Question on game mechanics feedback from CA
Good afternoon friends
In lieu of having a Ludus Magna type forum yet for M2, I thought I'd post this here.
If memory serves, shortly after the release of MTW and over the course of time, CA began to reveal quite a bit to the community regarding actual game mechanics, such as calculations, formulas, etc. I remember Puzz picked the thing to pieces through his amazing testing procedures, with CA validating the findings. I wasn't too happy with this situation in RTW and BI. Therother and crew did an absolutely outstanding job researching and posting findings, but it'd still have been nice to get the official word from CA. Another point is that I do understand that one of the big reasons behind this was that CA was switching over to the RTW engine which was a big technology change from MTW. I don't know if we can expect something like this for the jump from M2TW to the next title, but it'd still be nice to get the word straight from the developers.
Has anyone heard anything to this effect? CA? Any thoughts gentlemen? :help:
Cheers
Re: Question on game mechanics feedback from CA
After RTW, we were invited to submit some questions to CA and they did reply to them for the most part. They also nailed most of the early questions in my "game mechanics questions for CA" thread in the Ludus Magna.
One or two things - notably the combat formula and the derivation of the unit stats - CA did not want to get into the mathematical details of with RTW whereas they had provided that information with STW/MTW. They said they wanted to protect their intellectual property. I was disappointed by that, but can understand it as TW "clones" are more of a possibility now than in the STW/MTW era. One edge TW still has over the Imperial Glories, Marks of Chaos etc is in some of the hardcore wargaming elements in its battle model - morale, flanking, formation, terrain, weapon effects, weather, etc. Other companies can do battles with pretty 3D graphics but they often lack the depth of TWs combat resolution.
With M2TW, both the Org and CA are working to build closer relations - CAs inviting Orgahs to various events is evidence of this. This kind of relation could include stuff like us submitting questions about game mechanics. However, they are probably swamped with immediate post-release activities. I'll post again when I have more to report.
Re: Question on game mechanics feedback from CA
Ave Master econ
Quote:
Originally Posted by econ21
After RTW, we were invited to submit some questions to CA and they did reply to them for the most part. They also nailed most of the early questions in my "game mechanics questions for CA" thread in the Ludus Magna.
Indeed sir, I do recall this. Therother and friends did an absolutely outstanding job with their research, I was a religious reader of that forum for the longest time.
Quote:
Originally Posted by econ21
One or two things - notably the combat formula and the derivation of the unit stats - CA did not want to get into the mathematical details of with RTW whereas they had provided that information with STW/MTW. They said they wanted to protect their intellectual property. I was disappointed by that, but can understand it as TW "clones" are more of a possibility now than in the STW/MTW era. One edge TW still has over the Imperial Glories, Marks of Chaos etc is in some of the hardcore wargaming elements in its battle model - morale, flanking, formation, terrain, weapon effects, weather, etc. Other companies can do battles with pretty 3D graphics but they often lack the depth of TWs combat resolution.
OK... While I completely understand CA's wish to protect their property, I, personally, think that argument is incredibly weak. We already know from MTW how a great deal of the mechanics work, both from them and guys like Puzz. I'd imagine quite a bit of the core equations have not changed very much at all, so if someone wanted to try and write a competing product they already have access to this knowledge.
The gist of what I'm looking for isn't "well it sorta does this", I'd like to know actual hard math behind the game. Therother came up with a good chart depicting squalor for M2... While that's outstanding and I believe it's as close to accurate as we can get, I'd still like to know how the game calculates it exactly. E.g. (citysize / distance from capital) - buildings that lower squalor... etc etc... You get the idea. There are a number of different ways one could do these calculations which aren't necessarily "wrong".
I guess I just want to see the hard math. I don't think that this would jeopardize CA's I.P. at all. We just want to understand how the game works, that's all.:book:
Quote:
Originally Posted by econ21
With M2TW, both the Org and CA are working to build closer relations - CAs inviting Orgahs to various events is evidence of this. This kind of relation could include stuff like us submitting questions about game mechanics. However, they are probably swamped with immediate post-release activities. I'll post again when I have more to report.
A certainly laudable effort. I can understand and agree about post-beta-release patching (friendly jab) and being swamped with it. Hopefully a few weeks down the road they can open up with us and get into some real detail.
As an aside... Any word on getting a Ludus Magna type forum for M2 yet? Our stickies are getting rather lengthy with lots of good info at this point.
Cheers!
