STW and WE are not the same game

[Puzz3D]

I advocate for STW v1.12 over Warlords Edition v1.02 in the Sword Dojo. I got this PM today from Sasaki Kojiro:

"The Sword Dojo is a place where people who like the game shogun come to post about it. It's not a venting ground for one patron to describe what he doesn't like about the game over and over in every post he makes. Such posts are off topic (bordering on spam) and deleted."

[Sasaki Kojiro]

Hi Puzz. As expressed in the pm, the dojo is not your personal venting ground. I don't remember the last time I saw you make a post that wasn't expressing dislike for WE, 1.02, CA's method of beta testing, or the MP community at the time. You have a habit of responding to someone saying in their campaign AAR "I just tried guns for the first time, powerful units" with a three paragraph diatribe about the balance of muskets in the 1.02 patch. It's off topic and negative spam.

Usually I just let it be, I don't think I've removed one of your posts before this, but I judged this to be a enough of a thread derail (the thread was started by Monk to encourage people to try shogun if they haven't) to warrant deletion:

Don't try to laugh it off. That's what I figured you'd do. There is nothing funny about it. It's a disservice to the patrons of the org to point them to that one particular version of the game here in the forum, and on the front page of this site when the original is still available. I don't care if you like that version better. The org never used to be a place that existed to serve a moderator's personal interest, but now it does?

[Togakure]

Do you still have the post that led to this? Was yours the only post deleted?

Hmm ... I'd like to know more about this. It doesn't seem like a good thing. Deleting posts ... were they offensive? Did they blatantly break Org rules? Or did they simply offer an opinion (again) that was irritating to some (again)--but this time, annoy someone with "power?"


"The Sword Dojo is a place where people who like the game shogun come to post about it. It's not a venting ground for one patron to describe what he doesn't like about the game over and over in every post he makes. Such posts are off topic (bordering on spam) and deleted."


Emphasis mine. Yeah, this reads like reaction after slow burn. I smelled smoke when I saw the post with a link to another comparison thread, but don't know if that was posted before or after this action was taken.

I think there was context to justify Puzz's (repeated) input on this subject. I and others offered counter-opinions. Opinions are what discussions are all about. Those of us that have been around have heard them before, but some who are new, haven't. I'm not seeing why the thread and Puzz's posts are such a problem to warrant this ... and I'm surprised because the staff taking action has generally had a "hands-off" approach to moderating.

Consider the contributions that this patron has made over the years--I can think of few individuals who have spent as much time, thought and energy on forwarding TW here at the org or elsewhere, aside from the game-makers themselves. Yeah, this is a private forum, and those in power can do anything they want. Ultimately, only their judgment matters when it comes to what happens or doesn't happen on this board. But I would hope in cases like this, there would be some due diligence.

What's up?

Edit: insert this before Sasaki's post--was writing this and didn't see his response until after.

Edit2: Ah ... now I can see the post in question. No further comments here.

[InsaneApache]

He's right though. The muskets were overpowered before the patch.

It is a long time ago, I'm surprised that it still winds you up.

[R'as al Ghul]

I think there was context to justify Puzz's (repeated) input on this subject. I and others offered counter-opinions. Opinions are what discussions are all about. Those of us that have been around have heard them before, but some who are new, haven't. I'm not seeing why the thread and Puzz's posts are such a problem to warrant this ... and I'm surprised because the staff taking action has generally had a "hands-off" approach to moderating.

Consider the contributions that this patron has made over the years--I can think of few individuals who have spent as much time, thought and energy on forwarding TW here at the org or elsewhere, aside from the game-makers themselves.

Exactly. I second that. And for the same reason I'm still quite irritated that his posts were deleted.

Sasaki, how could you consider Puzz3D's posts as spam? He posts his opinion about Shogun in the Sword dojo at totalwar.org. Isn't this the right place?

I don't remember the last time I saw you make a post that wasn't expressing dislike for WE, 1.02, CA's method of beta testing, or the MP community at the time.

Just because you don't remember or don't care doesn't mean it is true.
Frankly, the tone in your post comes across as patronising and arrogant. Maybe that is becuase I'm not a native speaker but I doubt so. "Usually I just let it be"?
You could've done better as a moderator in my opinion.
I still think that deleting his posts was wrong and would like to see them restored.

Voicing your opinion about products is fine, but grant each other some air. Some like STW 1.0, others like RTW 1.3, others look forward to ETW 1.0 or the expansionpack for that.

