BI Demo Comments

[Intrepid Sidekick]

Hello everyone

Just a few points:

Walking speeds are the same as RTW and actually very realistic. (They are motion captured from a real person walking and are to scale)

Infantry Unit running speeds have been slowed for armoured troops by about 10%. (BTW They are also from motion capture)

Skirmishers move only very slightly slower than before.

There are also different cavalry movement speeds between light, medium and heavy cavalry.

The AI has been improved.

The game unit movements and kill rates haven't sped up, at all, in any area of the game.

Perhaps this perception to the contrary is either as a result of playing modded versions of the RTW game? i.e. where speeds and kill rates have been significantly reduced or a mistaken recollection of the original game speeds?


Intrepid Sidekick

[SpencerH]

Hello everyone

Just a few points:

Walking speeds are the same as RTW and actually very realistic. (They are motion captured from a real person walking and are to scale)

Infantry Unit running speeds have been slowed for armoured troops by about 10%. (BTW They are also from motion capture)

Skirmishers move only very slightly slower than before.

There are also different cavalry movement speeds between light, medium and heavy cavalry.

The AI has been improved.

The game unit movements and kill rates haven't sped up, at all, in any area of the game.

Perhaps this perception to the contrary is either as a result of playing modded versions of the RTW game? i.e. where speeds and kill rates have been significantly reduced or a mistaken recollection of the original game speeds?


Intrepid Sidekick

Glad to see y'all responding. I hope some of the thread comments are helpful.

The walking speeds etc may have been taken from motion capture but the actual speeds are in no way realistic. All you need to do is ask an ex-grunt (such as myself) how fast modern inf units move cross-country while carrying weapons etc. Staying in massed unit formations (such as in TW) will slow things down yet further.

To some extent though, the walking speeds are a moot point. Its a game. If the battles were played with realistic movement speeds many players (especially those who've not had the pleasure of 'humpin their ass through the grass') would complain that they are too slow.

I think the real culprit is the infantry running speed. The last time it I saw a discussion, running inf were clocked at 10mph!!!!! To put it in perspective, thats the speed of an elite modern marathon runner (who is obviously not burdened by helmet, shield, spear etc). Most importantly though, the inf running speed is way too fast in comparison to the cav running speeds. One only has to watch routing inf units outrun pursuing cav to know something is wrong.

[sunsmountain]

No, Intrepid, its merely because of comparing RomeTW to MedievalTW. Medieval units behave like slow moving blocks... they can be easily manipulated and give the AI plenty of time to react, with fewer options to flunk.

I care about a good AI. I dont have doubts you can improve this. But the actual fighting is over pretty fast. Perhaps realistic, but i like a prolonged fight more than a fast one. It allows you to enjoy the fruits of your strategic labour.

I can always increase the hitpoints, so soldiers fight longer & i can enjoy that more, it does theoretically make units like gladiators, arcani, etc less useful.

ps.: Running infantry speeds are indeed quite fast. Consider jogging instead? How long can a soldier run anyway? Was their endurance better back then?

[CBR]

The infantry marching speed for MTW and RTW is the same: around 6 km/h. Yes it is actually too much for a line trying to keep its formation but it works fine for a game. For that matter running/jogging/trotting, or whatever we are gonna call it, doesn't have to be realistic either but its more a question of control.

For standard infantry in MTW "running" speed is 66% faster than marching speed while in RTW its nearly 3 times as fast as marching speed. Overall units in RTW run about 50-60% faster than MTW. Sometimes MTW battles could be a fast clickfest but in RTW its guaranteed.

It is certainly not realistic nor fun for me with so much chaos and clicking.

Funny thing is, at least from the numbers I have, is that in RTW infantry running speeds was increased more than cavalry run speed (60% increase for infantry and only 50% for cavalry)


CBR

[Shaun]

well infantry can run mighty fast in RTW, making battles not very long.

[Lonely Soldier]

I just DL'ed and played through the demo then...

