Printable View
I gotta say, the qualities of the Org and this subforum really shone through since post-release. If you look on other forums, especially the official forums, there were/are flame wars going on about how CA is the devil and anyone that likes them is just as bad.
But I dont see any of that here, and I find that to be a testament to how great this community is. Kudos to everyone here for being top-notch people.
:bow:
Going apeshit wont fix anything. Besides, it seems the consensus here is that if CA doesn't fix what people have of various issues with the game, the modding community will as soon as they can ^^
Tell that to the people on the official forums and the TWC...Quote:
Originally Posted by Jarmam
:hide:
I am new here so I can't say if there is a tonal shift but outside of some dramatic "worst game ever!" stuff it's been fine. Nothing that makes me want to walk away from the forum as it were.
yeah, they get pretty wild over there....Quote:
Originally Posted by Hooahguy
anyways, the latest release has been a disappointment, but RTW (the first one), is always fun, so I can always go back to it, my mod (which is almost never ending :clown:), and work. (while we're on that note, I could use volunteers for the SYW mod (See signature): it's for the Alex engine of Rome total war, and we are going along, though we could use a full team).
besides, as Jarmam pointed out, I'm sure someone will come around, fix the bugs, and make it worth playing. If not, again, we got the older titles. (though to level with you, this shouldn't really be necessary...)
The official forums have been a write off for about 8 years. Most official forums are. It seems like level headed, realistic people simply don't bother getting all worked up about stuff. That just leaves the ADD type nut jobs frothing at the mouth providing feed back. Even reading that can get you all worked up even when you are pretty relaxed about how things are progressing.
That's why I'm here and have been for ages.
This game is immense, the coding is enormous and they do a great job getting a stable build out at release. Give it 2 to 5 weeks and you will have a top notch game with all the issues ironed out.
That's a good return on investment in my view. Managing your own expectations is the key. :)
.org rules, TWC drools! :laugh4:
The adults tend to post here. TWC has their share - including me occasionally - but too many kids. The official forum is almost all kids.
I read this then had a quote come up in game
"Wise men speak because they have something to say; Fools because they have to say something." Plato
I think the wow forums are my favourite - I gave up on them in Vanilla, if you read them you would assume that everyone no longer plays, that the nerfs made it unplayable and every class was both OP and GIMPED at the same time. I am now fficially a very ex player - I have been clean for 2 years with no relapses :)
While it is important to remember that you can express a criticism about a product in a mature way, it is also important to remember that if someone is criticizes something, it doesn't mean they aren't being level headed or realistic. None of us would be on this forum or the TWC if we weren't interesting in TW games, and thus we want them to be awesome. The pursuit of excellence is one of the few things in this world you can't denounce from any angle.Quote:
Originally Posted by AussieGiant
For me, I only buy games that rate extremely well in reviewers that actually do a quality job reviewing (PC Gamer for instance).
Thus, I have high expectations for my games. And the majority I've bought and played, including last few (SC2, Crysis and League of Legends) all meet those expectations. Rome II does not. I vastly prefer Rome I, and will continue too play it unless the land battles in Rome II aren't tied to capture points and the game turns out to be as moddable as Rome I was.
While everyone is free to their own opinion, or as Donald Rumsfeld said, if you live in a free society you are free to make mistakes, I do believe strongly that some of you should expect and demand more for your hard earned money. I was lucky enough to get an early beta key for SC2 and SC2:HOTS and both these Beta builds were far more stable than Rome II at release. That is unacceptable to me. It is unacceptable for a game to be released in that state. CA needs to know this, so it doesn't happen again, because it has happened before. Taking a passive approach of "managing expectations" or thinking "we got the older titles" does nothing to fix the problem, and in fact, it exacerbates it. From one adult to another, I found this forum to be far too supportive of CA pre-release, ignoring obvious problems with the game that we saw in videos and reviews pre-release and assuming the would be fixed on release. Those kind of assumptions are something a child would make, given CA's history. An adult would stand up and put pressure on CA to fix them. Worse, these kind of opinions didn't change after release when proven wrong (as an adult opinion would), they morphed into "well you should expect these kind of issues and they will be fixed soon." When Valve releases a game, we don't see these kind of issues.
But of course, we are all entitled to our own opinion. I hope Rome II becomes great, but managing (lowering) my expectations until Rome II meets them is not the way for me to get a good return investment.
If you don't expect much from anything in life, you'll be happy with anything.
Eh, considering that I paid good money for Jay "DOUBLED IT" Wilson's Diablo III - The Auction House Simulator, I sure as hell ain't jumping on the Blizzard bandwagon any more. After their merging with Activision the quality in their games dropped. Even SC2 is full of corny cliches and doesn't quite capture the atmosphere of SC1. The multiplayer in SC2 is great though.
I'll give Rome II the benefit of the doubt because I have a feeling It will be a great game. If only we could run real hotseats on it...
Quote:
Originally Posted by Myth
I second this. I've seen lots of people comparing Rome 2 launch to Diablo 3 launch, and while yes they didn't go as planned I think there's a pretty big divide in differences. When Diablo 3 launched, and during that first month people (including myself) were complaining about gameplay issues. Jay Wilson and his team's response was essentially YOU DON'T KNOW DIABLO. L2P. Anyone remember when the old Diablo 2 director said that he would have went in another direction? Jay Wilson's response was "F' that loser".
I don't really see CA doing any of that. They seem really invested in the communities response. It's very akin to times when a game is going through beta, and someone wants your feedback. Wink wink, nudge, nudge. But I digress. That's why I'm giving them the benefit of the doubt though. I think they deserve the criticism they're getting though.Because you should only release a game when it's polished.
I appreciate sanctuaries like this that allow for more game theory and discussion.
To fallen851:
Seeing as how your post indirectly points at me (not taking it personally, mind you) as one of those who were "far too supportive of CA pre-release", I have this to say to you:
Look at the comments of those actually playing it. Especially those who I would consider as veteran TW players (Lord of the Isles, Monk, quadalpha, andrewt, Captain Crunch, Barkhorh1x, Spoonska, amongst a few others at the moment) and the general, overall feeling could be summed up by these kinds of statements:
Quote:
Good not great, needs some TLC and it will get there
Now if you ask me, use your waaaaay back machine to the release of RTW 1. Pretty much the same comments as we see here (excepting the fact that RTW was the first to use the 3D map) could apply to the original. Now look at what folks have to say about all the myriad of RTW mods spawned since its' release and all the the patches/hotfixes that CA came out with.Quote:
So Rome II has its ups and downs. It pulls me in, but it annoys me at every corner as well. A few patches and balancing will really help with this one, but it won't keep me from enjoying my Suebi campaign some more!
Games of this scope require immense amounts of coding and design. It's inevitable that there will be problems given the nature of the video game business these days...name me one major release of any company at any time in the last 10 years that didn't have teething problems?!?
Does TW:R2 have its problems? Most definitely it does, and some major ones, at that. But this kind of statement...
...exhibits a certain lack of patience on your part which the history of TW games has shown to be necessary in ample amounts. Even the dreadful Empires, arguably the most buggy, problem riddled TW game at release, was eventually smoothed out to the point of being a very good game.Quote:
Those kind of assumptions are something a child would make, given CA's history. An adult would stand up and put pressure on CA to fix them.
Now, should CA have held this game for a month or two more to fix some of the problems being encountered? I think that goes without saying. But how much pressure was CA under to get this out of production and into the market? Considerable, I would say, though I'm no marketing guru. I would venture a wild guess that if the decision about when to release was entirely up to CA, we wouldn't have seen this game until the holidays.
Just my 2 talents
Well, I kept posting along the lines of "wait and see," and "It's permature to decide," and for this I was flogged as a CA catamite. So ... meh. It was too early to say, and the fact that those predicting a messed-up release were correct does not speak to their brilliance and wisdom.Quote:
Originally Posted by fallen851
Shogun 2 had the best release of any CA game ever. Balance that against the troubling reports in the final couple of weeks leading up to the release of Rome 2 and you get: Wait and see.
That's not being the cabin boy of Creative Assembly, that's being judicious and cautious.
Reminds me of a hedge fund manager I kinda know (brother of a close friend). He runs what's called a "doomsday fund," or a "bear fund," something similar. All of his investments are based on the idea that there will be a massive crash in the market. Most years his fund makes very little money. When the big financial crash came in 2008, he made out like a man who just found Inca gold. So I watched other investors and reporters treat him like a freakin' genius for about two years. It was absurd. He was not particularly clever; the environment had just come around to support his particular brand of investing.*
Now that the US economy is back to sluggish growth, his funds are back to making middling returns. And nobody notices or comments.