As Tosa says, it's perfectly valid to offer an opinion about a certain title.
If you, as a moderator, think it's getting off topic, there are a lot of things you can do. It should be the last action as a moderator to delete a post, not the first.
I you, as a member of this board, are of a different opinion or are annoyed by Puzz3D then you can always skip his posts.



R'as

[Sasaki Kojiro]

Exactly. I second that. And for the same reason I'm still quite irritated that his posts were deleted.

Sasaki, how could you consider Puzz3D's posts as spam? He posts his opinion about Shogun in the Sword dojo at totalwar.org. Isn't this the right place?

The sword dojo is not a personal venting ground. Any posts not deleted are things that are ok to post. The post that was deleted was enough of a crusade that it is outside the parameters of the forum, and would more properly be placed in the thread that I linked to for discussing which game is the best.

Don't try to laugh it off. That's what I figured you'd do. There is nothing funny about it. It's a disservice to the patrons of the org to point them to that one particular version of the game here in the forum, and on the front page of this site when the original is still available. I don't care if you like that version better. The org never used to be a place that existed to serve a moderator's personal interest, but now it does?

The tone is obviously upset and a thread derail seemed likely, so the post was removed.

Discussing the merits of one version versus the other is fine, the key word in my pm is "venting". Anger or emotion in posts discussing a version of a game that came out 8 years ago have no place here. Most of Puzz's posts appear to be venting, but I go for a more hands off style so I just let it be. However, the purpose of this particular thread was to encourage people to try a classic, not, as I've said, for venting.

[Puzz3D]

Hi Puzz. As expressed in the pm, the dojo is not your personal venting ground. I don't remember the last time I saw you make a post that wasn't expressing dislike for WE, 1.02, CA's method of beta testing, or the MP community at the time. You have a habit of responding to someone saying in their campaign AAR "I just tried guns for the first time, powerful units" with a three paragraph diatribe about the balance of muskets in the 1.02 patch. It's off topic and negative spam.

I point out a legitimate problem in Warlords to players who are unaware of it, and I try to give my reasons. The v1.02 units stats were not approved by 7 of the 8 members of that community rebalance beta team. CA took the stat submitted to them believing that it had been approved by the majority of the team. Even if you eliminate the two players who basically quit the team near the end, that still leaves 5 of 6 players not approving the stat. When you add in Erado San, who was the community liason and didn't participate in the testing, that still leaves 5 of 7 not approving. CA rejected the team's request to fix the problems in v1.02 with another rebalance effort. To this day CA labels that patch as a beta, but somehow it became incorporated into STW Gold which comes up as version v1.0. It's very misleading to new players who think that it's an officially approved stat. The problem shouldn't be glossed over in the Sword Dojo of all places.

The other major problem is that LongJohn, the designer of the battle field AI, did not work on the Mongol Invasion add-on. This resulted in stat choices that didn't fit the combat engine. For instance, the guns were given power = 16, but this parameter saturates at power = 8. Clearly, whoever was making the stat choices didn't know how the combat engine worked. This is why CA sought out a community based rebalance team. CA didn't have anyone who could do it. Unfortunately, the community beta team tried to change too many parameters instead of returning the parameters of the original Sengoku units to the values used in original STW and balancing the new units in MI to those. Also, the original ranged unit parameters were unknown to the beta team, and CA never did provide them despite requests to do so. Only much later with extensive testing on a LAN did I figure out the original ranged unit parameters.

[ReluctantSamurai]

I've been lurking this thread for a bit and now would like to add my 2cents.........

I was a late-comer to the STW scene and as such, never got to participate in all the MP games. I also never owned a copy of the original version.

To Puzz3D: while I do appreciate the effort you've put into this game (which speaks volumes for your love for it), it is still just a game. And the purpose of games, as I know it, are entertainment and fun and not necessarily to recreate history. Speaking from my own experience, I've gotten hundreds of hours of fun and entertainment out of STW/WE. That's also not to say that I've don't care for your POV....I've made changes to the unit stats as per your suggestions, and while this still may not bring them totally in line with the original, it is still better than leaving them as is.

As to the fantasy units....yes they may not have been modeled very well, but they provide an entertaining diversion to 'serious' historical campaigning when I get tired of that. And as has been mentioned, the variety of campaign dates provides replayability for me. I'm sure I'd get very bored with fighting the endless horde syndrome that the original seems to force. And if v1.12 difficulty is because the AI has no spending limit, how much better is that really?

