RTW multiplayer review

I've played a handful of battles. But am probably going to wait for a patch (which addresses the connection issue) before continuing to play anymore. Trying to connect is often a long long frustrating process.

Lag is a symptom of improper settings on the host and client boxes. Additionally there is a memory leak that shows itself after a couple games in a row.

Ignoring the memory leak, and assuming you play with settings suitable to your PC, the game plays smooth just like in single player (i.e., no lag).

The battles are fun and interesting. The maps are huge and the deployment zones allow for smarter deployment among teams.

It is not a rush game as the maps are huge and the 'turbo charged' speed that some people are griping about is refreshing imo. When you charge, the untis really look like they are charging. When you opponent charges you, and you hear the horn and see the waves of infantry coming running at you -- it gets your blood pumping and you feel the panic rising. This is great stuff imo.

Units do move more quickly than in STW/MTW. And as I point out above, I am growing very fond of this. The unit controls, once you learn them, are very effective and robust. You can wheel you formations now!!! (use the period or comma to wheel left or right). You can blend your lines now (use the minus or equals to increase or decreas you ranks).

Elephants are not all powerful as people feared. The different factions seem to pair up well. There are a lot of units to select from and mind you this isn't even with a VI like expansion!

You can play historical battles (very cool imo). And I imagine this could be modded so people could host custom battles with preset units. VERY COOL.

Once they connection issue is fixed. The multiplayer will be great fun.

The only bad thing left imo is that the games can be extremely long and boring if you get routed first or early. Here's why: with a restricted camera and no route command you can easily get stuck on a corner of the map with say 3 archers left who are rallied, but you are stuck with them and cannot view the rest of the battle being fought in the distance.

This will have the side effect of driving lots of players to disconnect early, and the problems associated with that.

I would grade the multiplayer currently as a D-.

Once the connection problem/server limit is remedied I would then give it a B.

If they enable route in the game and allow players to pick the same faction (currently two or more players cannot pick the same faction), then I would give it an A.

"When you opponent charges you, and you hear the horn and see the waves of infantry coming running at you -- it gets your blood pumping and you feel the panic rising."

You feel panic because you know you don't have time to coordinate all of your units? If the run speed was slower, your blood wouldn't get pumping as much? How does faster increase your ability to coordinate and issue commands to your 20 units? Got any replays you can post?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Puzz3D

You feel panic because you know you don't have time to coordinate all of your units?

---

I do have time to coordinate all my units. I may not have time to assess the situation and make the right decision. Ever played speed chess? Speed chess isn't hard because you don't have time to move a piece ... speed chess is hard becuase of the pressure to make quick decisions and the panic caused by your opponents quick decisions/responses.

If anyone is looking for a realistic tactical simulator, then I think RTW delivers more than MTW. And that is due to the enhanced controls, the new general's rally ability and the realistic speeds.

The game is immersive.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Puzz3D

If the run speed was slower, your blood wouldn't get pumping as much?

---

Not as much. STW and MTW caused plenty of panic and excitement ... but I think RTW has improved on that aspect. If you define improvement as *more* moments that will cause you heart rate to sky rocket ;)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Puzz3D

How does faster increase your ability to coordinate and issue commands to your 20 units?

---

I can't help but feel like you're attempting to set a trap. You are nervous about the faster speeds right? You should be ;)

They will test your tactical decision making.

I never said faster speeds increase the ability to coordinate! :no:

I said the robust controls of RTW make it easier to control/coordinate your units. Just as it took awhile to learn the controls and shortcuts for MTW, there will be a learning curve with RTW. The controls are improved imo. You can do things much more quickly and easier in RTW than you can in MTW, and with precision. I was bummed about the RTW controls after playing the demo, but after getting more aquainted with them I am pleased.

I do not have any replays handy (I'm at work). I'll upload some to my clan forum and post a link later.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by d6veteran

I do have time to coordinate all my units. I may not have time to assess the situation and make the right decision. Ever played speed chess? Speed chess isn't hard because you don't have time to move a piece ... speed chess is hard becuase of the pressure to make quick decisions and the panic caused by your opponents quick decisions/responses.

---

I've played plenty of speed chess, and there is no way it allows you to play chess to it's full potential. Shallow thinking and cheap shots is what wins almost all speed chess games. Also, the starting position in chess is always the same, so you can use previously analyzed lines in the opening to save time. You also only have to move one piece at a time, so of course it doesn't test your ability to physically move the piece. I can move a piece on a chessboard faster than I can move a mouse pointer to a unit, click on that unit, move the mouse pointer to another place on the map and click again. I also don't have to scroll around when I play chess because I can see the whole board.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by d6veteran

The game is immersive.

---

The game is immersive until something starts running at unrealistically fast speed.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by d6veteran

STW and MTW caused plenty of panic and excitement ... but I think RTW has improved on that aspect. If you define improvement as *more* moments that will cause you heart rate to sky rocket ;)

---

There is a trade off of other aspects to achieve that.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by d6veteran

I can't help but feel like you're attempting to set a trap. You are nervous about the faster speeds right? You should be ;)

---

I'm not nervous.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by d6veteran

They will test your tactical decision making.

