They will most likely make that particular feature the same way as in Rome, which by my opinion is far better than the old "risk" style provinces.
Printable View
They will most likely make that particular feature the same way as in Rome, which by my opinion is far better than the old "risk" style provinces.
Another vote for the RTW style map. The old MTW style was good, but I always hated those huge multi-stack battles that used to eventually happen; because of the reinforcements system. More often than not I'd just auto-resolve those.
Well, if the AI isn't a million times better than it was in RTW (where it was frankly terrible) then I would say give us back the province system, because at least the AI could handle that. I don't want them to muck this one up like RTW.
Does any1 know wat the mtw2 map campaign map will be like? I loved the map in mtw and stw but absoutly HATED the rtw map, so much that i have rtw and bi lying under my bed used once -.-
Since its MTW 2 i thought it might be like the MTW campaign map (obvious i thought) but ive heard some people saying thats its a rewrite of rtw, any1 know?
I don't think they'll go back to the province based map that MTW and STW had, I think they're going to stay with the fluid map they introduced with Rome total war and hopefully make it better and better with each new game they produce.
There was a thread a while back which raised the question how you would like to see the map built, I'll dig up the link for you.
Moderator's edit: well spotted, Dutch Guy. Threads merged.
MTW!! FTW!!
I find MTW alot more fun, instead of "How long will it take to go around the forest?" (as in RTW) its more "Can i take on the 5000 men with my 5000 men?"
I find that RTW was more confusing than fun, it was more focued on the economy (Trade routes, Upgrading cities) than the fighting (Which is the main part of Total WAR), instead of "Im going to destroy the French because I can!" as it is in MTW, its more ":O Nice trade roads, prepare yourself Roman Scum!".
+ Bacteria cells are smarter than the AI in RTW! :)
+ RTW was way too easy, and the way you unlocked factions was just bad (Although they did fix this in the BI expansion pack)
All in all, MTW was focused on battles as the Total WAR series should be!
(Note: This is just the Campaign map, i never play the Battle maps so i wuldn't know about them)
(Also Note: MTW: VI was the best expansion pack ever!!!)
Sorry to burst your bubble, but it'll almost certainly not be risk-style.Quote:
Originally Posted by Total War Merc
And, having played both MTW and RTW, I think RTW is a lot better (though the AI couldn't be accused of that) in general.
I chose MTW. It was much cleaner. RTW's strategic map is just a mess.
If the strategic AI is fixed, RTW's map might be okay, but I wasn't really that impressed with it, and I much preferred MTW's 'total-ownership-or-no-ownership' of a province.
As far as RTW's linkage of the strategic to the tactical maps, I think the idea was good, and still is, but RTW's tactical maps were awful.
I've played both RTW and MTW, and I have to say I prefer the MTW map a whole lot more. I personally think the RTW map wasn't done well, and you could exploit the AI a hell of a lot more easily in RTW's system than in MTW. The RTW AI was just clueless with its army stacks. I also like the "total ownership or no ownership" of a province, the bigger battles, and how it didn't take 30 turns for your emissary/diplomat to meet with a distant faction. If they vastly improve the AI (and I mean a HUGE leap) then I might like the RTW style better, but as of now I would love to have the old style back. But alas, this will not be so.:wall: :gah2: :shame:
MTW maps are out..............sack em.
RTW is ok
As with this new game I'd like to see an improvement on past games from CA. I am not nostalgic, because things in the past are now obselete. So get over this obsession with older games and look to the future and for things to be different/better. OK!
diBorgia
I'm not sure if anyone has pointed this out, (haven't been bothered to read the thread) but CA have already confirmed that they will be using the RTW map.
Whether I like this or note I do not know, although as it has been said quite a few times before, the RTW map would be much better if the AI was fixed.
Yes, I'd be very much in agreement with that. As things stand, there are almost no effects at all in a province with an enemy army in it, which is just ridiculous. The presence of the enemy should be devastating to your economy and population, forcing you to try and defeat the enemy quickly before the province is ruined.Quote:
Originally Posted by sapi
And it should work the same way when you are on the offensive. There should be a big incentive to take a city or castle at the earliest possible moment because the province population should be plummeting from famine just by your army's presence. In that way you would want to move quickly before all the wealth and population of the province you're trying to capture is wasted.
And BTW, when you think about it, a mechanic like this would also slow down the rate of conquest and minimize the "steamroller" factor. Because many provinces, especially on faction borders, would be getting smashed back to nothing by constant warfare and would not be very useful to you for quite some time after capturing them. Also, the AI could if necessary be given a much quicker recovery rate for captured provinces, to help it out and make your own expansion a lot more difficult, especially at the harder difficulty levels.
Yes, I made much the same comment on another thread. The RTW campaign map just isn't interactive enough. There isn't really anything you can do on it except march back and forth and siege cities. It would be more fun and more challenging if you could, for example, raid a grain hex and steal its grain for your own faction, or just burn the thing to the ground. Or alternatively, capture stuff like mines and resources and either destroy them or pillage them for goodies.Quote:
Originally Posted by Claudius the God
Alternatively, it would be good if you had to actually develop resources instead of just getting a graphic of a pot somewhere to indicate this province has a pottery resource. So you'd have to actually build a pottery on the resource and build a road to it before you can benefit from it.
That way you'd want to defend your carefully built up and expensive infrastructure from the enemy. It's the kind of thing that would add a lot of interest to the strategy side of things, which in my opinion is just what the TW series most needs at the moment (apart from a better the AI, that is).
I voted M:TW map because I think it worked better than the R:TW map. Don't ask me why, I don't know either. The R:TW map is beautiful and has far more potential than M:TW, but I don't like the way the armies interact with it. If this could be improved, I would vote R:TW.
The RTW/mtw2 campaign map should be a changing earth just like the real thing.
Rivers flood and affect the terrain, crop lands brown in drought conditions, sea coasts flood in storms, lakes swell making land impassable, avalanches block passes, weather, -when you zoom out of the map to fly like an eagle, birds eye view, clouds stroll by, rain and snow storms, and lightning. Weather affects movement on the map. Forest fires. Villages and farms appear and disappear over time. Small towns grow in the countryside dependent on your main capitol, faction and provinces’ growth. The weather and invading armies, spies and diplomats can affect these towns, things, and places on the map.
Like others have said, an army can raze farms, destroy villages, towns, roads, mines, ports, fishing villages, forts, bridges, and buildings, and watch towers should be destroyable. What was with a faction building an icon for a watchtower that can never be removed.
The campaign map as it is now is not a part of the game but only a picture that is a means to the end – battles. Attacking Cities are the only way to affect a faction; the “land” is just eye candy. CA needs to innovate a world map that immerses the player as a living breathing environment, one where battles/armies, changes in terrain, real earth weather and nature effects, landscape and campaign economics are effected by the other.
SKR