The bottom line, for me, is the fun factor, and the replayability. That's what great games do for me and the fact that other gamers keep playing this great game (even though most are probably playing with the WE version) says much the same. If the WE version can still hold attraction for gamers even now, how can that possibly be a bad thing?

Perhaps over time they can be 'nudged' to be more 'historical' about it

[caravel]

To Puzz3D: while I do appreciate the effort you've put into this game (which speaks volumes for your love for it), it is still just a game. And the purpose of games, as I know it, are entertainment and fun and not necessarily to recreate history. Speaking from my own experience, I've gotten hundreds of hours of fun and entertainment out of STW/WE. That's also not to say that I've don't care for your POV....I've made changes to the unit stats as per your suggestions, and while this still may not bring them totally in line with the original, it is still better than leaving them as is.

I'm not sure there was any talk of "recreating history" here? The main issue being discussed was play balance, though I concur the changes to the unit stats improve the game no end, some players may prefer the game with the STW/MI 1.02b stats - each to his own. The good thing is that there are many different versions and for example if you and I wished to play an MP game all we would need is the same version of the game.

As to the fantasy units....yes they may not have been modeled very well, but they provide an entertaining diversion to 'serious' historical campaigning when I get tired of that. And as has been mentioned, the variety of campaign dates provides replayability for me. I'm sure I'd get very bored with fighting the endless horde syndrome that the original seems to force. And if v1.12 difficulty is because the AI has no spending limit, how much better is that really?

Personally I can deal with the Naginta Cavalry, Kensai and Battlefield Ninja because I never see that many for them to be a problem - what I've never liked is the Geisha - and this has been around since the first version of STW right through to MTW/VI 2.01 where it takes the form of the Inquisition. I could have lived with it if were easier to assassinate or if it were invisible and could be caught by counterspies but it's simply overpowered. In a recent campaign I played, the Geisha went for my royal line and wiped them out systematically. This is quite simply not needed and ruins a campaign. I also don't like the idea of the AI having unlimited wealth in the same way that I dislike AI morale bonus cheats.

The bottom line, for me, is the fun factor, and the replayability. That's what great games do for me and the fact that other gamers keep playing this great game (even though most are probably playing with the WE version) says much the same. If the WE version can still hold attraction for gamers even now, how can that possibly be a bad thing?

Indeed and the problems with comparing one TW game with another is, where do you stop? We can go on about MTW vs RTW, then move onto STW vs MTW and then on to STW vs WE/MI. Perfection will never be achieved. Good results have been had through modding, though modding can't do much for AI and other hardcoded limits.

Also when we compare TW games in a way that rubbishes STW or mocks M2TW etc, etc, we risk alienating people for no good reason. This polarises them against us and ensures that they will never see our side of things. The important thing to remember is that they enjoy these games. Diplomacy is key.

It's all a matter of opinion I expect, also it depends on what someone is looking for in the game and how they approach it. Because someone else approaches the TW series from a different angle and tries to get something different from it than say a STW and MTW Single Player like myself, it doesn't make them wrong. It doesn't mean that they need to be trotted down to the re-education camp and given a good talking to. There are also a lot of stereotypes to be found. Just because someone is an SP player, does not mean that they don't care about battles having a tactical edge to them. It also does not mean that they prefer the RTW style campaign map over the old risk map. Everyone likes different things. Some like role play and historical accuracy, others like near perfect game balance, tactics and less emphasis on historical accuracy. There are many more who like differing quantities of these.

I can see the merits in all of the games. Of course there is one in particular that I can't stand, but I keep that to myself. STW I fire up every once in a while, just to relive some old times. MTW/VI is pretty much my main focus still. There are many good mods available for it also. Mods to suit every kind of player in fact. It's a shame that few get the recognition they deserve. RTW is not a bad game once patched up to v1.5, no it's not historically accurate but that's not an issue for me. We are all aware by now of the play balance and AI issues of RTW. Still it's not a bad "chill out" game and a good stress reliever in fact. For when you don't feel like thinking or just want to play a lot of sieges RTW is ok. There is a mod in development for RTW called "Ran No Jidai", this is probably the only mod for RTW that interests me at present. It's a pity that it is still not finished.

The next TW game has now been released and so far I am seeing mixed reports, though the AI and other facets of the gameplay are being praised. If CA can get it right this time and get the game patched quickly (which the Steam platform allows for) and without silly limits to the number of patches allowed then there is still hope for the TW series. RTW was a rebuild from the ground up and M2TW was based on this as we are all aware. Both of these games have been serious undertakings in terms of coding so it's obvious that there were going to be a lot of issues. Let us hope some (many) more of these issues have been ironed out with the release of ETW and that the series will begin to improve.

[Wishazu]

I'm not sure there was any talk of "recreating history" here? The main issue being discussed was play balance, though I concur the changes to the unit stats improve the game no end, some players may prefer the game with the STW/MI 1.02b stats - each to his own. The good thing is that there are many different versions and for example if you and I wished to play an MP game all we would need is the same version of the game.


Personally I can deal with the Naginta Cavalry, Kensai and Battlefield Ninja because I never see that many for them to be a problem - what I've never liked is the Geisha - and this has been around since the first version of STW right through to MTW/VI 2.01 where it takes the form of the Inquisition. I could have lived with it if were easier to assassinate or if it were invisible and could be caught by counterspies but it's simply overpowered. In a recent campaign I played, the Geisha went for my royal line and wiped them out systematically. This is quite simply not needed and ruins a campaign. I also don't like the idea of the AI having unlimited wealth in the same way that I dislike AI morale bonus cheats.


Indeed and the problems with comparing one TW game with another is, where do you stop? We can go on about MTW vs RTW, then move onto STW vs MTW and then on to STW vs WE/MI. Perfection will never be achieved. Good results have been had through modding, though modding can't do much for AI and other hardcoded limits.

Also when we compare TW games in a way that rubbishes STW or mocks M2TW etc, etc, we risk alienating people for no good reason. This polarises them against us and ensures that they will never see our side of things. The important thing to remember is that they enjoy these games. Diplomacy is key.

It's all a matter of opinion I expect, also it depends on what someone is looking for in the game and how they approach it. Because someone else approaches the TW series from a different angle and tries to get something different from it than say a STW and MTW Single Player like myself, it doesn't make them wrong. It doesn't mean that they need to be trotted down to the re-education camp and given a good talking to. There are also a lot of stereotypes to be found. Just because someone is an SP player, does not mean that they don't care about battles having a tactical edge to them. It also does not mean that they prefer the RTW style campaign map over the old risk map. Everyone likes different things. Some like role play and historical accuracy, others like near perfect game balance, tactics and less emphasis on historical accuracy. There are many more who like differing quantities of these.

I can see the merits in all of the games. Of course there is one in particular that I can't stand, but I keep that to myself. STW I fire up every once in a while, just to relive some old times. MTW/VI is pretty much my main focus still. There are many good mods available for it also. Mods to suit every kind of player in fact. It's a shame that few get the recognition they deserve. RTW is not a bad game once patched up to v1.5, no it's not historically accurate but that's not an issue for me. We are all aware by now of the play balance and AI issues of RTW. Still it's not a bad "chill out" game and a good stress reliever in fact. For when you don't feel like thinking or just want to play a lot of sieges RTW is ok. There is a mod in development for RTW called "Ran No Jidai", this is probably the only mod for RTW that interests me at present. It's a pity that it is still not finished.

The next TW game has now been released and so far I am seeing mixed reports, though the AI and other facets of the gameplay are being praised. If CA can get it right this time and get the game patched quickly (which the Steam platform allows for) and without silly limits to the number of patches allowed then there is still hope for the TW series. RTW was a rebuild from the ground up and M2TW was based on this as we are all aware. Both of these games have been serious undertakings in terms of coding so it's obvious that there were going to be a lot of issues. Let us hope some (many) more of these issues have been ironed out with the release of ETW and that the series will begin to improve.

You took the words right out of my mouth. :)

[ReluctantSamurai]

I'm not sure there was any talk of "recreating history" here?

Perhaps 'recreating history' was a bad way to phrase it

What I meant was that I understand Puzz's drive for unit balance, proper unit stats, and challenging gameplay. I, myself, am a mod for an old WWII game, and I said many of the same things about that game that Puzz says about this one. And I learned the hard way that pushing my ideas on someone else just makes them less likely to listen to them, as you have said.

Let us hope some (many) more of these issues have been ironed out with the release of ETW and that the series will begin to improve.

[Grimoire]

I've just been watching this:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=544OwlHM7Ao

and its sequels. Fascinating.

I have been playing the Warlords Edition in a fumbled manner, but since reading about the "reservations" concerning the game balance, I have been inspired to get back to the original...so. I've got it. I've patched up to 1.12 and I'm hoping to get into it. I'm even playing the tutorial.

