Initial Patch Thoughts

[Red Harvest]

Something cool:
During a battle near Caralis I noticed that I could see ships sitting in the water where the AI fleet was. And all the extra trees and such visible in the distance is a nice touch. I am looking forward to fighting near wonders or volcanoes (especially during an eruption.)

Wonder if they fixed the "incredible shrinking boulders?" (Boulders that shrank from vehicle sized to small box size as you approached them.)


Question:
Are the battlefields slightly bigger? I feel like I have a bit more room to chase men down.

[Lord Preston]

just had a quick go and without going into to much detail the game just "feels" more complete, where before i'd get p****d off at it (like when the groups screw up and it launches my who army at a spearwall, yeah! thanks a lot you stupid GAME! *alt-f4*) it hasn't done anything "daft"......... yet

its the little things that make a huge improvement, this is what the game should of been to start with...

[Lord Preston]

"my who army" lol damn no edit. whole army i meant (its early in UK 6am, thats my excuse)

[TigerVX]

The AI does seem smarter, and in one battle I saw a port and my fleet in the background, a nice change of scenery

[sassbarman]

Just played about an hour with the new patch and I agree that it just seems like it's finished now, much more polished. However I do have a slight concern involving ai factions engaging in more subterfuge. With activities like assassination attempts being considered transgressions, I fear alliances will be much harder to maintain. This has been my experience so far in my current game as the seleucids, with my long time allies (pre-patch) Thrace twice ending our alliance with failed assassination attempts (post-patch) in only three turns. I hope this not going to be a regular occurance.

[_Aetius_]

The patch has made some good improvements but then, modders made those improvements in half the time it took these guys to release this patch

Just seems like they put some effort in but failed to get to the point, the battles are as many! have pointed out ridiculously short, and the battles are what are supposed to make this game great, its what makes it better than previous games of this type yet theyve failed to even come close to using this asset to its max.

I feel abit like the way i did when i first played the game awestruck but disappointed.

[Quillan]

The readme with the patch said that squalor penalty to public order is now capped at 100%. Before the patch, it was either 120% or 125%, I forget which at the moment. That extra 20-25% will make a huge difference at the upper end of the population figures.

[Rosacrux redux]

I have finally downloaded the bugger (after unsuccesful efforts for the last 24 hours - darn, there is something wrong with living in Greece methinks) and am going to give it a go tonite.

One question: has the phalanx side-stepping issue been adressed? (yes, I know, everybody has his own pet issue... and that's mine )

[Puzz3D]

Rosacrux redux,

The phalanx side stepping has been addressed, and the phalanx will engage much better now when in guard mode.


Aetius,

I think the quick fighting is due mostly to low morale on the units. The combat cycle itself seems to be much longer than it was in MTW. CA seems to want a large range on morale from very low to very high in order to leave lots of room in the system for upgraded units, battlefield upgrades and effect of the general's command stars. You could raise morale on the units by modding the unit descr file, and I think that would make the fighting last longer especially with large unit size rather than normal unit size. We've been asking for a morale slider or at least a 4 or 5 step selectable level in the options for 4 years now, yet the game, now in its 5th incarnation, still only has a morale on/off option. We are up against a philosophical difference of opion regarding more options in the game settings with CA. Their objection is that too many options would make the game overly complex for the average gamer.

[Red Harvest]

Aetius,

I think the quick fighting is due mostly to low morale on the units. The combat cycle itself seems to be much longer than it was in MTW. CA seems to want a large range on morale from very low to very high in order to leave lots of room in the system for upgraded units, battlefield upgrades and effect of the general's command stars. You could raise morale on the units by modding the unit descr file, and I think that would make the fighting last longer especially with large unit size rather than normal unit size. We've been asking for a morale slider or at least a 4 or 5 step selectable level in the options for 4 years now, yet the game, now in its 5th incarnation, still only has a morale on/off option. We are up against a philosophical difference of opion regarding more options in the game settings with CA. Their objection is that too many options would make the game overly complex for the average gamer.

If CA would explain what morale does in RTW it would help. If morale increases both defensive skill and attack then it should offset in melee. If however, it just increases attack, then that would produce faster kills. Increasing combat speed alone (or effectiveness of strikes) would tend to produce faster kills. One thing I notice is that custom battles tend to be slower than in the campaign. So I wonder if it is because of the lack of an experienced or otherwise pumped up general to influence morale. And I don't know how any of the morale boosts work for generals being near (range based?)

My suspicion is that CA set the increment too high for attack. For example, if you set missile attack to "1" it will still kill at a substantial rate at full range vs. unarmoured opponents. And that is the absolute lowest you can go with the value (anything less is treated as zero, no missiles available.) To my way of thinking the absolute worst missile units should be no worse than flies at long range. Yet we have archers built with 14 missile attack and with upgrades and experience they can easily hit 18 to 20. I suspect the same sort of problem is happening with combat values.

[Nigel]

Rosacrux redux,

I think the quick fighting is due mostly to low morale on the units. The combat cycle itself seems to be much longer than it was in MTW. CA seems to want a large range on morale from very low to very high in order to leave lots of room in the system for upgraded units, battlefield upgrades and effect of the general's command stars. You could raise morale on the units by modding the unit descr file, and I think that would make the fighting last longer especially with large unit size rather than normal unit size. We've been asking for a morale slider or at least a 4 or 5 step selectable level in the options for 4 years now, yet the game, now in its 5th incarnation, still only has a morale on/off option. We are up against a philosophical difference of opion regarding more options in the game settings with CA. Their objection is that too many options would make the game overly complex for the average gamer.

Just wondering if having "standard options" and "advanced options" could be the solution - same as many other programs have standard setting for people who "just want to get on with it" and an advanced setting for those "expert users" who want/can spend time tweaking and optimising their personal settings.

Just a thought
Nigel

[CBR]

IIRC the benefit from a general goes only to added attack. So custom battles with no generals would mean fighting lasts longer as units dont have so high attack values.


CBR

[Red Harvest]

IIRC the benefit from a general goes only to added attack. So custom battles with no generals would mean fighting lasts longer as units dont have so high attack values.


CBR

That would fit. And supposedly CA has VH adding only to AI attack. So in combination we have extremely high kill rates in the campaign. If only they had granted split the bonus between offense and defense...as in previous TW games.

It is ironic that those of us who most want a tougher game and better AI also are the ones who most dislike the killing speed of the vanilla game. So we get double whammied.

[screwtype]

One question: has the phalanx side-stepping issue been adressed? (yes, I know, everybody has his own pet issue... and that's mine )

From what I've read, I believe it has. In fact I've read that phalanxes are a lot smarter now, and will maneouvre to best advantage when attacking a unit.

A couple of things I have noticed: first, the experience point thing seems to have been fixed. I sure hope so, because it seemed totally random before and it really, really bugged me.

This time, my units seem to be getting xp points from doing lots of killing, or from winning against odds, which is how it used to be in the earlier games. Also because of this, they appear to be picking up xp points quicker. It was taking me an absurdly long time to get xp points with version 1.0.

Another apparent positive is that scrolling around on the battle map appears to be MUCH smoother and crisper on my near-minimum spec machine - almost as good as STW! Mind you, I've only played a few smallish battles thus far, but I don't recall maneouvring around the battlefield to be anywhere near as easy as this. In fact, I've really enjoyed the few battles I've played, whereas previously it was a real pain trying to control the camera.

On the down side, I've been blockading a greek port with one of my ships for a number of turns and no greek ships have attacked it. Maybe it's because they're not as numerous as they used to be and they have other things to do, but it will be a bit disappointing if you can still blockade without being challenged.

Overall though, I have to say at this early stage I'm pleased with what I've seen so far.