All I can say is U G L Y units! OMG they were hideous.

The Franks particularly! Thank God for RTR!

[Kurando]

All I can say is U G L Y units! OMG they were hideous.

Beauty is in the eye of the beholder, but I am almost certain that the colours are not historically accurate in some cases.

It is my understanding that purple colouring could only be gathered from a particular type of shellfish in those days, and that the process of making purple dye was both labour intensive and VERY expensive. In brief, there is no way that an entire Roman battlegroup could be outfitted in purple regalia. Hence, purple was known as a "royal colour" because only nobility, or the very rich, could afford a touch of purple on their garments.

Maybe Orda Khan or one of the other historians could confirm this, but I'm pretty sure that such was the case back then.

[Zenicetus]

The colors bother me too. There are too many primary "digital paintbox" colors. It's a Crayola version of the ancient world. I don't know enough about the history of dyes to be certain, but it seems to me that the range of colors for clothing, shield paint, etc. would have been at least somewhat limited, and probably further away from the pure primaries we take for granted today.

BI (and RTW too) has the look of the early Technicolor movie epics, where all the colors were bright, bright, bright. More modern historical movies tend to use a dulled-down palette, which (historical or not) I think looks better. There is also more (simulated) dirt and dust on everything in most modern historical movies. That's another thing lacking in the look of RTW/BI. All the soldiers are just way too clean... like they put on freshly laundered uniforms for drill inspection in a training barracks, instead of wearing the same thing after a months-long march through enemy territory. Dulling down the palette would help kill that "freshly laundered" look.

[Orda Khan]

Beauty is in the eye of the beholder, but I am almost certain that the colours are not historically accurate in some cases.

It is my understanding that purple colouring could only be gathered from a particular type of shellfish in those days, and that the process of making purple dye was both labour intensive and VERY expensive. In brief, there is no way that an entire Roman battlegroup could be outfitted in purple regalia. Hence, purple was known as a "royal colour" because only nobility, or the very rich, could afford a touch of purple on their garments.

Maybe Orda Khan or one of the other historians could confirm this, but I'm pretty sure that such was the case back then.

The colour Purple was indeed regarded as the colour of nobility and I must add that I am honoured to be mentioned by one of our very own 'royal' members ( as in April 1999 ) It is so good to see the original members such as yourself, Kurando, still posting at the Org

.......Orda

P.S. I doubt whether each soldier would look exactly alike either, there is only so much that can be achieved by a game and colour coordination in order to identify your army is ok by me

[Kurando]

The colour Purple was indeed regarded as the colour of nobility and I must add that I am honoured to be mentioned by one of our very own 'royal' members ( as in April 1999 ) It is so good to see the original members such as yourself, Kurando, still posting at the Org

You flatter me with your complements, Mongol + the fact that I am still around after this long is due to two reasons:

1) That Tosa and company have kept the site going, and that the quality of the org patrons and moderators is always top notch.

2) That the Total War series itself is such a superb group of games. I think that BI is just another progression in this series and it keeps getting better. S:TW delivered the goods and R:TW was unquestionably a masterpiece.

..

As per the colours I'd have to agree: the main thing is establishing identity on the battlefield + historical accuracy is a distant concern. I recall that the original Shogun totalwar movies featured units that were so colourful that we nic named them "smurf armies" so Richie and the dev team toned them down a bit. I think the trend back towards more colour in the battle groups is clearly evident in BI, and this is a mixed blessing.

As per Lonely Soldier's contention that the units are ugly, I'd have to agree and say that too is a mixed blessing; nonetheless I'd be more worried if the Barbarians were pretty... Heck, the are barbarians after all!

[Puzz3D]

The game unit movements and kill rates haven't sped up, at all, in any area of the game.

Perhaps this perception to the contrary is either as a result of playing modded versions of the RTW game? i.e. where speeds and kill rates have been significantly reduced or a mistaken recollection of the original game speeds?

I play an RTW mod where the movement speed is slowed by 10%. My impression of the BI demo was that at least heavy cavalry was moving about the same speed as in the mod which would be slightly slower than vanilla RTW.

Remember, LongJohn made the argument in MTW that movement speed determines the effective size of the battlefield. Slower movement making the battlefield effectively larger. He refused a request to increase the running speed of cavalry in MTW, which was set at about 15 mph, by even 10%, and he even argued that 15 mph was historically accurate. I can dig out the post if you want it.

Relatively fast movement means you have to separate units by a greater distances, and it therefore takes more time to scroll the camera which makes it more difficult to control all of your units. The Battle of Chalons devolves into total chaos very quickly if you try to make individual unit matchups as the AI is doing. You were able to play by making individual matchups in the Total War games prior to RTW.

The way I got around this fast pace, and the way virtually everyone in multiplayer is coping with this is to use what CeltiMordred calls "snowball" tactics. For instance, as the Huns in the Chalons battle, I put my infantry line in guard mode and put my cavalry into two groups way out on the flanks. Once the Romans charged my line, I swept in with the two groups of cav on each flank. I didn't target any specific enemy units or give any unit specific commands. The battle is effectively reduced to 3 things to control, and that's how you keep up with the speed at which things are happening. In multiplayer, it's even more simplified as players are mostly using only two "snowballs"; one to engage frontally and the other to flank. In singleplayer, you have an AI that's trying to make individual matchups, and doesn't recognize the threat from massed groups sweeping in from the flanks.

At least with mods which slow fighting and movement, you can get back to a gameplay that allows giving orders to the individual units at the height of the battle. The mod I use only slows movement by 10%, but when coupled with a slowdown in fighting speed it allows a player to issue more movement orders to individual units which makes maneuver of individual units more important and increases the tactical complexity of the game. The AI copes well with this because it's trying to do the same thing.

[Little Legioner]

Remember, LongJohn made the argument in MTW that movement speed determines the effective size of the battlefield. Slower movement making the battlefield effectively larger. He refused a request to increase the running speed of cavalry in MTW, which was set at about 15 mph, by even 10%, and he even argued that 15 mph was historically accurate. I can dig out the post if you want it.

Relatively fast movement means you have to separate units by a greater distances, and it therefore takes more time to scroll the camera which makes it more difficult to control all of your units. The Battle of Chalons devolves into total chaos very quickly if you try to make individual unit matchups as the AI is doing. You were able to play by making individual matchups in the Total War games prior to RTW.

That's the point! Balancing the speeds crucially bound with battlemaps effectiveness. Ta da! Thank you PUZZ 3D! You expanded the critical subject.

An please mate dig it and post it the message. I guess we need some a succeed reference to get a clear stance.

[Squirrel_of_hatred]

Ive unzipped the files/folders now they are sitting on my desktop where must they go or was it automated for you lads???

[CBR]

Just open the folder and launch the bi_demo.exe. Doesnt need to be installed.


CBR

[Jochi Khan]

With the Demo disc the instal created its own folder in
Program Files/Rome-Total war/Barbarian Invasion and also put a shortcut on my desktop.

You could create a folder in Program Files called Rome-Total War/Barbarian Invasion and put all the files in there. Then create a shortcut to your desktop.

Jochi

[Ludens]

The infantry marching speed for MTW and RTW is the same: around 6 km/h. Yes it is actually too much for a line trying to keep its formation but it works fine for a game. For that matter running/jogging/trotting, or whatever we are gonna call it, doesn't have to be realistic either but its more a question of control.

For standard infantry in MTW "running" speed is 66% faster than marching speed while in RTW its nearly 3 times as fast as marching speed. Overall units in RTW run about 50-60% faster than MTW. Sometimes MTW battles could be a fast clickfest but in RTW its guaranteed.

It is certainly not realistic nor fun for me with so much chaos and clicking.

