No text.
Printable View
No text.
:thumbsdown: :rtwno: :santa: :thinking: :rolleyes: ~:rolleyes:Quote:
Originally Posted by Nerouin
???
I think he is frustrated like myself by all the whining and complaining ever since the demo came out.
And I must agree with him
As I. Also, is anyone else hearing music when they view this thread?
crazyviking03Quote:
Originally Posted by crazyviking03
check this thread in the org concerning music blasting...
Sorry, off-topic.
Quid
I am, and I agree with you, the demo is not perfect, and in some preview they said that CA would be still tweaking, at least the cav-charge, so I suggest to go on complaining when I am enjoying RTW and don´t have time to come here and read about things that don´t bother me when I don´t read about them. ~:rolleyes: ~D ~;)
Never thought to see n/t in a topic title here at the Org... :rtwno:
hhm now im curious to know what n/t means ~:confused:Quote:
Originally Posted by Duke John
"n/t" is shorthand for No Text. It alerts you to the fact that there is no point in clicking on the topic because the Title says it all.Quote:
Originally Posted by Basileus
Barkhorn.
At some forums it's quite common to type n/t after your topic title. This means no text and thus the only thing you have to say is in the topic title. It is usefull if you have to click on a messagetitle to see its content, so you avoid needing to look at an empty message.
At this board it is completely useless as all messages are already displayed. Plus it's if you only have 1 short sentence to say and still start a new topic then I doubt wether it's really that important. And from the replies it's clear that the topicstarter didn't even get his point across...
The whining about the whining is more annoying than the whining.
Yeah, perhaps if someone came out and said that the units speed was slower in the game, then we'd stop. But they haven't so it makes sense to let them know our opinon. BTW, a bit more anti-complaining complaining, and this will start to sound like the .com. ~:doh:
There’s nothing wrong with this Demo :rtwyes:
1. Open the Demo Preferences and change the following settings to read:
DISABLE_ARROW_MARKERS:TRUE
SHOW_BANNERS:FALSE
DESYNC:TRUE
and save it over the origional.
2. Then download the RoDeO v0[1].2zip mod and install it (anywhere).
http://www.totalwarcenter.com/downlo...mods&cat_id=10
3. Create a game on RoDeO using the Tutorial Map (which has a large open field to fight on).
4. Start the Demo and select all of the highest Video Settings for everything, and in Game Settings, be sure you have TotalWar Camera selected.
5. Now practice :jumping: how draw out formations (left to right, and don’t Group before this step, or you won't be able to to have full control of multi unit positioning).
Once you get the hang of the minor differences in interface, this plays very much like MTW, only more realistic, and looks much better.
~;)
With all due respect, if we have to go through all that then something is wrong with the demo.
Amen. And n/t threads are spam in a discussion forum.Quote:
Originally Posted by Sasaki Kojiro
Forums are for people who want to DISCUSS things. If a person posts no text threads, they obviously have no interest in discussion, and would be better off elsewhere. If people want to rebut an argument, great. But calling the forum a bunch of whiners as some like to do is imbecilic.
Thanks for clearing that up Barkhorn1x and Duke John.
I think the demo opened the eyes of many.
RTW is without doubt good, but it has its flaws and some new things to get used to.
Some will probably make it into the final product, some not.
The graphics are only good if you zoom in very close, other than that I have my gripes with the out of scale trees and their ability to hide the army from the user, too. :)
I think the strategic part of RTW will be much better, but the tactical part seems to be much more streamlined - for the good or for the better, the truth is somewhere in the middle.
I am not going to think that things will be completely different in the full version!
(This would be a good n/t line hehe)
Elm, I think the as-is Demo was intended to wow the “uninitiated” to sell games, and it does that!
For those pros who would like to test the metal for this new game engine, well they know where the mod forums are.
My post was for those in-between vets, who was where I was when I first tried this thing out, “very disappointed”! I thought the serious multiplayer community had been forsaken for the single player campaign flash battlers (all show and no real tactical go).
Now that I have poked around a little, I think that RTW is the best thing since sliced bread ~;p
Truly an “awesome” game (don’t want to overuse the word awesome, but there is no other)!
:bow:
And finally, in my opinion (again) there is nothing wrong with the speed of anything in this game either. Thought so at first also, then when I learned how to play in this more realistic invironment, it became clear that these are the correct speeds, not the ones we are use too.
P.S. If you want better camera height hit F9 (higher that standard TotalWar Camera), then adjust down and angle ;)
Realistic? No one can run like they do with full armor and weapons. No one.
That people like the new speed...fine by me, just dont use the realism argument plz
The marching speed for both MTW and RTW is 100 meters/minute. Now thats a nice speed for troops in marching column on a road but not when off road while trying to maintain a combat formation. But I dont mind that as its a game.
This might be a demo but some of us are concerned about the effect of a 50% increase in running speed combined with a 25% increase in units to control. Videos released seems to show similar speed so I expect its more or less final.
CBR
On a daily basis the Roman era soldiers lived in their basically light armor, and regularly carried in the neighborhood of 60 to 70 pounds in tools, armor, and rations. They lived their whole life on foot, and striped to their fighting necessities could probably have sustained a very lively clip, even over rough terrain. Add to this the adrenalin push of the possibility of an extremely painful death, and it just might all add up.
Remember these were boys (quite literally) who had never been to Berger King.
Well they did not do anything spectacular compared to other armies through history.
http://carlisle-www.army.mil/usamhi/...hing/rates.doc
http://www.totalwar.com/community/history.htm
http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Orac...arch-move.html
CBR
I think the whining about the whining about the whining is REALLY annoying :tomato:
Good work CBR!
Very informative.
But marching (fully loaded) from camp to camp in a baggage train procession, and deployment on a field for battle; apples and oranges!
All I really know is what I see. Step for step, marching, double time, and charge, all viewed up close and personal, all looks very realistic to me. May just be the eye of the beholder?
I won’t pursue this anymore, but would like to hear any further comments ~:)
Those sites CBR referenced indicate approximately 2.8 miles per hour for marching speed of Roman armies. The marching speed in MTW and RTW is 3.7 miles per hour which is faster than normal.
CA uses historical accuracy arguments to counter criticism of gameplay, and gameplay arguments to counter criticism of historical accuracy. I remember longjohn telling me that the reason he wouldn't make cavalry 10% faster in MTW was because historically cav ran at less than 15 miles per hour. Now in RTW cav is running at 22 miles per hour. What happened to the historical argument? After refusing to increase cav speed by 10% in MTW, he increases it by 50% in RTW.
Ok some comments then ~:)Quote:
Originally Posted by Tomi says
The basic Roman march speed was 100 steps/minute and quick march was 120 steps/minute. Being loaded up with equipment does not effect such marching speeds although fatigue will be greater. You can expect troops to march for hours with 100 steps/minute and highly trained can do it even faster as the links also showed.
A step/pace has been pretty much standard through the ages and is 2.5 feet (76 centimeters) but a step will be bigger if marching at very high rates (about 3 feet/91 centimeters)
Today US Marines are marching 120 steps/minute and double quick march at 180 steps/minute. Thats 91 meters/minute and 165 meters/minute. British troops before WW2 used the same except the step for double quick march were 40 inches so they did 180 meters/minute.
US Civil War infantry was to advance towards the enemy position at 110 steps and then 165 steps or greater when under fire. Only going into a run the last few yards.
I checked some Princepes and they did 120 steps/minute that should give 90 meters/minute but is actually 100 meters so they have nice long steps ~:)
So troops are always on quick march in the game which isnt that realistic. Their running speed is 250 meters/minute and thats really something no unit would be doing as they have to keep order in the formation and it would tire men quickly. Armor and shields also makes very fast movement rates difficult.
But the actual distance travelled over time is not that important for the game, its more the difference between march and double quick march. Even if we give the Romans the benefit of the doubt (and turn them all into US marines) and assume they can do 180 steps that would still only be x 1.8 the marching speed.
IMO the x 1.66 increase we had in MTW is more realistic than the x 2.5 we have in RTW demo.
CBR
Great info, CBR! Do you perhaps also have info about realistic walking/running speed of cavalry? Preferable medieval ones :grin:
Back to the subject of this thread... I don't really understand the point being made, yes this is a demo, it is a demo of the piece of software they are releasing...
Now I don't see "Beta" writen anywhere nor any disclaimer stating that the game is only 80% complete and not representative of the final product or whatever so forgive me for assuming that what is in the demo is what we are getting...
Personally I don't remember any great difference in what was in the MTW demo and what we got in the final game (other than all the campaign map stuff obviously.. ~:) ).
P.S. Personally I liked the demo...
Threads like these are starting to annoy me...
~Wiz
Cavalry walk speed is about 6-8 km/h with trotting about x 2 walk speed. Most cavalry charges starts with a walk, about 3-400 meters away from the target, then goes into a trot about halfway and only the last 50 meter or so goes into a canter/gallop. Canter would be something like x 3 walk speed and gallop x 5-6 (but depends on horse and armour)
Cav walked 50% faster than standard infantry in MTW and thats realistic (with infantry standard march rate of 4 km/h) and running is x 2.2 of walk speed (so thats the trot). Canter and gallop would be faster than what we have in game but that was only done for a short distance anyway.
Edit: Anything faster than trot made it difficult to keep a close formation together.
Edit2: Cavalry in RTW demo seems to run 4 times as fast as it walking
CBR
Thanks CBR!
But in M:TW we could mod the walking speed, running speed and charging speed. The charge only began some metres before the enemy. Hopefully it will be the same in R:TW so that cav can also have walk -> trot -> canter/gallop.
Yeah havent tested charging speed..not easy to do that. But it still seems to be slightly faster than the run speed.
