So ...

[SpencerH]

Froggie pretty much stated my feelings on BI. I've been pleased to hear Kraxis and others are finding it refreshing. I'll hold off until the newness is gone and the game is less expensive. Since there are fewer folks testing this one thoroughly, I'm going to wait a bit longer before I draw a conclusion on it. I'll probably wait for the 1.3 RTW patch at least, and perhaps wait for the price to tumble.

what he said

[Terry]

If it helps, I see that Best Buy has BI on sale for $24.99...........

[Garvanko]

Having said that, and stictly in my opinion only of course, RTW:BI is the best of the bunch so far. The improvements of plain RTW are many but one of the most obvious... On the battlefield, if you are defending and the enemy is moving to attack, they will attack in formation. As the AI is moving towards you it actualy manouvers. and constant checks its formation to keep units in place.

It does not do anything fancy, simply staying in formation for the attack and send cavalry to your flanks, but it does this consistantly. And it makes a big difference. This is not to say that if you know your stuff you can't break them, beat them and get a big kill ratio. But it actually takes some effort. And it makes the AI difficult to beat with a unrealistically small force (unless to do something very clever)...

The AI likes to target your archers before commiting units against your infantry. Clearly knows where the real danger lies.

[Puzz3D]

I had a senate mission to take a Macedonian city with wooden walls, and had to assault since there wasn't enough time to siege. The difficulty level is medium, and the year was around 245 BC. I had about 1000 men, 7 hastati, 1 principe, 4 velites and 2 equites under a 3 star general. The Macedonian garrison had about 700 men and something like 4 light cav, 2 skirmishers, 1 hoplite and 3 levi spearmen (they have long pikes) under a 2 star general. I broke through the wall with 2 rams and defeated the Macedonian light cav which made several aggressive attacks on the units I sent in. The hoplite and levi spearmen proved to be very difficult to defeat in the city streets. My velites damaged the hoplite enough that my infantry was able to finish it off. On a wide street, two hastati were eventually able to defeat one levi spearmen by getting at its flanks. On a narrow street, the principe, in engage-at-will, lost to a second levi spearman, but the spearmen lost to a hastati and velite when it advanced out of the narrow street into a wide street. That hastati advanced up the narrow street along with a second hastati, and they were able to kill the Macedonian general in some very hard fighting in the narrow street. That Macedonia general was killing an hastati on almost every swing of his sword. The surviving hastati from that fight was destroyed when it tried to rush the plaza, and was flanked by some light cav and attacked by the 3rd levi spearman. This triggered the 3 minute timer. I sent an equite charging at the back of the levi speamen as they withdrew back to the plaza, but the spearmen turned at the last second, and the equite ran right into the spears and was destroyed. I remember it had 16 men left out of 54, and I don't think a single spearman was killed. The time expired and I failed to take the city, and the time also ran out to complete the mission.

I attacked the city again, but had to build more rams before I was allowed to attack eventhough there was a hole in the wall. This time the AI stayed at the plaza with 1 levi spearman and 2 cav. I was just able to win at the plaza with heavy losses using 3 hastati and 2 velites. So, it seems to me that taking cities defended by pikemen is going to be very difficult since you won't be able to dislodge these units with cav charges. Incidentally, the levi spearmen pushed the principes back quite a bit.

[frogbeastegg]

Well. I've got it. I've played about 2 hours in one go, a rarity for me. And ...

Oh, blimey, I hate to say this but I see no difference between this and the old RTW except a shedload of graphical glitches! Oh, and the obvious things, like different units and map.

I'm playing Saxons very hard/medium. I started out with the plainly crazy sum of 15,000 denarii, and from there's it's been a gentle ramble along, building up 2 small but decent armies, stomping the odd crappy rebel army, and capturing a couple of extra settlements. All effortlessly. The AI is still passive as a wet sponge - no one has attacked me at all. No one! It's summer 372AD, and the only battles I've fought are those I've chosen. I’ve hardly seen any diplomats coming my way. Or anything, of any sort, besides rebel armies popping up when my public order is nice and high. So I don’t have the income to build larger armies or buildings in my cities, but so what? I simply don’t need any of the benefits, better units, larger armies, more armies, or anything.

Maybe in battles the AI is a tiny bit better ... but I can't really decide on that yet. I guess maybe somewhat better, if I'm forced to decide, and that is good.

Let me dedicate a paragraph to the entirely too much money I started with; it’s probably the second big problem here, the other being the passiveness of the AI. I built up 1 new army and expanded the one I started with. I constructed a whole lot of buildings in my starting city and the first I conquered. I peppered my lands with watchtowers. I didn’t need to work for any of it. I didn’t need to worry about money until about 370AD, and even then the worry was a very mild one, created mostly by my extravagant spending and lazy expansion – in other words the cash problem was entirely my own fault. Even in RTW I needed to work for my money and what it gave me in the beginning. It was the one slightly difficult part. BI removes even that.

So where is this very different game everyone was speaking about!? Really, because I’d love to know. I played Saxon because I didn’t want to ‘waste’ the hardest faction by using WRE for my first game, and be left playing the easier factions afterwards. If I have to play WRE to get any semblance of a reaction out of the AI and game then I can’t even see the point.

The graphics ... let's see. The first time the new camp map loaded half of it was black. As in pitch black, night time, can't see a dratted thing black. Moving my view so that bit was hidden and then going back fixed that. After roughly half my battles I get dropped back to a map which makes me feel I took drugs, because it's that classic 'graphical glitch multicoloured madness' type mess. Again, moving the view away and back fixes this. I just quit because I came back from another battle and found everywhere had turned into ocean ...

I'm blaming my drivers at this point, though they are the latest ATI catalyst ones and supposedly very good. I shall try rolling them back and see.

I'm also more than a tad fed up to find that once again my LCD's monitor’s very common native resolution is not included, so I have to edit files to get it. 1280X1024. The game's presets cut off at 1280X980 which seems to me a far more freakish and uncommon res. The edit is the second possible source for the graphics issues, but it’s the same edit I ran RTW with since day 1, and without a single issue except the infuriating tendency for it to drop back to 800X600 if I ever needed to alter any of the graphics settings in-game, requiring another bout of preferences.txt editing.

Oh, and while I think of it, a big frown and a rap on the knuckles to CA for not fixing the pause/game speed toggle problem/bug/issue/whatever which quite a few people, myself included, kept on reporting with all past versions of the game. Yay. I love not being able to pause most of the time; it's great when the phone rings and I have to leave my battle running. And watching my army being massacred on the highest speed setting while I frantically punch ctrl+t over and over trying to get it to slow back down is great too! Serves me right for trying to speed past the opening phase where my army marches in a mostly straight line, doing not much, in a bid to actually play more of the interesting parts of the game.

:cough: Perhaps that was rather abrasive, but I'm Not A Happy Frog after watching half my army get annihilated on top speed while I hammered buttons trying to get it to slow back down. Nor A Happy Frog after finding that all the aggressive AI and so on appears to have been put in other people’s copies of the game. I feel like I am playing on ‘super easy’ level, not very hard.

Now, if I’d been started with much less than the crazy 15,000 denarii, and had been attacked – or reacted to even a bit while attacking! – then it would have been tougher. But I did have way too much cash, and I was totally ignored except when I forced the game to notice me. Yawn.

So to sum up: after 2 hours the frog’s opinion is basically “Gggrrrrr!!” and perhaps “GAH!!!”

EDIT: Oh, and for the sake of reference, I'm hardly what you could call a strong faction. Any medium sized army of half decent units would cause me real trouble. If I lose an army I've got nothing to replace it.

I also forgot to expand fully my rant on those confounded rebel armies. I hate them, always did and still do - pointless little messes of peasants even 2 decent units can run over easily, which do nothing more than force me to divert an army and then fight another boring battle. Half the time I just smack them to death with my general's bodyguard and nothing else. Which turns him into a super general. Making other battles easier.

But while we're on the point, I suppose I should be glad I saw a rebel army of 2 peasants, 1 hunter and 1 spear warband! Wow! That's probably the best one I've ever seen.

[hrvojej]

Froggie pretty much stated my feelings on BI. I've been pleased to hear Kraxis and others are finding it refreshing. I'll hold off until the newness is gone and the game is less expensive. Since there are fewer folks testing this one thoroughly, I'm going to wait a bit longer before I draw a conclusion on it. I'll probably wait for the 1.3 RTW patch at least, and perhaps wait for the price to tumble.

Likewise...

[Uriel]

So where is this very different game everyone was speaking about!? Really, because I’d love to know. I played Saxon because I didn’t want to ‘waste’ the hardest faction by using WRE for my first game, and be left playing the easier factions afterwards. If I have to play WRE to get any semblance of a reaction out of the AI and game then I can’t even see the point.

Have you turfed the WRE out of Britain yet? Most posts I've read seem to say the real fun as the Saxons start when the Romano-british appear.

[Pode]

I bought BI and have yet to play it, spending all my time with RTW 1.3. I flattened the tech trees to make good units available earlier and set training times to zero, adding a pop growth bonus to small towns to help make up for the larger armies that allows. My observations:

-Load-save has been addressed. I'm not sure if it was truly fixed or if probability of AI lifting a siege was just set to zero, but the net effect is that 10 turns in, there are only a handful of rebel territories left.

-Tactical AI (unmodded, haven't tried the DarthFormations yet) is improved to the level of minimally competent. Doesn't sit still under archer fire, tough to bait out of defensive positions, passable at picking spots to defend, devotes a a fair effort to flanking when it has the chance, etc. It has satisifed my expectations of an AI opponent. I don't think it's as challenging as STW's, but I suspect that it's just that I'm not as green as I was when I played STW.

