Note on whinging

[Puzz3D]

although I somehow prefer SEGA over Activision, I doubt it is the publishers who decide about the actual gameplay.

Don't you remember the post by EatColdSteel, the MTW/VI strategic AI programmer, where he said that Activision had insisted that replacement generals be equal to the guy who died? All you got was a name change when a general died as the default behavior. He did go ahead on his own and put in his system as an option in VI that you activated with the -green_generals switch. Unfortunately or fortunately depending on how you look at it, the "all kings die at 56" bug was introduced. That was fixed in the v2.01 patch to MTW/VI which the programmers did afterhours on their own time. LongJohn took the opportunity to make some improvements to the battle engine. He fixed the "infinite charge" bug, removed the battlefield upgrades in multiplayer and made some playbalance adjustments.

I also remember a post by LongJohn where he said Activision had made him reduce the bonus given to armor piercing weapons. He said just prior to the MTW v1.1 patch that this had messed up the playbalance. He put it back to what he wanted in the v1.1 patch.

We saw the same pattern in RTW. I've looked but can't find the post where Jerome said he was really happy that he had been able to satisfy a variety of demands. The programmers are apparently in a better position to impliment what they want during patch time than they are during the development of the game or an add-on. Unfortunately, some things cannot be changed in a patch because it involves too much work.

[Lord Adherbal]

in the end the Demo will prove whether CA "listened to us" (or in fact just chose to go back to it's roots) or not. If it is still no were near the gameplay us old fans got used to, then I bet these old fans will not buy the full game and probably give up on the TW series. Many bought RTW after the disappointing demo, but I seriously doubt many will do that again with MTW2.

I know I won't spend €50 on a CD key if the game's MP is as poor as it was in MTW2. The only other reason why I would get the game is for modding.

That said, I know there is discussion inside CA to bring the gameplay closer to how it was in STW/MTW. How close that will be I do not know, but there is hope.

[Tahanaman]

I, like many other old vets, hope they (CA) get it right this time. Hopefully, CA will get it right!

[Alim]

At the time of making of STW and MTW CA was a small company trying to break into the games market. In order to survive, small companies need to do something differrent, something innovative, maybe to get a foothold in some niche market. CA achieved that with the uniquely realistic and tactically complex gameplay we've had in STW and MTW. But now that they are owned by Sega, and the TW brand has become much more recogniseable (not least because of the TV series), they have differrent aims. SEGA isn't interested in niche markets, they are interested in maximising their customer base (as an established company should be) and are looking to appeal to younger gamers. Since RTW the accent has been on better graphics and on making the gameplay "cool" and "fun" at the expense of realism and the AI and I think this trend will continue in MTW2 as well as the next titles in TW series.
From the information we've got on MTW2 so far there's been nothing to disprove that - in videos we've seen so far there is always insanely powerful artillery, even though artillery of that period wasn't really that effective at killing people, but mostly used in sieges. The often-mentioned movement speeds do look unrealistically high. In the campagn England has to conquer Rome as an objective to winning the game (and there are Aztecs). The biggest 'improvement' to the diplomatic engine that CA announced so far, is that AI characters will say what they 'think' about your empire when you click on them. The average gamer isn't necessarily looking for realism (or a really challenging AI) though and just because the vets are bored with this gameplay it doesn't make it wrong per se.
I agree with what Tamur said about the volume of complaining: it doesnt accomplish anything at all. Times change, life moves on, and we can only accept it. After all, companies exist to make profits. Anyway, most things in game can be modded (and here credit must be given to CA - the TW games are I think some of the most moddable out there). Of course, the one thing that cannot be modded is the AI and that is a shame. I know you cannot change the algorithms used but perhaps there could be some variables exposed in the text files, e.g. an interger between 1 and 10 regulating the AI aggression, or maybe a way to change the focus of AI spending from military to economic depending e.g. on the amount of florins in the AI treasury, or even something like ArchersJoinInMelee: true (which you can change to false). Making the game more moddable is the best way to appeal to wider masses with cannon elephants and the like while enabling the modders to change the game so it could appeal to the MTW and STW veterans more.
Anyway, sorry for the longwinded post, hadn't posted here in a while.

[Myrddraal]

Times change, life moves on, and we can only accept it.

I'm not sure I agree. I think we can make a difference.



