Bad news from CA about Battles

**Productivity** · 06-22-2005, 04:25

Delete please.

**screwtype** · 06-22-2005, 07:10

Originally Posted by dgb

I disagree. The proof is in the final result. In my thrace campaign, I ended up with final win/loss stats of ~350 wins, 3 losses. In any of my M:TW games, it would have been closer to a 5:1 ratio, at best.

AI differences? I'd say so.

And not only that, but your 350 victories are absolutely massive. It's not unusual to inflict ten times as many casualties on the enemy, even at the "hardest" level.

There is just no challenge in the game at all. Even if you lose a battle, you can just move your battered units to the nearest city and rebuild ten of them in a single turn. Back to a full stack in two turns.

CA *could* have made a game that appealed to both the kiddies and their hardcore base, simply by making the game at harder levels function more like the earlier games. Then the kiddies could have had their fun at easy and normal and we could have had ours at hard and very hard. But they were so terrified of including anything at all that might confuse an eight year old that they dumbed down the entire package. And so their original base got shafted. And that is why there is so much anger and bitterness out there.

**SigniferOne** · 06-22-2005, 07:31

You guys have not played any mods, it looks like, the latest developments of which have led to drastic improvements in AI, for example I have never seen the AI generals suicide in thsi current campaign, not even ONCE, and it's already 220 BC. So you can either a) continue whining, or b) find ways to enjoy the game and end the whining.

**Mount Suribachi** · 06-22-2005, 07:53

Originally Posted by GilJaysmith

If you don't like the show, don't go to the next one.

I bought Shogun: Total War on the day of release, I bought Medieval: Total War on the day of release, I bought Viking Invasion on the day of release and just last month I bought STW: Warlord Edition to play on my wifes laptop. I have MTW and NTW installed on my PC and play the latter all the time.

Yet I haven't bought RTW , and obviously I won't be buying BI either, thats approx £60 you won't be getting from this previously loyal customer precisely because I "don't like the show". I don't know if you saw any of the recent "will you be buying BI?" polls, but more than half of the respondents said they would wait and see whether it would fix the gameplay, AI and bugs with RTW (and by the sounds of the Q&As with The Shogun they won't)before they would buy it or said they wouldn't buy it at all.

Thats more than 50% of people in a dedicated RTW forum who said they wouldn't be buying the expansion pack. Doesn't that worry you?

I could understand it if STW and MTW were critical successes but commercial failures so you felt you had to make the game more "accessible" but thats not the case, I know they both went to the top of the charts in the UK when they were released. Obviously I don't have the sales figures to compare for STW, MTW and RTW, but STW and MTW proved that there is a market for realistic strategy games. I can only echo what dgb said about exploiting your niche in the market.

Its OK saying "if you don't like it don't buy it" until all your customers stop buying your product.

**Productivity** · 06-22-2005, 08:44

Originally Posted by dsyrow1

You guys have not played any mods, it looks like, the latest developments of which have led to drastic improvements in AI, for example I have never seen the AI generals suicide in thsi current campaign, not even ONCE, and it's already 220 BC. So you can either a) continue whining, or b) find ways to enjoy the game and end the whining.

Right, so the onus should be on the consumer to do the work to make the game reasonable. Taking the lawyer analogy further, that's like the lawyer telling you that you have to go and look up case precedents, you have to go and print out the statutes for them etc.

That's another logical fallacy, and it's stupid. Mods should be there to make the game different, not to fix up basic flaws.

**Loinnreach** · 06-22-2005, 09:13

It is all about money. Figuer this out already.

CA thank you for two beautiful games which STW and MTW were (are). I can't mention this for RTW.

You have forgot to mention something thought. Let us suppos that you someone has many clients or only which is quit rich.

If client is not satisfied with the result, you don't need to go back to court at your own expense until he gets a result which he likes,
(you forgot to mention following GilJaysmith)
becaus client will say goodbye to you.

People should always look on issues from many different points of views. Then you can see the full picture.