-Cavalry need to fear spearmen (as they should). I've lost my faction leader to green Gaul warband (green warband!) three times already. I'm unlearning my bad habits of generals bulling through most anything.

Summary: RTW 1.3 is what I thought I was buying a year ago when I got RTW 1.0. I'm not pleased with having to wait another year for it, but I am quite pleased with it now that it's here. I expect I'll enjoy the new features of BI as well, so I would recommend that it occupy some space on the froggy hard drive.

Edit: Frog, you posted while I was at lunch, and I left this post in mid creation. Oops.

[Puzz3D]

Yay. I love not being able to pause most of the time; it's great when the phone rings and I have to leave my battle running. And watching my army being massacred on the highest speed setting while I frantically punch ctrl+t over and over trying to get it to slow back down is great too! Serves me right for trying to speed past the opening phase where my army marches in a mostly straight line, doing not much, in a bid to actually play more of the interesting parts of the game.

Maybe it's because I'm more focused on the battles, but this isn't an issue for me. Why? Because I never speed up the battle except at the end if I have selected "continue the battle" and then decide I don't want to spend the time playing it out afterall. Why wouldn't I speed up the battle during the boring marching phase? Because it's not boring to me. I turn off banners, radar map, free camera and keep the camera as low to the ground as possible. When the battle starts I have to find the enemy unless he is the attacker and is going to come to me. I may send out scouting cavalry if I have it. For me it builds the suspense, and sometime the AI army shows up on my flank. Since I never pause the battle to issue orders, I can get caught out of position.

Nor A Happy Frog after finding that all the aggressive AI and so on appears to have been put in other people’s copies of the game. I feel like I am playing on ‘super easy’ level, not very hard.

Now, if I’d been started with much less than the crazy 15,000 denarii, and had been attacked – or reacted to even a bit while attacking! – then it would have been tougher. But I did have way too much cash, and I was totally ignored except when I forced the game to notice me.

The strategic AI is a bit passive, but overly aggressive wouldn't be good either. In my Julii campaign, I can see Germainia, with whom I am not at war, scanning one of my cities every turn. So they are planning an attack, but they don't attack because they are too weak. The problem might be that the player manages his money better than the AI which allows him to maintain bigger armies. Whenever AI factions fight each other that helps the human player as well. I remember that MTW had the problem where the AI tended to beat itself back into the stoneage. Reducing the player's money might help. You can do that in Rome Shell.

I also forgot to expand fully my rant on those confounded rebel armies. I hate them, always did and still do - pointless little messes of peasants even 2 decent units can run over easily, which do nothing more than force me to divert an army and then fight another boring battle. Half the time I just smack them to death with my general's bodyguard and nothing else. Which turns him into a super general. Making other battles easier.

Why not use auto-resolve to deal with rebels? Don't send your good general to fight them. It's beneath him and left to captains to deal with. The AI gets an advantage in auto-resolve, but, if the game is too easy, that would help make it a bit harder. I have 3 rebel armies in my provinces and they have been there quite a while, but I have been ignoring them. I don't feel that I have to smack down rebel armies as soon as they show up, and they make my income management less efficient which helps the AI compete economically.

Another thing I do which might make the game slightly harder is no retaining of units.

[Bob the Insane]

After reading frogbeastegg's last post I have to say you don't seem happy. Like I said before, it is better than RTW in all areas (it even has better graphical glitches... ), but in a lot of those areas it is only marginally better...

I will have to try a game as the Saxons to examine what you report, the starting funds seem excessive, more than the WRE if I recall rcorrectly...

As for the AI aggresssiveness on the strategic level. One thing I have icked up on is that the game is balanced to pretty much maintain the status quo and to let the hordes be ther driving force in the game which means that if you stablize your land quickly it will have a significant period of piece...

[RabidGibbon]

Originally posted by Frogbeastegg
I'm playing Saxons very hard/medium. I started out with the plainly crazy sum of 15,000 denarii, and from there's it's been a gentle ramble along, building up 2 small but decent armies, stomping the odd crappy rebel army, and capturing a couple of extra settlements. All effortlessly. The AI is still passive as a wet sponge - no one has attacked me at all. No one!

I'm surprised to hear that because my first campaign was a Saxon VH/M and I lost... badly. I started off like you describe expanding into rebel lands, but then noticed my next target was under siege already by the Romans and went for it anyway.

This started a series of on-off wars with the Romans, which finally ended with a WRE, Lombardi, Burgundi, Frankish alliance putting paid to my little empire.

Re: The battle AI - the problem (IMO) has been treated but not cured. During one siege (me attacking) some Roman units I expected to enter the city by a side gate and join the defence instead held back and attacked my reserves and archers after many of my units had entered in the city, resulting in a confused battle outside and inside.

