Medieval II: Total War Official Thread

[GoreBag]

They built them on site if I remember correctly.
But I guess they couldn't add such a feature so they added wheels for the sake of gameplay.

Trebuchets are made more efficient if wheels are added to them.

[Vladimir]

OMG OMG OMG!!! Fewer pictures of men let’s see the princesses! HOW would you control all that?!? The pause button was my friend before, now it’s going to be my lover. I hope they focus more on depth of play than pretty pictures even though they have a fairly young market. This…will be big. I’m kissing the next Brit I see regardless of gender.

Yes trebs may have had wheels. In fact they’re more efficient that way so the bucket drops straight down and not in an arc.

Dude, the Aztecs? If one of your guys sneezed will half their army die? The only reason they posed any challenge was because of their numbers and that was countered by disease and Cortez’s allies.

[General_Sun]

Trebuchets are made more efficient if wheels are added to them.

If I remember this correctly, you CAN'T have trebuchets on wheels. Trebuchets need very firm and stable surface to fire or else it wouldn't work. That's why you can't have catapults or trebuchets on castle towers. The castle towers usually are not a stable enough foundation, and would shake apart if a trebuchet fired. :P

[Hambut_bulge]

If I remember this correctly, you CAN'T have trebuchets on wheels. Trebuchets need very firm and stable surface to fire or else it wouldn't work. That's why you can't have catapults or trebuchets on castle towers. The castle towers usually are not a stable enough foundation, and would shake apart if a trebuchet fired. :P

There are medieval illustrations of both types:

http://members.iinet.net.au/~rmine/ht/ht01.html
http://members.iinet.net.au/~rmine/ht/ht02.html

As was mentioned earlier its thought (and has been demonstrated on medieval weapons programmes) that the wheels allowed the trebuchet to move back when firing. This causes the weight to drop in more vertical line, rather than proscribing an arc (which it would do if wheelless), and that this generates greater force.

[TB666]

There are medieval illustrations of both types:

http://members.iinet.net.au/~rmine/ht/ht01.html
http://members.iinet.net.au/~rmine/ht/ht02.html

As was mentioned earlier its thought (and has been demonstrated on medieval weapons programmes) that the wheels allowed the trebuchet to move back when firing. This causes the weight to drop in more vertical line, rather than proscribing an arc (which it would do if wheelless), and that this generates greater force.

I think you have misunderstood.
We aren't talking about the wheels that are on the drawnings.
We are talking about wheels under the trebuchet so that they can push it around the battlefield.
All Trebuchet versions I have seen don't have those wheels.

[Hambut_bulge]

I think you have misunderstood.
We aren't talking about the wheels that are on the drawnings.
We are talking about wheels under the trebuchet so that they can push it around the battlefield.
All Trebuchet versions I have seen don't have those wheels.

Not at all. In my haste, I merely should have linked to page 3:

http://members.iinet.net.au/~rmine/ht/ht03.html

The drawing for the Siege of Jerusalem has what appear to be wheels on the base, although the accompanying text does admit that this is a rarity in medieval drawings.

Also I found a link to a site (http://authors.history-forum.com/lia...h13122005.html)
about Chinese war engines (apparently the Chinese invented the trebuchets) and near the bottom of this are a couple of illustrations of what may be wheeled trebuchets. Sadly, as with many drawings of the period, there is a great deal of room for interpretation.

Also came across these pages (http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/lostemp...et/wheels.html and http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/lostemp...t/builds.html). This TV programme was shown on BBC2 a few years ago and provides a practical demonstration of how a trebuchet with wheel could actually work.

[The_Doctor]

OMG, its just wheels. There only there so you can move the thing around.

[Hambut_bulge]

OMG, its just wheels. There only there so you can move the thing around.

Well yes, but what else are we going to do until winter 2006?

[TB666]

OMG, its just wheels. There only there so you can move the thing around.

Hey I have no problem with the wheels.
As I said before they probably added them for gameplay.


@Hambut: Thanks for the links, very interesting read

[Reenk Roink]

The screens look promising, and I know some people are wary claiming "touchups" and all, and while this is true to a certain point, the initial screens for Rome were not that much better than the graphics in the game...

I am torn when it comes to the theme of the game, however...

