To 1.2 or not to 1.2? That is the question.

After RTW I was determined not to buy M2TW until some time had passed and reviews were in. Based on the types of comments I've seen, it doesnt appear that M2TW is any (or much of) an improvement on RTW. Despite my resolve, I recently broke down and finally purchased the game.

Again, based on the comments here at the org, it doesnt appear to me that 1.2 is a very completed version. So, given that I want to give M2TW the best chance of being a success for me, should I wait for v1.3 (when will it be out?) or play 1.2, with the possibility that I will be disappointed by the bugs and say goodbye to TW forever.

Keep in mind I loved STW and MTW but hated RTW (with its emphasis on style v substance).

If you've got the game, there's no reason to play without 1.2

I'd be tempted to say play it with 1.2 anyway - it's definitely not perfect, but if you keep waiting for the next patch you'll never be satisfied...

Any major issues you have with the game's style are unlikely to be fixed by a patch, anyway.

You might get some of "your money back" through modifications - there are quite a few out - experience says though that they mature about 2 years after initial game release. However, i agree with Sapi - if the style of the game doesn't apply to your taste then no patch will make you happy. For all intents and purposes M2 is to RTW what MTW was to STW: an improved version.

Many Thanks

Noir

I have reinstalled M2TW and finally applied the second patch. I am not much impressed. However, it appears to be a "better" version than any of its previous ones.

The download required much time as the patch's size is roughly similar to that of a CD. The question to put forth is whether appliance of the patch is beneficial enough. If I am to answer this, 'no' would outweigh 'yes'.

Quote:

---

After RTW I was determined not to buy M2TW until some time had passed and reviews were in. Based on the types of comments I've seen, it doesnt appear that M2TW is any (or much of) an improvement on RTW. Despite my resolve, I recently broke down and finally purchased the game.

---

Thus far -- personally -- I think RTW (1.5) better than M2TW (1.2), and here is a certain logic thereto as a '1.5' > a '1.2' or at least that is to be.

but. why are ppl comparin' m2tw to RTW? wouldn't it be more fair to compare to the original MTW instead? besides the graphics and performance there's no point really. I don't think RTW was bad given the period it was set in. don't compare apples to oranges compare m2 to m1 TW IMO.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by sapi

If you've got the game, there's no reason to play without 1.2

I'd be tempted to say play it with 1.2 anyway - it's definitely not perfect, but if you keep waiting for the next patch you'll never be satisfied...

Any major issues you have with the game's style are unlikely to be fixed by a patch, anyway.

---

Hmmm. I didnt mean that I would play 1.0 instead of 1.2. Rather that I'd wait and play 1.3 instead of 1.2 in order to avoid what appear to be some pretty big bugs with 1.2 (now that I've got it in my hands I'm finding the idea of waiting a little more time to be possible).

I agree that gameplay issues are not normally addressed in patches but some bugs are "game enders" fo me.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SpencerH

After RTW I was determined not to buy M2TW until some time had passed and reviews were in. Based on the types of comments I've seen, it doesnt appear that M2TW is any (or much of) an improvement on RTW. Despite my resolve, I recently broke down and finally purchased the game.

Again, based on the comments here at the org, it doesnt appear to me that 1.2 is a very completed version. So, given that I want to give M2TW the best chance of being a success for me, should I wait for v1.3 (when will it be out?) or play 1.2, with the possibility that I will be disappointed by the bugs and say goodbye to TW forever.

Keep in mind I loved STW and MTW but hated RTW (with its emphasis on style v substance).

---

I didnt get RTW because I dont care for the roman period. I generally dont buy PC games anymore until well after release, a patch or two and complimentary mods.

As far as improvements, well I think MTW2 isnt going to evolve much more until the addon comes out, so pretty much what you see is what you get. Patch up to 1.2, get a mod (I reccommend LTC) and have a go.

Yeah, some of the AI stuff is hogwash, but to be blunt the total war games can be approached two ways. You can go "total war" from the get go and you will win, fast, 95% of the time with whatever faction you choose. Or you envoke some house rules for limited starting conquest.