On the other side of the coin two Hun armies were besieging a vandal city, they got a single siege tower against the walls when the attacking stack, with the equipment, ran out of infantry for the grinder. The reserve stck, round the other side of the city, sent a single infantry unit running round the side of the city, making for the tower. It never made it - being in range of my towers. So, it sent another infantry unit. And another. And another.

Re: The pause / Ctrl-T button glitches I haven't experienced again yet, but then I haven't put the Minimal-UI on either, and I seem to recall hearing the two are linked?

[Mongoose]

Frogbeasteggs post sounded just like regular RTW...I don't think i'll be buying BI unless the price drops.

Though i think i should add that VH/M is not the hardest setting, the difficulty bug was fixed in the Xpac AFAIK.

[Shambles]

Well. I've got it. I've played about 2 hours in one go, a rarity for me. And ...

Oh, blimey, I hate to say this but I see no difference between this and the old RTW except a shedload of graphical glitches! Oh, and the obvious things, like different units and map.


Maybe in battles the AI is a tiny bit better ... but I can't really decide on that yet. I guess maybe somewhat better, if I'm forced to decide, and that is good.

Let me dedicate a paragraph to the entirely too much money I started with; it’s probably the second big problem here, the other being the passiveness of the AI. I built up 1 new army and expanded the one I started with. I constructed a whole lot of buildings in my starting city and the first I conquered. I peppered my lands with watchtowers. I didn’t need to work for any of it. I didn’t need to worry about money until about 370AD, and even then the worry was a very mild one, created mostly by my extravagant spending and lazy expansion – in other words the cash problem was entirely my own fault. Even in RTW I needed to work for my money and what it gave me in the beginning. It was the one slightly difficult part. BI removes even that.

So where is this very different game everyone was speaking about!? Really, because I’d love to know. I played Saxon because I didn’t want to ‘waste’ the hardest faction by using WRE for my first game, and be left playing the easier factions afterwards. If I have to play WRE to get any semblance of a reaction out of the AI and game then I can’t even see the point.


Oh, and while I think of it, a big frown and a rap on the knuckles to CA for not fixing the pause/game speed toggle problem/bug/issue/whatever which quite a few people, myself included, kept on reporting with all past versions of the game. Yay. I love not being able to pause most of the time; it's great when the phone rings and I have to leave my battle running. And watching my army being massacred on the highest speed setting while I frantically punch ctrl+t over and over trying to get it to slow back down is great too! Serves me right for trying to speed past the opening phase where my army marches in a mostly straight line, doing not much, in a bid to actually play more of the interesting parts of the game.

:cough: Perhaps that was rather abrasive, but I'm Not A Happy Frog after watching half my army get annihilated on top speed while I hammered buttons trying to get it to slow back down. Nor A Happy Frog after finding that all the aggressive AI and so on appears to have been put in other people’s copies of the game. I feel like I am playing on ‘super easy’ level, not very hard.

Now, if I’d been started with much less than the crazy 15,000 denarii, and had been attacked – or reacted to even a bit while attacking! – then it would have been tougher. But I did have way too much cash, and I was totally ignored except when I forced the game to notice me. Yawn.

So to sum up: after 2 hours the frog’s opinion is basically “Gggrrrrr!!” and perhaps “GAH!!!”

EDIT: Oh, and for the sake of reference, I'm hardly what you could call a strong faction. Any medium sized army of half decent units would cause me real trouble. If I lose an army I've got nothing to replace it.

I also forgot to expand fully my rant on those confounded rebel armies. I hate them, always did and still do - pointless little messes of peasants even 2 decent units can run over easily, which do nothing more than force me to divert an army and then fight another boring battle. Half the time I just smack them to death with my general's bodyguard and nothing else. Which turns him into a super general. Making other battles easier.

But while we're on the point, I suppose I should be glad I saw a rebel army of 2 peasants, 1 hunter and 1 spear warband! Wow! That's probably the best one I've ever seen.

Seems I wont be Geting This Either, :)

Think il Wait till the next game This time.

But how Is the load save bug now?
And do AI still march 1/2 way up a hill then change their mind.
Also.
Do the Ai still Fail to relize they have A height advantage and then moove away from it?

[Doug-Thompson]

Well, I have to apologize for helping lead you down a frustrating path, Froggie.

All I can say is that I have not had anything like the frustrations you've expressed, but I never played the Saxons.

I certainly haven't had anyting even remotely resembling the the "dark screen" problems, and never had a problem with pause/fast forward/normal time even in R:TW.

Edited P.S.: Now I'm really confused. First RabidGibbon reports differenty, now Obike Fixx posted a thread in which the Saxons won an epic battle outside London, although now there's a crash to desktop when trying to go to the next turn.

[Viking]

Though i think i should add that VH/M is not the hardest setting, the difficulty bug was fixed in the Xpac AFAIK.

If that`s the case, battles can actually be difficult. I remember once playing a Carthaginian campaign on VH/VH. There was two battles against the Scipii were we both had fullstack armies and around 1000 men. I lost both horribly. I replayed the first one more than 10 times, but it was simply impossible to win those battles because of the morale bonuses the AI got.

[Kekvit Irae]

Oh, and while I think of it, a big frown and a rap on the knuckles to CA for not fixing the pause/game speed toggle problem/bug/issue/whatever which quite a few people, myself included, kept on reporting with all past versions of the game. Yay. I love not being able to pause most of the time; it's great when the phone rings and I have to leave my battle running. And watching my army being massacred on the highest speed setting while I frantically punch ctrl+t over and over trying to get it to slow back down is great too! Serves me right for trying to speed past the opening phase where my army marches in a mostly straight line, doing not much, in a bid to actually play more of the interesting parts of the game.

That's a not a bug, but rather a lack of video memory. You try cramming 2000 individually-rendered troops into a battle and then see how well your video card works when the game speed is at maximum and the game is trying to catch up on rendering each frame by frame.
Upgrade your memory and/or video card, or play with lower unit-size settings.

[frogbeastegg]

Hmm, quick dash through things here. Apologies, but if I'm not speedy I won't be able to say anything until tomorrow.

1. Remember, I've only played for two hours. I am going to go back for more in the hopes it will improve. Also, I'm only one frog - statistically speaking more people are finding BI to be a lot better. They've also played for longer. I'll be playing several factions to completion or near completion before I decide whether to drop this game, or (I hope!) not.

2. I'm playing on a very high end system here - P4 3Gig, a smidgen over 2Gig RAM, ATI radeon 9800 Pro, latest drivers, and all that. I don't have much up to upgrade to, barring marginally better video cards which cost a fortune I'm not going to spend.

2B I've always had this pause/speed altering issue, right from 1.0 before the minimal UI was even considered. The minimal UI makes it worse because there are no clickable speed altering buttons at all, only the hot keys. Which don't work reliably.

2C. This happens even on tiny, crappy little 500 men total battles. Even once on a 200 man total battle. Even on low graphics settings. I ran through the whole collection of fixes I could think of back in RTW ... 1.1, IIRC.

3. I won't comment further on the graphics issues until I've tried a slightly older set of drivers. Won't be the first time I've had this kind of trouble because of drivers.

4. I'd love to sit about and admire the eye candy during the marching phase, but often I have so little time every single minute counts. The minutes spent watching the marching could be used better and more interestingly for me, for example, in taking more time to consider my moves on the camp map, or in not rushing the actual fighting phase of the battle. Given unlimited time, yes I could enjoy the eyecandy. But now I'm rather forced to stare at the eyecandy knowing all the while I'm not going to have time to fight the battle with anything approaching more subtly than a warhammer to the face.

5. Very hard campaign, medium battle, simply because I hate cheaty battle bonuses handed out to either side.

6. I don't autoresolve any battles. It's a frog thing, and one I've held to since the first days of STW. I also don't reload if my game goes pear shaped (I wish, oh how I wish!), and several other iron man type rules. Autoresolving battles is eyewatering for a control freak like me. The battles are also about 65% of the game's draw for me. If the rebels came out stronger, and with better units, or less often, then I'd be happy. Either give me a real fight, or don't bother me

7. I'd by far prefer too aggressive to what appears to be a card holding member of a pacifist association. It is a wargame, after all. Total war. Well, to be very wishful I'd prefer a medium between the two, which others seem to be getting.

8. I was going to smush up the WRE in France before going to Britannia, and I've already sort of committed myself to that direction. But as soon as is feasible I'll try and head that way.

9. Rome shell?

10. I don't pause battles either, unless I have to answer the phone or something. Which happens distressingly often; people bother me at the worst of times. It amuses me - in STW and MTW I was a frequent pauser because I couldn't keep up with the (slow!) pace of battle. But RTW is faster in battle, and I can keep up fine.

11. I haven't loaded any games, so I've no idea about the load/save thing. All reports indicate it's fixed.

12. I wouldn't blame anyone for my buying the game. I chose to, even if I did still have doubts.

[Pode]

9. Rome shell?

Hit the ` key to bring up the "cheat" window, which says "Welcome to Rome Shell" and allows you to input various commands, like toggle_fow.

[Mongoose]

4. I'd love to sit about and admire the eye candy during the marching phase, but often I have so little time every single minute counts. The minutes spent watching the marching could be used better and more interestingly for me, for example, in taking more time to consider my moves on the camp map, or in not rushing the actual fighting phase of the battle. Given unlimited time, yes I could enjoy the eyecandy. But now I'm rather forced to stare at the eyecandy knowing all the while I'm not going to have time to fight the battle with anything approaching more subtly than a warhammer to the face.