CBR
Cav is 4x walking speed and still can't catch routers, hahahaha
I'll repeat what has already been said, MTW was no different to the demo. Why should we suddenly think RTW will see major changes?
.......Orda
http://imcintosh.com/ugly/modules/Fo...es/bowdown.gif CBR
You got it all man ~;)
Salute!
Tomi
Exactly.Quote:
Originally Posted by Orda Khan
Also, I dislike how valid concerns that the community is bringing up related to gameplay and game features in the demo are considered "Whining and Complaining" by the fanboy mob instead of what they are - ways of improving the game or at the least, keeping the essence of the game the same while improving other portions. It's as if we can't voice any concern or the mob will drown our concerns out with incoherant praise for CA.
Yeah. It's impossible to make suggestions at the .com.
THat's why I rarely (if ever) go there.
I understand that most of these concerns that we have won't be adressed, but I'd rather voice my concern along with others in hopes that CA will realize that they have some dissention in the ranks that may be smoothed out with their help.
If we really want to have a better chance of being heard (and to get beyond the appearance of whining and complaining), we would need to initiate “a respectful” Official Petition from the Concerned Online Community (the COC ?).
For instance, the speed issues (of which I am now a convert) could be addressed with specific recommendations (CBR’s). We could then ask for all in agreement to sign, and present it to CA, asking them to “please consider” making the changes before the final release.
We would have to move fast to get it written up, and create a special purpose (heavily moderated) name collection forum. And then fast again to get the word out, and then to get it delivered.
Any takers?
I think perhaps the most realistic action would be to look at creating a mod specifically for multiplayer. because, fwiw, i think it would be highly unlikely that CA would be prepared to make large changes to the unit speed (especially this close to release). I would imagine the speeds have been set by CA based on a fair bit of testing, and it would indicate that with CA's drive to reach a wider audience base they have chosen to speed the game up.
Possible solution:
I am currently playing an Enemy Territory competitively (a team based FPS). The standard version of the game was very unsuitable to competitive play (I won't bore you with details ;) ) so a mod was created called ETpro, with the idea of balancing the gameplay specifically for competitive play.
ETpro has allowed the competitive ET scene to provide a lot of feedback over the last year and the game has continuously evolved. It is unlikely the developers would be prepared to spend the time needed to this type of ongoing tweaking - especially as the 'competitive' community of any online multiplayer game is usually a very small portion of the total market.
So in the upcoming developers chat it may also be worth asking if mods can be created for online play and also perhaps ask if specific areas (such as unit speed) can be changed. Then try and get a few of the better MTW modders together to start building the new RTW pro ;)
I dont mean to threadjack any further but I thought I'd put my 2 cents in about this.Quote:
Originally Posted by CBR
In my experience, regular inf in combat gear (which may or may not be heavier that what a legionaire would carry, I dont know) can maintain a walking pace on a road, on the flat of 3 mph for say 8 hours. On the other hand, even that leisurely pace for 20 miles will take a fatigue/morale toll of regular troops by even the second day. Every year during the Nijmegan marches, soldiers (who have trained for them) fall out when pushed with a 4 x 30 mile test (usually on the 3rd and 4th days) and thats not marching in combat gear.
Training, conditioning, and professionalism are more a factor in "forced marches". Based on my own (mis)deeds, I know that small units of professionals can march >4 but less than 5 mph in combat gear for a long day (12h) provided they have enough water (or are 'whipped') and given short breaks. Similarly, they should be able to dog trot 10 miles in 90 min.
Without roads and/or carrying 100 lb packs up and down hills 10-15 miles/day is reasonable, especially for large units.
Don't worry about threadjacking. Since the threadstarter posted n/t he is not really bothered with the content of this thread.
Ya dudes its only a demo
yes its a demo, everyone knows that. usually demo's are very important for the future sales figures for a game. in the case of RTW, CA already has 2 class games under its belt to help sell it, but the demo is still very important. lets face it, its not an open-beta which could influence the game, its the only demo which will allow us to see (part of) the game in action before we have to pay to see the full product.Quote:
Originally Posted by Lonewarrior
Don Coyote
no way! ~:eek:Quote:
Originally Posted by Lonewarrior
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lonewarrior
The purpose of a demo is to demonstrate what the final product will be like. Many people were not pleased by the needless changes and questionable design choices evident in the RTW demo.
perhaps CA is just rushing it out the door and will release a mega patch when it's out the door..... maybe...
you know, just to beat that other game...
You might want to look at my post over here https://forums.totalwar.org/vb/showthread.php?t=36046 concerning the seperate tracks the demo and actual game have been running on. You can judge my rationale but it's a strong case that the game will have 3-6 months more development time in it than the demo. The whole thread might be worth your time. If Gold comes tomorrow, that'll lend additional credibility to the sources quoted in that thread. Take a look and keep an open mind. I'm a developer, although not a game developer. The process is still the same.