---

I make my tactical decisions as fast as anyone playing the game today. Because my reflexes are not as fast as my opponent I'm supposed to loose?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by d6veteran

I never said faster speeds increase the ability to coordinate! :no:

---

I didn't say you said it. So this is an area where the gameplay has deteriorated especially since we have more units to coordinate than before.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by d6veteran

I said the robust controls of RTW make it easier to control/coordinate your units. Just as it took awhile to learn the controls and shortcuts for MTW, there will be a learning curve with RTW. The controls are improved imo. You can do things much more quickly and easier in RTW than you can in MTW, and with precision. I was bummed about the RTW controls after playing the demo, but after getting more aquainted with them I am pleased.

---

Does this increase in control compensate for 25% more units and 50% faster run speed? I couldn't protect a skirmisher from being decimated to 4 men by an enemy cav unit charging from something like 100 meters away with a spear about 20 meters behind the skirmisher, and my attention was focused on my two units at the time, so I reacted as fast as is humanly possible. It wasn't a case of me not seeing it coming. The cav attacked from the side, so the skirmisher didn't automatically fall back behind the spear. I'll have to keep the spear within 10 meters to protect the skirmishers.

Puzz: I am glad we see things in the same light. That's not often happened before! :)

I find the new controls counter-intuitive, the short-cut keys have always been there, and I am hard pressed to see anything that has enhanced the controls, with the exception of being able to "wheel" your units. All of the other things were more easily done by clicking and/or dragging. Now it is back to using hotkeys again, when MTW had a perfectly good solution with the mouse.

The faster speeds have absolutely nothing to do with reflex.

This is not quake.

Having played quite a few multiplayer games (not online) I somewhat agree with the original poster. The faster speeds actually encourage you to think much more carefully about your deployment (which is far more improved in RTW than MTW) because when the battle starts all hell breaks loose (as it should be).

Also, most people don't run until the last moment so there really isnt that much running at all. Run at your own peril as your units tire VERY quickly. Also playing as Roman factions its prudent NOT to charge (pila anyone?) but rather march steadily towards your enemy.

Hysteria over faster kill rates are a bunch of bollocks as everyone has the toughest units which withstand a LOT of punishment and cavalry is pretty weak for the same reasons. Elephants are still VERY powerful but not overpowered due to their cost.

Both me and my regular lanning partners agree that multiplayer RTW is far far above MTW in terms of FUN and our games have lasted longer despite the 'killing speeds' and 'rts style aimed and short attention spanned kiddies'.

Some of my issues:
Can't group units that are alone, grrr
Game goes out of sync (nothing to do with playing single player then going into multiplayer like MTW)
I wish you could set different levels of Denarii for different teams.

All the nitpicky things that people seem to be flaming CA seem to be born out of some resitance to tradition, such as only 3v3 heavin forbid (have any of you played multiplayer and seen how laggy it gets with all the units?? 4v4 would be impossible even if it WAS in there), only set Denarii levels OH MY GOD I WANTED TO PLAY 13245 Denarii, and only one player per faction which might SPICE the game up by seeing a wide variety of factions in a game. ~:rolleyes:

Heh I remember on MI there were people who said things like "faster game tests your tactical decision making" and then were surprised when I whooped them twice as bad in a game with some lag to slow it down ~:)

4v4s in MTW were easy to host without any lag. I had hosted 4v4s ever since the STW days and never had a problem with lag in my games. It is possible the 4v4 was removed due to a lag issue with RTW, but we will never know, until the reason is given by the developers. Personally, I would rather have more players and less units than the other way around.

The worse thing is the huge TW clan community has grown up around the big 4v4 games of STW and MTW. The 3v3 of RTW is a step backwards for these players since they just lost one teammate per game.

As for speed: I am still undecided about that. The other problems with MP are more of a priority with me right now.

I might add that someone who can "click" faster than you isnt really going to have much of an advantage, because most people use hotkeys for their groups anyway.

It would be only an issue if in MTW you had buckloads of spare time to sit there and think, now be honest, did you? I certianly didnt in my games of MTW.

Also, you can drag boxes around units far off in the distance, you dont have to click on them.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ElmarkOFear

4v4s in MTW were easy to host without any lag. I had hosted 4v4s ever since the STW days and never had a problem with lag in my games. It is possible the 4v4 was removed due to a lag issue with RTW, but we will never know, until the reason is given by the developers. Personally, I would rather have more players and less units than the other way around.

The worse thing is the huge TW clan community has grown up around the big 4v4 games of STW and MTW. The 3v3 of RTW is a step backwards for these players since they just lost one teammate per game.

As for speed: I am still undecided about that. The other problems with MP are more of a priority with me right now.

---

Your points are all valid of course, but your last comment is the one that I think is the problem here.

People of the MTW community have gone in thinking RTW is MTW2. This is THE problem.

If RTW came out and MTW/STW didnt exist, how many of these gripes would you have? You would still have some but I guarentee 3v3 is just as fun as 4v4.

Even 4v4 is no fun if your computer is giving you 1fps, and having had some 3v3 battles RTW is much much laggier. Also if there is a large difference in computer specs the slower ones slip out of sync and have an aweful time trying to render all those sprites. Remember we have come from a Doom2 like 2d sprite world with minmal animations to a full blown 3D Rendered world.