Anyway.
*Okay, glancing at the Wiki write-up, I see he made some clever calls after that, and it's a little more nuanced than I'm making it out to be. So sue me.
3I'd rather be playing the buggy game now than be waiting for a perfect release in a monthQuote:
Originally Posted by ReluctantSamurai
Diablo II was indeed a disaster. And it deserved the criticism it got. However if Diablo II had never been released, most people would have said it was a good game. Rome II, is in the same boat for me. If other TW titles never been released, most people would have said it was a good game, me included (for me the capture points on non-siege battles really hurts).
The fact that other games, made by CA or not, have suffered issues like this, or that CA was pressured to release the game, does not release them from responsibility. Nor does my "lack of patience" for a finished product mean that I shouldn't expect one when they release what they say is a finished product! Remember that perhaps the best definition that comes out of Plato's Republic for justice is "to do what you say you will." You can make a strong case they did not finish RTW II.
Those are indeed excuses made in defense of CA that are not logically sound.
This is where you were wrong. It does speak to their brilliance and wisdom.Quote:
Originally Posted by Lemur
It doesn't take Nostradamus to view the videos they released and assess them, or read the reviews and see the direction of the game. Your wait and see approach was a defense of CA when the problems were evident, and given their history, I found it ignorant and thought you must be on CA's payroll. I'm not saying I'm brilliant, because I didn't feel this prediction required much thought. Nor do I think it was really a prediction, we saw the reviews, saw the videos firsthand. I do believe you are biased toward CA in some fashion however, and let this influence your opinion.
But there are somethings called accountability and responsibility. Everyone should be held accountable and responsible for their actions. You made a wrong assessment of the situation, and people could have trusted you and bought the game. Now, this isn't a big deal, you shouldn't get flogged, but don't pretend that other people weren't right. Don't pretend that you weren't wrong. Take accountability and responsibility of your actions and correct them. Most of all, listen to the people who were right, and try to understand why they were right, so you aren't wrong again. That is learning.
Had Rome II been trouble free on release, I would have apologized, congratulated CA, sung their praise and most importantly, learned. Instead we got a Beta.
But my main point is here, is that there are four kinds of responses to RTW II:
1 - There is criticism that is justified.
2 - There is criticism that isn't justified.
3 - There is praise that is justified.
4 - There is praise that isn't justified.
2 and 4 are the problems. There is a lot of 2 on the TWC. There is a lot of 4 in this thread, and a lot of refusing to see 1.
CA should have released the game relatively free from issues and in good working order. It should have been finished, many products are released in such a form. The fact that other TW titles have needed polishing, the fact that other companies have done the same, or that I need to have patience to wait for them to finish it, is to deny justified criticism.
I'm looking forward to CA crafting RTW II into a better game. It definitely has potential. I just really hope they remove capture points in non-siege battles, or at least allow the defender to choose where they want the capture point. And let's not ignore 1.
I've a more positive feeling about Rome II than that but I still sympathise with almost everything you posted fallen851. And I also think your post kind of proves the OP's point: even people critical of the game here have mostly criticized it in well argued ways. Anyway, enough mutual back-slapping ... :pleased:Quote:
Originally Posted by fallen851
Once upon a time I could get worked into a frenzy before a game's release. But eventually, having been through Master of Orion 3 and Call to Power II to name just two, I've learned to expect less. Not your attitude fallen851 but it led me to a similar course of action: not to buy a game until it has been out for a while (I made an exception for Rome II because I'd been so impressed by Fall of the Samurai). Since the disappointment of Empire I learned more patience - NTW, Shogun 2 and its 2 expansions were all bought months or even years after they were released.
So how has my gamble on Rome II gone? Some bits of it worry me but it doesn't seem to be as bad as Empire on release (yet), even if it is a long way from being as good as some others in the series. And I've given up waiting for CA to just once ignore graphics and showy things and produce a half-sensible AI. Pre-orders for Rome II were enormous and I doubt the majority were from the aging wargamer historical-accuracy-demanding demographic.
