M2: TW. Pre-E3 and E3.

I'd appericiate it if anyone who comes at some new info, would quote it here and put the link of the source.

Thank you!

http://www.gamespot.com/pc/strategy/...25&mode=recent

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gamespot

E3: Medieval 2: Total War Pre-Show First Look!
"Of course, the team isn't putting all its energy into making Medieval 2 look prettier; the designers are working hard to make it play better, too. It sounds like there will be even more for you to do in the midst of battle than before, such as deploying some of the roughly 250 unit-specific abilities that will be available.."

---

Preview on IGN: (The_Doctor)

http://uk.pc.ign.com/articles/707/707754p1.html

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by IGN Preview

During the fight we noticed a few different things about the battle. First off, musketmen fire and then retreat to the back of the line in order to keep the lines firing one after another..

---

A new video on gamespot. Different from the one on totalwar.com (May, the 10th). (The Doctor).

http://uk.gamespot.com/pc/strategy/m...war/media.html

Medieval 2: Total War Impressions (Gamespot):

http://www.gamespot.com/pc/strategy/...44&mode=recent

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by E3 06: Medieval 2: Total War Impressions

".. the artificial intelligence should be smarter, according to the developers. They've worked on this a lot, and we saw it in the game, as the French army.."

---

2 new gameplay movies (Gamespot):

http://www.gamespot.com/pc/strategy/...war/media.html

An video interview with a M2: TW dev (Gamespot):

http://www.gamespot.com/pc/strategy/...war/media.html

Some new info about Aztecs and the New World (IGN):

http://pc.ign.com/articles/707/707754p1.html

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by IGN

"The Aztec armies are a colorful lot. It's hard to comment on the authenticity of the garb these guys are wearing when you know very little about the culture"

---

250 unit abilities??!!! I wonder how that will work?!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by LegioXXXUlpiaVictrix

250 unit abilities??!!! I wonder how that will work?!

---

Unit specific abilities perhaps? We get around 250 abilities to maybe that number or a somewhat larger number of units. It is possible that they did add two or maybe even more abilities per unit, but I personally do not find that as likely.

Call me untrusting, but I have experience with telling the truth and making it work a lot like a very good lie. And this sounds like something I would say in order to make something appear better.

it's Gamespot who said that, not CA. They probably meant there are roughly 250 different units, not 250 different abilities.

Interesting idea.

Lets look at english Longbowmen as an example. Maybe you can train them to have different abilities

Make Wedge
Place stakes in the ground
Use different types of arrows
second quiver of arrows
Aim at different parts of the body or maybe at a mounted knights horse.
Flaming arrows
mounted/ unmounted
different types of contract levy/indenture
Different draws giving different ranges
Specialise - ie knight killers, castle attackers etc.....
dig potholes, ditches or use hedges
etc....

This is just ment to be an example of what could be done with specific units.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ShadesWolf

Interesting idea.

Lets look at english Longbowmen as an example. Maybe you can train them to have different abilities

Make Wedge
Place stakes in the ground
Use different types of arrows
second quiver of arrows
Aim at different parts of the body or maybe at a mounted knights horse.
Flaming arrows
mounted/ unmounted
different types of contract levy/indenture
Different draws giving different ranges
Specialise - ie knight killers, castle attackers etc.....
dig potholes, ditches or use hedges
etc....

This is just ment to be an example of what could be done with specific units.

---

I like the mounted idea, but they shouldn't fire the bow from horseback just use it as means for speed and movement.

Also maybe using Caltrops as another defensive means against cavalry?

I hear at E3 they will show a night siege, a campaign map demo and the Aztecs for the first time!

I think that such special abilities would ruin the game. I mean, if longbowmen would be able to defend themselves against cavalry, then their will be no way except other archers to kill him?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by x-dANGEr

I think that such special abilities would ruin the game. I mean, if longbowmen would be able to defend themselves against cavalry, then their will be no way except other archers to kill him?

---

Or cannon. ~;) I recall reading that cannon was a key factor in giving the French an edge over the English in battles at the end of the Hundred Years War.

