PC Mode
Org Mobile Site
Forum > Rome: Total War > Rome: Total War > R:TW Multiplayer >
Thread: Second Draft of Formal Petition (final?)
Page 2 of 2 First 12
Dionysus9 22:12 10-15-2004
Lond,

Great ideas but sadly I think it is too much to ask from C.A. At this point we just need groups to work properly and for units to respond to orders. You are talking about additional features above and beyond anything that has ever been attempted by CA in any Total War game--and quite frankly I'm 100% certain they would not implement this suggestion in a patch. Maybe (like 2% chance) they would do it in an expansion if we all whined and moaned long enough-- but MP is sadly lacking in options as it is.

So at this point I think, although your ideas are great, that it would be counter-productive to include your request in this petition. That being said, you have yourself a great tournament/ladder format!

Too bad the replays and logfiles are all buggered up so we don't know what units anyone took :( It kinda makes it hard to admin a tourney . . .

grrrr....

So I think we must concentrate on the basics--major bugs and critical game-destroying issues.

HM-Pathfinder 00:05 10-16-2004
Regarding the missile bug Oswald mentioned, the only thing i have noticed is, if your using missile units, then try to switch target, they will not switch from the 1st target to the next, but rather carry on firing at that one instead...

I havent noticed any other specific missile unit bug.

Dionysus9 04:28 10-16-2004
Originally Posted by HM-Pathfinder:
Regarding the missile bug Oswald mentioned, the only thing i have noticed is, if your using missile units, then try to switch target, they will not switch from the 1st target to the next, but rather carry on firing at that one instead...

I havent noticed any other specific missile unit bug.
I think we should be hyper-vigilant to make sure no phantom bugs get reported, but we should be equally certain we are not missing something important.

Does anyone have any info on this "bug"-- has it been tested?
results?

Dionysus9 04:34 10-16-2004
There is a thread at the .org that says we now understand how to modify the unit models and animations and should be able to mod unit speed that way.

From the reports I read, this opens new dimensions in terms of creating units (I'm thinking dragons that shoot flaming arrows?)

So I guess we should remove the request for speed-mod info.

CBR 04:43 10-16-2004
Yeah I think that is as good as we possible can get. It wont be as easy as MTW but it can be done.


CBR

baz 09:46 10-16-2004
Thanks Yuuki

I dont mind posting it to CA in UK, just point me to the final version when it is done and i will kindly send it.

Baz

Bachus, are you going to email it? and if so who to exactly?

Colovion 09:54 10-16-2004
It looks much more polished now. Before I felt good about having my name on this, now I feel great about it - as if this may actually influence their decisions on the MP for RTW.

Cheers - I look forward to playing a bug free and polished Rome: Total War with the lot of you!

Oswald 13:05 10-16-2004
Well I tried a few 1v1 this am with Kyolic and HM Ari to get a feel for the missile bug. All I can say for sure is that it is there, affects grouped units, combi units and cav javelins. But I cant get a handle on it. Missile units seem not to like being given orders to fire at a particular unit. If they are used passively they work fine.

So whereas I want to make some comment on it in the letter, until we get an accurate replayable idea of how and why the missile bug works, it will have to remain out.

*frustrated*

3rd edit:- removed request for speed modifyier as per Bachus; added sentence in liason paragraph noting other bugs that we have not been able to accurately charaterise.

Bachus do you want to be named or not?

Again this is YOUR document. Please keep the comments coming. I think we should aim to send this early next week, even Monday.

1dread1lahll 01:26 10-17-2004
IM sure you can expect CA to look into the various 'bugs', as for the command controls I dont know if they can change them even if they wanted to. Bugs/controls/imbalance, I depart RTW multi and await a patch to see if it gets better. Outside of the above mentioned three things I assume it would be too much to ask for a list of things that are just 'wanted'.

Nigel 11:36 10-17-2004
Great work, Dion. Where can I sign this petition ?