VorCid

**Intrepid Sidekick** · 06-22-2005, 10:39

As we have already said, there will be no radical departures from the existing battles and their mechanics in BI.
However this does not mean that a large amount of care and attention hasn't been given to tightening up and polishing the battlefield experience.
If you buy Barbarian Invasion you will find that there have been some tweaks to a few areas in this part of the game. How much you like the tweaks is going to be a matter of personal taste.
WE think that we have improved the game with the changes we have made. As always we will await forum feedback at the .com and here with interest.

Intrepid Sidekick
#C.A. Staff#

**Puzz3D** · 06-22-2005, 13:11

Originally Posted by Intrepid Sidekick

As we have already said, there will be no radical departures from the existing battles and their mechanics in BI.

So, cataphracts will still beat silver shield pikemen frontally because that would be a change to the game mechanics?

Originally Posted by Intrepid Sidekick

If you buy Barbarian Invasion you will find that there have been some tweaks to a few areas in this part of the game.

This policy of not telling people what you changed is astonishing given the criticism that has been leveled at the gameplay of RTW. Half the people here aren't going to buy BI to find out what got changed.

**PseRamesses** · 06-22-2005, 14:01

Originally Posted by Intrepid Sidekick

As we have already said, there will be no radical departures from the existing battles and their mechanics in BI.
However this does not mean that a large amount of care and attention hasn't been given to tightening up and polishing the battlefield experience.
If you buy Barbarian Invasion you will find that there have been some tweaks to a few areas in this part of the game. How much you like the tweaks is going to be a matter of personal taste.
WE think that we have improved the game with the changes we have made. As always we will await forum feedback at the .com and here with interest.

Intrepid Sidekick
#C.A. Staff#

Excuse a stupid Q from an addicted TW-player since STW: How is it possible for the battlefield AI to "evolve" from a very good decision making STW to the sheer stupidity RTW one? I´m worried, please give any answer! Thx in advance.

**screwtype** · 06-22-2005, 14:03

Originally Posted by Puzz3D

So, cataphracts will still beat silver shield pikemen frontally because that would be a change to the game mechanics?

This policy of not telling people what you changed is astonishing given the criticism that has been leveled at the gameplay of RTW. Half the people here aren't going to buy BI to find out what got changed.

Oh, quit whining. Honestly, every time someone from CA posts here all some of you guys can do is moan that you weren't told enough. What do you want, a thesis? You know that CA employees are contractually bound not to talk in depth about upcoming products. They've told us often enough.

Sidekick at least has the decency to drop in now and then and try to respond to our concerns. If all these guys get when they turn up here is a kick in the teeth, what motivation will they have for coming here at all?

He's said there have been changes that they think improve the game. He's said they care about how these changes will be received here at the com. How about giving the guy a little credit for showing some concern and consideration about what we think?

If you want to know every detail about everything that's been done, then I suggest you wait until a few people here have bought the Xpack and reviewed it. That will no doubt be the best way to get an assessment of the game anyhow.

**Little Legioner** · 06-22-2005, 14:41

Originally Posted by screwtype

Sidekick at least has the decency to drop in now and then and try to respond to our concerns. If all these guys get when they turn up here is a kick in the teeth, what motivation will they have for coming here at all?

He's said there have been changes that they think improve the game. He's said they care about how these changes will be received here at the com. How about giving the guy a little credit for showing some concern and consideration about what we think?

He's right mates. Calm down be some positive. Keep it in mind also fellas they had done STW and MTW am i wrong?.. They deserve some respect and proper motivation.

I'm glad to see a CA staffs constructive message in this topic. At this point we should have to continue the constructive position again. As a community responsibility we should run the message traffic with calm, responsible, objective behavior. We have to keep that values alive if we want to keep our healthy relation and proper connection with the CA staff at the future.

So, the situation proves it that our voice heard from CA again and i hope so, it will get a response which will be reflect to BI. I think so and i hope so, which is our primary concerns: larger battlefields, long battles and smarter battle ai will correct at the BI.

