Too Many Rules Take Away the Variety in Gameplay?

Is it just me or were there more variety of strategy in STW's earlier times? People used different strategies because people used different armies. I used a variety of army units that included missile, infantry, and cavalry units. Their different strong points supported each other. Then there were some other people who used the ashigaru rush, monk rush, naginata cavalry rush, camping, low koku games, etc. Once I figured out how to beat these unusual strategies with my usual form of army, it was fun and refreshing. Plus, beating these difficult armies was exhilarating. The Mongol army added much more spice to the game.

Then they added a patch that made it more expensive to use ashigarus, monks, and Mongol cavalry. The Mongol cavalry became depressing because people no longer used that army. There was no point in having the Warlord Edition except for the naginata cavalry. I rarely used the kensai or the battlefield ninja.

Instead of banning certain armies so that we could stick to our usual army movements, we should improvise in our strategy. I met the same sort of armies so many times, and that made me do the same thing over and over again.

The same could be said for the no elephant and no artillery rule. Artillery is the best weapon (mostly the rocket launcher) against elephants. I find it fun to watch enemy elephants go on a rampage against armies on their own side. Did you know that after routing an elephant unit, the rocket launcher will automatically aim at another while it fires in succession? It's refreshing after watching similar armies face each other over and over again.

And the preference for 10K games worked well for STW. But I don't think it's enough for MTW and M2TW. We keep using the same cheap army units including hundreds of different cheap spear units. I'd like to use army units that were specific to certain factions.

What do you think about that?

Shogun didn't exactly have diversity in units and factions, hence why it was much easier to have balanced MPlay. With M2TW there are far too many factions and units hence why there are user-created limitations. For balance purposes, artillery does not exactly reflect skill due to its randomness, so competitive MPers tend to avoid it. Elephants in RTW were allowed because it was possible for both teams to have them, whereas M2TW limits elephants to one faction -- so one team in a match. And they are not just elephants...they are sniperphants and cannophants which increase routing capability due to the gunpowder element. In one tournament artillery was allowed because elephants were allowed, but when you are faced with an elephant rush you have to hope that one...maybe two volleys of inaccurate fire ammo can hit the ele before it smashes you. Limiting these elements does in a sense reduce tactical variety, but it also is necessary for competitive play. Shogun was simpler and more balanced which did not require these stringent rules.

Regarding 10k, well you have to budget. Too often people get accustomed to stacking expensive units with large 20k+ games, but this does not exactly attribute any skill to your unit selection which has become an integral part of Mplay. You have to make sacrifices in either your cav or your inf to improve the other. For team games you can coordinate this and go top-heavy with factions that have advantages in either cav or inf.

I Think Some Rules are Needed, but I don't like when players use so many rules, then they say they are needed. I mean Come on. Some Rules yes, but most no way.

The host can make rules, players can join.


Does a rule try to fix/finetune a balanceproblem or does it just ban a unit that's considered annoying? It's a bit of both. The 4 ashi max rule in STW WE was more of the first type, no art in MTW was one of the second I feel. But mileage varies.

I prefer no rules at all, but when the host sets rules, and I wish to play I stick to that without protest.

Good playbalance increased variety in army composition and tactics utilized, and allows the full potential of the gameplay to become apparent. The game should be balanced well enough that rules are not needed because that gives the best playing experience. Removing units with rules detracts from variety, splits the community and causes problems when someone doesn't follow the rules either inadvertently or intentionally. Using mods also splits the community, but they don't suffer from the other two problems associated with using rules.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Puzz3D

..Using mods also splits the community..

---

Mods do not split the community. Maps do not split the community either, nor does different money levels.

However, sometimes it does: when people insist on their own favourite. But that doesn't have to be a bad thing either. When there is something to choose, the chance that there's something that suits someone increases and thus the pool of players increases.

Illustration: one map, one money level, one unit, one weather and one being the number will make near 0% community splitting, but how many people will like such a setting? How large will the community be?

Support for playing mods, regarding playing them online !, is not optimal. Every game from STW up till Kingdoms, is a totalwar game that can be played online. And every one of them is still played online today.

It's a pity that the original games that started the success and are still sold today in new distributions (be it in small volumes), do not allow official online play. It's also a pity that each game, if it's still supported, is played in its own room/channel/server. Not every one plays the same title, but it's still a totalwar game.

When STW WE was released, the new players were sent to a new channel. When VI was released, people were sent to a new channel. The patch fixed it and brought the MTW and VI people, both totalwar players, back together in one and the same room. New VI players, who didn't know about the patch, still entered the old new VI channel, an empty channel. There even wasn't a message in that empty channel to tell those new people to update. Left in the dark. Those new channels weren't a requirement set in stone, as STW WE would function in the STW lobby and vice versa, same for MTW and VI.

MTW has that nifty system of eras, it doesn't work smooth, but at least you can load partial mods without the need to relog and restart the whole game. When you play a game like UT online and when the host has it enabled, you don't have to worry about having the right content or not.

Totalwar players should be in one lobby and be able to play a mod without the need to install it first (and worry about doing it right). Ideally, all totalwar games should also share the same updated engine, so a M2TW player can play a game with the old buddies that stayed behind in STW.

Puzz3D, we KNOW you dislike everything after STW, but the question is regarding why there are limiting rules. We would all ideally love the game to be balanced enough that there are no rules, but that is not reality. These games are flawed, and we have to input rules for balance. Yes it does hinder diversity, but these games have more unit varieties than STW and is not as easily balanced, hence why the community injects their own rules to manipulate the poor game design.

RE: TosaInu

I agree completely. Games such as SupCom have this in place and allow people to select the mod they are using when they host. This would make retrofit more popular and maybe bring some life back to the MP community. Every mod would benefit from this in fact...

i rarely see many mods, and "no art, 4 max same unit" isnt a bad rule.

actually i dont even mind art too much but i despise cav armies, it is just obnoxious in my opinion

a) they usually hurt the team unfortunate enough to have the new/average guy with the cav army

b)they tend to have alot of horse archer and you have to chase his stupid army around all over the map to finish him, no matter if he cant really hurt your army or not

c)in a good players hands it is too powerful, especially when matched against a pick up team. it just asks to much of the average gamer to defend that garbage

d)it just adds too much chaos to larger games, and when u got 8 people on 1 map you dont need added confusion, especially when the guy is on your team marching his host of cavalry behind your lines and nobody knows what he is doing

thats all that bothers me

when i host games my rule is normally "4 same unit type, max 6 cav" not too draconian in my opinion, but like tosa says, nobody has to join a game that they dont like

even when it happens to me, i always get a chuckle out of a well placed rock launched from a catapult that lands squarely on my unfortunate generals head :ahh:

With Retrofit mod you need ''no art'' and it works quite well actually. Besides new fixes are coming and it could be even better then MTW/VI. imo

I do not deny the potential for retrofit to become a solid game. What I am curious about is what Tosa said regarding an in game feature that allows you to select the mod without logging out to restart the game.

If a mod was ever to become successful I think that tool is needed, otherwise it will always be a minority of players using the mod.