Posting fun Multiplayer battles (RTW Vanilla)

[fallen851]

That is an insult to anyone who has ever played RTW, to say that its all due to luck

Not every battle is decided by luck. But if I went for all archers and you went from a bit of cavalry with some infantry and some archers in a "low" money game, I would win. The "skill" in a battle like this is in the unit selection, which is totally blind and therefore the game becomes luck , much like a game of rock-paper-scissors. However, if we both picked armies of archers, opportunities for skill would arise.

I really can't speak to high money games, the fact that 75% of the units and nations become useless really annoys me, and speaks to the poor balance of the game.

Regarding the dialogue about an almost inherent trend toward fights between specifically composed armies that tend toward one unit type or another, I don't buy it.

We should play a game and post it here. And these comments in your very next post contradict the portion I quoted above:

Even in Rome the most simple of rule-sets call for limitations on certain unit types. This in and of itself prohibits a spamming of certain units.

Don't hate the player, hate the game. There is nothing stopping people from spamming any given unit except for "pre-defined" rule-sets which aren't part of the game. Fact of the matter is, if the majority of people who really understand this game were to play in a tournament for a large cash prize and the only rules were the ones the game itself forces upon players, there would be tons of spamming the same few units from a small pool of nations.

That is because the game is poorly balanced. End of story.

I do agree that diversity is rad (which is why I play low money games), I enjoy playing games with balanced armies, but they are simply not as effective as spamming certain overpowered units, and this is why people have to impose rule-sets. However, if you impose some kind of rule-set, it isn't Rome Total War, it is Rome Total War + your rule-set, which is now a different game (like saying that we are now playing basketball, except you don't have to dribble, dribbling is a part of basketball and without dribbling the game ceases to be basketball and becomes something else). Finally, stating the idea of rule-sets to limit spamming, is admitting that game is flawed, which I am arguing. The limits should be built into the game, or better would be to balance the units.

Again, we should play a game so I can show you in vanilla, but don't hate me, hate the game when I win with a max cheese army. Redharvest put it best when he said that Rome Total War wasn't a game, it is a do it yourself project.