From the point of view of modding, I hope someone steps into what was Jerome's role after the RTW release. I really hope for a more moddable game. I think if I had one request, it would be a better (or programmable) AI. If I had two, it would be a more modable game.

[Orda Khan]

Myrddraal,

Your bitterness about RTW permeates everything you post in this forum. You haven't seen the AI of M2TW, but you aren't even willing to give it a chance. If you can't see a problem with that, then I'm wasting my breath (figuratively speaking)

Though the Keep taking the pills part was not particularly nice, it was the above which offended me most. I remember a post very similar, nastier maybe, but similar none the less which resulted in a ban. I have had numerous disagreements with Puzz3D but I would not say the things that you have posted. I do not ask that you edit your post, rather consider the tone before posting.
Then in another paragraph I said..

People suggest we should all give CA a chance (yet again) Well all I can say is this......
When one reads the last page of a book, all one knows is its ending. To comment on the book one needs to read its contents

Commenting on giving CA a chance, notice I say yet again, implying that we have already.
I then say

When one reads the last page of a book, all one knows is its ending. To comment on the book one needs to read its contents

So we should consider RTW and give them another chance? I have seen the AI issue discussed over and over since well before RTW. So to the people who say give them another chance, I am saying how many times are we going to do just that?
I could have gone on to ask how many times have we seen this?

If CA makes the game like rome or even better I think that the game will be from start the best strategy game ever.So all who have something against rome or medieval should shut up.We don't want to hear what you say.If you want to say something against any of total war war games make your own site.

Seems like the lead up to every new release to me.

Every member here who whines or whinges, who gets bitter or angry, frustrated or even disappointed, has been loyal above all else to the TW series. We love it for what it was and for what it could be but we despair that certain things have happened, wanting them to be remedied and most of all wanting to say Congratulations CA, you did a Great Job!.

....And on a lighter note, next time I will try to be less subtle

......Orda

[Tamur]

So all who have something against rome or medieval should shut up.We don't want to hear what you say.If you want to say something against any of total war war games make your own site.

Oj, I missed this somehow, but I hope this is not a sentiment most agree with. Elsewise discussions around here would be fair full of pastry sugar.

[econ21]

Oj, I missed this somehow...

Don't worry, I didn't miss it.

[Myrddraal]

Neither did I

Every member here who whines or whinges, who gets bitter or angry, frustrated or even disappointed, has been loyal above all else to the TW series. We love it for what it was and for what it could be but we despair that certain things have happened, wanting them to be remedied and most of all wanting to say Congratulations CA, you did a Great Job!

Orda, what I don't understand is (to use the phrase of another) the polarisation of this thread. You talk to me about 'we' the upset veteran players. I'm not criticising dissapointment (how could I).

Though I joined the .org two years after you, I've played the entire series, STW, Mongol Invasion, MTW, VI, RTW, BI, and modded MTW, VI, RTW and BI.

I've seen the changes over the years, I'm not blind. I don't agree with lots of them, particularly many that came about in the jump from MTW/VI to RTW/BI.

When one reads the last page of a book, all one knows is its ending. To comment on the book one needs to read its contents

I was upset because, with that sentence you strongly imply me as a 'new player' who hasn't considered the background of the total war series, and is blinded by shiny graphics. I take offence to that.

Re-reading my own post, I see nothing malicious, or at least, nothing intended as such.

I do give allowance for the fact that it was a new engine, nonetheless I'm dissapointed in RTW.

I'd be willing to bet there isn't a grievance you have that I don't share. It's the manner of expressing those grievances that sometimes gets on my nerves, and the seeming lack of hope for the future that I disagree with. The automatic defensive reactions in this thread are something I'd lump in with the stuff that annoys me (though in this case, the first post doesn't really help much)

Take screwtypes thread on comparisons with LOTR2. It makes a good read, makes good observations. In short, it's enjoyable to view. When I read yet another comment about CA's lack or respect/ability/etc, which has little or no constructive criticism and is entirely fixed on the RTW experience rather than the possibilities of M2TW, it certainly isn't enjoyable to read. After all, are we not all here because we enjoy discussing the series with (mostly) like-minded people?

So to the people who say give them another chance, I am saying how many times are we going to do just that?

You know you want to give them another chance really. Go on, you know you do, or else why are you here?


I realise that maybe the pills comment was out of order, but it was genuinely meant as a joke. Maybe that's just my upbringing, keep taking the pills is commonly used by members of my family, not that we're nuts or anything.

