RTW: Patch comparison

[OldSchool]

Sorry if this is in the wrong forum. My junior status seems to limit where I can post. (It's actually kind of funny at my age to think of myself as a junior anything.)

I'm playing RTW unpatched and am looking for a comparison of what bugs and\or fixes were introduced in each patch. From what I can tell browsing through the threads, I might be better off leaving it alone. Since I am quite late getting to the RTW party, I would assume that the different patches have been well documented by the community, but I haven't quite found all the info. If someone could point me to the right thread or faq, I would much appreciate it. Especially about the earlier patches.

Thanks in advance,
-OldSchool

[Severous]

Hello Oldschool. Welcome to the forum and the RTW world. Hope you will enjoy the game.

Try this link:
http://www.totalwar.com/index.html?page=/en/support/supportrome.html&nav=/en/8/1/

Its the official site.

It might sound a bit suspect me criticsizing the official site, but you might want to look for alternative advice before you act. The Official site has undergone change as expansion packs have come out and it looks as it the clear and accurate advice for RTW V1.0 patching has got lost as the new versions have come along.

The long recommended path of patching for RTW V1.0 is to patch to V1.3 then to V1.5. The respected moderator on that official forum always recommends that. Its the path I followed. Ive had no problems except that the saved prologue campaign started on V1.0 would not load up after patching to V1.5 so I had to restart the prologue campaign.

If you like mods then I believe some mods only work on certain patches.

When i downloaded the patches they came with readme files. Alternatively Google search might find 'RTW patch read me notes' ?

Good luck and enjoy.

[Ludens]

I also recommend to use the latests patch. Patches 1.2 and 1.3 both had a few issues, but they fixed a lot more than they broke. The problems with the current 1.5 patch are IIRC all present in 1.3. They include a slight memory leak on the campaign map, some problems with siege towers, and a few graphical glitches. The worst bug is a problem with the A.I. occasionally using it's archers as melee troop or not using them at all, but I haven't heard about it recently. The rest can be fixed with Player1's Bugfixer (https://forums.totalwar.org/vb/showthread.php?t=55464). I also recommend Darth Formations (http://www.twcenter.net/forums/showthread.php?t=46330): it will give the A.I. a performance boost on the battlefield.

Welcome to the Org, BTW ~:wave: .

[OldSchool]

Thanks for the info, guys.

The problem with official readme's, of course, is that they aren't likely to tell you about new bugs introduced. I hadn't thought to check the 1.5 to see if the loadgame bug had been fixed. Thanks for the reminder.

I haven't decided about using mods,yet, as I'm having quite a bit of fun tweaking the text files myself at this point. Both of those mentioned look like good ones.

The game is quite playable and enjoyable unpatched, but if the patches help the AI, I would like to use them. My main concern is the loadgame bug where the strategy map AI breaks of seiges and such. That would kill it for me. I'm not quite clear about which patch introduced it and which, if any, fixes it. I hadn't heard of the archer bug and will research it before deciding.

Thanks alot for the info and quick responses. This is one of the best game sites going and I wish others were more like it.

Does sucking up help one upgrade from junior status?

[Ludens]

The load-game bug was either introduced by 1.2 or already present in the original game (I incline to the latter hypothesis, but the evidence is not conclusive) and is fixed by 1.3. There seemed to have been a residu of it in 1.3 though, as the A.I. seemed unable to commence naval invasions unles you reloaded the game (a sort of reverse load-game bug), but 1.5 fixed this too. Both 1.2 and 1.3 improved tactical and strategic A.I. Don't forget to download the additional campaign fix from the site: it is not crucial but restores the Roman's ability to build Temples of Epona (provided a sacred circle is already present).

[OldSchool]

Thanks Luden. I know in my unpatched version, the AI is still seiging when I load a saved game and I didn't want to break that aspect of the game. Although, come to think of it, I just got backstabbed by the Germans and I wasn't prepared for it, so I may be wishing they would break off between turns.:laugh4:

Speaking of Epona. I was quite looking forward to building some of those temples as I like cavalry (who doesn't). I took all of Gaul and just finished taking Spain and they had built sacred circles to other gods in all of their cities. Not one single Epona. I don't regret enslaving them the least little bit, now.

Thanks a lot!

[Ciaran]

The general sentiment is to get patched to 1.5, but you might want to try 1.2 as well. If you don´t save and load very often it´s not that bad, in my opinion at least. It´s definitely the best option if you don´t want to dl the hundred-and-something MB of 1.3, which is a prerequisite for 1.5. As well, 1.2 will allow you using siege towers on every wall level and your cavalry can charge into the rear of phalanxes without getting slaughtered (search for "butt-spike" if you want details on that particular issue).

[OldSchool]

Thanks for the info, Ciaran.

Unfortunately, I do have to save and reload often due to limited playing time. I guess I'll go ahead and bite the bullet and patch all the way. So far in my game, the archers don't seem to melee unless I get too close to them and my cavalry seems to be able to take on anything even head-on, much less from behind. Anything called "butt-spike" can't be a pleasant experience. :trytofly:

I had hoped one of the patches would fix the kamikaze generals and idle enemy armies standing around, but I guess it is not to be.

I thought about staying unpatched and offering comparisons for the bug-finding threads, but I guess it wouldn't be much use since I doubt very many are playing unpatched these days.

[econ21]

I think the patches do help with the inactive enemy armies. At least, AI expansion seems more dynamic in RTR Platinum (based on 1.5) than RTR Gold (based on 1.2); they also make more use of naval landings.

Kamikaze generals is not such a big problem to me - yes, the AI general usually charges in and dies, but - unlike say Shogun - it does not seem to be that decisive in battles (the AI is going to lose anyway) or in destroying factions (lots of replacement generals for a suicidal faction leader).

I'd strongly recommend a mod such as RTR Platinum that "fixes" a lot of the most commonly raised complaints about the gameplay (e.g. the uber cavalry you note) and historical accuracy of the game.

[stalin]

I also recommend Darth Formations (http://www.twcenter.net/forums/showthread.php?t=46330): it will give the A.I. a performance boost on the battlefield.


If by "boost" you mean the AI running back and forth untill exhausted then yes.

[Keba]

If by "boost" you mean the AI running back and forth untill exhausted then yes.

The AI does that anyway, no need for mods for that.

Darth Formations only affects the intial formations, from what I remember. If (and it's a big IF) the AI maintains consitency, you will get a bit of a challenge. Mainly, it will offer a challenge now and then (which is now and then more than RTW AI, which, as we know is about as smart as mold).

[Puzz3D]

If by "boost" you mean the AI running back and forth untill exhausted then yes.
Turning off fatigue will give you a better challenge from the AI. If you patch to v1.5, you can use XGM (Extended Greek Mod) for a more challenging game especially if you take a faction such as Carthage. XGM uses Darth Formations and turns off fatigue. In addition, it uses a trick to give AI generals more command stars which furthere increases the challenge. XGM even works with BI v1.6 to provide, night battles, swimming and shield wall features.

The v1.2 fixed over 100 problems in RTW. They are not all mentioned in the readme. However, it broke the Parthian shot. The v1.3 patch fixed that and a serious bug in the cavalry charge vs phalanx (The cav charge is now turned back on the cav by a phalanx.), and made modifications to the suicide general and jumping horses and may have fixed some cav speeds. However, it broke pila. The v1.5 fixes pila, but now units also throw their pila when engaged in melee. On the strategic side, save/load problem seems fixed, naval invasions work and the AI consolidates it's armies better.

The "butt-spike" problem is probably being caused by the phalanx reflecting the cav's charge. I think you can work around this to a large extent by using cav to charge into the side of the phalanx, and timing that charge when it has a good chance of causing the phalanx to rout. In anycase, phalanx being strong vs cav is a good thing for the gameplay. The type of thing you can do with cav vs phalanx in RTW 1.0 and v1.2 defies belief.

[orangat]

.........
The "butt-spike" problem is probably being caused by the phalanx reflecting the cav's charge. I think you can work around this to a large extent by using cav to charge into the side of the phalanx, and timing that charge when it has a good chance of causing the phalanx to rout. In anycase, phalanx being strong vs cav is a good thing for the gameplay. The type of thing you can do with cav vs phalanx in RTW 1.0 and v1.2 defies belief.

Why is the side less likely not to produce butt spike deaths?
Is it because the side of the phalanx is coded differently from the rear? Or is it because the frontage is much smaller in the sides (less horses contact on charge there less deaths from buttspike charge reflection).?

[Ciaran]

I suspect ("suspect" being the keyword!) the "reflection" of the cavalry charge depends on the angle in which they hit the phalanx. Now if the cavalry hits full frontal, it´s supposed to get the maximum damage back - and that works fine. However, it seems the reflection angle is 90° (at 90° from the unit facing the damage reflected is minimal) only - means the back is treated the same way as the front. A programming shortcut, I suspect, which backfired.

[BlueRobin]

Two key issues that I don't miss from RTW v1.0

1. Always crashed to desktop. The end turn button was a game of russian roulette. Ditto winning the game.

2. Enemy navies would coagulate into huge stacks.

[gmjapan]

Definately patch all the way or not at all. The Save/Load bug ruined the game for me becaues I have to play in spurts. I just felt like i was cheating the whole time.

On the Phalanx theme though - they are 100 times better in 1.5. Phalanx can actually fight like a Phalanx, Cav get murdered at the front and the rear.

However, and its a biggie, your own spear tips will kill your General if he charges through an already engaged Phalanx.

[Ludens]

Thanks for the detailed reply, Puzz. You didn't mention the archery issue in 1.5, though. Is there something that can be done about that?

[Puzz3D]

Sometimes AI archers work properly, and sometimes they enter into melee before they are out of ammo. When the AI is defending the archers seem to shoot ok, but in general the AI moves it's skirmishers around too much. It's had that problem ever since the first game, STW.

I tried a quick test of cav charging into the back and side of a phalanx in custom battle with no fatigue. The cav was a 54 man cataphract, 3 men deep as I recall, and the phalanx a 122 man silver shield pikeman 8 men deep. The cav lost 9 charging into the rear of the phalanx, and then another 3 before beating the phalanx unit. When charging into the side of the phalanx the cav lost 6 or 7 in the charge and another 3 before beating the phalanx. Some of the cav wrapped around the front and back of the phalanx when it charged. So, it was a little better to charge the flank of a deep rank phalanx rather than the rear, but not much. This might simply be the result of less frontage contacting the phalanx during the charge.