MP help guide

[KyodaiSteeleye]

thanks guys - i'll try the grouping suggestions. Is it my imagination, or are missile units (esp' archers) far more effective in RTW - eg: faster fire rates, higher kill rates and far more ammo? (except face on against phalanxes and cohorts).

[Cheetah]

No, it is not just your imagination and whenever possible you should have one of the advanced archer types, such as cretian archers, chosen archers, pharaohs bowmen, archer auxilia. Also, horse archers are better and need less micromanagement as in MTW. However, friendly fire is a lot more devastating, you should be very careful not leting your archers firing into a melee.

[Agravain of Orkney]

I find it very tedious to form/break/reform groups during a game. My solution was to break free of my MTW habit and stop trying to move my entire army at once while keeping it in formation. During setup I create roughly six groups, by purpose, and I avoid mixing unit types within the group. So one group is my spear wall, I have left and right infantry groups, left and right cav groups, an archer group, etc. Each group I usually give the single line formation order (shift +1) so that I can draw the group on the map in any thickness or orientation that I want.

When I want to move my whole army from point A to point B, I just Ctrl + A to select all and then right click on point B. A press of the space bar will show that if you did nothing else, your army formation will be all jumbled once they got to point B. So while they are marching to the new location, I redraw the groups on the map in the exact place and orientation that I want them to be when they get there.

There is a change from MTW to RTW for the better (IMO) in that unless you are setting waypoints, when you issue a movement order it automatically cancels the previous order. In MTW you needed to either wait for the previous order to complete, or you needed to manually cancel with a halt command (bringing your units to a stop), before you could change the order. So in MTW, when moving my whole army in formation, I frequently had to move/rotate several times until I got it in exactly the position and facing that I wanted it. In Rome, I just draw it on the map where I want it to be....if I don't like it or want to change it, I just redraw it.

[KyodaiSteeleye]

Hi Agravain - yes, i've been doing something similar, in that i've been using 4 or 5 seperate groups for my missiles/main line, secondary line and cav wings, but to be honest its a real fag having to redraw them all to get them into some sort of ordered formation - although i will try a bit harder to redraw while they move.

[Nigel]

hmm, this is a useful thread.

I am still struggling to control my formations, too.
Will be interesting to see how other people deal with it.

[Agravain of Orkney]

but to be honest its a real fag having to redraw them all to get them into some sort of ordered formation

Agreed Kyodai. Would be a whole lot easier if you could just CTRL+A to select everything and then just draw it once on the map, while having everything retain their original groups, spacing, facing, etc. Both methods described in this thread have their advantages and drawbacks. Guess it comes down to individual comfort in the end.

[Dionysus9]

Agreed Kyodai. Would be a whole lot easier if you could just CTRL+A to select everything and then just draw it once on the map, while having everything retain their original groups, spacing, facing, etc. Both methods described in this thread have their advantages and drawbacks. Guess it comes down to individual comfort in the end.

Thats why I use the single-group-army, because you CAN just select it all and draw it out on the map, and it retains formation, and you draw the facing you want. . . only works if its (G)rouped though, and only one single group will work at a time.

As Dreadlahll says, they got rid of "groups within groups" which generally means that you either do it Agras way (many small groups, but no "full army formation"), or my way (one big group that retains formation, but no sub groups).

If they had retained the old dual group system (numbered groups being distinct from "G"roups that are visually linked) we could combine both methods much more easily and regain some semblance of control over our armies.

We tried to get at this in the Petition and I only hope they picked up on it.

[Sid_Quibley]

I remember quotes from ca saying that in rome you would have to anticipate more in where you order your troops to move.

One big group responds more precisely than drawing several groups maybe this is a reflection on their idea of chain of command(or lack of it in ancient times)

Remember this is not vi.