Nigel

Oswald 12:46 10-17-2004
*Signature list updated, added u Nigel*

This is pretty near complete now. Oswald plans to ring CA tomorrow AM for appointment. We will get it printed as a scroll once Kyolic, Bachus, Alrowan, and Oswald have polished it to everyones satisfaction.

HM-Assassin 16:59 10-17-2004
sign me up too pls m8

Dionysus9 17:16 10-17-2004
Yeah I think we should aim for Monday.

Please take my real name off the petition, it was only intended as part of the "lawyer" hook-- since we've ditched the attorney letterhead there is no longer a point for it.

Any mention of the "memory leak"? That was never in any of my drafts but a lot of people have complained about it. I'd say that would be an assorted annoyance because you have to restart every 3rd game or so to avoid a memory crash-- but most of us have been doing that for years :)

HM-Cowman 17:19 10-17-2004
Sign me up too plz!

Oswald 19:32 10-17-2004
OK Bachus I have emailed u a final version.


If people have burning issues contact:

Kyolic: if u wish to add your signature.
Oswald: If u spot a typo, constructive thoughts on format,and I have noted the above comments, or some outstanding issues where I have sent you emails.
Bachus: for major bugs we have missed and you are absolutely convinced need adding.
Zeus: if u need a sparring partner in VI.

Please keep signing!

Thx for all the support by all concerned.

Kalle 23:26 10-17-2004
Good work all :)

My native toungue isnt english as u know and i dont know if im correct about this but better to ask then not;

Originally Posted by :
We feel it is important to note this Petition has its genesis in the deep passion the signatories feel for the Total War series and that our only goal is to help you improve the multi-player portion of this fascinating game you have created. I hope it is obvious we would not go to such lengths as a community if we did not feel a very strong fondness for the Total War series, a strong desire to see the series survive and flourish, and an equally urgent need or action on your part.
This is from the second part of text in the petition, if you look at last sentence in the quote it says "urgent need OR action" shouldnt it be urgent need FOR action? Sorry if im wrong.

One other thing is that the text says "to make the game more perfect" (freely quoted), if it is perfect then why we need this big petitionthing? Maybe instead say "to make the game better". This was just a quick reflection and to change it might not be better - i dont know.



Apart from this i saw there were questions where ff and tenjo are with their signatures.

I signed and I used to be in FF and I think I saw Almircar had signed also and he also was in FF. There are still people in FF though and I asked Annie the other day if she would sign and it sounded like she would, ill ask her again when see her again.

As for Tenjo, I am currently a member of Tenjo clan and maybe should have signed with Tenjo_Kalle but in the diffrent forums I allways just signed things with Kalle. Satake and Himelady I think posted at .com that they would like to be added to the petition - i will direct them here if necessery but I think Satake had some problems logging in. Ill make a post about it at Tenjo-forum.

Best regards

Kalle

Oswald 00:20 10-18-2004
Thx Kalle :)
good spots.

On your point about 'perfect', I have substituted language which communicates our request and suggests that is is commercially valuable to improve the MP experience. There is, I note a good thread on this subjuect here.

When I talk to Kyolic I 'll get him to address your changed names and clans.

We would love to have Anniep as signature, the last thing we will do is close the signature list.

Dreadlahl:- I know where you are coming from, but we have to stay credible. IF we can establish a measure of contact then perhaps we can address 'wanted' at a later date? Is this fair?

*edit 5 reflects Kalle's post*
Also I have addressed this to CA. It may at some stage be sensible to send it on to Activision. But at this stage it is clearly CA which is the author of the software.

.

Dionysus9 03:24 10-18-2004
Kalle,

"for" action you are correct. You have better english skills than most americans, I'll tell you that. I've made that change and also changed
"more perfect" to "create a superior"

hmmm, maybe I better check my email for os's latest version. . .

very close now.

Page 2 of 2 First 12
Up
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO