Heart of the Matter , Is RTW good value for $?

[Kekvit Irae]

I find it funny that people are praising the AI in MTW. There's really nothing to be praised about it.
The enemy stands 50 meters from a line of my Longbowmen army, watching the arrows land in them and their buddies. Sometimes they charge, and promptly get smacked down by a full volley from the second rank. They make no attempt to flank me, whereas the AI in RTW always tries to circle me using their cavalry.
Is this something you want to praise?

[SpencerH]

I find it funny that people are praising the AI in MTW. There's really nothing to be praised about it.
The enemy stands 50 meters from a line of my Longbowmen army, watching the arrows land in them and their buddies. Sometimes they charge, and promptly get smacked down by a full volley from the second rank.

and you havent seen similar behaviour in RTW...

They make no attempt to flank me, whereas the AI in RTW always tries to circle me using their cavalry.
Is this something you want to praise?

Flanking attacks did happen in MTW. IMO the AI in RTW does attempt to flank more often. All it means, however, is that the first AI units to be routed are the AI's cavalry.

[SoxSexSax]

I find it funny that people are praising the AI in MTW. There's really nothing to be praised about it.
The enemy stands 50 meters from a line of my Longbowmen army, watching the arrows land in them and their buddies. Sometimes they charge, and promptly get smacked down by a full volley from the second rank. They make no attempt to flank me, whereas the AI in RTW always tries to circle me using their cavalry.
Is this something you want to praise?

I am frankly amazed at what I am reading in this thread. How anyone can keep a straight face while saying RTW has a better AI than MTW amazes me. I have played both for HOURS and I KNOW which one is better. By default, the AI in RTW uses the same formation for open terrain battles EVERY TIME! Check the formation file in the data folder, it is HARDCODED to always prefer one specific formation. And you claim it's AI is better? Go away and learn your stuff boy.

[Spino]

Is RTW a good value for the money? It depends on what kind of gamer you are.

If you're a casual gamer or a relative newbie to strategy games or someone just looking for some cheap thrills and eye candy then I suppose RTW is worth the money. The initial 'wow' factor is quite high and there's lots of things to do initially. If you aren't looking for a serious challenge or have an allergic reaction to difficult strategy games then RTW is for you.

However with regard to veteran strategy gamers I'd have to say that RTW is simply not worth the money. I bought RTW the day of its release and paid roughly $50-55 for it. Given the outstanding bugs, issues and lackluster AI that exists even after two patches I honestly feel I overpaid for this game. Once the initial 'wow' factor wore off and I recognized RTW's lack of challenge and depth I wished I had bought it on sale or at a bargain bin price. It all comes down to longevity and I feel that RTW simply doesn't possess the replayability factor that MTW:VI had, even with extensive modding. In fact I think the better mods out there for MTW:VI did more to improve gameplay for that title than any of the current mods have been able to do for RTW. When it comes down to it RTW simply doesn't offer the kind of challenge and deeper gameplay veteran strategy gamers are looking for.

Regarding the AI. Yes the AI in RTW makes some of the same mistakes as the AI in MTW but overall I'd have to say the tactical battles in the latter were more challenging. The sheer number of lopsided victories I've won in RTW on Hard (and not the by product of 'gamey' or unorthodox tactics) far exceed those I achieved in MTW:VI at the same level of difficulty. RTW was in development for roughly four years and the tactical AI seems no better than it was in Shogun and certainly worse than that found in Medieval! As far as I'm concerned this is the most disappointing aspect of RTW and the one area that CA seemed to completely ignore. I can understand the strategic AI being somewhat lackluster in its execution since the campaign game has been completely changed but the tactical battles are what the Total War series are all about and to see CA offer up a tactical AI that is, for the most part and with few exceptions, worse than its predecessors comes as a rude shock, especially given the time and development that went into creating Rome.

[DisruptorX]

If you can pick up RTW for 20 bucks usd or the equivalent, you will get your value. The game is deeply flawed, and the campaign is a boring mess, but there is one thing that the game does do right, and that is seige battles. Really, when I played it, I only defended or attacked castles, because this is the only fun part. Seiges are amazing and very well done. Otherwise, the AI is a joke, the campaign is hollow and a joke, and the Egyptian faction is a joke.

If you can get it cheap, buy it, otherwise, stick with MTW.

If anyone does not take my word that the AI in RTW is beyond attrocious, I present visual proof. Sorry for the H-scroll, but I feel that this is worth seeing, even if it is inconvenient.





and as you can see by the total troop count in the second image, those two images are indeed from two seperate battles.

[saddletank]

Buy R:TW then install patch v1.2 then install Rome:Total Realism. It's great. I haven't touched M:TW in weeks since getting R:TW. I have played 2 M:TW campaigns as Turks and French, plus three M:TW VI campaigns as Picts, Irish and Vikings. Then I played three R:TW campaigns as Julii in a vanilla 1.2 and as Carthage and Egypt in two R:TR campaigns.

I would say that the AI is perhaps very slightly poorer in R:TW but the R:TR install makes the armies you encounter much better balanced, which forces you to construct better balanced armies. On the whole, despite the lousy pathing during sieges I would say R:TW is very slightly the better game. And the eye candy is great.

[Kekvit Irae]

Go away and learn your stuff boy.

My suggestion is that you take on a lighter tone. Insults are not tolerated lightly in this forum.

[mxlm]

Frankly, it sounds as if you haven't played it very much (let me guess, you saw this at the start of an English campaign after bribing the Welsh army, right?) Wait until the computer actually has some decent units, and MTW's AI will show up Rome's, I assure you.

Start of an English campaign, but was against a Welsh rebel force of...hell, I don't even remember the composition. Several polearm wielding units and a peasant or two. That's what I get for trying to garrison a newly conquered province reeeeaaally lightly.

My point wasn't that MTW's AI isn't "better"--if you say it is, I'll take your word. However, it simply isn't good, and can be downright horrible.

Which doesn't mean the game isn't fun. It just isn't as massively superior to RTW as numerous posts on these boards had led me to believe. I've enjoyed RTW more than I have my initial experiences with MTW (though MTW is certainly fun). Maybe that'll change, maybe not.

And STW, well...RTW is certainly better than that was. Of course, since RTW is the third game in the series started with STW, it damn well should be.