You do the later, on VH VH and you'll get a decent game.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bijo

I have reinstalled M2TW and finally applied the second patch. I am not much impressed. However, it appears to be a "better" version than any of its previous ones.

The download required much time as the patch's size is roughly similar to that of a CD. The question to put forth is whether appliance of the patch is beneficial enough. If I am to answer this, 'no' would outweigh 'yes'.


Thus far -- personally -- I think RTW (1.5) better than M2TW (1.2), and here is a certain logic thereto as a '1.5' > a '1.2' or at least that is to be.

---

Luckily for me a cd sized download is not an issue for me. I dont remember what version of RTW I gave up on. It was certainly after playing the bigger mods (none of which could save the poor gameplay IMO).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by redriver

but. why are ppl comparin' m2tw to RTW? wouldn't it be more fair to compare to the original MTW instead? besides the graphics and performance there's no point really. I don't think RTW was bad given the period it was set in. don't compare apples to oranges compare m2 to m1 TW IMO.

---

I'm not ignoring your comment but I dont want to get into RTW bashing (I did that enough while it was a current game - to no noticable effect).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Odin

I didnt get RTW because I dont care for the roman period. I generally dont buy PC games anymore until well after release, a patch or two and complimentary mods.

As far as improvements, well I think MTW2 isnt going to evolve much more until the addon comes out, so pretty much what you see is what you get. Patch up to 1.2, get a mod (I reccommend LTC) and have a go.

Yeah, some of the AI stuff is hogwash, but to be blunt the total war games can be approached two ways. You can go "total war" from the get go and you will win, fast, 95% of the time with whatever faction you choose. Or you envoke some house rules for limited starting conquest.

You do the later, on VH VH and you'll get a decent game.

---

An interesting point. I actually play all TW games with 'house rules' that include not attacking a peaceful neighbor. The tactical AI has never been truely good enough to deal with aggressive players.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SpencerH

The tactical AI has never been truely good enough to deal with aggressive players.

---

This is still the case with MTW2.

Get 1.2 running, get LTC, take the turks on a long campaign and these house rules:

1. never dow a faction of the same religion

2. for the first 40 turns, dont dow AI factions at all

3. Dont do anything ridiculously out of faction charecter (Examples: occupying rebel held Dublin, making a treaty with the Pope whereby he pays you florins). You get the gist.

Keep it on h/vh and you should have a nice game.

Well, the major bugs were fixed by the 1.2 patch. What remains, are some minor issues as well as a harder difficulty.

Oh, and some unit rebalancing after the shield bug was fixed.

cool

i prefer agressive ai from 1.1 but dont like fact that you need dimounted feudals to beat peasants so its up to you.

I think if you download 1.2, just go play the game, and DO NOT READ THE FORUMS, patch 1.3 will be out before you even notice the small bugs that remain in the game.

Seriously, nothing ruins the fun of a game faster than researching bugs on a forum. The problems that are still in this game after 1.2 are minor, and take some time to even notice, if you ever do.

Play the game. Have fun. Worry less.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SpencerH

Luckily for me a cd sized download is not an issue for me. I dont remember what version of RTW I gave up on. It was certainly after playing the bigger mods (none of which could save the poor gameplay IMO).

---

I find RTW 1.5 very playable and well done. In fact, I would enjoy it more than M2TW 1.2, truly. But M2TW 1.2 is (or can be) adequately enjoyable either way. What Rhedd says must be heeded, though. It is advisable to not check any information regarding the patches, etc., and simply play the game. There are still certain (minor) issues to be resolved, but it will be so soon enough.

I thoroughly enjoyed RTW, BI and the alexander add-ons. And I also really enjoy M2TW.