It certainly has a different feel, right from the word go. And there is a certain affection expressed by the gentleman in the video on Youtube for this particular version, it seems

Just thought I'd add a bit.

[minishog]

To play/install the original S:TW do you have to uninstall the warlords edition?

[Togakure]

Id' think that if you install it to a different location it'd be fine. I never bothered with STW, but I've had three versions of MTW/VI installed at the same time.

[Tony Furze]

Both STW and STW ME can go into the same Total War folder-they're labelled differently.

Masamune: I'd really like one of your MTW/VIs! I just can't install it on my new Vista OS computer!

[Togakure]

...
Masamune: I'd really like one of your MTW/VIs! I just can't install it on my new Vista OS computer!

? Well, I can't play any form of MTW1 campaign on my current computer, which I've had for almost three years now. It crashes to the desktop as soon as the campaign map loads. The three installs I've had on here at once were for playing MP--MTW-VI, Samurai Warlords Beta 5, and SW Beta 8/8.1. I've since removed the VI install as I lost interest in playing that online.

[thip]

Masamune, if MTW1 is locking up on campaign map loads, the problem is probably due to anti aliiasing. Manually change the settings to 2x and it will work fine. i know as i had the same problem.

[Togakure]

Masamune, if MTW1 is locking up on campaign map loads, the problem is probably due to anti aliiasing. Manually change the settings to 2x and it will work fine. i know as i had the same problem.

Hey thanks thip, I'll give that a try. I was just thinking it'd be fun to play a VI campaign as it's been about four years or so. Plus, if this resolves the issue I can finally try the Samurai Warlords SP campaign.

[thip]

No problems Masamune. I was annoyed when I got a new video card and the CTD issue started to happen and I thought there would be no more MTW. But oddly Shogun still worked fine. Luckily the fix is simple.
As a side note, after reading this thread I decided to get a copy of the original Shogun. I bought one for $10 on e bay last night. Can't wait to face The Horde and unstoppable Geisha...lol.

[thip]

and boy, is it hard. Much harder than MI. Totally different...

[minishog]

Just to give belated thanks to people for answering my previous question. I posted it, meant to check back, then forgot all about it. Deeply embarrassed - sorry.

[Erado San]

When you add in Erado San, who was the community liason and didn't participate in the testing, that still leaves 5 of 7 not approving

Ah, good memories and mixed feelings, much the same as Puzz explained above. Hi mate, good to see you again, still holding on to your valid points. And while I didn't participate in the incredible amount of testing that you and the others did, you did show me the end result, explained why it shouldn't be the end result, and if you remember the mails I sent, you know I fully agreed with you guys, so make that 6 not approving.

I just wish they'd given us one more frigging week to work out the problem. I know it would have worked out, and everybody would have benefited from them, and judging by this discussion, still would be benefiting.

In the end it's all about what you enjoy most. And for that matter, discussions with a sting should be fine, depending on the sharpness of the sting. Boy do I remember that...

But for what it's worth: it's been years since those testing days. The knowledge gained by that testing gave us, and in the end the entire community, a hell of a lot of information that found it's way into mods. That very patch, while in some ways disastrous, helped a long way. Most people aren't probably aware of it, but whether you like it or not, whether you can take a sting in a discussion or not, whether you prefer STW or WE, you and the other testers still deserve a hell of a lot more credit than you ever got. And don't count me in, after all I was just the community liaison :)

Cheers Puzz

:bow

[Puzz3D]

I just wish they'd given us one more frigging week to work out the problem. I know it would have worked out, and everybody would have benefited from them, and judging by this discussion, still would be benefiting.

Hi Erado San. I hope you are well.

The 3 day extension that you secured for us was very important, but in the end I compromised to get a power reduction on guns from 5 to 4. What I wanted was power 3 which is the stat that most of the team tested an approved. However, I've come to realize that the whole idea of reducing the back kills from guns was misguided and also wasted a lot of time. The back kills are a very important feature of the tactical dynamics because it forces the player to place his guns far enough in front of his infantry to allow the possibility of attack by cavalry. The original STW design was simple and yet brilliant. Muskets had an open fire range of 100 meters. The back kill range was 50 meters beyond that. Heavy cavalry had a run speed of 20 and yari cavalry a run speed of 24. Charge speed was the same as the run speed. The anti-cav spears, yari samurai and yari ashigaru, had run speeds of 10 and 12. You can see that yari samurai standing 50 meters behind a musket has just enough time to intercept a charging heavy cav that has been standing just beyond the musket's range of 100 meters. The same is true of the yari cav/yari ashigaru matchup. An inattentive player will have his muskets nailed by cavalry while the attentive player can just barely defend them. The muskets are not strong enough to repell a cavalry attack by themselves. The design is so precise that there is no way to improve it. When the v1.2 beta team decided to alter the movement speed of the units they destroyed the dynamic balance. Making the guns more powerfull on the target unit than even in STW/MI v1.0 exacerbated the imbalance, and made guns the deciding factor in a battle. In essence, STW was turned into Projectile Wars. I can play a WWII game if I want that kind of gameplay.

In the end it's all about what you enjoy most.

I agree to the extent that many players are happy with unbalanced games, but I disagree for myself and those who want balanced gameplay. The units fit into a combat system and represent a mathematical problem which I think has a unique solution. As a friend has recently said to me, " The enemy of good is better.", meaning that attempting to make something that is already good better often results in making it worse. The mistake the beta team made was thinking that they could make the tactical gameplay substantially better than the original game. In fact, the only improvements you can make on the original STW tactical gameplay are changing the cost of monks from 500 to 550 (they are 10% overpowered), moving one combat point of the heavy cavalry from defense to offense, making muskets shoot in the rain and possibly making guns slightly stronger. The mandate of the community to that beta team was to restore the original STW gameplay. The beta team got carried away, and lost sight of this mandate.

But for what it's worth: it's been years since those testing days. The knowledge gained by that testing gave us, and in the end the entire community, a hell of a lot of information that found it's way into mods. That very patch, while in some ways disastrous, helped a long way. Most people aren't probably aware of it, but whether you like it or not, whether you can take a sting in a discussion or not, whether you prefer STW or WE, you and the other testers still deserve a hell of a lot more credit than you ever got. And don't count me in, after all I was just the community liaison :)

Cheers Puzz

The knowledge gained has been applied to Samurai Wars. We also had about a dozen of the top players in STW test Samurai Wars, and we incorporated their suggestions and fixed the problems that they uncovered.

I wasn't after recognition. What I wanted was to provide the comminty with the most balanced gameplay, and I recognized the elegance of the original design not just in the combat system which is brilliant, but in the precision with which the values of the various parameters were chosen. It's important to get those values right. When you get them right, the tactial dynamics blossom into a huge variety of possibilities. When those parameter values are less than optimal, the tactical dynamics become more limited. Original STW was played with no purchase limitations on unit types. Players could be successful with almost any kind of army, and yet any kind of army could also be defeated. This dynamic existed between closely matched players, and it was not a consequence of excessive randomness in the combat system. In fact, STW has less uncertainty in the combat system than any other TW game.

[Erado San]

The design is so precise that there is no way to improve it. When the v1.2 beta team decided to alter the movement speed of the units they destroyed the dynamic balance. Making the guns more powerfull on the target unit than even in STW/MI v1.0 exacerbated the imbalance, and made guns the deciding factor in a battle. In essence, STW was turned into Projectile Wars.

Yep, it's what I mean when I say in some ways that patch was disastrous. After a while I realized we tried the wrong things for the right reasons and ended up somewhere in the middle. The compromise.

I agree to the extent that many players are happy with unbalanced games, but I disagree for myself and those who want balanced gameplay.

Well put. Couldn't agree more with you there.

In fact, the only improvements you can make on the original STW tactical gameplay are changing the cost of monks from 500 to 550 (they are 10% overpowered), moving one combat point of the heavy cavalry from defense to offense, making muskets shoot in the rain and possibly making guns slightly stronger.

Something like that, yes. That is, for what it's worth, probably the most balanced setup and leaves most room for proper tactics and gameplay.

The mandate of the community to that beta team was to restore the original STW gameplay. The beta team got carried away, and lost sight of this mandate.

It was only during the testing that we learned how intricate the system really was. We had some very weird and unexpected results when we meddled with mechanics we didn't fully understand and CA wouldn't or couldn't explain. Looking back it's always easy to see where we took the wrong turn. 2 days break to reflect on what we had learned and 5 more days to work out what was needed. I think that would have sufficed, but who's to tell?

I wasn't after recognition.

No, you never were. None of us were. Doesn't mean we don't deserve some though.

Still think we did well, certainly tried hard enough. We did make a good improvement over what we started out with, but no, we didn't reach our real goal.