Battle speed

**econ21** · 01-23-2006, 23:02

Don't panic - quicker paced may refer to the campaign speed. RTW campaigns are faster than STW and MTW campaigns, I think, but still very long and IMO lacking pace. The mods that slow down the battles - RTR and EB - are even more glacial at the level of the campaign. (I think EB requires about 1000 turns to get the Marian reforms.) By contrast, I think BI was a step in the right direction with less provinces, a shorter campaign and big unpredictable threatening hordes (I've nothing against a mega-campaign, but give us the options of more bite-sized ones too).

I've been playing Civ4 and although it is also lengthy (on epic/huge), it manages to be more tense and exciting ("one more turn") than TW. I'd like to see more done to get the "fewer and more decisive" battles we were promised in RTW. Fewer skirmishes (especially with spawning rebels) and no contest sieges.

Of course, a key way Civ4 maintains the tension is by having an AI that really breathes down your neck. TW needs a little more of that element of danger. IMO, the threat from AI factions in the campaigns has progressively diminished as we've moved from STW to MTW to RTW. Of course, we'd love cleverer AI but in the absence of that raising the AI threat may just require more Civ style cheats to boost the AIs resources. (EB has recognised that with the scripts to keep replenishing the AIs coffers).

**Templar Knight** · 01-23-2006, 23:06

You might be right, however the sentence was to do with the 3D battles not the overall game.

**Reenk Roink** · 01-24-2006, 02:35

Don't kill me, but I liked the speed of the RTW battles, and actually wouldn't mind if they were a tad bit quicker...

**Martok** · 01-24-2006, 06:32

Originally Posted by Reenk Roink

Don't kill me, but I liked the speed of the RTW battles, and actually wouldn't mind if they were a tad bit quicker...

[Martok comes at Reenk Roink with a club] Hold still! I promise I'll be quick.

Seriously, though, shorter battles would be very very bad. I admittedly could usually do without the epic 5-10 hour-long battles we sometimes have in Medieval, but I was very dismayed that most battles in Rome didn't last more than 5 minutes or so.

**fester** · 01-29-2006, 18:19

Originally Posted by Martok

[Martok comes at Reenk Roink with a club] Hold still! I promise I'll be quick.

Seriously, though, shorter battles would be very very bad. I admittedly could usually do without the epic 5-10 hour-long battles we sometimes have in Medieval, but I was very dismayed that most battles in Rome didn't last more than 5 minutes or so.

Could'nt agree more. Some battles in MTW are responsible for the black bags under my eyes but the lets clash and dash crap in Rome leads me to believe the CA think the mass PC gamer market is over ran with brain dead lets blast the crap out of it dudes, and I dont believe this is true.Surely thats the console market......

**SirGrotius** · 01-29-2006, 19:50

I look back fondly on those few battles in MTW which I would call "epic" battles. Fighting against the first incursions of the Horde comes to mind.

Most of my battles for MTW lasted between 10-30/40 minutes. I thought this was perfect, especially since turns were abstracted to take place within a full year.

My RTW battles last about 2-3 minutes of getting units into position (on the fastest setting), then back on normal, engagement, which lasts, oh, maybe 3-5 minutes, before someone routes. Usually, the greatest difficulty is making sure I'm able to click on my units fast enough so that the battles is not decided before everyone has been issued an order. Very frustrating.

That was a long-winded way of saying "faster paced" battles in MTW2 would make me cry.

Things that have me worried:

1) I do not think that that CA post effectively eliminated my concerns (the reference to other TW titles could mean RTW, of course)

2) I do not think Game Informer/PC Gamer reviewers (or previewers) will bother to talk about the length of battles, just about graphics and probably the campaign map and factions. Sigh

**Martok** · 01-29-2006, 20:29

Originally Posted by SirGrotius

Things that have me worried:

1) I do not think that that CA post effectively eliminated my concerns (the reference to other TW titles could mean RTW, of course)

2) I do not think Game Informer/PC Gamer reviewers (or previewers) will bother to talk about the length of battles, just about graphics and probably the campaign map and factions. Sigh

I pretty much agree with your entire post, SirGrotius, but especially that part. Unless battle speeds are closer to what they were in Medieval and Shogun--or better yet, give players the choice of two battle speeds--then combat still won't be very much fun for me.

And I too very much doubt that reviewers will even mention battle speeds. I'm also concerned that they won't discuss the AI very much; and/or that they'll say the AI is great, except that it's difficult to say such things if you've only been playing the game for a few days before writing up your review.

**fester** · 01-29-2006, 18:09

Originally Posted by Reenk Roink

Don't kill me, but I liked the speed of the RTW battles, and actually wouldn't mind if they were a tad bit quicker...

So what do you want?any faster and two units would meet, Decide emediately who was the best and the lesser would route. This is one of the most fundamental floors with RTW the fact that things happen so fast that your not given time to implement any tactics.Thats the main reason I went back to MTW. Rome just feels like a very pretty arcade game.

**Reenk Roink** · 01-31-2006, 23:09

Originally Posted by fester

So what do you want?any faster and two units would meet, Decide emediately who was the best and the lesser would route. This is one of the most fundamental floors with RTW the fact that things happen so fast that your not given time to implement any tactics.Thats the main reason I went back to MTW. Rome just feels like a very pretty arcade game.

Hey, with all fairness, read my second post:

Originally Posted by me, with a little bit of time for reflection

I give in, you should all enjoy the longer battles, I'll admit, I like them as well, but in Rome there were just so many friggin' battles that it really got boring quick. I just hope the AI is improved so that battles actually matter, and you are not bombarded with 1/4 full stacks every turn...

And anyways, there's still the speed up.