In beta?

I'm sorry but why do so many people refer to Rome: Total War as being still in beta? This here really boils my potatoes. The game is definately not a beta. Just because the game didn't live up to your expectations doesn't mean that it's still a beta. There are bugs, yes, but medieval wasn't perfect either. I think all of you complainers want the game to be just like medieval. Well, it's a different game, folks. Don't just make posts here to bash CA. It really ruins things for me when I come to the boards here, and just see post after post about how bad the game is.

I mean, I haven't seen any of the veteran posters start up a thread about something they like about the game. I have yet to see a thread about how fun it is just to watch men swordfight (and even writing this I know someone will counter with "it's hard to watch the sowrdfight when it's over in 5 seconds" or even "well the hastati behaving ahistorically so it takes the fun out")

Almost every single game on the market has bugs. Many games have worse AI than Rome's. In fact, Rome is the only game of its type out now (to my knwoledge) so if you don't like it, don't just make post after post ripping it apart. It's just a game guys, if you don't like it, there's no reason to be bashing CA over it. Nobody forced you to buy the game, so you shouldn't be angry at CA for taking your money for a "broken product." Again, if you don't like it, either mod it or leave it, don't dwell on it to make it worse for others.

The vanilla release of Rome was deffinately a beta product. Now most of the bugs are fiixed and it's pretty good, but there are still some problems which will probably be fixed in the expansion; though I'm actually mostly looking forward to the Europa Barbarorum mod. RTW was deffinately a revolution in the series, as revolutions are rather abrasive in nature.

Sorry, why can't we complain?

Because every other game has bugs? That's insane logic. You are saying that because an industry has bad standards, nobody should try and change them.

Because it's just a game? It's a game we gave our money for, so it's the same as any other faulty/defective good. I fail to see why people put games on a pedestal as being unworthy of complaint when compared to other consumer goods.

Nobody forced me to buy the game? True, nobody did. Nobody forced you to buy a car, so if it doesn't work do you sit and take it?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dgb

Nobody forced me to buy the game? True, nobody did. Nobody forced you to buy a car, so if it doesn't work do you sit and take it?

---

Actually, someone did mforce me. His name was Sam and he was a car salesman, very despressed man, made me sign the contract at gunpoint. ~;)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Zalmoxis

Actually, someone did mforce me. His name was Sam and he was a car salesman, very despressed man, made me sign the contract at gunpoint. ~;)

---

~:) Then the contract is not legally binding due to duress. ~D

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dgb

~:) Then the contract is not legally binding due to duress. ~D

---

That's not what the judge said...~;p

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Zalmoxis

That's not what the judge said...~;p

---

Appeal :book:

The first release realy had problems but now it is a top notch top quality game that deserves game of the year!!!!

The only people complaining are the punk kids that complain about everything in these forums anyhow you can see the complainers post and in every post they make it is complaining and throwing of tantrums so just ignore the ignorant ones.

Lol @ the car sales....

Oh look there is another one.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Colovion

The vanilla release of Rome was deffinately a beta product. Now most of the bugs are fiixed and it's pretty good, but there are still some problems which will probably be fixed in the expansion; though I'm actually mostly looking forward to the Europa Barbarorum mod. RTW was deffinately a revolution in the series, as revolutions are rather abrasive in nature.

---

i would never have thought, but now it makes sense, some of the bugs were so blatantly obvious that shows the game wasnt properly tested, if tested at all. if thats true then thats pretty poor, CA were counting on non total war players not to notice, & because TW veterans are the minority then they can put up & shut up unless they make enough noise then well give them a patch
, the biggest game of all time HL2 was released with virtually no bugs, rome could have been the same ~:handball:

where can you get the europa barbarorum mod when its ready

The game doesn't seem to inspire the same kind of wonderful tactics, strategy & battle threads that we used to enjoy on these boards during MTW.

My love of the TW series has been diluted in direct proportion to its new mass appeal - hurry up with HOI2 Paradox.

Beta - i.e. unfinished.

A few minor bugs are acceptable but based upon the large number of bugs and their effects on the game, the initial release was clearly unfinished. Patch 1.2 appears to have fixed most of the bugs and added some improvements :b: but one of the best changes on the tactical map compared with MTW, horse archers, is now in need of a fix and we've been told no more patches. What else will we find in the next few weeks? Will we then be expected to fork over another $40-50 for the expansion in order to get the fixes for RTW but then inherit the bugs from the expansion?

BTW I'm 46 years old, ex soldier, now scientist and have played TW and CIV since they started.

I think the main reason people here complain so much about RTW is because it is so very nearly the game we all want.

It is frustrating to see a game come so close, yet failing on just enough points to make you want to cry.


Think of a lost race; if you lose by a mile, you'll get over it a lot quicker than if you lose by a handswidth.

yes i think thats the problem. but what is HOI2 from paradox or something like that

Hearts of Iron 2

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Daevyll

I think the main reason people here complain so much about RTW is because it is so very nearly the game we all want.

It is frustrating to see a game come so close, yet failing on just enough points to make you want to cry.


Think of a lost race; if you lose by a mile, you'll get over it a lot quicker than if you lose by a handswidth.

---

Yes, that's it exactly, at least as far as the frog is concerned. So close! 1.2 is so close to what I hoped for with 1.0 it is painful to see it stumble on just a small handful of issues. For example the campaign and battle AI is now much improved, but I find myself facing armies filled with weak units like warbands whereas before I faced swordsmen and other good units. If only the AI still used good units in addition to the new fixes ...

Maybe not as much a beta as an unfinished product.
There are other great unfinished products. Schubert made some. The Corean war gave us M.A.S.H., and it's not finished. Unfinished furniture is very popular in the US these days.
Schubert is currently decomposing, and unable to finish his work.
Unfinished furniture is advertised as such.
Sometimes other people can try to finish unfinished symphonies or furniture.

RTW was marketed as a fully finished product, and also something like "the most moddable game ever" or Rome "moddable" Total War.

It was clear from looking at clues in various files that development was cut short, and from glaring bugs that QA had been ... average.

There have been several hints that CA just ran out of the time and resources that Activision had allowed them, and just had to tie up the loose ends as best they could.

I agree with those who think that 1.2 is "release quality". It is of the quality I had hoped for in 1.0

Other people try to fix what's left.
HA have already been fixed, at least 95%.
Glints and reflections are fixed.
Map extensions are available.
Completed Factions mod is available.
great Historical Battles
new Formations
a plethora of new or reskinned units
tweaks to battle behaviour, animations, killrates etc...
It's really starting to shape up.
(but it's a nuisance trying to keep track of which mods are available and worthwile due to the insane amount of TW fansites and fora) :furious3:

There are too many hardcoded values that affect moddability, though. Good luck to those who are trying to make a total modification. I mean that.

