A REALLY Interesting Preview Of M2TW

here something interesting

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

:

Quote:

---

Another new addition to the strategic map are princesses - pawns that can be used in a variety of underhand ways. Little more than whores in expensive garbs, these harlot diplomats can be prostituted to make alliances with rival factions (through arranged marriages), or sent to seduce enemy generals to your cause.

---

another:

Quote:

---

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

Mercilessly slaughter the prisoners you capture during a battle (a feature reprised from the original Medieval) and your general's 'dread' rating will rocket, making enemies fearful on the battlefield and civilians more obedient within cities. And while showing mercy in war may make your generals a target for 'big girly girl' remarks from opposing armies, at least the people will love them should you order them to babysit a settlement. Unless of course they raid the fridge, invite over their girlfriend and leave sticky stains on the sofa, in which case, they could be faced with a revolution.

---

you probably already know this but:

Quote:

---

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

Dead bodies now stack up in horrific mounds - rather than the flat 2D corpses of Rome - while the battle physics have clearly enjoyed a makeover, with clashes looking more brutal and jarring than ever before. Individual blades of grass sway in the breeze, shrubs look prunable, weather changes dynamically and night-time battles are looking more visually impressive than ever, while every armour and weapon upgrade you make in the strategic map is now visually represented on the real-time battlefield.

---

i like the preview! (the battles melee sounds great) if i can run RTW on low, do you think i can run M2TW in very low? btw i found this preview at the .com

Quote:

---

What strikes me most though isn't the French tactical naivety, but the breathtaking level of detail that these battles contain.

---

Um, bad sign?

yeah even tho many may think that is a funny remark, it probably points at weak AI more then anything. But hey, the graphics took his breath away so all is good, right ?

~:thumb:

Quote:

---

We've even ensured that each nation has the correct accent.

---

Heh, I'm sure this gives a whole new meaning to the word "correct".
Also did I get it right, infantry can impale themselves?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by L'Impresario

Also did I get it right, infantry can impale themselves?

---

AI infantry can, apparently.



:laugh4:

But the graphics are better than ever so no worries.


CBR

Tsk tsk tsk, such bitterness, shame...

Quote:

---

During the course of the next 20 minutes, I sit through three battles, each one more brutal and cinematic than the last.

---

Now, now, I hope the "sit through" has a similar meaning to "correct accents" :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by The Spartan

if i can run RTW on low, do you think i can run M2TW in very low?

---

um.. question?:idea2:

Quote:

---

"If you want to delve a little deeper into the economy, you'll be able to move merchants to pockets of resources dotted around the map," reveals Roxburgh. "If allied factions have merchants guarding a resource, you can attempt a hostile takeover and force them off. It's like an economic rivalry that's totally separate to being at war with a faction."

---

Sigh.

Also, 3 battles, including one siege, all with lots of men, over in 20 minutes?

Sigh.

Crazed Rabbit

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by The Spartan

if i can run RTW on low, do you think i can run M2TW in very low?

---

can anyone answer my question?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by The Spartan

can anyone answer my question?

---

Oops, I forgot to answer that in my first post... :sweatdrop:

Well, at one point I'm pretty sure CA said that "if you can run Rome, then you'll be able to run M2TW", but I don't think it's going to be that simple. If you are able to run it, then it will only be on the lowest graphics options...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Perplexed

Oops, I forgot to answer that in my first post... :sweatdrop:

Well, at one point I'm pretty sure CA said that "if you can run Rome, then you'll be able to run M2TW", but I don't think it's going to be that simple. If you are able to run it, then it will only be on the lowest graphics options...

---

thanks! at least i can play it! but perhaps i will get a new graphics card by then...

"What strikes me most though isn't the French tactical naivety, but the breathtaking level of detail that these battles contain."

Are the authors trying to convince me to spend my money on something else? Really the only way dumb AI could be justified is if they are playing on easy and they are on Agincourt versing a French side which is scripted to be as stupid as its historical counterpart.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Furious Mental

"What strikes me most though isn't the French tactical naivety, but the breathtaking level of detail that these battles contain."

Are the authors trying to convince me to spend my money on something else? Really the only way dumb AI could be justified is if they are playing on easy and they are on Agincourt versing a French side which is scripted to be as stupid as its historical counterpart.

---

I hope weak game reviews from half wits do not have more impact on game design than the hardcore fans. Remember when the reviews were complaining about inability to tell the difference between your units from the AI's in STW? Ugly bright faction colors started to make their appearance henceforth.

