New Video Shows Crippling Bugs That Have Plagued the Series Removed!

And if you believe that, I got a bridge to sell you. Seriously though, how many would have preferred that video to "New Video Showing Off New Unit Camera!"? Pardon the sarcasm CA, but maybe you could answer me a question. Why, 8 games into the series, have you not addressed a number of core bugs that appear in every game you put out yet? Heck, you haven't even tried. The redundant orders bug, the bugs with path-finding in cities, the weapon switching bugs, the skirmishing not working bugs, the cavalry circling around a unit to attack it from the front when you have positioned them on the flank bug, etc, etc.
These are critically important bugs, and they have been here at least since RTW. TW: RII will be the fifth game since them and they still have not been fixed! (there hasn't even been any noticeable improvement)
Pardon my being blunt, but I am exasperated and losing faith. I have bought every game you have ever put out (as well as all your expansion and all or most of your rip-off DLC), but it has gotten to the point where I am having trouble finding reasons to do that. Gosh, if you fixed the darn bugs and released the bug fix as a DLC pack I would buy it!
Some of those bugs wouldn't be that difficult to address. If you spent less time poorly implementing crap like your baggage train system, you would have found plenty of time to squash those bugs. Every game you are putting out is the same as the one before it, but with better visuals and a few cheap gimmicks tacked on. How about you actually improve that core darned game before moving on to the gimmicks and new game-play devices? You have had 5 chances to do it and failed every time! WTH gives?

*Rant Over*
I would appreciate it CA if you could have one of your guys answer this question for the community, because I know that I am not by any means the only one who feels this way.

I remember hearing something about improved pathfinding in cities to cope with their new Bigger and Better urban battles (which I don't see the point of). I've given up on skirmish and accepted that it will always be useless.

Once again 8 games into the series and some people can't get it through their thick skulls that something working in a way I don't like IS NOT A BUG. A bug is something that was unintended and the result of errors in the games coding. You'd think that after 5 games you'd get that what your complaining about is no error, it's intentional.

Hey, I'm happy that the cavalry disengage from melee thing was fixed as that was by far the most annoying for me.

Skirmishing works just fine for a feature that is supposed to be inferior to actual micromanagement of the ranged units. You don't have any evidence of how weapon switching and pike formations work so I don't even know why are you so mad.

PS. TDS was complete fail compared to TDP and TMA, how come you have Deadly Shadows models and quotes in your signature?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by quadalpha

I remember hearing something about improved pathfinding in cities

---

Yep, they've specifically mentioned this in various interviews.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by lars573

Once again 8 games into the series and some people can't get it through their thick skulls that something working in a way I don't like IS NOT A BUG. A bug is something that was unintended and the result of errors in the games coding. You'd think that after 5 games you'd get that what your complaining about is no error, it's intentional.

---

Intended? Why would they intend your cavalry (other units too, but it is the worst when they do it) to circle around to the front and attack when you have positioned them on the flank? Why is it that that does not always happen, but only some times randomly? They intended to have your units randomly disobey your attack orders and go out of their way to attack an enemy unit's front? Really? Sorry mate, but that sounds like tosh to me. Did they also intend for your pike men to randomly, rapidly switch back and forth between pikes and swords after you tell them to attack in a phalanx formation or pike-wall? For skirmishers to randomly switch back and forth from swords to javelin when in throwing range of an enemy and only finally wind back to throw their javelin when the enemy is almost on them? Did they intend for units (esp skirmishers) to pull 90% of their men back and leave 10% behind to draw the entire unit into combat after being given a retreat order manually or being placed in skirmish mode? Did they intend your units when told to attack an enemy around a corner in a city to try to draw a diagonal through the building and have most of your men get caught up on the corner so that they drip-feed themselves to the enemy one at a time? Is that also their intention then? How about on a battlefield when a tree or rock is in the way, and rather than circling around it or splitting up around it half your unit gets caught on it? In real life unit commanders or individual men figure out how best to micromanage their movements. Their general doesn't have to hold every individual man's hand and teach him how to move! Don't tell me that is intentional, and quit posting your condescending tosh in my thread.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Myth

Hey, I'm happy that the cavalry disengage from melee thing was fixed as that was by far the most annoying for me.

Skirmishing works just fine for a feature that is supposed to be inferior to actual micromanagement of the ranged units. You don't have any evidence of how weapon switching and pike formations work so I don't even know why are you so mad.

PS. TDS was complete fail compared to TDP and TMA, how come you have Deadly Shadows models and quotes in your signature?

