Best map!

[King of Atlantis]

Which map do you prefer. The risk style one from MTW and STW or the 3-d map from RTW?


I put this in here to get an impartial judges.

[King of Atlantis]

Can people please explain why they think RTW is better?

[edyzmedieval]

Although I am a MTW-addict,

I prefer the RTW style map. Much better made......

But the parchment type detail province thing it's the best(from MTW)

[King of Atlantis]

Although I am a MTW-addict,

I prefer the RTW style map. Much better made......

But the parchment type detail province thing it's the best(from MTW)

the rtw map is one of the biggest flaws of rtw. The ai armies wonder around not knowing where to go and all i end up with is siege battles. It is one of the reasons rtw got so dull.

[Marcellus]

The ai armies wonder around not knowing where to go and all i end up with is siege battles. It is one of the reasons rtw got so dull.

Isn't this more the fault of the AI rather than the map?

I prefer the RTW map. It's more detailed and colourful, plus each unit moves a fixed distance (even if it is too small), which is more realistic than it is in MTW, where a unit can move one province, which can be a very large or a very small distance.

[Uesugi Kenshin]

RTW. The map adds some flexibility to where and how you will attack a province and even though it has less atmosphere than the STW or MTW maps it is better for gameplay, though I wish we could play multiplayer campaigns as the AI can't really take advantage of the map as well as a human player.

[IliaDN]

MTW - just, because current level of AI in the game is not for RTW map ...

[Viking]

RTW.

I like ambushing :charge:+ more details etc. etc.

[King of Atlantis]

We have to look at it this way. Many people here have played 100's of hours of mtw, but get bored of rtw in a couple months. so what makes mtw so much more enjoyable.

AI-the ai is about the same in each game, but in rtw it has to deal with more than it can handel.

graphics-the graphics of rtw are much better

time period-i think both time periods are equally intesting.

units-rtw's units are much more diverse than mtw

map-RTW map is better, but AI cant handle it

That is they only thing that i can see that would make rtw worse.

[Silver Rusher]

RTW, definitely. On the whole I prefer MTW, but the map on RTW is much better. One of the main reasons is that it is much more open to using different strategies on the campaign map rather than just in the battle.

[King of Atlantis]

Okay people who like RTW map better, please explain what makes MTW better and more playable. In the end you will see it is almost soley the map.

[manbaps]

One thing that is bad about MTW map is that moving provences by sea takes the same amount of time no matter the distance which is quite unrealistic. Someone with a developed navy can move from norway to egypt in one turn.

[[DnC]]

RTW map by far. It offers far more indepth strategies. Sure the AI is less adept then a human player, but that in my opinion has nothing whatsoever to do with RTW's campaign map itself. Although STW and MTW campaign maps were fun and good in their own way, I prefer RTW more so. What I personally find lacking in RTW has nothing to do with the campaign map. If certain things are added and improved upon (like AI, more and better diplomacy options - being able to coordinate attacks on cities, being able to tell factions to piss off your land, call armies from further away then armies that are directly near the friendly and/or enemy armies [in the influence sphere] as long as enough movement points are left for the army being called upon - like the AI can do [hope this last one makes sense]), then the campaign map's great gameplay potential will be justified. I think (hope) BI will provide just that bit more to make RTW have more appeal. Just like VI made MTW better (never played MI).

[King of Atlantis]

The rtw map would be better if the AI could handel it, but it cant.

[Uesugi Kenshin]

Well as I said I prefer the RTW map, that doesn't mean that I think the AI handles it better. I was talking only about the map, if you asked which game I preferred I would say MTW because I have spent 100's of hours playing it and it is far better for replay value.

[King of Atlantis]

But, the thing is what makes MTW better than RTW. THE MAP! In every other aspect the games are pretty much the same with rtw having a few advancements.

RTW map- When my empire is big i have to spend ours getting my men across my empire. That is annoying. With ships in mtw i can get my troops acrosse europe in a year. And that is realistic.

[Uesugi Kenshin]

True, but that is not the map. That is the period of time that a turn represents.

The map is not all of what makes MTW better, MTW does not iirc have as many annoying bugs as RTW and the battle AI at least appears to be more competent, although that could just be my memory.

[King of Atlantis]

The AI in rtw just seems to have to muxh do do. If rtw was made with the mtw map i believ it would be a much more enjoyable game.