I agree. It doesn't have to be 100% realistic, as long as it's controlable. One of the things I enjoyed about M:TW and S:TW was the slow pace of the battles, whereas in R:TW once combat is engaged it's over so fast that there is little you can do to influence it.

Melee killing rates may be the same as in M:TW, but that does not explain why I always manage to annihilate the enemy army. Once the battle lines are joined it is too easy to roll up the enemy line with cavalry charges from the flanks. And routing units, especially infantry, lose men very quickly.

I play an RTW mod where the movement speed is slowed by 10%. My impression of the BI demo was that at least heavy cavalry was moving about the same speed as in the mod which would be slightly slower than vanilla RTW.

You have mentioned this mod before. Where can it be found?

[BobTheTerrible]

Most mods lower the movement speed by 10%. It's not done by actually lowering the unit's movement, but by editing the terrain modifiers so that units move more slowly over different types of terrain. Somewhere in the data folder there should be a file for terrain modifiersm all you have to do is decrease the number for each terrain type. (for example, it will say grass- 1.0. Change that to .9 to make units move 10% slower over it) The animations will remain the same, so it will look a little funny.

[Puzz3D]

Most mods lower the movement speed by 10%.

But simply lowering the movement speeds is not enough. This mod raises morale and defense slightly so that units fight longer, it reduces lethality of all non-spear units to 0.75, and increases the anti-cav bonus of spears. There are a few other minor changes like better javelins and longer range slingers. The result is better RPS gameplay, and the time to make use of it during the fighting. It typically takes 2 to 4 minutes for the fighting on the battleline to be resolved depending on the units involved. The AI benfits from the improved RPS as well. I've seen the AI counterflank my flanking units, it's flanking units now have time to seriously threaten your general, archers have more time to inflict damage and the AI is very smart about choosing good matchups. The suicide general is still a problem, as is the AI's tendency to use one unit at a time in certain situations.

I'll post the link to Mordred's mod here when I get home. He has a new version v0.11 which reduces the anti-cav bonus slightly because online experience with the mod was showing that infantry was beginning to dominate the battles.

[CBR]

Melee killing rates may be the same as in M:TW, but that does not explain why I always manage to annihilate the enemy army. Once the battle lines are joined it is too easy to roll up the enemy line with cavalry charges from the flanks. And routing units, especially infantry, lose men very quickly.

Well the formula used for RTW combat has indeed increased killing speed but that is compensated by increased defense stat. Of course when using barbarian units that doesnt have enough defense the killing rate is higher.

I cant remember if a general's command rating increases both defense and attack stats or just attack stat...

But one thing for sure is that killing routers is now done a lot faster than STW/MTW and cavalry can get huge amounts of kills and IMO its too much.


CBR

[gardibolt]

Frankly, the units move far too slowly to suit me. It's duller than dishwater to wait for units to creep slooooooooowly across the battle field to engage. I always end up running things on triple game speed because otherwise I'm bored to tears during the movement phase.

It's a good thing that cavalry can get kills on routing units, because units on foot can never catch up with routing infantry units, which seems absurd.


And on another kind of movement, why does it take 4-5 years to sail from Spain to Egypt? It certainly seems like sailing ships should move at least as quickly as men can walk in formation, but that doesn't seem to be the case.

[Puzz3D]

Frankly, the units move far too slowly to suit me. It's duller than dishwater to wait for units to creep slooooooooowly across the battle field to engage. I always end up running things on triple game speed because otherwise I'm bored to tears during the movement phase.

This isn't a game where you are supposed to have constant non-stop action. The speed control is there so you can speed up the initial movement of the armies and the final stage of chasing routers.

It's a good thing that cavalry can get kills on routing units, because units on foot can never catch up with routing infantry units, which seems absurd.

I wouldn't expect infantry to catch infantry since they both run at the same speed. Routers do slow down once they tire, but the chasers are going to get tired as well.