Has anyone read Gamspy's review of Alexander expansion? All was good till he started complaining about how hard the game was. :laugh4: Things like that water downs the game.

What is naievety? I have never seen this word, ever. I think it looks great, but my bet is that all the battles we have see are arcade battles witht the game speed set high. I hope the AI isn't as stupid as the French at Agincourt.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Perplexed

AI infantry can, apparently.



:laugh4:

---

That statement was pure evil, but funny and true.

Quote:

---

In Medieval II, the AI will not only remember previous dealings you've had with it but your dealings with other factions, too. It'll then base its stance towards you on all of those factors."

---

So finally if I shell money to a faction/nation, then suddenly share a border I won't immediately be greeted by a full stack army

Quote:

---

What's more, once your medieval empire becomes overwhelmingly powerful, you'll quickly find your rivals rallying together to oppose your expanding kingdom, a feature which the team hopes will make the game challenging from beginning to end.

---

Like that's new news

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Oaty

Quote:

---

What's more, once your medieval empire becomes overwhelmingly powerful, you'll quickly find your rivals rallying together to oppose your expanding kingdom, a feature which the team hopes will make the game challenging from beginning to end.

---

Like that's new news

---

Not sure what you mean about it not being new news. But it is new to TW at least, isn't it? I know other games have that "clubbing together against the pack leader" but I have not noticed it in RTW. (Can't recall about MTW and STW).

I actually don't like that kind of mechanic. It's not realistic: for example, it's not like all the world is going "Oooh, America is getting too powerful, let's all gang up on her." Moreover, it rather debases the diplomacy and means that if you are going to win it has got to be by total war. Yes, I know we could hardly sue CA under trade descriptions but still, I'd like to see more scope for diplomacy. Civ4 does it much better, with it being possible - but not easy - to charm your way to the top.

In MTW factions will not ally with you so easily (or not at all) if you're to big. In that case it's also more possible that all your neighbors suddenly start to attack together (think HRE).

I find it strange that CA depicts almost every thing that was included in a TW game but not in RTW as a new feature. It's as if they distance themselves from STW and MTW or that they ignore the older fanbase. Either way I find it a really strange and even (in case of option 2) an insulting move.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by The Spartan

if i can run RTW on low, do you think i can run M2TW in very low?

---

I would think so.

Quote:

---

Also, 3 battles, including one siege, all with lots of men, over in 20 minutes?

---

It is probably like in the RTW previews.
CA showed them something and then moved on without finishing the battle.

Quote:

---

it probably points at weak AI more then anything.

---

Quote:

---

First off is the age-old grudge match between the English and the French, set in lush surroundings flanked on both sides by dense forests. With Roxburgh's English forces dug in along a ridge, the French infantry launch an audacious bid to turn themselves into gallic kebabs as they march straight onto a row of spikes placed down by his archers (an all-new feature), while they send their cavalry through the trees to launch a surprise attack. Misjudged in the extreme, Roxburgh quickly dispatches an attempted foot soldier diversion, leaving the French mounted knights isolated and vulnerable.

---

Doesn't sound stupid to me.
It didn't work true but atleast the AI didn't send it's entire army up through the spikes and instead it tried to flank the army.
While going through a forest with cavalry isn't very smart, it had no other place to go, it was either that or the spikes.
If it went through the spikes then it would have been a sign of a weak AI.

Quote:

---

the French infantry launch an audacious bid to turn themselves into gallic kebabs as they march straight onto a row of spikes placed down by his archers (an all-new feature)

---

Does anyone with any historical knowledge know how these things actually worked? From my uninformed perspective I imagined that if a force of infantry had no other option than to move through an area guarded by these spikes, then rather than just charge through as normal they'd instead move really slowly suffering only a few losses but arriving at the otherside piecemeal and voulnerable to attack. I suppose this would depend on the density of the spikes, but I just can't see a armoured person willingly charging a wooden spike with enough momentum to pierce his armour.

To be fair to CA this might be how it happens in game, and the kebab comment might of just been the journalist embelishing what he saw. Either way it's difficult to assess whether or not this was a viable strategy from the perspective of the AI unless we know exactly what kind of obstacle these spikes represent and what kind of losses can be expected when forced to move through them.

Mercilessly slaughter the prisoners you capture during a battle (a feature reprised from the original Medieval) and your general's 'dread' rating will rocket, making enemies fearful on the battlefield and civilians more obedient within cities. And while showing mercy in war may make your generals a target for 'big girly girl' remarks from opposing armies, at least the people will love them should you order them to babysit a settlement. Unless of course they raid the fridge, invite over their girlfriend and leave sticky stains on the sofa, in which case, they could be faced with a revolution.

