My personal MTW longevity: 3 months

I stopped playing MTW. And I think I won't play no more. I got that "satiety" feeling that means that the game has no more to offer to me.
I bought the game in october. I've played a dozen of campaigns; played only with Byzs, Italians, English, Almohads, Spanish, Danes; but I don't think that playing with a new faction would give me fun.
The things that enjoyed me in the first campaigns: the background, the variety of troops, the tactical battles. http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cg...icons/cool.gif
The things that made me stop playing after only 3 months: the AI stupidity, the impossibility to make a diplomatic strategy, the facility of the game itself. http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cg...cons/frown.gif
The biggest disappointment: no MP campaign. http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cg...cons/mecry.gif
The patch enhanced a lot of things, and I think that without it I would have stopped playing a month ago.
I played STW for more than a year; even if MTW got a better graphic, background, variety etc., dunno why but STW had a longer longevity. obviously, this is my very personal opinion.
I still think that CA made a good dev work, but they really disappointmented me not developing the MP campaign. I had bought MTW most for the MP camp, so I think i'll buy a TW game ONLY when and IF I'll be sure it will be included in the game.
bye guys
see u for TW 3

http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cg...icons/wave.gif

Sorry to see you go.

But you bought the game on a wrong basis. The devs posted often that there would not be an MP-campaign. So you could have saved yourself the money from the beginning. I knew it wouldn't be there, for that I was sorry, but I didn't get let down when I bought the game.

It's too bad you didn't arrive here earlier to learn about the MP campaign problems. We have known for many months that it was not going to be included.

It does sound like you got some pleasure for your money at least. 12 camapigns had to take some time. Maybe in a few weeks you'll play some more. Everything gets old after a time.

The real duds are the ones we toss in a week or less.

Sorry to see you go Jon. Your post reminded of a similar one I made at Apolyton when I'd had enough of CivIII and set me thinking about just how subjective a topic this is.

What makes a good computer game? If I knew for sure I'd jack in this job and make my fortune http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cg...cons/smile.gif There's the anticipation when you rip off the plastic cover after getting home from the games shop (I *like* that bit). Waiting for it to install and wondering how it's going to play. Whew, gotta sit down for minute, getting too excited... http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cg...s/rolleyes.gif

Why am I still hooked on MTW? Let me tell you a story. I have an Italian campaign (Early, GA, Expert, v1.1, No Agents mod) that I went back to last night. It's 1245 and I have all of Italy, all the Med Islands and from Egypt to Antioch as a result of some successful crusades. My formerly profitable trade empire had crashed some years ago when France, HRE, Spain and the Byzantines all declared war but with 500,000 florins in the war chest I can last out a long war.

Then the Mongols attacked Syria. I had 1300 troops under a 6 star former Prince, Italian infantry and spearmen in the front line with Genoese Sailors, some heavy cavalry and 3 units of Turcopoles recruited locally. I have better armies but this one had started off as desert specialists (hence the lightly armoured spearmen and lack of Arbalesters). The Mongols had 3500, mostly cavalry.

I started off well, routing their first wave with minimal casualties but the last half of the battle saw me with no cavalry after my Turcopoles gradually got worn down to nothing. My infantry stood on the top of a hill and took the Mongol arrow fire, occasionally repulsing sneak attacks from Steppe cavalry and Mongol Heavy cavalry. Still having a kill ratio about 2:1 in my favour, I was down to a couple of hundred men as the timer reached 11:30, creeping towards midnight and safety.

Just a sliver of white remaining but then came a last attack: two units of heavy cavalry. My largest unit of Italian Infantry took the main impact and all the other units, including the General's bodyguard of 4 men, rushed to help. But to no avail; they broke and routed, just minutes away from victory.

http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cg...cons/mecry.gif

I cursed CA as I saw the Good Runner Vice that poor general picked up. But I've calmed down now, and can truly say that it'll be a sad day when I finally stick my MTW CD into the "lost interest" pile. What a game.

good post, man
and same feeling here, just replace Italiana with HRE and mongols with Brits in Flanders and you'll have my last battle yesterday night

and I'm going back to it right now...