I am of the hope that you are correct Morindin: The reason for no 4v4 is a lag issue, which is caused by the change from a 2D to a 3D engine. This would indicate that, with time, a patch could overcome this issue.

One major fun killer for me, is the MP lobby. There is not much there to hold a community together for an extended period of time. Other Gamespy-hosted lobbys have been better instituted: Check out the WarHammer 40K Dawn Of War lobby for a good example. This game should not have been released with such a basic, featureless lobby. This loss of features is big when compared to the STW and MTW lobbies of the past. The much needed and loved features such as the #ignore and #ban, and the private chat area are no more. Once you have run across your first lobby spammer, you will curse the day that #ignore was removed. ~:) The degrading of the lobby has nothing to do with the different engine and I know the MP community feels they have been "kicked in the teeth" and been "sat in the back of the bus" again.

Of all the lobbies the STW lobby was one of the best. It had private chat rooms you could host and it was easy to see all the information about each hosted game.

The MTW lobby didn't offer as much: No private chat rooms, a private chat function that was never stable, you never knew when it would place your priv message in the public lobby. (Many an awkward moment was found by those saying things they probably would not have said if they knew everybody was seeing it! hehe) Though to compensate, MTW did eventually come up with the #ignore and #ban commands. My ignore and banned list was huge!

RTW is the worst lobby of the 3. It is featurless. It is hard to read chat. The private chat function goes to the main lobby, which kind of defeats the purpose of it. (Spammers will have a fun time once they realize they cannot be ignored) There was no good reason for the lobby to be this way. It should have been at least equal if not better than MTW since it uses Gamespy. At least MTW had an excuse for being slightly worse than STW. It was using an entirely different game service.

The out-of-sync errors are an old problem. They seem to occur each time a new game is introduced. Normally, this has been patched fairly quickly, but I am not hearing much from the developers as in the past. It may be because they are gun shy from the previous games or they are still concentrating on the single player problems and will eventually get around to the MP lobby stuff.

If the lobby is improved to at least MTW levels and the hosting interface is improved, (I can see new hosts having much problems with it and giving up on MP from frustration.) then I am sure we can then settle down to the usual "Cav is overpowered", "Elephants are overpowered", and the newly infamous "Speed is too fast" discussions. First things first. :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ElmarkOFear

I am of the hope that you are correct Morindin: The reason for no 4v4 is a lag issue, which is caused by the change from a 2D to a 3D engine. This would indicate that, with time, a patch could overcome this issue.

One major fun killer for me, is the MP lobby. There is not much there to hold a community together for an extended period of time. Other Gamespy-hosted lobbys have been better instituted: Check out the WarHammer 40K Dawn Of War lobby for a good example. This game should not have been released with such a basic, featureless lobby. This loss of features is big when compared to the STW and MTW lobbies of the past. The much needed and loved features such as the #ignore and #ban, and the private chat area are no more. Once you have run across your first lobby spammer, you will curse the day that #ignore was removed. ~:) The degrading of the lobby has nothing to do with the different engine and I know the MP community feels they have been "kicked in the teeth" and been "sat in the back of the bus" again.

Of all the lobbies the STW lobby was one of the best. It had private chat rooms you could host and it was easy to see all the information about each hosted game.

The MTW lobby didn't offer as much: No private chat rooms, a private chat function that was never stable, you never knew when it would place your priv message in the public lobby. (Many an awkward moment was found by those saying things they probably would not have said if they knew everybody was seeing it! hehe) Though to compensate, MTW did eventually come up with the #ignore and #ban commands. My ignore and banned list was huge!

RTW is the worst lobby of the 3. It is featurless. It is hard to read chat. The private chat function goes to the main lobby, which kind of defeats the purpose of it. (Spammers will have a fun time once they realize they cannot be ignored) There was no good reason for the lobby to be this way. It should have been at least equal if not better than MTW since it uses Gamespy. At least MTW had an excuse for being slightly worse than STW. It was using an entirely different game service.

The out-of-sync errors are an old problem. They seem to occur each time a new game is introduced. Normally, this has been patched fairly quickly, but I am not hearing much from the developers as in the past. It may be because they are gun shy from the previous games or they are still concentrating on the single player problems and will eventually get around to the MP lobby stuff.

If the lobby is improved to at least MTW levels and the hosting interface is improved, (I can see new hosts having much problems with it and giving up on MP from frustration.) then I am sure we can then settle down to the usual "Cav is overpowered", "Elephants are overpowered", and the newly infamous "Speed is too fast" discussions. First things first. :)

---

All valid points, having not played online much (only lans, playing with people you know and all that) I hadnt come across this problem.

However, RTW DOES have a console (~ key I think?) and such commands might be available there - have you tried that ?

Nope, but I will check it out. ~:) How do you access the console?

A user in this forum posted a post saying they'd found it. If its not the ~ key im not sure. Maybe press all the keys or something.

I tried setting on the keyboard, but now I have to buy a new one! ~:)

I will see what I can come up with and let you know.

D-, from someone who, in other topic, is rather positive about the game, whohoo! ~:eek:

Ok, I'll wait to see if those issue get solved and will buy RTW when it will be worth a A.

