There's a roman storm brewing!

And it consists of a large amount of upset TW fans.

In my opinion rightly so.

The TW series has been like a secret christmas present for a few years now. Probably the only game in any genre than offers what it does, how it does.

There are very many gripes, many legitimate about the gameplay.

Because there has been no press response from CA this leads to comments about the organisation and business practices of CA itself - maybe partly true, maybe not.

I truly want a RTW like MTW with better graphics, better skirmishers, better charges and cavalry, bettter sieges, and NO LOSS IN REALISM and from what the demo shows us that won't happen.

The good news though and think about this carefully.

This is a demo, it is not for us old school TW fans. Imagine the meeting where they are deciding what to put on the demo. We coulod have this battle or that battle, to show the fans what it can do and then some bright spark pipes up and says "Why don't we do the demo in ARCADE MODE?, THAT WAY WE CAN ATTRACT NEWBIES. THE FANS WILL BUY IT ANYWAY"

Now we know there is an arcade mode in the game and we know what arcade modes run like in other games, faster and less realistic.

This demo IS AN ARCADE MODE.

My justification is this - if this isn't we are being shown just imagine how truly gay (please excuse the use of this word but you see the point) arcade mode will be.

Evidence - troops do not slow down when exhausted, kill rate at riduclous ( YES RIDICULOUS LEVELS), general running speeds.

Have faith peeps, it will all come good. ~:cheers:

Uhhh, running speeds are fine. Only problem is that units have the stamina of a freakin nazi-superman ~:joker: They should only be able to sprint like 50metres and then stop and be weakened. Killing speeds are only a little to fast, how long does it take to stab a guy in the back? ~:p but hopefully the full version of RTW will be better ~:pat:

I think the game will be fine and alot of people are worrying a little too much over nothing. The only thing that gets on my nerves is the power of the cavalry, but that can easily be modded.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by danimal

This demo IS AN ARCADE MODE

---

Thats just it really iand it has to be a good idea doesnt it? For marketing purposes.
My main grips with the coming RTW game are Gamespy intergration. I played alot of online MTW but was basically stoped in my tracks by gamespy. I have since found that it would run ok if i bought MTW:VI as this had the latest patch - thasnk CA for just stopping ALL support for MTW v1.1 :(

Hi,

I heard about the arcade mode before. But isn't it odd if this is true, that CA doesn't respond to its loyal core with a note? I mean.. if they simply say "People, the demo is in arcade mode, this is to show of the nice graphics and interest people who never played the series before. But! We also have the normal (or oldschool) mode, which is exactly like before, and should appeal to the people who bought our previous games", everything will be fine. The new people who like RTS-style fast action and are bored with C&C generals and Warcraft 3 would like it (they can play arcade mode) and the people who like the atmosphere of the previous TW games can rejoice as well (since they'll play the other mode).

So if they have those 2 modes, and they are like that... why doesn't CA put out a notice? The only reason I can think of is... that there won't be 2 modes like that, and therefore can't make the notice...

I don't mind the power of cavalry at all. In fact I feel that Rome is more realistic than ME or Shogun. Look at ME, castle sieges are a joke. And battles against the AI can get repetitive quickly. AI still isn't that great in Rome, but I don't think we should say the cavalry is too powerful unless we try stand up to a charge ourselves ~:p

And I don't understand what this talk about arcade mode is. CA is not going to throw in a massive 4-hour advanced battle into the first demo. If Trebia is too easy for you, then guess what, we are just getting started.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by danimal

This demo IS AN ARCADE MODE.

Have faith peeps, it will all come good. ~:cheers:

---

Our Puzz3D (can I call him Yuuki?) has tested and confirmed that the demo is NOT in arcade mode. In addition, the Roman troops are not tired and are actually experienced troops, close to the valour of the carths.

If you play at expert and be a little slow in your use of cavalry, the romans can actually punch through your cartha troops. However, the death of the general has too big an effect on them.

I'm concerned about the speed, even if it is in arcade mode. The running speed will not change no matter what the mode, relative to the other troops and relative to the walking speed. Maybe the whole game is sped up, but the running speed of infantry is very fast compared to walking speed (someone somewhere on the .com posted what the speeds were). This speed is coded into the demo in dpack_0.pak, and it's the speed of the unit. That won't change (unless they modify the file before full launch). Kill speed probably won't change either, though I might be wrong about that.

Cavalry speed I thought was pretty good, but I think maybe the elephants are a bit too quick.

Now, perhaps the demo went quickly because it was an easy battle. It was. The Carthaginians are better in the environment of that battle, and (perhaps) they're of higher valor/experience (though when looking at the data file, Roman troops also have some valor/experience). But also, it was an ambush. That's supposed to work, and I'm glad it did.

However, I still felt like it went by a little too quickly. I really didn't have time to watch the cool battles, because I had to zoom out too much to keep an eye on everything going by so fast. I wouldn't mind the guys having to hit each other a few more times before killing each other or routing. After all, I would assume that the Romans, with their training and formations, would be far less likely to rout. Okay, elephants can be crazy, and I'd probably rout, but really, I'd just run away from the elephants, and then regroup with my unit.

Another really nice touch that would be nice for CA to put in would be for my units that were routing and have recovered to gather in one place (perhaps a location I could set as a rally point).

"...I still felt like it went by a little too quickly..."

Yes, without a doubt it did. But that's more the effect of the armies starting toe-to-toe. Get the excellent mod of the demo that allows you to start without the cutscene description of the battle, with the two armies about as far away from each other as you can get on that map, and you'll be amazed with how SLOW the phalankai (the Greek plural of phalanx, btw) move.

Agreed though on the run/rout run speed, those routing Roman triarii almost outrun my cavalry.

Speaking of cavalry, see this post and following discussion regarding being run over by a horse...

LongJohn will make a final pass at balancing the combat just before the game goes gold. I am somewhat worried when something as simple as getting the skirmishing distance right is wrong in the demo. Didn't Activision QA notice that? As good as LongJohn is, he can make mistakes which is why you need other people checking things out. The organ gun in MTW/VI that can't shoot at its specified range because the projectile's speed parameter is set too low is a good example of what can happen when thourough checking isn't done. It only took me about 2 minutes to notice that when I was looking over the projectiles.txt file. I don't buy the "we didn't have time to check things out" excuse. Set up the project properly so that you have time. I've been involved in enough projects to know that managers never want to give enough time for debugging. The engineers/programmers have to stand their ground and insist on enough time being put into the development schedule for it.

I mesured the unit speeds to be:

MTW: walk x, inf run 1.67 x, cav walk 1.5x, cav run 3.33 (chiv knights), cav run 4.0x (alan cav)
RTW: walk x, inf run 2.5x, cav walk 1.25x, cav run 4.375x (sacred cav)

I measured two different kinds of inf in RTW, skirmishers and poeni inf. They were both the same. I have no way to actually measute it, but the walking speed in MTW and RTW seems to be about the same. It's pretty clear that the game has been speeded up in the running speeds. Walking your army into position before the fighting starts feels about the same as before and looks great, but when the fighting starts it feels like time all of a sudden got speeded up by about 50% faster. That doesn't give you better control over what's happening. It gives you less control than you had in MTW. In MTW multiplayer, it's already difficul to control all 16 units once the armies engage. In RTW, you're going to have 20 units to control.

I think a conflict in the gameplay between two different gendres has made itself apparent. I don't think CA can successfully embrace both gendres in a single gameplay. I don't understand why CA is so against providing two distinct styles of gameplay: histoical and gamey. They certainly are pushing the idea that the game can simulate ancient battles with the Decisive Battles Program on the History Channel, and they make a big deal about all the control you supposedly have and the need to use sophisticated tactics. Then when you play the RTW demo you say to yourself, "What happened to the tactics and control?". The Trebia battle in the demo is apparently CA best shot at making the game appear to be somewhat historical. Give me a break. As stated in an interview of a CA executive, the game has been designed so that you can simulate the opening battle in the movie "Gladiator". And later on with the full game, why on earth would I use elephants, fire pigs and vicious dogs if they are going to kill my own troops? For the fun of it?

Lets face it, the majority who have played TW before are going the buy this game regardless of playing a demo or not. I like the demo overall & the mods which people have supplied. I personaly have complete faith that the final game will be a solid & polished article.

I want my copy now!!! :jumping:

IRT #1

A pretty puny storm, in my opinion. I'm not gonna critisize you (and anyone else who wants a super-realistic RTW) for wanting what you do, but I think it's important that you realize that games are a buisness. The only way Creative Assembly can stay in buiness is if they make games which sell, which they do by making games which appeal to the majority of gamers out there . Your points are valid and true, but I'm afraid that this time you and all the other guys who want realism are simply in the minority (not nessecarily within the context of this forum, but within the context of the entire gaming PC gaming market). Besides, I'm sure that within a week on release there will be several mods making the game more realistic, so you'll probably get what you're looking for anyways. But expecting CA to put their sales down the crapper to appease a relatively small section of customers is just unreasonable.

Anyways, I mean no disrespect and I'm just throwin' out my two cents.l

Disagree Katana.

A truly realistic game would mean monster sales. Advertising would be a breeze for it.

'Come fight in a realistic roman war and slaughter gauls' is what appeals
Not 'Come fight in a roman war on amphetamines'.

But I do appreciate the respectful tone of your comments
~:cheers:

Again, I'm afraid I disagree. A truly realistic game would have terrible sales, because it would be absolutely no fun to play. Regardless of the 'realism' factor, do you really think the average computer user (i.e. not someone who uses these forums) cares whether the color of druids cloaks or if there actually were camel cataphracts? Of course not, the general computing population just wants a good game. Anyways, you're free to want whatever it is you do (though that one fantasy about the sheep is slightly distrubing).

~:cheers:

katana your point is diverging from the actual argument

the argument that the game moves WAY too quickly is a valid one. I don't really mind that perhaps the running is a little faster, I understand that to a point and can comprimise. The thing that really irks me is that you have exponentially less control over your troops once you engage with the enemy. It's almost like they over compinsated for teh MTW way that units would become stuck in a mass of units in melee combat. The combat seems extremely sped up even with the armour that the units are wearing. I appreciate CA trying to appease their fans but it seems like they never talk to us and if they do read these forums they don't really seem like they're interested in attracting us back for another round of Total War gaming with their absence.

Then again maybe the demo is totally rubbish and the actual game will be a miracle...

... but I'm not holding my breath

It's good that you're not holding your breath, as you seem to be a rather pasty fellow with laughable lung capacity. ~D

I can see your point, but I personally find certain aspects of the game, such as cavalry flanking, to be way, WAY easier in RTW than in MTW. Anyways, this is pure personal preferance, but I really think that CA is making a smart buisness descicion by moving away from the glacial pased combat of MTW. And don't forget, there is a pause button and there will inevitably be a bevy of realism mods developed right after the game is released.

Pause button is not for game play ... it is for real life interruptions.

Games that require pause button are normally their not to slow the pace down but to answer to real life. How many FPS do people play using the pause button to keep up with the pace?

Its like playing DiabloII pause, think about next attack, pause, think pause...

:saint:

BTW cut down on the personal references such as:

Quote:

---

as you seem to be a rather pasty fellow with laughable lung capacity.

---

Snide remarks have a way of returning people to Junior Patron Status not getting them out of it.