Printable View
spot on. CVP and BugFixer shouldn't exist IMO. CA should be doing it.
Getting 1.2 (and thinking "great!") :charge:
Playing for a night and having a couple of "scarred" generals and still seeing suicidal generals. ~:confused:
Thinking WTF, they knew this but released anyway. ~:mecry:
anyway, do like the .org tho. not as paranoid here about upsetting anyone.
It baffles me why you think that battles would need to be autocalced...Why do you claim this?Quote:
Originally Posted by Alexander the Pretty Good
It have a feeling that some people in this thread thinks they are some superior being because they have been playing strategy game not FPS and anyone who likes RTW is an stupid kid.
True?
You sure about that? I have a unit of one, count 'em, one druid in my Britannia campaign right now. Bastards sitting in Lemonum, waiting for me to remember to disband his sorry ass.Quote:
Originally Posted by chef4fun2
There isn`t much discussion in this thread; just statements that tell people how awfully bad it is.Quote:
Originally Posted by bodidley
It`s not healthty to only read one single damn point of view about a matter. People who consider buying the game might get frightened of all these bad things there`s said about RTW even though they could have got a good time playing it.
Optical cable or high speed DSL should be fast enough.Quote:
Originally Posted by Alexander the Pretty Good
Wont multiplayer campaign take too much time?
How long would it take to finish to the end?
Yes, it would take pretty much time, but I thought of putting in some kinda feature that allows you to save the campaigns. Otherwise I can`t see how it should be possible.
Well I disagree that it would need a LAN connection, it would need a broadband connection yes, but I'm not so certain a LAN connection would be needed. Maybe some intelligent rationalising of sent data. If there are two players playing, one as Iberia and one as Numidia, the server has to calculate what's going on in Parthia, but it hardly has to tell the players that.Quote:
Originally Posted by Alexander the Pretty Good
As for the autocalcing, again, I disagree. Games that have has split tactical/strategic interfaces have worked before, without autocalcing. Read a book FFS while your mate plays his game. You don't have to sit there and stare at a screen while he plays it.
I really disagree, in terms of complexity, it can't be much harder than it is allready.
My biggest disappointment was in RTW as a grand strategy game. Specifically, the diplomatic model was terrible. I hated the way alliances could be formed and broken and reformed ad infinitum with no real penalties. I would be attacked by an ally, utterly crush them, only to be attacked by my next “friend”. Conversely, I could make alliances and then attack without warning and without penalty.
Still, I don’t want to sound like I didn’t like the game. It’s great as a tactical simulation for individual battles against other humans. I definitely got my $15 worth of entertainment value out of it.
Why not regular DSL?Quote:
Optical cable or high speed DSL should be fast enough.
I don`t know; Alexander kept on talking about that LAN was the only connection fast enough. So if regular DSL(acccording to him) wasn`t enough, I would guess high-speed DSL or VDSL should be enough since I don`t think 100 m/bit is necessary.
So, the multi player CAMPAIGN battles will be different from the regular multi player battles in RTW non-campaign, in their connection requirements?Quote:
Originally Posted by Viking
Why?
Not the battles that take up the speed, but why high-speed is required I don`t know.
Check out this thread about MP campaigns:
Multiplayer Campaign in the works!
Well, my point there is that I think it's one in many of a series of off the cuff commentary made by a lack of knowledge..."Multiplayer is impossible, etc..."Quote:
Originally Posted by Viking
Thanks for the link to MP...It's what I wanted from RTW in the first place...
I don't think anyone here thinks that RTW was a complete waste of time, though some may think that they wasted money, just that there are problems with the game that need to be addressed and they ruin replayability.Quote:
Originally Posted by Viking
Objective discussion doesn't mean people can't have opinions by the way ~;), it just means that people have to state their opinions respectfully and without the intention of just getting a negative reaction from someone else.
If there wasn't a valid reason for threads discussing problems with RTW, then they wouldn't generate so much reply.