Let's see how those multiple issues get solved...

Louis,

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Puzz3D

I make my tactical decisions as fast as anyone playing the game today. Because my reflexes are not as fast as my opponent I'm supposed to loose?

---

yea i think you should :sweatdrop: otherwise it makes no sense that you win someone clicking faster than you when both make the right decisions ~;p

"when both make the right decisions"
Who wins has done the right decision.

I am preatty happy to have a fast game, Med was so disappointing compared to Shoggy, but on the other side, I like to play battles where the two opponents has enough time to control the units before the clash, and create several fake moves and counteractions.
If the units speed, added to the factor there are 20 and no more 16, reduces this features from the games, then add me in the list of players that are unhappy about the speed.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tootee

yea i think you should :sweatdrop: otherwise it makes no sense that you win someone clicking faster than you when both make the right decisions ~;p

---

It makes no sense to loose to someone clicking faster than you when they are making inferior tactical decisions. The best tactics should be what determines the winner. The whole point of tactical depth is that the decisions over the course of the battle will rarely be exactly equal. The more speed is emphasized, the less tactically deep your decisions have to be in order to win. The two things are at odds with each other.

Control will improve as a player gets more accomplished using the interface, but is there enough there to compensate for the 25% increase in units and 50% increase in running?

As Elmark has already stated, 4v4 is long standing, especially with Clans.
Morindin, I don't want to appear offensive but you should comment on this when you actually play MP, as you appear to play mainly on LAN. Only then will you appreciate exactly what has been taken away from us. I have played countless 3v3 and I can assure you it is nowhere near as good as a tough 4v4.
I have not 'flamed' CA but I have asked them pertinent questions regarding these MP issues. Another question I would ask them that I have not done so far is ....Why did they not announce this during the other marketing hype?
If graphics have been improved, the server also can be improved, this is progress. Limiting MP is not. MP support has always been minimal but even so, a loyal community has made do on MP because they love the game. To make MP worse than it already was is no way to treat that community. The one faction-one player issue was sorted in MTW and the game was better for it. Forget lots of different guys running about the map for variety, what if I would like to host an historical battle....3v3 Parthia v Rome is still impossible. So historical battles now must be 1v1....Historical battle or historical skirmish? ~:rolleyes:
The way things are I can see a lot of 'vets' disappearing and/or Clans splitting. Maybe this won't have an impact on RTW online, what with all the new players who will arrive. Most of these will only have a passing interest.
The fact still remains that the MP community have been let down and I'm just sorry you can't see this.

.......Orda

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Puzz3D

It makes no sense to loose to someone clicking faster than you when they are making inferior tactical decisions. The best tactics should be what determines the winner. The whole point of tactical depth is that the decisions over the course of the battle will rarely be exactly equal. The more speed is emphasized, the less tactically deep your decisions have to be in order to win. The two things are at odds with each other.

Control will improve as a player gets more accomplished using the interface, but is there enough there to compensate for the 25% increase in units and 50% increase in running?

---

typically faster clicking will result in victory if the manoeuvre is well plan out and well rehearsed.. it is hardly often that someone clicking quickly anyhow without any plan will result in victory.

often best tactics do not determine the winner.. victory often goes to those with an executable and sound tactics.. i can made the best strategy covering every possible contingencies but if it cannot be executed *in time* it is worthless. its much like i can have the best mp3 player but if i cant hit the window of opportunity and miss the time-to-market, im not going to win the market.

all possible effort should be spent in strategising in details before the battle, but once enemy is contacted, speed in action and reaction is essence. it is not unreasonable to be able to think fast and act fast.

Loius Ferte, I gave it a grade of D- based on the connectivity bug alone, right after that I commented that the game is pretty good once that bug is fixed. If you can't hardly connect, you can't grade it well no matter how much fun the game is once you get in.

Puzz3d, I specifically stated that quick decision making may be required while quick reflexes are not. I think there is a distinction there. The controls are improved (read the manual). I don't see this as a battle of the quicker clickers, if it was I wouldn't play it since I can't stand that type of game. Go play Dawn of War or something to get some perspective on a game that requires quick reflexes.

Instead of picking apart my opinions of the game ... here's a novel idea ... post your own reviews here!

Basically the lines are being drawn between those who think the game is too fast and those that think the game is *not* too fast. Obiovusly the speed of the game isn't bothering *me*, and honestly I don't think the game has been out long enough to get to set in our trenches over this.

I'm definitely tired of arguing with everyone about it though.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by d6veteran

Loius Ferte, I gave it a grade of D- based on the connectivity bug alone, right after that I commented that the game is pretty good once that bug is fixed. If you can't hardly connect, you can't grade it well no matter how much fun the game is once you get in.

---

You know, I only play MP, so as long as this game can't play in MP thanks to connection problems, I can't play at all.

As far as I know, this bug is not fixed.

When it will be, I will reconsider.

So D- it is for now.

Louis,

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Louis de la Ferte Ste Colombe

You know, I only play MP, so as long as this game can't play in MP thanks to connection problems, I can't play at all.

As far as I know, this bug is not fixed.

When it will be, I will reconsider.

So D- it is for now.

