Org Mobile Site
Thread: MP faction
ok... i know this is a longshot... but there are a lot of players onine that just want quality battles.. we dont care about 1000's of troop selections and uber units... could ca plz include a faction for mp only.. this faction would consist roughly:
4 kinds of infantry..
a) spear unit
b) defensive unit
c) balanced attack unit
d) attack unit, high attack- low defense
3 kinds of cav
a) heavy cav armed with swords and armoured for melee
b) faster light cav armed with spears
c) cav armed with bow.. less range than foot archer
1 kind of missle
a)archer
all these troop types are based off of stw units...
benifits:
no need for making custom graphics- the people who would play with this faction dont care much what they look like..
makes mp community happy
easy to include- a few lines of code.. 1-2 people at ca could acomplish this in about a days worth of work.
cheap upgrade- see above
saves time of devs- imagine all the time saved when you dont have to sift through 1000's of posts complaining mp isnt balanced..
profit- with all the players leaving the game.. the money spent on this very small upgrade would have a huge return. imagine if they all came back and bought this version.. $$$
drawbacks:
hmm.. i cant really think of any.. loss of a days worth of work? not a big gamble..
in conclusion... all you need you can find from stw.. unit types and stats.. really... this wouldnt take any time at all to do and it wouldnt affect sp at all.. i humbley ask you (ca) on behalf of the 1000's of stw fans.. plz add this mp faction.. you have very little to lose and everything to gain.
4 kinds of infantry..
a) spear unit
b) defensive unit
c) balanced attack unit
d) attack unit, high attack- low defense
3 kinds of cav
a) heavy cav armed with swords and armoured for melee
b) faster light cav armed with spears
c) cav armed with bow.. less range than foot archer
1 kind of missle
a)archer
all these troop types are based off of stw units...
benifits:
no need for making custom graphics- the people who would play with this faction dont care much what they look like..
makes mp community happy
easy to include- a few lines of code.. 1-2 people at ca could acomplish this in about a days worth of work.
cheap upgrade- see above
saves time of devs- imagine all the time saved when you dont have to sift through 1000's of posts complaining mp isnt balanced..
profit- with all the players leaving the game.. the money spent on this very small upgrade would have a huge return. imagine if they all came back and bought this version.. $$$
drawbacks:
hmm.. i cant really think of any.. loss of a days worth of work? not a big gamble..
in conclusion... all you need you can find from stw.. unit types and stats.. really... this wouldnt take any time at all to do and it wouldnt affect sp at all.. i humbley ask you (ca) on behalf of the 1000's of stw fans.. plz add this mp faction.. you have very little to lose and everything to gain.
Can you please clarify your point?
lol yes that would be good :D
i think nc's point is pretty clear... one unit stat like shogun had. the same units available to each faction, like shogun had. mp battles based more on skill and tactics than selecting and upgrading the proper unit.
t1 has got it ...
simple version:
create a faction named "x"
faction "x" is only available online and can only be played against itself.. x vs x
this faction would roughly resemble the setup from shogun same units/stats adjusted for the new game engine
one step further....
make this faction have its own unit stat text file... that way if the mp community decides it wants to tweak it with a stat patch it wont throw regular games out of sync vs non "x" faction players.
plz ca... this is a simple idea.. very easy to add.. call it competitive mode or something... heck... you could even put that on the box somewhere ...
1000's of troops...
castle sieges...
online play in regular and competitive modes...
:)
simple version:
create a faction named "x"
faction "x" is only available online and can only be played against itself.. x vs x
this faction would roughly resemble the setup from shogun same units/stats adjusted for the new game engine
one step further....
make this faction have its own unit stat text file... that way if the mp community decides it wants to tweak it with a stat patch it wont throw regular games out of sync vs non "x" faction players.
plz ca... this is a simple idea.. very easy to add.. call it competitive mode or something... heck... you could even put that on the box somewhere ...
1000's of troops...
castle sieges...
online play in regular and competitive modes...
:)
i think that's a wonderful idea
to be added in the drawback section:
* complaints of people who don't know the specific purpose of this faction: "WTF!!111oneeleven broken faction: unit selection not big enough and units look ugly and are just plain bland! Please fix this CA!!"
which will bum out a lot of casual players
to be added in the drawback section:
* complaints of people who don't know the specific purpose of this faction: "WTF!!111oneeleven broken faction: unit selection not big enough and units look ugly and are just plain bland! Please fix this CA!!"
which will bum out a lot of casual players
Awesome idea, however I would very much like it to be a server option. Not mandatory. as I enjoy re-creating historical battles with my mates.
Ummm why don't you just organise a game where everyone plays as the most balanced and generic faction available? I would much prefer that CA use factions slots to liven up the campaign map.
@Original Suggestion: But that's the same as Spain vs Spain, Rome vs Rome and so on..
Same as Rome vs. Rome.
But in MP RTW you could not choose the same faction as another player. So you could never get the balance that NC is talking about.
STW all factions had the same type of units on offer. So there was always balanced fight.
But in MP RTW you could not choose the same faction as another player. So you could never get the balance that NC is talking about.
STW all factions had the same type of units on offer. So there was always balanced fight.
In MTW there exists a MP faction, the French, no special units...
its not as simple as playing the french vs french.. or rome vs rome...
balance is not just being able to choose the same faction... its true balance between the units and their roles. the rock paper scissors factor that this game is moving away from is the heart of what made the battles special for me in stw.
a regular faction like rome or france cannot be balanced for optimal online play because of sp reasons.. and i fully understand that sp is the more popular side of the tw series.
the concern of using a valueable faction slot is mute. the game supports the addition of several new factions. this is a built in feature for modders. this idea will take nothing away from sp.
making this online mode the only one available for play is not what my idea is about.. i want to play with all the factions from mtw2 just like the next person.. this would just be an additional option in mp... and imho once players who have never experienced the old stlye of stw mp try this setup it will quickly become the most popular mp game played.
balance is not just being able to choose the same faction... its true balance between the units and their roles. the rock paper scissors factor that this game is moving away from is the heart of what made the battles special for me in stw.
a regular faction like rome or france cannot be balanced for optimal online play because of sp reasons.. and i fully understand that sp is the more popular side of the tw series.
the concern of using a valueable faction slot is mute. the game supports the addition of several new factions. this is a built in feature for modders. this idea will take nothing away from sp.
making this online mode the only one available for play is not what my idea is about.. i want to play with all the factions from mtw2 just like the next person.. this would just be an additional option in mp... and imho once players who have never experienced the old stlye of stw mp try this setup it will quickly become the most popular mp game played.
lol in rtw ppl stuck to plaiyng rome vs rome
it will always be:
strongest faction vs strongest faction
u cant change this
and even if CA agrees im pretty sure ppl will find the best way to own others.. the "others" willa dopt that tactic.. so we will come back to:
strongest faction vs strongest faction
it will always be:
strongest faction vs strongest faction
u cant change this
and even if CA agrees im pretty sure ppl will find the best way to own others.. the "others" willa dopt that tactic.. so we will come back to:
strongest faction vs strongest faction
Originally Posted by Darren_Shan:
lol in rtw ppl stuck to plaiyng rome vs rome
it will always be:
strongest faction vs strongest faction
u cant change this
and even if CA agrees im pretty sure ppl will find the best way to own others.. the "others" willa dopt that tactic.. so we will come back to:
strongest faction vs strongest faction
You obviously have no idea what NC is talking about. There was NO strongest faction in STW because all factions had the same unit choice and these units were designed in a way that countered other units....aka rock, paper, scissors. lol in rtw ppl stuck to plaiyng rome vs rome
it will always be:
strongest faction vs strongest faction
u cant change this
and even if CA agrees im pretty sure ppl will find the best way to own others.. the "others" willa dopt that tactic.. so we will come back to:
strongest faction vs strongest faction
Maybe people did 'stick to Rome v Rome' in RTW, what does that tell you about faction balance? Perhaps you should take a look at STW, you can pick STW/WE up quite cheap in the bargain bin and it is still being played over a fakeserver.
Oh and by the way, you will find that the only way to 'own' at STW is to adopt superior tactics, something that cannot be said about RTW
.......Orda
no actually i played STW and i was great there.. but got bored of this hilarious thing that u have the same units
(btw i was talking about rtw)
but rtw is much more tactical.. iv seen ppls who mastered the selucids egyptians and owned rome in no time (i mastered brits)
and remember Rome HAS the same units :D
(btw i was talking about rtw)
but rtw is much more tactical.. iv seen ppls who mastered the selucids egyptians and owned rome in no time (i mastered brits)
and remember Rome HAS the same units :D
Originally Posted by Darren_Shan:
but rtw is much more tactical.. iv seen ppls who mastered the selucids egyptians and owned rome in no time (i mastered brits)
and remember Rome HAS the same units :D
battlefield tatics and knowing how to use units properly are 2 seperate things... an echlon attack in rtw is suicide for example... the bull horn manuver is equally as ineffective... these are tatics.. but rtw is much more tactical.. iv seen ppls who mastered the selucids egyptians and owned rome in no time (i mastered brits)
and remember Rome HAS the same units :D
war elephants, chariots, pila throwing tanks and other uber units require no skill to use.. just the knowlage of how they work.... to say rtw is more tatical than stw is simply inccorrect.
besides... there are people who want and would enjoy this mp faction option... can anyone think of a good reason it shouldnt be included???
just saying "play french vs french" is not a reason.. nobody is asking for the other factions to not be included... besides... i could take a single unit of chiv knights and run over 3 spear units at the same time ... france still had the inherient imbalance the entire game had..
I can think of a reason, Ca would have to add in a new faction, and balance it entirely sepearately from all the other factions. How about we just wait and see how well MIITW is balanced?
If you want to make sure that tactics are decisive in an RTW multiplayer game then just use the same faction and the same or nearly similar armies.
Originally Posted by Lusted:
I can think of a reason, Ca would have to add in a new faction, and balance it entirely sepearately from all the other factions. How about we just wait and see how well MIITW is balanced?
this would take 2 people 1 day of work... the stats have already been balanced with stw1.03.. graphics wise you would need 1 custom image to put on the banners and faction selection screen.I can think of a reason, Ca would have to add in a new faction, and balance it entirely sepearately from all the other factions. How about we just wait and see how well MIITW is balanced?
mtw2 will be balanced.. im sure of that... knights will take 2 turns to produce and their upkeep rates will balance them against weak spear units. this however means nothing when you play online. mtw2 nor any verion of tw will be balanced online.. simply impossible when sp and mp stats are the same.
Originally Posted by Furious Mental:
If you want to make sure that tactics are decisive in an RTW multiplayer game then just use the same faction and the same or nearly similar armies.
plz read above again... its not that simple... faction vs faction is not balanced taticly if the factions themselves arent balanced to begin with. trust those that were there.. ive played tw for 6 years now.. why would i lie to you about this? im not asking for samurai units cause i miss the stw era.. (although that would be icing on the cake) just the stats used in that version.. dont knock it till you try it :)If you want to make sure that tactics are decisive in an RTW multiplayer game then just use the same faction and the same or nearly similar armies.
dear NC
as i said above.. (thats my last post) i wouls be veyr happy if CA would listen to "us" about including these "rules" in the game
i just pointed out that IN MY OPINION rtw is more tactical.. but again this is MY opinion
*bows*
as i said above.. (thats my last post) i wouls be veyr happy if CA would listen to "us" about including these "rules" in the game
i just pointed out that IN MY OPINION rtw is more tactical.. but again this is MY opinion
*bows*
very well... i understand your points... i appericate your support for the mp faction and we agree to disagree on the rtw vs stw thing... everyone is entitled to their opinions afterall :)
*hands darren mug of elmo shine*
any stw player will recall how prized elmo shine was.. good thing for me that our clan stockpiled this rare and potent beverage :D
*hands darren mug of elmo shine*
any stw player will recall how prized elmo shine was.. good thing for me that our clan stockpiled this rare and potent beverage :D
yay then we are cleared.. good luck with ur clan m8
Originally Posted by FearofNC:
... the stats have already been balanced with stw1.03..
yeh, but those stats are for units with completely different physics and game mechanics, careful rebalancing would still be needed ... the stats have already been balanced with stw1.03..
eg. cav charges and charge impact have hugely different mechanics in STW and RTW, hence most probably also in MII:TW
Personally, I am against an MP faction, anyone can beat another opponent if everything is equal. The true test is adversity, over-coming.
Look at Alexander who often fought out-numbered, look at Erwin Rommel, possibly the greatest General since Lee, who fought a desperate war in appaling circumstances with crappy Allies (Italians) very rarely with the supplies he needed (Armchair Generals talk tactics, Professional Generals talk Logistics) and cut-off from support...
Hannibal (anyone with a brain and big brass balls would've gone for the end-run, but the idiot didn't bring Siege Equipment) who marched an Army across the Alps.
Look at Genghis Khan who often fought out-numbered...
That being said, I would like a tweek to the game engine that would allow much more maneuver based warfare instead of the attritional warfare you saw in M:TW...
Look at Alexander who often fought out-numbered, look at Erwin Rommel, possibly the greatest General since Lee, who fought a desperate war in appaling circumstances with crappy Allies (Italians) very rarely with the supplies he needed (Armchair Generals talk tactics, Professional Generals talk Logistics) and cut-off from support...
Hannibal (anyone with a brain and big brass balls would've gone for the end-run, but the idiot didn't bring Siege Equipment) who marched an Army across the Alps.
Look at Genghis Khan who often fought out-numbered...
That being said, I would like a tweek to the game engine that would allow much more maneuver based warfare instead of the attritional warfare you saw in M:TW...
Originally Posted by allfathersgodi:
Personally, I am against an MP faction, anyone can beat another opponent if everything is equal. The true test is adversity, over-coming.
adversity is welcome... in stw i could take on armies 2v1 with a better than 50% success rate.. never since then have i been able to use my skill to such effect. when our clan battled in 3v3 or 4v4 we would always play on mountain maps to allow our oppenents drastic height bonuses.. then there was always the challenge of fighting a famous general like Fearamp or Magyar Kahn..Personally, I am against an MP faction, anyone can beat another opponent if everything is equal. The true test is adversity, over-coming.
and if you think anyone can beat anyone when things are equal you never faced amp, magy, myself or any of the other well recongonized experts... the only luck involved was when 2 generals of equall abilities fought to almost a draw and the death of a general caused one army to rout first.
anyways.. being "against" including a mp faction is a bit upsetting to me... its not just that i take it personally because its my idea.. why be against any option that would cause some players to enjoy the game more when you have the choice of not playing with it..
"faction vs faction is not balanced taticly if the factions themselves arent balanced to begin with."
I've read that ten times and it still makes no sense. If you are using the same units how else can you win or lose except by being smart or dumb?
I've read that ten times and it still makes no sense. If you are using the same units how else can you win or lose except by being smart or dumb?
you win by knowing how to stand in one place and throw pila...
NC, it just seems you haven't adapted to R: TW, that is all. Their is a rock scissors paper work out in R: TW. Get a praetorian cav to charge a triarii and see what happens, get a swordmen unit fight a triarii and see what happens. Every game has it's tactics, and you just need to adapt to them, not to bring the old stats into them. BTW: The SP and MP stats aren't the same, actually I think their is something wrong in BI unit stats, a clibs unit for the ERE costs 1800 denarii in SP, but in MP it costs 1390. While a Sass Cata cost 1400 in SP and MP.. Thus, giving a huge advantage to ERE..
i have adapted... just like i did in mtw... i win alot more than i lose... but thats not really the point... its not about winning or losing... its about having fun.. i can understand why most of you dont agree... you never played stw.. trust old battle axes like myslef and orda.. when you experience true balance... the game is 10 times more fun..
sadly.. i will adapt again in mtw2.. i just wish there was a balanced faction available for competitive play. its not asking much.. it wont affect anything in a negitive way.. and if my experience and 6 years of playing tw counts for anything, it will be a huge hit.
sadly.. i will adapt again in mtw2.. i just wish there was a balanced faction available for competitive play. its not asking much.. it wont affect anything in a negitive way.. and if my experience and 6 years of playing tw counts for anything, it will be a huge hit.
Nothing like that would be necessary if the game was well-balanced. Which it won't be.
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO