re-write of the game engine. As with any game engine there are intrinsic hard coded limits that have to be present for the game to function. However, I assume you are asking for reasons of modding. If so, some data that was originally embedded in the code have been pulled out in to data text files.

SigniferOne

09-22-2005, 16:09

Guys just wait until Tuesday, then we'll know everything.

edyzmedieval

09-24-2005, 08:24

Hopefully we'll find some more info.

Looks like it's promising, in terms of modding. ~:)

Revolting Friendship

09-25-2005, 02:12

You see Player1's quote is the reason I asked, because it's not definate, maybe you will be able to edit faction limit, given that it has indeed been pulled out, but I want a definate anwser.

Anyway, I think it should be something they would be more than happy to announce if it was so, thus I have my doubts.

SomeNick

10-20-2005, 03:56

Few more thoughts and questions from me, post 1.3 patch for RTW.

Also I agree with Steppe Merc above. Night battles would be very cool for RTW. :duel:

My problems with Cavalry...
I still have issues with grouped cavalry not following orders. I know impetuous charge may affect it and the units morale, fatigue etc but when I click a group to go to a point on the map they tend to run themselves into the nearest spears of phalanxes if nearby etc. Damn annoying. Even if a General is in the unit they seem lax at carrying out orders. I'm sure experience of the unit has something to do with it too. Also, Cavalry reform after initially engaging in melee and routers get away. That is really damn annoying in campaign play heh.
Anyway, I hope this issue can be addressed or maybe explained to me in full detail. I'm still not sure if it is game mechanics or a bug...

My thanks in advance for any help or resolution. ~:cheers:

Actually, could there be an indicator on a grouped unit so as to show if they are feeling a bit suicidal near pike/spears, i.e. 'they are gonna charge impetuously anyway!' >? Like a big red flashing siren near the unit or something. :)

It's hard to control an army if you give orders to one unit then move to another and the first isn't carrying out what you wanted.
This has cost me way too many battles.

~
1.3 patch is good, overall I reckon. Few issues though with red flashing banners etc... for me anyway.. Not sure if it is an indicator of a specialist unit carrying out their ability such as Berserkers etc but anyway, looks like a bug. Or am I wrong?

Also occasionaly with multiplayer, any host by the way, there seems to be a hang at start battle and no battle... And, if it's incompatable data , they got into the game at the lobby didn't they?

There is also install issues of 1.3 patch and a lot of 1.2 players aren't using the patch :(

Mainly being , I think, firstly the actual installation of it and having to rename the InstallShield file to InstallShieldOld in common files in order to install patch if there is an install problem (check out Hoggy's post in tech help), and many couldn't be bothered or don't know it seems... lol...
Also, they lose all their saves for campaign etc. I personally made a back up of RTW 1.2 'justincase'youknow... :O I invested heaps of time on my particular little campaigns afterall.
~

Could RTW incorporate an official mod switcher? It would make RTW a lot more enjoyable and give the modding community less headaches for sure. I'm aware of 2 currently developed by modders but an official in game mod switcher would be a lot more user friendly. Especially for tweaks and stuff.

~
Bridges> I believe it would be really fun and add to the startegical aspects of the game if bridges could be constructed/destroyed. Maybe with a limit on the number by available nearby forest/quarry of a province, also able to be upgraded to resist destruction/support very large units like war elephants crossing. I'm sure back then there where a heck of a lot of logistical problems/risks with large armies crossing not to great a bridge hehe. Armies being able to construct temporary bridges would be a lot of fun too. Maybe with risks of instability and possible troop loss if the construction of the bridge is done too hurredly or without an engineer ancillary for the general.

~
Special Effects> Setting the battle field aflame where there are woods would be heaps of fun, look amazing and add to the realism and tactical play. Especially if troops get trapped etc.

I did read a post at TW forums about it being a drain on pc system resources, however could it be included as an option in settings for RTW?

~
About Multi-Player > Could the online game system be modified to allow or disallow, and maybe a limit option as well; Artillery, Elephants, Specialist Units (Berserkers, Arcani etc) and a maximum limit on cavalry and chariots in host game set up?

I know this would take a bit of effort having learned a bit from these forums about modding etc but it would generate a lot more interest for online play I'm sure. I'd be online more for sure...

Don't know about the others but waiting around an hour sometimes to get a decent fair game, enjoying the humourous antics of those up way past their bed times in the chat lobby, (Why isn't ignore permanent on gamespy? btw..) , getting disconnected from gamespy if I alt tab due to sheer boredom, in order to do other things while waiting for numbers... tends to annoy me just a tad. There said it lol!

~

Last question/issue, there seems to be no modification to RTW with 1.3 patch to save campaign battle replays. I was really hoping for this to occur. It wouldn't be that difficult to implement it in the game I'm sure, as it's all there already. I hope that this is addressed soon as I really want to save some battle replays from campaign as they are spectacular battles on occasion and this function that should be there would bring me a lot more enjoyment from playing RTW. I really like this game and it was a big disappointment for me that this was not addressed.

If anyone knows of a mod to do this could they please point it out to me?

Anyway, that's my wish list I s'pose, thankyou for the patch and I hope numbers pick up online using it. In the meantime I just use RTW 1.2 if I log in and there is no one with 1.3.

Oh, and these thoughts and questions about RTW come from me as a run of the mill TW series collector. That's 'consumer' not 'gamer'. But I do read lots and lots of forums in an attempt to keep clued up about a game I lurvvv. And to avoid serious flaming :O lol!

Thanks to all the contributors to all RTW forums too, and the modders :)
Have a good one ~:cheers: