1.6 a job well done by CA

[AquaLurker]

Ultra smooth gameplay, its nice to see some units in previously weaker or stronger factions solved fine tunedm solving some balance issues though not there are some factions like east rome and berbers that may need further tweakings. I may even give the singleplayer mode a go to see if theres anymore improvement that I can't experience in multiplayer.

Congrats on a job well done CA, 1.6 had made the multiplayer experience so so much more wonderful in BI that I just couldn't believe it, you have my thanks.:san_laugh:

Cheers!!!

[Sir Robin]

I am an SP player and its too early for me to tell yet.

So far it does seem to improve things.:san_grin:

[IceTorque]

First thing I noticed was the improved terrain on the battle maps.
Kudos CA.

[GFX707]

Can't say I've noticed the improved terrain....

[Red Harvest]

Can't say I've noticed the improved terrain....

Haven't noticed that either. I'm wondering if it is something specific IceTorque has noticed or that I've overlooked. Interested to hear what hidden jewels are out there.

[IceTorque]

Perhaps I should have said, The improved terrain texturing.
Much easier on my eyes,

You have noticed that right ?

[Red Harvest]

Perhaps I should have said, The improved terrain texturing.
Much easier on my eyes,

You have noticed that right ?

Not sure that I have. The textures in the folder don't appear to have changed. Perhaps it is the way some setting is being processed?

[TB666]

I must say that this patch so far is very good.
It has fixed alot of things and didn't break anything in the process(atleast not what I have seen so far).
Well done CA indeed.

[Just A Girl]

I must say that this patch so far is very good.
It has fixed alot of things and didn't break anything in the process(atleast not what I have seen so far).
Well done CA indeed.


Well seems ive been selling CA short,
Im glad to see their patching there games now :)

i think i will try this patch as well.
:)

[Jambo]

I doubt anyone's been selling CA short. What criticism there has been for RTW has on the whole been deserved. It's just that now CA have started producing the goods and making RTW into the game it really should have been! :D

There are still faults, there always will be, but on the whole there doesn't appear to be any real game-breakers!

[Red Harvest]

One of the worst aspects now is the pila "fix." Criminy, why can't they just get it right and leave it be? Yes, I want the AI to use its pila, and to be able to finish the sequence when they start. However, I don't want them to be able to do repeated pila cycles while already engaged! First we have no pila, now they are able to empty their pila point blank until empty while meleeing (and it seems to "pause" the enemy attack during the animation to a degree as well.) Don't they play test??? I don't remember anyone asking for uber pila.

The effect is sort of like it was with the pri/sec attack bug (with its +4 attack bonus.) When I'm attacking against pila wielders in melee they are getting many "extra" kills this way. Cheesy.

This isn't as bad as the pri/sec bug because it effects fewer units, but I sure would like to see it properly fixed, rather than bouncing from one extreme to the other.

[TB666]

Well I see no problem with it.
I use that method myself sometimes.

[Jambo]

likewise TB666

[Zatoichi]

I've not been able to get as much playing done as I'd like to really notice this pila thing - does this actually help the AI in battles? If so (and I presume it does), isn't this actually a good thing?

[Red Harvest]

I've not been able to get as much playing done as I'd like to really notice this pila thing - does this actually help the AI in battles? If so (and I presume it does), isn't this actually a good thing?

Yes, it does help the AI, but in a very artificial way. The player can use this exploit as well. I choose not to (like I don't use warhounds, flaming arrows, and stacks with many elephants.) It is an immersion killer watching this.

[Zatoichi]

Oh OK - I'll watch out for this then - I presume that makes Plumbitari (?) extra-specially lethal now then, as they certainly don't lack missiles. I'm generally against the cheesier exploits myself, but for the sake of clarity, how do you get infantry engaged in combat to throw their pila? Is it just FAW enabled an re-click the unit you're fighting? Not that I want to do it of course, but I don't want to do it by accident!

Incidentally, is this the case for the axe throwers as well? Do skirmishers & archers do this?

Back on topic - yes, on the whole this is a very good patch so far as I can tell, with no game breaking additions, and plenty of fixes. Add in Player1's new bug fixer (version 3) and you get it pretty much where it should have been (in an ideal world) when released. I don't mean to be damning with faint praise here - I really do think it was a good effort from CA - there's only so much that can be done in limited time and on a limited budget.

[Watchman]

Huh. I'm not sure if it's that new a "feature", and not an old problem (?)reappearing. At least waaaay back when I was unlocking the rest of the factions the hard way (ie. playing through the long Roman campaign) I distinctly recall having managed to cause about ten times as many casualties to an unit of wall-storming Urban Cohort than the enemy ever managed by the simple virtue of having left Fire At Will on and the rear ranks "aiding" the front-rankers with the occasional pila volley... Happened in field battles too, though not as devastatingly.

It may actually be intentional (at least assuming the troops conform to normal ammunition restrictions), as I understand that sort of thing was done historically too. It's not like the rear ranks had better things to do with their javelins than lob them onto the enemy over the heads of the front ranks...

[Red Harvest]

Watchman,

What appears to be new to me is that I've seen the front rank also throw. I wouldn't mind just the rear rankers trying to throw as they should have great difficulty actually releasing due to FF and the like, but that is not the way it appears to be working. And javelinemen and archers don't seem to be able to do this. They finish a firing sequence and then are fully in melee even if FAW is enabled. Why shouldn't they be able to do the same?

If the pila was exploitable to this extent before, I was not using it, nor was I seeing it. It could have been something I overlooked...if so, I'm not overlooking it now. :san_shocked:

It is important that others don't confuse this with the initial clash. I understand fully why we need to allow the pila to be released on the initial firing sequence--since the whole reaction sequence doesn't work well/automatically and pila would never be used otherwise.

[Watchman]

Well, I'll give you that I'm pretty sure back in the day the front-rankers were busy swinging swords. Can't quarantee it though - it was long ago, and the way I play the game rarely results in slugging matches long enough for the prec-javelineers to "cycle through" to the firing sequence the way they did in the (rather one-sided) drawn-out fight on the wall.

[Just A Girl]

I doubt anyone's been selling CA short. What criticism there has been for RTW has on the whole been deserved. It's just that now CA have started producing the goods and making RTW into the game it really should have been! :D

There are still faults, there always will be, but on the whole there doesn't appear to be any real game-breakers!

What i mean by me selling ca short...

Is ever since STW ive blamed CA for only releasing 2 patches,
Same with MTW...
So i was adament that CA were refusing to patch the game Just so they could then sell there add on's
"as the expantion would also fix some bugs".
I even reported them to the trading standards.

I am very pleased to see that they are releasing multiple patches for RTW.
And i know that the game Really needs the fixe's.
But there are aspects to all the TW games that could have done with a nother patch.

To me the fact that They are releasing these patches, Makes up for all the other short comings that had caused me to become so disheartend towards CA and the total war games,

[Zild]

That sounds a little too forgiving, to me...

Surely it would have been better to have games that worked right to begin with, rather than having them fixed over a year after they were released! The fact that people have had to wait this long just for bug-fixes makes me angry.

[Slug For A Butt]

That sounds a little too forgiving, to me...

Surely it would have been better to have games that worked right to begin with, rather than having them fixed over a year after they were released! The fact that people have had to wait this long just for bug-fixes makes me angry.


Would you have been more forgiving if it had been a Ford that you had bought, that was later recalled for a fault? The point I'm trying to make is that it isn't just CA, it's car manufacturers, house builders, IPODs with dodgy batteries, TV's with a bad batch of cathode ray tubes etc, etc.
In a perfect world, everything would be perfect right from the start. But this isn't an ideal world, and I don't think game manufacturers are any worse that other manufacturers. Many things aren't right when they are first marketed, and if people don't like it they vote with their feet. And if they don't vote with their feet, they shouldn't be complaining really. If it p*sses them off that much, they just don't buy another. And if they do buy another it can't have been that bad in the first place.
Just that I'm sick of people slagging off CA when they still buy their games. If people don't like them like they claim... DON'T BUY THEM.

[Just A Girl]

If people don't like them like they claim... DON'T BUY THEM.

STW was bought So was the expantion AND then WE.
MTW was bought So was VI
RTW was bought Lots of complaints only some bought BI.

So They ARENT BUYING THEM!


That sounds a little too forgiving, to me...

Surely it would have been better to have games that worked right to begin with, rather than having them fixed over a year after they were released! The fact that people have had to wait this long just for bug-fixes makes me angry.

This is the 1st time they have released more than 2 patches for a TW game,
So Atleast there trying now.
And thats all i ask for.

[Red Harvest]

Just that I'm sick of people slagging off CA when they still buy their games. If people don't like them like they claim... DON'T BUY THEM.
Your rant is misplaced. Many of us in fact didn't buy BI for this very reason, but we checked in periodically hoping for things to be improved. We also did our part trying to recommend how to improve it. 1.5 has finally improved the game enough that I plan to buy BI.

Note that I bought MI and VI as soon as they became available. Why?Because I considered STW and MTW sufficiently well finished to base an expansion pack on. Also note that for the original STW and MTW I waited for the games to mature a bit before purchasing...not so with their expansions. And I do wish I had waited on RTW like I did with STW and MTW.

[Zild]

Would you have been more forgiving if it had been a Ford that you had bought, that was later recalled for a fault? The point I'm trying to make is that it isn't just CA, it's car manufacturers, house builders, IPODs with dodgy batteries, TV's with a bad batch of cathode ray tubes etc, etc.
In a perfect world, everything would be perfect right from the start. But this isn't an ideal world, and I don't think game manufacturers are any worse that other manufacturers. Many things aren't right when they are first marketed, and if people don't like it they vote with their feet. And if they don't vote with their feet, they shouldn't be complaining really. If it p*sses them off that much, they just don't buy another. And if they do buy another it can't have been that bad in the first place.
Just that I'm sick of people slagging off CA when they still buy their games. If people don't like them like they claim... DON'T BUY THEM.
I can honestly say that I do not recall having purchased many items at all that did not work as advertised when I first got them. Both computers I've owned have suffered damage during shipping, but I cannot think of anything beyond that.

I don't dispute that other companies also ship faulty goods, what I'm saying is that I'm annoyed at how common it has become amongst game developers.

Let me ask you this: have you ever taken a CD back because one of the songs on it was only half-written? Have you ever taken a DVD back because they hadn't quite got around to putting the soundtrack on it? Or taken a book back because the author hadn't bothered writing chapters three and seven yet?

In the highly unlikely event that you have, was this a fault with just your copy, or with every copy out there? Because the difference here is that NO copies of RTW work properly - they are all incomplete.

What truly frustrates me is that game developers feel they can get away with this for PC games. It is as if the ability to patch games gives them the right to do so. I've heard people fear that forthcoming consoles, with their ability to download content and store it on HDs, will suffer from this as well.

I realise this isn't just CA, but with CA it hits home a lot more because of how much I have enjoyed STW and MTW. There are worse games out there when it comes to bugs (Oil Tycoon 2 has some critical ones, and the only patch is in German), and I'm glad to see CA didn't stick to their previous policy regarding patches, as more were clearly needed. But this does not make them good, it merely makes them less bad.

As for voting with my feet, I already have. Whilst MTW may be my favourite game of all time, I did not buy RTW because of the flaws I heard about on these forums. I still have not bought it, and will not until it truly works. If that means never, then so be it.

[gardibolt]

I don't think this is just a game software problem. It's endemic in the software industry. Nearly every business software provider until recently has provided its wares without any warranties, including any warranty that its software will actually work. When you complain, they bill you more to try to get it to work, whether or not they succeed. Some tech departments are getting more savvy and letting themselves get raped less by software developers, but it's really how the industry has worked for some time now. Games are just a small slice of an enormous problem.

[Slug For A Butt]

I can honestly say that I do not recall having purchased many items at all that did not work as advertised when I first got them. Both computers I've owned have suffered damage during shipping, but I cannot think of anything beyond that.

I have taken a Ford Focus back beacause of a fault that required a factory recall, I have taken an Aprilia motorbike back for a factory recall. It's the same as a patch for software, but my next bike will still be an Aprilia. And I don't bitch about it even though I could, because the overall product is great.


Let me ask you this: have you ever taken a CD back because one of the songs on it was only half-written? Have you ever taken a DVD back because they hadn't quite got around to putting the soundtrack on it? Or taken a book back because the author hadn't bothered writing chapters three and seven yet?

Thats just stretching it al little beyond reason. What you are saying is would you have taken the CD back if the album tracks had been crap? No you wouldn't. If your RTW CD hadn't worked when installing you would have taken it back. See the difference? It works as the manufacturer intended in either case, just because you are disappointed with the product, don't bitch and don't buy another.
.


What truly frustrates me is that game developers feel they can get away with this for PC games. It is as if the ability to patch games gives them the right to do so. I've heard people fear that forthcoming consoles, with their ability to download content and store it on HDs, will suffer from this as well.

My point exactly, it's a general problem. Whether it's Barrat houses (UK), cars or software there will always be problems.


I realise this isn't just CA, but with CA it hits home a lot more because of how much I have enjoyed STW and MTW. There are worse games out there when it comes to bugs (Oil Tycoon 2 has some critical ones, and the only patch is in German), and I'm glad to see CA didn't stick to their previous policy regarding patches, as more were clearly needed. But this does not make them good, it merely makes them less bad.

So what you are saying is that they are one of the better software companies because they patch their games? I agree.

[Zild]

So you're saying people shouldn't complain about games that do not work properly? People's unwillingness to complain and vote with their feet over past years is one of the main causes of this problem!

As for CA's behaviour, I'm not saying they are good - I am merely saying they are less bad (I thought this was clear from the part where I said:


But this does not make them good, it merely makes them less bad.

I'm sorry, was that not clear enough for you?

There are many companies out there who do not patch their games at all, and many more whose patches still leave games at a poor standard. But there are also some who actually patch games until they have no bugs, and some who (brace yourself for a bit of a shock) actually release games bug-free!

I'm entitled to complain. If you don't like it, you're entitled not to listen.

[Taurus]

The 1.6 patch is excellent, fixes lot of the balancing issues in MP and SP and the replay fix is excellent too. Thanks, CA. :san_wink:

[Slug For A Butt]

I did not insinuate in any way that you said they were good. I merely said that because there are worse software firms out there, by definition they are one of the better ones.


So what you are saying is that they are one of the better software companies because they patch their games? I agree.

I'm sorry, was that not clear enough for you?

Hmm, complaining about something you don't even own seems a little strange.

Good job CA.

[Puzz3D]

The v1.5/v1.6 patch is good, but the message is clearly "wait about a year before you buy Creative Assembly PC games". There is no way I can recapture the experience of playing the game for the first time or get back the time I wasted playing the flawed versions.

[Zild]

I did not insinuate in any way that you said they were good. I merely said that because there are worse software firms out there, by definition they are one of the better ones.
But as I said, there are also better developers out there when it comes to pacthing, which, by definiton, makes CA one of the worse ones. That argument can be used both to attack and defend CA, because on its own it is weak and pointless. I don't argue that they are worse than the best devs, or better than the worst.

I'm merely saying they rank at about average amongst the industry. Do they deserve to be criticed for being average on this scale? Yes, I believe they do, given how badly the industry as a whole is performing.

As for complaining about something I don't own... surely it's better than complaining all the time, but still giving money to people who do a sub-standard job?

[Slug For A Butt]

Not really. At least if you have spent the money, you have something to complain about. You have not spent the money because you do not feel you would enjoy the game, which is fair. But to then complain about it when you didn't buy it, knowing you would not enjoy it, isn't fair. You have nothing to complain about have you?

[Zild]

I have plenty to complain about. I can complain about the remaining bugs in MTW, which I purchased, or the fact that the games industry in general have been doing this for too long - I have purchased other games that are sub-standard, and refuse to do so anymore.

The real question is what are you complaining about? So far, it seems to be me. That reaks of flame-war, which I really don't wish to get involved with. If you want to say CA's good, you go for it - I won't stop you. But stop interpretting my clear messages wrongly to benefit your own viewpoint.

Now, could we kindly get back to the matter at hand: discussing CA's performance, not each other.

[Slug For A Butt]

And my personal opinion is that CA have done a fine job. Of course there are a few niggles (such as the guys pushing the seige towers that forget how to climb inside them) but overall, it's a fine game.
I own all the TW games, and I just think this is much more enjoyable and diverse than any of their other titles so far.

Edit : and before you complain of flame wars, I was only challenging your point of view and trying to put my point across. If you really want to stay clear of flame wars, do not start quoting people with only funny little comments underneath. Thats usually a good way of starting one, don't you think?

[Zild]

Well, if you're going to say that, you'd be better off backing it up with a quote or two yourself - I've just had a quick look back through this entire thread, and I can't see any point where I have used a quote only to make 'funny little comments'. Each of my quotes was used to agree or disagree with an opinion, or to clarify my meaning. Try not to get too upset by factual remarks...

Still, I must say that one thing has come of this. You are the first person that I've seen so far who has actually gone from STW and/or MTW on to RTW and found it more enjoyable. There are probably others out there, but I don't recall seeing any. It actually good to know that there are people who have really played the earlier games (I'm assuming you've given one or both of them a good amount of playing time) and still found RTW to be not only good, but better. It's statements like that which actually give me a little hope for RTW. If I hear a few more backing it up, I could be tempted to change my mind and give RTW a go - especially after people have had a chance to test the latest patches. Thank you for that.

[Slug For A Butt]

I find the strategic map of RTW realistic compared to MTW. And I prefer the battles in RTW compared to STW because I don't end up chasing enemy units around the field before they will even engage me. Jedi knights (MTW), non differing units for most factions (STW), lame seige battles etc always infuriated me or bored me.
I think lots of people really do wear rose tinted spectacles when comparing the various guises of Total War. Admittedly RTW was quite buggy when initially released, but I still enjoyed it in spite of these bugs. I never exploited the bugs like load/save, so they never affected me. And now I think CA have done a great job with their latest patch. Like I said, I think the only major bug which can sometimes p*ss me off is the men not climbing seige towers, but what the hell...

[Goofball]

Does 1.6 fix it so my chariots no longer take it upon themselves to charge face-first into the nearest wall of interlocked shields with pointy sticks poking out between them, thereby committing suicide, no matter what I am actually commanding them to do?

[Zild]

Does 1.6 fix it so my chariots no longer take it upon themselves to charge face-first into the nearest wall of interlocked shields with pointy sticks poking out between them, thereby committing suicide, no matter what I am actually commanding them to do?
That sounds to me more like a feature than a bug :san_laugh:

I read in another thread that apparently the suicidal general problem is back in 1.5 - has anybody spotted this in 1.6?

Slug For A Butt: It's strange... I didn't remember the STW method of running around the pitch until the time-limit expired until you mentioned it! Oddly enough, I remember it happening now... and yes, I remember doing it more than once myself in MTW :san_rolleyes:

I don't recall too much by way of lame siege battles - getting the AI to attack me at all in castles is a rarity, and then it's usually by having a citadel with a garrison of about four men! I must say I'm not entirely pleased with MTW's handling of castles and garrisons, as much as I do enjoy fighting those battles. But from the opinions I've heard, apparently RTW sieges just turn into a mass of men fighting without any real co-ordination...?

As for the RTW strategy map being more realistic, I do agree with that. It's also something I would have thought was an improvement in terms of gameplay, though I've generally heard more bad opinions about it than good...

Damnit, the more I talk about it, the more I want to at least try it!

[AquaLurker]

I don't remember chariots ever doing that in pre patches game either...

Anyway, I played STW,MTW,VI,RTW and BI.

STW units are too generic, but it makes the Campaign ,more enjoyable...I think the AI is somewhat better because they actually make use of archers or Hills to gain an advantage, their defensive formation is more organised. Didn't try the multiplayer mode, can't really comment on that. High replay value.

MTW is about the same as STW with more diversity in units. AI is more organised in both attack and defence then RTW and BI. Multiplayer is fun and pretty much balance, allows more tactical option.High replay value.

What I didn't like about them is that, its tough to maintain formation while on the move, very irritating.

RTW, units selection very diverse, great battle engines ridiculous AI still...even in 1.5. The only way to keep yourself interested in campaign games...look for a good mods. Multiplayers have alot of balance issues, limited tactical option, but have a better feel of realism(in 1.5) then the previous 2 titles. Low replay value.

BI is simply MTW combined with RTW engine, less diversity in units, new campaign features like the horde mode, but AI is still as dumb as it has alway been. Wait for future mods to make the game more enjoyable in campaigns. Multiplayer is fun and pretty much balance, allows more tactical option. Low replay value...

Comparing kill speed and game speed of STW/MTW with RTW/BI. They are almost about the same after patched.

What pissed most people off, Bad AI, sub standard jobs during release, slow patchs updates, initial patches like 1.1 is a joke, unessary lag due to bad programing in multiplayer(currently solved in 1.5/1.6)and memory leak still exist.

[AquaLurker]

Hi Zild,

The campaign map is much more realistic, gives you alot of stratagical option for planing your campaign...but the AI will never learn to take advantage of it this feature or handle it, you can easily bypass their huge armies and attack their weaker position or capture their important cities.

Siege...is only fun in Multiplayer lobby, against AI you will be bored to death. They are incompetent in defending and attacking city walls.

[Puzz3D]

Hi Zild,

The campaign map is much more realistic, gives you alot of stratagical option for planing your campaign...but the AI will never learn to take advantage of it this feature or handle it, you can easily bypass their huge armies and attack their weaker position or capture their important cities.
I have a solution for this which is to siege cities but never assualt them. This gives the AI time to concentrate its forces to drive your army away, and they will do that if they have armies in the vicinity.

On a different point, the tendency on the battlefield of the AI to charge when it has the weaker forces works against the AI because all you have to do is wait in a defensive formation. This may be contributing to the suicide general and to ranged units charging into melee making the AI easier to beat than it was in STW. I did many tests in STW, and one thing the AI never did was move a unit forward to frontally charge a stronger enemy unit. It would always try to make an indirect attack on stronger enemy units or maintain a defensive posture.

[Jambo]

Puzz3D yoyu raise an important point there - "wait about a year before you buy Creative Assembly PC games"

How true. I feel like I'm playing RTW now as it should have been on first release and expecting the "first" patch to solve issues...

[IceTorque]

Who's decision was it to release RTW when it was. CA's or Activisions ?
Lets not forget who takes the time to post on these boards and give us all sorts of inside information.

Also lets not forget we have a whole new game engine and sure it's had it's teething problems, as do all new born babies.
The biggest innovation with this new engine that gets me excited is.
You can walk from one end of the game world to the other all on the 3D battle map.

Now just imagine a Total War game similar to a RPG. Exploring, Quests, etc.
I imagine a game similar to Morrowind, where your army gains experience and finds new and improved weapons. Your army must bed down for the night and set up defenses, and your army will have it's sleep disturbed by diseased peasants.
Where you make decisions on the fly depending on the situation. e.g. You march over the hill and lo and behold there is a small village. Do you rampage and pillage ? or See if you can find some interesting auxillaries to recruit into your army. Well I'm sure you get the idea.

The publishers of these games invest huge amounts of cash.
They want a gauranteed hit, no risks which means no innovations just the same old games with new and improved graphics.
They pull the strings folks, and no matter how much we complain I don't think it will change.

So I like to think CA are trend setters, and are going to surprise us all with a new type of Total War game.
Wishfull thinking, probably, but a possibility, certainly.
Ask not what CA can do for you but ...........................

Merry Christmas and a happy new year to all.

[AquaLurker]

Puzz3D yoyu raise an important point there - "wait about a year before you buy Creative Assembly PC games"

How true. I feel like I'm playing RTW now as it should have been on first release and expecting the "first" patch to solve issues...


This way you can also buy the game at a cheaper price with most of the problem fix thus you won't be as frustrated as most early buyers are :san_laugh:
.

[Zatoichi]

This way you can also buy the game at a cheaper price with most of the problem fix thus you won't be as frustrated as most early buyers are :san_laugh:
.

Yeah, but if we all did that, then no one would be finding the bugs for CA to fix... Oh, and CA would go out of business. Someone has to bite the bullet and buy them for the good of the community! :san_tongue:

I've had over a year of fun with RTW, not counting all the previous years with MTW and STW - I'm a discerning chap, I wouldn't still enjoy these games if they were so terrible. Sure they need extra touches and tweaks, but they are the only games to hold my interest over all these years, and I'm pretty sure they will for the forseable future too.

[AquaLurker]

I still enjoy the game very much, just not the campaign which can get really boring even in potential huge battles, facing elite armies. But I do enjoy the historical battles. Just can't see why the AI can be so much better in STW/MTW but not in RTW/BI in battles.

[SpencerH]

Your rant is misplaced. Many of us in fact didn't buy BI for this very reason, but we checked in periodically hoping for things to be improved. We also did our part trying to recommend how to improve it. 1.5 has finally improved the game enough that I plan to buy BI.

Note that I bought MI and VI as soon as they became available. Why?Because I considered STW and MTW sufficiently well finished to base an expansion pack on. Also note that for the original STW and MTW I waited for the games to mature a bit before purchasing...not so with their expansions. And I do wish I had waited on RTW like I did with STW and MTW.


Yep. I guess I'll install the patches and take a look. Of course, I have to beat my civIV addiction first.

[KSEG]

When CA is going to fix that goddamn bug where you can't add a new building since BI?
I'm dying to play CTW.

[ToranagaSama]

I find the strategic map of RTW realistic compared to MTW. And I prefer the battles in RTW compared to STW because I don't end up chasing enemy units around the field before they will even engage me. Jedi knights (MTW), non differing units for most factions (STW), lame seige battles etc always infuriated me or bored me.
I think lots of people really do wear rose tinted spectacles when comparing the various guises of Total War.

Rose-tinted glasses?

I think too much of what is RTW is aimed toward the LAMER GAMER.

Lamers love the so-called realistic map with all the pretty pictures.
Gamers question whether the map is truly a Strategy map; and whether it is additive to Strategic play. Gamers know that RTW's map is not a strategy map, but a Tactical map.

Now, the true question is whether a Casual Gamer is a Lamer Gamer, and whether a Lamer Gamer is a Casual Gamer; or if they are two separate entities.

Its quite clear that CA is attempting to grow their sales by moving away from the die-hard grognard strategy gamers toward erhemmm... the "Casual" gamer. That is they are making the game easier for the Casual gamer to SUCCEED in playing the game.

While it may be more *fun* for some, the casual gamer, to not be outplayed and/or out-tacticed by the AI, by not having to chase an AI that won't engage---meaning that the AI is winning.

Isn't it clear, now that you can "engage", you can do so ONLY because the game has been tuned to a lesser level of play/tactic.

How is *knowing*, experiencing and disliking this "lesser" play---looking through rose colored glasses?

Preposterous!

---


Comparing kill speed and game speed of STW/MTW with RTW/BI. They are almost about the same after patched.

Can an ole time rose-tinted glassed Org member confirm this? It is true?
Are battles no longer resolved, faster than a speeding bullet?


The campaign map is much more realistic, gives you alot of stratagical option for planing your campaign...but the AI will never learn to take advantage of it this feature or handle it, you can easily bypass their huge armies and attack their weaker position or capture their important cities.

Who cares? Isn't the map beauuuuuutifffuullllll.......?
Didn't you buy the game because its so pretty to look at?
Everybody admits its beauuuuuutifffuullllll....


The biggest innovation with this new engine that gets meexcited is.
You can walk from one end of the game world to the other all on the 3D battle map.

Does the word Grognard have any meaning to you?


Now just imagine a Total War game similar to a RPG. Exploring, Quests, etc.
I imagine a game similar to Morrowind, where your army gains experience and finds new and improved weapons. Your army must bed down for the night and set up defenses, and your army will have it's sleep disturbed by diseased peasants.
Where you make decisions on the fly depending on the situation. e.g. You march over the hill and lo and behold there is a small village. Do you rampage and pillage ? or See if you can find some interesting auxillaries to recruit into your army. Well I'm sure you get the idea.

How about, TURN-BASED-STRATEGY?

Fine, if, indeed, CA is intending to create a new game and category, why do it at the expense of STW/MTW?

[IceTorque]

Does the word Grognard have any meaning to you? -ToranagaSama

Actually, yes it does.
I often refer to WarMap as a gameplay mod for grognards,
and not an eye candy mod for the kiddies.

How about, TURN-BASED-STRATEGY? -ToranagaSama

Yes turn based would suffice, like when night falls you enter your
field HQ/throne room. Receive and dispatch messengers. Plan your next days activities etc. So one turn could equal one day.

Of course I am not an expert gameplay engineer, but when a few friends of mine who loved STW and bought it on my recomendation.
Told me they did not like MTW because it was too similar to STW.
I did'nt understand, until playing RTW many years later I can see where they are coming from. Like you know the build que thingy is gettin sorta old, and a less predictable way of obtaining troops might help with gameplay immersion.

Movement orders: Drag a line of units then click on unit then click on target,
Is gettin to be a bit of a drag.
How about just give a command to form a battle line/marching line.
Attack flank(s) and or the centre, again introducing some unpredictability into the gameplay equation.

So as much as I like the TW games if they do not evolve, even an old grog like myself would stop playing/purchasing the game.
Not only will TW games evolve, they need to.

[gardibolt]

I don't get why people go on about RTW's fairly crude graphics, as if that's some kind of draw. They're not very well done, even for a 2004 game. If you want to talk about an eye candy game, try Battle for Middle Earth. After playing that, RTW seems like a step above text-based gaming. If old-time TW players think RTW is fabulous graphically, STW and MTW must truly be hideous. :dizzy2:

[IceTorque]

Does battle for middle earth have 8,000 + soldiers on the battlefield ?

Myself I would'nt mind MTW sprites with say 20,000 soldiers on the battlefield.
As I like to zoom out a bit and take in the bigger picture.

[Slug For A Butt]

If old-time TW players think RTW is fabulous graphically, STW and MTW must truly be hideous. :dizzy2:

Yup... I DO find STW and MTW hideous. Fine games, but hideous.