After 1.2 I've started playing RTW again. I play it way too much, according to my fiancee... It's a great game. It could have been the greatest...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BobTheTerrible

I'm sorry but why do so many people refer to Rome: Total War as being still in beta? This here really boils my potatoes. The game is definately not a beta. Just because the game didn't live up to your expectations doesn't mean that it's still a beta. There are bugs, yes, but medieval wasn't perfect either. I think all of you complainers want the game to be just like medieval. Well, it's a different game, folks. Don't just make posts here to bash CA. It really ruins things for me when I come to the boards here, and just see post after post about how bad the game is.

I mean, I haven't seen any of the veteran posters start up a thread about something they like about the game. I have yet to see a thread about how fun it is just to watch men swordfight (and even writing this I know someone will counter with "it's hard to watch the sowrdfight when it's over in 5 seconds" or even "well the hastati behaving ahistorically so it takes the fun out")

Almost every single game on the market has bugs. Many games have worse AI than Rome's. In fact, Rome is the only game of its type out now (to my knwoledge) so if you don't like it, don't just make post after post ripping it apart. It's just a game guys, if you don't like it, there's no reason to be bashing CA over it. Nobody forced you to buy the game, so you shouldn't be angry at CA for taking your money for a "broken product." Again, if you don't like it, either mod it or leave it, don't dwell on it to make it worse for others.

---

You Newbies make me want to throw up!

Quote:

---

It really ruins things for me when I come to the boards here, and just see post after post about how bad the game is.

---

I bet you went to a school without competitive sports, where everybody was a winner....

Guess what?

All you people who are so happy, satisfied and devoid of deep thinking, ruin this forum for me.

So now what?

Quote:

---

There are bugs, yes, but medieval wasn't perfect either. I think all of you complainers want the game to be just like medieval.

---

Wrong. We simply want it to be BETTER than STW/MTW. It ain't!

Quote:

---

I mean, I haven't seen any of the veteran posters start up a thread about something they like about the game.

---

What does that tell you? Maybe there isn't much.

Quote:

---

I have yet to see a thread about how fun it is just to watch men swordfight (and even writing this I know someone will counter with "it's hard to watch the sowrdfight when it's over in 5 seconds" or even "well the hastati behaving ahistorically so it takes the fun out")

---

FIRST, I didn't buy the game to watch the sword fights. Duh!

SECOND, Newbie why don't you do a search of the STW archives, you may have to ask Tosa to upload them. If you can get the Search function to work and the archives are there, you will find a post by me, ToranagaSama, exclaming wonder at the sprite animations, how the sprites parry and retreat, blah, blah...

In your search, you'll also find a BUNCH of other *awe-struck* posts by the now Veterans.

NEWSFLASH: Despite RTW's 3D graphics, STW's sprites have BETTER animations!

Summing up: Why do you expect and demand Veterans to ack like Newbies? We've been there and done that. Do you get the logic here?

Quote:

---

Almost every single game on the market has bugs. Many games have worse AI than Rome's. In fact, Rome is the only game of its type out now (to my knwoledge) so if you don't like it, don't just make post after post ripping it apart. It's just a game guys, if you don't like it, there's no reason to be bashing CA over it. Nobody forced you to buy the game, so you shouldn't be angry at CA for taking your money for a "broken product." Again, if you don't like it, either mod it or leave it, don't dwell on it to make it worse for others.

---

Throwing it right back at ya. If you don't like the so-called bashing, then WHY do you read it?

BTW and JFYI, Rome is not the ONLY game of its type out now. There are TWO others, namely Shogun: Total War and Medieval: Total War. Did you miss those?

Dude, its just a forum, there are other forums aren't there? Nobody is forcing you to read the posts.

FIRST, CA effected the cause for verterans to purchase the game. They did so by raising our expectations and NOT informing us that RTW would have SIGNIFICANT differences than STW and MTW.

It could be argued that CA won our Loyality then Betrayed us....

LASTLY, why are you making it worse for ME??

It goes both ways, if all you folks coming out of the woodworks and who seem so satisfied choose to agree or defer to Veteran opinion and experience THEN CA/Activision might just be compelled to FIX this game. Specifically, everything effecting battle speed(/high tactics).

For the most part you people are satisfied, yet we are not. So, ahhh, whose experience is being ruined?

Unmodifed, the game is unplayable.

---

I mean really, aside from discussing the *Bugs* and work-arounds, what is there to talk about?

We used to talk MOSTLY about TACTICS, but DUH!, there are NO tactics....

Think about it this way, for many of us, myself in particular, the single most important aspect of the game as been....ahhhh.... nullified, taken away, gone, kaput, evaporated!!! (High Tactical Maneuvers)

The second most important part (Stragegic) is plagued by Headless Armies and Purposeless Armies.

The purpose of the Strategy Map is to give MEANING to the Battles. THIS is what is significant and revolutionary about Total War---NOT the 3D Graphics.

So what's the problem? Most of the battles are MEANINGLESS and ANNOYING!!

Soooo, ahhhh, I'm supposed to happy about what exactly? The 3D graphics????

Pleasseeee, gimme back the Sprites and the 2D Map....

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Daevyll
I think the main reason people here complain so much about RTW is because it is so very nearly the game we all want.

It is frustrating to see a game come so close, yet failing on just enough points to make you want to cry.


Think of a lost race; if you lose by a mile, you'll get over it a lot quicker than if you lose by a handswidth.

---

:bigcry: :bigcry: :bigcry: :bigcry: :bigcry:

I think it's really funny, in a sick and twisted way, how when RTW Demo/Release happened that there were so many vets complaining and then most of them left (myself included until the patch was released), then now all the newbs think that for someone to complain about 'their game' is almost heretical in nature... but they don't know how bad the game they're defending is compared to it's predecessors. It's so close, but so far away at the same time.

MTW was amazing but I missed the MP aspect of it because everyone was in the throes of RTW's impending release. I waited to play with many of the respected members who were around at that time on the new RTW engine online... only to find that aspect of the game largely broken and well the massive petition that was put up kind of shows the amount of support for a workable MP feature. In the end, I've only played about a dozen MP battles, which is unfortunate.

Amen to everything that ToranagaSama said. I have said in another topic but will mention it again, how many topics did you see that discussed strategy, tips, hints, maneuvering, usage of units....NONE! Bacause RTW is just too straight forward, the Battle AI always acts the same with whatever army it is using...line up and charge...challenging, amusing? In MTW the AI was a always a challenge, there were never sure victory.

Sure we have 3D graphics, but they are secondary for a strategy game and MTW and all Paradox games prove it.

We were promised a lot more than we recieved and that is why people complain.

Not to mentioned that the game was shipped as a beta.

*goes off and waits for the EB mod....waits....waits.....*

You know, anyone complaining about the word "beta" being used ought to do some research on what "beta testing" is all about.

