How often do you use the Pause button?

[Aesculapius]

Are you (like me) a 'Chess Player'? That is to say, do you use the pause button all the time, to plan your next moves, put them into action, assess the enemy's response, and react in detail?

Or are you more of a 'Basketballer'? You play your battles 'live' much of the time, but take 'time-outs' whenever you need to catch up with the action, reassess and re-assign.

Or are you an 'Arcade-gamer'? Apart from perhaps a pause at the beginning of the battle to launch your attack, you consider the pause button to be vaguely 'cheating' and hardly ever use it - true 'Real-Time Strategy'.


Just wondering.......

[Zatoichi]

Well, I've voted 'Arcade', but there is a huge proviso - I play RTW with the unit movement speeds modded to be slower as I prefer to play without pausing. In MTW and STW, I very rarely used pause. I'm not trying to turn this into a 'too fast/too slow' rant thread by the way, just reporting the facts...

[Dutch_guy]

well in RTW I don't pause a lot but sometimes in a big battle when I think I'm losing control over my units I do press pause.
In MTW I use pause a little more than in RTW

overall I would say I'm the Basketball type.

:balloon2:

[Productivity]

I don't pause except for screenshots etc.

If things start getting out of control I'll chuck some reserves at an area, in an attempt to overwhelm the enemy there while I deal with other issues.

Apart from that, I usually play quick nimble armies (Pontus/Parthia), and the skirmish function isn't bad for keeping people out of trouble.

[Ciaran]

Basketball player, it would be for me. In Medieval I alwas hit pause the instant after I started the battle, to arrange my units, that´s a big improvement in Rome that you can set up your units even if you´re attacking.


I play RTW with the unit movement speeds modded to be slower
How do you do that?

[Taurus]

I voted Arcade Gamer because I really use the pause button. In fact the only times I use the pause button is for taking cool screens and getting something to eat.

~:cheers:

[Zatoichi]

How do you do that?

Hi - I use the Movement Rate Mod by Apollonius. I can't find his original post which has the downloadable file, as it was on TWCenter and seems to have been lost (it was done last September from what I remember, and they've reorganised a few times since then). Basically he edited the values in the "desc_battle_map_movement_modifiers.txt" file. This contains a list of terrain types and associated values which affect the movement rates of units over the corresponding terrain. By editing them all to lower numbers, he was able to reduce all unit movement speed across the board.

Unfortunately, I'm stuck at work and so don't have access to this file to let you know what values he used - I can post them later if you want (or pm you).

One thing, this mod doesn't affect the animation speeds, so you get the weird 'ice skating/loss of traction' effect when tired troops are running - but I can live with that! Also, it's a one size fits all solution - you cannot make some units faster or slower, this will alter the speed of all units.

Please make a backup of any text files you plan to alter! That way, if you don't like it, you can always back out the changes. Once again, thanks to Apollonius for this mod!

[PseRamesses]

Extensively! Since my units can´t "think" for themselves I´ve to pause for every counter-move I´ve to do. A bit frustrating but the results are satisfactory, he he!

[abortretryfail]

I use it every battle. Every soldier on the battlefield is using only one brain.

[bubbanator]

I hardly ever use it. It just dosen't feel right to pause a game just for the purpose of looking for a weakness in the enemy formation. I can see pausing to fix your own troops if they are being retarted because that is an AI problem. However, using it to gain a futher advantage over the AI just isn't right. I only use it if I simply can't afford to lose a battle or I cannot afford many casualties (like if I am planning to take over a large city with a small army and need all of the troops to keep the peace)

Other than that I don't really pause at all...unless I need to take a pee...

[Slug For A Butt]

I suppose I'm a basketball player.
I never use the pause to think about my next move or to analyse the enemy's movements, I see that as taking the adreneline pump (and realism) out of the game. But I do quite regularly use the pause while giving orders to my units just so I'm not overrun while I'm busy clicking. The mechanics of the game can make it quite hard for you to set a formation up just as you want it, so the pause comes in handy for that. But I definitely NEVER use it for thinking about my next move... that would be a little lame I think. Ok for the strategy map where realistically a ruler would have time to think over decisions, but a battle has to be fought as it happens.

[King of Atlantis]

I usaullly puse cause i just like to take in the battles

[Deus ret.]

In the meantime, I've become something between as basketballer and a chess player.

Until a week ago, I was a true basketballer, only interrupting when things became too difficult to overlook or if I had to issue too many orders at once (in large battles).

....well, when I tried the Darth mod, I became far more prone to press "p" once in a while since the AI now does its best to give you some hell on the battlefield.... in which it succeeds remarkably often btw.

[gardibolt]

I hardly ever use it; it feels like a cheat. The exception is when my mouse is misbehaving for whatever reason; if I can't get it to go to the right spot I will pause to coax the cursor over where it's supposed to be, but that seems fair enough to me.

[Troy Lawton]

I think the P button is just about worn out on my laptop ~:cheers:

[Colovion]

I used to use it every five seconds. Then I kinda got used to it, but still was basketballer. Then I stopped playing for a while. Then I started using Mods with the slower speed settings.

