Med2 Preview Event... the answers

*There are 21 factions, namely;
i prefer not to have starting factions

*Unit speeds and kill speeds have been decreases;
excellent news

*There are 8 Historical Battles planned
good news i guess

*A public demo is in the works and nearing completion
excellent

*They are aiming for minimum specs of; P4 1.8 Ghz Geforce4 128.
i would prefer they were higher, but i appreciate that won't suit everyone

*Generals can't be given titles like in Med 1
shame

*No eras like in Med1, there is only one campaign period.
not too fussed, but in the same manner as custom battles more variety is good

*Campaign battle replay... is uncertain.
do you mean battle replays or campaign replay, i am only aware of the former in M:TW?

cheers soulflame,

i'd love to see the answers to the modding questions.

particularly:
> max # of provinces
> max # of factions
> max # of unit types
> max size of map
> how christian/muslim reformation/schism events can be accomodated
> can we force linear multi-part year progression

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Peregrine_Tergiversate

*They are aiming for minimum specs of; P4 1.8 Ghz Geforce4 128.
i would prefer they were higher, but i appreciate that won't suit everyone

---

Can you tell us why? Don't forget, it isn't a 3D first person shooter. :laugh4: It is a battle simulation with 10k soldiers!

I'm a little confused about the titles. I know that, unlike MTW/STW, you can't turn any old captain into an important person with a title, but what was 'broken' about the 'drag Duke of York to Lord Roos' system? It personalized your armies and your generals in a big way and it was one of the biggest things I felt was missing from RTW. The spontaneous appearance of 'Commander of the Armies of the East' and the like in RTW/BI was a half-hearted effort to put this back -- you had no say in who got the titles to begin with, and your generals had to be sitting around in a city to get them in the first place!

I guess I just don't see the motivation behind this change.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ituralde

The Famous General can be seen in the faction overview scroll, the only screenshot I have found is the following of rather bad quality, I'm afraid, hope you can still make it out:
http://www.mitglied.lycos.de/eagleey...hots/mtw04.jpg

The faction overview can also be seen in the newest Official Movie talking about Religion and Crusades. The faction overview appears around 2:12 into the movie. The movie can be found here:
http://www.3dgamers.com/dlselect/gam...sades.wmv.html

Hope that helped!

Cheers!

Ituralde

---

Thank you very much mate :laugh4: :2thumbsup:

"I guess I just don't see the motivation behind this change."

Probably to make sure governors actually stay in the places they are supposed to be governing.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Furious Mental

"I guess I just don't see the motivation behind this change."

Probably to make sure governors actually stay in the places they are supposed to be governing.

---

For what purpose? This wasn't necessarily historically true, and it's certainly not great for gameplay. If the Duke of York's troops were going to battle under the King, the Duke had jolly well be there.

Look at the bit in Henry V (okay, not the most historical document, but still) where they read off the names of the French nobles who were killed or captured at Agincourt. It's a long list of nobles who were present. Sitting at home (while maybe a good idea, if you were French around Agincourt) wasn't the norm.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by |Heerbann|_Di3Hard

Can you tell us why? Don't forget, it isn't a 3D first person shooter. :laugh4: It is a battle simulation with 10k soldiers!

---

i am a tech geek, i pay for expensive PC components and appreciate seeing it pushed to the max.

Peregrine_Tergiversate; those are not the only things I asked, I have more answers for you in I think the second page of this thread (I'm not sure if you saw them, but you only quoted the startpost of this thread).

As for the modding questions, I emailed them to CA England, who will forward them to their Australian collegues (who work on that and balance issues and the like), they said that it might take around a week to get answers on those questions.

many thanks Soulflame, i have seen the second page. :)

Thank you for your excellent report, Soulflame. I'm guessing... maybe I'm stupid... but why did you wrote "Atari"? Maybe it's a silly question, but isn't M2TW published by Sega? Is Atari involved?

It's published by Sega, but in the Benelux, Sega doesn't have it's own office for distribution yet, so Atari does the Sega distribution there.
I was confused as well until they explained it :).

Oh, sorry...

