Printable View
A couple of guys from RTK are downloading and checking out Alexander: Total War as I type. I'm pretty sure others have too, and I want your impressions for the multiplayer aspect of the game. Is it balanced? Are 4 factions enough? etc...
Thanks in advance... :bow:
There might be problem with this add-on. Many players simply doesn't have international credit card :)
Oh a couple of Sith had already played it. "I see too much pink," said one of them. The other complained because he can't conquer India ?! And also saying that the campaign is too short. About MP, well it is too hard to get a game going with it, because it is like only %1 of those who play MP do have it.
I guess the easiest answer to that is to get going some sort of sub community for it and plan on forums when you play etc, IIRC something similar to how RTR players play.Quote:
Originally Posted by x-dANGEr
Anyhow, not played it, don't intend to. The only game I can afford atm is America's Army :laugh4:
https://img67.imageshack.us/img67/7493/alexlol3ci.jpg
https://img365.imageshack.us/img365/...lexvsno8gs.jpg
The only screenies I found posted on the forum. Fawkes who seems the most active on it hasn't posted any..
P.S. Days of spam, make use of them before they're limited lol.
Seems your clan mate likes to spam cavalry...I bet that makes for a great gripping game with lots of strategic planning required.
(Counting eles as cav btw too)
Is that meant as an insult? Because I see no wink to imply sarcasm.
Yes. :PQuote:
Originally Posted by x-dANGEr
All elepehants. :P
And don't woork X Danger Monarch is msotly harmless.
Whatever woork means.. !
Anyway Monarch, I suppose that army was easy to beat, so basically that Sith guy did him a favor ~;)
But its boring to play against, note the "host has left and terminated the game" in both instances, TBH I'd usually say they're idiots leaving a game even if its right near the end and what have you, especially as host, but when they've just got raped by ele spam I support what they did.Quote:
Originally Posted by x-dANGEr
To be honest, me too. But really, you can't judge a whole battle through and end 'screenie'. You have nearly no input about the armies of the battle (Note that in the second one, you can only see that JC had 6 cav units, which is far from effective spam AFAIT).
We don't have to limit spam armies in STWmod for MTW/VI because the standard 60 man spear which costs 400 beats the best 60 man cav which costs 1200. You have to bring a combined arms army.Quote:
Originally Posted by x-dANGEr
Cool. (We all know that Shogun was another thing, even though I strictly don't agree to the fact that any spearmen unit can beat any cav unit, I don't know if that is implied in Shogun though).Quote:
Originally Posted by Puzz3D
Plus, we have a community of mature players who want tactical gameplay.Quote:
Originally Posted by Puzz3D
I can't imagine any of them bringing a spam army and I can't evenb imagine a possible spam army.
It's not like it is in R:TW. When a spear unit is flanked or hit in the back it willQuote:
Originally Posted by x-dANGEr
loose against Cav. Even worse when the spear unit is already engaged.
It doesn't happen that the unit simply wheels around and finishs the Cav off like in Rome.
Yes it was clearly stated that it was supposed to be like that. Checkout this chart of the Unit vs Tree in the IGN Guide It clearly shows that Yari Samurai provide an exceptional win against Heavy Cavalry and Yari Cavalry.Quote:
Originally Posted by x-dANGEr
R'as is right that, if cav charge into the rear of a spear unit in STWmod, the cav will win because the spear will rout. Since the morale level in STWmod is controlled, this works as intended. In versions of total war multiplayer where many upgrades are used, the RPS tactical system can breakdown and the rout characterisics change as well.
Lol, how does an Alexander discussion thread turn into an advertisment for Shogun?
If a low level spearmen unit can beat a high end cavalry unit, then the system is broken.Quote:
Originally Posted by Puzz3D
What do I mean by low level spearmen: Runaway Slave Spearmen in BI, etc.. Though, in S: TW, there is only 1 kind of spearmen, so there isn't a low level or a high level. Got what I mean?
It would be absurd if a cata unit would lose to a Runaway Slave Spearmen one.
Yeah low level spears should lose to the best cav and thats how it works on STW too as Yari Ashigaru loses to heavy cav (STW has two spear units)Quote:
Originally Posted by x-dANGEr
CBR
I know this is kinda "by the by", but when you hover over a unit in battle selection it lists its special features, on some spearmen such as Frank Spears, possibly Runaways and Legio Lanciarri, the "bonus fighting cav" doesn't show up. Do you we know if this is a fault on CA not including it in the hover but it actually has bonuses in game files or do the spearmen jsut randomly not have bonus vs cav?Quote:
Originally Posted by x-dANGEr
Again, sorry for going off topic.
