First impressions on mp

[Puzz3D]

You can't expect CA to hang back on the Graphics side just to let more people be able to play the game.. "Technology moves on." People eventually will get to upgrade. I can almost guarantee in a period of 6 months to have rare lag issues.

I don't expect CA to do anything. You just stated a reason for not buying this game for at least 6 months. It doesn't matter if you have a good machine yourself. You're going to have to wait for the players with insufficient machines to either upgrade or quit.

These fancy graphics aren't necessary for good gameplay. They actually hinder the gameplay by causing performance problems and visualization problems.

[tibilicus]

I don't expect CA to do anything. You just stated a reason for not buying this game for at least 6 months. It doesn't matter if you have a good machine yourself. You're going to have to wait for the players with insufficient machines to either upgrade or quit.

These fancy graphics aren't necessary for good gameplay. They actually hinder the gameplay by causing performance problems and visualization problems.

Gah.

What are CA meant to do? Keeep romes graphics for every total war game due to some people not having the machiens to play it. MTW2 is designed to target an audience. The vast audience being those who wish graphics to move on. If you don't wish to, then don't buy the game. But what I will say is you seeem to be critisizing the game which you yourself have said you havn't played. I agreee fair enough there is some lag issue. I can't personly agree its a major problem as the games I have played with that does lag is minimal and doesn't effect the game. To truley critisize the problems at heart you have to play the game m8. Each experience is different from different people due to different veiws. At the moment it is to early for people to be taking one universal veiw on the matter.

Tib

[Puzz3D]

What are CA meant to do?

How about blocking AthlonXP from playing online since their game doesn't support it for multiplayer. Also, if a machine has insufficient processing power for a particular hosted game, don't allow that machine to join that game.

I played the demo, and I can see the visualization problems, and I can also tell you that these fancy graphics don't improve the gameplay. You lost all that stuff from the battle engine that I mentioned in my earlier post for better graphics, and the ironic thing is that the sprite graphics in the new game are worse than the original game they made 6 years ago.

[t1master]

possibly time to move on yukki and orda mates...

total war is not going to be the same as shogun, ever. it's done, mtw:vi is all but done too.

i hear what you are saying and for the most part agree with it, but stating it tenfold is not gonna change anything, it didn't with rome, it won't with m2. there is also little value in attempting to explain to folks who never played shogun or mtw:vi, and no point rehashing old debates with folks who are satisfied with their current mp experience in rome and now m2.



for my part, as critical as i was with rome, i am mildly surprised with what i've seen in m2 mp. it's not perfect, it's pretty much a copy of rome, but they've tweaked something that makes the game play more intuitive. at least to my untrained, and lazy eye.

so hope to see you on the field.

[Orda Khan]

How about blocking AthlonXP from playing online since their game doesn't support it for multiplayer. Also, if a machine has insufficient processing power for a particular hosted game, don't allow that machine to join that game.

Wisest proposal so far.

I played the demo, and I can see the visualization problems, and I can also tell you that these fancy graphics don't improve the gameplay. You lost all that stuff from the battle engine that I mentioned in my earlier post for better graphics, and the ironic thing is that the sprite graphics in the new game are worse than the original game they made 6 years ago.

This is very true. I can't think of anyone who has time to zoom in on the action and kill animations and still manage to control all their other units or check that their ally does not need assistance or communicate a problem to team mates. The important factor is battlefield view, there is no need for the graphics other than watching a replay. The current sprites are quite shabby IMO and it is quite surprising. STW sprites were pretty darned good, they were incredibly detailed. From the red armour plates of the Naginata down to the helmet details and even the Katana and Wakizashi the archers had. Puzz3D, I just loaded STW and had a shock, I've got to admit I forgot just how good they were

.......Orda

[Chad]

http://www.madminutegames.com/gallery.htm
This game has good Sprites

[tootee]

How do you define "deep" ?

Sooner or later the lag will be fixed, one way or another. I remember in RTW 1.3 I had horrible lag even in 1 on 1's, but then it got fixed magically one day.

Again, why do you see them more "tactical" ?

It is a combination of factors, you would have to experience it in order to appreciate.

STW
Do not be fooled by the simplicity of STW; despite all factions having similar units and the variety of units are not as many compared to later TW, this actually helps STW. If you looked through the archive, the discussion about game balance, the bashing, etc, was even more than MTW or RTW. However even when most felt the game could be better balanced for MP, it did not make any unit useless; almost all the available units are 'usable', have its tactical value, and are used in battles.

You have the yari, naginata and heavy cav, all reasonably priced and served different functions. You have the yari samurai, nodachi and warrior monk, found in every game hosted; even the super peasants that were hotly debated, didnt tilt the game balance too much, is not all over-power. You have only archers and musketeers, but one doesnt rule the other, and are used in different ways. Later on you have special units like battlefield ninja and the loneman kensai, that are both fun, and not unbalancing (maybe except taking multuple kensai for its morale effect if i recall correctly). And the horse-archers, they are one hell of a unit when used with skill, but even then are balanced and countered effectively by yari-cav.

You have good scissor-paper-stone system between the unit types. It is like chess, the players have similar pieces, all useful and 'balanced' (not a word imaginable then, but looking back..). This provide the mean to give STW very good tactical depth, but by itself cannot guarantee tactical depth.

As proof, see http://shogun-academy.tripod.com/battle_154803_pg1.html

STW games become more tactical primarily because of control imo. Somehow I feel the control interface in STW to be better than MTW, and for sure RTW. And control of the army is one key attribute to winning the day; and control not as in grouping a bunch of horse spam, and clicking it behind the enemies, and routing them off because of super-duper morale penalty effect you get when all the cav charges hit one poor infantry unit along the line. Control then was at individual unit level; although STW has only 16 pieces compared to RWT, but RTW feel more like 5 pieces at most to me, STW is true 16 pieces.

And control is enhanced by what I feel is the right speed of units.. I just feel STW units speed to be the better balanced, between walking and running. You can tell when trying to catch those horse-archers; they are fast, thus serving their function of harassing the flank, but if you dont watch them, they can be quickly caught by yari-cav. You dont get this is RTW.. some how even if I ignore my horse-archers in RTW they do fine by themselves.

IMO, it was these reasons that then the players attracted to STW were mostly tactical minded, and we enjoyed many massive 4v4 (and constantly having heated debate on game balancing ).

Also, the ladder made a difference. Even able to know the ping reading in the foyer made a difference.


MTW
Now you have many many unit choices, and factions have unique units. This expanded the tactical breadth, since now there is tactical importance in making the appropriate team armies, or rather, to employ different tactics with different team combo. The scissor-paper-stone system between the unit type is still there, but imo didnt feel as good as STW. Factions like turk and mongol are entirely different, and this is good; team need to play differently with or vs them (but the mongol in late probably not as fun as turk).

You have cav swipe bug initially but this was resolved later with a patch. Cav is more important in MTW imo, but it is appropriately so given the warfare nature of this period. It was in MTW i think you see players all cav army, and winning games. But these were not that bad as experienced balanced army players can counter effectively.

I still prefer STW maps (and the trees.. man i missed those trees) and terrain, but MTW maps are fun.

4v4 were very enjoyable like STW.

Overall, MTW tactical breadth and scope shifted w.r.t to STW, but is not much less than STW in term of playability, and required a paradigm shift, a change in tactical mindset.

Control of army is still highly relevant.

RTW
Not much I wanna say.. just roman.. and cataprachts. And my favourable faction is the german.