When I installed BI I was like "HOLY CRAP PAUSE PAUSE PAUSE OMGZ!)Krth0qw38rn:///dead"

[screwtype]

When I first bought Shogun I played for several months without even realizing there was a pause button. I still won most battles, but found it incredibly frustrating that I often couldn't scroll around the battlefield quickly enough to do what I wanted to do.

When I finally found the pause feature, I never looked back. Yep, I'm definitely a chess player, I hate to be in a hurry, and I like to carefully plan out my attack or defense and to beat the enemy with strategy.

[DS_Legionary]

I hardly ever have to pause my battles so I picked arcade, but in truth I'm more of a chess player. I set up my armies before the battle starts to be able to predict, and react to any AI movements quickly and efficiently. I think ahead at what the AI would most likely do, and prepare for that scenario. Sometimes they do something completely different, but I'm usually in a good enough position that I don't really have to pause to reposition or rethink my strategy.

[Puzz3D]

I play chess, but I've never used pause in a Total War battle.

[Nelson]

Since I never play in arcade mode, I did not vote in the poll.

Only a RL interruption will induce me to pause the game. Otherwise, like Puzz, I never pause in battle and haven’t from my earliest Shogun demo days.

I want to add that I in no way consider this habit of mine any indication of superior command prowess. I simply enjoy the stimulating effect of deciding in real time what to do and when and where to do it. Not pausing also compels me to make at least a crude plan before I begin the fight just as I imagine any commander would have needed to do.

[Aesculapius]

Since I never play in arcade mode, I did not vote in the poll.


That's not really what I meant, respected Admiral. 'Arcadegamer' has nothing to do with the arcade mode option for battles, but is simply the term I've coined for someone who plays their battles continuously live and hardly ever uses the pause button. But maybe you knew that.........

[Aesculapius]

Wow - I'm impressed by how even a spread the poll shows. I thought I'd be in the minority as a 'chess player'.

I'm interested to know how the 'arcadegamers' manage (apart from those who've modded down their movement speeds). I would find it impossible to manage a large battle between two strategically-balanced armies without taking huge unnecessary casualties. Managing flanking and enveloping manouevres on two or three battlefronts, timing your charges, bringing up support for wavering troops - how do you manage it all simultaneously?

1. Simply accept larger casualties than the 'chessplayers'?

2. Simply have faster reflexes and motor skills?

3. Use strategically simple armies?

I guess some troops take more management than others. Wardogs don't really need any input once they're let off the leash; and missile troops in skirmish mode will look after themselves as well as a human can; so I guess a bunch of massed cavalry could then be your principal focus of attention in real-time, and just do without infantry (or leave them to their own devices as cannon-fodder or 'speedbumps').

I figure in real life a general would have commanders in charge of different divisions, and would entrust them with a greater or lesser degree of autonomy according to his personality and their tactical abilities. So for example, a cavalry division that had made its way behind enemy lines might charge at its own discretion, rather than waiting for a signal from a general at the other end of the battlefield and possibly out of sight. In particular, generals who were often in the thick of the fighting, such as Alexander, would HAVE to rely on the initiative of sub-commanders.

And of course, while the AI might not think very well, its biggest advantage over a human thinker is that it can think fast - and it doesn't have to point and click to translate thought into action. So that's how I justify to myself the frequent use of the Pause button. But others may argue "Why not accept the slowness of manual command as a handicap to balance your greater intelligence compared to the AI?". Well, maybe when I get to be better at the game.....

[Humiliative]

Good Question Aesculapius

I used to be somewhere in between an Arcade and a Basketball player. I did use the pause button but only in dire organisational disasters.
Now Im almost pure arcade as I have started playing online where the 'mutual pause only' feature makes its success limited.
I guess I will have to admit that I probably just suffer the unnecessary casualties, however I do use very simple army formations/layouts:

The typical Archers in Front/Triarii closely behind/several 'rectangles' of infantry :duel: with seige at the rear and cavalry :charge: at the flanks.

It is however mentioning I am new to the TW franchise with only having had Rome for 3 weeks or so now but I love it and im learning lots by playing online.

[Joe_Nvidio828]

i will pause usually only when im about to get flanked and didnt realize it or something. i usually just pause whenever i think i need to, or i feel i will be benifited if i do.

[Colovion]

When I first played MTW I didn't know there was a Pause button. I was really happy to find out you could use it during a battle... but I was also kind of bummed that I had found out about it because it's so tempting. At first I thought of it like:

"the computer is constantly pausing and readjusting their units all at the same time so why can't I?

So that worked well in MTW, lost a lot less battles, but still lost a decent amount. In RTW it's no fun with the Pause button. Undefeated with the Pause is disgusting and lame. Lots of wins and lots of close calls is more exciting.

[jerby]

all the time, since my cav share 1 brain for 4 units..
especially with rtr 6.0 ..damn things go fast.
gaugamela took half a day..rtr takes 3 minutes..it's all a bit extreme

[Ciaran]

I figure in real life a general would have commanders in charge of different divisions, and would entrust them with a greater or lesser degree of autonomy according to his personality and their tactical abilities. So for example, a cavalry division that had made its way behind enemy lines might charge at its own discretion, rather than waiting for a signal from a general at the other end of the battlefield and possibly out of sight. In particular, generals who were often in the thick of the fighting, such as Alexander, would HAVE to rely on the iniative of sub-commanders.

