Until the patch is released, I am playing MTW!

[MacBeth]

Yeah - not only has the game been dumbed down, so has the feel of these forums.

[Butcher]

1. The majority of those who frequent these forums are not those who used to frequent them during the MTW days, let alone the STW days.

True, doesn't mean they haven't been playing them though. I only joined here in december, but I suppose would be classed as a 'veteran', whatever that means.

[danimal]

For me, the biggest way that RTW lets me down compared to the other two is that when you take an army into battle after looking at theirs, the odds, the experience etc is that you know beforehand what the result will be and most often if not always (unless a brutallt stupid AI bug such as general suicide with reinforcements) you know you will win.
The only thing in doubt is how much you will win by and if the enemy army will still exist post conflict.
Someone mentioned build up of tension previously on this thread and that is the key element that RTW misses. RTW is more like taking a Dyson vacuum cleaner over Europe and easily sucking up enemies, especially with the AI not doing to you what you can do to it ( as effectively) such as assisinations, building up and using diplomats to bribe etc.
I remember in MTW taking my stack of 1000 well solid troops with an awesome general against many thousands, lets say 4000, and having an EPIC.
Due to tiredness you would have to keep a couple of units in reserve until later but would that mean you would be too badly outnumbered. OK i've killedthe general quick, that leaves only 3800 troops to deal with vs my 950.
This type of tension no longer exists in RTW and was a real draw for me in the other 2.
I PREDICT A POST WILL FOLLOW THAT SAYS 'I THINK THERE IS THAT TENSION IN RTW AND I AM JUST NOT PLAYING IT RIGHT' Hmmmm, how long will it be.?

By the way, hello all, haven't posted in bloody ages.

[Colovion]

Yeah - not only has the game been dumbed down, so has the feel of these forums.

yeah. it used to be all history and strategy chat. good point.

[MacBeth]

I should be more careful what i post. To clarify, I mean that the game in its current state has not encouraged many threads on how we can defeat the uber AI or on battle tactics. I in no way meant the members of this forum, which is currently the only plus point to a rushed and pretty incomplete game.

[Old Celt]

Many of the posts I read here suggest changes that, while they may make the game more "realistic", they would also take the element of fun (you know FUN; the purpose of all games) out to some degree. An example would be the whole bribing/assassination genre. Sure, the AI can be programmed to use every advantage to build up a big treasury, then systematically bribe everything you have away from you. Would that be fun? We could change the AI so cities would revolt constantly, and the people would never be happy. Would that be fun? We could eliminate morale from the battle AI, and also any attempt to emulate the particular style of a civs battle tactics and instead have cold calculated logic for all AI behavior. Would that REALLY be fun? We could make siege warfare much more realistic by emulating real life behavior and eliminating nearly all direct assaults. Sieges will be a waiting game because, with proper defensive logic, direct assault = SUICIDE. Again, would it be fun?

I'm not a bonafide military genius, but I know the computer can easily outmanuever you if decision making and actions are equally based on logical reference and limited time to execute (i.e. RTS where you cannot pause). Do you think it would be fun to have a game that deteriorates to a "click fest" because you cannot think and react as quickly as the computer? A good game will always balance the fun aspect with the difficulty or tedious aspects of the representation.

There are bugs which need to be addressed. Hopefully, all the major ones will be. The bigger the scope of a project, the more likely bugs will remain hidden for long periods. They still discover bugs in Windows 2000 on a routine basis. I really don't see how any enthusiast for military history and tactics could NOT have fun with this game. Yes it has limitations, bugs, and stupid behavior at times on the AI's part. But I think, even with all that, the game is still a dang lot of fun. I play it for hours and hours, and enjoy it even with the flaws. The patch should fix most of the outright bugs, but there's no way the AI will be improved enough to satisfy some of the most demanding players in the time they've (CA) had to implement the patch.

[Quietus]

In past TW games it took a lot more time to deploy troops, march troops and do the actual battle itself. The deployment/marching/maneuvering ritual is gone!

The units are too fast and unbalanced. What is the longest battle you've had in RTW? In MTW? in STW?

In STW, deployment was very crucial, due to the chain rout.
In MTW, it was much easier, due to the strength of the spears and higher morale.
In RTW, it was dumbed down to the point that it doesn't even matter anymore since the enemy will all charge at the same time at unbelievable speeds

[econ21]

In STW, deployment was very crucial, due to the chain rout.
In MTW, it was much easier, due to the strength of the spears and higher morale.
In RTW, it was dumbed down to the point that it doesn't even matter anymore since the enemy will all charge at the same time at unbelievable speeds

Um, I'm not sure about this. In some ways, I think deployment matters more in RTW because combat is so quick - it is hard to pull off grand manouvres, so it is more a question of having pointed your men in the right direction and letting them go.

However, it seems terrain matters rather less in RTW than the earlier games - hills, in particular, don't seem so dominating. (This may be a good thing.) So this reduces the importance of deployment.

I appreciate the speed of RTWs battles, particularly in the context of keeping a campaign moving at a brisk pace, but they do often seem to miss the epic quality of some of STWs and MTWs battles. However, my hunch is that a lot of the problem is in the AI failing on the strategic map to get a reasonable force to counter the player's. The few times I've confronted full strength AI stacks with decent generals, the battles have been impressive if still brisker than in the earlier games.

[a_ver_est]

Um, . The few times I've confronted full strength AI stacks with decent generals, the battles have been impressive if still brisker than in the earlier games.

Fully agree, IMHO the main problem of the AI is the bad use of their generals, most of it's full stack armies are leaded by a capitan, meanwhile player armies are leaded by a 4 stars general at least.

It has two major effects, armies are cheap to bribe and their battle performance is to poor.

If AI used good generals to lead their armies. the game would be more challenging

[Quietus]

I think deployment matters more in RTW because combat is so quick

I disagree too. Whatever happened to the Rock-paper-scissor scheme?

it is hard to pull off grand manouvres

That's because it was abandoned. That's what separated TW from other games in the first place. You can't do it because the units are meant to plow head-on. Why do you think they cranked up the speed in the first place?

Here's some of what's missing, from STW (minus expansion pack):
- Vicious fights for the Hill. Defending or attacking, the fight is always on the edge.
- Weather effects. Attack a province in a middle of a
a) Snowstorm/blizzard. The AI is hidden. Formation is always defensive.
b) Heavy rain. Most of the AI is hidden in the forrest and your arrows are considerably weakened. Occasional lightning can help. Trying to extricate a buried army is amazing. ( in RTW, you just plow right through).
- AI hides and divides its forces. You are constantly torn whether to divide your army.
- Limited access to army. You can't pump out units from many province or you'll go broke quickly.
- Routing and Rallying. It is practically impossible to do this since 100s of soldiers are wiped in a couple of seconds. In bridges, you just create a box, let the AI flow through and then charge. Literally, the whole army vaporizes.
- Ranged unit shootouts. Try charging arquebusiers with melee units and they will rout. Attack hidden archers without backup and your melee units will be decimated.
- Better battlemap. They kept talking about huge battlefields, yet you have this tiny area to maneuver in the final product.

Where are these TW hallmarks in RTW? I can let my collosal disappointment of MTW pass, after info on RTW was leaked out. Heck, I even bought VI since I was impressed with RTW.

I'll try out Imperial Glory if RTW is still a dog after the patch. CA seriously need a competition. Right now RTW is a Wargame/Arcade hybrid, it simply doesn't mix.