The whole purpose of beta testing is to identify bugs in your program so they can be fixed. In an ideal world, that would eliminate all of the bugs for the release, but, of course, that isn't going to happen. Still, there is the expectation that all of the readily identifiable bugs will be dealt with.

That was not the case with RTW 1.0 release. There were many obvious and glaring bugs with the program. That left the job of beta testing it up to the people who paid money for the program, which is an unexceptable position to be in.

Now you may make the assertion that all companies do it, or somesuch nonsense, but that is merely an attempt to sidestep the issue. The game as it was released, was not in a sufficient state to deserve release. The paying customers got ripped off.

Now I don't blame CA for that, because I'm sure it was the corporate side of things that made the decision to release. But I'm certainly not going to praise their efforts for something that was as flawed as this was.

Bh

Blah, looks like I've thrown a stone into the hornet's nest. Let me just try to clarify what I meant.

I played MTW and it is probably the best game I have ever played.

Rome is clearly not up to par with medieval. I agree with almost everything you vets say about it. The AI is usually mediocre (although after the patch it doesn't seem horrible), men and cav run too fast, and the battles are too fast. In my personal experience, the kill rates aren't insanely fast as you guys imply, but then again I play on huge units. And I do, in fact, get to use actual tactics. I do realize that my style of play is different, so I won't bother arguing that point; there's no way I can prove to you that I do use tactics, just as there's no way that you can prove to me the game is unplayable.

But my point is that Rome is a different game. It wasn't catered towards most of the players who post here. The game is going to remain entirely newbie friendly, whether we like it or not.

Quote:

---

You Newbies make me want to throw up!

---

Thanks.

Quote:

---

Unmodifed, the game is unplayable.

---

See its the comments like these that I don't like. Perhaps its unplayable to you, but I have played the game through unmodified several times. So have the thousands of what you would call 'noobs' over at the .com forums. It's NOT unplayable; can't you see that other people are playing it. But alas, this is an opinion so no use arguing...

Quote:

---

All you people who are so happy, satisfied and devoid of deep thinking, ruin this forum for me.

---

Another compliment, I see. I'm devoid of deep thinking because I enjoy the game?

Quote:

---

Wrong. We simply want it to be BETTER than STW/MTW. It ain't!

---

Exactly. That's my point.

Quote:

---

Think about it this way, for many of us, myself in particular, the single most important aspect of the game as been....ahhhh.... nullified, taken away, gone, kaput, evaporated!!! (High Tactical Maneuvers)

---

Again, that's my point. Why do you stick around and just bash the game?

Quote:

---

SECOND, Newbie why don't you do a search of the STW archives, you may have to ask Tosa to upload them. If you can get the Search function to work and the archives are there, you will find a post by me, ToranagaSama, exclaming wonder at the sprite animations, how the sprites parry and retreat, blah, blah...

In your search, you'll also find a BUNCH of other *awe-struck* posts by the now Veterans.

---

Yeah but those weren't exclaiming wonder at Rome Total war, were they?



I personally didn't encounter any show stopping bugs myself until I stopped by here to hear what you had to say. From the way you put it, it sounded like you thought the game was bargain bin material. Clearly, you still do. I don't. Opinions can't be argued. I'll just stop here, before I lose any further respect from the community. That's just my reason for posting; I thought you guys were being too harsh but clearly you aren't.

BTW, I've been in several beta tests myself. I can tell you that many beta's have more bugs than Rome did at release. I mean, look at star wars galaxies. Over a year from release and it's still buggy as heck.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BobTheTerrible

BTW, I've been in several beta tests myself. I can tell you that many beta's have more bugs than Rome did at release. I mean, look at star wars galaxies. Over a year from release and it's still buggy as heck.

---

And yet you're still using this "defense".

"I bought a car that fell apart in the lot, so you should be happy to have a car with only 3 wheels and no brakes."

Sorry, but that argument holds no water. It doesn't matter whether some betas have had more bugs than RTW. I mean, I could just as easily point to beta tests I've done that have had less bugs than RTW. But that proves nothing.

RTW when it was released had too many fundamental issues to warrant a release at that point. There were too many unaddressed issues. And too many things that should have been spotted during any competent beta test. The fact that they either weren't, or were but weren't dealt with is simply an indication that releasing a beta product on the customers wasn't considered to be a bad thing by the powers-that-be. And that is an entirely sad way to look at things.

Bh

I think the game is brilliant and the 1.2 patch has exceeded my expectations.
Many people in this forum complain and its the nr1 reason why i never came here anymore untill now.Surprised i was when people where still complaining even when in my eyes the patch up was a great improvement compared to the original game.It seems that no matter how good the patch would be those people would still be complaining about even the smallest problems they can possibly find.Its becoming like a sport for some....
Yet still those same people still have there copy of the game so i gues its not that bad after all.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ToranagaSama

You Newbies make me want to throw up!

---

Erm! Im a veteran of all three and I like the game - and calling someone a Newbie to try and belittle their opinion is a bit pretentious.

Quote:

---

I bet you went to a school without competitive sports, where everybody was a winner....

---

and he probably secretly hopes for world peace - what a load of "I did it harder in my day" biggoted rubbish

Quote:

---

All you people who are so happy, satisfied and devoid of deep thinking, ruin this forum for me.

---

Ahem! Now people who like the game are devoid of deep thought - that sounds like a very reactionary shallow opinion to me

Quote:

---

SECOND, Newbie why don't you do a search of the STW archives, you may have to ask Tosa to upload them. If you can get the Search function to work and the archives are there, you will find a post by me, ToranagaSama, exclaming wonder at the sprite animations, how the sprites parry and retreat, blah, blah...

---

so what are trying to say - now your a jaded veteran whos probably played the game to death and should probably take a break and get a life

Quote:

---

NEWSFLASH: Despite RTW's 3D graphics, STW's sprites have BETTER animations!

---

Well the obvious answer is go back to STW! PLEASE! at least then you might stop whining

NEWSFLASH this aint STW - get over it

Quote:

---

BTW and JFYI, Rome is not the ONLY game of its type out now. There are TWO others, namely Shogun: Total War and Medieval: Total War. Did you miss those?

---

No in fact I remeber posting a large rant (back when MTW was new) about how they were in essence the same game that had inherrent problems with the AI - ahh the memories

Quote:

---

FIRST, CA effected the cause for verterans to purchase the game. They did so by raising our expectations and NOT informing us that RTW would have SIGNIFICANT differences than STW and MTW.

---

Now its really getting laughable - ludicrous - but amusingly so

Quote:

---

It could be argued that CA won our Loyality then Betrayed us....

---

MWHAHAHA HA HA HA OMG you left out they are also destabilising central american countries and secretly developing WMD - PARANOIA

Quote:

---

It goes both ways, if all you folks coming out of the woodworks and who seem so satisfied choose to agree or defer to Veteran opinion and experience THEN CA/Activision might just be compelled to FIX this game. Specifically, everything effecting battle speed(/high tactics).