Well, you can do that, you can hand over a group to be AI- controlled. I´ve never done that, though, so I´m not sure how well the AI manages. It handles the reinforcements not too bad, according to my experience, but I don´t like to trust the AI if I´ve got a choice.

[RabidGibbon]

I used to use pause all the time when I was playing Mediveal, and that habit carried onto R:TW. Then i got broadband and spent several months just playing MP.

When I went back to SP I find I don't need to use pause, as I generally know what I'm going to do in a given situation and besides, I never remember its there.

[bubbanator]

Wow - I'm impressed by how even a spread the poll shows. I thought I'd be in the minority as a 'chess player'.

I'm interested to know how the 'arcadegamers' manage (apart from those who've modded down their movement speeds). I would find it impossible to manage a large battle between two strategically-balanced armies without taking huge unnecessary casualties. Managing flanking and enveloping manouevres on two or three battlefronts, timing your charges, bringing up support for wavering troops - how do you manage it all simultaneously?

1. Simply accept larger casualties than the 'chessplayers'?

2. Simply have faster reflexes and motor skills?

3. Use strategically simple armies?



Actually, I don't do any of those (except maybe for the simper armies). You simply need to set up a plan of action. One that is simple, but effective. One that has the small chance of failing, but can be mannaged easily and without having to waste more time than needed. RTW isn't a game that is so complex that you have to pause every few seconds to keep your battleplan in order. I usualy have spies or diplomats to get a picture of what the enemy has before I fight them. You set up a plan of action, then stick to it unless the enemy does something entirely different than expected. That is the moment where you could pause to look at your options, or make a split-second decision that will make or break the battle. It is not that I am just bent on realism or that I have super fast reflexes, and it is deffinitly not that I accept larger casualties than someone who pauses often. I simply enjoy the game more when I am forced to make decisions quickly. And if you have a sound stratagy, you have the ability to make rapid changes in your plan without wasting the lives of your men.

I just set up differently depending on what troops I have at my disposal. If I have nearly all infantry, I will set up with my weak troops in the center with some reserves behind them, and heavy troops on the flanks with some fast infantry, or what cavalry I have off to the side to run to the rear and cut them off.

If I have a decent ammount of cavalry (4-6 units) I will just set up my infantry line and have my cavalry on the flanks. My cavalry runs around to the rear and charges into the center of the enemy line while they are engaged with my infantry. The whole time, my archers have been firing on the center of the enemy line so that they are already very weak when my cavalry hits them.

My point is, RTW is a game where you don't need to 'call timeouts' though you can and in some situations they help. However, RTW is not an incredibly complicated game. You don't need to advance in echilon and have your cavalry charge through the gap in the line simply because you don't have to. You are rarely outnumbered by so much that you are forced into an overly complex, all-or-nothing plan. You must be able to control your enemy no matter what they do. You must adapt and react.

Everything revolves around how you plan your stratagy.

[hoom]

I used to be a 'chess player' with STW & MTW but not RTW.
It doesn't help at all that the pause button is bugged.
With RTR the battles are slow enough to do most stuff live.

Basically I only pause RTW when a supposedly simple move or sequence somehow gets munged by the game & eg my entire army decides to about face just as the enemy charges or my gateway blocking phalanx up spears & runs headlong out the gate.

I guess also because phalanxes take a long time to reform after a move I often take the army movement step by step where in the previous games my army movement would often be one smooth advancing movement if the pauses were removed.

Also large selections of units told to move stay in formation much better in RTW, requiring less micromanagement. Lots of my previous pauses were setting up the formation at the new location.

[gardibolt]

Aesculapius, I don't use pause (except in case of mouse trouble, as I said above), but I'm not a particularly fast player---I'm an old guy. I'm pretty much in Bubbanator's boat. In addition, I do use grouping a lot to move multiple units and keep things organized, and tend to put everyone who can fire at will on FAW. That usually buys me time to get back to a situation that's developing. And I've taken to shutting off skirmish for just about everyone because in the chaos it led to losing track of units who got forced to the edge and routed.

But yes, when I started I experienced enormous casualties and many defeats. That has progressively gotten better, but in a pitched battle of any size I'll still lose 100-150 troops though I do win consistently now. Real generals don't have a pause button so I don't see why I should. You don't have infinite time to contemplate on the battlefield once things begin. :duel:

[Viking]

I use the pause button occasionally, when I want to issue alot of orders at once or when I want to have a look at what`s going on, on different places on the battlefield.

So it`s 'Basketballer' for me.

[TB666]

I don't think I ever used the pause button in battles.
I like it when it get chaotic, feels more realistic.

[Jammin]

I'm a little of all three but am now an arcade player.
I started out as a chess player, to learn units and formation strengths and such and to react with detail and learn the strength and weaknesses of units.
That and to look at the cool skins...
But once that lost its touch and I started to learn the units I became more of a basketball player where I'd pause in order to rally and organize parts of a battle that got out of control.

But after playing Multiplayer, pausing just seems so wrong.....so I hardly ever pause, unless I'm in a seige battle, which makes it necessary to pause with all the path finding issues and such.

I voted Arcade, FYI.

[jerby]

'real generals didnt have pause buttons"

true, but real units weren't ass half-arsed as RTW's . i pause almost constantly because it's moving to damn fast. i dont need time to lay out my moves, i need time to see wth is happening.
example: in the historical battle of Trebia. your supposedto wait until teh first line buckels to sent in the Cav. in RTW, this absolutly impossibel with out. Pause a: bukling? no...puase b: cav lined up yes pause c: line buckeling almost... pause d:elephants in place. pause e: ah yes, strike strike strike!!!

without pause:
clicking like hell with a camera thats doenst move fast enough, ligning up cav, ellies, switching skirmisher from skirmish mode. checking cav, get back to see the line buckeled...sweating liek a pigg over a battle that historically lasted half a day, but took 2 minutes

[LordKhaine]

I find myself pausing less in RTW generally, with the exception of phalanx based armies. In MTW/STW I would often fiddle around trying to get formations perfect and it's not so important to do it in RTW. Unless it's a phalanx army... in which case I'm hitting that pause button like you wouldn't believe ;)

[screwtype]

Real generals don't have a pause button so I don't see why I should.

I think that's a very false analogy, which a lot of people seem to fall for.

In a game like RTW, as often as not you have mere seconds to make a decision before the battle is over one way or another. Real ancient battles typically lasted many hours, sometimes all day. It's just wrong to imagine you are having a more authentic experience by avoiding the use of the pause button.

Also in a real battle there are many brains at work. Unit commanders generally know what to do and will do something sensible. In a game like RTW your brain is the only brain your army has, it's pretty silly for example if you end up losing a battle because you failed to switch a unit back into phalanx mode before it was charged or something.

Apart from that, there is the appalling unreliability of the interface in RTW, where grouped commands are hopelessly bugged, and where units frequently ignore orders completely or go places or do things you didn't order or intend them to do. For me, the pause button is mainly a tool to avoid the frustration of struggling with a clumsy interface when I want to concentrate solely on my tactics. I don't want to lose battles because I couldn't manage to click on the right unit in a bunch, or because I didn't double click quite fast enough to make the unit run, or because the camera scrolled too slowly from one flank to another.

[screwtype]

without pause:
clicking like hell with a camera thats doenst move fast enough, ligning up cav, ellies, switching skirmisher from skirmish mode. checking cav, get back to see the line buckeled...sweating liek a pigg over a battle that historically lasted half a day, but took 2 minutes

Yup. That's exactly how I feel about it!

[ToranagaSama]

Are you (like me) a 'Chess Player'? That is to say, do you use the pause button all the time, to plan your next moves, put them into action, assess the enemy's response, and react in detail?

Or are you more of a 'Basketballer'? You play your battles 'live' much of the time, but take 'time-outs' whenever you need to catch up with the action, reassess and re-assign.

Or are you an 'Arcade-gamer'? Apart from perhaps a pause at the beginning of the battle to launch your attack, you consider the pause button to be vaguely 'cheating' and hardly ever use it - true 'Real-Time Strategy'.


Just wondering.......

I have NEVER used the Pause button, except to go to the bathroom, answer the phone, and the like.

Pausing is a Cheesy tactic, to which the AI is not capable. End Story.

A human player has such a HUGE inherent advantage versus the AI, the notion of pausing is simply a case of *piling-it-on*!

There's nothing "Arcarde" about NOT pausing.

What I've always found amusing, in the pre-RTW days, were the players who might state or complain that the AI, the game, or whatever is too easy.... All the while they're just pausing away.... Seems sorta oxymoronic...

Similarly, for example, how could RTW's AI be so *unchallenging* IF you have to use the Pause button? It's OXYMORONIC!!! Though, given the present state of RTW's battle *speed* settings, one could be forgiven. (No one s/b required to smoke crack in order to keep up with an unbalanced and poorly designed (battle) game.)

I've also found those so focused upon the *historical* to, also, play in a contrarian state. I mean what's *historical* about pausing?

I mean, really, did Ceasar, Alexander, Patton, Gregarian, hit the Pause Button when things got tough?

*OMG! I'm about to be flanked. PAUSE. Click; Click; Click; Click. UN-PAUSE. Crisis OVER. The AI is in deep dodo. I win.

Pausing is for Wimps!

Of course, some may have physical impairments that compell them to use Pause; but, that's not what you're talking about is it?

One day Campaign Multiplay will, finally, be a reality, when it is, Pausing will be exposed for what it is. There will be no Pausing when playing a real human being!


I used to use pause all the time when I was playing Mediveal, and that habit carried onto R:TW. Then i got broadband and spent several months just playing MP.

When I went back to SP I find I don't need to use pause, as I generally know what I'm going to do in a given situation and besides, I never remember its there. [Emphasis Added.]
A warrior speaks! Nuff said.


Experience will provide a Contingency for every situation. Think fast, Hold your Nerve, and Execute.
~ToranagaSama

[M.T.Cicero]

I'm a 100% Chess player, I pause for all sorts of reasons. Usualy to give simple orders to each and every unit on the field leaving them with minumum chances to screw things up in the fashion only AI is capable of. Sometimes for much less tactical reasons such as simply to admire the beautiful bloodshed and utter havoc on the field without hurrying around yelling with my cursor at the brainless morons doing all but the most logical thing. And I feel no guilt for that. And Toranaga, sry, nothing personal, I'll just quote you line by line since you made such a nice list of things I want to mension. ~D ~:cool: ~D



Pausing is a Cheesy tactic, to which the AI is not capable. End Story.

AI is capable of giving an infinite amount of commands in a milisecond.



A human player has such a HUGE inherent advantage versus the AI, the notion of pausing is simply a case of *piling-it-on*!What

I've always found amusing, in the pre-RTW days, were the players who might state or complain that the AI, the game, or whatever is too easy.... All the while they're just pausing away.... Seems sorta oxymoronic...

Similarly, for example, how could RTW's AI be so *unchallenging* IF you have to use the Pause button? It's OXYMORONIC!!! Though, given the present state of RTW's battle *speed* settings, one could be forgiven. (No one s/b required to smoke crack in order to keep up with an unbalanced and poorly designed (battle) game.)

It's not my fault that AI is totally moronic and can't put up a decent fight. It's CA's fault. It's enough that I give the AI hundreds of thousands denarii during the campaign so it actually raises something better than Easterner Infantry and Principes for me to fight. Now you're telling me that I should help it in the fights to. Maybe it would be best to just let my army stand still the whole battle so maybe once in a while the comp will win. Nobody HAS TO use pause to win, but if you can why not then when it helps?



There's nothing "Arcarde" about NOT pausing.

Arcade means that you take more interest in the action part than the tactical part so yeah I suppose you're right. The only kinda arcade element of no pausing is that things are faster and more dynamic but that is also in a way more realistic (aside the fact that gamespeed sux).



I've also found those so focused upon the *historical* to, also, play in a contrarian state. I mean what's *historical* about pausing?

I mean, really, did Ceasar, Alexander, Patton, Gregarian, hit the Pause Button when things got tough?.

No, they took a nice 5, 10, 15 miuntes or half an hour to think about the situation and then did the right thing. Without pause I have half a second to make the move, I mean what's *historical* about that? ~D Of course. some decisions have to be made fast but pause won't save you from those anyway.



*OMG! I'm about to be flanked. PAUSE. Click; Click; Click; Click. UN-PAUSE. Crisis OVER. The AI is in deep dodo. I win.

In reality the "OMG! I'm about to be flanked." part goes through the brain of those men on the field who are about to be flanked and they do something about it on their own, they don't sit nice, still and tight waiting to be slaughtered, if they are not given a direct order from the head general himself.



One day Campaign Multiplay will, finally, be a reality, when it is, Pausing will be exposed for what it is. There will be no Pausing when playing a real human being!

Sure, in MP all of the above is nill, the 2 players are completely equal, both are limited by the speed of their fingers and their brains and they both have equaly stupid soldiers under command so there is really no need for pause.

[M.T.Cicero]

OK, this is stupid ~:eek: :dizzy2: , but how the heck do I vote on the poll?????? Or I can't as a junior? ~:confused:

[Colovion]

It's not my fault that AI is totally moronic and can't put up a decent fight. It's CA's fault. ... Now you're telling me that I should help it in the fights to. Maybe it would be best to just let my army stand still the whole battle so maybe once in a while the comp will win. Nobody HAS TO use pause to win, but if you can why not then when it helps?


I've never lost a battle in RTW which I used the Pause button in - so I try to use it as little as possible. To me winning all the time isn't fun, it's boring.

Please, go on and explain how that can be fun.

[Shaun]

well in vannila, i used the pause button alot! because the battles were way too fast. in RTR 6.0 i harly ever use it.

[M.T.Cicero]

I've never lost a battle in RTW which I used the Pause button in - so I try to use it as little as possible. To me winning all the time isn't fun, it's boring.

Please, go on and explain how that can be fun.


To me it's no fun if I know I could have won and I didn't just out of the pity for ai. I just seak other ways to make it more chalenging, like giving tones of money to AI and right now I'm doing a small mod for campaign in which I plan to give the comp all the starting advantages possible.

[Gustav II Adolf]

I use the pause button frequently. I like it when i manage to hit my foe with precision and timing :smash: . Even if the ai is´nt the most able general i always enjoy a perfect victory.

[Ludens]

OK, this is stupid ~:eek: :dizzy2: , but how the heck do I vote on the poll?????? Or I can't as a junior? ~:confused:
Junior members cannot vote for some reason. I guess it is to prevent poll-spamming. Newcomers have a tendency to start polls on subjects that have already been beaten to death in the past (best archer, best cavalry, best faction, and so on).

As for myself, I use the pause key very often for all sorts of reasons. I have tried to use it less, but when I have to give precise orders in a short time it is faster to hit P than to go through the sequence of orders. After all, ancient general could give instructions to their troops before the fight started. I cannot. The game is so fast that I need the extra time that pause gives to accomplish this.