But am still having fun playing it so far.
https://i.imgur.com/S3aSJCJ.jpgQuote:
Originally Posted by fallen851
Sigh. Sad but true.Quote:
Originally Posted by Lord of the Isles
However, if the people making big decisions at CA aren't entirely stupid (never a safe assumption with upper management of any organization), they will realize that losing the long-term fanbase would be catastrophic, even if our numbers are minuscule compared to the casual gamer population.
That bit in bold is certainly true. Were it not for the fact that CA have so much history of doing just that, it would amaze me. In truth I expected it when they announced the release date on Sep 3 when the expectation in forums was for a couple of months later. I guess deadlines from the publisher may be a factor but CA never seem to give themselves enough time to properly finish and test their ambitious products. An earlier me might have typed: wouldn't it be better to release something relatively well playtested rather than have to apologise publicly in the forum for all the issues? But the current me thinks cynically that the number of units shifted is the only thing that matters and it willl always be like this.Quote:
Originally Posted by fallen851
Yeah, I gotta say, I sure thought/(think) you were/(are) on CA's payroll too Lemur. A blind man could see what was coming, and yet you blindly defended it at every turn. You and other members tried to make those of us who were predicting what eventually happened seem like we were just people who loved to complain. Of course with almost every other CA release since I joined this forums I have been extremely optimistic and usually have done almost no complaining, so I don't see how you could think it was just a case of someone who always complains finally being correct.
I guess it doesn't matter either way as people erred on the side of optimism this time round and CA already made its fortune.
Hopefully the lessons people will take away from this are:
1) DO take pre-release footage, reviews, and descriptions into account when judging a game.
and
2) If in doubt, don't buy till a few days after release when you have heard from others you trust if it is good. Definitely don't preorder if you have any doubt that the game will be fantastic.
What CA did this time around is highway robbery. They deliberately misrepresented their product to the community and got as many people as possible to shell out the dosh for it in advance before they could see it.
Think of it guys, would you buy a car if they dealer told you "Yeah, I got it locked up in the garage. Just sign this piece of paper to finalize the deal and I will let you see it! It is a great car BTW!"?
Of course not. Be wise with your money. The only way you will get what you want from a company is if you speak (or remain silent) with your wallet. When you buy things regardless of quality, you are telling them that quality does not matter, and you have become part of the problem with modern games. Be part of the solution, not the problem.
It absolutely is. The fact that so many games, particularly PC games, come out buggy but still generate lots of money tells pretty much what you need to know. Take money and give an apology later instead of spend time making the game "perfect" and having people walk away at extended release dates.Quote:
Originally Posted by Lord of the Isles
On the other hand, it shouldn't be the job of the community and the modder to fix the game.Quote:
Originally Posted by Jarmam
I find it good that there is some feeling of "that's not acceptable". The publishers wouldn't do it if they knew they couldn't get away with it, so in a sense trying to be too "reasonable" is actually a bad thing.
Where your analysis falls down is the assumption we agree that Empire turned into a very good game.Quote:
Originally Posted by ReluctantSamurai
I just got Empire with all dlc a few months ago and only got around 14 hours on it; with mods too.
A pure mess... The game is just simply unplayable even with all those mods I've plopped on it.
Alt tab makes it freeze up on me for petesake... Just wait till we get to the meat and potatoes of the game which is empty.
I wish there was more direct competition with the Total War series. For instance, I am a fan of the battlefield series of games, and while I am not as big a fan of the Call of Duty series, having COD constantly competiting against Battlefield for customers helps to push Battlefield to put forth top effort. Until there is a really good challenger, I dont think we will ever see the "best" product CA could produce.
I guess I will be taking a very careful look at Europa Universalis IV.Quote:
Originally Posted by JeromeBaker
And then there's always the mod love for the older TW games.
Beyond that ... sigh.
I dunno, I had many hours of enjoyment with DarthMod and Empire. It's still broken in many ways, but it is, in fact, playable. (Also, I have a particular weakness for the period.)Quote:
Originally Posted by BroskiDerpman
From what I have read it sounds like Empire was never half as broken, buggy, or poorly designed as RII.Quote:
Originally Posted by BroskiDerpman
They seem around the same with Rome being an huger disappointment since it's much more anticipated plus it's CA screwing up again with the marketing especially. (Empire marketing and twisting words but even more nuts)
Also anybody waiting for a huge sale or Gold Edition?