:2thumbsup:

Don't be worried comrades, for even though the enemy troops may be running circles around themselves and marching over cliffs, the gentle swaying of each individual blade of grass in the breeze shall keep us entertained for many months. :no:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BeeSting

Has anyone read Gamspy's review of Alexander expansion? All was good till he started complaining about how hard the game was. :laugh4: Things like that water downs the game.

---

now that you mentioined it im the one who brought that thread to the org! what do you mean he said he enjoyed it! (or are you talking about BI?)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Anthony Cecil Hogmanay Melchett

Does anyone with any historical knowledge know how these things actually worked? From my uninformed perspective I imagined that if a force of infantry had no other option than to move through an area guarded by these spikes, then rather than just charge through as normal they'd instead move really slowly suffering only a few losses but arriving at the otherside piecemeal and voulnerable to attack. I suppose this would depend on the density of the spikes, but I just can't see a armoured person willingly charging a wooden spike with enough momentum to pierce his armour.

---

Longbowmen's stakes are meant to stop cavalry. They cannot have been too dense as that would have prevented the archers from going forward as we know they did at Agincourt. If infantry gets impaled on stakes in M2TW then that is 100% BS


CBR

I'm not surprised if that preview brushed aside the criticisms of AI as if it wasn't important - this is the same magazine that didn't actually review Rome Total War, they just presented a glorified press release with a 90%+ score at the end and made no real mention of problems with the game. They even said RTW had 'AI so great Hannibal could be in charge'. Which Hannibal are they talking about exactly? Some drunken unwashed tramp co-incidently called Hannibal who hasn't seen a bath in his life time, let alone a battlefield? PC Zone seem much like all the other games publications these days: full of over the top enthusiasm for games and developers they're in bed with.

Regardless, MTW2 seems a lot more promising than RTW. Who knows, a few more TWs down the line and we might edge towards the perfect real time strategy game.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CBR

Longbowmen's stakes are meant to stop cavalry. They cannot have been too dense as that would have prevented the archers from going forward as we know they did at Agincourt. If infantry gets impaled on stakes in M2TW then that is 100% BS


CBR

---

I see, thank you. There was something that didn't seem to sit right about the concept of being able to build such an effective barrier against enemy infantry. Can you imagine how horrible it's going to be to fight a bridge battle against the English, if this is the case?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by professorspatula

Who knows, a few more TWs down the line and we might edge towards the perfect real time strategy game.

---

Yes. You'll have health packs strewn around the battlefield to replenish your hitpoints.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Anthony Cecil Hogmanay Melchett

Does anyone with any historical knowledge know how these things actually worked? From my uninformed perspective I imagined that if a force of infantry had no other option than to move through an area guarded by these spikes, then rather than just charge through as normal they'd instead move really slowly suffering only a few losses but arriving at the otherside piecemeal and voulnerable to attack. I suppose this would depend on the density of the spikes, but I just can't see a armoured person willingly charging a wooden spike with enough momentum to pierce his armour.

To be fair to CA this might be how it happens in game, and the kebab comment might of just been the journalist embelishing what he saw. Either way it's difficult to assess whether or not this was a viable strategy from the perspective of the AI unless we know exactly what kind of obstacle these spikes represent and what kind of losses can be expected when forced to move through them.

---

When I read that I interpreted it in three different ways at the same time.
1 - I thought instantaneously to the wooden stake scene in Braveheart, where the infantry waited until the very last second to drop down and lift the stakes into the air, effectively implailing the entire english cavalry charge and destroying the greatest asset they had on the field that day. I could see the archers waiting until the last second to impale some charging infantry with hidden stakes like that, then charging or firing on the demoralized and scared crapless infantry that just suddenly got a mouthful of spears that hadn't previously existed only a second or so ago.
2 - I thought of the possibility of a really dense hedge of large spikes pre-placed into the ground. The infantry try to move too quickly through the hedge and their comrades in the rear accidentally push the front ranks into spikes as they try to shove their way through.
3 - The infantry try to quickly move through the spikes and the archers unload on them as they do, the kebab part coming from infantry being impaled while wading through the spikes by arrows or infantry who see this happening trying to route and falling over the obstacles, impaling themselves on them in the process.


I would love for nothing more than to hope that the infantry didn't just blatantly charge a wall of spikes it could clearly see.