I do admire those who manage to go without.

[zukenft]

instead of "pause" we should have a "slow-mo" button.
I rarely use pause. In fact i rarely used the keyboard in battles. mostly what i press is shift, alt, or ctrl.

[Zenicetus]

I use the pause button because I bought this game to see big armies fighting at least somewhat realistically for the period. Ignoring what the enemy AI does, my own army doesn't use realistic tactics without a fair amount of micromanagement, because the units lack enough initiative and intelligence.

Caesar could have told a cavalry unit to hide in the trees, and wait to charge until the exact moment when the enemy infantry was pinned against the main battle line. My cav unit won't do this... it just sits there. Caesar and Alexander would never have accomplished what they did, with units that require this much micro-management to behave realistically.

And then there's the somewhat clunky camera interface, and the rapid pace of battles. I don't enjoy the mad click-fest required to see a semi-realistic battle played out on the screen without pausing. For me, pausing results in a more historical looking game, and isn't less realistic at all.

It's certainly not "cheating against the AI" either, because the AI can perform, within it's programming limitations, much faster than I can direct my own troops. The proof of that is how fast it deploys troops in a seige defense. I click the start battle button, and the enemy troops appear instantly in their defensive positions. It would take me 5 minutes to get my own troops set up like that, because I'm not just reading unit names off a table and instantly teleporting them to a map coordinate grid. The mechanism I have for selecting a unit and telling it to do something, is much clumsier and more time-consuming than what the AI uses. So if anything, occasional pausing is a balance against the way the AI "cheats" by having a faster way to select and move units. And yes, the AI isn't hard to beat, but I can find other ways to make the battles more challenging, like always fighting with smaller armies than the enemy is using.

[Colovion]

To me it's no fun if I know I could have won and I didn't just out of the pity for ai. I just seak other ways to make it more chalenging, like giving tones of money to AI and right now I'm doing a small mod for campaign in which I plan to give the comp all the starting advantages possible.

It's not pitying the AI to disallow oneself a handicap. It's an option which is enjoyable to some, but much to easy for others. RTW made me start using it a lot more due to faster kill speeds, maybe one of the abrasive qualities of the title to people averse to the P button.

[M.T.Cicero]

Junior members cannot vote for some reason. I guess it is to prevent poll-spamming. Newcomers have a tendency to start polls on subjects that have already been beaten to death in the past (best archer, best cavalry, best faction, and so on).

Thnx, I was already frustrated by closely observing every button and could-be-button on the page. At the top it says "View results of the poll" or sth like that, but it's not a link and under that there's number of voters :dizzy2: I figured that's where the poll should be so I went through all the user cps and stuff, found nothing and was afraid of getting an answer like "It's right up there, u silly blind n00b" ~D

[ToranagaSama]

I use the pause button frequently. I like it when i manage to hit my foe with precision and timing :smash: . Even if the ai is´nt the most able general i always enjoy a perfect victory. :wall:

[Orda Khan]

One could put forward many arguements as to historically reacting to a given situation over the course of minutes or even longer but the fact that pausing allows time to stand still and that is supposed real time which is very definitely NOT real time, tells me that pausing is giving me an unsurmountable advantage over ANY AI army. In reality I, as commander would have officers under me who would make their own judgements. How real can this game actually be? It was and still is an absolute revelation. No game has even interested me apart from the Total War series and if I lose a battle through not pausing I consider that to be a reality that sometimes rocks me enough to think harder next time. Besides, revenge is sweet

.......Orda

[ToranagaSama]

Thank you for the response.


AI is capable of giving an infinite amount of commands in a milisecond.

So is the human brain.


It's not my fault that AI is totally moronic and can't put up a decent fight. It's CA's fault. It's enough that I give the AI hundreds of thousands denarii during the campaign so it actually raises something better than Easterner Infantry and Principes for me to fight. Now you're telling me that I should help it in the fights to. Maybe it would be best to just let my army stand still the whole battle so maybe once in a while the comp will win. Nobody HAS TO use pause to win, but if you can why not then when it helps?

You're being contradictory.

Just as I originally said. On the one hand the implication is that the AI is "moronic", meaning dumber than you (or any human); and, that you need to handicap the game. THEN, summarily, you state, that no one *needs* it to win.

The OBVIOUS question, then, is why do it?

The AI is moronic, you can win without it, then WHY?


The only kinda arcade element of no pausing is that things are faster and more dynamic but that is also in a way more realistic (aside the fact that gamespeed sux).

My point PRECISELY!!!

In general, the entire Forum makes such an emphasis upon the Historic and Realism; but, all of sudden, Pausing, which is ahistorical and unrealistic, is fine and dandy.

Hey, one wants to pause, great. Enjoy. Everyone should enjoy the game however they wish, just accept the fact that its not realistic and ahistorical.


No, they took a nice 5, 10, 15 miuntes or half an hour to think about the situation and then did the right thing. Without pause I have half a second to make the move, I mean what's *historical* about that? Of course. some decisions have to be made fast but pause won't save you from those anyway.

Perhaps my examples weren't good ones(?).

When you're on the Campaign Map, this is where you have the time to think and make *Strategic* decisions. Here you are NOT in the *field*.

When you're on Battle Map, you are in the place of a Battlefield Commander. You are on the field and commanding the battle. At the opening, sure, a Commander has time to asses the circumstance and make a plan.

After the opening, its all about **INSTANT** decision making.

YES, you are correct in that Command may take "5, 10 15 minutes". Yet, this does not come close to Pausing. The stark reality is that while Commanders take that time----MEN ARE DYING!

Time does not stop.

If they make the *right* decisions---the simple fact is that men will still die, just fewer of them.

Such, is Victory.

This is historical, this is reality, this is how the game *should* be played. You might find it interesting to view the movie "We Were Soldiers" (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0277434/), which is a good interpretation of Field Generalship and Tactical fighting, as well as its relationship to *Desktop Generalship* or, more precisely the Tactical Strategists who are always in the rear.

The generals that I had mentioned were, in reality, a combination of both the Field Commander and the Tactical Strategist, which is why they were great. In the American Army, Field Commanders most often hold the rank of, Major, Colonel and Brigadier (1 Star) General.

When playing Total War, on the Campaign/Strategy Map, your equivalent *rank* is above a Brigadier General.

When on the Battle Map, your equivalent rank is either Brigadier General or below.

If you're not American you can use this page to equate the rankings to your national army: Nationmaster (http://www.nationmaster.com/encyclopedia/U.S.-Army-officer-rank-insignia)

Total War is designed to accomplish one thing, marry, in a game form, the Strategic and the Tactical. Prior to Total War, there were Strategy games (TBS) and Tactical games (RTS).

A player spends all that time, planning, plotting and scheming on the Strategic stage, when you get down to the Tactical battles----that's where everything is on the line.

It's an opportunity to try and get into the shoes of the great field generals, the tacticians. To experience, as much as you can in a game form, the pressure to perform!!! Think fast, Formualte, Execute, all in a split second---that's what its all about.

Win or lose, it'll be the result of your abilities. The next battle you'll be better for the experience, and better still the battle after that, and so on, and so on.... Until the notion of pausing is completely unnecessary. You can't reach that point if you start and continue to pause----and, YES, this means you are going to get you're butt whupped a few times. Just part of the experience.

Granted---RTW battles are so whacked, what does it matter?

Though, if you have hopes of playing Multiplay, Pausing won't help.


In reality the "OMG! I'm about to be flanked." part goes through the brain of those men on the field who are about to be flanked and they do something about it on their own, they don't sit nice, still and tight waiting to be slaughtered, if they are not given a direct order from the head general himself.

You must be playing a different game. Certainly, it can't be ROME: Total War. What was the KEY factor in (overall) Roman battle success, or, if you will initial success (say the first 500 years!)??

Discipline, as in Decimation (http://www.livius.org/de-dh/decimation/decimation.html), the sole purpose of which was to ENSURE precisely the actions of the men do NOT adhere to what their brains are telling them; BUT, to do EXACTLY that----*wait* until " they are given a direct order from the [commander] himself."

Organization and Discipline, these are the keystones of Roman success.

THIS is why they were successful. When others would turn and flee, ROMANS would Stand, Fight and Die.

This is how they were able to conquer the other civilizations (city-states). Roman Organization and Discipline (on the battlefield) began to be less successful against *some* Barbarians, not because Barbarians equaled them in Organization and Discipline, but as a result of their Barbaric traditions which caused them to fight in a *Fearless* manner which, often times, would equate to Roman Discipline.

Some Barbarians would be more Organized than others. When they were both Fearless and (battlefield) Organized, then *often* they were a match for the Romans.

So, you see Pausing cannot be justified on this ground. Not in terms of RTW nor STW (Samurai were the most disciplined of fighting men). MTW may very well be another story---a period in which the lessons from the Romans were lost.


Sure, in MP all of the above is nill, the 2 players are completely equal, both are limited by the speed of their fingers and their brains and they both have equaly stupid soldiers under command so there is really no need for pause.

Your implication is that against the Computer/AI, things are NOT equal. The question then, is *which* has the advantage, or *if* there is any advantage?

If the Computer/AI are considered equal, then there is no overall advantage. So why pause?

If the Human is considered to have the advantage, then, ever more so, why pause?

If the Computer/AI is considered to be advantaged over the Human, then pausing has a more solid justification, though I would strongly argue the point.

---

ToranagaSama also wonders about the reasoning of those who refuse to use "Expert" difficulty (and its equivalent RTW difficulty (yeah, I know its broken)) on the basis that the AI cheats, yet use Pause. Again, seems rather contradictory.

[Colovion]

ToranagaSama, you're my hero.

[econ21]

Pausing is for Wimps!

No, it's just a different play style - there's no virtue in name-calling people who prefer oranges to your favoured apples. I come from a background of playing turn-based board wargames, with hexes, CRTs et al. Long evenings pushing counters and praying the cat doesn't walk over the map scattering them etc. Others play twitch based RTS computer games. Put me in front of Battle for Middle Earth or Dawn of War - two fine recent RTSs - and I am not happy. It's too fast paced and hectic. It's not cerebral enough for me and I can't savour the juicy tactical decisions. A stately real time game with a functional pause is a perfect compromise for people like me. I get my thrills from the "real time" speed of the game, but I can stop and ponder over interesting decisions as I am used to.

Personally, I find little need for a pause playing RTR with its slower move and kill speeds. I tend to speed up and slow down the action constantly - I want to cut to the chase (I'm playing 200+ battles per campaign), but I want to enjoy the critical phases of the battle. I am not that conscious of using the pause button now - I know I do use it to zoom in on some of the wonderful graphics - eg when a cavalry charge hits home (in RTW, I never did this much as it was all too frenetic to savour). And I really like the freedom to stop and think about grand strategic maneouvres or appropriate tactical responses. In vanilla RTW, without a pause, I would find it intensely unsatisfying - I remember the Trebia battle in the demo and thinking "That was a battle?", it was over so quickly and could not compare to some of the hour long MTW epics.

In terms of gameplay, I don't like a game that is challenging only by virtue of it being hectic. Maybe that is vanilla RTW, but it is not true of some modded games like RTR in my experience.

[CBR]

I could pause in vanilla as I sometimes was about to throw something out of the window out of sheer frustration heh. But now that speed in RTR is back to MTW standards I never have the need for it. Yes sometimes it can be hectic but I find that as am important part of a real time tactical game. I can always speed it up when its needed.

Of course I can pause in case I want to see something up close but not to issue commands.


CBR

[ToranagaSama]

I use the pause button because I bought this game to see big armies fighting at least somewhat realistically for the period. Ignoring what the enemy AI does, my own army doesn't use realistic tactics without a fair amount of micromanagement, because the units lack enough initiative and intelligence.

I can appreciate the reason(s) for which you purchased the game, and respect them. To those reasons, Pausing is used to a different effect than what *most* people are doing.


Caesar could have told a cavalry unit to hide in the trees, and wait to charge until the exact moment when the enemy infantry was pinned against the main battle line. My cav unit won't do this... it just sits there. Caesar and Alexander would never have accomplished what they did, with units that require this much micro-management to behave realistically.

I can understand your point, BUT that's not the game you're playing. The game is not "Sit Back & Watch: Total War". That's the game you're describing with your comment.

In the Total War series, you are BOTH, *Field Commander* and *Unit Commander*. You not only must controly your entire Army, but you must control EACH unit that composes your army. So, taking a full stack RTW army, you must wear 21 hats. (RTW has 20 units, correct?)

Battles in Total War are comprised of these components:

Tactical Planning
(gotta have a battle plan)

Unit Organization
(gotta use some *useful* formation from which you will have *options*. AS well as when things get all dis-organized, gotta have the ability to RE-organize!!)

Execution
(gotta be capable of handling ALL twenty units, know where they are, know what they are doing, know what they are *supposed* to be doing, can't forget about any of them--gotta be in control!)

Resolve
(for want of a better term, this is when all seems lost you use YOUR initiative to find a *way*, some way to pull out victory.)

Knowledge
(You gotta be familiar with the unit *types*, their inherent strengths and advantages, as well as how then can be *used* to advantage/disadvantage that is not so OBVIOUSLY inherent. In other words, just gotta do a little homework---remember experience is the greatest teacher!!)

This is the challenge of the game, to become fairly proficient in these areas. I promise, if you simply become farily proficient you will have little *need* to Pause. THIS is what the Coloseum, the Main Hall and the Dojo are about, to aid ALL of us in becoming *proficient*, imuho.


And then there's the somewhat clunky camera interface, and the rapid pace of battles. I don't enjoy the mad click-fest required to see a semi-realistic battle played out on the screen without pausing. For me, pausing results in a more historical looking game, and isn't less realistic at all.

Oh yes, thank you. I forgot one. True, unfortunately, one MUST master the Interface, clunky or not. There will NEVER be a *perfect* Interface, so one simply must deal with what is given. The interface is NOT a justification.

You are QUITE correct---RTW is on Crack! That reason, and no other, justifies Pausing!!!

Sorry, historical "looking" does not translate into *historic*. If you bought the game for the *Looks*, enjoy. Sa la vie! Though, you must admit the look is not the game's raison d'etre.


It's certainly not "cheating against the AI" either, because the AI can perform, within it's programming limitations, much faster than I can direct my own troops. The proof of that is how fast it deploys troops in a seige defense. I click the start battle button, and the enemy troops appear instantly in their defensive positions. It would take me 5 minutes to get my own troops set up like that, because I'm not just reading unit names off a table and instantly teleporting them to a map coordinate grid. The mechanism I have for selecting a unit and telling it to do something, is much clumsier and more time-consuming than what the AI uses. So if anything, occasional pausing is a balance against the way the AI "cheats" by having a faster way to select and move units. And yes, the AI isn't hard to beat, but I can find other ways to make the battles more challenging, like always fighting with smaller armies than the enemy is using.

First, I just want to address one thing. Computers are DUMB! If you do not know this, then you simply don't know a great deal about computers--and have fallen prey to the myth. As far as computers, lets break it down to the, CPU and Memory chips.*