Oh no - it was indeed a mess and on a par with Rome 2.Quote:
Originally Posted by Vuk
Yeah, on the bugs level they may be equal, but as far as misguided design, surely Empire was not half as badly as Rome II. Most of the systems it implemented were pulled off much better and were just better ideas to begin with. The only system RII implemented that sounds like a great concept is the LOS system, and like with many of Empire's new additions, it was implemented horribly.
Probably a bit presumptuous on my part seeing as how I never played it. I have no interest in that era of military history, and was just going by what others have said and that it's been said that Empires has sold more copies than any other TW title:shrug:Quote:
Where your analysis falls down is the assumption we agree that Empire turned into a very good game
Amen to this....Quote:
Until there is a really good challenger, I dont think we will ever see the "best" product CA could produce
That's for copies sold/ activated on Steam.
Though I think Rome 1 beats it if you could actually count all sales since the release of that game.
I like the era (Prefer 1400s to 1700 better) but it's just poorly represented and implemented.
First, thanks for the nice thread Hooahguy
Second, I pretty much liked ETW as well, it had its issues in the begining, but overall I enjoyed it for many more hours than NTW (which I varelly played). I did not like the guided approach and limits of NTW... enjoyed much the Open familiar play of a ETW campaign.
A more exciting game would be a game like ETW but set in the Napoleonic era, with Open gameplay and the setup of ETW, (Americas and Asian Continents etc).
Yet the periods are close nevertheless, and with the mods of ETW one could have a great variety of troops even, which made it all more interesting.
On the oher hand the Strategic mechanics of NTW were somewhat of an improvement over ETW.
Can you now immagine ETW but with Rome2 mechanics/strategy map? That would be something!
Hey, no hard feelings as far as I'm concerned towards the CA boys and girls, I consider it a major success finding one game out of everything a development house makes that I consider a great game. It doesn't come along often so I most assuredly appreciate it when it does.
For me that game was Shogun 2.
So if they fail to ever make another game that's worth a flip it won't matter a whit to me, they'll still be aces in my book.
There is a difference between a "feeling of thats not acceptable" and "hyperbolic mayhem". I have that feeling quite a bit, and have expressed it often. I am just still stoked for the game because of its potential in the hands of competent modders. But I still complain, of course. There are many puzzling decisions made that I am... puzzled by.Quote:
Originally Posted by Akka
If criticism is fair then there isn't (or shouldn't be) a need to make up more or go ballistic in spamthreads. I believe that's what this thread is about.
This community is a more tempered version of other places. I've always enjoyed it.
I started playing TW with Rome, and found the Org while playing Medieval II, although I didn't join until around Empire. I will say Empire seemed to cause a schism in the Org, if not general falling out in CA support in general. Posting activity for Napoleon, Shogun 2 and now Rome 2 is considerably less than Empire or Medieval 2.
While I was disappointed in a lot of decisions for Empire I'd say I generally enjoyed it, especially with mods. However after reading post after post about how awesome it was to play England, and later figuring out that the AI couldn't do naval invasions.......I just couldn't overcome the complete failure that game was. The Org pretty much ran the spectrum of fans at the time. There were: those who could only spit vitriol about CA, those who were generally depressed, those who were hopeful mods could fix it, and those who loved the game regardless. I'd say the extremes on either end were the fewest but generally the most vocal, and at odds with each other.
I sat out Napoleon (picked it up on sale but haven't even played through Italy). Played the heck out of Shogun 2 but really haven't been active in the Org since.
I do miss all the activity....Like Ask the Pizza Guy's total conquest speed challenges and all the guides people used to go to the trouble to make.
You will be pleasantly surprised then :2thumbsup:Quote:
Originally Posted by nafod
lets turn this thread into a flamewar, just to prove the op wrong?!?