---

erm hasnt for the last two titles but hey keep on whining away there - you never know pigs might fly

Quote:

---

Unmodifed, the game is unplayable.

---

now your really showing your stupidity - thats just BS - I dont know what Ive been playing for the past months???

Dont let the door hit you in the ass on the way out

Quote:

---

Pleasseeee, gimme back the Sprites and the 2D Map....

---

as I said you still got STW - enjoy!

your getting like a broken record ToranagaSama

find a new tune

didnt read anything particularly deep in your post either - in fact it sounds like more of the same old whiney over-opinionate drivel to me!

One to refer to the game as "beta" really shows a missunderstanding of "beta" and the software industry in general. "Beta" really has many more problems than this game did. Balance issues do not constitute the sort of problems that would keep a game as beta. Typically it deals with making sure a program (in this case a game) is "platform independant" or doesn't crash on as many platforms as are supported, major AI bugs(not weak AI), or that the engine functions as intended. As far as I can tell these problems do not exist with one exception: I have noticed an apparant memeory leak pertaining to archers. I still play with a few freinds of mine and I recomend this game to other stategy players as I can.
-To qualify my statments I'd like to say that I work in QA (so I get paid to find problems in software) and have been involved in sending projects back to coders as "not ready for release" multiple times. I'm also only 20 years old.-

Two not only do all programs past a variation of "print "Hello World" have problems (and even that case may be debateable). OH WELL. It is our job as users to responsibly report problems in as much detail and reason as we can. I have seen many game communities where nobody does ANYTHING but scream and complain about vague problems. While I don't think this is a particularly bad case (there are a not so small number of people who contribute), I also don't think as a community we have done perfectly. I don't have enough time to narrow down my observed problems and report specifics. I don't doubt there are a few others.

Third truly capable modding is extremely difficult until an SDK if released (note : I may have missed this).

I have seen alot of people complaining "the game is too fast" citing STW or MTW. This is unfounded as RTW seems to be a TOTALY different game as far as many factors go, speed being one of those.

Now I don't know what's going on in the MTW/STW world but... If you don't like RTW and prefer STW/MTW start or get involved in a community balance and upkeep project. Don't scream and complain about fundamental pieces of a game if there are games out there that have the features that you want play those and quit complaining about the ones that don't.

Listen to the whiney kids calling themselves veterans and everyone else they never saw on these forums noobs, well little nooblets, I started with Civilization yea the original, and also have STW and MTW which this game blows the hell away, MTW is way to repetetive and is easy to get bored with, its the same old thing the entire game, diplomacy sucks, assasination attempts suck, and the AI is way behind the AI of this game.

Read the walkthroughs for each faction in MTW, you can do the same thing every game you play knowing exactly what the AI is going to do, with RTW I have watched the AI switch its tactics and strategies with every new game, so get off your dady's computers and go play some more of your game types like Pack Man or Mario Brothers. Or why dont you cry about it some more so we can laugh at you some more :laugh4:

Although it can be a bit irritating with lots of threads with complains about this or that, it's much better than no complaints at all.

What would've happened if no one had complained after the release of RTW? If everyone would've just said "Great game"...

We would still be playing version 1.0 and CA would've never considered making a patch.

The ONLY way to ever make the game better (aside from modding, if that's possible in a game) is to complain about the game!

So: If there's something you don't like about the game, COMPLAIN...Please!!

I really enjoy the game after the patch, but there's still things i really would like different.
They say they won't release anymore patches, but i very much doubth they'd ignore it if there was a massive "please fix this" feedback.
Don't think it will happen, most people enjoy the game as is and unfortunately thoose who still want a better game isn't heard enough.

My 2 cents...

Lets look beyond all the whining and counter-whining. You cannot deny that alof of M:TW players have left the forums and that the nature of posts have changed.

You can then either think that M:TW players were just a bunch of whiners, or that there might indeed be something wrong with R:TW.
My guess is that R:TW has moved the TW series into a different category and M:TW players realize that they do not like this. They liked M:TW and R:TW could have been the next step onto the same path.

But with R:TW CA has taken a slightly different path and all the "whining/complaining" you see here is IMO little more than regret/grievance of M:TW players losing their favorite series.

I agree Duke, but by going in a different direction they have changed the TW community.

The boards will be filled with 'Guess my age?' or 'Look at the pic of my uber cohort' and 'Jimmy got owned by Frank' and 'Exterminating it's soooo easy' - well I guess i'll just fade away now.

*insert veteran rant about silly stuff/bugs/historical errors & why STW & MTW were better*

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Duke John

Lets look beyond all the whining and counter-whining. You cannot deny that alof of M:TW players have left the forums and that the nature of posts have changed.

---

I have played with MTW a lot of hours, I agree that RTW 1.0 wasn't as good as we expected but the last patch changed the game.

But what are these major differences that you found that makes the game worse? for me there are only two:

- game speed, now is faster, you have less time to maneuver your troops, and let less time to tactics but on the good side you don't have to play those "never end" golden horde/big_stacks battles.

- effects of moral/terrain/weather ... have less impact than in MTW. ok, there isn't any positive view, but sometimes I think than in MTW it had to much impact, facing the golden orde (again) you could easily win with small number of polearms in a forest which IMHO isn't very accurate.

On the other side there are a lot of new features that makes the game better such real damage after the battle, no teletransport armies, better diplomacy, factions have very different sets of units, sieges battles, ...

MTW has had several problems too which only where solved after the patch and expansion pack ... and if you really want a challange game you need a good mod.

Does we forget those full peasant armies ? or factions declaring the war to every one? or the ships chain to a province without a port ? ...

RTW hasn't had time enough to reach its golden age and probably never will be perfect but now I think that is funny to play at least for me.

I am sorry if my lack of english knowledge make the post difficult to understood.:bow:

Quote:

---

You cannot deny that alof of M:TW players have left the forums and that the nature of posts have changed.

---

Maybe, but a lot (like me) have joined the .org because of RTW. As it is a game of more depth and complexity I have found that I need more info and opinion than I ever did on MTW.
And I'll leave you with this:
Italians attack my ship after 100yrs of peace, causing my factionleader to be cut off. My entire empire goes into revolt because of this one action, resulting in lots of tedious uber-stack rebel killing.
Great. ~:handball:

This discussion is really about two seperate issues.

First there is the growing tendency for some game designers/publishers (including CA/activision) to release games before they are ready (ie beta products). We saw it with CIV3 and now we have exactly the same thing with RTW. Of course there will be bugs with any program but how can anyone justify a product that ships where a number of major games elements such as fighters for civ3 and protectorates for RTW simply dont work at all. One has to ask whether any beta testing occurred at all and if so were any changes made prior to shipping? Surely someone must have noticed the glaring errors in the 1.0 game! Ask yourself why 1.0 was shipped in that condition. Loyal fans will pay for a quality product but I cant see many paying for expansions 'sight unseen'.


