Unit speed in RTW is indeed WAY too fast

[Turbo]

The unit speed is fine imo. In fact I've grown to like it quickly and I'm not using the pause. It makes the battles exciting and immersive.

I've played a handful of online battles and the speed seemed right in those battles too. The maps are larger and the controls are more robust (you need to learn the shortcuts). I think you need to give it some time and let go of MTW preconceptions (as great a game as that is).

I think it is a shrinking minority that thinks the speed is too fast.

I don't find the speed to be an issue. If anything, I speed the game up when marching on the battlefield.

[Oaty]

SPENCERH

I can walk at 5mph(about 3 mph for normal pace) jog at 8 mph and sprint at over 10 mph, so those statistics are'nt far off

Anyways what it really boils down to speed vs A.I. Does the comp really have a chance at lower speeds? I think I'd be guaranteed victories, the problem is there are tons of variables and it is hard to program the A.I. to take notice of every single possible aspect. Now for MP I can understand the difference but apparently the troop selection is quite different from single player and things work differently for the most part. Maybe what really needs to be done is a charge penalty for charging head on into a unit with cavalry. That would definately emphasize the need for cavalry to hit the flanks and rear. And maybe special units like kataphracts do'nt get a penalty for a head on charge

[d6veteran]

Maybe what really needs to be done is a charge penalty for charging head on into a unit with cavalry. That would definately emphasize the need for cavalry to hit the flanks and rear. And maybe special units like kataphracts do'nt get a penalty for a head on charge

And I think that is the case. I mean my experience with Cavalry charges so far shows that to be the case.

[Morindin]

Walking speed of infantry = fine.
Running speed = too fast.
I zoom down and watch my men running and they actually look pretty realistic to me, but they take about 10 seconds or so to cover 100m which is like an olympic sprinter.
Zoomed out however this can look absurd, however RTW wasnt made to play zoomed out :) After all zooming out is "unrealistic".

Skirmishers = way too fast running and Cavalry = about right.

I've tried some slow down mods and now it just makes my units look like they're walking on a treadmill. When they get tired its absolutely ridiculous how slow they are moving, I could crawl around faster than they "run".

[SpencerH]

SPENCERH

I can walk at 5mph(about 3 mph for normal pace) jog at 8 mph and sprint at over 10 mph, so those statistics are'nt far off

What people can do is their jogging shorts has no comparison to what soldiers have to do. I ran a 5:15 mile indoors and averaged 6 min/mile cross country.

As I said, the numbers I gave were based on my experience in the infantry and airborne while carrying fighting order (which weighs in excess of 30lbs without body armor). The RTW inf numbers are not even close to realism. 4 mph for a march speed down a road is 'movin' (but do-able) for around 8-10 hours.

[Morindin]

What people can do is their jogging shorts has no comparison to what soldiers have to do. I ran a 5:15 mile indoors and averaged 6 min/mile cross country.

As I said, the numbers I gave were based on my experience in the infantry and airborne while carrying fighting order (which weighs in excess of 30lbs without body armor). The RTW inf numbers are not even close to realism. 4 mph for a march speed down a road is 'movin' (but do-able) for around 8-10 hours.

What about in battle? After all that's what we're talking about. Pumped full of adrenaline marching speeds go out the window.

[son of spam]

What about in battle? After all that's what we're talking about. Pumped full of adrenaline marching speeds go out the window.

Since RTW is supposed to be 'simulating' hours long battles (yeah, right), a short term boost of adrenaline should not make a huge difference in marching speeds.

IMO unit run speeds should either be taken down or make it something like a 'boost' that you can only use when you are above a certain level of fatigue (like warmed up).

Walk speeds seem fine though.

[Morindin]

Since RTW is supposed to be 'simulating' hours long battles (yeah, right), a short term boost of adrenaline should not make a huge difference in marching speeds.

IMO unit run speeds should either be taken down or make it something like a 'boost' that you can only use when you are above a certain level of fatigue (like warmed up).

Walk speeds seem fine though.

What gives you the idea that RTW isnt simulating 'hours long battles' ? Have you played the campaign long enough yet to get that are the size of the real life ones that HAD hours long battles?

I seriously doubt anyone has played the game enough to get 10,000's of armies or even 45,000 yet but I have no doubt that they will last just as long, if not longer, than MTW.

I can't imagine a battle of a few hundred men forming one line of battle, which is common in this stage of RTW to last for "hours". Not only would it be highly unrealistic it would be EXTREMELY boring.

I think many peoples judgements are way premature. One thing ive noticed about RTW that will give it potential for longer battles with bigger armies is the fact that routing units dont seem to set off a chain rout through your entire army.

[d6veteran]

Well said Morindin.

Besides. I don't know about anyone else, but I want realism to a point and then I want gameplay. I don't want a 6 month turn on the strat map to take 6 months!

If the units on the battlefield are running 8 mph vs 4 mph then what is the big deal?

I think the game plays very well. You have time to respond, the controls are not a hinderance, the maps are huge ...

I'm about 60 years into the game and the sieges and some of the battles are taking longer and longer. This game can hardly be considered quick ;)

[son of spam]

What gives you the idea that RTW isnt simulating 'hours long battles' ? Have you played the campaign long enough yet to get that are the size of the real life ones that HAD hours long battles?

I seriously doubt anyone has played the game enough to get 10,000's of armies or even 45,000 yet but I have no doubt that they will last just as long, if not longer, than MTW.

I can't imagine a battle of a few hundred men forming one line of battle, which is common in this stage of RTW to last for "hours". Not only would it be highly unrealistic it would be EXTREMELY boring.

I think many peoples judgements are way premature. One thing ive noticed about RTW that will give it potential for longer battles with bigger armies is the fact that routing units dont seem to set off a chain rout through your entire army.

Read my post. I put 'simulating' in quotation marks, not hour-long battles. I feel the game right now is quite unrealistic and more importantly not fun to play.

Besides which my post was not aimed at you, but rather at a previous comment which said adrenaline would provide the speed boost we see in the game.

Anyway, what you seem to be suggesting is that RTW is a 1:1 scale of regular roman combat. I may have missed this somewhere, but please provide me with a link explaining how the Romans conquered Sicily with a couple hundred men.

Obviously the game is on more of a 10:1 or even a 100:1 (that's probably a bit too high) scale. So I expect battles to last a bit longer than 20 seconds when I fight with around 1000 "game men".

[Lord of the Isles]

What gives you the idea that RTW isnt simulating 'hours long battles' ? Have you played the campaign long enough yet to get that are the size of the real life ones that HAD hours long battles?

I've no idea what that was supposed to mean.

Arguing with those that disagree with you is par for the course at the Org. Quite new to see someone say "running speed = too fast", then argue with someone who posts supporting that point. I guess all that's left to accomplish is to miss out the middle man and start rebutting your own posts.

[SpencerH]

What about in battle? After all that's what we're talking about. Pumped full of adrenaline marching speeds go out the window.

Adrenaline doesnt turn soldiers carrying armour, spears, helmet etc into world-class cross country runners while trying to maintain a semblance of formation over natural countryside.

To those who like the inf run speeds as they are, good for you. You wont have to mod the game. I dont, so I'll have to hope a way can be found to reduce the run speed of armoured units in formation. I'll probably leave skirmishers and non armoured units alone since, like the cav speeds, they are not too outlandish for a game.

[d6veteran]

I have to wonder if some of you are playing larger battles yet.

I played a large siege last night with many reinforcing armies on both sides and the battle went into the night.

I'm enjoying the single player as much as I hoped for.

[Kraxis]

I have to wonder if some of you are playing larger battles yet.

I played a large siege last night with many reinforcing armies on both sides and the battle went into the night.

I'm enjoying the single player as much as I hoped for.

And pausing was at a minimum?

I'm really joining in on either side here, just making certain you guys don't talk past each other...

Ohhh... How replays could have helped here. Both sides could come up with 'proof' within a second almost. Then it would just be a matter of determining which proof was the strongest.

[Red Harvest]

I have to wonder if some of you are playing larger battles yet.

I played a large siege last night with many reinforcing armies on both sides and the battle went into the night.

I'm enjoying the single player as much as I hoped for.

??? With the game imposed timer, how do you get a battle to go into the night? How do you get it to go more than 20 minutes? I've never seen the actual fighting last more than 10 minutes (and most of that is chasing routers.) A long battle with two full stacks usually has less than 60 seconds of melee before the cavalry runs everyone down.

[todorp]

Thanks a lot for the speed mod!