5. Very hard campaign, medium battle...


9. Rome shell?

4:Not having fully working speed controls is VERY annoying. having to watch a bunch of horse archers shoot at each other for 20 minutes is a pain. Though i've never lost a battle just because the speed controls were too slow, just large numbers of


5:I agree, but a minor morale bonus isn't that bad as long as you don't get crazy results like a unit of "town watch" Can't instantly route your best infantry. Something like a +1-2 moral bonus is the best IMO.

9: "Rome shell" is a text box that can be opended by hitting ~. you use it to enter Cheats.

[ulyanov]

Oh, blimey, I hate to say this but I see no difference between this and the old RTW except a shedload of graphical glitches! Oh, and the obvious things, like different units and map.

I've played 3 games as the Goths on Hard/Hard, and although the game says it's supposed to be easy it's bloody hard.

The first turn the vandals become a Horde. They will be in your one city in 10 turns or so. Meanwhile the Huns are marching toward you, driving out the Samations, often into your territory (though they usually go for the ERE) then the Huns come after you. Even though the Vandals and the Hun are at war, they both come after you via the same route without knocking heads first.

I've tried defending the city (1000 men to up to 4000) and get creamed.

So the third time I tried pulling up the stakes then moving West myself, and the Vandals bloodywell chased me to the WRE region next over. It was Rebel at the time, so I was going to hole up there, but I got wiped out in 2 bridge battles that were both in my favour, first was 1:2 and I got a clear win with over 50% losses to me, and 80% to him (So I lost 1000 he lost 800 or so) the second was more like 2:3 and I got creamed. The Troops were equal - same units, no XP no armor/weapon upgrades and I got creamed in a bridge battle.

I'm finding it a definate challenge when compared with RTW....

[Puzz3D]

I'm also using an ATI Radeon 9800 Pro with 128 MB video memory. I haven't had any problems using driver version 6.14.10.6525 dated March 22, 2005. I have the secondary display disabled. I run the game with large units, 1024x768x16, anti-aliasing: none, unit scale: large, terrain detail: high, unit detail: medium, building detail: medium, effects detail: high, grass detail: none, vegetation detail: high, with smoke/dust and unit shaders. I don't have an LCD display. I have an AMD xp2400+ cpu (2.0 GHz) and 512 MB RAM.

Rome Shell is a command console for the game. You can enter it by pressing the key to the left of the 1 key. That's the tilde key on my keyboard.
This is a complete set of shell commands as posted by Finn last Oct 25, 2004. Many of these are restricted commands which are not enabled. The ? to get help within the shell doesn't work, and there is no official documentation on how to use these commands.