Louis,

---

Oh I understand. That is *your* grade too! Ha! I thought you were mocking me. :dizzy2:

For those who are only buying for multiplayer I feel bad for you.

Since when is a LAN not multiplayer? Is my opinion not valid because I mainly play LAN? It's the same thing as a playing online with your clan buddies MINUS gamespy and lag. It still suffers from the same "issues".

A lot of the issues seem to be with pre-game settings.
Well, how many players were put off MTW because it wouldnt accept their CD Key? I almost was.

I keep remember people saying in these boards it was a hassle to get on MTW but once it was there it was worth it. Well RTW is the same, with less hassle IMO.

Also people seem to forget this when it comes to RTW and the game has hardly been out for a week!
I agree with TooTee. There is far too much hysteria over the game by people who havnt even PLAYED it. Give it time and wait and see what people think in a month.

There also seems to be an air of arrogence about the "MTW multiplayer veterins" that seem to indicate because they've played MTW for X amount of years that RTW should be exactly how they say it should be.


Actually the laughable thing about this thread is there have only been two peope have who seemingly have played multiplayer EXTENSIVELY who have high opinions of the game, one who is so-so, and a bunch of people who dont even own it saying how much it sucks.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Morindin

Actually the laughable thing about this thread is there have only been two peope have who seemingly have played multiplayer EXTENSIVELY who have high opinions of the game, one who is so-so, and a bunch of people who dont even own it saying how much it sucks.

---

I have not understood really this part, so I will avoid any comment.
Instead the question between the differences LAN/multi can be answered, in just few words(my opinion I mean):
in Lan u play friends, people that you know, while in multi there are unknown persons. This attribute can be the difference between a funny night playing, with a nasty flame war.
If you ever had the necessity to use commands(ie: #ban, #ignore, etc..), u should understand the disappointment to discover that the game, in this moment, does not have them.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Morindin

There also seems to be an air of arrogence about the "MTW multiplayer veterins" that seem to indicate because they've played MTW for X amount of years that RTW should be exactly how they say it should be.


Actually the laughable thing about this thread is there have only been two peope have who seemingly have played multiplayer EXTENSIVELY who have high opinions of the game, one who is so-so, and a bunch of people who dont even own it saying how much it sucks.

---

I disagree. I don't see it as arrogant to ask questions that are relevant to MP and the veterans I talked about are the ones who have played Total War since its inception. These people are not arrogant, they have been compromised and are frustrated. Whether they own the game yet is of no consequence as this would not make the MP experience any different to what it already is. With or without the game there is still no 4v4 ( to name but one of many issues )
To quote Louis, when effort is applied there is usually an improvement and judging by the MP feedback this is not the case.

I apologise if I offended you and I did say I wasn't trying to offend. I realise that LAN involves multiple players but I have to use the terminology at my disposal in the game menu. If you and your mates participate regularly in tournaments like the CWC and CWB you will see how 3v3 impacts upon Clan challenges

Back in STW I could host a battle and choose the map, season, 4v4, comp, friendly and koku level, the choice of game type ( LMS, KOTH ) and a timer if I wanted. When people joined they could view a picture of the map and a map description.
When I see what is on offer now I can see that RTW is very limited

........Orda

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by PaolinoPaperino

I have not understood really this part, so I will avoid any comment.
Instead the question between the differences LAN/multi can be answered, in just few words(my opinion I mean):
in Lan u play friends, people that you know, while in multi there are unknown persons. This attribute can be the difference between a funny night playing, with a nasty flame war.
If you ever had the necessity to use commands(ie: #ban, #ignore, etc..), u should understand the disappointment to discover that the game, in this moment, does not have them.

---

I only agree with half this. While it is annoying when you get spammers and what have you that cant be ignored, it hardly detracts from the actual gameplay. But yes, It SHOULD have those features and it does make it look like MP was tagged on.

The first half of your statement however I do not agree with. Just browse through this very forum right here and see all the recommendations by members of this forum saying "Yeah I only play MTW with my clan mates now". There is no difference in that respect is there?

BTW this thread is "multiplayer review" which includes LAN play. Not "RTW sucks because of the online community review". Taking the people factor out of it, RTW is a damn good game.

The idiot factor is a constant throughout many genres of games, and not all of them have a ban or ignore feature either :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Orda Khan

I disagree. I don't see it as arrogant to ask questions that are relevant to MP and the veterans I talked about are the ones who have played Total War since its inception. These people are not arrogant, they have been compromised and are frustrated. Whether they own the game yet is of no consequence as this would not make the MP experience any different to what it already is. With or without the game there is still no 4v4 ( to name but one of many issues )
To quote Louis, when effort is applied there is usually an improvement and judging by the MP feedback this is not the case.

I apologise if I offended you and I did say I wasn't trying to offend. I realise that LAN involves multiple players but I have to use the terminology at my disposal in the game menu. If you and your mates participate regularly in tournaments like the CWC and CWB you will see how 3v3 impacts upon Clan challenges

Back in STW I could host a battle and choose the map, season, 4v4, comp, friendly and koku level, the choice of game type ( LMS, KOTH ) and a timer if I wanted. When people joined they could view a picture of the map and a map description.
When I see what is on offer now I can see that RTW is very limited

........Orda

---

I still think it would be much wiser of you to reserve judgement until actually purchasing the game. I read this discussion board like a bloodthirsty hound, looked at all 118 or so screenshots on gamespy, and from "hearing" and "seeing" and even playing the Demo nothing compared to the real game.

