Swedish Pre-order "Mistake"

**Phalaxar** · 11-05-2006, 20:08

Originally Posted by Furious Mental

"I doubt the majority of people who play the game think dismounted knights fight better than mounted knights. "

It might not be obvious to people in field battles but nonetheless it should be intuitive to anyone that in, for example, a siege situation, dismounted knights may be more useful because horses cannot ride up to the battlements. In any case it is not that CA has chosen not to include small units of heavily armoured foot soldiers and such. Rather it has simply chosen not to bother including under the rubric of an ability to dismount cavalry before a battle. That is not a result of a decision to promote a particular type of gameplay to conform to popular concepts. That is a result of a decision not to bother doing something properly.

Meh, it's easy for you to dissect their ideas from the outside and arrive at the conclusion that they're stupid.
Give them some credit. They're not a bunch of lazy retards who are trying to screw over history so that X-Box gamers will pick up the game.
They're clearly just trying to make the game as fun as possible (to sell more) and make some money.

It's not that they just "didn't bother" like they thought, hey, you know what, we could check the little box that says "let knights dismount" or, you know, we could eat some crisps.
Letting knights demount would have been a lot more work (to code, to make the models and skins, animations and the like) for them for very little benefit (they reckon), and I think that's fair enough.

On these boards, it's easy to get carried away and think that everyone, or everyone that matters, is a bit of a history buff. In real life, the vast majority of players aren't. It makes good sense for CA to make the game for their biggest demographic. Get over it. CA were never different.

Finally, I think people are just generally being too down on MTW II before it's even out. You won't like it if you pick it up, pop it in and say, "omsg wtf the install screens were better on MTW." Give it its chance.

**Kralizec** · 11-05-2006, 20:58

Letting knights demount would have been a lot more work (to code, to make the models and skins, animations and the like) for them for very little benefit (they reckon), and I think that's fair enough.

There will be dismounted boyars and various other dismounted [insert cavalry], but you can only get them by training.

Buyt that's not a big enough reason for me to drop the game altogether

There's been various other stuff that bothers me as well. I just don't like being misled. It's obvious that CA raised a smoke screen of confusion to make buyers believe that mount/dismount was back.

**Phalaxar** · 11-05-2006, 21:30

Originally Posted by Kralizec

There will be dismounted boyars and various other dismounted [insert cavalry], but you can only get them by training.

There's been various other stuff that bothers me as well. I just don't like being misled. It's obvious that CA raised a smoke screen of confusion to make buyers believe that mount/dismount was back.

I thought they were seperate units?

That's not obvious at all. Things make sense even if there's no Evil Empire of Profit-tasting Doom with CA as a greasy eminence.

**Prince of the Poodles** · 11-06-2006, 03:45

Originally Posted by Kralizec

There will be dismounted boyars and various other dismounted [insert cavalry], but you can only get them by training.

There's been various other stuff that bothers me as well. I just don't like being misled. It's obvious that CA raised a smoke screen of confusion to make buyers believe that mount/dismount was back.

Oh my god, who actually buys the game based on the stupid mount/dismount function?! Some people are acting like this is a horrible, despicable act committed by CA.

It was probably just confusion because a lot of the knights and horse infantry can be trained as either.

I didnt even use it in MTW...