The second issue is disappointment with the direction that RTW has taken with respect to the tactical aspects of the game. There are many of us that dislike the changes but it's a business decision to bring in RTS players. Hopefully, we'll find other games that suit us better. So far I cant see myself playing more than 1 campaign even with 1.2. I just wish that CA had allowed us to mod more aspects of the game instead of hard-coding many of the points that the 'old-timers' dislike.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SpencerH

Loyal fans will pay for a quality product but I cant see many paying for expansions 'sight unseen'.

---

That's right, and CA/Activision had better make a note of that.
I'll be watching this space before I buy, no preorder this time.

let me understand
you are saying that ca had hard coded items in the game to limit moders ?
from their point of view - ok :huh:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by caesar44

let me understand
you are saying that ca had hard coded items in the game to limit moders ?
from their point of view - ok :huh:

---

CA made a mistake there then!, i mean take a look at the Morrowind community, how long ago was that game released & yet people are still playing it, this is mainly because of the 1000s of good mods that are out there,bethseda gave a good construction set along with the game, but its those mods that have kept people in the game for years, & as a result the community is buzzing about new game oblivion(cant wait)
MTW xl 2.0 was an excellent if not the best tw mod, same with the total realism guys alot of good work, theve kept me in the game for a while,
come on CA, a little more modder friendly please ~:cheers:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by caesar44

let me understand
you are saying that ca had hard coded items in the game to limit moders ?
from their point of view - ok :huh:

---

For example, we can alter the 'friction' of different terrain to slow down every unit, but we cant change that inf units run like modern olympic athletes. Personally, I dont understand why CA did that, it seems pretty short sighted. If they hadnt hard coded so many items we could have at least built mods to satisfy everyone.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by FURRY_BOOTS

take a look at the Morrowind community

---

Goodness me, you mean there is actually a Morrowind community? I can hardly believe it. I consigned that game to the shelf after about a week.

You can buy a copy of it at my local store now for $5.

MTW on 1.0 was practically unplayable due to CTD, at least for me. RTW is much better in that way. It is true that there were way to much bugs in RTW 1.0, but for complex products like this game, I guess it´s hopeless to expect it being tested as thoroughly as required.

What I reject is the claim that "all the MTW veterans don´t like the game". I´ve played thousands of hours MTW and I enjoy RTW a lot. From the vocal group of critics, we cannot infer anything. That´s not to say that CA didn´t make design decisions I don´t like. The kill speed for one is too high. This seriously affects the feeling of battles. It´s unfortunate that CA made this decision, but it´s their game, no one forced me to buy it. It should not be forgotten that RTW does a lot things very much better than MTW.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Paul Peru

That's right, and CA/Activision had better make a note of that.
I'll be watching this space before I buy, no preorder this time.

---

Same.

I'd rather spend money for the EB mod than the XP because I'm pretty sure that the XP isn't going to change the pace of the game and make the game actually Strategical.

This is true:

MTW + STW Had more strategy/tactics than your average Real Time Strategy Game.

RTW has worse strategy/tactics than your average Real Time Strategy Game.

Not to say that Rome doesn't have a load of potential, but potential means fuckall if it isn't harnessed - and as of yet RTW has masses of unharnessed potential... whose job is it to harness taht potential? partly the modders after teh game is released - but the majority of the game's features and abilities should be fleshed out in the initial release.

In it's current state RTW barely deserves to be called a Strategy game.

The initial release was definately a beta and poorly playtested at that. I have trouble getting excited about a patch that fixed a lot of broken features that should have been fixed to begin with.

CA tried to broaden the appeal of RTW to a larger audience and in doing so turned their back on the core base. The tactical battles which used to be the centerpiece of the series are over in a couple of minutes and are little more than a clickfest. I was really disappointed that this wasn't addressed in the patch.

CA may have taken several steps forwards with RTW, but in my opinion it took a big step back with these arcade style battles.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by FURRY_BOOTS

CA made a mistake there then!, i mean take a look at the Morrowind community, how long ago was that game released & yet people are still playing it, this is mainly because of the 1000s of good mods that are out there,bethseda gave a good construction set along with the game, but its those mods that have kept people in the game for years, & as a result the community is buzzing about new game oblivion(cant wait)
MTW xl 2.0 was an excellent if not the best tw mod, same with the total realism guys alot of good work, theve kept me in the game for a while,
come on CA, a little more modder friendly please ~:cheers:

---

Ah, Morrowind. The perfect example of an incredibly large, complex and successful game that was supported to the fullest by the developer and publisher. Activison seems to have selectively ignored the phenomenal success and lessons learned from Morrowind (or for that matter, Starcraft, Diablo or Half Life). Morrowind on its own or combined with its expansion packs is a MASSIVE and incredibly, complicated game that was greenlit for patches numerous times by Bethesda. Furthermore said patches were released independently of the the expansion packs, meaning you didn't have to fork over $20-30 just to get bug fixes and additional tweaks for the original. I jumped on the Morrowind bandwagon from the beginning and was amazed as the support for the game kept on coming as the months passed. Bethesda made good by listening to the Morrowind community and allowed the game to be patched numerous times. The same could be said about Bioware and Atari regarding Neverwinter Nights. However it is clear Activision simply does not give a crap about Rome and the TW community beyond their two patch agreement with CA.

Best of all was the jaw dropping moddability of Morrowind thanks to the inclusion of the developer's incredibly powerful editing tools. This alone made Morrowind the most moddable game I've ever seen. Users could not only edit the game to their hearts content but they even fixed a surprising number of bugs before Bethesda patched them! The amount of user made mods for Morrowind is simply astounding, I wonder just how many man hours went into creating all of them! Given all the factors I've mentioned (as well as the fact that Morrowind was a great game) I could not be more enthusiastic about Morrowind's sequel, Oblivion.

I refuse to place the blame for RTW's shortcomings squarely on CA's shoulders. Not that CA isn't somewhat responsible for that which we find disappointing about RTW but let's face it, they're severely constricted in what they can do to support the TW community based on their contractual agreement with Activision. The die was cast once CA signed with Activison and began taking their money to make Rome. The bitter taste in everyone's mouth is how RTW was a perfect case of two steps forward, one step back. Two steps forward; great graphics, sound, completely new strategic map & gameplay, etc. and one giant step back; the tactical battles, which are the core element of the TW games, are tainted by the fact that the tactical AI is actually worse than it was in MTW:VI. Add to the mix the high speed, RTS clickfest nature of the battles, the blatantly ahistorical nature of some of the factions (i.e. Egypt) and the utter lack of alternative campaign goals (i.e. no Glorious Achievements) and the 'one step back' label is completely justified. This bitter taste is made that much worse by the fact that such a massive and complicated game is being limited by the publisher to two patches, one of which was issued immediately after its release solely to address MP problems! To limit a complicated game like this to two patches and apply a 'the rest will be fixed in the expansion' attitude is a clear signal from Activision that they simply don't give a f---k about their customers.