Not to seem rude, but any one who finds rtw a hard game after playing for afew months is probably not very old.
Ohh... it is soooooo difficult... if only they'd let me frag all those stupid urbans with my Spartan rocket-launcher... :charge:Quote:
Originally Posted by mongoose
Maybe in the upcoming Doom: Total War... ~:grouphug:
*EDIT*
Doom:Total War... its all the same... I just want that rocket-launcher or my rail-gun to shoot those Urbans in their shiny t-2000 armour... ~:cheers:Quote:
Originally Posted by mongoose
Rail guns are more fun when the enemy only have spears. :balloon2:
just give me the bfg.. ill take em,
*EDIT*
Quote:
.We don't all have to be fanboys, there's planty of room for objective discussion, and people who haven't bought the game can learn about it if we discuss issues related to it.
Amen to that!
ok.
i have to agree with alot of the things on the list, alot of them are true. But uve got to look at the good things! I thinks the creators of RTW have done a really good job to create a game thats this....Detailed. i mean, how many other games have the general giving a speech at the start of a battle? How many other games actually ALLOW you8 to create spys and diplomats and assasins? How many other games give you such a selection of unique units?
A few maybe, but not many and hardly any on the scale the RTW has done it. So a game this big and complex has to have a few mistakes, but when you compare that to what the game really is, its plenty to entertain people who enjoy this game and look at its good points. Thats how i look at it, same with all my freinds. So maybe you just spend to much time looking for all the bad points in this game instead of actually having a life outside of pcs. :duel:
On another note, If BI doesn't fix battlefield AI so the enemy can fight and fix the autoresolve my support will be lost.
Goodbye to ur support then, I'm afraid. :furious3:Quote:
Originally Posted by Aetius the Last Roman
Maybe so. Maybe you're under 20 years old. Maybe scratch maybe. Maybe my concerns are actually legitimate complaints.Quote:
Originally Posted by Sextus the mad
The game has good points, I'm not saying that it doesn't, if you think the game is great, and if you like it with the flaws that it has, then by all means, enjoy the hell out of it.
But if "Maybe you and all your friends see lots of good points" is some logical way to conclude that "I have no life outside of PCs" is....well, a rather unfounded conclusion. Such 'logic' and unfounded conclusions lead me to believe things about the authors of such ideas.
How are you enjoying summer vacation so far?
We criticize CA because we PAID MONEY for this game. $50 (USD) is not a small investment, unless you are rolling in cash. We want the Rome Total War experiance to be as good as possible. To make it worth the $50.
And the "few mistakes" are pretty crippling. Mediocre AI is a problem when you fight battles against the AI and you want a challenge.
-----------
Re: Multiplayer Campaign.
Maybe I'm wrong and it wouldn't take a LAN connection, but I question whether the game would be enjoyable without a very good connection. Player against other people means dealing with:
1) Time issues. Your opponents may take a really long time to make moves and resolve battles. During which the game is still sucking down your connection. And serious campaign with multiple human players and non-autocalced battles means taking hours to finish a single round - maybe. So people would have to work that into their schedules. And it could be difficult to find people who can play regularly.
2) Lag. If lag is bad, then the game will be pretty much unplayable.
3) Asshats. Losers trolling the MP lobby just so they can screw you over in the game. Someone who joins a game and stops playing when its his turn. Just stops playing. And it would be difficult to know whether he has stopped or is just thinking. Sidenote: would it be possible to send a virus through the game, like maybe as a save game file?
And there are issues for CA as well. Developing a MP expansion requires the game to be compatible with a whole lot of stuff. And if they don't make it perfect, they will be denounced in the streets. And who knows how monetarily successful such a venture would be.
Good rant. Great points.
The bottom line is that you can't tell me the dev's when they sit down and play this game, if they ever do, find it challenging and rewarding to play. That is a sad thought because I felt there was a love and a greater attention to detail in the first two games of the series, especially shogun. C'mon CA we know you can do better.