---

I was very happy as well to find out that they made cavalry be able to disengage, but that was one major problem out of many across 8 games. And you are wrong about skirmishing. They sometimes do the same thing even when you give the order manually. And why would they bother implementing a deliberately broken feature to increase micromanagement anyway?

And you are wrong about my signature. The artwork and the quotes are from the first two games. None of it is from TDP.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lemur

Yep, they've specifically mentioned this in various interviews.

---

Yeah, they've mentioned it, but their gameplay videos do not confirm what they say. If it is better, it is not better by a lot. Every game that comes out they tell us that they are gonna be fixing all these bugs, but they never do.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Vuk

gameplay videos do not confirm what they say [improvements in city map pathfinding].

---

Have we seen a video yet that includes city streets & navigation? (I confess I have not watched every single video that has come out.)

-edit-

Also, who am I kidding? The only TW game I ever successfully resisted at launch was Napoleon.

Whatever does or doesn't get fixed/improved:

https://i.imgur.com/dOFeGhg.jpg

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lemur

Have we seen a video yet that includes city streets & navigation? (I confess I have not watched every single video that has come out.)

---

We have. The "Total War_ Rome II - Interview with Pawel Wojs" for instance. Watch 5:13-5:25 for an excellent example of the pointless and avoidable bottlenecks I was talking about. The cavalry all try to cut a diagonal through the building instead of wheeling their formation more and the second unit ends up drip feeding into the enemies.

Here is the link.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lemur

Have we seen a video yet that includes city streets & navigation? (I confess I have not watched every single video that has come out.)

-edit-

Also, who am I kidding? The only TW game I ever successfully resisted at launch was Napoleon.

Whatever does or doesn't get fixed/improved:

https://i.imgur.com/dOFeGhg.jpg

---

Well, the only Total War game I've ever bought was Rome (will probably buy MTW II when EB II gets completely finished). So they can work for my dollars. And I'd like to buy Rome II if it an improvement. Doesn't seem like one though.

I usually wait till I can snag their games for $10-15 if they do not stand out to me as great games. I did this with Shogun 2 for instance because I am not a fan of the setting, with MIITW because I was broke, and with Napoleon because it seemed like a rip-off. I am gonna do the same with RII-TW because I am really hard on money and because I am not at all impressed with what I see. Roma Surrectum II is still the greatest Total War game made IMHO (yes, I now it is a mod and not technically a full game). That is where I get my RTW fix. Anyway, in some ways its graphics look much better than TW:RII.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Vuk

Here is the link.

---

I see what you mean. But it has been far worse; ETW for instance.

Quote:

---

Why is it that that does not always happen, but only some times randomly? They intended to have your units randomly disobey your attack orders and go out of their way to attack an enemy unit's front? Really? Sorry mate, but that sounds like tosh to me.

---

Sounds like real-life battle situations to me. When do a generals troops ever follow orders exactly? A little randomness on the battlefield makes things more interesting, IMHO.

Are there still problems with things like pathfinding, etc, etc, etc....of course. TW has come a loooong way from the truly bugged times of ETW and my hat is off to the devs for making a concerted effort to get back on track since Shogun 2.

My advice? If you don't like what CA is doing, don't buy their games.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ReluctantSamurai

Sounds like real-life battle situations to me. When do a generals troops ever follow orders exactly? A little randomness on the battlefield makes things more interesting, IMHO.

---

Odd argument. Could be applied to Windows crashing ('Working as designed! When does everything in life ever happen the way you want it to?').

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ReluctantSamurai

Sounds like real-life battle situations to me. When do a generals troops ever follow orders exactly? A little randomness on the battlefield makes things more interesting, IMHO.

Are there still problems with things like pathfinding, etc, etc, etc....of course. TW has come a loooong way from the truly bugged times of ETW and my hat is off to the devs for making a concerted effort to get back on track since Shogun 2.

My advice? If you don't like what CA is doing, don't buy their games.

---

No, this is not realistic. Sure, people disobey orders some times, but why would men when put in a tactically advantageous position and often under enemy fire take a bunch of time to place themselves in a tactically disadvantageous situation before charging? I really doubt something like that has every happened in the history of warfare. Sure troops disobey sometimes, but I doubt they would ever disobey like this.
Also, it happens far too often even if it was intended. When you play with 90+% cavalry armies, it can be a game breaker.
I'm happy they improved as well, but as I said, these bugs have existed long before ETW and can be devastating to a player's gameplay experience. It is not being ungrateful to wonder why they have not been dealt with all this time.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ReluctantSamurai

My advice? If you don't like what CA is doing, don't buy their games.

