Printable View
Anyone want to share them?
Also, what differences do you guys see between Vanilla RTW and EB Multiplayer? I, for one, hope there are no A. Flamers, B. Annoyingly named clans, C. Imbalanced factions (Oh god, the Romans... made it hell to play against them..)
May I ask what problem you have with the name of my Clan?
There are no clans Baed on EB, no there are no flamers here, no there are very few imbalanced factions here.
And vanilla romans were shit.
I have no idea what your clan is called, I was being general in referring to clans with weird names.Quote:
Originally Posted by Lazy O
Lol, I tried playing vanilla MP again yesterday. And man, ıt was... Well, you know how it is. Lost both of my matches thanks to imba Praetorian Cavalry rampage... They'd just group and charge my squads head on... And it worked!... It made me realise -again- how awesome EB is,
Its called cataphracts/chariots/head hunting maidens. Learn to use them. Vanilla is a GAME not historical simulation.
Well, brother, GAMEs are meant to be balanced. :PQuote:
Originally Posted by Lazy O
And its very balanced provided you pick the right stuff :) . That means, no picking Spain/Gaul/Numidia(vs most factions)/Thrace .
Well, the fact that it's practically impossible to play as a barbarian faction (Spain/Gaul/Numidia/Thrace) without getting your ass kicked takes a lot of the fun out of it for me, and I suppose a lot of other people who want to play as other factions apart from Rome/Egypt/the Seleucids.
Actually even playing as Macedon or the Greek Cities puts you at a disadvantage against Roman players, who still have their ubiquitous Urban/Praetorian spam armies.
Gaul and Spain are universally accepted spectator factions which are good for nothing. Germania is a hard counter to rome. Picking egypt is frowned upon. An other chariot factions are balanced against Carthage/Brittania/Greece. Rome mega fails against any faction besides carthage/numidia/macedon(this matchup is balanced)/greece/spain/gaul/thrace/dacia. And I am in the network right now, mind playing so I can determine whether I should be taking you seriously?
As you may have gathered from the above posts, I have had rather enough of playing Vanilla Multiplayer. Furthermore I see no reason to get in a game with you just for the sake of proving my points. You can either take me seriously or disagree with me, which I am perfectly happy to accept.Quote:
Originally Posted by Lazy O
However,
That's 8 factions you've listed there. I think what makes the idea of factions in RTW fun is variety, and having 8 factions (according to you) that will generally not match up to Rome in MP is not fun at all in my opinion.Quote:
Originally Posted by Lazy O
I disagree with you about Macedon, in my view a Royal Pike/Companion army will mostly lose in a matchup against a typical Urban/Praetorian Roman one under normalized CWB rules due to superior stats in both infantry and cavalry. I don't think Germania proves a "hard counter" to Rome as many of their units are unarmored with low defence stats including Berserkers.
I said normally. The people I play with can compete on an equal level in Rome vs Macedon.
And I was inviting you to play EB not vanilla. there are 4 people me included online right now, have time to spectate? :)
I'm coming online now - I will probably spectate as I'm still learning the ropes of EB Multiplayer after just installing it last night :)
Sorry to nitpick dude, but by your stance you didn't really make it clear that it was EB you were asking me to play. Whether you "should be taking me seriously" or not on my points regarding Vanilla Multiplayer has nothing to do with EB.
See you in a couple of minutes.
It meant that I only replied to this topic because you were in the network. I usually ignore people who do not play multiplayer and talk about it.
I played Rome: Total War from 2005 through 2008, and this included plenty of online play. It is more than obvious that the game is poorly balanced in that wherever the balance does lie, it lies within an extremely narrow scope, meaning only certain matchups are reasonably fair, and by that I mean both matchups of army compositions as well as factions in general.
I have never played Multiplayer and I have little interest in doing so but you just perfectly described an imbalanced game. A game where certain, limited matchups are somewhat fair for both sides cannot be called balanced. If you let a twenty-two year old bodybuilder wrestle against a six year old, the six year old might have a chance if you drug the bodyuilder with a lot of narcotics, tie his hands behind his back and give the six year old a gun but that doesn't make fights between adults and children generally balanced.Quote:
Originally Posted by Lazy O
It's been a while, but Vanilla multiplayer would, in most cases, give me the win on a silver platter when I played Rome. I would play EB online right now, If it weren't for the fact that my Rome disc is lost :no:. I miss those battles (but I remember that I never won many on EB).