Though I do like the Medieval era, I was actually hoping for something fresh, or if they had to make a "sequel," then I would prefer to see one of Rome (perhaps a bit earlier too, focusing on the diadochoi kingdoms).

I am optimistic that the AI, diplomacy, and other factors will be improved, and that new features will add much to the game. I'm concerned about the addition of an Aztec faction, because if they are added, then I would expect the Americas to be well represented too, which I doubt due to the 21 factions...

Still, this is just early speculation, and more importantly, I need to grab a 7800 GTX .

[allfathersgodi]

My MTW2 Wishlist.

First off, it is good to be the king, but sometimes just for fun I'd like to be able to play as a mere General, Provincial Governor, a Unit Commander or perhaps a Mercenary.

Secondly, have a campaign option that scripts all the countries for historical accuracy, meaning the English never pushed so far East that they met the Byzantines in battle.

Thirdly, a better way of capturing a defended castle other then a frontal assault, a long drawn out siege or a spy. Perhaps under-mining the walls to bring them down and allow your troops a quick way in. Perhaps even night assaults?

Fourth, Naval Battles, I don't want to hear about them, I want to fight them.

Fifth, get rid of the entire having to have a line of ships. If you are English and you want to Invade Constantinople, how about building ships, embarking your invasion troops on said ships and sailing for the enemy...

If other kingdoms can re-emerge, why can't I?

I'd love for CA to do a Total War game set in the post-Medieval period, say from Christopher Colombus to Napoleon?

MP Campaign or a better AI. The Byzantines are facing a crap-load of Mongols to the East and to the West is my HRE Procinces. I wed two of my princess off to them in exchange for a pair of theres and we have been allied for 20 years. I am their biggest ally, and instead of asking for my help to defeat the Mongolians, they attack me!

Which brings me to another point, if I am allied with another country and they are getting hammered, why can't I send troops through their provinces to engage our mutual enemy? Example, the Spainiards were fighting the Alohamads in Cordoba, in Navarre I had over a thousand Hobilars, Archers, FMAAs, and Frydmen, why can't I march them through Castile and into Cordoba to help the Spanish against the Alohamads?

A mini-campaign as the Crusader States would be awesome!

I will now shut up...

[David]

My MTW2 Wishlist.

First off, it is good to be the king, but sometimes just for fun I'd like to be able to play as a mere General, Provincial Governor, a Unit Commander or perhaps a Mercenary.

Secondly, have a campaign option that scripts all the countries for historical accuracy, meaning the English never pushed so far East that they met the Byzantines in battle.

Thirdly, a better way of capturing a defended castle other then a frontal assault, a long drawn out siege or a spy. Perhaps under-mining the walls to bring them down and allow your troops a quick way in. Perhaps even night assaults?

Fourth, Naval Battles, I don't want to hear about them, I want to fight them.

Fifth, get rid of the entire having to have a line of ships. If you are English and you want to Invade Constantinople, how about building ships, embarking your invasion troops on said ships and sailing for the enemy...

1
I dont think TW is designed for that. Its called TOTAL war, but youre right thats not always good to be king.
2
Thats the fun part of the campaign. My best campaigns in MTW were when something like that happened, like the Almo's fighting HRE or so. If script the campaign like that every game would be the same.
3
They were in RTW BI so they might be M2TW
4
True, but i prefer good land battles first.
5
Again, with map like RTW, that'll probably be the case.

[allfathersgodi]

A few others, especially for Diplomacy. Back in the day it wasn't unheard of for kings to foster one another's children if they wanted to cement an alliance.

Why must I bribe an oppossing army to get them to switch sides? Shouldn't the spy be able to coerce the general by taking hostage his family? Or the Emissary appeal to said General's Ideology or Ego?

Religion, if I am King, why can't I change it?

Better AI... I am sick and tired of seeing the Byzantines getting their butts handed to them by the Mongols, the Turks and the Egyptians... And the Byzantines initiating a third front by attacking my HRE that is pushing south into the Balkans... They are fighting against Muslim Factions, a Pagan Faction, and instead of calling on support from fellow Christians (albeit from a different Sect) they initiate war?

[RedCoat]

I hope that they spend more time on the Eastern/Central European factions...and Austria, not any German state, should be the powerhouse of the HRE.

They need to be distinctive, yet historically accurate.