M2TW vs RTW

[Fate]

I've gotta agree with Timoleon the Brave, RTW is an absoloutely fantastic game, i bought it about 3 years ago, and havent stopped playing it since. In all seriousness ive completed about 50 campaigns on it (but still never taken themyskyra, or however the hell its spelt, the amazonian settlement). And many many more on some of the fantastic modifications for the game.
My view is however biased by the fact that i have never played M2TW, solely because i didnt wanna waste money on a highly buggy rushed out game. Im glad to see the CA have dropped by Empire again. More time = better game!

Still, even if you dont really enjoy the time period of Rome, its worth a play for the hours of enjoyment it will give you at what is now an absoloutely bargainous price.

[Flying Pig]

The best games in the world are RTW mods, although with EB2 that may change. Still, LOTRTW won't port (to my knowledge) and FATW is still a BI mod for the forseeable future. Also, Hplites and legionaries are something that few other changes can really replace.

[Xipe Totec]

I should perhaps add that I consider M2TW to be the second best game ever released, and would probably play it endlessly if I hadn't already got bitten by the RTW bug. It's also true that there are many flaws in RTW, but I know that if I had to choose between never playing RTW again and never playing every other game I have ever bought (that's a lot!) again, I'd keep the RTW without a moment's hesitation.

In the final analysis I am more interested in the time period RTW is set in. The flowering of classical civilisations clashing with barbarian cultures in Europe is more interesting to me than the nauseating religious conflict between Church and Mosque which drags on interminably even in the modern world.

Like any good general I like to go to any lengths to minimise losses to my men in the pursuit of victory, as if they were real people (don't mock - it's all part of getting the most out of the game for me). I find it much harder to keep casualties down in M2TW and more difficult to pull off an unexpected victory defending a settlement against the odds. Victory is inevitable most times you fight, as it should be if you are doing it right, but I still get much satisfaction from winning with lighter casualties than expected.

I have played and enjoyed many campaigns of M2TW and Kingdoms but I never develop any love for my generals and usually tire of the mutual annihilation battles and annoying heretics / inquisitors / merchants / assassins / heck even princesses steal my King's favourite sons and turn them into enemies! I prefer the gameplay of RTW even if M2TW is more sophisticated and realistic. Many of the added features are maybe just needless distractions and delays to the progress of the game. Maybe one day we will see an R2TW or an S2TW so I can tell if I just don't like being Medieval?

Apologies to die-hard fans of M2TW for all the negatives, but elephants with cannons on their backs is just too silly to be true!

[Quirinus]

My view is however biased by the fact that i have never played M2TW, solely because i didnt wanna waste money on a highly buggy rushed out game.

lol, to offer an understatement, the 1.0 version of RTW isn't exactly bug-free.......

[G^2]

Personally, I like M2TW better than RTW. To me there essentially the same game, one just has better graphics, more agents, and is in medieval rather than classical times. I really enjoy the merchants, princesses and even the diplomacy involved with M2TW. I also enjoy the by-play between the Catholic factions and the pope, which I feel does a reasonable job of capturing the tension between the Church and the emerging nation states. Although, I will say that M2TW didn’t shine for me until Kingdoms and moding. Vanilla Grand Campaign is simply too dull without mods to better AI and diplomacy (which is why I play Stainless Steel).

As for Rome it’s the same game without some of the features. I played EB, which was pretty fun and made the game a lot more interesting, but at the end of the day I would rather see my armored knights than legions of hopolites (sp?). I simply find medieval times more interesting than classical which is why I probably like M2TW better.

So I guess if you are interested in classical times get Rome. It’s cheap now and worth the money, mod it to EB or one of the other great mods for it. MTW and STW were better games for their time though in my opinion. I played MTW with almost every faction and no mods because it was that good and challenging of a game.

[Rhyfelwyr]

There's not a huge difference between M2 and RTW, it just depends which timeframe you prefer.

M2TW has much better diplomacy, significantly better graphics, and many more features such as Crusading, the Pope, the Mongol invasion etc.

But I've just returned to RTW. It feels nostalgic for me since I used to just muck about on it when I was younger, managing battles as if it was Age of Empires.

But now I am playing it more properly, it is a very fun game. Although the lack of significant events (eg Mongol invasion, discovering Americas etc), means that campaigns can drag on. Also it seems to take longer to get high level units since I can't just stick a high chivalry governor in a castle.

But characters age properly in RTW (and live longer and don't all die between 60-62), which is good.