I consider myself a TW veteran and I certainly don't dislike Rome. It's a really good game. However, the fact that the tactical AI got the red headed stepchild treatment and is worse than the previous installment really gets my goat and prevents me from giving it higher marks.

So basically CA needs to get in bed with a new publisher.... or alternatively stick it to the man like VALVe did.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tocca

Although it can be a bit irritating with lots of threads with complains about this or that, it's much better than no complaints at all.

What would've happened if no one had complained after the release of RTW? If everyone would've just said "Great game"...

We would still be playing version 1.0 and CA would've never considered making a patch.

The ONLY way to ever make the game better (aside from modding, if that's possible in a game) is to complain about the game!

So: If there's something you don't like about the game, COMPLAIN...Please!!

I really enjoy the game after the patch, but there's still things i really would like different.
They say they won't release anymore patches, but i very much doubth they'd ignore it if there was a massive "please fix this" feedback.
Don't think it will happen, most people enjoy the game as is and unfortunately thoose who still want a better game isn't heard enough.

My 2 cents...

---

Tocca is a true Org member.

Agitate, agitate, agitate!

Welcome.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wh1teWolf

Listen to the whiney kids calling themselves veterans and everyone else they never saw on these forums noobs, well little nooblets, I started with Civilization yea the original, and also have STW and MTW which this game blows the hell away, MTW is way to repetetive and is easy to get bored with, its the same old thing the entire game, diplomacy sucks, assasination attempts suck, and the AI is way behind the AI of this game.

Read the walkthroughs for each faction in MTW, you can do the same thing every game you play knowing exactly what the AI is going to do, with RTW I have watched the AI switch its tactics and strategies with every new game, so get off your dady's computers and go play some more of your game types like Pack Man or Mario Brothers. Or why dont you cry about it some more so we can laugh at you some more :laugh4:

---

You define yourself in your comments.

One wonders if you have the requisite communicative skills necessary to articulate yourself.

How is MTW repetitive?

How is MTW's AI **way** behind the RTW's AI?

Please, impress me with your knowledge and expression.

Thanks.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by A.Saturnus

MTW on 1.0 was practically unplayable due to CTD, at least for me. RTW is much better in that way. It is true that there were way to much bugs in RTW 1.0, but for complex products like this game, I guess it´s hopeless to expect it being tested as thoroughly as required.

What I reject is the claim that "all the MTW veterans don´t like the game". It should not be forgotten that RTW does a lot things very much better than MTW.

---

Amen

This says it all really.

I remember vanilla MTW AI being worse than RTW in fact it didnt improve till MTW:VI was patched - so I think people could show a bit of patience and wait and see.

RTW a BETA - dont make me laugh - I installed the game off the shelf and played it from start to finish - no game stopping bugs. Thats no beta. Doom 3 needed a patch before I could even get past the intro.

RTW is RTW not MTW and its never going to be - this is what is frustrating about the whining - Its a NEW GAME - Im glad its not MTW - MTW was very frustrating and like STW was an unstable game platform which took a lot of machine tweaking to get to run. I was never able to have a single successful LAN with STW or MTW because someone needed to roll back a driver or change OS or machine params etc etc etc. The participants would say - No lets just play something else after serveral almost battles when someone would CTD. I had a LAN where we played 3v3 players vs the AI - it was great - theres 1 point for RTW.

I agree that bugs and game problems should be reported in a constructive and thourough manner. But endless whining threads crying about it not being MTW - or I wanted this or it aint got that, or I did 100 unit tests of greek vs macedonian hopalites and the greek ones are overpowered - PLEASE. There are always going to be exploits and things you would like changed, if the first thing you do before youve even finished the game is start looking for exploits - well I pity you. I prefer to play and enjoy the game - not analyse every little number that has gone into making it.

If some of the community cant get past the fact "it aint MTW" then dont - just leave quietly.

So a program is no longer beta if it doesnt cause a CTD. Interesting definition.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SpencerH

So a program is no longer beta if it doesnt cause a CTD. Interesting definition.

---

He has a point

but he's using it as a slippery slope argument, so that's no good.

The game is obviously playable, but remember how many people played the open betas for Warcraft and Age of Mythology and hell - almost any large scale release? They played through a technically playable game that had a bunch of unfinished or totally broken features, bugs, huge exploits.... and they fed back those problems to the devs so they would make sure that the Orcs didn't get 10000 Gold at the beginning of a certain campaign. This way when Timmy goes down to the store on release date he doesn't have these problems which he has to deal with.

I really enjoyed the game at the beginning. After a few hours play I posted a huge praise thread for CA. I had begun my campaign as Julii and was loving every minute of learning the game. That's when the fun stopped unforunately - once I learned how to play the game I didn't feel lilke I could improve at all and after playing a half dozen factions I got bored with teh battles; they were no longer epic contests of strategical prowess. The battles were known to be broken during the Demo so I focused on the new parts of the game I hadn't seen.... so that wasn't a large aspect of my concern at the time since I'd already ranted about it earlier and expected a patch to come to fix it..... ~:handball:

/rant

Quote:

---

Quote:
Originally Posted by ToranagaSama
You Newbies make me want to throw up!


Erm! Im a veteran of all three and I like the game - and calling someone a Newbie to try and belittle their opinion is a bit pretentious.

---

I'll have to get back to you all on your individual points later, but just to clear something up regarding Newbies.

First, MY use of the term Newbie is not directly intended to belittle anyone or anyone's opinion. The term Newbie is relatively self-defined, as in New and Unknowing. It is in this specific manner that I use the term.

If you find the term as applied to you belittling, then that's your problem--Not Mine! I call them as I see them.

Second, lets define further, the term Veteran does not apply to everyone who happened to purchase Shogun way back when, but to one who is a Veteran of THIS Forum, the Org. A long time member of the Forum, usually from the Shogun and/or Pre-Shogun days, who has distinguished himself by demonstrating his knowledge of and experience with the Total War series.

Got it? The majority of you are not Veterans, but are Newbies to the Total War series. Even if you bought Shogun on Day 1, the fact does give one some credence, but doesn't necessarily mark you as a Veteran. Again, Knowledge and Experience that what counts.

---

Yunus Dogus, you claim to be a Veteran, yet I don't know you from squat.

Quote:

---

Quote:
Wrong. We simply want it to be BETTER than STW/MTW. It ain't!


Exactly. That's my point.

---

I don't get your point, care to explain.

In any case, the rest of your responses are too juvenile for me to respond further, enjoy.

---

Can someone answer these questions for me:

Why is it that you find being called a Newbie and/or Non-Veteran belittling? I don't get it. If you're new to a Form and/or Game, you're a Newbie, what's the problem?

If someone has more knowledge and experience than you, then they're a Veteran and you're not. What's the problem.

---

Quote:

---

I do realize that my style of play is different, so I won't bother arguing that point; there's no way I can prove to you that I do use tactics, just as there's no way that you can prove to me the game is unplayable.

---

You know, I don't think I seen a single thread of someone describing their "style of play" re RTW. I'd love to hear it.

Regarding Tactics, simply explain what you do, simple. Be as elaborate in your description as you wish.

Do you use any particular sort of formation?

THIS is the kind of stuff that USED to PRIMARILY be discussed around here....

---

Quote:

---

See its the comments like these that I don't like. Perhaps its unplayable to you, but I have played the game through unmodified several times. So have the thousands of what you would call 'noobs' over at the .com forums. It's NOT unplayable; can't you see that other people are playing it. But alas, this is an opinion so no use arguing...

---

But you see, I'm sure you can tell ;) , its precisely the sort of comments that your original post represented that I don't like. Frankly, my dislike is probably more vehement than your own.

The fact that other people, as you say, are playing it doesn't really account for much. I don't mean this as any sort of insult, but the frank fact is lots of people are doing lots of things. Lots of people are playing The Sims too. By the reasoning you present (the number of people doing a thing), I should respect and be playing The Sims, or, in fact doing EVERYTHING everyone else is doing. I don't put much value in what everyone else is doing....

For that matter, I'm NOT the only one who considers the game unplayable. The fact of the matter is I STOPPED playing the game. Why?:

1) BATTLES: Number one reason is that Units/Lines won't Hold, not matter what you do, and a player has absolutely NO idea WHY a Line crumbled; can't point specifically to a Unit or Units as to the cause. There is NO WAY to evaluate. Replays *would* help, but really isn't the solution.

2) Campaign Map: I tired rather quickly of the number of, as well as the fact of, fighting inumberable MEANINGLESS battles. Battles that serve NO PURPOSE in furthering the Campaign. Fight them, Don't fight them; Win them, Lose them----NO EFFECT! What's the point?

Too Many, Too Meaningless.

3) What's the point of beating up on Headless Armies????? There's NO challenge in this----WHATSOEVER.

4) Autorresolve is UNUSEABLE. Absolutely Unsuseable. I got to the point where I said screw the battles. I'll try and salvage some value from the game---personally, I always found the Campaign Map more intriuiging anyway. I'll concentrate on the Map and Auto the battles, but nooooooo. Autoresovel is a JOKE!

Not only is the Battle AI WORSE than STW and MTW, but so is Auto-resolve. Unfukinblievable.

5) AI Controlled Armies, you know when your General joins you on the field and proceeds to act like a idiot no only with himself but with his entire army.

I still remember the last time I played the game, the last straw for me. I had manuevered on the Strat Map two armies into a perfect L shaped ambush of the AI. Isn't this what the new 3D map was made for?

Mind you this is on VH/VH, and after MANY turns and time---Got em! Significant game moment.

Blink! I'm on the Battle Map. I've got control of one army and the AI my other. I'm facing the AI enemey head on, and my AI army is advancing on the Enemy right. What happens? Rather than waiting and responding to what I do, the AI General advances WAY ahead of his army and charges ahead; his Army is coming on as quick as they can. (STOP, you morons!)

The Enemey AI splits his army and sends part straight at my AI General with the commensurate results. General running for his life.

[You know, for the first I see, where to some degree I must reproach myself just a bit. YES, you all are kinda right the AI does do some interesting things. It is kinda cool the way the AI *split* its army in response to the circumstance!! Despite all that, back to the battle:]

I have to advance my army as quick as I can upon the Enemey, with NO forumation, NO planing and NO setup!!!! I just gotta charge on, SLAM my troops in some hope of quickly whiping them out, in order tha I can save my other, AI controlled army.

THIS IS NOT WHAT I WANT TO DO NOR INTENDED TO DO.

There is NO skill involved in this battle

So what happened? The AI general kept heading for the hills; the AI army got killed; my controlled army got creamed cause they did an all out charge. TWO armies virtually whiped out---through NO fault of my own. I NEVER had control of that battle as the AI did whatever it wanted. Unfukinbelievable!

What----is the point of playing this game?

Now, I don't say this to pump myself up, but just to state facts. I have extreme knowledge of the TW games, and extreme battle skills. Yet, NONE of it was worth a damn---cause I never got to use ANY OF IT.

So, what's the point?


----

NOW, CA has deemed us with a patch, that allows for reinforcements to be dripped onto the field, ala Shogun and Medieval. Thank goodness.

To all those for whom their forum experience is being ruined, do you think this change would have been implemented WITHOUT comment from the Forum? If all the posts had been about all the *positive* aspects? Ohhh, look at the pretty graphics....

Personally, I stopped, some time ago, buying games where there is no Developer support and no Developer communication with the community. If they don't respond to my whines, then I don't buy their games. Simple as that.

In the Shogun days and mid-way thru the Medieval days we had direct contact and communication with the Developers. Newsgroup, Forum, Email. Now, unless you're a VETERAN you wouldn't know anything about it would you. NOPE!

Unfortunately, the Patch doesn't fully address my main concerns, so unless Auto-resolve has been fixed, the game is still going to be unplayable, unmodded.

----

Now, if you find it playable, like I said, people, a LOT of people, play The Sims too....

I know this vet thing can be confusing - the admin at .com told me that 'As a TW vet I should know better......' when banning me from his boards. I took it as a complement.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ToranagaSama

I'll have to get back to you all on your individual points later, but just to clear something up regarding Newbies.

First, MY use of the term Newbie is not directly intended to belittle anyone or anyone's opinion. The term Newbie is relatively self-defined, as in New and Unknowing. It is in this specific manner that I use the term.

---

While 'newbie' may be used descriptively ie "New and Unknowing", you know that it's most often used as a pejorative. As you've said one can be a newbie to this forum, a newbie to the game, or both. What difference does it make though? Newbies that like RTW (as is) are as entitled to their opinion as those, such as us, who strongly dislike the disappearance of tactics from the current game. What purpose is served by labelling someones comments as 'newbie'? Isn't it better to simply refute them and provide evidence so support your position? Your comment "You Newbies make me want to throw up!" is not likely to be taken as "not directly intended to belittle anyone or anyone's opinion" whether that's your intent or not. Personally, I never use 'newbie' except to someone who is clearly not a newbie so there is no misinterpretation of my intent.

I agree that we have to make our opinions known. At poly my sig in support of RTW (as the replacement for civ) triggered comments from the civ fanboys about my sanity (I haven't had any wrt the revised version-similar to my .org sig). Its possible that my .org sig helped trigger this thread (at least I hope so). If we don't voice our displeasure with the direction that RTW has taken then we can be assured that nothing will change.

@ToranagaSama - Im a n00b, to this forum.

As a n00b, Im more than up for a discussion with board veterans on any subject relating to Video Games, their design, production, distribution, history, hardware, collectability, from 1951 to the present day, any title, any system, any genre, any hardware mod, any homebrew effort, anything relating to the vast subject.

Im not interested in arguments / flame wars. I just want to see how you will justify me as New and uninformed (to anything other than this forum) based on the fact you dont know me?

I too have been sorely disappointed by RTW, believing it to be a waste of potential and a step backwards for the series. However I for one do not need an ally like ToranagaSama to "champion" the cause using a combination of sophistry and arogance thank you very much.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Duke John

Lets look beyond all the whining and counter-whining. You cannot deny that alof of M:TW players have left the forums and that the nature of posts have changed.

---

So, I'm not alone in my thoughts....

The nature of this place is changing and it shouldn't be. Something needs to be done. When RTW first came out, I asked Tosa for a Veterans only forum, but he shot that down (I suppose mine wasn't the first request?).

I feel as if someone has walked into MY house; sat down on MY sofa; started watching MY TV; went into MY fridge and started eating MY food; then, turned and looked at me and said: "Who are are you and what are you doing here?"

[Rant]
Example:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Yunus Dogus
If some of the community cant get past the fact "it aint MTW" then dont - just leave quietly.

---

Somebody TELL me! Who is this guy? What has he contributed? To the Forum? To the Game?

WHO are these people and where do they get their attitudes?

Quote:

---

...or I did 100 unit tests of greek vs macedonian hopalites and the greek ones are overpowered - PLEASE. There are always going to be exploits and things you would like changed, if the first thing you do before youve even finished the game is start looking for exploits - well I pity you. I prefer to play and enjoy the game - not analyse every little number that has gone into making it.....

---

Do you Veterans and anybody else with eyes see? This guy does not have an ORG mentality. Should he have been let out of the EH? There's a certain cluelessness here. Dude don't you realize it? You're a .COMer.

Should people new to the game, new to the forum, be allowed to do this? IMUHO, they are disruptive to the general business this forum has ALWAYS been about. Come on guys, you know what the Org was about back in the pre-Shogun days, and what it was in the post-Shogun days. Read his quote, do you think this guy, and those with similar attitudes, would've even stuck around, let alone be a contributor?

Think about it. Some of the things the "New People" say just boils my blood!! Did the Veterans of this Forum and Game go away because the game sucked; or was it because the Newbies sucked? Something to ponder and discuss.

Think MORE about it. Why did CA not find it necessary to address the Battle Speed issues? Could it have been because there wasn't a place where they could engage with the most knowledegable and experience players. Those would could comprehend the issues, disscuss them INTELLIGENTLY and KNOWLEGEDABLY, seek and discover SOLUTIONS????

This process, which has occurred here at the Org many times, did not happen. Rather, it was just one big NON-PRODUCTIVE fight!

I believe an additional policy s/b instituted in the Entrance Hall and throughout the forum.

People shouldn't be allowed to come into one's HOME and start acting liking they own the place.

If it wasn't for the true Veterans, this place wouldn't be here and the game would have died a LONG time ago.

Veterans ONLY Forum, pleaseeeee. Where *we* can do what we've always done, and CA can have immediate access to *our* view, as well as the view of the unwashed masses.

The forum would function similarly to the EH, except that prespective members would need to demonstrate a certain *Want*. Want to Enjoy, Examine, Experience, Everything about the game on an Elevated level. The 5 Es.

You could call it the Grognard forum to make it more palatable, for Grognards and Grognard wannabes. Not everybody wants or is interested in being a Grognard, a Wargammer, not everyone RESPECTS or has interest in such things.

Want to see an Example of a need for such a place? Look at the TWCenter and Total Realism. What I'm talking about is a Forum in some ways equivalent to the TWCenter, but more Org-like.

Such a place would lower the blood pressure and decrease the clashes....
Serve as a Filter for CA, and a place of Sanctury for *US*.

Remember the SPers vs. MPer battles? Of course you do. The Org worked that out quite nicely. Same thing could happen again.

Help, please.

[Rant Over]

Quote:

---

You can then either think that M:TW players were just a bunch of whiners, or that there might indeed be something wrong with R:TW.

---

Nah... We're just a bunch of whinners who don't have a clue what we're talking about.

Quote:

---

My guess is that R:TW has moved the TW series into a different category and M:TW players realize that they do not like this. They liked M:TW and R:TW could have been the next step onto the same path.

---

Evolution NOT Revolution!

Quote:

---

But with R:TW CA has taken a slightly different path and all the "whining/complaining" you see here is IMO little more than regret/grievance of M:TW players losing their favorite series.

---

...and betrayal and deception....

Thank you for your post, and how about having a talk with Tosa re the above.

For me, RTW is a step forward with regard to the stratmap. I just have to remember the "all buildings in a province destroyed once you lost a battle even though you retreated to the castle" feature in early MTW, and it's great. There's even a diplomacy implemented in RTW, even though it's in its infant state (which I surprisingly end up not using after all; what's the point when there are no consequences, say to break an alliance). City management is nice, continuous strat-to-tactical map superb, etc. So, I'm not a grognard who is against progress.

However, battles are just a huge step back. Thery have regressed almost as much as stratmap has progressed. I never played "arcade battles" (switching off ammo, morale, etc.) in MTW, but I guess this is how they must have been played out. And no, it's not my skill resulting from me playing TW games for months; I played a few MTW battles for comparison, and they are much more involved. If this was a conscious marketing decision to attract more casual gamers (and not e.g. adjustment period to 3D), I am disappointed, primarily at the shortsightedness of such business strategy. That audience would still buy the game because of all the glitzy glossy graphics etc., and throw it on a shelf after a week, just like they did now, regardless of how involved the battles were. So, all the prerequisites to gain wider audience were already there just through the production values. Why it was necessary to cut down on the other values, because of which the TW games were the only ones I didn't buy from the bargain bin, is however beyond me.

ps.
I actually bought RTW only around christmas, after an episode with the VI patch. I guess I still bought it too early though. It would seem that the next titles are going to come from the bargain bin after all.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ToranagaSama

Come on guys, you know what the Org was about back in the pre-Shogun days, and what it was in the post-Shogun days.

---

What the org is about? I think it was summed up very well by KukriKhan in another topic: "Truth, honour, fun." This topic contains precious little of the last two and the first is buried under the rather poisonous feeling atmosphere.

This thread is closed.

Some of you may have read what I am about to quote before. if you haven't read it now, and pay attwention this time.

Quote:

---

We will have no elitism here. We will have no special veterans forum. We will have no hierarchy based on whether your name is known enough or you've won a lot online. I will not tolerate as moderator to receive emails from long term members who lurk but rarely post complaining about the behaviour of supposedly senior and respected members of the community, and even Assistant moderators towards enthusiastic new members of the community.

This thread is closed. Do not carry this argument elsewhere on .org

---