---

No offense, but this is ridiculous. If someone puts out the best car in the world, but they keep repeating mistakes, should you just stop buying their cars? No, you should make a stink to try to get them fixed.
TW is the best strategy game out there - hands down, no competition. If I were to stop buying CA's games I would have to give up one of my favorite gaming genres. It is not that simple.
Like I said, I'll buy it, but only when I can get it for ~$10.
There is nothing wrong with reaching out to the developers and making your concerns known RS. You act like it is somehow unreasonable for me to be upset about this, but it is not. All I want is CA to respond to my concerns. Even if they don't think it is worth their time, I would at least prefer a "Sod-off, we don't care."
Ignoring the community sends the worst possible message.

Quote:

---

I really doubt something like that has every happened in the history of warfare.

---

Actually, it has. There are numerous examples I can think of (others can chime in with their favorite), but the one era I am most familiar with (WWII) has a classic example....the opening of Operation Barbarossa.

Quote:

---

No offense, but this is ridiculous. If someone puts out the best car in the world, but they keep repeating mistakes, should you just stop buying their cars? No, you should make a stink to try to get them fixed.

---

No, it's not. If said car-maker doesn't put out a car to your satisfaction, even after repeated pleas, the smart buyer buys something else~;)

Quote:

---

Ignoring the community sends the worst possible message

---

While I am no expert on CA consumer relations, my own personal experience, and from what I can read says that they haven't:shrug:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ReluctantSamurai

Actually, it has. There are numerous examples I can think of (others can chime in with their favorite), but the one era I am most familiar with (WWII) has a classic example....the opening of Operation Barbarossa.

---

On a tactical level troops were positioned on their enemy's flank and were told to charge, and instead circled to the front and charged? You'll have to source that for me, because I am not buying that.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ReluctantSamurai

No, it's not. If said car-maker doesn't put out a car to your satisfaction, even after repeated pleas, the smart buyer buys something else~;)

---

Even if all the other cars are less to your satisfaction? Should you just walk instead maybe?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ReluctantSamurai

While I am no expert on CA consumer relations, my own personal experience, and from what I can read says that they haven't:shrug:

---

No, they have been good with listen to the fans on some things, I'll give them credit there. On other things though, they have been really bad.

Quote:

---

You'll have to source that for me, because I am not buying that

---

I am not going to get into a pissing contest over sources, etc. Military history is rife with examples of commanders disobeying direct orders; of units leaving superior positions for what ever the reason; of units not being able to carry out the orders they were given because they were incapable of doing so (lack of readiness, lack of experience, lack of leadership, etc)...and so on. Feel free to browse the internet at your leisure to find such instances. Whether intended or not, units in RTW that do not do exactly what you direct them to do is not unlike real battle situations. I get just as frustrated as you when directing a battle where my units behave in a wayward fashion. But I take it as a challenge. So in the words of Gunny Highway : "Improvise...Adapt".

Quote:

---

Even if all the other cars are less to your satisfaction?

---

Obviously, the RTW series has enough going for it to keep you coming back for more despite your distaste for its' "bugs".~;)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ReluctantSamurai

I am not going to get into a pissing contest over sources, etc. Military history is rife with examples of commanders disobeying direct orders; of units leaving superior positions for what ever the reason; of units not being able to carry out the orders they were given because they were incapable of doing so (lack of readiness, lack of experience, lack of leadership, etc)...and so on. Feel free to browse the internet at your leisure to find such instances. Whether intended or not, units in RTW that do not do exactly what you direct them to do is not unlike real battle situations. I get just as frustrated as you when directing a battle where my units behave in a wayward fashion. But I take it as a challenge. So in the words of Gunny Highway : "Improvise...Adapt".

---

This is a bit silly. The point is not that CA intended to simulate real-world errors (unless you are asserting this?) but that a feature that clearly should work one way is dysfunctional. There are games that do simulate chain of command and screw-ups along the way, but TW is not one of them.

The flanking cavalry going around the unit to attack it from the front really ought to be a bug mainly because no disobedient Hipparch would do that, unlike an AI that tries to properly engage another unit. What these sorts of people do is:
Attack(and give up an advantageos or concealed position) without orders. This means they just storm ahead and don't do any fancy manoeuvring. While there actually is a trait for that in some TW games, I never actually seen that happen. :(
Not attack(against the supreme commanders order). easily explained.
Go rouge(aka following the colonels own agenda) and do unplanned things. No this does not mean that they just do what the commander ordered in a fancy(and stupid)way it means doing something else.
Desert
Start recreative activities, like play ball, cards or bake bread.

But they do not go around a hostile formation to attack it head on. They may attack a tad too late, too early, another unit or not at all or they might just "reveal" their position by general stupid/cockyness, but they don't...

Also skirmishers in antiquity don't go:" OH NOES they got lame leg Laomedon! we don't leave anyone behind! Let's just stand here and watch how they kill him" This again is OBVIOUSLY an unitAI issue. Because the unit is not the individual soldiers but the whole mob, the unit thinks it's engaged and thus all of them stop to fight(or in case of skirmishers, die).

I can understand why one would defend the devs and personally I dislike endless complaining. but this obviously isn't a feature, it's a bug.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ca Putt

The flanking cavalry going around the unit to attack it from the front really ought to be a bug mainly because no disobedient Hipparch would do that, unlike an AI that tries to properly engage another unit. What these sorts of people do is:
Attack(and give up an advantageos or concealed position) without orders. This means they just storm ahead and don't do any fancy manoeuvring. While there actually is a trait for that in some TW games, I never actually seen that happen. :(
Not attack(against the supreme commanders order). easily explained.
Go rouge(aka following the colonels own agenda) and do unplanned things. No this does not mean that they just do what the commander ordered in a fancy(and stupid)way it means doing something else.
Desert
Start recreative activities, like play ball, cards or bake bread.

But they do not go around a hostile formation to attack it head on. They may attack a tad too late, too early, another unit or not at all or they might just "reveal" their position by general stupid/cockyness, but they don't...

Also skirmishers in antiquity don't go:" OH NOES they got lame leg Laomedon! we don't leave anyone behind! Let's just stand here and watch how they kill him" This again is OBVIOUSLY an unitAI issue. Because the unit is not the individual soldiers but the whole mob, the unit thinks it's engaged and thus all of them stop to fight(or in case of skirmishers, die).

I can understand why one would defend the devs and personally I dislike endless complaining. but this obviously isn't a feature, it's a bug.

---

Thank you. Exactly my point.
As far as defending the devs, do so when appropriate. When someone is raising a legitimate concern and asking the devs to way in, don't tell the person that their concern is illegitimate because you like the devs. :P That is exactly what several people in this thread have done so far.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ca Putt

Also skirmishers in antiquity don't go:" OH NOES they got lame leg Laomedon! we don't leave anyone behind! Let's just stand here and watch how they kill him" This again is OBVIOUSLY an unitAI issue. Because the unit is not the individual soldiers but the whole mob, the unit thinks it's engaged and thus all of them stop to fight(or in case of skirmishers, die).

I can understand why one would defend the devs and personally I dislike endless complaining. but this obviously isn't a feature, it's a bug.

---

No Peltast Left Behind

Not trying to be a Debbie downer, but where is this " New Video Shows Crippling Bugs That Have Plagued the Series Removed"....I know this is my first post, but stop complaining about a game that is not even out yet

I am not complaining about TW:RII. I am complaining about a bad attitude from the developers when it comes to them prioritizing gimmicks meant to make more money over making a better gameplay experience.

Ya agree with ya man. I've played almost all the total war games and really hoping with this new large scale budget, that they will create something amazing

I remember the original rome pathfinding... :(

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Vuk

I am not complaining about TW:RII. I am complaining about a bad attitude from the developers when it comes to them prioritizing gimmicks meant to make more money over making a better gameplay experience.

---

I am confident that the “gimmicks” to which you refer are in place precisely to enhance the game play experience. Maybe not your or my idea of the best experience, but one calculated to appeal to a wide audience.

And really, railing against any business for trying to make money serves only to deny CA’s raison d'être. Whatever else CA might do, they MUST earn money.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Nelson

I am confident that the “gimmicks” to which you refer are in place precisely to enhance the game play experience. Maybe not your or my idea of the best experience, but one calculated to appeal to a wide audience.

And really, railing against any business for trying to make money serves only to deny CA’s raison d'être. Whatever else CA might do, they MUST earn money.

---

Yes, they must, but the obsessive focus on maximizing short-term profit at the expense of long-term profit is not wise. If they took the time to fix just one of the bugs I mentioned every game since Rome, they would all be gone now, and they would have taking a minimum amount of time away from adding new content and features. In the long-term, having a better (and constantly improving) foundation to build their games on is gonna stop them from getting stale (let's face it, there are only so many eras they can do) and will bring more old fans who have given up on the series back into the fold. It will also help make sure that new gamers who buy their games will continue to buy their games.

It's a perfectly valid criticism to point out that CA might have lost sight of the basics while adding more bells and whistles. It really started happening with RTW's 3d map.

Quote:

---

and will bring more old fans who have given up on the series back into the fold. It will also help make sure that new gamers who buy their games will continue to buy their games.