Because there is no "tightening up and polishing the battlefield experience" besides of them. Put aside 80 new units, swimming units and night battles. We know that clearly they are not related with our point. They are only "features" not related with philosophy... We arent talking about only the actors we are talking about the "stage" which is directly related with the show.

Sounds promising Intrepid Sidekick i hope so you will come with better news at soon.

**Intrepid Sidekick** · 06-22-2005, 14:59

Hi Puzz3d

In answer to your first point:
No they can't beat silver shield pikemen in a frontal charge.

In answer to your second point:
There are many small, and some big, changes in the game, far too many to list here.
Development on titles like RTW and the BI expansion is a constant process, full of change.
As Captain Fishpants will have pointed out on this forum and at .Com, the CA staff who come here and talk to everyone are dev staff and not PR agents. We do this voluntarily.
I am a member of the dev team whose job is to work on the game, not to talk, at length, to the public about the new features. Or to talk about changes to the game, or even about our companies PR policy.
That is a PR type persons job.
I'm genuinely sorry if this doesn’t make you happy, but please be aware that we do try to answer questions as and when we have a few spare moments - during our lunch breaks, between design tasks, while compiling new code or while waiting for a new build to try out new data.

Anyway I'm sure there will be more information made available as Barbarian Invasion comes closer to release. Hopefully that information will satisfy your queries and perhaps change your mind about buying the game or not.

**Mongoose** · 06-22-2005, 15:10

One question: Do you mean they can't beat them in a frontal charge now or that they won't in the xpac? Thanks

**ChaosLord** · 06-22-2005, 15:24

I didn't really expect BI to go to any great lengths changing battles, hopefully the tweaks will be enough. But on another note, its good to see CA staff posting here again. While you fellows are floating around, would you mind telling us if any of the modding restrictions(such as faction limit) have been removed for BI?

**Old Celt** · 06-22-2005, 15:50

These posts which refer to any complaint over RTW as whining and as "kicking CA in the teeth" really make me laugh. Sure it's nice when Intrepid Sidekick comes and says "we think we've improved the game". Yes well, what else would we expect you to think? I'll point out that same rationale applied with the creation of RTW after MTW. Is the game really improved? Depends on who you ask.

If you accept that RTW is not a serious strategy game, liking it becomes much easier. Once you stop expecting any depth to long term strategy, continuation of ongoing plans from the saved game state, or meaningful diplomacy, it becomes a much more attractive version of Kingdom Under Fire, with more missions. That sort of game appeals well to children from 8 to 15, and it has become obvious this is the target market.

I do agree that no amount of complaining or suggestion in whatever form will have the slightest effect on the actual plans for BI, and certainly not for RTW. The policy is: Here's our stuff, like it or lump it. The mistake some of us have made is to think that ANY aspect of the product is negotiable: It is not. Terms are dictated by the supplier, and this iron clad format for success will be followed as it has for the last 5 years.

Ultimately, the only power we have is to buy or not buy the product. If the provider doesn't care if the membership here buys the product, then that of course says something about the level of importance attributed to such customers.

**KSEG** · 06-22-2005, 15:56

Originally Posted by Old Celt

These posts which refer to any complaint over RTW as whining and as "kicking CA in the teeth" really make me laugh. Sure it's nice when Intrepid Sidekick comes and says "we think we've improved the game". Yes well, what else would we expect you to think? I'll point out that same rationale applied with the creation of RTW after MTW. Is the game really improved? Depends on who you ask.

If you accept that RTW is not a serious strategy game, liking it becomes much easier. Once you stop expecting any depth to long term strategy, continuation of ongoing plans from the saved game state, or meaningful diplomacy, it becomes a much more attractive version of Kingdom Under Fire, with more missions. That sort of game appeals well to children from 8 to 15, and it has become obvious this is the target market.

I do agree that no amount of complaining or suggestion in whatever form will have the slightest effect on the actual plans for BI, and certainly not for RTW. The policy is: Here's our stuff, like it or lump it. The mistake some of us have made is to think that ANY aspect of the product is negotiable: It is not. Terms are dictated by the supplier, and this iron clad format for success will be followed as it has for the last 5 years.

Ultimately, the only power we have is to buy or not buy the product. If the provider doesn't care if the membership here buys the product, then that of course says something about the level of importance attributed to such customers.

Do you think you are some superior being because you play some diffarent game?
Do hear any game developer actually TALKING to people in forum after game release?
Did you ever heard developers of AOE series comes down to ask a bug list for the commynity?
Some people's snobbish attitude in this forum sickens me.
Show some respect for them.

**Old Celt** · 06-22-2005, 16:19

"Do you think you are some superior being because you play some diffarent game?
Do hear any game developer actually TALKING to people in forum after game release?
Did you ever heard developers of AOE series comes down to ask a bug list for the commynity?
Some people's snobbish attitude in this forum sickens me.
Show some respect for them." - KSEG (spelling errors original)

Answer to question 1: No, I think that for other reasons.

Answer to question 2: Yes!

Answer to question 3: Yes!

Comments on your comments: Your 24 postings and April join date suggests to me that you don't know much about the history of my postings and the discussions I've had about RTW. I was one of the biggest supporters of the game at its inception, and defended the developers quite stoutly. Any remaining grognards on this forum should be willing to back me up on that. I had to be beaten over the head to change my views, but after enough discussion and observation on responses, my opinion has come around 180 degrees. The reasons for that have nothing to do with my respecting other people's opinions on this forum, and everything to do with certain people not respecting my own and other forumers factual statements.

**KSEG** · 06-22-2005, 16:26

I apologize for getting heated up.
But please understand that I love this game despise its flaws, and seeing the constant bashing against CA makes me bit angry.

**Orda Khan** · 06-22-2005, 16:43

Originally Posted by Revelation

Well Orda, I reckon you could come up with the answer to this one yourself mate, don't you agree? After all, you have the horse, why not use it right!

So this forum member has become so important that he feels he has the right to tell others to leave. I shall treat this with the contempt it deserves.

But he's short, bald and fat. No wonder you have only limited problems with RTW Orda! Perfection in your world is easy to achieve it would seem......

......and you obviously have no idea about Buddha do you, since you describe Hotei. Siddartha Gautama ( Buddha ) was neither bald, short nor fat

......Orda

**Old Celt** · 06-22-2005, 16:47

@KSEG:

Apology accepted and appreciated. I think that if you consider the whole history of the critical discussions we've had here, remarks in this thread are extremely tame. They have to be because passionate argument gets termed as "abuse" and threads are locked.

Back on topic: I think CA is being completely honest when they say they aren't going to change the mechanics of the battle engine for the BI release. They have no reason to change them. The very successful sales of RTW proves that a great many people are satisfied with the performance as is. I think the only way changing something as intrinsic as that to the game would have to be driven by it being unacceptable to a large percentage of the target audience (not your typical forum members here). If something is working for your purposes, why fix it?

@Orda Khan:

I fail to see the slightest relevance of your posting to this topic. I respectfully ask you to take your personal battles out of here.

**Little Legioner** · 06-22-2005, 16:55

Good to see some peace. There was no reason for harsh behaviors. Well done fellas

Most of us love the TW series. I play this game with great passion for years. I have too many memories and nice moments with the TW games and i have great respect for the developers for the TW legend. And, here are my two cents worth opinions and critique.

I belive we will see some good news in the near future. As i understood correct CA will make serious improvements about our subject. Intrepid Sidekick has made his personal opinion and i believe they were good and promising news as a reflection about our main subject: "battles&battlefieds"

.

Back on topic: I think CA is being completely honest when they say they aren't going to change the mechanics of the battle engine for the BI release. They have no reason to change them. The very successful sales of RTW proves that a great many people are satisfied with the performance as is. I think the only way changing something as intrinsic as that to the game would have to be driven by it being unacceptable to a large percentage of the target audience (not your typical forum members here). If something is working for your purposes, why fix it?

Very succesfull sales do not make the game a classic. I guess they will change the mechanics. RTW sold too much but it is not a simple fact. Until recently I was thinking of RTW as an improved continuation of MTW. But, I didnt find successful elements of STW and MTW in RTW. Many of the fans ,I suppose, had the same disappointment... Just look at the comparison topics. I can remember many of them with different manners. RTW's target audience was false. RTW sacrificed hardcore strategy gamers whom earned from older series of TW episodes to the click-fasters and kiddies. It was not so necessary coz every TW game was selling very well and looking serious and different from the mainstream. Sorry but imho this is the story.

Intrepid Sidekick, i personaly thank you and the CA Staff. I hope you will make your best and we shall claim the better RTW experience again.

With my best wishes.

**drone** · 06-22-2005, 17:24

I don't really think that it would be wise to drastically change the battle machanics for an expansion pack. Think of the potential can o' worms (and bugs) that could unleash. The comments we are seeing from the devs are that they have tweaked the mechanics. Hopefully they will improve the AI some as well. The vast changes necessary to satisfy the STW/MTW diehards are best left to a new release (which, with refined AI/features plus the RTW graphics engine, could potentially be the Best. Game. Ever.).

Regarding the purchase of the XP. Many here have said they will not buy it, many have said they will wait for others to review. The majority of people who bought RTW do not visit this forum, and probably not TWC or the .com either. While it is difficult to gauge these "casual" users, how many of them will purchase the XP? Will the "click-fest, ADHD, RTS/FPS addicted" owner of Rome spend the money (or bug the parents) to buy the XP, or has the novelty worn off for them? This will truly be the gauge for CA to see if they are on the correct path financially.

**Orda Khan** · 06-22-2005, 18:02

Originally Posted by Old Celt

I fail to see the slightest relevance of your posting to this topic. I respectfully ask you to take your personal battles out of here.

Another important member I see. There was no 'personal battle' until another, such as you, told me to leave.

Just as you did, I replied to a post that was directed at me. You are allowed to do that but I am not, right?

There are three pages to this thread and my posts have been relevant, not that I have to explain myself to you. I guess one has to be anti CA and anti RTW to post here?

.....Orda

**Old Celt** · 06-22-2005, 18:42

Originally Posted by Orda Khan

Another important member I see. There was no 'personal battle' until another, such as you, told me to leave.

Just as you did, I replied to a post that was directed at me. You are allowed to do that but I am not, right?

There are three pages to this thread and my posts have been relevant, not that I have to explain myself to you. I guess one has to be anti CA and anti RTW to post here?

.....Orda

Come on Orda! With all the posts you have, you should know better than to descend into personal combat like this. I'm not saying for a minute that you shouldn't post here or defend yourself if you feel the need. What I was saying, and I was polite about it, was that it was completely off topic and didn't belong in the thread. When I say "take your personal battles elsewhere", I mean PM the person or e-mail them if you want, but don't hijack threads to flame wars. If we don't stay on topic Catiline or Nelson will come with their mighty sticks of thread locking. Now, please play nice!!

**Elmar Bijlsma** · 06-22-2005, 19:27

Originally Posted by drone

I don't really think that it would be wise to drastically change the battle machanics for an expansion pack. Think of the potential can o' worms (and bugs) that could unleash. The comments we are seeing from the devs are that they have tweaked the mechanics. Hopefully they will improve the AI some as well. The vast changes necessary to satisfy the STW/MTW diehards are best left to a new release (which, with refined AI/features plus the RTW graphics engine, could potentially be the Best. Game. Ever.).

Regarding the purchase of the XP. Many here have said they will not buy it, many have said they will wait for others to review. The majority of people who bought RTW do not visit this forum, and probably not TWC or the .com either. While it is difficult to gauge these "casual" users, how many of them will purchase the XP? Will the "click-fest, ADHD, RTS/FPS addicted" owner of Rome spend the money (or bug the parents) to buy the XP, or has the novelty worn off for them? This will truly be the gauge for CA to see if they are on the correct path financially.

The later question is exactly why I had hoped that BI would return RTW to it's grognard-lite roots. Expansions tend to be bought by the more hardcore following. I believe that is us or people like us (not exclusively, ofcourse, but mainly) so I hoped they'd listen more to our wishes.

And no disrespect to the CA staff* taking some of their time to post here but the prime benefit for me of having CA staff posting here is getting little snippets of news. But of late there is none of that. That you guys are improving things; yeah well duh, I still have enough faith in you guys to assume you don't set out to make things worse. Please ask the powers that be to ease up on the gag order and allow you to give us some actual insider snippets. No one is asking for 'The Big Secret To Making Total War', just one or two neat factoids would be really, really cool.

*please don't go "uh-oh" at that, it really is meant. My Grognard heart may have been wounded by woeful PR and support but you code monkeys are still highly respected by me and most people here.

**Mongoose** · 06-22-2005, 19:40

*please don't go "uh-oh" at that, it really is meant. My Grognard heart may have been wounded by woeful PR and support but you code monkeys are still highly respected by me and most people here.

Well said

. What's funny is that the programmers are very thick skinned...and the PR people are not.

**Puzz3D** · 06-22-2005, 20:22

Originally Posted by Intrepid Sidekick

Hi Puzz3d

In answer to your first point:
No they can't beat silver shield pikemen in a frontal charge.

Thanks very much for the response on this since I had heard nothing since demonstrating this problem to CA back in January. I hope the change extends to all cav/pike matchups, because I believe improving the RPS will have a positive impact on the gameplay. This weak RPS as well as the apparent non-working charge bonus have a negative affect on both the regular tactical game and on mods.

Originally Posted by Intrepid Sidekick

In answer to your second point:
There are many small, and some big, changes in the game, far too many to list here.

Ok. Big changes but not radical changes have been made. I don't know the difference between big and radical, but it sounds promising for the people who feel the current gameplay is substantially flawed.

**player1** · 06-22-2005, 20:32

Originally Posted by mongoose

One question: Do you mean they can't beat them in a frontal charge now or that they won't in the xpac? Thanks

We'll it's true even now to some extent.
Usually in my test battles, pikemen wins and cataps rout (with no big casualties).

**econ21** · 06-22-2005, 20:36

I recall most substantive patches to early TW games altered the gameplay in subtle but important ways. For example, in MTW v1.0, I seem to remember spearmen seemed to shrug off knights. This was soon changed in a patch and knights rather dangerous. At some stage, swords also received a bonus against spears. The tweaks were rather subtle, but they did alter the way the battles played out quite substantially. I hope and suspect CA will do some similar revisions when altering the basic game in their work on the expansion.

**BrutalDictatorship** · 06-22-2005, 21:00

Originally Posted by screwtype

And not only that, but your 350 victories are absolutely massive. It's not unusual to inflict ten times as many casualties on the enemy, even at the "hardest" level.

There is just no challenge in the game at all. Even if you lose a battle, you can just move your battered units to the nearest city and rebuild ten of them in a single turn. Back to a full stack in two turns.

CA *could* have made a game that appealed to both the kiddies and their hardcore base, simply by making the game at harder levels function more like the earlier games. Then the kiddies could have had their fun at easy and normal and we could have had ours at hard and very hard. But they were so terrified of including anything at all that might confuse an eight year old that they dumbed down the entire package. And so their original base got shafted. And that is why there is so much anger and bitterness out there.

This is what I'm attempting to DRIVE home here....

Some of these fanbois don't want to hear any negative talk regarding the game but at the same time, WarioWorld for Gameboy 13 years ago provided a more significant challenge.

CA took the franchise and dumbed it down to the point where my 5 YEAR OLD NEPHEW won 8 straight custom battles last night...EIGHT IN A ROW.

Tell me how that's justifiable?

Thread: Bad news from CA about Battles

Thread Tools

Display

Re: Bad news from CA about Battles

Re: Bad news from CA about Battles

Re: Bad news from CA about Battles

Re: Bad news from CA about Battles

Re: Bad news from CA about Battles

Re: Bad news from CA about Battles