[deafcadet]

Does anyone know what this means from the patch readme:

Bribing settlements and characters is now a transgression.

So what, do we get penalized for doing that now?

[Sparticus]

Can the game run in 1280x1024 yet? I'm stuck with 1024x768 post patch. I have'nt had the chance to snag the patch yet.

[Colovion]

A couple other things:

1. the computer AI for diplomacy + campaign map seems much improved - the Gauls were messing with me for a bit so I took one of their cities and they laid back for a while and didn't even put an army into the field but hid in their settlements near me. I brought my largest army yet assembled to take down their settlement and was caught off gaurd by two Gaulish armies converging on my spot to intercept me before I reached the city - very cool. Also, Carthage is doing poorly... which I'm guessing because I took over their settlement on Sardinia and that gave the Scipii the edge on Sicily. A few turns later Carthage sent a diplomat up to talk to me in Sardinia. They wanted trade rights and a ceasefire - I counter offered that they would ALSO pay me 2000 or I would attack... They accepted! I was so suprised that threatening attack on a weaker faction actuallly gave me a believable response.

2. The battles turn into meat grinders. On battles where the enemy routs first they're prettymuch all dead; I suppose that is realistic as the side that routed first would get the majority of the casualties, but I guess it's the kill speeds which throw me off. Anyway one thing that was awesome to see last night was the Gauls had their fancy Swordsmen put on the front of their troupe as they barrelled into my Hastati. We clashed and fought for a bit - both sides piling soldiers on their side - then once they stared actually fighting I heard the enemy enable the "Warcry" feature and WOW! they started cutting their way through my guys like nothing! It was as it should have been from the beginning.... kinda.

[Bhruic]

Can the game run in 1280x1024 yet? I'm stuck with 1024x768 post patch. I have'nt had the chance to snag the patch yet.

The game could always run it. It just doesn't give you the option. You can manually set it at that resolution in the preferences.txt file.

Bh

[Ar7]

Does anyone know what this means from the patch readme:

Bribing settlements and characters is now a transgression.

So what, do we get penalized for doing that now?

I believe it means that when you bribe an army then it is treated as declearing a war on the country that previously owned the army.

[screwtype]

Does anyone know what this means from the patch readme:

Bribing settlements and characters is now a transgression.

So what, do we get penalized for doing that now?

I think "transgression" means the faction will declare war on you if you do either of those things.

[Bob the Insane]

I think "transgression" means the faction will declare war on you if you do either of those things.

A transgression is a basically carrying out a diplomatic no-no and getting caught at it...

Stomping your troops around other nations lands can do it, dogdy diplomatic deals can do it and now bribing does it...

Basically it sends the other faction's (and possibly their allies) opinion of you down the scale...

So bribe enough of a factions troops and not only will you rapidly run out of cash now you will also actually really piss them off... (no allying with someone and then slyly bribing their army away to nothing with no consiquences...

My only problem with the changes to bribing is that it make picking up those rebel generals that turn up not really worth the money...

Additionally - I can't believe no one else has mentioned the minimal UI... Full Screen RTW... It is fantastic...

[Spino]

A list of issues/items that really make me take notice...

THE GOOD:

- Friendly Fire Fixed - Missile troops are much more careful with their targeting and as a result there are far fewer FF casualties than before! Great!

- Missile units - Missile troops now take less time to prepare and fire their missiles. This is especially noticeable with javelin/pilum equipped units who can now get off a round in the face of an advancing/charging enemy.

- No more weapon switch animation 'pause' for pilum equipped units when ordered to attack. This is GREAT! I noticed this in a few custom battle last night. Sent an early Legionary Cohort which had expended all its pilae earlier on in the battle to take care of an advancing Seleucid Pikemen unit, they charged as soon as I gave the order.

- Phalanx units - Aside from their increased turning efficiency and the elimination of the phalanx shuffle I could swear that units in phalanx formation march faster now. Phalanx units are much more dangerous in 1.2.

