PDA

View Full Version : Battle game speed..too fast?


Barry Fitzgerald
11-30-2006, 00:02
Just curious as to how people feel about the battle speed?

Currently it is clearly faster than MTW...and RTW to my eyes..not sure if this appeals though..I thought RTW was a good bit faster than MTW..now this seems more speedy again.

So what do you think? Is it too fast? Or is it better?


Would be nice to have an option to tweak the speed..that way battle minded players could enjoy it more..and campaign players could get on with that if they wanted too.
Doug-Thompson
11-30-2006, 00:34
I just about wore out the "pause" button in RTW. It's been much less of a problem in MTW2.

While the speed may be too much for new players, I've never had the feeling of being overwhelmed and watching battles fly by that I had with RTW.

I don't know whether that's because movement speeds have been toned down or because kill rates aren't as bad. There's room for debate.

So the short answer to your question, IMO, would be: No, I don't think the battle game speed is too fast.
Morindin
11-30-2006, 00:38
M2TW is definately not faster than RTW.

Combat speed seems comparable to MTW, although units route more due to the lack of awesome generals everywhere that MTW had.

Movement speed seems faster than MTW, but not absurd like RTW due to the fact units have to form after moving.
Martok
11-30-2006, 01:31
[Bear in mind I didn't fight a ton of battles in the short time I was able to play the game, so take my words with as many grains of salt as makes you comfortable.]

I still think the movement speeds are a bit too fast, say by about 15% or so. This is particularly true for units that are running (be they infantry or cavalry); walking speeds are pretty much okay. Battle speeds have definitely been slowed down from Rome, though (thank goodness); I now actually have time to think and maneuver! :yes:

All that said, the bigger issue for me is not movement speeds, but the kill rates. Unless units are perfectly matched against each other (and sometimes not even then), men seem to die at an alarming rate. I don't remember how fast it was in Rome, but compared to MTW, I would say Medieval 2's kill rate is at least twice that of its predecessor. :no: Units--both yours and the enemy's--get ground down and melt away faster than you can say Hattin.
Barry Fitzgerald
11-30-2006, 02:12
Very hard to say isnt it!

Yes sorry movement is slower than RTW....a bit. But battles don't seem to last as long for some reason..? Maybe the kill rate is a factor...

Not done any tests as such...just a few thoughts...could be wrong.

I noticed that cav units don't seem so fast....compared to inf units...took longer to chase down routing units than in RTW.
Quickening
11-30-2006, 02:13
The movement and kill speeds are fine for me. I had no problem with the speed of Medieval 1 or Rome either.
Shahed
11-30-2006, 07:20
The battle speed is fine.

The unit speeds are slightly too fast, for the terrain they are covering.

A little slower, specially on the heavy infantry/cavalry would be ideal.
Lord Condormanius
11-30-2006, 07:41
The battle speed is fine.

The unit speeds are slightly too fast, for the terrain they are covering.

A little slower, specially on the heavy infantry/cavalry would be ideal.

I agree. You can only swing a sword around for so long.
Dave1984
11-30-2006, 10:35
The only complaint I have regarding speed at all is that my halberd militia take three years to get across the field- the damn fools consistently walk in sloooooooooooooooow moooooooootioooon. Even with spearwall off.
Rothe
11-30-2006, 10:48
This is a difficult issue. I think that for me to be able to finish a grand campaign I have to play battles quite fast and also to autoresolve many battles, as a single battle can take 15-30 min of real time and with my turtle style (H/VH) I am on the defensive and some battles do not "progress" the game too much at all.

So, I think there should be a way to slow down the speed in MP at least, maybe in SP as well, but the current speed is a decent default. I mean, I could not play with 2x speed anyway if the game was slowed down...

I understand that in MP the slower battle speed would make things more interesting and it does not really matter if it takes 10 min more to play a battle. So I completely understand your point about the speed. In SP I can use the pause as much as I like, so I prefer a good pace.
Quickening
11-30-2006, 10:54
The only complaint I have regarding speed at all is that my halberd militia take three years to get across the field- the damn fools consistently walk in sloooooooooooooooow moooooooootioooon. Even with spearwall off.

In fairness, it cannot be easy to run with such weapons especially when in a regiment.
Dave1984
11-30-2006, 11:06
In fairness, it cannot be easy to run with such weapons especially when in a regiment.

Nope, but it's not hard to walk with them at 3-4mph.
fuzzilogik
12-01-2006, 18:42
Feels about right to me.
Vlad Tzepes
12-01-2006, 18:47
I'll never forget my 4 hours battle against the Mongol Horde (with several reinforcement waves on each side) in MTW 1. 4 hours, starting midnight.

And then it crashed. :furious3: :wall:

I feel MTW2 has the appropriate battle speed - not blitz-clashes like RTW, not yawning hours of waiting for the end in MTW 1.
Doug-Thompson
12-01-2006, 18:50
The only complaint I have regarding speed at all is that my halberd militia take three years to get across the field- the damn fools consistently walk in sloooooooooooooooow moooooooootioooon. Even with spearwall off.


Ye gods. Is that in loose formation?
ChewieTobbacca
12-01-2006, 19:10
Game speed is NOT fast at all... movement might be a bit faster than MTW1, but given the maps now are HUGE, it's quite reasonable

Kill rates are also quite slow when playing on VH in a balanced battle... i've had lines of dismounted knights melee it out for minutes before I finally won the cavalry fight and swung them around for a flank