toggle_tow : shows/hides the tabbed output window
add_money : adds an amount of money to a faction's coffers, can be negative, default is player faction
add_population : adds an amount of population to a settlement, can be negative
move_character , : moves named character to position on campaign map
auto_win : the attacker or defender wins the next autoresolved battle
create_unit : creates one or more units of the specified type
toggle_fow : toggles the fog of war on or off
toggle_restrictcam : toggles camera restrictions on or off
give_ancillary : gives the character an ancillary
give_trait : gives the character a trait at level (default = level 1)
process_cq : Completes all (possible) construction pending in queue
character_reset : resets the character back to it's start of turn settings
show_cursorstat : shows the cursor position and region id
bestbuy : sells units cheaper
oliphaunt : big elephants
jericho : and the walls came a-tumblin' down
write_ui_cache: writes out the ui texture cache to disk
toggle_terrain : toggles the terrain to display various data sets, no param resets to normal
give_trait_points : gives the character points for trait
list_traits : lists all the available traits
list_ancillaries : lists all the available ancillaries
mp : gives the character movement points
list_characters : lists all the characters in the world or those belonging to a faction
show_landings : shows the landing positions available to the ai from a given region, default hides them
filter_coastlines : applies filter to world map coastlines
toggle_coastlines : toggles strategy map coastline display
set_building_health : sets health of a building of the specified type (eg core_building) in a settlement, so that the final health percentage is as specified; for building chains see export_descr_building.txt
ai_turn_speed : sets the maximum speed of turn processing during the ai round
amdb_min : sets aerial map overlay depth bias for min zoom
amdb_max : sets aerial map overlay depth bias for max zoom
amdb_offset : sets aerial map overlay offset towards camera
zoom : zooms to specified aerial map zoom
set_ranking_interval : sets the denominator of the faction ranking graph interval which is calculated as (number_of_turns / denominator). If set to 0, then the denominator will be set to number_of_turns, giving an interval of 1
regenerate_radar: Does what it says on the tin
adjust_sea_bed : adjusts whole sea bed to specified height
reload_shaders : reloads all vertex shaders
reload_textures : reloads all textures
toggle_perfect_spy : toggles everyone's spying ability to perfect and infinite range, and off again
building_debug: toggles building debug mode. TAB to toggle view modes, RIGHT SHIFT-TAB to reset mode, LEFT SHIFT-TAB to go back modes. G damages mouse-over building. P displays plaza.
reset_display: Forces a display_close(); display_open() display reset cycle
toggle_underlay:
toggle_overlay:
process_rq : Completes all (possible) recruitment pending in queue
force_diplomacy : Forces the negotiator to accept or decline a proposition
diplomatic_stance : Set the diplomatic stance between the two factions
shadow
ie
invulnerable_general : makes that named general invulnerable in battle
test_ancillary_localisation: adds all ancillary to the character info display. Ancillaries aren't actually added to the character
perf_times: Toggle display of simple performance times of game update vs display
burn_piggies_burn : ignite all the piggy winks
test_message: Test the event message specified in descr_event_enums.txt
show_terrain_lines : display defensive terrain features
message_collation_set: Set the message collation on or off (sets all factions)',0
show_all_messages: Show all messages to all factions (on/off)
clear_messages: Clear all the current stacked messages
puppify_my_love
reapply_rigid_model_influence
toggle_flowing_water: toggles display of campaign map flowing water
nw_stats: toggles display of network stats.
toggle_pr: toggles pr mode.
list_units : lists all of the units in an army, with details.
victory : show victory message for faction for short or long campaign.
trigger_advice: triggers an advice thread
damage_wall : Damage wall of settlement. Forces 40% damage to a random gatehouse and a nearby straight section. Destroys gatehouse if 'gate' parameter present; breaches wall if 'breach' present'
test_victory_scroll : 'Opens up the victory scroll declaring that the given faction is the victor
date : changes the campaign date to the given year
season : changes the campaign season to the given season
upgrade_effect : triggers unit upgrade effect
force_battle_victory : forces the local player's alliance to win the battle, completely destroying the enemy alliance
force_battle_defeat : forces the local player's alliance to win the battle, completely destroying the enemy alliance
output_unit_positions : output the positions of all units in the battle to the specified file
show_battle_paths : show all valid processed paths in the pathfinder
show_battle_paths_for_unit : show all valid processed paths in the pathfinder for a specific unit given a unit id
show_battle_street_plan : show the street plan for the settlement
show_battle_marker : display a marker at (x, y) for t seconds
show_battle_circle : display a circle at (x, y) of r radius for t seconds
diplomacy_mission : creates a diplomacy mission
event : creates an event at position
kill_character : kills a character with the given name
control : switches player control to specified faction; old faction may not act correctly as ai faction
create_building : creates a building of the specified type in a settlement; for building level id's see export_descr_building.txt
capture_settlement : evicts any resident characters and armies and gives the settlement to the local player
disable_ai : disables the ai, so that it does nothing
halt_ai : halts the turn sequence just before the start of the specified faction's turn, or the current faction if no faction given
run_ai : re-starts an ai turn sequence after disableai or haltai has been triggered

[Garvanko]

I never use Rome Shell. Total War is not that difficult.

[Kraxis]

Ok, now I'm certain.
The Saxons are more than just easy a whol lot of the time.

First, I used them for a 10 year testrun to check for the siege-bug. I never did anything and nobody did anything to me either. I had actually chosen them for this very thing to happen (aw those Saxons are not worth it, they are poor and out of the way, lets go plunder Constantinople).
Then I hear a friend say that he had never played an easier game in RTW, he simply rolled over the WRE.
Now this and several others.

I think it is partly because the Saxons are like the English of MTW, secure and out of the way. And then there is the fact that the hordes do not go north, rather southwest, well away from Saexland. That means that the Saxons have the enemies working overtime to deal with that while they are free to do what they want.

So you want a challenge? Don't pick the Saxons.
Though I'm happy to hear RabbidGibbon has experienced something better, so it can be challenging, though I think it is stacked against that.

[Doug-Thompson]

Kraxis, I'm inclined to agree with you, but having a boring faction is still a flaw.

Like you, though, I don't think any faction is going to be boring throughout a whole game.

Whether you have a boring game for any span of time, and when, relates to an exchange Tincow and I had on another thread.

Originally Posted by Doug-Thompson
Hordes are wild. Crusades in M:TW were usually focused on the Levant provinces. If not, they had a specific region as a goal.

Hordes are just looking for a home. They might attack your province. They might not.

Exactly. I can tell you for a FACT that if the second horde (Goth) hadn't just walked peacfully through my territory I would have lost that game right there and that was only about 20 turns in. At the same time, if neither of my two horde fights had occurred, I would be sitting pretty with half my abandoned territory reclaimed already. I must say though, hordes seem far more threatening when they're wandering. After taking one homeland, they don't move anywhere near as much even if they have several full stacks left.

It is possible, at least in theory, to go through a whole game and never have to contend with a horde. It's far less likely, I'd guess, to escape a horde's attention if you're a poorer, barbarian faction, but even the poorer factions have to conquer something civilized before winning the game.

[Kraxis]

Kraxis, I'm inclined to agree with you, but having a boring faction is still a flaw.


It relates to an exchange Tincow and I had on another thread.

Yes, that is true. I think some of the chances for a challenging game is for the Vandals to go after the Burgundians. That will force them northwest. But as noted the hordes are wild and we don't know what makes them tick.

I think CA knows this. They have made the game quite like reality that way, the Saxons did have an easy time compared to the peoples of the balkans and eastern Europe.
But what could CA have done? Vandals scripted to go north could be an answer as the Burgundians would not need to find a new home. But that would leave the south too strong for the Huns to make a true impact in too many cases.
Burgundians another horde? That one I like, but then cahnces are they would fall in with the Vandals, ripping the strength from each other. Result could be even worse than the first.
Stronger WRE would weaken the hordes too much.
Weaker Saxons could be a nice answer I think, but that would only set them back rather than making them harder to play. And it could even make them easier to play since you wouldn't be going into war with the others for a while, making them shift moer focus to the hordes, that would weaken them. So instead of getting into war when the enemies are strong you would got into war when they are weakened.

I simply don't know what could be done with the game as it is. And I think CA didn't know this would happen until the work was done. Backstepping for the sake of one faction simply isn't a solution. And I think that happened.

[Doug-Thompson]

To clarify, I'm not complaining about inpredictability per se.

The game would have a lot of replay value if you never know when a horde will hit. The trick is to have hordes hit often enough that no faction can safely ignore them.

[Mouzafphaerre]

.
Lurking this thread since the very beginning, I think I'll wait longer before getting RTW (yes, RTW!) and hope for EB to decide moving on to BI after the current mod is done.
.

[Grifman]

Well. I've got it. I've played about 2 hours in one go, a rarity for me. And ...

Oh, blimey, I hate to say this but I see no difference between this and the old RTW except a shedload of graphical glitches! Oh, and the obvious things, like different units and map.

I'm playing Saxons very hard/medium. I started out with the plainly crazy sum of 15,000 denarii, and from there's it's been a gentle ramble along, building up 2 small but decent armies, stomping the odd crappy rebel army, and capturing a couple of extra settlements. All effortlessly. The AI is still passive as a wet sponge - no one has attacked me at all. No one! It's summer 372AD, and the only battles I've fought are those I've chosen.

Duh, the game only begins in what, 363 or 364 AD? You've only played 18 - 20 turns and you crying that you're not being attacked? Don't you think you ought to give the game more time? You'd be screaming bloody murder if a horde invaded you in the first few turns.

The AI is building up just like you are, give it time. In addition, you're not near the scene of action. The Huns are pushing from the East and the events they set in motion are going to take time to be felt in your area, as one tribe displaces another towards the empire.

If you want immediate action, take a tribe along the Danube - you'll get your action all right . . .

[Azi Tohak]

Right now, on my H/H campaign with the ERE, I am at an equilibrium. The Persians attack one of my forts I have guarding the entrances into the main part of the realm (Euphrates crossing outside Antioch [my new capital] and mountain passes to the north), I smack them (still too small of armies, but at least they are not incompetant) and then I get tribute from the Persians. The west is more interesting, as I just had Sirmium, under Hun rule for a long time, defect to me. Now I have to defend it. I am mainly working on infrastructure, but I know I need to move out soon. The problem is, I know when I move, I am going to have to spread myself out, which will leave me open to attacks from the Persians (not such a big deal with my forts) or one of the Hordes might try to go East again (right now I think they are squabbling in Germany).

I think it is fun, but WRE should be more interesting.

Azi

[Doug-Thompson]

Re: 18 to 20 turns without getting attacked, "whining", etc.

While it's true that Denmark and North Germany aren't the hot spot, it does make me wonder why the game designers made the Saxons a playable faction and not, say, the Burgundians.

Also, there's more to the complaint. The Saxons are spending all their time fighting bandits when there's at least three different factions they could be fighting: The aforementioned Burgundians, the Western Empire and the Franks. All are close by.

I tried my hand as the Saxons tonight, and must say they are in a boringly peaceful place. However, there's another way to look at that. They would have to spend some money on spies and such, but they are also in a position to take advantage of other people's misfortunes.

I kept having this sense of deja vu with them, and finally realized why. They are very much like the Danes in M:TW. The Danes weren't considered the most fun to play, either. After all, they couldn't even launch a Crusade.

Like the Saxons, though, the M:TW Danes had good infantry (the Vikings) and spent most of their early game grabbing a couple of "barbarian" provinces (Sweden and Norway, and a little of the Holy Roman Empire, if they were bold and lucky) then building up trade and their sea power.

As other factions had failed Crusades and civil wars, the Danes would steadily -- sometimes, explosively -- expand. Possibly, that's exactly what's supposed to happen here. Substitute "Western Roman Empire" for "Holy Roman Empire," and the situation is quite similar.