Re: STW,MTW,RTW - does play sequence matter?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Puzz3D
With the radar map off and the camera low you have to search for the enemy, .....
You are kidding me right?...:embarassed:
I had trouble finding the enemy with all this turned on - that's what led to starting this post in the first place...
After doing the campaign map, I guess I got 'cocky' and clicked on 'quick battle', so I found myself with a slew of troops and a big 'Start deployment' on top of the screen, so I click it and a 'Start battle' came up all the while the enemy was nowhere to be seen and as I didn't know any better I clicked on 'start battle' as I was under the assumption that my install was corrupted and I wanted to get out of there - well, when I clicked that button, all of a sudden, there were enemies everywhere :dizzy2: - needless to say, it wasn't pretty - I learned how to run quite well though...~;)
Thanks for everybodys help so far, I promise to keep on trying (mental note: lots more reading to do) - back to the tutorials it is...~:cheers:
Re: STW,MTW,RTW - does play sequence matter?
I'd suggest starting with STW since I always found the risk-style map of Japan to be more straight forward from a strategic perspective than that of Europe (MTW) especially if you start from the end of the island. Therefore, it may be a better starting point to learn the tactical/maneuver side of the game. The British Isles (MTW) are also less complex for the same reason but then you have to deal with the vikings.
Re: STW,MTW,RTW - does play sequence matter?
Quote:
Originally Posted by C-F
I had trouble finding the enemy with all this turned on - that's what led to starting this post in the first place...
Ok. Then leave the radar map on until you get better.
Re: STW,MTW,RTW - does play sequence matter?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ludens
M:TW's battle model features rank bonuses, push back and a tweaked morale system. Cavalry depend more on their charge and less on the following melee to win. I didn't think S:TW that much smoother than M:TW, but I agree the battles were more of a challenge and the A.I. could skirmish better. It had too, though, because IMO M:TW's skirmish units are no match for their S:TW equivalents.
Yes, I think MTW's battles are probably more - epic, shall we say, because they seem to last a lot longer before one or other side breaks. In Shogun the battles are usually shorter and more intense. It's probably no more than a matter of taste which you prefer.
However, I wouldn't describe the tweaks you refer to as part of the battle engine. They are more to do with the battle logic. The engine is the bit of programming that handles the actual movement and redrawing of the units, and in Shogun, it's much smoother.
Perhaps this is more evident to me because I used to play both games on a less than powerful PC. MTW battles get bogged down really quickly. STW's is much smoother, faster and more responsive by comparison. It's like the difference between a program written in C and one written in Assembler.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ludens
S:TW was more of a challenge in the initial stages of the campaign, but once you had half of Japan you could steamroller the rest. This is less present in M:TW, especially if you install MedMod.
Yeah, it's true that STW is a lot easier by comparison. I had fun for ages when I first got it though. I can steamroll my way through an STW campaign now.
