Ladder

[Paolai]

CA told us that there is a ladder for MP. Anyone knows where is it? How it works? I think that there are just personal stats and not a real ladder. I wonder why CA called personal stats "ladder".

Thx in advance.

[Sp00n]

Winks at Paolai, I'd like to know thw answer to this also please if anyone know?

[ELITEofWARMANGINGERYBREADMEN88]

Nope, me don't Paolai. It looks more like Players Stats to me then a actual Ranking/Ladder system.

[RTKBarrett]

The game is a massive dissapointment already... its so limited

[Kenchi_Sulla]

I am not sure about this ladder/stats thing.... Ofcourse, I do not really care about it so that could explain my ignorance :D... Heart of TW is tournaments imo, not single game stats/ladders.

[RTKBarrett]

Yes but again like many things that have been previously advertised... this has not been delivered. Lies and deceit will only go so far...

[Paolai]

Yes, I would like to know if CA lied about the ladder or not

and

I would like to know then the difference between comp games and friendly ones

and

Why CA called personal stats: ladder.

Im getting old, I am very curiosus

[Mars]

Amazing, there is no ladder. But, same as the online-campaing, it prolly will get delivered with a patch someday. ;)

[Paolai]

weird thing is that there are competitive games and friendly ones

[Swoosh So]

Probably will say they will tag on at a later date, been reading the steam forums and the people there say steam have never advertised leagues and ladders and that it was only sega that promised it on their page.

I know some rts games use automatch compeditive to define your stats not sure how it works in empire totalwar.

[Monarch]

The game is a massive dissapointment

Surprised?

[Kenchi_Sulla]

Monarch, what do you find lacking in the game?

[tibilicus]

I echo the limitations. Whilst I still can't play due to steam and my firewall being stubborn as I can tell it's going to be limited by seeing there is only a maximum of what, 8 infantry units? It's simply limiting game play to the same tactics as well as creating the same generic army builds.


Take Rome and BI for example, you had a range of factions and units each varying to such a degree that it created dynamics in the tactical game play. For example a faction like Lombardy would be a threat because of their armour piercing axemen, you would then have to change your tactics to adapt to that faction. For example you couldn't use your usual Saxons army as you would get eaten alive, you would have to adapt and change. Bear in mind this example might be a bit outdated as Rome/BI was a while back and my memory is vague.

Anyway you get my point, limiting the variation in factions and units makes for awfully similar game play and takes out a huge tactical side to the game. I'm all for making things balanced but that shouldn't mean cutting things down.

[pevergreen]

I echo the limitations. Whilst I still can't play due to steam and my firewall being stubborn as I can tell it's going to be limited by seeing there is only a maximum of what, 8 infantry units? It's simply limiting game play to the same tactics as well as creating the same generic army builds.

To my understanding, wasnt Shogun like this?

This game acurately reflects the time period. If you don't like it, why would you buy it?

Its about tactics, not uber units.

[tibilicus]

To my understanding, wasnt Shogun like this?

And that would be a step back to what, 1999? You get all these people ranting and raving about how great shogun was but for someone who likes to see the continuous development of games why on earth would I want that? If I wanted to play Shogun I would buy it on the cheap and play on one of the servers which are hosted, I want play a game that will bring something new to the table.

This game accurately reflects the time period. If you don't like it, why would you buy it?

Its about tactics, not uber units.

It may accurately reflect the time period but that's still no reason to limit the game down. And from what im picking up from people I know and the two MP games my firewall would actually let me play is that the "tactics" so far consist of spamming mortars and line infantry, never knew that was the tactic of the day. Oh and when I say spam, I mean spam. There is also an incredibly low number of maps which limits game play further and again takes out diversity.

And before you ask why would you buy it I purchased the game for the SP and MP. I'm not saying the MP is bad I'm just stating it lacks the diversity of previous total war games. I can tell you right now that by taking away the feature of unique unit builds for certain factions your really slashing the tactical depth on half. After all, who's really interested in playing another battle on province where enemy camps on a hill with 5 mortars?

[Monarch]

To my understanding, wasnt Shogun like this?

This game acurately reflects the time period. If you don't like it, why would you buy it?
.

I'm looking for a game, not a historical reenactment.

[tgi01]

I ve played some ranked battles , and you receive and lose points when you win or loose ...

but i have no idea how to access the info online .... and havent found any refernces to it so far ...

so there is ranking data somewhere but ...

weird ...

Im only hosting ranked battles with no mortars right now its easier to get decent opponents ...