I fear that it might be a similar story with me. What is needed is modding tools from CA. With more and better modding tools, this game could be a classic on the order of Civ2.

You lasted about a month longer than me, Jon Perhaps the problem is high expectation as I thought that MTW would be Shogun battles, with Europa Universalis political strategy. Lost interest when I realised that the Campaign game is basically identical to Shogun, just bigger. The lack of any historical accuracy is a disappointment, too.

Don't want to knock the game as clearly some people love it. I think MTW is really 2 different games, the Battles are so different to the campaign map I wonder if the same company wrote it i.e. Battles look excellent, easy to control units, decent AI, plenty of depth. Campaign looks cluttered, hard to control, abysmal AI, no depth just micromanagement. Problem is that battles on their own soon become uninteresting so you need a context for them.

To try and be constructive, I think that TW3 should dump the grand strategy completely and have a tactical map a level above the current 3D battles, about current province level. Here you actually move your armies like more conventional wargame, rather than the unrealistic 1 Province = 1 Battle = 1 castle. Some of the most interesting parts of historical battles was the maneuvering over days and weeks leading up to the battles. This is lost at the moment and I would rather have that than pointless princesses, assassins that are little more than coin toss and a trading system and diplomacy that is sub Civ-1.

There'll be no TW3 for me unless the whole campaign game is reworked, not just expanded.

http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cg...icons/wave.gif

I like that idea. Using the total war engine, I think it would be very cool if they got it to work correctly. However, I really like the strategy portion of the game. I think its a lot more fun to fight in a battle because I need to weaken a particular faction because they threaten an important ally than it is to make something up, i.e., choose your units and the enemy units. Just my feelings, feel free to disagree.

Lord of the Isles: great Post that's just the kind of experience I'm having at present with my Egypt campaign. I'm still playing and I think that I will be for a while longer. http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cg...ns/biggrin.gif Indeed I hope that we will some day see an MP campaign along the STW/MTW campaign lines. http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cg...icons/idea.gif

Jon: Sorry to see you go. See you in TW 3

http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cg...icons/wave.gif

For me, i may go for a bit and return in terms of playing the game. I certainly will return time and time again as more mods and patches appear, and as i play other things. One thing that has effected the longevity for me is the fact that i had played STW before. Given that MTW is effectively the same game but bigger and in a different setting, that must have knocked a good month of for me. to be honest i havn't played this week, but i still come to this board and see what's happening, i'm waiting to get a pc that won't feel so much like an effort to play on.

Anyway my advice would be to by all means , leave it for a month and come back. also remember that even a good FPS with good online play lasts me a maximum of 1 month before i leave it, so 3 months and more as it will be is really good value for money even if i never played again.

I have a shelf full of good games that i go back to every now and again, and it will eventually end up there along with various ersions of civ, BG2, counter strike, STW and many many more.

So bye for now to you, perhaps we will see you again sometime, i'll be here for a bit still.

http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cg...cons/shock.gif
http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cg...icons/wave.gif

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by [b

Quote[/b] ]The biggest disappointment: no MP campaign.
The patch enhanced a lot of things, and I think that without it I would have stopped playing a month ago.
I played STW for more than a year; even if MTW got a better graphic, background, variety etc., dunno why but STW had a longer longevity. obviously, this is my very personal opinion.
I still think that CA made a good dev work, but they really disappointmented me not developing the MP campaign. I had bought MTW most for the MP camp, so I think i'll buy a TW game ONLY when and IF I'll be sure it will be included in the game.
bye guys
see u for TW 3

---

Just wanted to add my tears too, I sure hope the Devs are getting the message and are working on the Design as I type..... http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cg...cons/angry.gif http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cg...ons/pissed.gif http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/mad.gif

download a few mods - explore other cultures in-game, it livened it up for me and i have adhd

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by [b

Quote[/b] (Sir Dipthong @ Dec. 06 2002,11:04)]You lasted about a month longer than me, Jon Perhaps the problem is high expectation as I thought that MTW would be Shogun battles, with Europa Universalis political strategy. Lost interest when I realised that the Campaign game is basically identical to Shogun, just bigger. The lack of any historical accuracy is a disappointment, too.

Don't want to knock the game as clearly some people love it. I think MTW is really 2 different games, the Battles are so different to the campaign map I wonder if the same company wrote it i.e. Battles look excellent, easy to control units, decent AI, plenty of depth. Campaign looks cluttered, hard to control, abysmal AI, no depth just micromanagement. Problem is that battles on their own soon become uninteresting so you need a context for them.

To try and be constructive, I think that TW3 should dump the grand strategy completely and have a tactical map a level above the current 3D battles, about current province level. Here you actually move your armies like more conventional wargame, rather than the unrealistic 1 Province = 1 Battle = 1 castle. Some of the most interesting parts of historical battles was the maneuvering over days and weeks leading up to the battles. This is lost at the moment and I would rather have that than pointless princesses, assassins that are little more than coin toss and a trading system and diplomacy that is sub Civ-1.

There'll be no TW3 for me unless the whole campaign game is reworked, not just expanded.

http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cg...icons/wave.gif

---

Here, here http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cg...ons/smokin.gif

i have to agree that the campaign game is a mess. i'm only on my first campaign, but each turn is now taking over half an hour, just moving agents, checking loyalty, piety etc meaning i can only get a little bit further each session - i'm not going to be finished til Xmas at this rate... i had to go and get Hitman2 just for some light relief.

seriously though, i hope CA sticks with it. I don't think MTW is a game for everyone, but it needs some real improvements to management functions if the next version is going to be worthwhile - I mean we shouldn't have to use pencil and paper to keep track of the game give us some better management menus, more explanation of why and how things like rebellions, v&vs, princesses etc work or don't.

There is a lot of depth to the game (and far from bored with it), but it shouldn't be down to the community to have to work it all out for ourselves — Civ3 has a 100+ page instruction booklet, not to mention the in-game civilopedia. MTW is ambitious enough to approach that level of complexity, but ducks out making it manageable.

CA - sort it out http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cg...icons/wink.gif

Shameless plug time...

Sandy-San (and others),

If you begin to find the micromanagement tedious, try a mod that can reduce it. Look at my NoAgents1_1.zip in the Org's Downloads -> Medieval Downloads -> Full Version Direct Downloads area. You still have to keep an eye on province and general's loyalty but with no agents besides emissaries and princesses, a lot of the tedium is gone.

And once you get a feel for the loyalty mechanisms in the game, you don't need to check every turn. Only after things like a King dying or being excommunicated, King moving to another province, your fleet network being disrupted, losing a battle or province and so on.

well i dirfted from the game for about 2 weeks, then i started making maps and such for it, and now ive found that a game is only what you make of it. M:TW is awesome, sure there are flaws, and no game is perfect, but its ones attitude and expectations of it that makes a game playble for so long. If you have expectations that are extreemly high, then you will be dissapointed, with whatever they release. I know a lot of people thought M:TW would be a massive improvment of S:TW, but were dissapointed to find it only improved some areas and not all. and because of this they dont see the game as decent, where it is perhaps even much better than S:TW ever was. The way i looked at it, i saw it as a sequel to S:TW, much like Quake, Quake2 and Quake 3 are all sequals, not much nis ever improved overall in gameplay, but its the small changes that can make it stand out against its predesesor.

Same Game different setting i hear a lot of, but essentually its Same game, different setitng, more depth.

Attitude people is they key to fun

I would be curious to see how many other computer games could keep you going for 3 months..

Civ 2, Halflife (and mods), Championship Manager.. can't think of any others.

Most games are lucky to last a week.

Depends on how you play it I guess. If you play every day for hours and hours, 3 months is a long time... if you're a more casual player it might not be much.

I play it quite a lot (since it came out) but I also play other games. I couldn't play any game for 3 months straight.

i didnt read this thread just the title ; but i go back to shogun; dont know why i am askin this myself ; M:TW campaign si very easy i think and since i dont get a cable connection i cant play on-line http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cg...cons/frown.gif
maybe 2 or 3 months maximum ..

Three months don`t say much, it`s the number of hours you play. So you played 12 campaigns, I would say that`s a lot. I played Warcraft 3 for three weeks, maybe 2 hours a day and still think it was worth it`s money. I follow this rule: if I play a demo of a game and it`s still fun the day after I installed it, I think about buying it. Most demos are off after 10 minutes

Still playing both STW and MTW.

Along with Red Alert, Diablo2, Dungeon Keeper2 and Sacrifice, Doom (still great for stress relief).

Notable games that have fallen by the wayside include:

La Grande Armee (Gave up after about two hours)

Uncommon Valour (Never finished a single campaign)

Talonsoft (Could never find an opponent with a similar interest in historical play)

Lord of the Realm (Loved the campaign play hated the tactical)

Europa Universalis (Universalis boredomus)

Napoleon 1812 (Couldn't manage to complete a campaign without it crashing)

I'm *still* playing the original Master of Orion, 10 years after its release. Will hopefully soon be able to stop playing it when MoO3 comes out.

Master of Orion 2, thats another game that I played for longer than 3 months. Still the best game of its kind and hoping for MOO3 as well.

Of course the multiplayer campaign added a lot to moo2 :P

Argh Not the MP Campaign thing again.

First off, always sad to see someone leave the community, but if you forced yourself to play the game it'd be no fun at all.

That said, the MP Campaign IS NOT a vital part of TW, infact I wouldn't care if it never appeared, I did post a LARGE post on why it shouldn't be in and I still stand by that, it mainly consisted of the fact that there would be way too many problems and it would be too time consuming etc.

And anyway role on TW3.

For me nothing (so far) can catch the magic of playing STW online. Anyways they all say they wont come back: but they always do (including me).

12 campaigns? i am not suprised you have seen enough.
i have only done 1 and a half campaigns in three months
i still find the game very interesting, yes, some campaign aspects are simple, yes, some more summary screens along the lines of civ2 (fan-bloody-tastitc) and civ3 would be very useful but how many other games allow you to run down peasants by the hundred (such nice screaming effects) with your heavy cavalry?
a thought just occurred to me, mtw simplifies some campaign aspects but it could be argued that other strategy games vastly oversimplify combat (when compared with mtw).

True, but a game is judged by its replayability. And personaly MTW is second for me behind Civ series. I played Civ2 for 4 months and many many hours each day. Civ3 was in my DVD-Rom for about 2 months. I am playing MTW since the second day it was released in Greece, that is 3-4 months, played Byzantines x2, Germans x2, English. I currently am enjoying a 3rd Byzantine campaign, late though, and I am still eager to play Danes, Italians and Egyptians.

Edit: My true love (in the pc-game world) lasted for only one week. It was Baldurs Gate II Shadows of Amn. I was playing 14-16 hours a day. Never done that before and never will. When I killed Irenicus in hell and finished the game, I thought that I had nothing to do with my life anymore. Brrr...

impressive. My favorite game was Sid Meier's Pirates...

But sure MTW is a hell's good game. Minor improvements are needed though, as a centralized management of agents. For example, a screen where I choose to "send 20 spies in Northumbria" to finish up the roastbeefs & "spread every other spy in friendly provinces to reduce rebellion probability". And another screen here I could Ally, Marry, check opinion from other factions or declare war. And another screen where I could check wich province is building what, without right-clicking everywhere.

I'm somewhat a professional programmer. In another domain than gaming, but I'm pretty sure it should be possible for the Add-on. The 2 last should even be easy. and soooooo useful. Frankly, I tend to save each turn & react only if a rebellion appears, instead of micro-managing. It's cheating, but it spares much time - and I find it's a shame...