---

Judging by pre-sale orders (which some place at 6X that of Shogun II), I'd say that both the former and the latter have already happened:quiet:

Quote:

---

It's a perfectly valid criticism to point out that CA might have lost sight of the basics while adding more bells and whistles. It really started happening with RTW's 3d map

---

Well, you can always fire up a game of the original STW or MTW:rolleyes:

So it's a good thing that CA focuses on (useless) bling rather than actually improving the game? It yielding more profit makes it "right"? So Game developers are not supposed to improve their games?

Well if that's the way people today think I think I need my moral compass realigned.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ReluctantSamurai

Judging by pre-sale orders (which some place at 6X that of Shogun II), I'd say that both the former and the latter have already happened:quiet:

---

That says nothing of returning fans. I know that I will not be buying it till it is dirt cheap because I really do not like what I see.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ReluctantSamurai

Well, you can always fire up a game of the original STW or MTW:rolleyes:

---

No one is saying they want clones of the original games RS, and I am not sure what would make you believe that. All people are saying is that instead of just focusing on adding floors onto their building, they should also be spending some time to fix the foundation.

I am glad that they add new features...I just would rather they add a few less and spend a bit more time working on improving the very heart of the game which is as flawed as its first inception!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Vuk

That says nothing of returning fans. I know that I will not be buying it till it is dirt cheap because I really do not like what I see.



No one is saying they want clones of the original games RS, and I am not sure what would make you believe that. All people are saying is that instead of just focusing on adding floors onto their building, they should also be spending some time to fix the foundation.

I am glad that they add new features...I just would rather they add a few less and spend a bit more time working on improving the very heart of the game which is as flawed as its first inception!

---

This.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ca Putt

So it's a good thing that CA focuses on (useless) bling rather than actually improving the game? It yielding more profit makes it "right"? So Game developers are not supposed to improve their games?

Well if that's the way people today think I think I need my moral compass realigned.

---

You bring up a good point here. A game designer is more than just a money making machine. He is also supposed to be an artist who cares about delivering the best possible product to his customers. Yes, he is morally obligated to try his hardest to turn a good profit as well (since he is living off of and using someone else's money), but this doesn't diminish the fact that he is an artist. His obligations to his fan-base are just as important as to his investors. He needs to strike a balance that does wrong to neither of them. Most modern game companies unfortunately have their obligations horribly unbalanced in the favor of investors. CA is guilty of this to an extent (true, not half as bad as others, but if consumers don't speak with their wallets, it will get worse). I like CA, and love that they are one of the few developers out there that have not sold out to the console-money-making crowd. I just think it is said that they put supposed profit above improving their games in this case.

Quote:

---

That says nothing of returning fans.

---

I would venture a guess that a pretty big chunk of those gamers on the pre-order list are returning fans. There's been an insistent clamor for a RTW remake since M2TW that is finally getting its due....

Quote:

---

You bring up a good point here. A game designer is more than just a money making machine. He is also supposed to be an artist who cares about delivering the best possible product to his customers. Yes, he is morally obligated to try his hardest to turn a good profit as well (since he is living off of and using someone else's money), but this doesn't diminish the fact that he is an artist. His obligations to his fan-base are just as important as to his investors.

---

Really? Sez who? It's money that fills the sails of any game developers ship.....millions, to make games of TW's scope. The fan-base determines how long the developer gets to sail, and often times to where. Now sitting in front of your PC's monitor, you may feel that CA has failed to deliver a good product. Funny how you keep coming back to the well (even if it's to get the "Gold Edition" months later) to purchase a "flawed" product. That there are several CA staff members who post here at the .org says to me that they do care what their fans think.

Don't get me wrong, here. My list of faults with TW games is as long as my arm...and anyone who has read any of my posts at the RTW or STW Forums has a pretty good idea of what they are. But.......when I get frustrated for the umpteenth time about a particular feature that has me completely exasperated, I simply remove the disc from the drive, and get my gaming fix from elsewhere. This goes for any game....name me one that doesn't have flaws (even the venerable Baldur's Gate, one of my all-time favs, has required multiple MB-sized patches and fixes to make things right).

Quote:

---

if consumers don't speak with their wallets, it will get worse

---

But consumers are speaking with their wallets....you just happen to not like what they are saying.

I guess Jack didn't see fit to address this. I didn't think they would.

Rule # 73 of software development: making new features is more fun than fixing existing bugs, therefore whenever possible code new features rather than fix bugs (and because there is no glory inside the hierarchy of CA or any place for those that code fixes for existing implementation vs. those who code and show off new stuff).