TGI

[robpa]

I ask you all to please visit: globalwf.com

I am an administrator there and If 20 or more of you would like me to Start a ladder I will do it. I will also discuss with you what you would like, maybe we could start it out with a tourny then start the ladder system? I do not post here much but I have been playing Total war since Shogun and I have played every game and expansion and even some of the mod packs here. I was offered the position of Game Manager on globalwf.com. We have around 2500 Active players on our ladders. With the Help of you guys I will start an Empire: Total War ladder. I am also willing to Have a Tournament as a Kickoff to the Total War Ladder. We would give prizes for the top 4 players etc.. Im not talking dumb stuff either, for our tournies we have given away computers, gaming Mouse's etc etc. I just need some support from you guys and I will set this ladder and have this tourny for you. I am a very fair game manager and Will have endless discussion with you guys on what you want. Anyone who is interested please reply to this Topic or Xfire me: robpa82

I have the resources to Give you guys your own Ladder with your own rules. Xfire me, or even Email me if you would like to help organizing or if it would be even worth it to do this. I dont know if there are total war clans out there ETC so get in touch with me. Remember, its Globalwf.com We have an excelelntly programmed ladder system. I would also be looking for ladder assistants to help me out so lets try and do this!


xfire: robpa82
email:robpanotch82@yahoo.com

[Monarch]

Monarch, what do you find lacking in the game?

My issues are different to Baz's, in that they mainly focus on the lobby/network rather than gameplay, As someone who cba with the competitive side anymore I think the game play is pretty fun (except of course for bs mortars, my ally had his general sniped literally after 10 seconds of play earlier. Grenadiers are a joke too.) Keep in mind though I've played a 2v2 and two 4v4s...I'm sure as (or if) I play more I'll find some issues.

The main issue is the online system, lobby, coding or w/e it is is absolute trash. Had a group of four people today on teamspeak ready to play some games. One cannot join any games unless I host, then he gets booted if people join. Weirdly, I can't join his games. The other two cannot join each others games, they can join my game and be in the same game that way. Not all the time though, sometimes they fail to join. It also takes 15 minutes plus to get a 4v4 going, which bring me to my next point...why the bloody hell isn't there a 3v3 map? Also tried a 2v2, one time as soon as we finally go a game we got a desync error. Next issue is I can't find a list of people online and theres certainly not a lobby chat, please don't suggest steam groups, thats a work-around to a problem, it's not a good alternative. I mean are CA just trying to annoy people or they just that lazy? All four of us regularly play games online btw, why is Total War's system so absolutely terrible.

Edit: Just had another game. Crashed after about 10,15 minutes. Was just about to uber double team the frenchies. lulz.

[gollum]

Originally posted by Tibilicus
I echo the limitations. Whilst I still can't play due to steam and my firewall being stubborn as I can tell it's going to be limited by seeing there is only a maximum of what, 8 infantry units? It's simply limiting game play to the same tactics as well as creating the same generic army builds.

Take Rome and BI for example, you had a range of factions and units each varying to such a degree that it created dynamics in the tactical game play. For example a faction like Lombardy would be a threat because of their armour piercing axemen, you would then have to change your tactics to adapt to that faction. For example you couldn't use your usual Saxons army as you would get eaten alive, you would have to adapt and change. Bear in mind this example might be a bit outdated as Rome/BI was a while back and my memory is vague.

Anyway you get my point, limiting the variation in factions and units makes for awfully similar game play and takes out a huge tactical side to the game. I'm all for making things balanced but that shouldn't mean cutting things down.

Playing a bit longer with *generic* factions and army builds might prove more fun than you ve thought - i dont think that the tactical gameplay is limited, rather the gameplay of *matching army selection* is. They are not the same thing in my book. You might be surprised that the *generic* can give rise to the *diverse* if you give it sometime with an open mind.

Originally posted by Monarch
I'm looking for a game, not a historical reenactment.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Empire_total_war

It says *its a real time tactics and... computer game* so i guess you got the right thing, and from what you say it seems you like it already.

[Wolf_Kyolic]

My issues are different to Baz's, in that they mainly focus on the lobby/network rather than gameplay, As someone who cba with the competitive side anymore I think the game play is pretty fun (except of course for bs mortars, my ally had his general sniped literally after 10 seconds of play earlier. Grenadiers are a joke too.) Keep in mind though I've played a 2v2 and two 4v4s...I'm sure as (or if) I play more I'll find some issues.

The main issue is the online system, lobby, coding or w/e it is is absolute trash. Had a group of four people today on teamspeak ready to play some games. One cannot join any games unless I host, then he gets booted if people join. Weirdly, I can't join his games. The other two cannot join each others games, they can join my game and be in the same game that way. Not all the time though, sometimes they fail to join. It also takes 15 minutes plus to get a 4v4 going, which bring me to my next point...why the bloody hell isn't there a 3v3 map? Also tried a 2v2, one time as soon as we finally go a game we got a desync error. Next issue is I can't find a list of people online and theres certainly not a lobby chat, please don't suggest steam groups, thats a work-around to a problem, it's not a good alternative. I mean are CA just trying to annoy people or they just that lazy? All four of us regularly play games online btw, why is Total War's system so absolutely terrible.