[Samurai Waki]

The whole problem with Map vs. AI in RTW is the fact that as mentioned before the AI can't handle it. Also, the style of map in RTW would be better suited for being played in Real Time rather than in Turns. This would make marching distances more realistic, and would keep the Player on his/her toes at all times. I think if a system like HoI2 were implemented in the game, it would more enjoyable in the long run. Of course I do very much enjoy the schematics and look of the RTW map more than the MTW/STW map. The reason why I picked the MTW/STW style map is because it is more suited for the engine, with turns its more like a board game rather than something realistic. of course, adjusting the speed a unit travels and how much time a year would take would be hard to adjust in proper.

[ShadesWolf]

MTW-STW

I like the look of it as compared to Rome.
Rome as a few nice touches like the Volcano etc, but a combination of the two would be nice, you could zoom down from the risk style into the Rome style would be my prefered option.

[Evil_Maniac From Mars]

I like the VI map, but not the vanilla MTW or STW maps.

[BrandywelBhoy]

No question! Rome map.
It just gives so many tactical opertunities

For example u cant choose what hill or Forest u want to fight in the Shogun or Medieval maps, or is there something i wasnt told all those years :nice:

[King of Atlantis]

If you actuall compare the componets of RTW and MTW, RTW sounds like a much better game. But, when actually playing the game MTW is much more enjoyable and it seems to me that a major cause of this has to be the map.

[edyzmedieval]

After analyzing,

I say that:

MTW is loads better on all chapters, except graphics.

Discussion ended.

[King of Atlantis]

I've come to the same conclusion, but it is hard to say something like that as fact. Some people like RTW better. It's really a matter of prefernece.

[Viking]

After analyzing,

I say that:

MTW is loads better on all chapters, except graphics.

Discussion ended.

I have to strongly disagree. MTW better than RTW? No way! MTW is way too shallow for me.

[Martok]

After analyzing,

I say that:

MTW is loads better on all chapters, except graphics.

Discussion ended.


I generally agree, although I have to admit I feel Rome is superior in at least a couple other ways. For one, I think Rome's music and soundtrack is generally better (Medieval's is good too, but Rome's is simply superb).

I also prefer Rome's combat system and interface over Medieval's. Overall, it's easier in Rome's battles to handle and maneuver the various units in your army. On the other hand, units in Rome move way too quickly across the battle maps, and the kill rates are ridiculous. Whereas battles in Medieval tend to drag on a bit, I've never fought a battle in Rome that lasted more than about 5 minutes. Somewhere in between the two games' combat systems, there's a happy medium.....

[King of Atlantis]

I For one, I think Rome's music and soundtrack is generally better (Medieval's is good too, but Rome's is simply superb).



I LOVE the music from VI. The drumming beat is just so motivating when im about to raid some English. ~:)

[Evil_Maniac From Mars]

High five, Atlantis!

[barocca]

i prefer the RTW map from a graphical point of view

but i prefer to PLAY on the MTW maps

the AI in RTW is not good at handling the map,

RTW - i send a unit to run to a point and it over-runs the mark and turns it's back on the enemy to get to where it was supposed to stop??
and i'm not talking about a few feet here, i'm talking about an entire tile over-run,
i've seen them turn their backs on the enemy a hairsbreadth from the enemy troops - naturally they get charged in the rear,
that is not good.

RTW - i line up my men the way i want em, then tell em to advance and they jumble up and get back into the positions they were in at the start of the battle,
now thats plain bad.

RTW - i tell a unit to flank, and one of it's men gets caught/swipes an enemy and the entire unit stops?
not clever.

RTW - i tell a missile unit to engage H2H and before it does it stops and goes through the missile animation (but does not fire)?
absolutely awful.

thats why i prefer to PLAY MTW.

the RTW map and game is unfair to the AI and uplayable as a consequence, despite liking the look of the RTW map, i voted MTW.

Whats the point of a very groovy map if I dont get to SEE it because i dont play campaign anymore?

B.

[Shadow]

RTW

Better graphics, you can pincer enemy, ambush, disaster shown on map etc ~;)

[Ludens]

Apart from the AI not being able to deal with it, there is another thing bad about the campaign map and that is the number of possible battlefield generated. Each and every land tile that is not a mountain, dense forest, river or swamp has to be a battlefield: there are thousands of possible battlefield and since they are all generated by the same algorithm they are all quite dull.

S:TW and M:TW on the other hand had "hand-made" battlefields with small hills and little forests you could use to hide troops in. Especially the S:TW battlemaps were very good in terms of placement of these features. On the other hand, R:TW battlemaps tend to be dominated by one big hill or one big forest and that's it. Tactically that is very dull, since there is only one feature you can use (and then the AI doesn't use it well either).

Though the 3D map is very beautiful, the 2D map wins for me if it means the battlefields will be more diverse.

[King of Atlantis]

RTW

Better graphics, you can pincer enemy, ambush, disaster shown on map etc ~;)


yes the rtw war map is very pretty, but as the total war bible says,

thou shall not live on eye candy alone

[Oaty]

@ barrocca


RTW - i tell a unit to flank, and one of it's men gets caught/swipes an enemy and the entire unit stops?

That's been in all TW games. so that is not RTW specific. Been a while but I believe STW was the worst about this occurrence.

Anyways on topic I prefer the RTW style map. Makes it more realistic as far as how an army moves. This is excluding timeline wich was made that way for gameplay purposes.

[swirly_the_toilet_fish]

Having only played RTW that was my decision. :sweatdrop:

However, the 3d landscape draws you into the world and gives you a feel of the terrain and the army movements seem to closely mimic real life movements.

I do think that the map should have been a bit larger, but those reasons are for mods and other topics.

[Strappy Horse]

Absolutely the RTW map for me.
It adds a whole strategic element that was lacking in MTW. I will admit that the AI does not make complete use of that in RTW, but nevertheless it has enhanced my gameplay.

I had a very enjoyable campaign with the Julii in Spain, maneuvering my armies around the map to make sure they ended up on the right spot, giving me the advantage of terrain in the following battle.

[edyzmedieval]

MTW map rulz.

No question, it does rule. And it's also very modifiable. Just look at BKB's new mod. He made a map of America, which demonstrates that the MTW mod is very modifiable.

[Geoffrey S]

I enjoy the way the RTW map gives so many more strategic options, it's a shame the AI isn't really geared up to making that kind of decisions. I loved the style of the old maps though, looking like a proper old fashioned map laid on some conquerer's table.

[Midnight]

It *should* be the RTW map, but right now it isn't. It looks better, and you have a hell of a lot more tactical freedom... but sadly the AI just cannot deal with it.

So the choice is a groovy-looking map on which I can do lots of things but have virtually no opponent, or a sightly-less-groovy looking one which limits my options but which is actually more challenging (and thus fun). Unless BI makes some *serious* AI improvements, it's got to be MTW's map, because of the AI.

[Martok]

It *should* be the RTW map, but right now it isn't. It looks better, and you have a hell of a lot more tactical freedom... but sadly the AI just cannot deal with it.

So the choice is a groovy-looking map on which I can do lots of things but have virtually no opponent, or a sightly-less-groovy looking one which limits my options but which is actually more challenging (and thus fun). Unless BI makes some *serious* AI improvements, it's got to be MTW's map, because of the AI.


Excellent way of putting it, Midnight. I couldn't have said it better myself. Rome's map would be better, *if* the AI could handle it.

[King of Atlantis]

man i cant believ rtw is winning. For people who played MTW first which game did you play more?

[Martok]

man i cant believ rtw is winning. For people who played MTW first which game did you play more?


KingofAtlantis, I play Medieval almost exclusively; I haven't touch Rome in months. Medieval is a far superior game to Rome in almost every way--except visually, and this includes the campaign map.

I am in no way saying that Rome is a better *game*, just that it looks better. Granted, its campaign map doesn't have the same old-school charm as Medieval and Shogun, but it does make for a more interactive and realistic gameworld--and frankly, it is more attractive. The main flaw in Rome's map (as you, me, and nearly everyone else has pointed out) is that the AI simply can't handle it. It's so easy for a human player to exploit Rome's campaign map for strategic advantage over the AI factions, that it's absolutely no challenge.

Everything you've been saying is true, except that you're supporting the wrong argument. The points you've been making support the argument that Medieval's AI and overall gameplay are better than Rome's. It's not that Medieval's map is better, it's just that Medieval's AI can handle the map much better than Rome's AI can handle *its* map.

[Csargo]

I've never even played the game but from what I saw of my friends map off his game it looked alot better than the MTW map. Not trying to diss the MTW thats the coolest game i've ever played but the RTW map is way better.

:bow: