Timid response yet again from CA's Wikiman

**Incongruous** · 03-03-2006, 05:39

http://p223.ezboard.com/fshoguntotal...cID=1076.topic

Although this only awnsers the questions of

Will CA base M2TW upon an historical timeline?No

Will it include Summer and winter?yes

I think that the 225 turn (this has been edited because Simon Appleton told me to, I can give no more information, I would like it if you didn't draw to much attention to it please. I am very sorry) will be included, unfortunatley CA refuse to provide any reasoning for this decision.

Oh Well...
Any other decent TTS/RTS games coming out?

**TB666** · 03-03-2006, 06:42

Your link doesn't work but I assume you mean this
http://p223.ezboard.com/fshoguntotal...cID=1076.topic
I see a reason why they have done this.

The designers now have the fidelity they need to make the game play better without being tied to very specific historical dates. The player doesn't have wait through long periods of medieval nothingness which detracts from the enjoyment of the game.

This is like the fewer provinces in BI.
Alot of people whined about it but when we actually got it alot of people found it better then the original map.
Maybe CA has found that this new system adds to gameplay.

**Incongruous** · 03-03-2006, 07:12

Sorry fixed the link.
Well I'll need a bit more enlightenment about the 225 turns.

**TB666** · 03-03-2006, 07:17

Originally Posted by Bopa the Magyar

Sorry fixed the link.
Well I'll need a bit more enlightenment about the 225 turns.

I think we all do but this system could still be in the works, maybe that is why they aren't giving us the full info on it yet.
Personally I'm not entirely sure about this new system but right now it is in the "try it first" area.

**screwtype** · 03-03-2006, 07:43

Sounds like what they're doing is just having numbered turns, instead of turns by date.

And then now and again I guess, you will get an announcement about some chronological milestone that has been reached, such as "1390 - the first culverin reach the battlefield" (no I don't know when culverin first appeared, I just made that up).

Sounds fine to me. What's the problem with it?

**Zatoichi** · 03-03-2006, 09:56

I've definitely got a bad 'gut reaction' to the idea of seeing turns instead of years - but I can't really put the reason why into words. Maybe it's just the fear of change! I'm not sure how it will work with generals/Kings aging though - that falls under the need for more information category.

So - how will it all work, and how is this better than the way it's worked since Shogun?

Answers on a postcard please...

**PROMETHEUS** · 03-03-2006, 14:47

I don't like the way he manages pring .... too much words for saying actually nothing .....

**Orda Khan** · 03-03-2006, 17:06

Just mirroring some comments here, turns instead of dates is NOT a good step IMO

.......Orda

**doc_bean** · 03-03-2006, 20:16

I really doubt they're going to keep turns instead of just adding a certain date to a certain turn. They're probably still balancing the campaign pace so they haven't added them yet.

**General4Hire** · 03-03-2006, 20:55

bottom line, i find any change in this area to be unacceptable. As one person pointed out very clearly: When did someone complain about "nothingness" for long periods of time before?

This better not just be some moron design team's idea that they're going to "try" with a game that has the potential to be the greatest grand strategy game ever made.

225 turns? I don't buy. If you want each game to be a copy of an AOE zerg fest then go ahead...I don't. The prospect of spanning 500+ turns through this entire period was probably the MOST appealing aspect of the game at this early stage.

**Dutch_guy** · 03-03-2006, 20:47

Originally Posted by Orda Khan

Just mirroring some comments here, turns instead of dates is NOT a good step IMO

.......Orda

Seconded.

**Dead Moroz** · 03-03-2006, 21:47

Originally Posted by PROMETHEUS

I don't like the way he manages pring .... too much words for saying actually nothing .....

I have the same impression of that wicked man Wikiman. :) I thought I knew English but every time I read his posts I understand almost nothing. He is very tongue-tied and he is one of those people who talk but not tell. Though maybe he's just trying to speak with teens on their language, 'coz I noticed that teeny fans always admire his words.

Talking 'bout turns issue. First time I heard it I thought like: "Strange... But why not!? Maybe it's really better decision." But now the more I think about it and read other people comments the more "contra" I see and no any "pro". That idea of "passing through medieval nothingness" is very-very doubtful. I'd like to ask CA: what are you making the game for if it's just about "nothingness"? And maybe it's better to call this "nothingness" its real name - "poor gameplay"?

Btw, I think I can answer instead of CA to those who ask for turns moddability: "Forget about it!" Remember how much CA spoke about "unique moddability" of RTW before its release? And what did we get instead? Now they don't even mention any possible moddability of the game.