And on another kind of movement, why does it take 4-5 years to sail from Spain to Egypt? It certainly seems like sailing ships should move at least as quickly as men can walk in formation, but that doesn't seem to be the case.

I think it's a game balancing thing because of the turn based nature of the strategic campaign. Even the land movement takes longer than it would have in real life. This gives the enemy a chance to interdict your movements since the game doesn't allow that in mid-turn. MikeB said they experimented with longer movement distances, but the gameplay became a blitzkrieg. There are traits which increase the distance a fleet moves per turn.

[barocca]

in the Demo i am finding things happen slower

if you give the guys an experience point or two and it makes them stand that little bit longer

movement speed seems to have been reduced for units,
get close to a routing infantry, it is moving across the ground slower than it's animation,
which, unless you get in real close, matters not one little bit because you cannot see it from a distance.

it still seems that all cav travel at same speed,??

i am seeing Heavy cav stay ahead of HA's.
and HA's getting caught by Heavy Cav

can anyone confirm? perhaps it was the unit matchups, or just me.

B.

[CeltiberoMordred]

You have mentioned this mod before. Where can it be found?

You can download it from here:

MCM-v0.11 English

Enjoy

[Ludens]

You can download it from here:

MCM-v0.11 English

Enjoy

Thanks for the link.

I have installed it just now, but I couldn't get it to work. The game said there was an error loading the mount database. I did install it twice in different folders (I wanted to see which files where affected) but the problem remained after I uninstalled both, did a registry clean up and reinstalled the mod. Normal R:TW still works.

Do you know someone who can help me with this?

[Puzz3D]

I did install it twice in different folders (I wanted to see which files where affected) but the problem remained after I uninstalled both, did a registry clean up and reinstalled the mod. Normal R:TW still works.

All the files go into a MPComMod folder under the main game folder, and the new shortcut points to that folder. I installed v0.11 andit works for me. Make sure you aren't installing it into a modded version of RTW.

[Ludens]

All the files go into a MPComMod folder under the main game folder, and the new shortcut points to that folder. I installed v0.11 andit works for me. Make sure you aren't installing it into a modded version of RTW.

Thanks, I got it to work by installing in a 'clean' R:TW folder. Though I don't understand why he refused to work in the other folder: the only differences were a few edited text files and two new maps to store the original data.

[CeltiberoMordred]

Thanks for the link.

I have installed it just now, but I couldn't get it to work. The game said there was an error loading the mount database. I did install it twice in different folders (I wanted to see which files where affected) but the problem remained after I uninstalled both, did a registry clean up and reinstalled the mod. Normal R:TW still works.

Do you know someone who can help me with this?

That's because your RTW is not "clean" : it contains the player1 bugfixer. If player1 would have made its bugfixer in a separated folder that would not happen .

[Ludens]

That's because your RTW is not "clean" : it contains the player1 bugfixer. If player1 would have made its bugfixer in a separated folder that would not happen .

Ah, but then it wouldn't be a bug-fixer. It would be a mod .

[Red Harvest]

Remember, LongJohn made the argument in MTW that movement speed determines the effective size of the battlefield. Slower movement making the battlefield effectively larger.

Yes, and there is always going to be a scaling problem until the game can support tens of thousands of men on each side at a time. The scaling problem is "aspect ratio" and the difficulty of turning large formations. The typical RTW formation is about 1/5th to 1/10th as wide as it would need to be. Running laterally accross the field should be incredibly difficult to do mid battle. Rotating would have similar limitations, since the folks on the outside of the formation must walk much further, thereby limiting formation turning speed.

The scaling aspects present trouble for using a full motion video capture approach to the game.

[Duke John]

Played a few battles choosing sides depending on wether there were interesting units. I played casually and did use the pause button. I did not not use overly clever tactics and was able to win the battles. Perhaps I didn't pick the hardest sides, but as I got 2 CTDs already (never happened in normal R:TW) I got fed up with it already. Not impressed by it.