Yes you're allowed expectations but in no way have you been "mislead" by CA. 3v3 is extremely fun, and this is something you wont know until you've purchased the game.

Besides, I find it highly likely the next patch will be full of new multiplayer content personally. Its like what that CA guy said, there are a lot things that come to light when the game hits the 'real world'. CA were probably lanning the game themselves with themselves and didnt come across these issues due to that fact.

My god if you think this is bad, you should see how Doom fans feel about Doom3 multiplayer. Terrible online framerate and ping, 4 players max, etc. :)
In no way is multiplayer dying however. 99% of games these days are aimed at multiplayer and it feels like single player has been "tagged on"

Do you know how refreshing it is to see a game with immersive single player content again? A game that actually lasts more than 7 hours and incredably effort has been put into the AI?

*speaking as Assistant Moderator*

I remember some heated arguments back in MTW 1.0/1.1 days and I hope we can avoid anything that comes close to that.

I can understand the frustration some players have as I feel it too.

Some are new players, some are veterans and some like the current game, some dont. Just try and keep it civil thats all. Everyone is entitled to his opinion. If you disagree about something please use facts and/or examples.

And no this post is not directed against anyone in particular.

Thanks :bow:



CBR

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Morindin

Do you know how refreshing it is to see a game with immersive single player content again? A game that actually lasts more than 7 hours and incredably effort has been put into the AI?

---

Shogun had the most immersive single player of any game I've ever played. And it had good multiplayer. So it's not like it's one or the other.

CBR: Ok, I'm sorry. I didn't REALLY sit on my keyboard! HEHE

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ElmarkOFear

CBR: Ok, I'm sorry. I didn't REALLY sit on my keyboard! HEHE

---

Ah thats better! :laugh4:


CBR

Nice sig CBR. How you like my new one? :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Morindin

Yes you're allowed expectations but in no way have you been "mislead" by CA.

---

You've got to be kidding. We most certainly were mislead. For instance: "* Rome: Total War also allows up to 8 players to fight epic battles over a LAN or the internet." It still says that at the official site. Also, who would have expected so many useful multiplayer features that were present in the previous game to be gone now? Besides, RTW multiplayer battles can diverge without you knowing it. What a waste of time to even try playing this game online. People who buy RTW should be warned
that they are purchasing a single player game and that's all, and even then you have to mod the stats to get battles where you have a hope of coordinating a large number of units. Gil said if there had been no effort put into multiplayer there would have been no multiplayer option. Creative Assembly should have seriously considered removing multiplayer altogether going by what got released.

I will quote from the developer chat on the gamespy server:

The maximum amount of armies available on the battlefield at any given time is 8 and the maximum amount of units per army is 20. The maximum amount of soldiers per unit is 300.

He forgot to say NOT in custom/mp battles. AFAIK the manual hasnt even been updated and still talk about 4v4 battles.


CBR

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CBR

AFAIK the manual hasnt even been updated and still talk about 4v4 battles.

---

Follow through on that line of thought CBR. Why would they say the game has a certain feature and then pull the plug on it at the last minute? Most likely there were some last minute problems with 4v4s. Would you rather have a 4v4 that isn't playable/doesn't work or not even have the choice? If 4v4s were unplayable but were left in the game, CA would have an earful (or screenful) of complaints about inadequate testing and so on.

You can use the same line of thinking about some of the other missing features in MP...like "one player, one faction". If they had the feature in VI to allow multiple players to have the same faction, why would they take it away in RTW? There must have been some issues they couldn't resolve with that feature when applied to RTW. It's the only thing that makes sense.

RTW is a different beast. Not all features in prior games may translate well into it (yet).

Oh yes there might have been some problem, I just wonder why they apparently only found out about that after manuals had been sent off to the printer.

The dark side of me would say thats because they never bothered to actually play a 4v4 untill after the game was done and they wanted a quick 4v4 and encountered a problem ~:)

I got a theory about why they "left out" some of the stuff we got in MTW patch and VI expansion: https://forums.totalwar.org/vb/showp...6&postcount=55

One problem IMO is that they never really will tell why some things turn into what we get. It allows lots of speculation and frustration. If CA devs where allowed to speak more openly I think it would be better for all.


CBR

It would be nice if the devs could speak more about the game's development, however, no matter what they say, some would choose to argue pointlessly or second guess every decision. Thinking back on some of the previous high dialogue times with the developers, I have my doubts as to whether we could all remain civil enough with them to make it a worthwhile investment of their time. Sooner or later someone would blow a gasket and flame them to Kingdom Come.

Also, if they talked to us while the game was under development they run the risk of being held to task for everything they said - "said" being translated by the fans as "promised". I know because I ran into the same thing when I developed software for a living. We were always purposefully very vague about features and completion dates with those users outside the project for that very "said=promised" equation. What they say in those interviews and previews is probably very controlled and they only say things that are fairly certain about the final version of the game. If they said 4v4 was available for MP, then they must have been very certain of it. That they had to back off from it indicates to me that there was some kind of serious problem with 4v4s. Was it lack of testing? Don't know. I can easily see them "testing" 4v4 LAN games in the office, but what kind of testing environments are available to them on Gamespy? All we can do is speculate and a lot of the speculation so far is not of the healthy variety.