Basically, you have to take a game for what it IS, not what YOU think it should be (or could be). Simple fact, this is how it is. In the first few "versions" (i.e RTW and M2TW) of a new game engine, there are always going to be bugs and things people don't like. Thats just the way it is. The OP sounds like he's already made up his mind not to like the game, which is understandable looking at some of the threads on this forum:laugh4:

Myself, i really didn't noticed many of the bugs in patch 1.02 of M2TW at all until I bothered to look in the forum, then they became apparent, but nothing at all that was game-breaking. I can't even see why people say that defending settlements is nearly impossble because you can't place units properly, because I have no issues doing that. Sure, some things are not realistic, but the game would be pretty boring if it was :laugh4:

I would suggest, for the OP, that as he has the game, try it. Its a waste of money to have it sit on the shelf waiting for patch 1.3, which really will not change much in terms of the gameplay of the game engine. Also, don't expect 1.3 or even the Kingdoms expansion to be the answer to your dreams for this game, or you will be disappointed and probably will give up on the TW series.

Find a game style that suits you, understand the game limitations, because every game has limitations, and you will enjoy it. Also, like others have said, a good mod can work wonders and really increase the value of the game. I myself tried LTC and DLV mods, and they are great, but i think that Stainless Steel really is the best. It keeps the game close to Vanilla, but adds things that I think should have been in the original game from the start.

I've also seen the game do things with the SS mod that vanilla never did (Scotland taking taking Ireland, Antwerp and Bruges, and invading Denmark...anyone? plus other things like it).

I bought the game "BUT" don't want to play it yet :thinking: . Spin it up it's great fun :yes: .

you've bought it so you may as well at least get 2 games out of it

one now 1.2

and one when 1.3 comes out

and if youve got a decent machine - love those graphics No1 longest time jiggy jig - they are wonderful

then you'll be bored with it, (even the greatest graphics in the world dont make for replayibility, or take away frustration) put it in the cupboard forever, and go back to playing MTW

but see thats 2 plays vs 1 which is 100% more return

A fascinating take, Yun. I still am to engage in MTW especially regarding what many think of it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HoreTore

Well, the major bugs were fixed by the 1.2 patch. What remains, are some minor issues as well as a harder difficulty.

Oh, and some unit rebalancing after the shield bug was fixed.

---

A quick look at the 1.2 buglist/1.3 wishlist makes me disagree. The failure of CA to fix the annoying issues with the pursuit of routing troops (that drove me crazy in RTW) is enough alone to give me pause about playing this version.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rhedd

I think if you download 1.2, just go play the game, and DO NOT READ THE FORUMS, patch 1.3 will be out before you even notice the small bugs that remain in the game.

Seriously, nothing ruins the fun of a game faster than researching bugs on a forum. The problems that are still in this game after 1.2 are minor, and take some time to even notice, if you ever do.

Play the game. Have fun. Worry less.

---

Again, I disagree. When the demo for RTW came out (to huge disappointment with the gameplay), the consensus was "its a demo, the game will be different". Well it wasnt. For many of us RTW was a waste of time. The 1.2 buglist contains many items that are not minor to me.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by PapaNasty

I thoroughly enjoyed RTW, BI and the alexander add-ons. And I also really enjoy M2TW.

Basically, you have to take a game for what it IS, not what YOU think it should be (or could be). Simple fact, this is how it is. In the first few "versions" (i.e RTW and M2TW) of a new game engine, there are always going to be bugs and things people don't like. Thats just the way it is. The OP sounds like he's already made up his mind not to like the game, which is understandable looking at some of the threads on this forum:laugh4:

Myself, i really didn't noticed many of the bugs in patch 1.02 of M2TW at all until I bothered to look in the forum, then they became apparent, but nothing at all that was game-breaking. I can't even see why people say that defending settlements is nearly impossble because you can't place units properly, because I have no issues doing that. Sure, some things are not realistic, but the game would be pretty boring if it was :laugh4:

I would suggest, for the OP, that as he has the game, try it. Its a waste of money to have it sit on the shelf waiting for patch 1.3, which really will not change much in terms of the gameplay of the game engine. Also, don't expect 1.3 or even the Kingdoms expansion to be the answer to your dreams for this game, or you will be disappointed and probably will give up on the TW series.

Find a game style that suits you, understand the game limitations, because every game has limitations, and you will enjoy it. Also, like others have said, a good mod can work wonders and really increase the value of the game. I myself tried LTC and DLV mods, and they are great, but i think that Stainless Steel really is the best. It keeps the game close to Vanilla, but adds things that I think should have been in the original game from the start.

I've also seen the game do things with the SS mod that vanilla never did (Scotland taking taking Ireland, Antwerp and Bruges, and invading Denmark...anyone? plus other things like it).

---

I'm glad you enjoyed RTW. I thought it stunk compared to the brilliance of the previous games and I wonder if M2TW will stink the same way. Even so I want to give this game the best chance to please me so I'm willing to wait. Purchasing it last week was just an amazon impulse buy with the gift certificates I accrue from using their credit card (I also preordered the new civ expansion - which I will play immediately :beam: ).


I noticed your sig. My last visit to the org (around the time of the demo release) was to argue against that travesty.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Yun al-Din

you've bought it so you may as well at least get 2 games out of it

one now 1.2

and one when 1.3 comes out

and if youve got a decent machine - love those graphics No1 longest time jiggy jig - they are wonderful

then you'll be bored with it, (even the greatest graphics in the world dont make for replayibility, or take away frustration) put it in the cupboard forever, and go back to playing MTW

but see thats 2 plays vs 1 which is 100% more return

---

Well thats kinda where I was heading but I wonder whether this will be the last TW for me if I'm disappointed by M2TW. I've gone back and played STW and MTW but without much satisfaction. After playing them so many times they are simply too easy.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SpencerH

I also preordered the new civ expansion - which I will play immediately.


I noticed your sig. My last visit to the org (around the time of the demo release) was to argue against that travesty.

---

hehe, The Civilisation series is one of my all time favourites :2thumbsup: I've got Warlords already but didn't realise another espansion was out :idea2:

And as for the elephants, I enjoy it despite the fact its not realistic... I leave it to the modders to work that one out :yes:

But seriously mate, if your disappointed with vanilla M2TW, the stainless steel mod is a good improvement over it. I know some people don't like getting mods for their games (some strange bullheaded thing about "how it should be like that in the box, i refuse to mod it"), but it takes literally nothing to install a good mod, and increases enjoyment a lot :yes:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by PapaNasty

hehe, The Civilisation series is one of my all time favourites :2thumbsup: I've got Warlords already but didn't realise another espansion was out :idea2:

And as for the elephants, I enjoy it despite the fact its not realistic... I leave it to the modders to work that one out :yes:

But seriously mate, if your disappointed with vanilla M2TW, the stainless steel mod is a good improvement over it. I know some people don't like getting mods for their games (some strange bullheaded thing about "how it should be like that in the box, i refuse to mod it"), but it takes literally nothing to install a good mod, and increases enjoyment a lot :yes:

---

The next civ expansion will be out by the end of July.

I like mods well enough. I thought the RTW mods did a lot with poor starting material but they couldnt entice me to play the last expansion ( I dont even remember wgat it was called). It can be a problem installing a new TW version ontop of a mod though which is a bit of a pain.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SpencerH

Well thats kinda where I was heading but I wonder whether this will be the last TW for me if I'm disappointed by M2TW. I've gone back and played STW and MTW but without much satisfaction. After playing them so many times they are simply too easy.

---

The problem is that there is nothing else on the market at the minute that even remotely matches the TW series.

I find I quickly get fed up with other peoples attempts at historical strategy games and end up coming back to the TW series again.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Didz

The problem is that there is nothing else on the market at the minute that even remotely matches the TW series.

I find I quickly get fed up with other peoples attempts at historical strategy games and end up coming back to the TW series again.

---

I agree. I've never found another similar game to match the TW series (CIV is beyond comparison IMO) thats why RTW was so disappointing and why I'd like to give M2TW the best opportunity to impress.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by PapaNasty

I know some people don't like getting mods for their games (some strange bullheaded thing about "how it should be like that in the box, i refuse to mod it"), but it takes literally nothing to install a good mod, and increases enjoyment a lot :yes:

---

Some mods increase enjoyment to some people. Equally though, to some, sifting through the trash to get to the good mods is a pain in the *ahem*. Suggesting that choosing not to get mods is bullheaded however, is rather rude. Honestly, while I've modded my own game (to a degree at least, slightly reduced pirates/Chivalric Knight "bandits", two turns per year, kings purse changes) I get kinda tired of seeing really good, informative threads devolve into "get this mod it fixes everything".

Anyway. For me, 1.2 made the game bearable again. I flat out refused to play it after 1.1 came out and waited for the patch, hoping beyond hope that it would fix most of the blatantly awful issues. I'd been looking forward to M2TW since I heard announcement of it's development, so it's not like deciding I wouldn't play was an easy cast-aside either. Now, even unmodded it's a fun game for me, it still has a few/many issues, but I don't see any mods that fix the issues that I find disagreeable as they're all AI/pathing troubles. Right now, I'm getting a great deal of enjoyment for my money... but I'm still not buying Kingdoms until it goes budget though, that way it'll have been patched to a working state. :beam:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SpencerH

I agree. I've never found another similar game to match the TW series (CIV is beyond comparison IMO) thats why RTW was so disappointing and why I'd like to give M2TW the best opportunity to impress.

---

Hearts Of Iron 2 and its expansion from developers of Europa Universalis is the game you can easy add to Civ and TW series, but it is about 2d world war. It is also an example how same developers can make absolutely different games on basically same engine. From historical point it is much more accurate. I dont even look at Civ or TW(not including Shogun) like they are historically accurate games, where you can learn georaphy or history during the playtime.


Howewer, CA can be happy - they made a game with PLAYABLE SP. After Shogun i cant play SP MTW and RTW at all. But at least i played MTW MP a lot, and if it was something special about this game - it was its MP part. Its sad , that now, when we have even better ( in MP terms ) game MTW2, too few players are playing it now, cause of great fault called RTW ( which was unplayable both in SP and MP for me ). But even in SP MTW2 is more enjoyable than MTW and RTW because of its presentation, voice acting, things which not tied much to AI programming:2thumbsup:

And yes, Civ 4 and Hearts of Iron 2 have much better AI than MTW2 if not to say the best. So , my advise - dont bother with TW AI and play MP :whip:

About the patch - it fixed shield bug and two-hand bug, and its definetly fixed routing units capturing problem, my highlanders capturing dismounted knights and crossbowmens on foot and feudal knights can capture every infantry unit. Thats all i wanted from it. Now i can enjoy MP and kill time in SP.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SpencerH

CIV is beyond comparison IMO.

---

Civilisation is the best game in its class too, but its not in the same class as the TW series. Its basically a boardgame based upon the God concept not a wargame set in a historical setting. Your moving counters about not troops and the whole thing is abstract.

It works beautifully if you can live with the predictable AI and appalling imbalance allowed to the computer to compensate for its lack of intelligence, but it can't be compared to the TW series because they have nothing in common.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by zaher

Hearts Of Iron 2 and its expansion from developers of Europa Universalis is the game you can easy add to Civ and TW series, but it is about 2d world war.

---

I played Hearts of Iron 2 for about a month, before getting thoroughly fed up with being treated like an army quartermaster and made to micro-manage every aspect of my preparations for war only to have the buggy combat routines screw up battles that I was not allowed to take part in and destroy everything I had spent hours organising in seconds. I know from the forums that this game has a huge cult following of players who are clearly into accountancy and computer induce self-abuse but after nearly doing my head in trying to remember all the fixes necessary to get this game to do what I needed it to do and protect my counters from AI bug destruction I decided I had better things to waste my life on.

Europa Universalis...well what can I say I really tried to like that game and I appreciate it too has a cult following, but personally I got heartily fed up with watching my units baby-step their way over the map in totally unecessary simulated real-time movement. I found I had to have the TV on to keep me awake whilst the programmers tried to bore me stupid in between something happening. Somewhere underneath this anal simulation of real-time rubbish I suspect there is a good game, which is probably something on a par with Civilisation but I just didn't have the patience to wait for the program to finish playing with itself and let me join in.

Again both of these games are basically boardgames rather than wargames and not in the same class as the TW series.

Didz , i am not talking about how good this games are, i wondered how i can play Hearts of Iron so long after my attempt to play Europa Universalis ( no more than 1 hour at all ). Same developer made 2 games - one totally bored me, and another i liked. In each game i like challenge, from start to finish. I played Civ 4 on monarch difficulty several times , and on prince difficulty alot. Each time i developed rocket and finished game. When i played Shogun, i finished campaigns for all daimyo. I remember, that i first met geisha when i played campaign 3d or 4th time, and it was like lighting in sunny day. Even if MTW2 was same quality game as Shogun ( in terms of funfactor ) , this is just not enougth to keep me busy with it. Even one, who started to play TW from RTW will notice, that basically nothing was changed, same map, same mechanics, same concept. So, once you become skilled enougth, i dont see a point to play this game from start to finish and win it. I know that i will win when i starting new campaign, not matter which way - blitz or house rules.

Just a little example: i played as Scotland (house rules), from england remained only Oslo, and i was in war with France. I developed militia drill square in Renne, Brugge, Antwerpen, and started producing heavy pike militia.Then i got all spear militia from those 3 towns ( 18 units ) and moved them to French territory in one stack. AI attacked me on its turn with 2 stacks of units, including Scotts guards and noble knights, leading by French family member. I have to continue? I remained with 2 units of spear militia, French family member found a noble death, and most of french army was destroyed. For me, monopoly or bodybuilding is more wargame than that. Civ 4 is more wargame than that, because you can be sure - weak unit will never be able to kill stronger one.


With or without patch you can win this game, because what need to be added ( and not fixed ) is battlefield AI.


And i want to finish on positive note - i saw New World !:yes:

In my opinion the battlefield AI is the last thing that needs to be fixed.

The first thing is the actual game deisgn, which currently allows itself to be explioted by Blitzers, and needs to be changed to eliminate sacking benefits and introduce penalties for constant warfare.

The second thing that needs to be fixed is the strategic AI, so that computer factions behave in a more rational and challenging manner.

And only when thats done and the AI is waging war only when appropriate and with armies that are properly formed should thought be given to how well those armies are commanded on the battlefield.

Penalties on constant warfare in a game called "[Something]: Total War"?! No offence but CA won't introduce that in a million years - the whole point of the games is to blitz and keep fighting people IMO. After all, they are designed to appeal to the casual gamer who wants to see loads of little men killing each other, and not worry about economics.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by I Am Herenow

Penalties on constant warfare in a game called "[Something]: Total War"?! No offence but CA won't introduce that in a million years - the whole point of the games is to blitz and keep fighting people IMO. After all, they are designed to appeal to the casual gamer who wants to see loads of little men killing each other, and not worry about economics.

---

I disagree, if that had been CA's intention then we would not have the elements such as merchants, spies, assassins, and priests included in the game. It would actually have been designed more like Medieval:Command and Conquer where all that was involved was gathering resources, building barracks and churning out military units, as that is all that is really used or needed by blitzer.

However, CA have obviously put a lot of effort into the economic and diplomatic aspects of the game, its just that they failed to notice the obvious expliot potential arising from the sacking rewards and the lack of attrition. I suspect that this was due to the fact that as designers they naturally play tested the game the way they designed it to be played and so never noticed the potential to blitz a victory.

Well, fair enough, but a penalty for being at war all the time in a game with "Total War" in its title just ain't gonna happen.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by I Am Herenow

Well, fair enough, but a penalty for being at war all the time in a game with "Total War" in its title just ain't gonna happen.

---

Well thats your opinion, but personally I think your putting to much stress on a name of the game and not enough on the value of its content.

It is after all the content which sells the game not the name, and as things stand TotalWar is close to losing its market due to the degredation of its quality not the betrayal of its name.

You know the funny thing i'm noticing is that around this forum the only people that seem to be complaining about the exploits are those that are using them.

Yeah there are bugs, but they don't make the game unplayable (for most people), as even those who seem most vocal about the bugs still play the game.

Eventually the bugs will be fixed. Maybe not in this game, but *hopefully* at the latest by the next. Either that or many of the original and *loyal* TW players will give up on the series (looking at what i read on these forums).

I would hope that they find some way of smoothing out the Blitz method of gameplay, aside from introducing a penalty for going to war. Really, being penalized for going to war, in a war game, is just silly :yes:

You should still be able to blitz, if thats your style, but perhaps reduce the florins gained and maybe introduce lower moral, lower movement points and higher upkeep for troops the longer players are at war. But I agree with Didz that the campaign game needs to be fixed/improved before the battlefield AI, but both would be nice :laugh4:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by PapaNasty

Yeah there are bugs, but they don't make the game unplayable (for most people), as even those who seem most vocal about the bugs still play the game.

---

I hope I end up agreeng with your opinion I downloading 1.2 at 600 or so kB as we "speak" :beam:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by PapaNasty

Eventually the bugs will be fixed. Maybe not in this game, but *hopefully* at the latest by the next.

---

Sorry, but we've said that before.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by PapaNasty

Either that or many of the original and *loyal* TW players will give up on the series (looking at what i read on these forums).

---

One of the things I was interested in was the opinions of players who I knew from the .org. Sadly, I find very few familiar names.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by PapaNasty

Yeah there are bugs, but they don't make the game unplayable (for most people), as even those who seem most vocal about the bugs still play the game.

---

Until 1.2 I did go back to RTW.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by PapaNasty

Eventually the bugs will be fixed. Maybe not in this game, but *hopefully* at the latest by the next. Either that or many of the original and *loyal* TW players will give up on the series (looking at what i read on these forums).

---

I didn't pay full price for a game thinking it was a down payment on the next in their series. I paid full price and expect a full game. I will never give up on the TW series but I will NEVER EVER pay full price again, when it reaches the bargain bucket and has a couple of patches behind it, then I will buy. Remember the band "The Who" and their classic "We Don't Get Fooled Again"? That's the way I see it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by PapaNasty

I would hope that they find some way of smoothing out the Blitz method of gameplay, aside from introducing a penalty for going to war. Really, being penalized for going to war, in a war game, is just silly :yes:

---

Least of my worries having taken 6 months to make this game playable.

It is a fine game now, but I feel like I have had the p*ss taken out of me. I was sold a new, full price game that was obviously only half finished. Shame on Sega, I hope they take note... I WON'T BUY ANOTHER.

I've had RTW since it came out, & then got M2TW. I played M2TW for a short while & went back to RTW & still playing it. To me some of the bugs are miner, i enjoy the game so much & played all the factions with delight. My very first RTW game, I played till I won 101 cites. Yes, it took a while. I play other games some times but always come back to RTW....

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by PapaNasty

I would hope that they find some way of smoothing out the Blitz method of gameplay, aside from introducing a penalty for going to war. Really, being penalized for going to war, in a war game, is just silly :yes:

---

No, not if the result enhances the challenge and makes the game more realistic. At present the whole issue is that the game isn't a challenge because the rewards for going to war are ahistoric and much too high.

Wargames usually attempt to model the problems of real warfare, therefore most have some form of attrition and logistics system. Whilst, I don't want to see TW turned into a accountancy tool I do think that something needs to be done before it becomes just another Command and Conquer clone.

So I installed the game but the 1.2 patch installer stalled very near the end. Typical!!!!! Now I have to find out what was wrong try to uninstall - re-install. Damn, but I'm tired of this.

I was lucky all it required was to install the patch again.

If you are not bored by the ancient setting why give not the Europa Barbarorum mod for RTW 1.5 a trial? It is as historically correct as possible (I have a few concerns still but that are minor things), slow motion, very educative and changes lots of annoying features of RTW and M2TW. You can play it with the BI exe and get a still better AI therefore (although not a good one of course.:laugh4: ).

I never played M2TW again after I (better late than never) had discovered EB.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by geala

If you are not bored by the ancient setting why give not the Europa Barbarorum mod for RTW 1.5 a trial? It is as historically correct as possible (I have a few concerns still but that are minor things), slow motion, very educative and changes lots of annoying features of RTW and M2TW. You can play it with the BI exe and get a still better AI therefore (although not a good one of course.:laugh4: ).

I never played M2TW again after I (better late than never) had discovered EB.

---

I played BI and EB but neither could fix the underlying (bad IMO) game design choices that were made with RTW. Never say never, but I doubt I'll play RTW again. I'm much more likely to play STW or MTW.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by PapaNasty

I've also seen the game do things with the SS mod that vanilla never did (Scotland taking taking Ireland, Antwerp and Bruges, and invading Denmark...anyone? plus other things like it).

---

In my current vanilla 1.02 game as England Scotland tried to take ireland after i took york and caernavon (sp?)... but lost the battle. But they somehow managed to take Arhus from the Danes!!!
I guess it is just rare... and not every campaign plays out the same (which is good).

I got started on teh TW series with RTW (right after 1.5 was released).. absolutely loved it since i had never played anythig like it before...more so with RTR and EB... Got on the forums and heard a lot of nostalgia about MTW. I then played MTW but somehow did not like it as much as RTW... seemed like a totally different game and was annoyed by how i could move from Ireland to Antioch in one turn.. I did like the civil war and re-emergence features (only the re-emerged factions seemed to have good army compositions). The strategic AI was pretty much the same in terms of unit recruitment but the map style did not expose it as ruthlessly as RTW or M2TW. The battlefield AI probably did more flanking i think... so it seems to be a case of liking the first one you come across more...

back on topic, start the game..give it a try... i personally dont find chasing routers too much of an issue except in siege defences where the routing units form a beeline and are scattered all over the map

So I've played it for a short while now. I was gonna write this last weekend but I thought I'd give it one more try.

I cant believe anyone who knows the TW series thinks this game is good. This is just RTW with different animations. TW is now an RTS+ game (if you want to give it a plus). My last two battles were a seige where I found that catapults can now knock down castle walls, can move at the speed of infantry (ie would beat Jesse Owens at 100m), could fire faster than my 4 units of longbows, and seem to be unkillable by my best cav. It was ridiculous! The battle shouldnt have been close given the forces arrayed against me but I barely managed to win. The next battle was even worse. I was relieving a beseiged city. I attacked with a better and bigger force and a better general. I didnt take into account that it was under dense foilage (right beside my city) and that I couldnt see ANYTHING and therefore had no control of my units! I had to try to control my units by radar! Who at CA thought this was fun? I understand "fog of war". I've been there for real and I understand that sometimes generals (and lower ranks) dont have the control they want in a battle but this kind of loss of control is just nonsense in a game. It made Warcraft seem like a chess game.

The strategic portion is even less fun than RTW (and that's hard to imagine). Not that there arent some good ideas, it's just that the interface is so clunky that its a pain in the butt to play. It was bad enough with RTW but since there doesnt seem to have been ANY improvement, now it's just obscenely painful to play.

I've had it with TW. It'll take an act of god to get me to buy another. I wouldnt even bother to borrow a TW game and I guess I have no chance to return this rubbish.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Didz

No, not if the result enhances the challenge and makes the game more realistic. At present the whole issue is that the game isn't a challenge because the rewards for going to war are ahistoric and much too high.

Wargames usually attempt to model the problems of real warfare, therefore most have some form of attrition and logistics system. Whilst, I don't want to see TW turned into a accountancy tool I do think that something needs to be done before it becomes just another Command and Conquer clone.

---

I agree. Civ 4 does this very well with "war weariness" where your population becomes increasingly unhappy the longer a war drags on. Something similar could easily be implemented in the TW series to counteract the blitz without feeling too artificial or unrealistic.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SpencerH

After RTW I was determined not to buy M2TW until some time had passed and reviews were in. Based on the types of comments I've seen, it doesnt appear that M2TW is any (or much of) an improvement on RTW. Despite my resolve, I recently broke down and finally purchased the game.

---

That is exactly what happened to me. I am now playing 1.2 and I think it will provide about 2 months of fun, and then I will be back to Civ IV.

I am also disappointed in CA...650MB patch? Let's hope they figure out gameplay is more important than pretty graphics for the next iteration. And how about shipping a finished product, too?

It even steams me more when they have a good idea like the ancillaries but have them so bug riddled that private individuals have to fix them for them.