- Shipbuilding Fetish Cured - The strategic AI now builds far fewer ships, the result of which is the presence of healthier army stacks roaming the map in the early game. Personally I'd prefer it if even fewer ships were built by the not-so-wealthy factions but it seems to ok so far.

- Tactical AI - Haven't played enough to really get a good idea of just how much it has improved but it does seem a tad wiser in some areas. I could swear enemy generals aren't as suicidal and enemy cavalry in general seems to take greater care so as to not frontally engage your front line (especially if they're spear equipped units). I've seen heavy cav chase my skirmishers running back behind my pike units only to stop and head back to the flanks! Really good news is enemy AI armies keep a respectable distance from city walls when fighting sally battles!

THE BAD:

- Minimal UI option is good... and bad. The only reason it's bad because now the Orders and Formation buttons are at the top which means unless you know all the keyboard shortcuts your eyes and your mouse has to travel farther to see what you're doing and get things done and that means longer delays in battle. I would have preferred it if the orders/formation buttons were stacked directly on top of the single row of unit cards at the bottom. Not a big deal though. I'm sure it won't be long before I memorize all the hotkeys and enjoy the less restricted view.

- Elephant units are still way overpowered.

- Roman cavalry is still overpowered, especially the Marian reform era medium and heavy units which are HUGELY overpowered!

- Insufficient consolidation of AI army stacks on the strategic map. I think CA improved on this but I don't think it was enough. The same kind of consolidation tweaks that were applied to AI fleet behavior should be applied to army AI behavior. As a general but not all encompassing rule army stacks should instinctively seek to combine with others in the immediate vicinity whenever possible.

THE UGLY:

- Unit cards still do not auto sort by type and experience on the strategic map. The haphazard stacking of unit cards makes armies look messy. How difficult would it have been to incorporate an auto-sort routine?

- The tactical AI still needs schoolin' - It's still pretty bad at handling Roman legions and still loves to break up an imposing wall of pikes. For whatever reason the tactical likes to put its less effective Auxiliary Infantry in the front row instead of on the flanks or in the rear! Part of the problem is the AI's reliance on the the multi-row formation for Roman armies. If it would only spread the line out into one or two rows it would have a much better chance of overlapping and outflanking your line.

- The tactical AI can still be too reluctant to commit fully when attacking and is a tad too passive when defending with an attack oriented army (read 'european barbarian'). Gauls, Britons, Germans, Dacians, Thracians are laden with impetuous, high attack/high charge, low defense units and to see them stand around getting impaled by arrows or javelins and waiting for your units to engage them can be frustrating. The worst thing the AI can do with units like those is sit back and play defense, especially on relatively level ground!

- Phalanx units still break formation and give chase to skirmishers and cavalry units... in phalanx formation!

- Marian Reforms date trigger - Well we now have a 'never before' date for the reforms. That's good.... then again maybe not. According to Obake Date at the Com...

...the trigger for the Marian event is the building of an Imperial Palace in Italy. My take on that is that it must be on the penninsula, and not just by a Roman faction. In other words, that Imperial Palace MUST be built in one of the STARTING Roman provinces.

In addition there IS a date trigger that has been added to the Marian event. The Reforms of Marius now should not occur any EARLIER than 220BC. So even if you are able to build an Imperial Palace in Tarentum by 250BC, you've still got another 60 turns to wait before you can start using Legionaries.

My personal preference was to have the Reforms happen no earlier than 150BC to keep it more in line with historical reality, but I got blatantly ignored on that one!

220 B.C.?!? Who's bright idea was it to use such an early trigger date? Modding alone can prolong the Marian reforms for some time simply by requiring the presence of additional buildings before an Imperial Palace can be built! What a terrible decision!

[Jace11]

Grey squares around coastlines....

Yuck, they look horrific, how did they miss this. Would it have been so hard to test the patch before releasing it?

A temporary work around is possible by moving settlements away from coastlines e.g Lilybaeum > 1 pixel on regions.tga in Base folder, but you will need to move occupying forces in desc_strat also...

Pretty quick to do, but there are a lot of settlements affected by this, though the real problem would probably be an easy fix in adjusting tile size or layer order etc, however a mini patch for that would probably take CA another 6 months :)

Is this fault ubiquitous or are somepeople not seeing it, in which case a graphic setting moght solve it...

[Sheep]

220 B.C.?!? Who's bright idea was it to use such an early trigger date? Modding alone can prolong the Marian reforms for some time simply by requiring the presence of additional buildings before an Imperial Palace can be built! What a terrible decision!

Probably someone who realized that a full 75% of the people who play this game don't care (or even know) about historical accuracy and just want to build the best units they can and romp all over the Mediterranean.

If you are so concerned about historical accuracy AND you think it's so easy to mod... then do it!

[Quillan]

Not intending to hijack the thread here, but how many of your games have gone past 150 BC? Anyone? Rarely do mine make it that far. I think 220 BC is still a bit early, but I think 150 will result in many campaigns finishing before the reforms. I haven't had time to play with it yet, but that might wind up being better. We'll see.

[BDC]

I saw a flash flood!

[LordKhaine]

Loving the new patch so far. Though I found an easter egg that I've never heard of before (if you can call it that, it's not exactly hidden). Egypt demanded I become a protectorate, and the Pharoahs words were, and I quote, "All your base are belong to us". Also noting a scarred trait too that I never saw before. One of my generals is now "cruelly scarred", and he's now known as Demetrius "Scarface"

[Quietus]

Quote:
Originally Posted by GFX707
Quote:
Originally Posted by GeWee
Personally I'm glad they didn't change the kill speed. If you want the battles to last longer bring more men to the grinder...

Sorry, that comment was just stupid.


Wouldn't it be better to explain why you think it's stupid instead of making a stupid comment of your own?

GeWee. You got to understand why a lot of peeps are frustrated as heck. First of all, the word "grinder" is not what is normally associated with tw games (pre-RTW anyway). There's no more tactics in RTW, it's basically the best units vs. the best units. I enjoy using balanced armies. With this "grinder" battles, it's not doable and practical any longer. One heavy cavalry easily rout 5 of my units! They basically erased the Rock-Paper-Scissor balancing. Also, cavalry jump and swish all over like there is no gravity, momentum or friction. They move like fish! Try defending your archer units with your Spear units. Watch those cavalries either penetrate or skirt between your defenses. It degenerates to a quick and mindless melee.

@topic. I'll give this another "shot", although I'm already sick to my stomach Last time I did try was early december, and I literally stopped after one battle.

[Nelson]

Something cool:
During a battle near Caralis I noticed that I could see ships sitting in the water where the AI fleet was. And all the extra trees and such visible in the distance is a nice touch. I am looking forward to fighting near wonders or volcanoes (especially during an eruption.)

I happen to control six of the wonders in my current Seleucid campaign. They can be seen at anytime on the battle map,f rom a distance at least, by zooming in on the nearby cities. From Halicarnasus you can see two of them well and a third far off on the north west horizon! The lighthouse looks great from Alexandria.

[The_Emperor]

I happen to control six of the wonders in my current Seleucid campaign. They can be seen at anytime on the battle map,f rom a distance at least, by zooming in on the nearby cities. From Halicarnasus you can see two of them well and a third far off on the north west horizon! The lighthouse looks great from Alexandria.

I had a battle in Rhodes today and I could see the top of the Halicanasus wonder from the other side of the water...

I didn't see the colossus, but I was at the wrong end of the island with a hill blocking any possible view.

Oh yeah Minimal UI rules... Suddenly everything is back to classic TW, with the F keys to hide the icons!!

Excellent job on that CA!!