Did they explain how to unlock factions by modding? Is it a matter of a single txt file?

honestly, why bother modding it as soon as you get the game? simply do a short campaign with whatever faction (of the 5 available) to learn the ropes of M2TW then do a big campaign with the faction you really want to play.

They didn't know for sure since they always tested and such with all factions unlocked (which is why they weren't sure how the unlocking worked.. hehe).
I reckon it will be easily moddable though, and I for one will probably start with the Byzantines since none of the starting factions appeal that much to me.

Smith, I'm in love with the Sicilians... maybe because I'm Sicilian! I must play them as my first faction, if I can...:2thumbsup:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Soulflame

I for one will probably start with the Byzantines since none of the starting factions appeal that much to me.

---

Go Soulflame!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Viva le' Byzantium!!!!!!!!!!!!!11

thanks man good job.


did they say anything about bribing armies.?

No sorry, didn't ask or hear anything, I assume it's the same as in Rome or they probably would have told so.

One of the gamesites who went to the same event has posted a video interview with one of the CA England guys. It's not much we didn't know yet, but I think there is some new footage weaved in there.
Also, in the final bit of the video, you can see someone standing in the back reading, that's me, going over some of the questions I still needed to ask :p;
http://www.insidegamer.nl/pc/medieva...ar/videos/944/

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Soulflame

No sorry, didn't ask or hear anything, I assume it's the same as in Rome or they probably would have told so.

One of the gamesites who went to the same event has posted a video interview with one of the CA England guys. It's not much we didn't know yet, but I think there is some new footage weaved in there.
Also, in the final bit of the video, you can see someone standing in the back reading, that's me, going over some of the questions I still needed to ask :p;
http://www.insidegamer.nl/pc/medieva...ar/videos/944/

---

Rofl indeed...You look quite busy :2thumbsup: :laugh4:

any news on the modding questions yet?

Not yet unfortunately... I'll make another email today, hopefully they didn't forget.

As i was looking at all of the movies i know the ones who are trailerswhat a friend asked was the close up fighting you see of them hitting with battleaxes and putting swords thru them is that game play or movie thanks

The video always freezes for me.

I hate how you can only bribe units that you can recruit.

Cheers all good info

can we play with the ottomans?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tefo87

can we play with the ottomans?

---

Welcome to the Org, tefo87! ~:wave: CA has already said the Turks will be a playable faction, although they're not specifically called the Ottomans in the game.

Will you be able to assasinate your own generals?

Or with Spies put them on trial for treason?

I know Inquisators are Papal controlled now.

I run my campaign as a true Catholic King should, probably because I'm a true Catholic. I kill all Perverted Generals and eliminate those who are abusing my people. In Rome I couldn't do this(Maybe I just didn't know how?) and I found it quite disappointing to have to suicide them in a battle. Not my style, I don't want them dieing with honor, I want them eliminated for the people to see that evil will be eliminated in my Kingdom.


Thanks

Lord_Phan

It really should be.

It honestly should be. While I know the main way to do this in MTW 1 was to inquisite them, I recall assination as a option. Spies could never put them on trail for treason, that's just not or ever has been in game. Spies just make there bad traits more public, so better used against opposition.


If you were clever and could use a spy on your own general you could try to find a low faith trait, and then put him near inquisitors I guess. Still recall there were quite a few uncatholic, bad, whatever generals who were highly popular and lost in battle, historically.


Anyway here's my question:

If you get your cardinal elected to pope, how much control do you have? Do crusade requests come to you now? Do you pick crusade targets? Do you control where inquistors go and who to excommunicate? I mean just how much power does becoming a pope give you?


I'm just curious

Getting your cardinal elected makes your relations with the Vatican better. That is all I am afraid.

So if I"m elected to pope all I get are good relations? I can't send inquistors, choose crusade targets, or excommunicate anyone?

Well i'll hope, I havn't heard anything official on this yet :P

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Polemists

It really should be.

It honestly should be. While I know the main way to do this in MTW 1 was to inquisite them, I recall assination as a option. Spies could never put them on trail for treason, that's just not or ever has been in game. Spies just make there bad traits more public, so better used against opposition.

---

Spies could put your own generals on trail and execute them. The less loyal your general was the easier it could be done.

Quote:

---

4. Like I said before, kill speeds and run speeds are down. But I'm not sure if it's enough for the people who didn't enjoy it in Rome. If I had to guess (warning, take this for what it is; a guess..) it's probably a reduction of about 25-40% in kill speeds and movement speeds.
Playing the 2 Historical battles, I was able to complete and win both of them without using pause, while I used pause quite a lot in Rome's historical battles. I personally felt that the speed was pretty good in that I felt in control, without needing to pause the game, but also always having something to do or adjust.
Once more, this is just me personally. I think it might still be too fast for some people, but I guess that's inevitable.

---

Could you give a comparative analysis of the battle speeds?

a) MTW2 vs MTW/STW and/or the MedMod (if you've played it)

b) MTW2 vs. RTR mod

c) MTW2 vs the EB mod

Did your line hold, if so for how long? How would you say this compares to, a, b and c?

Did the AI present a coherent line, and did it hold its position; or did it advance its line in a piecemeal fashion?

Did the AI attempt reasonable and effective flanking manuevers?

Did the AI ***respond*** to your flanking or other type of manuevers? Did it **counter-manuever** appropriately?? Like the the AI does in STW and MTW?

For example, in RTW, I could place my Cav (or any unit) way out on the my line's flank and the AI simply would not respond, allowing the cav to zoom right past its line and into the its rear.

Also, did the AI utilize terrain to its benefit?

---

I find it stultifying that you are invited to a 'Preview Event', representing a 'Community' of gamers, and the representatives involved aren't capable of answering some of the most mundane questions.

BTW, perhaps I missed it, but you didn't say much regarding your experience playing on the Campaign Map. Any comments?

Thank you for your efforts.

I don't think he was expecting the Spanish Inquisition

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Furious Mental

I don't think he was expecting the Spanish Inquisition

---

NOBODY EXPECTS THE SPANISH INQUISITION!:whip:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ToranagaSama

Could you give a comparative analysis of the battle speeds?

a) MTW2 vs MTW/STW and/or the MedMod (if you've played it)

b) MTW2 vs. RTR mod

c) MTW2 vs the EB mod

Did your line hold, if so for how long? How would you say this compares to, a, b and c?

Did the AI present a coherent line, and did it hold its position; or did it advance its line in a piecemeal fashion?

Did the AI attempt reasonable and effective flanking manuevers?

Did the AI ***respond*** to your flanking or other type of manuevers? Did it **counter-manuever** appropriately?? Like the the AI does in STW and MTW?

For example, in RTW, I could place my Cav (or any unit) way out on the my line's flank and the AI simply would not respond, allowing the cav to zoom right past its line and into the its rear.

Also, did the AI utilize terrain to its benefit?

---

I only played both Historical battles twice because I didn't have time to play them more. Also, these battles are very scripted, so it isn't a very good sample. For instance, in Agincourt, France attacked in waves, and you didn't have all that much to do (nearly half your army was archers). So that was more or less just shoot and hold ground.
Also, 'how long my line holds' is really ambigious, some units had experience, some improved shields etc. It's almost impossible to judge that, I don't think I could even say those things with certainty about Rome.
The cavalry of the AI was more sensible then in Rome, I gave the example of the Pavia battle where they foiled the easy flanking plan that worked so well in Rome.
There also wasn't that much terrain to worry about. In Agincourt the main battle is flat with trees to the sides, and in Pavia, there are only a few small hills (on 2 of which artillery is standing and nothing else) so again, I can't say.
In Agincourt the battleline was maintained, but in Pavia there were multiple fronts that all acted independantly (as you start you'll be under attack from two sides), and there was scripting involved (like the king regrouping with the second battle line).
I actually never played with the EB or RTR mods, I was busy working on my guides and a Warhammer mod before I shelved Rome for a while and played WoW.
But relating to Medieval and Shogun, it's still slightly faster, but it is a definate improvement over Rome. That's all I can say really. I was happy with the speed, because like I said, I always had stuff to do while I didn't need to use pause (whereas in Medieval I usually played on higher then normal speed and in Rome I paused the game sometimes).

Quote:

---

I find it stultifying that you are invited to a 'Preview Event', representing a 'Community' of gamers, and the representatives involved aren't capable of answering some of the most mundane questions.

---

It's actually pretty understandable. CA Australia is the main HQ for CA, there is where all the latest balancing and such goes on, and it was still being handled (and probably still is) at the time of the event.
And as far as the modding goes, that's also something they personally didn't have to deal with.
Although I'm also a bit disappointed we didn't get answers to all the questions, I am happy for the ones we did get.

Quote:

---

BTW, perhaps I missed it, but you didn't say much regarding your experience playing on the Campaign Map. Any comments?

Thank you for your efforts.

---

There was no campaign mode for the demo, just one battle tutorial and 2 Historical Battles. They did show some of the campaign, but we weren't allowed to personally play it, and what he showed was very similar to the video's already present.

I got a reply from Ian today, which I thought I'd share with you

Quote:

---

Hi Harm,

Sorry about the delay in response but, as you guessed, it's really rather busy around here at the moment! :)

Anyway, I did send your questions over to the Aussies but they're just too flat out to find the time to answer the questions, I'm afraid. However, I believe there is going to be something about modding on totalwar.com very soon - and I'll chase the Aussies up as soon as the game has gone gold to answer your questions in full.

Please feel free to chase me up on this regularly - as I'd be liable to forget otherwise! :)

Speak to you soon,

Cheers,

Ian

---

I think that's good news; they are working hard on the game and we'll soon get a few answers. :)

OMGZ U GUTS CONNEXXIONS =O


Yeah, very good news indeed

Though it could be another 3 weeks before it goes gold

i look forward to the modding answers.

though I agree considering the demo questionable fiasco, I am curious what going "gold" soon will mean, March 2007?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Polemists

though I agree considering the demo questionable fiasco, I am curious what going "gold" soon will mean, March 2007?

---

Going gold means that a game is at the point in its development that no major changes will be made to the game, everything is pretty much ready. usually the only step between a game going gold and shipping is quality assurance and some tweaking.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Maizel

Going gold means that a game is at the point in its development that no major changes will be made to the game, everything is pretty much ready. usually the only step between a game going gold and shipping is quality assurance and some tweaking.

---

Actually it is step beond that... Going gold refers to the build that will actually be shipped...

Haha I knew what the term going gold meant. My meaning was I am curious to see if when they say the game is going Gold "Soon" what time frame that soon will be. CA hasn't exact been doing to hot on dates and info for the game so far.

I wouldn't want them to have a fixed date for going gold. The game should go gold when its ready and all the bugs have been eliminated, NOT when it meets some fixed arbitary date just to satisfy some unknown people on the internet who think a lack of fixed dates = incompetence.

If we have to wait till Christmas before the game is released, I'll actually be happier as it means they'll have spent longer tweeking/polishing/fixing the game.

Lol they are already doing the tweaking and stuff the game is nearly finished nearly ( gold ) i think they are ready in about 3 weeks.

Call me cynical, but in modern games, going "gold" means that the publisher wants the game out (be it close to a major season, or they think it should be ready). The game is then released, and those that buy it prepare themselves for the multiple (and sometimes massive) patches.

The compilation pack that is released often a year or more later (the "gold edition") IMO is the developers tactictly saying that is when they thought that it was ready for release.

~:smoking:

I don't know, I personally think when it goes gold it will be ready. They don't need to put dates not be incompietent but why tell people all words like close, soon or what have you if you can't deliver. If you need another month, just say I need another month. Dosn't take a genius to know fooling people is when you get in trouble :wall:

going gold is when you provide the gold-master CD/DVD to the manufacturer for mass production.
it's that simple.
playing around with this definition would just be dishonest on CA's part, were they to do that.

OT: any news on the modding answers?

Gold happens around 2-3 weeks before release date.
And since the release date is set for 10-14 november, the game should go gold around 1 november.

hi Soulflame,

could you post a list of your modding questions which were never answered please, there may be an opportunity to re-ask them.

I was suprise there no were MP Questions answered, unless I was to blind to see it. Did you get any answers about MP, since I like MP more then SP??