dittoQuote:
Originally Posted by player1
plus, I'm sure it's easier to patch up a couple skins rather than rework an entire battle engine or enemy AI
Printable View
dittoQuote:
Originally Posted by player1
plus, I'm sure it's easier to patch up a couple skins rather than rework an entire battle engine or enemy AI
Most seem to be forgetting that it is what it is.....a game.
Jochi
Both battles played, Very Hard, Heroic Victories.
The battle with Arthur was actually a bit challenging, because of the terrain and the AI tendency to suicide the German general (of course), causing a loss.
1. I just noticed, after playing a little STW & MTW for old times sake, that battle pace is actually Very Very Fast. So fast that it prevents:
- Me enjoying the graphics. Whatever i see is over within seconds. The camera i have to choose to enjoy (a few clicks scroll 'down') doesnt give a good overview of the battle, which you need every second because its so fast.
- AI making better decisions, which are of course scripted in demo's so i cant comment on them. Despite scripting you still see AI infantry trying to charge your cavalry, and other target choices which expose archers, etc. even on Very Hard.
- Melee fights. Horses move so fast they can rout opponent as quickly as you can click on them, its unbelievable. This is unbalancing... It takes away the strategy & enters the split second tactical decisions type of game... faster even you have to use pause to give multiple necessary orders at the same time.
- Rome:TW being a strategy game on the battlefield. It doesnt even matter that much what fights what (unit stat wise), its all about morale.
Now i enjoy both, and feel MTW and STW are too slow, plus you dont have a run button. I also dont feel that the battlefield is too small, thats just appearance.
2. Campaign pace is notably slower than MTW or STW, because of all the options/traits/ancillaries. I dont think most people like this aspect, imo.
Rome:TW is not that bugged... its just all the different possible styles of play.. tough job. But playing Rome feels more and more like playing Halo. Damn, never thought i'd say it (DX8.1 versus DX9, yet Rome can be graphics cards intensive like Halo, contrary to what i thought).
Don´t tell me you´d actually stoop so low as to cheat with iddqd?Quote:
Originally Posted by EvilNed
....and? That means we shouldn´t desire better playability or more fun from out of it, or what?Quote:
Originally Posted by Jochi Khan
It just so happens that challenge and believability are what make this -GAME- -FUN-.
As in many other cases, I simply cannot understand this answer.
"It´s a game, so we should just be happy with it as it is".
Pardon me if I misunderstood, but it´s just that I see this answer all the time whenever people start talking about realism and challenge and how it would make things more fun.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ludens
Well now it's out and while it's seems to have some decent new features, I'm hearing the same complaints about AI, and pathfinding... so I will wait... there are many decent looking games planned to be released late 06... TW is still in it's own category, but for how long?
Does anyone know exactly how much as actually been addressed from the the mulitplayer's petition?
https://forums.totalwar.org/vb/showthread.php?t=38505 It would be nice if someone could do a run down on this or direct me to where it may be... sorry I don't come that often to keep up.
The add on really breathes life into the game and i am really enjoying it with the west empire campaigns being one of the hardest i have ever played. Top stuff indeed and alot of the new units are not that bad either. The berber skins apart from the bright bluey/green are really good work.
The sea turned black in my Sassanid campaign.. This happened to anyone else?