Before that, longbowmen were not easy targets for knights - they did use stakes to protect themselves from mounted knights and when out of arrows, they could rush out and butcher dismounted knights with knives, mallets, axes etc. They were big powerful men with very muscular upper bodies and in the English armies in France, probably a hardcore of semi-professional fighters. Some have speculated from the sources that the French knights avoided attacking clusters of English archers because they were not worthy opponents (no honour in killing a "peasant") but I am not wholly convinced.

I recall a TV documentary - fronted by that medieval weapons enthusiast who sometimes was an expert on Time Commanders - which speculated that the English longbowmen could act as horse archers in a pinch, based on an account of how they stormed a defended ford in advance of one of the big battles of the Hundred Years War.

There is a new video on gamespot. It is not the one on the .com.

http://uk.gamespot.com/pc/strategy/m...war/media.html

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by The_Doctor

There is a new video on gamespot. It is not the one on the .com.

http://uk.gamespot.com/pc/strategy/m...war/media.html

---

Hmmm, looks a bit weird to me. The soldiers do look motion captured but they also seem to move very jerkily at times. The horses legs when running look all wrong. And the animation of the cannon recoil looks just plain ridiculous, with the wheels lifting off the ground like that. It makes the cannons look as if they weigh next to nothing!

Those animations look very good! With R:TW it seemed that alot of the motion-captured animations were postprocessed to make them look more extreme, but it looks they now looked more at how people move at kept to it.

The jerkiness might come from when one animation goes over into the next. This was very smooth in R:TW so I guess they will fix it.

:2thumbsup: Well done, CA! A few modding tools quickly after release and I am a happy man.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by The Blind King of Bohemia

I like the mounted idea, but they shouldn't fire the bow from horseback just use it as means for speed and movement.

---

Totally agree

What I ment was for moving about, and maybe a nice animation of the horses being help behind the archers. In the baggage area at the back of the camp

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by The_Doctor

There is a new video on gamespot. It is not the one on the .com.

http://uk.gamespot.com/pc/strategy/m...war/media.html

---

This link doesn't seem to work for me...
Is there some other link for that video? Anyone....:help:

Quote:

---

This link doesn't seem to work for me...
Is there some other link for that video? Anyone....

---

Welcome the forum, Justicion.
Try going to Gamespot, then search for M2TW and go to the video section of it.


Also there is a preview on IGN:
http://uk.pc.ign.com/articles/707/707754p1.html

Quote:

---

During the fight we noticed a few different things about the battle. First off, musketmen fire and then retreat to the back of the line in order to keep the lines firing one after another.

---

This is will make the The Lordz happy.

Thanks Doc,
but I guess I wasn't clear enough, the link is fine...
it's just that i can't play the video from their site:furious3: , and i'm not a member :inquisitive: so i can't download it.... but never mind, i'll see it sooner or later
(if i don't die from curiosity first:wall: )

Quote:

---

it's just that i can't play the video from their site , and i'm not a member so i can't download it.... but never mind, i'll see it sooner or later

---

I see.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Justicion

Thanks Doc,
but I guess I wasn't clear enough, the link is fine...
it's just that i can't play the video from their site:furious3: , and i'm not a member :inquisitive: so i can't download it.... but never mind, i'll see it sooner or later
(if i don't die from curiosity first:wall: )

---

Then, register and become one! :)

I see everyone is talking about what it looks like and not how the gameplay is going to be. It is obvious that no time will have been spent improving the Tactical AI, so everyone will have to play multiplayer to get any worthy opposition.

They aren't even thinking of increasing the number of units under a players control. The only differnce is going to be in how it looks. It's a game that only taxes your RAM and GPU. Your CPU will never become the bottleneck as the AI which sets the bar for singleplayer gameplay has been ignored.

I haven't seen any improvement in gameplay since STW. The sprites get prettier each time, and the switch to 3D only critically wounded multiplayer gaming, but it was still possible in that incredibly jerky way for 2-4 players.

(Check my join date before you start bagging me out, I've been with TW a very long time.)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dunhill

I haven't seen any improvement in gameplay since STW.

---

It depends what you are looking for. If you are just thinking about the battles, I can see your point. But I think the MTW strategic layer was a massive step up from STW. STWs SP campaign was essentially a slugfest (Hojo horde anyone?). MTW liberated the player, giving them much greater strategic freedom, especially with crusades and other glorious achievements. The faction settings and unit line ups were also much more varied. So, personally, I found the gameplay in MTW much better than STW.

RTW is more of a mixed bag. The strategic map is even more free than that in MTW and moving your armies around on it just feels more realistic than the risk style map. Perhaps inevitably, the AI is less competitive on it, though. At a tactical level, I like the greater differentiation of army styles in RTW - phalanx, legion, horse archer, barbarian, hybrid etc. That variety has added to the gameplay, although again the AI maybe has not caught up (esp. with phalanxes - it's rather good with horse archers, as far as I can tell).

Personally, I prefer the SP gameplay of RTW mods such as RTR and EB to that of the older TW titles. It now feels like a pretty authentic and very enjoyable historical wargame, which is what the TW battle engine always had the potential to provide. The AI may be less competitve, but then I guess that's the price of the greater realism and freedom (Chess anyone?).

Best animation yet: Cannon loading! Holy smokes that looks good!

I'm interested in those rockets... :inquisitive:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by edyzmedieval

I'm interested in those rockets... :inquisitive:

---

That scared me too. Reminds me of the greek fire flame-thrower in Spartan. :no:

Flame throwers, flaming pigs, rocket launchers... huh? Sure, there might be one time in history that some bizarre invention was attempted, but as a regular unit incoporated into the game? Gah.

You forgot Cannon Elephants.

:grin:

I don't agree that you must sacrifice on the AI for greater realism and freedom of play.

Take Command has multiple uniforms within individual units, individual sprites for particular officers. The ability to mod for one sprite one = one man, and as its a game for grognards, you can be sure the order of battle is perfect if you want realism. However, if you want freedom, its built to mod, so if you want a new unit or you want to change the unit stats go ahead.

However, it is the AI which makes it a challenge. TW just becomes a slog, and the lack of an AI means increased difficulty just produces hordes.

I'd much rather have them spend 1/4 of the time working on the AI than all thier time designing new unit graphics. The TW community is going to do that anyway. What we can't mod is the AI. What they are doing is adding strategic units one by one to the mix, which adds a bit to that level of play, but it is somewhat meaningless if the only options for the AI are pushover or horde.

Good point. The AI is hard-coded and has been silly in R: TW, and if it continues the same, I think many SP-fans will reject TW games.

"That scared me too. Reminds me of the greek fire flame-thrower in Spartan.

Flame throwers, flaming pigs, rocket launchers... huh? Sure, there might be one time in history that some bizarre invention was attempted, but as a regular unit incoporated into the game? Gah."

If you are going to make it your business to get outraged over historical inaccuracies I suggest you do your research first rather than simply selecting something which seems intuitively unlikely and deciding that it is unrealistic. In fairness to CA rockets of the sort depicted in the video were a regular feature of armies in many parts of East Asia and were used by Muslims too. Amazingly the rationale which CA gives for their inclusion is completely valid.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Furious Mental

If you are going to make it your business to get outraged over historical inaccuracies I suggest you do your research first rather than simply selecting something which seems intuitively unlikely and deciding that it is unrealistic. In fairness to CA rockets of the sort depicted in the video were a regular feature of armies in many parts of East Asia and were used by Muslims too. Amazingly the rationale which CA gives for their inclusion is completely valid.

---

I have every right to express my concern over historical accuracy, and that is nowhere near outrage. I suggest you watch your tone. If I am incorrect about something, then say so and show me how. I will listen. There is no call for attitude when a member simply suggests something may not be wholly accurate.

We all love TW and have respect for the contributions of CA, otherwise we wouldn't be posting at the Org.


If you want to continue this discussion, PM me. You don't need to flame others in the open forum. However, if you would like to have a scholarly discussion on the historical accuracy of included units, then by all means, let's do it here and with mutual respect. Thanks. :bow:

Quote:

---

There are more than 250 unique units in the game, each with special abilities, such as the English longbow ability to place spikes down before a battle, protecting them from charges by mounted knights.

---

Just found this in another thread. So it looks like we were on the right type of track about abilities.

Flaming? Rofl.

Boomtown preview

interesting:

Quote:

---

Creative Assembly points out the three most important lessons from Rome: Total War: 1) no more samey-looking soldiers 2) a far superior AI and 3) a deeper campaign. We will see the result of their endeavours this November, but after the demonstration I cannot doubt that Medieval 2 will be the best Total War game to date.

---