Slightly, OT, but great to see you're still around, AG!Quote:
Originally Posted by AussieGiant
Stop trying to fan the flames like ... a fanboy.Quote:
Originally Posted by The Stranger
:evilgrin:
I used to like TWC but now it appears it is populated by nationalists and children. :wall:
Stirring up trouble, tsk tsk tskQuote:
Originally Posted by The Stranger
~;)
you know me :P trouble preceedes me, its not a causal relation, just bad luck :SQuote:
Originally Posted by edyzmedieval
I actually joined this forum because the users here seem more grounded and respectful to each other. TWC was becoming a bit to divisive to my liking and the release of Rome2 and its results only made things worse, plus it didn't help that the influx of users slowed it down to a crawl so logging in is near impossible. You guys seem like a more reasonable and down to earth group especially after seeing how well you guys have maintain a sense of civility since the fallout of the Rome 2 release :).
I sunk close to 1000 hours into ETW. After the final patch the game was reasonably good. FotS imho is the pinnacle of the TW series so far, I absolutely love it. As for Rome 2, haven't bought it, and now have zero plans to buy it until it's patched up and sitting firmly in the bargain bin. They had the gall to charge $59.99 for what is essentially a beta. Shameless.Quote:
Originally Posted by Vuk
Anyway, I hope they don't screw up the Warhammer license.
I think Shogun II brought a lot of people into TW that weren't aware about the problem in previous TW releases. I mean, M2TW had shield values that were negative and animation bugs that made peasants stun lock all their enemies to death. It wasn't until Kingdoms that most everything was fixed. Likewise ETW wasn't completely playable until that game's expansions came out. I think that CA realized they couldn't screw up Shogun II and that a lot of people were very passionate about doing a sequel of Shogun right so we had basically a perfect launch with nothing majorly broken.
I think this community is more Chill because the center and the official forums honeypot most of the rabid people there.
I wonder if you're active for EB online? I'm installing and patching up during the weekend for some online action. Shogun 2 is empty, Napoleon is full of droppers (Can't save replays then) and Rome 2 is screwed up.
Plus I'd like to try out EB online as it seems fun. 1v1s interest me the most on time matters.
(Sorry for derailing in advance :P)
CA from what I've seen needs serious balance patching and instead of putting capture points in SP it should've been in MP.
Hello everybody :-) OP is right this is a much quieter forum. Compared to others it's like a haven in the midst of the zombie apocalypse. Mundus bellicus is just like here, so rabies hasn't spread everywhere yet. R2 is a weird mix of nice innovations and total regressions. If some of you think it can be fixed, well it bring some hope. And if its not... well EB2 will be there sooner or later. As for Rome 2 's AI, maybe it needs to be fed with tons of datas and situations to behave normally.
Now if we can just get more people to visit here instead of the other forums.... :book2:Quote:
Originally Posted by Alcibiade
It will become as bad as the other forums? :shrug:Quote:
Originally Posted by Hooahguy
Exactly, this forums is like bliss to me. Sure people differ opinions than me on Rome 2 but at least nobody goes all out nerd rage... Yet....
Actually we could use more members and contributors. The .org prides itself in its core user base, but the new guys will quickly pick up our attitude I think. Plus, we staff members are here to advise and if necessary, enforce the .org way of conduct.
It's comparably quiet to the last time I was reading this forum (M2 was the last TW title I played prior R2). When M2TW came out there was more activity here iirc.Quote:
Originally Posted by Myth
But .com and TWC is not bearable. So much flaming and ranting. This forum is is much more mature and I like it. I too think new members will enjoy and adopt the .org way.
EU is a GREAT serie, but it doesn't really compete with the TW one. They have common background theme, but aside that they are polar opposite (EU focus on management, diplomacy and grand strategy with battle being automated and graphics kept to a minimum, TW focus on battles and graphical immersion).Quote:
Originally Posted by Lemur
I'm right now having a blast in EU4, but it doesn't scratch my "huge battle" itch like I wanted RTW2 to.
Quite true, an influx of new members would definitely suit the Org and make this play even better than it already is. :yes:
Agreed. Its like comparing apples to oranges.Quote:
Originally Posted by Akka
Agreed. The Org isnt as strong as it used to be. I remember back in 2007-2008 almost every subforum was a bustling place, it was a great place to be. Now, while its still a great place to be, its not exactly bustling anymore.Quote:
Originally Posted by edyzmedieval
Now I realize, this place just feels too quiet. Even the IB mod subforum can be more active which surprises me ...
Keep the noise down, some of us are trying to sleep here!
It's the Rome 2 party, of course it's going to be loud, what it's loud for? Hmmmmm I really do wonder... :inquisitive:
Back in 2005, when I joined, Rome was barely out and this place was literally bursting with people. Endless posts, replies and what not, it was quite something. :yes:Quote:
Originally Posted by Hooahguy
Quite a lot of fun around here back in those days...
Don't know about you guys but do any of the old timers here think the forums is dying or something? Seems like most new comers post one thing and are gone. Most of the rest seem to be just posting stuff from twc. There seems to be barely anybody that actually "joins" and posts.
I know I only posted a few times till now.
Yeah, I know what you mean. As I said before, I was here mid-2007, and even till 2010 this place was bustling.Quote:
Originally Posted by BroskiDerpman
But this place only dies if we let it die. Keep posting topics, make AARs, and we will even be hosting screenshot competitions soon. If we dont want this forum to die we have to put in the work if we want it to keep it afloat.
It fluctuates depending on how the core audience of the Org is satisfied with the latest TW games I think. lol
If CA gets its stuff together and actually puts out a great game that makes us all fall in love with the series again, you will see this place exploding with action.
Forums ebb and flow, rivals pop up that consume some of the membership for a while and all sorts of varying factors, the Org is certainly a lot quieter than I ever remember it in recent times but to be fair I find that when discussions do get going they're more articulate and grown up which is much more enjoyable for me. Partially because popularity equals trolls, the other forums have perfectly good members but I remember when this place was booming and it had legions of complete morons like everywhere else does right now, I think here it's going down to a dedicate and sensible core.
I like to think that when quality posters come our way, they like it and stay as patrons of the .org without leaving the big communites like TWC or the .com. For example - @LooseCannon1 in the TR.
I've historically used this forum as a resource if I needed help, and never posted or joined because I came to the total war party way late and who needs my opinion on M2 like 6 years after the fact? The only reason (honestly) I've started posting is because I alt-tab out of rome during the end of turn sequence :-)Quote:
Originally Posted by BroskiDerpman
You guys have always been my favorite though...
Rome 2 end turn sequence? Mine seems to be fast enough but for many it takes forever. I guess that happens to you right?
Welcome then, jbillybrack :2thumbsup: Glad you decided to start posting. By the way, you'd be surprised but we do get people posting in the M2TW section on occasion. We had a recent fastest conquering of the map record. Anyway I came to the TW games in 2010-ish. M2TW at the end of 2010, early 2011. And I posted a lot, and many people enjoyed discussing what they remember from their M2TW days.Quote:
Originally Posted by jbillybrack
Plus, M2TW is not dead - it's 99.9% of what we play in the Throne Room where we play hotseat mode (human controlled factoins on the map).
I started with Medieval 2, I'll go post some screenshots in that thread with the Last Kingdom mod. (With my Sweetfx config)
I wanted to run a hotseat based on that mod. Check it out and let me know if you're intersted.Quote:
Originally Posted by BroskiDerpman
I sadly don't have time as of now. Hence why I'm posting on a mobile device most of the time.
I refuse to play this game until the capture points on the battlefield is removed. If CA don't want to remove them entirely just make them optional!
Why would anyone of sound mind add such a stupid and imo game breaking feature. It just doesn't make any sense.
As someone who was mainly looking forward to playing as Parthia, with the intent of using HA only armies for at least the first portion of the campaign, I found the field battle capture points mechanic absolutely mind boggling in it's idiocy.
Then I went back to EB.
This Forum will not die.... With age she will only grow sweeter.
The maturity that this forum handled there opinions after Rome 2 was launched in an almost beta like state was a breath of fresh air.
It has its problems, but it is and will become and even more incredible game! I just miss my family tree... My sons, the almost RPG level of gameplay it added.
I hope to see it come back soon....
Just because I like this thread I'd like to share something I found that help to avoid lag during battles (until this game is fully optimized) : just lower the unit details, and you'll easily gain 10/20 fps. This wont affect the level of detail at all, just the diversity of the soldiers faces (not something I watch that much during battles). So, you'll have clones, but you can in return have all the other options on Ultra (for unit details and aesthetic the most important one is "texture level'').
Also, in Shogun2, doing that was making corpses vanish but not with Rome 2. I just put it to medium or even low and can now play easily with 40 units armies without lag, and in a beautifull landscape.