I'd love to chat some more but I have to run my daughter out to get her driving learner's permit now. Have mercy on me. :wreck:

CBR, it's not worth the hassle. MP has gone downhill and IMO it would be better if CA now decided to drop it. As I see things, they are SP to the core and I've watched the online game deteriorate since STW. A few posts ago I listed the many and varied features of STW MP, RTW has nothing new, has nothing special, nothing to get the MP'er excited about the game. I yawn at the influx of people arriving on the scene, telling everyone how tremendous a game it is. Shades of time repeating itself, remember all those MTW groupies? Oddly enough, where are they now? I don't think I'll bother, at least that way I can save myself money, time and stress. I certainly will not be a part of 6 player max MP and I can find many things to do rather than spend hours on end dropping from games. I'd be lying if I said I won't miss it, the interaction with many friends that I have made will be a loss but tossing a coin to see who plays the next game is not something I want. For the life of me I simply cannot think of a reason for MP to go backwards other than it simply being overlooked. That only goes to show that it's not important anyway, which in turn makes me conclude it will not change. I could make about twenty arrows with the thirty quid RTW will cost, why would I spend it on an unfinished game? Let's face facts......the kill speed has been modded, the unit speed has been modded, non playable factions have been modded.........How many on MP would use these mods? Apart from you and I and a handful of others? It's just not worth the effort anymore

......Orda

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Orda Khan

Let's face facts......the kill speed has been modded, the unit speed has been modded, non playable factions have been modded.........How many on MP would use these mods? Apart from you and I and a handful of others? It's just not worth the effort anymore

......Orda

---

I'm trying my best to be optimisitic about the MP game. And this is the main reason Orda. So I'm trying to be hopeful that CA will deliver in the short term. It is obvious that mp development was second fiddle and perhaps not considered a priority for the release. Maybe ... and I'm hoping here ... a polished mp game is being worked on right now and will release with the patch.

I know ... it might be a long shot. Just trying to be optimistic.

On the other hand ... maybe it isn't completely unrealistic that a mod is agreed upon and distributed through clan sites and fan sites like this. Maybe we'll see 50+ players running the mod everynight online.

D6: Unfortunately, history has proven that most people who play MP do not download the mods or even custom maps for multiplayer. Unless, CA would be willing to release an official community-made mod, then it will not be played by many people.

"Unless, CA would be willing to release an official community-made mod, then it will not be played by many people."

Probably true, but I wonder how likely it will happen given that "the community" has torn to shreds in hours something the developers have poured their blood and sweat into for the last four years...... I remember watching a video (I think on GameSpot) that was released shortly after it was announced that RTW went gold. They interviewed a lot of the developers and it was great to see a bunch of people beaming with pride about their work. It was obvious that they poured their hearts and souls into this game.

Due to connectivity issues (first CD key and now I keep exiting the game to desktop) I have yet to play a multiplayer game. As a result I have spent my time playing SP campaign battles on very hard settings with large unit size and have been digging through the unit stats file. Based upon what I've learned so far I think the tactical depth of the battles in RTW blows MTW away. Just one example is the loss of the rally button from MTW which allowed you to simply CTRL + A and then pound the rally button to recall all of your troops. Now your general has a purpose other than to stand there waving the flag and be the "last reserve" to go into battle. Have him chase down some high value yellow-bellied troops that you need back in the battle, blow his rally horn, and urge them back into the fight. Like MTW there are some units which cause morale penalties (fear) in other units, but there are also some units which give morale boost to nearby friendlies. As far as I know, the only unit to do that in MTW was the general and other elite units in MTW only had the advantage of ignoring routers who were not elite, not causing a morale boost. Another example is that the combat equation for each unit varies based upon terrain they are fighting on (scrub, sand, forest, snow) and climate (heat) -- some units accrue advantages under certain conditions and are penalized under other conditions. Yes we had a system like this in MTW but it seems to be even more advanced in RTW.

From the comments it is obvious MP is buggy and was probably released premature but the problems don't seem to be too huge to fix. So stamping out those bugs and then some tweaking to slow the infantry running speed a bit and to slow the speed of killing (by increasing the pause between combat cycles), both easy fixes to do, IMO will allow the tactical depth built into the game to come shining through.

Great post Agravain!

Perhaps they will make they will make the battle configuration more robust and allow the host to select between arcade battles, campaign battle mode and special battle mode. For lack of a better set of terms. The special battle mode would have reduced killing rates and a tweak to speed. This way the host could determine the settings and that would eliminate a need for a mod.

Everyone would be happy.

Great post, yep. Unfortunately I've read even that he has not been able yet to play MP.
Greg and Yuuki's point of view are mine as well.
The game itself can be a great one, can be innovative (as in many SP features it is), it can be complex and not trivial (as several other players has stated, and I discover every day playing it), can be the result of years of hard work, etc..
but it's not what I expected, and then I do not feel satisfied.
If we are still here to discuss, it means that the interest and the good will are not missing.
The question is how these problems, already seen in previous games version, has not been solved.

I wish i could speack about my RTW experience online, but my game keep freezing when i try to log in .......

anyone have any clue what going on ??

I had that problem it was my firewall, try disabling your firewall if you have one.....

Yes a good post and I agree with much of it but I question it also. I would not call things that are programmed into the game 'bugs', to me a bug is an unexpected occurence. When things have obviously been changed there is no accident, it is intentional.
As for being proud and pouring heart and soul into their work.... I take great pride in my work and I always do the best I possibly can. It is for this very reason that I am disappointed because I don't believe they have done, at least not with regards MP. I compare RTW to STW and have to say STW trounces it.

Wheeling a unit was just as easy in MTW by using alt/ right click. Most importantly, if that unit was in a group and I moved that group forward, the 'wheeled' unit would stay that way and not revert back to what it was before it had the wheel command. Ok some people say it's a new game with new commands, I thought all the hype mentioned 'easy to play'. Well I know which set of commands are easiest for MP use where pause is not an option. I certainly don't find time to select my General, chase after routing units etc, by the time I did this the battle would be over.
What some people must realise is that by being disappointed and airing that disappointment does not mean that I, or others hate CA, hate Total War, hate Gamespy.......We are genuinely pissed off because we love this game. Just think what would happen in the next twelve months if there were no fixes required. Instead of that it's back to altering this, adjusting that and just when it's nearly fixed.......Shazam!! New game release. I just can't be bothered to go through all that again

.....Orda

Thanks Swoosh i'll try that, even if i am not very hot on playing without a firewall, seeing the number of times i got hit everytime i log on to VI....

RTW is a good game, with greater potential. As i couldnt play online so far, i have only played a campaign. Campaign is great, few bugs that can easily be corrected.

The only things that bother me so far are the speed of units, the killing speed, and some control that are lacking or that i didnt find, like moving your army in formation. Each time i try to move my whole army, all formations got tangled up with each others ....

Speed of units, just need to be a little slower, a bit like in Shogun. I wont mind a longer game if i can better control my battles. As it is, i dont have time for much things, if i want to look at a unit, i need to pause the game.... Same for killing speed. So to me the speed being bring down a bit would only allow me to enjoy the game even more.

But even with that "speed" issue, i wont spit on that game, its too good ! Especialy since it can be tweack.

Now please CA, lots of peoples buy your games since Shogun mostly for multiplayer, i am one. Totalwar is great because of the battles. Battles online are an experience that cant be match !! With just a little more support, the online community would be happy.

I understand frustation of my mates versus the lobby and online bugs, if only i could share that frustration, maybe i will if i can finally log in......

hehehehe

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Agravain of Orkney

I remember watching a video (I think on GameSpot) that was released shortly after it was announced that RTW went gold. They interviewed a lot of the developers and it was great to see a bunch of people beaming with pride about their work. It was obvious that they poured their hearts and souls into this game.

---

Yes, and after playing the single player campaign for a while I can see why they are so satisfied. I'm not very far into my first campaign, but the strategic gameplay seems very smooth and well thought out, and not at all overwhelming for such a complex game. I've found playing each turn very enjoyable, and tying the strategic map to the battle map is brilliant. During the prologue I used the release version of the stats, and control of my army in battles seemed to be mostly taken out of my hands. I found it so aggravating that I was about ready to try returning the game to the retailer, but I decided to start a campaign with 20% slower movement speed mod and the 0.5 fighting speed mod, and that trick to turn off the battle timer. Well, it transformed the battles into something a lot more believable and gave me a lot more control over my tactics (I never use pause). I'll keep the game because I find both phases of it are now enjoyable to play.

I'm not the only one modding the movement and fighting speeds. It seems like a lot of players prefer it slower. Now how did Creative Assembly conclude that a slower battle speed was undesireable? Creative Assembly did answer criticism of the RTW demo battle speed. They said they looked at it, and concluded it wasn't a problem. So, you can hope that they will adjust the battle speed to be a bit slower in a patch, but the fact is they don't consider it to be an issue. The normal speed setting is fast, and there are 2x and 3x options on top of that. Is anyone really considering playing at 2x or 3x speed?

Now look at what increasing the number of units in the army and increasing the battle speed has done to multiplayer. You have less opportunity to coordinate your army which is now even larger than before, and 4v4 battles were eliminated. These are not improvements to gameplay. Design decisions are being made which have a negative impact on multiplayer, and Creative Assembly says it isn't a problem. I'll remind CA that some people purchase their games for the multiplayer aspect, and not the single player campaign. I have a suggestion. Make normal speed 1/2 of what it currently is, make 2x into what is currently normal speed, and make 3x into what is currently 2x speed. That suggestion did not originate with me. It was made by others before the game was even released. Of course, the chances of it happening are almost zero because there is no problem.

hasty goto your firewall internet access control panel, selected ADD new internet application,

browse C:\Program Files\Activision\Rome - Total War,
then selected:romeTW.exe

make sure its (permit all) under romeTW.exe

romeTW.exe should be in your internet access list

problem sorted ~D

untill you try to join a hosted game :dizzy2: