should rtw get rid of the strat map altogether ?

[IceTorque]

in the thread should rtw get rid of battle map boundries jerome said it's possible to walk from one side of the map to the other on the battle map.

just a thought but i think it would be cool to play the whole game
" on the battle map "
march with your army, recruit/replenish troops from conquered city's/towns/villages.
have a field tent/HQ /throne room, to view the world map speak to advisors
recruitment officer, treasurer, and recieve messages/orders diplomats etc.

i think it would be much more immersive gameplay you would get really attached to your army and it would feel much more like i was a caesar rather than a city governor, i'm sorta getting tired of running economies.

just a thought what do you guys think ?.

[Wishazu]

sounds kinda similar to warrior kings, i like this idea :)

[Didz]

That would be the last straw for me, I hate games like Age of Empires and EU where everything happens at strategic level.

[Ar7]

I agree with Didz, the TW series are the only games where you see a bigger picture of the world rather then a simple battle. Of course there are the Paradox games, but they are lacking the actual battles, so the TW games actually combain the best elements of different games.

[magicalsteve]

I personally think this would be a brilliant idea. Albeit hard to pull off (I'm guessing).

The more realistic a game is, the more immersive it is. Therefore realism = fun.

Why distance yourself from the game and and move chess pieces around when you could instead live the life of a general?

[Didz]

Why distance yourself from the game and and move chess pieces around when you could instead live the life of a general?

Quite simply because thats how real generals operate.

Napoleon for instance had a large map table transported with him wherever he went and a range of sticks marked with the scale distances his troops were expected to march in various time frames. He then spent hours every evening over his map table (sometimes actually laying across it) moving wooden blocks and markers whilst his chief of staff made notes.

Once he was happy with his deployments and objectives for the next few days these were drafted into orders and dispatched to his Corps who were then required to acheive the specified destinations within the given timescales.

Thus as you can see there is a distinct split between Strategic Planning and Tactical implementation.

What happens with games that blurr this distinction is that you end up with nothing more than a large battlefield. Everything including resource acquisition happens at tactical level in real time which unless one is going to slow the game speed down to 1:1 and spend all day on a days movement means that everything has to be done under unrealistic pressure.

These games are great for those with a click-festish but are hopeless for any sort of strategic planning. The classic recent screw up was actually LOTR3 which whilst it did seperate strategy from tactics failed to stop the realtime clock when a battle was being fought thus acheiving all the penalties of the one map system with none of the benefits.

Not Realism, so much as Vandalism.

[Ptah]

I personally think this would be a brilliant idea. Albeit hard to pull off (I'm guessing).

The more realistic a game is, the more immersive it is. Therefore realism = fun.

Why distance yourself from the game and and move chess pieces around when you could instead live the life of a general?

Because this is a Strategy game, not a RPG. A mix of the good aspects of two different genres can sometimes create interesting results, but there are some basic limits to a certain genre which should never be crossed, lest the game turns into a weird bastardized version of corny strat game with messy gameplay.

Some people just go crazy about 'realistic graphics', but any serious strategy gamer would instantly understand the need for an overall main interface which is immensely useful when you have to manage multiple armies, cities, personnel, resources, empires, etc etc.. Something that is fast to control, effective in management, and easy to understand. I'm not gonna spend 30 minutes staring into the forests of Germania using satellite photos, trying to find out just where my legions were placed before. Click, click, a simple and well laid out overview map is about the best way to handle any kind of strategic action. Always.

Besides, "more real = more fun" is about the most flawed (and yet, most overhyped) analogy that could ever show face in the simulation genre. Realism can, and often will, contradict gameplay.