@ Puzz, I don't know if you took offence, but please accept my appology, I am posting with good intentions.

[Kraxis]

I also remember a post by LongJohn where he said Activision had made him reduce the bonus given to armor piercing weapons. He said just prior to the MTW v1.1 patch that this had messed up the playbalance. He put it back to what he wanted in the v1.1 patch.

I remember that post. In fact I believe I was an important part of the discussion that lead to the 'revelation'.

On a general note on the thread.
I complained here for a while. I didn't like the apparent road M2 was taking. That doesn't mean I don't like a whole lot of issues, but so far I'm not impressed. So I complained, and I foun myself getting more and more unfriendly towards CA.

In the end I figured that
1) I was not contributing much really. Other people saying the same things but in a more eloquent way were being ignored as much. How could my posts be of any use then?
2) That it was better for me to just leave. I have been silent and have stayed away. I might return for the demo, I might not. I will however look at the first true reviews here from people I respect and know. If they like it, then chances are I might too. Until then I will wait, but not with a whole lot of optimism. I have been burned too many times...

[Puzz3D]

in the end the Demo will prove whether CA "listened to us" (or in fact just chose to go back to it's roots) or not. If it is still no were near the gameplay us old fans got used to, then I bet these old fans will not buy the full game and probably give up on the TW series. Many bought RTW after the disappointing demo, but I seriously doubt many will do that again with MTW2.

I know I won't spend €50 on a CD key if the game's MP is as poor as it was in MTW2. The only other reason why I would get the game is for modding.

That said, I know there is discussion inside CA to bring the gameplay closer to how it was in STW/MTW. How close that will be I do not know, but there is hope.

That's right. All we have to see is the demo to assess the battlefield gameplay, and this time there won't be a lot of multiplayers buying the game then resorting to a petition to try and get the gameplay changed. I've already withdrawn from multiplayer, so I don't have to deal with that aspect, and I won't be spending 2 months on a beta team hoping to get the gameplay adjusted as I did with RTW. There are a couple of other games coming out in the fall which may provide satisfying tactical gameplay to the vets who left Total War.

The SP campaign players who don't like RTW/BI gameplay have to wait for the full game to be released, but they can take a long term view since patches and mods are likely to substantially improve the gameplay.

[Tamur]

I won't be spending 2 months on a beta team hoping to get the gameplay adjusted as I did with RTW

Very irritating that you spent that much time. I must have missed this during my time away.

Are there threads in the multiplayer area talking about this? I did a quick search in the archive but couldn't find anything terribly relevant. If there aren't, no problem, but it would be enlightening for me personally to read this sort of thing.

[NeoSpartan]

Well, so far CA has not said much about AI improvment or anything. Plus CA is rarelly posting anymore.

So far all I see is that we are left waiting for the Demo and the Game. And in the meantime:
1- hope that CA IS READING WHAT WE SAY, (for their own good really)
2- Keep them fingers Crossed
3- Keep discussing how/what/when/why/if/maybe/I did/do/will do/won't do/think/and don't think, etc about MTWII.

At least the Flaming has gone down a bit and we can now discuss MTWII a little better.
I do know FOR SURE that once MTWII comes out, its sales won't be as great as RTW if its demo is no good. Not only will Vets and Realist gamers (like me) won't get it when it hits the shelves, but also the so called "Average Player/Young Player" isn't CREAZY about MTWII comming out. If CA wants gamers (old, young, vets, realists, etc) to be like they will be when Blizzard annouces that StarCraft II is comming out. CA needs to stick to its roots. It is that what made TW series become a hit WITHOUT really fancy graphics.

[AussieGiant]

The Demo will be the acid test.

I will be reading with interest what Puzz3D and screwtype have to say.

These two guy's will be able to assess the situation very quickly I believe.

It is good to see this thread getting back to being a little more friendly.

[Captain Fishpants]

Just to confound all expectations, I thought I'd post in this thread. It conflates many issues, some of which I'm in a position to refute, others I'm not. As always when posting in this particular place I must point out that I'm not part of the Medieval 2 team, and therefore not in a position to comment on that title.


CA don't listen to us.

Obviously, we spend all our time not listening. I personally spend nearly 23 hours a day not listening, with the remainder of my time spent ignoring things. Oh really, please. Don't be so silly. How many times do we have to say this: forums are monitored and sensible comments are fed back into the system.

CA don't talk to us.

So this is probably true but, there are a couple of reasons that I could cite:

(a) When a CA post is made it is quite often dismissed because the answer isn't *exactly* what people wanted to hear. It doesn't matter whether what they are being told is the truth, it wasn't what they wanted. Or we're accused of lying. Eventually, even the most dedicated will give up trying to explain in the face of that kind of attitude, now won't they? I now predict that this post will produce a similar rash of negative comments.

(b) Posting up anything as gospel during a development process is risky, because development by its very nature means that things are developing. What's mentioned one week may not be true the next, but by then the rumour machine will have constructed a complete "Grand Unified Theory of Everything And Why It's Rubbish".

(c) Given the hostility and simple rudeness that CA posts have met, are you surprised? I suggest that one or two people would be well advised to think about how they would react if their work and/or competence was publicly attacked in such a fashion. How would you react if someone came up to you in your workplace (or school, for the worst offenders - the people who really haven't worked out that politeness costs nothing). The internet is a marvellous device for encouraging a lack of people skills to be the virtue of "free speech" when really it's just being uncivil at best and foul-mouthed at worst.

CA are deliberately damaging TW by doing/not doing X (whatever X may be).

No, we're not. It might surprise people to learn that we do actually think about this stuff, quite hard, and for quite a long time. You might not like some of the solutions we arrive at (and yes, we do think you're entitled to your opinions), but that's not the same as us "damaging" the games. There's also an element of the "shock of the new" still going on: it's not the same as it was, therefore it can't be as good. Well, things have to move on in this world; that's the nature of a competitive, commercial, capitalist system.


We "know" what's going on inside CA. CA are secretly plotting to do X (whatever X may be) and the proof is that they don't talk to us.

Anyone but us who claims to know what is going on inside CA is not telling the truth. We have a code of silence round here that makes the mafia looks positively chatty because we take commercial confidentiality seriously. And because we are so secretive, we don't know everything that's going on either. I don't want to know everything that's going on - some of it is probably very disturbing and not nice. :)

Whatever "they" do, it will be rubbish.

Really? Well, there's no arguing with this one, is there? It's really a matter of opinion. However, there are grounds for assuming that some people will never be happy with anything that's done. There are always people who would be unhappy if you gave them the moon on a stick, because the stick would be the wrong colour and the moon would be too big to fit on their shelving.

But to be sensible for a moment, in "A Theory of Fun for Game Design" Koster makes a good case that the sense of fun of discovering something new (Shogun, in this case) is impossible to recapture on later occasions (MTW and RTW). In short, he argues for a variety of "familiarity breeds contempt". This also goes some way to explain the rose-tinted view of the past that also happens, not just in the case of TW games, but in the case of many things. The excitement of the new is replaced by the blandness of the familiar. The other reason why some will never be happy -- and some here will immediately get all offended by this, I'm sure -- is simple peer pressure. In order to be part of an in-group, it's necessary to adopt the social norms of the in-group, and there's a natural human tendency to unite around a negative. The norm here for a vocal group has become one where they are the innocent hobbits and True Fans and CA are Sauron's orcs and are Messing Things Up.

Personally, I think that there are people here who are squandering an opportunity. You could be feted by the entire community of players. Instead, many here exhibit an almost irrational dislike of noobs and enthusiasts - those who express any kind of liking for games that the group thinking has decided are flawed. That's a real pity. As the expert players, you have the chance to turn yourselves into netgods of helpfulness.

CA are a bit stupid because of all the above.

Maybe we are stupid. But then, if we are, we're just as stupid as the rest of humanity. And in the long run, that's pretty clever.


We are the only true fans, and we're being let down because of all the above.

Well, yes, we've never denied your enthusiasm. I don't think you are being let down, for all the reasons I've already cited. If you let yourselves admit it, TW games have been immensely entertaining so far, and that's what they are supposed to be: games, entertainment, fun. You know, the good stuff that makes life better.

The demo will be rubbish, you know.

I don't think it will be, but you have the freedom to arrive at your own opinions. Isn't it annoying when someone is reasonable? :)


And finally, there may be a solution available to one or two of you, if you have the courage of your convictions. You could always apply for a job here. We're looking for extra designers at the moment: www.creative-assembly.com/jobs.html#gamedes

Who knows, you may even be exactly what's needed. But obviously, you have to bring something special to the party, not just negativity, a pack of cigarettes and half a tank of gas.

[SpencerH]

There are a couple of other games coming out in the fall which may provide satisfying tactical gameplay to the vets who left Total War.

Which?

[Duke John]

I don't know at who your post was aimed at, Captain Fishpants, but few if any of the "veteran" critics who posted in this thread look at CA the way you descirbed. I think you are quite capable of discerning the complaints that are based on "I just don't like the game" and the ones that are based on actual playtesting.

And I hope that you know that most us ignore the posters who make such general statements about CA. So to be honest, I don't know why you wrote your post.

[TB666]

His post is aimed at the people that do say those things inclueding some of the veterans.
But true the veterans do not say things like "CA sucks" and those do say that are indeed ignored.
However some of the veterans do say things that is brought up in his post such as :
"We are the only true fans, and we're being let down because of all the above."
"We "know" what's going on inside CA. CA are secretly plotting to do X (whatever X may be) and the proof is that they don't talk to us. "
"CA are deliberately damaging TW by doing/not doing X (whatever X may be)."
"CA don't listen to us."
"Whatever "they" do, it will be rubbish. ".
Now they don't say those exact words but they are however implying it and it is very obvious in the attitude they write in.
Hence it is what some people have pointed out, it isn't the criticism that is bad but in the way they write it in.

[Ringeck]

Bashing is never a good idea, but I sorely hope that reasonable constructive criticism or good ideas, which is usually more difficult to spot, is heeded by the developers (of which Fishpants is not one, if I recall correctly - he is in England while M2TW is being developed in Sheepland-Downunder )

We will see this when the game comes out. Since the release date is a mere three months from now, I strongly suspect most major points of concern for fans are already well settled, one way or the other. Since the game is never going to satisfy me anyway (to satisfy me, I fear the game would be greatly disappointing to the regular consumer, which is a reasonable enough thing to avoid), I just hope some of the modding concerns have been ironed out - faction limits and province limits, that sort of thing - the easier the game becomes to mod, the more people can customize it to their liking (one way or the other).

The only thing I'm really hoping for, which I suspect will not happen, is for the mod-loading to be built into the game, much as CivIV (and most shooters) did it. That would mean we could easily play mods MP on public servers, which would be great.

[Lord Adherbal]

wow, did people actualy say the says Fishpants quoted? I guess I have the tendency to ignore comments like that, because what are people who think like that still doing on a TW forum?

I myself didn't like RTW, and the only thing that prevented me from giving up on it after a month or two is modding. Considering how much I still like MTW and enjoy it in MP almost every week, I am still hoping CA will decide to go back to the old gameplay. MTW2 is their last chance for me - if it isn't the game I hoped for I'll just leave the TW series. But I certainly won't be hanging around these forums making claims such as "Whatever they do, it will be rubbish.
"

[L'Impresario]

And finally, there may be a solution available to one or two of you, if you have the courage of your convictions. You could always apply for a job here. We're looking for extra designers at the moment: www.creative-assembly.com/jobs.html#gamedes

And there was this fellow in a Monastery thread asking what one can do with a History degree

[SpencerH]

I don't know at who your post was aimed at, Captain Fishpants, but few if any of the "veteran" critics who posted in this thread look at CA the way you descirbed.

I dont see it either

I think you are quite capable of discerning the complaints that are based on "I just don't like the game" and the ones that are based on actual playtesting.

I disagree

The other reason why some will never be happy -- and some here will immediately get all offended by this, I'm sure -- is simple peer pressure. In order to be part of an in-group, it's necessary to adopt the social norms of the in-group, and there's a natural human tendency to unite around a negative. The norm here for a vocal group has become one where they are the innocent hobbits and True Fans and CA are Sauron's orcs and are Messing Things Up.

Personally, I think that there are people here who are squandering an opportunity. You could be feted by the entire community of players. Instead, many here exhibit an almost irrational dislike of noobs and enthusiasts - those who express any kind of liking for games that the group thinking has decided are flawed. That's a real pity. As the expert players, you have the chance to turn yourselves into netgods of helpfulness.

I think those comments speak for themselves.

TW games have been immensely entertaining so far, and that's what they are supposed to be: games, entertainment, fun. You know, the good stuff that makes life better.

You just dont get it. STW and MTW were "immensely entertaining". RTW was not. While I agree with your comment by Koster and "the sense of fun of discovering something new", I'd point out that it doesnt mean that the games are "doomed" to decline. CIV4 is arguably the best version of the game.

And I hope that you know that most us ignore the posters who make such general statements about CA. So to be honest, I don't know why you wrote your post.

I think my tank is filled wrt comments and threads about "whining". I sincerely hope that MTW2 is a great game but I guess I'll just lurk until the reviews by players I respect come in (assuming any remain to play).

[AussieGiant]

Thanks for throw'in that into the thread Cap'im Fish.

I'd say you "Hit the nail on the head" with that post.

-----------------
Dear All,

Please note that "hitting the nail on the head" is not to be taken negatively or literally.

If you do then it is your own choice.

[sunsmountain]

Have you seen any dev come here and ask for a list of things to be fixed the way they do for a patch? They've never done that in 6 years when a new product is being developed. Besides, the suggestions based on experience with RTW/BI have already been made.

I do see mr. Fishpants again who shows a somewhat emotional response towards us. Evidently, CA are humans who care about us. Your seem to imply they don't. Where are those suggestions based on experience with RTW/BI? Haven't found them, and NOW is the time to repeat them!

I still don't see how the public can give any feedback on M2TW AI since they haven't seen the game yet. The kind of info you would need to do that isn't being released by CA.

Look mate, would you understand if I put it like this: You have Shogun:TW, and you can give feedback before Medieval:TW is released. I think MTW would have been even better if you did, as you know MTW has some weak points introduced since Shogun (in particularly, spears are useless in multiplayer, you could have warned them saying stuff like: The rock-paper-scissors balance is excellent in Shogun, don't change it!)

I think the most difficult thing about game play that nearly everyone agrees with is the moment speeds and kill rates.

Until this day I have never seen any CA person address why both were increased...AND THAT IS ANNOYING, given the impact to game play it has had.

Would it make you feel better if they said: "Movement speed is based on motion-captured animations. Kill rates are also based on those. The result we feel is more realistic"
?
Because that is the case. Apparently, CA are choosing realism over gameplay, and hope gameplay will get used to it. The AI is lacking in any case. I don't agree with current speeds either.

Unfortunately, some things cannot be changed in a patch because it involves too much work.

All the more reason to state what is wrong with RomeTW now instead of later.


ps.: Maybe I'll apply for that job, though I don't hold degrees

[Ser Clegane]

You just dont get it. STW and MTW were "immensely entertaining". RTW was not. While I agree with your comment by Koster and "the sense of fun of discovering something new", I'd point out that it doesnt mean that the games are "doomed" to decline. CIV4 is arguably the best version of the game.

The issue is that these are things that very much depend on personal taste - I see that a lot of patrons actually do consider RTW to be "immensely entertaining" (personally I enjoyed M:TW more, but that has various reasons), while others disagree - perhaps their criteria regarding what qualifies as "immensely entertaining" simply differ.

The same is the case for Civ IV. Personally I think it is a great game and I have a lot of fun with it, however, this thread shows that a lot of people disagree.

[TB666]

You just dont get it. STW and MTW were "immensely entertaining". RTW was not.

No he do get it.
Entertaining is in the eye of the beholder.
I enjoyed all TW-games so far and RTW is my favorite.
You disagree which is your right to do so but you can't state that I don't get it because I do, I just don't agree with you and neither does Fishpants.

[econ21]

Would it make you feel better if they said: "Movement speed is based on motion-captured animations. Kill rates are also based on those. The result we feel is more realistic"

Because that is the case. Apparently, CA are choosing realism over gameplay, and hope gameplay will get used to it.

Yes, that explanation has been given several times in this forum. I think - hope - it applies to the movement speed only. I would not like to be one of the guys killed in order to get motion-captures of kill speeds.

It would be interesting to debate this explanation in detail, especially with CA, but I fear this rather defuse and emotional thread may not be the best place for that kind of specific debate.

[AussieGiant]

I recind my previous post on the "general feel" of the post getting better. I don't think it is now.

It seems Fishpants can read the future are things seem to be heading down the path he described.

There seems to be very little common ground to discuss things.

[Duke John]

Both movement and moment of an attack is determined by the animations and related files. The rate of showing attack animations and wether an attack becomes a hit is determined by the stats and in the case of missiles also by collision detection.

As far as I know that has never been an issue for people. But that routing units melt away when attacked and the decision to have high movement speeds and kill rates does bother alot of people. Those decisions have been made with a certain vision of what makes a good game, and it seems that CA thinks that a fast-paced game that is decided in 5 minutes is the fitting gameplay for an engine that can display epic battles with thousands of men. Nowhere do I read that they are changing their idea of good gameplay, I only read about improvement. And in my opinion, fast paced battles where the AI rushes towards you cannot be improved, that concept is flawed from the beginning, at least if the goal is to provide the player with epic battles.

So in short, CA advertises improvement of the R:TW engine, while the "whingers" want change. And that is what keeps most people away from being optimistic... just my random thought for today.

[Puzz3D]

I do see mr. Fishpants again who shows a somewhat emotional response towards us. Evidently, CA are humans who care about us. Your seem to imply they don't. Where are those suggestions based on experience with RTW/BI? Haven't found them, and NOW is the time to repeat them!

You have to be kidding. What they care about is bad publicity, and I've posted a lot about the gameplay.

Make the battlespeed slow enough that you can coordinate 20 units
Balance the maneuver and attrition aspects of a battle
Balance offensive and defensive styles of play
Get rid of the bias that favors the AI on auto-resolve on normal difficulty
Put back the combat penalty when units overlap
Fix the suicide general
Make the infantry running speed 1.66x the walk speed
Make the cavalry run speed 2x the infantry run speed
Make sure that units fight long enough so that hammer and anvil tactics work
Make the AI understand how to protect a unit's flanks
Fix the group movement commands so they work so that you don't have to use drag all the time
Get rid of the delay to movement orders
Get rid of the battlefield upgrades in multiplayer
Increase the rock, paper, scissors back to the level it was in STW
Stop using heavy artillery as anti-personnel weapons
Make crossbows use their ammo faster so that battles don't drag on for an hour with boring shootouts
Make the AI understand how to use a shield
Make the AI respond better to ranged attack
Make ranged units use their ammo before they charge into melee
Stop having the AI make frontal charges with units that are weaker than the target unit
Stop AI units from walking towards the enemy only to turn around and walk away
Get rid of exploding rocks
Stop using fire weapons in the rain
Reduce the uncertainty in combat results to the level it was in STW
Stop horses from jumping into pikes
Stop the skirmish AI from shooting its own men in the back so often
Put LOS for individual men back in the game
Bring back the weather effects of STW
Make the AI use the secondary weapon when it's better than the primary weapon
Provide more settings on fatigue rate, morale level, and ammo
Separate the fatigue, morale and ammo settings
Make the loyalty of a province dependent on distance and isolation from the faction leader
Stop having the AI sail around with a full army on a single ship until it's sunk
Make the AI provide reasonable garrisons for cities
Make sure the traits are working
Shorten the timespan of a campaign and provide multiple campaigns
Return to seasonal turns

Look mate, would you understand if I put it like this: You have Shogun:TW, and you can give feedback before Medieval:TW is released. I think MTW would have been even better if you did, as you know MTW has some weak points introduced since Shogun (in particularly, spears are useless in multiplayer, you could have warned them saying stuff like: The rock-paper-scissors balance is excellent in Shogun, don't change it!)

I was on 2 MTW beta teams and put in hundreds of hours. I tried to get LongJohn to reduce the cost of spears in MTW/VI, but for some reason he wouldn't. I don't know why.

Would it make you feel better if they said: "Movement speed is based on motion-captured animations. Kill rates are also based on those. The result we feel is more realistic"?
Because that is the case. Apparently, CA are choosing realism over gameplay, and hope gameplay will get used to it. The AI is lacking in any case. I don't agree with current speeds either.

CA said that realism and historical accuracy are not their focus. You won't get anywhere with them using those two things as reasons for making a change. In RTW, the men appear to go into slowmotion when they are fighting compared to the speed at which they run. It doesn't look logical. At least CA could try to retain a sense of logic in the battles. The illogic extends to the diplomacy as well with, for example, factions attacking you on the same turn they make an agreement that is supposedly beneficial to them. Now in M2TW we see an illogical time paradox being implimented. Where does this kind of thinking end? It's dramatically altering what the game once offered in terms of plausible gameplay which allowed a suspension of disbelief.