Has anything really changed from CA?

[ReluctantSamurai]

I've bought every TW titles so far, but this will probably be the last one, you can only get treated like a idiot so often.

I reached that point with M2 and gave it away to a friend...........RTW only gets played because of all the mods, and the only one that gets played with any regularity is Samurai Warlords...........

I have tried to figure out why some things are ignored or even changes from the historical without much reason behind it.

I do not mind ahistorical units or situations that may be placed in a game. They can make for fun diversions when you get tired of the same old, same old. But there should be in-game functions to turn them off when you don't want them.

The other driving force behind a lot of these changes is of course the multi-player sub-game. Something that I don't have the slightest interest in and will never play but seems to be 'the tail thats wagging the dog' on a lot of these ridiculous 'play-balancing' idea's.

I might agree with that, but........that's where the money is and, whether one likes it or not, that is the bottom line.

[Goaswerfraiejen]

Well, I steadfastly refused to buy the game, given what happened with M2TW (I loved RTW, though--still play it regularly). I must say that I'm very glad that I did: from what I see posted on these boards every few months, little has changed. The game still came out half-finished, and that's unacceptable. The only question that I have left, really, is if they'll pull another M2TW and stop fixing it so that they can release their next titles instead. Honestly, I kind of hope they do, so that more of us will learn our lesson for the next time.

[econ21]

I might agree with that, but........that's where the money is and, whether one likes it or not, that is the bottom line.

I don't think the TW money is in the multi-player scene - I suspect only a small minority of TW players do MP.

But in a more general sense, I agree with you - the money is not in a historically realistic game. Rather, CA, particularly Lusted, see better "balancing" as improving the historically flavoured game (both SP and MP) that most customers want to buy.

Ditto putting Scots in kilts, including rocket ships, mortars and other anachronistic battlegear, RTW Egyptians in Moses era outfits, geishas in STW etc - it's what is thought will most appeal to the mass market audience.

Personally, I am probably not in that target market but I can live and let live, so long as realism mods are possible. I still find TW a much more engaging platform for historical wargaming than most of the more drab hardcore games.

I loved RTW, though--still play it regularly

Um, if you loved RTW, not buying M2TW and may be ETW could be your loss. M2TW is very similar to RTW, but with better AI. I can't see why anyone would love RTW and not like M2TW, unless it was due to lack of interest in the period.

ETW is a more revolutionary change and only time will tell if the AI has kept up with the change in the game engine. At the moment, it reminds me of RTW in that the AI has so far not kept up with the changes (in RTW, the changes were the move from the Risk style map and the change in the battlefield engine; in ETW, the changes include the reduced number of provinces per faction, trading theatres and the greater importance of naval operations).

[Goaswerfraiejen]

Um, if you loved RTW, not buying M2TW and may be ETW could be your loss. M2TW is very similar to RTW, but with better AI. I can't see why anyone would love RTW and not like M2TW, unless it was due to lack of interest in the period.

ETW is a more revolutionary change and only time will tell if the AI has kept up with the change in the game engine. At the moment, it reminds me of RTW in that the AI has so far not kept up with the changes (in RTW, the changes were the move from the Risk style map and the change in the battlefield engine; in ETW, the changes include the reduced number of provinces per faction, trading theatres and the greater importance of naval operations).

You misread my post. I did buy M2TW (not Kingdoms), and was sorely disappointed by the quality of the game. The most egregious of my problems was that I could not control battles myself for the first six months, until a patch was released to fix the specific problem I was having (one frame per minute or so due to bugs with the animation). I was even more disappointed in the decision to stop fixing M2TW so as to release Kingdoms, and the subsequent decision to stop fixing Kingdoms so as to release ETW. These decisions have resulted in three unfinished games with serious bugs and promised but non-existent features, and that's just not acceptable to me.

Again, you did not read my post properly. My reasons for not purchasing ETW have nothing to do with the style of the game, or with its perceived dissimilarity to RTW: they have to do with the quality of the products which I purchased after RTW, which seems to have been in steady decline. Reading these boards since ETW's release, I find few indications to the contrary. I mentioned RTW because I considered its engine and concept to be significant improvements over MTW's, and not just mere graphics-glitz. RTW certainly had a number of problems, yes, but in my estimation they were fairly minor and were largely fixed before M2TW was released. This was not at all my experience with M2TW.

I would love to play ETW, or to properly enjoy M2TW--but that's extremely hard to do when I am forced into the role of an un-consenting beta tester, and when the efforts to complete the game and streamline the product are half-assed at best, and quickly abandoned for the empty promises that come with a new release. Many people have enjoyed M2TW, Kingdoms, and ETW, and that's great. Nonetheless, I stand by my decision and refuse to purchase any more half-finished products from the TW line.