Yari Samurai are not low level spearmen.Quote:
Originally Posted by x-dANGEr
Here is what you have in RTW: Legionary cav with 55 men (cost 790) beat Desert spearmen with 80 men (cost 390). The cav kill the spearmen at a rate of 2 to 1. There is clearly something wrong when spearmen have to cost more than 1/2 the cav they beat. This is why you have the cav spam problems in RTW multiplayer.
You do in 1.5, however in BI due to heavy cav costing around 1000 denarri just for bog standard barb nobles and cataphracts/clibs costing 1300+, there is much less cav spam. (only real exception for decent, under 1k costing cav is sarmarttian auxilia, a real bargain around the 800 denarri mark.)Quote:
Originally Posted by Puzz3D
I think that is cool, since those Desert Spearmen, are probably folks who never had fought cavalry, since they raided, and not got raided. (And, they're the lowest level of spearmen around there).Quote:
Originally Posted by Puzz3D
Though, if you take a trained spearmen unit, let's say Triarii, they can hold to 5 catas charging at the same time, and even slaughtering them for that matter. So, I do think that crappy spearmen are/should be crappy, no matter what are they fighting, because they are just folks with spears, not those who trained with it, learned formations about it, etc..
// If you say that's wrong, well maybe I'm a bit exaggerating, but I know that I was able to kill 4-6 roman cav units with a Triarii one.
If Desert Spearmen are so crappy, why do they cost 390 when Triarii cost 500?Quote:
Originally Posted by x-dANGEr
I just ran a test, and Triarii (83 men, 500 denari) do beat Cataphracts (54 men, 940 denari) with a 1 to 1 kill ratio. At the point the Cataphracts routed with 11 men, the Triarii had 43 men left which is about 1/2 strength. I then tried 2 Cata (109 men, 1880 denari) charging simultaneously into a Triarii (83 men, 500 denari) and the Cata won with a kill ratio of 4 to 1. The Catas killed 65 men and lost 16. The Triarii routed at 18 men while the Catas had 95 men.Quote:
Originally Posted by x-dANGEr
A triarii (500) beats a cata (940), but looses to 2 cata (1880). The triarii costs slightly more than 1/2 of the cav it beats, which is better than the cost relationship of the desert spearmen to the cav it beats, but it's still a lot to pay for the spear considering the cav has higher mobility.Quote:
Originally Posted by x-dANGEr
That test is quite not efficient me thinks. An army VS army one would be better, since in that case, Catas can't just retreat, because the morale disadvantage then will more likely make them rout. Though, as I said, Catas maybe are too strong, but try Roman cav. (About the Desert Spearmen, well I'm really surprised they're 390 0-o)
(charge/attack/defense)
Cataphract Cavalry ........... 9/7/23 cost 940
Praetorian Cavalry ............ 6/11/22 cost 840
Roman Legionary Cavalry ... 6/8/22 cost 790
The Roman cav looks like a better buy than the cata. The Praetorian cav actually beat cataphracts with a 2 to 1 kill ratio.
i think this thread took a left turn at alberquerky...
thumbnail click for large version
http://www.totalwar.org/barocca/misc/200_0021a.jpg
B.
No way.Quote:
Originally Posted by Puzz3D
If you don't beleive me, run the test yourself. Take a Praetorian cav and walk towards a Cataphtact. I say walk because, if you charge, the Praetorian will win by a 3 to 1 margin. I'm not surprised the Praetorian wins because it has 33 combat points compared to the Cataphract's 30 combat points. I know this doesn't take into account the secondary weapon of the Cataphract.Quote:
Originally Posted by x-dANGEr
Maybe someone will post the combat stats and costs of the Alexander units.
Take a cata unit and charge it into a praetorian cav unit..
take a praetorian and charge a cata - praetorian wins
take a cata and charge praetorian - cata wins
take a praetorian and walk it into a cata - praetorian wins
take a cat and walk it into a praetorian - praetorian wins
B.
Anything in particular you want to know? There's rather too many units to type them all out. IIRC, my first impression - e.g. of the Macedonian phalanx and compansions - was that the stats were almost identical to vanilla RTW, except that they halved the upkeep of (all? some?) infantry. There were some other tweaks - eg to moderating the missile attack of elite missiles like Cretans and reducing quite a few charge bonuses (maybe because they work now). But I did not focus on the purchase cost as I don't do multiplayer and in SP the upkeep is more important.Quote:
Originally Posted by Puzz3D
DOH ?!Quote:
Originally Posted by barocca
Does walking count into anything? Since one when using cav against infantry (Which's what we're talking about) will keep charging-retreating-charging, so the melee stat isn't really the factor, the charge one is though. Also, if you walk a cata into any cav unit except with using it's secondary weapon, it will win.
The cav vs cav test showed that Roman cav is even more cost effective than cataphracts (not considering secondary weapon). The point is that the reason cav spam works in RTW/BI and apparently Alex as well is that cav is too cheap relative to spears.Quote:
Originally Posted by x-dANGEr
Gah.. Not considering secondary weapon.. Like you're saying "Barbarian Noble Cav beat Clibs not considering the 'secondary' weapon..).
Ok, I tell you what. I will have a game, save the replay and send it to you.
I didn't need the Cataphract's secondary weapon to beat the spear in the test. The Praetorian cav does even better againt the spear for less money. If the Cataphract uses its secondary weapon, it makes the problem even worse. The spear is too expensive relative to the cav.Quote:
Originally Posted by x-dANGEr
I was arguing "Roman Cavalry beats Catas" phrase..
About the Triarii thingy, I remember upgrading them +3 weapon, + 1 defence to make them effective. Try doing that and see the results.
P.S. Today I waited for 4 hours for my clan mates to have this battle for you.. BUT, it appears I was in the wrong lobby 0-i
I did that test to see if switching to Roman cav made the cav vs spear work better because you suggested trying Roman cav. It didn't make it work better.Quote:
Originally Posted by x-dANGEr
What's the point of that? Upgrading makes the spear more expensive releative to the cav.Quote:
Originally Posted by x-dANGEr
You don't have to. I've been in plenty of RTW battles, and seen other people's battle reports. You posted in this thread for players to hurry up and get in on the cav and elephant spam fun of Alexander before rules are made which try to address it. No thanks.Quote:
Originally Posted by x-dANGEr
if you think I made that point seriously, then think again.
Maybe it makes the spears more expensive, but more cost-effective.
Yes, the weapon and armor upgrades are cost effective since you actually get double the upgrade that the mouseover indicates. So, desert spearmen with 1 weapon + 1 defend (cost 490 denari) do beat Cataphracts and Praetorian cav. In general, as long as a spearmen is not less than 1/2 the cost of a cav the spear can win. So, in a 10k denari battle, you could take 20 triarii at 500 each and be ok vs all melee cav. That should stop players from taking all melee cav armies if they run into all spears a few times. That's good, but I would still say the spears are too expensive compared to the cav they beat.Quote:
Originally Posted by x-dANGEr
Yes, but my point is that 1 Triarii +3W + 1A can beat more up to 4 (?) catas.. 4 catas = 4000, 1 upgraded Triarii = ???
I just tried that. Triarii +3W + 1A = 730 denari (81 men). Cata +3W + 1A = 1390 denari (54 men). The Triarii beats 1 Cata (no secondary weapon used) killing 42 Cata and loosing 36 men in my test, but it can't beat a second Cata. The second Cata kills 40 Triarii and looses 13 men. The totals casualties are 76 Triarii killed and 55 Cata killed. So, the factor of 2 cost relationship is still being maintained even with upgrades. I would expect that to be the case because upgrades do not increase the anti-cav bonus.Quote:
Originally Posted by x-dANGEr
The test I just made is the absolute best scenario for the spear. The cav made only frontal assaults one after the other. If the cav used it's superior mobility, it could make flanking attacks which are more devastating.
Econ21,
Maybe you could post the stats of Companion cav, Macedonian phalanx, and a non-phalanx spear unit. Thanks.
Gah Puzz3D.. I expect it that when the enemy cata charge, it stays there, not retreats. Because as I said that will cause routing in a normal battle.
Oh, and I meant 4 catas with no upgrades.
P.S. I'm not sure of this, but if you have been trying in braced formation, try counter-charging and vice verca.
EDIT:
I tried this. Since +3W +1A for the Triarii means extra 220, I upgraded the Cata with the worth of 200: (Note: The 5 men lost was because of a flank charge)
https://img216.imageshack.us/img216/6273/test0ae.jpg
There were no retreats. 730 deanri worth of spears killed 1390 denari worth of cav.Quote:
Originally Posted by x-dANGEr
Well the upgrades are not priced properly. That's why you can get good results upgrading the spears and not the cav. I'm not convinced that the game is better because the upgrades are underpriced, and you shouldn't have to upgrade the spears to make them work the way they should. I hear that people are playing with rules to limit cav. Why are rulles being used if it's not a problem?Quote:
Originally Posted by x-dANGEr
I think the rule limiting cavalry is no more.
And I really don't care: In fact, I think spears are overpowered in 1.5:
Yesterday, I was Parthia playing against a clan mate who was Macedonia. He had 4 phalanx left, exhausted and weared down to 30 men each (Half). I flank-rear-front charged one of them, and instead of it dying/routing, my 3 cata camels routed.. That wouldn't happen in 1.2.
And the annoying thing is how fast can phalanx turn.. In 1.2 it wasn't a big deal, because then they'd die anyway, but it is a big one in 1.5. Also, the 'speat-butt' bug that was introduced in 1.3 makes phalanx too strong again..
In short: Green Triarii maybe bad, but good against other green cav with cav support. Upgraded Triarii are enough to hold & kill (Sometimes) cav. Phalanx is tooo overpowered against cav in every way you can think of.
Phalanx should decisively beat cav, and the back rows could easily turn and face an enemy behind them. The phalanx is supposed to be 11 ranks deep, but the small unit size you're forced to play with doesn't allow you to make a proper phalanx formation.Quote:
Originally Posted by x-dANGEr
When you attack with 3 units, if one routs it can easily make the other two rout especially if the units are less than maximum strength. Also near the end of a battle, battlefield upgrades change the way units work. In anycase, if I had 3 cav vs 4 phalanx units I wouldn't expect to be able to win.
Then Puzz3D, phalanx is too overpowered.. What, it beats cavalry, infantry and doesn't get effected by arrows..
Which phalanx unit is it?
Theoretically that's how it's supposed to be. As this is no great revelation, already mentioned hundreds of times around here, frontally phalanxes should be able to withstand whatever is thrown at them, but they could lose due to lack of mobility and weak flanks. Ofcourse I underline that all these things are theoretical, in no way an attempt to insinuate that RTW has these features.
I'm curious - I don't do MP, but do people find phalanxes overpowered in MP? Because fighting the AI in SP, I have developed a great disdain for them. They are simply too slow to attack you and easy to flank if you want to attack them. However, I can see that without a pause button and with a human to maintain a solid phalanx line, they could be more worthy opponents in MP.Quote:
Originally Posted by x-dANGEr
BTW, I don't know if any MPers have tried the RTR Platinum hoplites - they are dense masses of spearmen without the phalanx formation button or a secondary weapon. I find it a better way of simulating the phalanx - they can run so they pose a real threat and if cavalry flanks them, they don't switch to swords but keep jabbing with their spears. RTR Platinum has not extended the innovation to the real pikemen though (sarissa-armed troops) although sometimes I wonder if they should.
Well, if you get 4 Sacred Bands, deploy them with their backs to each other, and upgrade them gold armor and weapon, they litterly can beat anything thrown at them. (Even any other phalanxes.. Though, they still are more "bloody" against non phalanx units..)
Well I thought Urban Cohorts beat sacred band, but that problem you mention isn't caused because sacred band is too good against cavalry. That's being caused because they are too good against non-phalanx infantry, and if you can go into a box like that without getting shot to pieces then the armor rating on that unit is too high. This is exactly the gameplay problem I originally pointed out. The RPS isn't strong enough in RTW.Quote:
Originally Posted by x-dANGEr
This problem first surfaced in STW/MI (Mongol Invasion). By upgrading the lowly yari ashigaru spear unit it became the strongest melee unit in the game. You could purchase 8 of them and 8 guns, arrange them in a square and you had an army that couldn't be beaten except by the exact same army. Cavalry and sword units were useless against this army. In MTW, we saw a simlar thing happen but it was reversed with cav and swords dominating. If you play STWmod, neither spear/gun or cav/sword armies work because the RPS system prevents it.
They will get shot to pieces if put in a box (Still few will die but..), you can deploy them onto each other, with each unit facing in a direction. Like this
<>
<>
<>
<>
When you deploy them upon each other, arrows from the left will be reflected by the shields of the unit from the left, and so on..
Yet another reason why RTW/BI/Alex is inferior to the previous battle engine. Unit stacking is a problem and Creative Assembly was aware of it back in Dec 2004.Quote:
Originally Posted by x-dANGEr
Yea it is quite annoying when people do that. Although in the small chance that artillery is allowed they are screwed. You could charge them from the sides if back to back and then when they turn to face the units that charged, charge the sides that just opened. Or you could take a phalanx unit and engage them and charge the sides. The seleucids are good at this with cats, pikes and legions.
Goalie, you can always stuck another unit, put it into the thinnest formation and make it face the flanks..
True, but you said nothing about that in you post above and that is what I was responding to. But most players arent that noobish and use these strategies anyway.
Well Goalie, I didn't want to post the "tactic" in detail :P