Edit: Just had another game. Crashed after about 10,15 minutes. Was just about to uber double team the frenchies. lulz.

Hmm weird. Actually TW series after MTW are known to have perfect MP. CA fails this time?

[Andres]

Hmm weird. Actually TW series after MTW are known to have perfect MP. CA fails this time?

Some people prefer STW/MTW over the newer totalwar instalments, other people prefer the newer instalments over STW/MTW.

De gustibus et coloribus non disputandum est

Let's not derail this thread to a pointless discussion about tastes and preferences.

[Wolf_Kyolic]

I was reffering to the HORRIBLE MP experiences after MTW. Not the game itself which is a whole different story.

[Tomisama]

I was reffering to the HORRIBLE MP experiences after MTW. Not the game itself which is a whole different story.

Not sure if you are talking specifically talking about the lobby conduct deterioration that emerged with the release of Rome, but it was a major issue for others and myself.

Many folks quit playing because the lobby was so full of disgusting banter and ferocious bulling. The Org multiplayer community response was to form a code of conduct, which is still collecting signers today.

No-lobby is a blessing to me. I can pick who I want to associate with, and not have to put up with or witness the abuse by moronic sociopathic misfits.

I’m here to play the game and have fun, that’s all!

(Sorry, getting off topic here should be ladder not lobby. )

[t1master]

who was the guy who was always spamming maek big mani game!!! 99999k sometimes the lobby was good for a laugh.

[ELITEofWARMANGINGERYBREADMEN88]

Not sure if you are talking specifically talking about the lobby conduct deterioration that emerged with the release of Rome, but it was a major issue for others and myself.

Many folks quit playing because the lobby was so full of disgusting banter and ferocious bulling. The Org multiplayer community response was to form a code of conduct, which is still collecting signers today.

No-lobby is a blessing to me. I can pick who I want to associate with, and not have to put up with or witness the abuse by moronic sociopathic misfits.

I’m here to play the game and have fun, that’s all!

(Sorry, getting off topic here should be ladder not lobby. )

Argeed Tomi on all points but the lobby. I think gameplay had something to do with it of course, but conduct was another thing also.


But having no-lobby doesn't make sense. I don't know how many people are on and who is on. I can't just go on Steam and check our social groups and see. Most of them are on SP, so it doesn't do us not one bit of good.


Just my 2 cents .



I am still awaiting a answer from CA/SEGA about this Ladder/Ranking system. From the info I gathered, maybe they mislead us?

[Kalle]

The ladder system seems to be, as TGI states, based on certain games being set to status ranked by the host.

So the host can choose if a battle should be counted towards the ranking or not.

Winning these ranked games gives you some kind of prestige that other players can see at least when you are hosting a game. The more stars besides the name of the host the higher rank, at least thats how i understand it.

Win vs someone with more stars and you probably raise your own stars aswell, it happened to me today .

So far I can only see other players stars when they are hosting. Do not know if possible somewhere else. Also I do not know how many stars is possible to have and there are of course other questions to be asked regarding this also.

A ladder I would not call it.

About the chat and lobby. Steam gives the possibility to have the private chatrooms and gatherings that was asked for by the veterans of shogun during the whole mtw/vi-era so that is very good I think. You can set up a game, chat with the selected people you want to play with and host and invite only these people.

BUT, it would still be very good to have a functioning lobbychat in addition to this I think.

Kalle

[tgi01]

Actually you get 5 stars very quickly ( like 5 ranked battles wins ) in some weird way you reciev like 6300 points for the first 5 wins so you land around 32000 after 5 battles after that you receive a cpl of hundred if you win a ranked game (the amount varias between 70 - 250 depending on sumthin I dont know what ...) .. you also receive the win and some points if your opponent quits ...( havent seen many drops just quits so far )

The statistics page is at least good for keeping track of how many games you played won / lost ranked / nonranked ...

And remember the steam feature players where you can see the names of the ppl you played with
so if you want to talk to some1 afterwards you can add them to steam friends ...

TGI

[PanzerJaeger]

And that would be a step back to what, 1999? You get all these people ranting and raving about how great shogun was but for someone who likes to see the continuous development of games why on earth would I want that?

All the Shogun engine needed to bring it up to date was a graphical overhaul. The gameplay was far superior to anything CA has put out since.

De gustibus et coloribus non disputandum est - no pointless discussions please - Andres.

[FearofFucy]

Hmm

No spaHmm please - Andres.