Ladder

**tibilicus** · 03-07-2009, 13:20

Originally Posted by pevergreen

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?

**PanzerJaeger** · 03-09-2009, 01:57

Originally Posted by tibilicus

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** · 03-09-2009, 03:00

Hmm

No spaHmm please - Andres.

**Andres** · 03-09-2009, 12:38

Question asked by OP; several answers given.

Thread has served its' purpose and can be locked.

Thank you for all helpful contributions.

As an aside: I don't mind people comparing older TW instalments with newer ones, but I'd prefer to see it in a seperate thread dedicated to that.

Often threads derail into such comparisons and the initial concern of the OP gets forgotten.

Sometimes, like in this thread, the initial question does get answered, but the thread continues in an off topic discussion about [insert TW game of your choice] is better than [insert other TW game].

I know that's just forum chemistry, but a thread with title X that contains alot of elaborate posts about anything but X is annoying for the occasional reader looking for specific information.

Hence, question asked - answer given - thread locked.

**Andres** · 03-09-2009, 13:10

Re-opened at the request of Paolai

1) Is there a "ladder" in the true meaning of the word ("ladder" as in (courtesy to Wiki, since your local moderator had to look up a definition

) : a series of ranking levels used to measure playing skill in competitive games.) and if so, where can it be found?)
2) It appears that in MP you can choose for Ladder matches and Friendly matches. The OP feels that there is something wrong and would like to know why you can choose between ladder matches and friendly matches if there is (apparently) not a "ladder" in the true meaning of the word.

**Paolai** · 03-09-2009, 13:12

Thank you Andres :o)

**Mars** · 03-09-2009, 16:54

Well, its not easy to stick to a topic with such a question 100%. Lots of things are involved.

Else this would be only one answer with a: "No there is no ladder".

For me the question is: Why we need a ladder?

or

Where is the benefit?

Maybe its worth to look at the long time of TW-gaming and compare. In STW/MI we had both times a ladder. What we could see, was in many cases a fight for the ladder. You could see Solo-player and also teams.
Majority did only care for the Soloplayer, this did lead into many 1v1 games played.

Also, people did need "food", which was new player. You can say, that many new player had quite a high chance to get a game real quick.

Now move forward to MTW, there was no ladder and with time the majority of games was played 4v4 and many of them was closed with pass. No side did want a new player in his ranks. Its hard to say how many new player did check online once and never came back. Imo it was impossible to get games as new player.

A ladder will clearly move more towards "STW-times", it will be a lot easyer for new player and thats what this game need!

Cheating as we saw in STW-times will be harder, not impossible, but harder.
There is a lot what could be done to improve the system, today its surely not hard to add more stats to the ladder, to make it easyer to filter.
How about player who defend and sit on a hill 99 out of 100 games?!? I love to see this in stats, there should be extra "points" if ur attacker, points for really roll ur enemy....

Koc