"Multiplayer sucks" - RTW. Give it time people.

Hi, I've been lanning all day today, and I've also been reading comments of people in the RTW thread.

Multiplayer does NOT suck. Units do NOT die fast and battles are NOT over in 10 seconds, infact, it's about the same as MTW. The WORST thing I've experianced so far is the game going out of sync between computers which has happened a few times.

The stronger units, such as Urban Cohorts vs Sacred Band fight for a LONG time, flanking doesnt effect them much (infact Ive seen such units have special formations for when they get flanked).
There is plenty of time to manouver your troops and use proper tactics due to the wider variety I'd dare say RTW is even more tactical than MTW - and running really isnt that common.

The only thing so far that mows through troop is elephants. They're almost impossible to stop. It's easy to scare them though.

There are SOME things however that MUST be addressed - the ability only to pick one faction, 3v3 max, logfiles, and the fact you cant have split money between attackers/defenders.

What do you mean with only beeing able to choose one Faction? That one Player can only choose the Troops of one Faction? If it is that then whats so terrible about that? Why should one Player be able to choose the Troops of different Factions? That would imho be quite silly.

Sorry, I mean there can only be one faction in one game at a time.

I.E you cant have two Egypt players in one game.

Ah, well i'm in Germany and dont have Rome yet. ~:mecry:
That doesn't really make Sense then but i think it should be ok. So probably you're right if you say Mp doesn't suck. I also hope so of course. ~;)

A lot of people are concerned about the killing speed and its effect on multiplayer. But really after a day of playing the stronger units really do duke it out over a long period of time.
Most of my multiplayer games have in fact been LONGER and more tactical than MTW games ive played on lan.

Cavalry is also much less effective against the more heavily armoured troops than it is against gauls with no armour :)

Most of my roman units (Legions, Urban Cohorts, etc) fight until they're down to 6 or so men before routing, if they rout at all! Cavalry smashing into them is damaging, but they hardly get cut down.

The only thing that rips through troops is elephants, a group of 32 of them stomped through and killed 3 units of about 200 odd men! My guys still didnt rout tho :) They [the elephants] eventually got scared and went "balistic" which is also damn scarey but my units didnt rout.

I also saw units who were being flanked adopt a formation on their own where one rank would turn to face the flankers, while the remaining three ranks would continue fighting the other flank. Very cool.

I might add this is with NO upgrades either (as everything is so damn expensive).

[QUOTE=Morindin]I also saw units who were being flanked adopt a formation on their own where one rank would turn to face the flankers, while the remaining three ranks would continue fighting the other flank. Very cool.
[QUOTE]

Isn't this one of the key features of a legion? That they are so flexible and don't have to worry about their flanks? At least that's what Aryeh told in Time Commanders. Of course, he used more :karate: and :army: and :scholar: to show it...

So if you are not playing Romans... you might still have trouble with your flanks...
Multiplayer doesn't become good if '4 or 5' factions are nice and work, it becomes good when all factions ar nice and work.

So do you have experience with any other factions? Is playing them in MP also good?

Everyone is vulnerable at there flanks. Its just that swordsman can quicky turn to face there new threat much more quickly than spear class units

[QUOTE=Soulflame][QUOTE=Morindin]I also saw units who were being flanked adopt a formation on their own where one rank would turn to face the flankers, while the remaining three ranks would continue fighting the other flank. Very cool.

Quote:

---

Isn't this one of the key features of a legion? That they are so flexible and don't have to worry about their flanks? At least that's what Aryeh told in Time Commanders. Of course, he used more :karate: and :army: and :scholar: to show it...

So if you are not playing Romans... you might still have trouble with your flanks...
Multiplayer doesn't become good if '4 or 5' factions are nice and work, it becomes good when all factions ar nice and work.

So do you have experience with any other factions? Is playing them in MP also good?

---

Ive only being playing the Romans myself, but I've played against a few of them (carthies, eggies, mac's).

It's not just legions that do the "protect the flanks" formations but i've seen barbarian mercs do it too for example.

I found it very enjoyable to be honest. Gets a big laggy with lots of units around though - I doubt anyone short of NASA has a computer that could handle a 4v4 - which is probably why it's not in available.
Sieges are really fun now too.

One annoying thing however is you cant ctrl-group a unit unless its in a group. This isnt really a multiplayer issue, but because you need hotkeys more it becomes an issue.

I only think "hardcore" multiplayer MTW players will be dissapointed in this game if they EXPECT it to be MTW.
It's a different time period - far more infantry based, in other words its not MTW, so don't play it as such. With that in mind, its a blast. All the moaners should try Doom3 multiplayer, what a fricken disaster.

Tactically I find it a bit more challanging than MTW. MTW was pin, flank blah blah. Because of all the unit variety (skirmishers, roman infantry with pila's, etc) it opens up all sorts of possibilities.
I find your positioning and tactical manouvering is even more critical than in MTW because units move very slow when walking but tire very quickly when running. And there are no pavase arbalest wars to deal with too.

I think all the people who do not purchase this game because of a few sour people expecting MTW2 are missing out personally. Sure there are some annoyances but its hardly as bad as people make out.