[ELITEofWARMANGINGERYBREADMEN88]

Here is my Opinion

Me,being a MTW/VI Vet, Also Realiezes, TW Will Never be like it was, on STW, or even on MTW/VI. Never. Period. We can fight till we can't fight no more, and it stil lwon't matter. That was 6 years ago, when I first got STW. I was 8 1/2 years old, and in 3rd grade. MTW2, now I am 14 1/2 and in 9th grade. Can't change Back Time. We can't go back to STW or even MTW/VI, with the good gameplay, with the clans like GreyWovles,Mizu,7Bear7Bottom and SA and other clans playing... I think People are so attached to the Old Games, like STW/MI or MTW/VI, Like Myself and others here, we can't let go. But We have to move On. We Have to ethier start fresh on MTW2, and start playing so other vets would come back,mabye, or just don't play it and play old STW or MTW like old times... I seen RTW tear up many clans, and I seen RTW take away every single MTW person I known on my unpatched server. Everyone,no lie. All 50+. I think We just have to accpect the fact TW will, Sadly, never be the same..

[Fenix7]

Only quick mentioning that people are many times mistaking when to mention ''tactic'' and when to mention ''strategy''.

I don't recognize anything such as more strategical/tactical or less. Understanding of this depends only on how good you understand strategy and tactics and how good you are to use this ''theories'' in the practise. So it can be tactical or strategical, average or simply nothing of this.IMO

For example if we would be playing chess against good chess player who knows a lot about chess and it's theoretical approach - meaning that he is better tactician then we. If he is not able to put all his tactics to work with a good strategy he is going to lose against us, if we consider that that we are better strategiest.


x-dANGEr what Puzz is trying to explain to you, is that RTW didn't (don't) requier any finenesses. You need up to 8 rules to made match playable - read:less spam then no rules matches. Secondly you get the feeling that RTW engine is ''behaving'' almost coincidental. Thirdly you had to pick strongest units if you had any intentions to win the match. Fourthly your units won't sustain ''flooded'' attack from your opponent and we could keep counting.

Instead of saying why MTW was ''more tactical'' then RTW, let me use another expression - you needed more effort to put in MTW match if wanted to win it.

And Puzz is trying to explain to you that in STW you needed 90%-100% ''effort'' to win the match, in MTW this was 80%-90% and in RTW it was below 50%(oldies will probably give you less then 20%).

Of course another important thing here regarding game engine is that for example MTW allowed you many more ''tactical situations'' then RTW ever could. This is what Puzz wanted to say with ''more tactical''.

How do you define "deep" ?

Very simple. In those matches you were almost there. The atmosphere in those matches was fantastic. This is same as reading two different books. Good book is ''deep'' and the other one is ''shallow''. RTW is the other book here. Simple as that.

And about graphics.

I can't think of anyone who has time to zoom in on the action and kill animations and still manage to control all their other units or check that their ally does not need assistance or communicate a problem to team mates. The important factor is battlefield view, there is no need for the graphics other than watching a replay.

I second this. I don't deny that they have done good job on graphics, but honestly how many people - even SP players are going to watch cinematic features during the match? When I want something like this I go to the cinema or I run media player.

Let's say that after RTW we have finally good nice game with MTW 2, but there is another problem now. You simply can't have lag free games..

[x-dANGEr]

Please.. Think closely before you write. Being repetitive only eats more of my time to reply..

Three rock, paper, scissors systems operating simultaneously that worked because the units were well balanced resulting in combined arms tactics.

Available in RTW 1.5. Though, it is just more complicated. You need to know how to use a spear unit to make it "decimate" cavalry, and how to use infantry to make it "decimate" infantry (It gets to an edge, that you can kill the most expensive phalanx unit with an archers unit in melee), you need to know how to use a cavalry unit to be able to kill a spear/infantry unit.. Of course, the last one doesn't mean that cavalry is imbalanced. Yes, it can kill all, but "can" doesn't mean that it does. If you give your units' backs to it, it will kill them, and that is what I mean by can.

Optimal morale level and fatigue rates.

I'd call the Morale level of RTW 1.5 optimal, but then, I can't compare it to STW/MTW, because I barely remember a thing of the later, and haven't played the former. Fatigue rates.. The same.

Standard money level which was consistently used.

I can't see what has this got to do with "deep". Though, I think the most suitable money level in RTW 1.5 is 10k, though most people use 12.5k, which seems fine. It weakens Barbarians, though.

Gamespeed that allowed individual control of all 16 units at the height of a battle which is necessary to make use of the combined arms tactics.

Watch a replay of a battle of some experts, and you'd notice how they have no trouble controlling their 20 units, coordinating with allied armies and executing nice tactics with that speed, even at the peak of battle. As I said, it is a matter of getting used to the game, and adapt.

Seemingly infinite variety of army formations designed to counter particular enemy army formations.

How is this different in RTW? The only thing that was gone is the "Elite: Doesn't get affected by lesser units routing" factor.

No "best" units because all units were useful and cost effective which lead to variety in army composition.

If this really bothers you, just think that all the non-used units are their for the campaign, not MP. Yet, I think games with 10k would allow even more units to be used. I remember at the start, when playing with 10k was more popular, you could see every unit Roman factions had, same going for other factions.

No army purchase rules.

What has this got to do with "deep"? At any cost, I won't stop playing a game because of 1 or 2 rules, and those rules really got born beacuse of the amazing imbalance RTW 1.2 had. If people would give 1.5 another chance, most of them will be erazed, me thinks.

max 4 unit type tax.

"What has this got to do with "deep"?" And, you haven't tried it yet, so I suggest you don't comment on it. Maybe it just fits M2: TW greatly balancing it intensly.

You had to account for every single enemy unit because leaving even a single unit unaccounted for would cost you the battle.

So the battle was decided by the army set up? How could that be deep..

Variety of weather effects which had a significant affect on the units and on visibility conditions.

This is available in RTW 1.5, but no one really uses it.. Also, due to the "restricted camera" option always unchecked, it won't matter at all.

Significantly superior battle engine

Let's see.

(squeezed too tight melee penalty calculated for individual men

If you need a penalty through numbers, then yea, it is not there. Though, it is there in a gameplay way.. It gives you a better chance of doing more things to the enemy, it simply just makes him valnurable.

deep formation ranged unit penalty

"If you need a penalty through numbers, then yea, it is not there." Simply, a 4 ranks deep archer unit will suffer more from arrows than a 2 ranks deep one.

distance calculation for shooters

It was already wrong to count the distance for each man, because really, their isn't a maximum range for an archer. It just varies a lot. So, the difference that this not included in the archer battle is quite minimal, and quite realistic.

Large number of events used to resolve unit combat which gives a reasonable level of statistical uncertainty.

Hmm?

Proper ratio of cav speed to infantry speed. Well selected reload times for ranged units.

You can't define "deep" by this. It is a matter of taste when it comes to these things, and in mine, they're all fine in RTW 1.5.

Well paced battles which mostly lasting between 20 to 30 minutes.

I don't know who were the guys you played on RTW, but I know that the least of my battles take 20 minutes.

Highly distinguishable units from each other and from the ground textures.

They were distinguishable in RTW, and I'm sure they would be in M2: TW, after people get to know every unit's look.

Fatigue indicator on the unit icons which provides quick assessment of all the units fatigue level.

Talk about deep 0-o.

Definable subgroups within groups.

Isn't this more like a complaint about the UI, rather than the "depth".

Independent toggles for hold position and hold formation.

GAH.

You just stated a reason for not buying this game for at least 6 months.

Nothing's wrong with that.

These fancy graphics aren't necessary for good gameplay.

Well, kind of they are.. In other words, people care for them, which is why it's the best seller point in the game.

How about blocking AthlonXP from playing online since their game doesn't support it for multiplayer.

Well, since they can play, they will let them decide wheather they want to have the trouble and get a battle, or not.

Also, if a machine has insufficient processing power for a particular hosted game, don't allow that machine to join that game.

What if 2 friends want to play together, even if the battle will lag?

And Puzz is trying to explain to you that in STW you needed 90%-100% ''effort'' to win the match, in MTW this was 80%-90% and in RTW it was below 50%(oldies will probably give you less then 20%).

It depends on your opponet.

Thirdly you had to pick strongest units if you had any intentions to win the match. Fourthly your units won't sustain ''flooded'' attack from your opponent and we could keep counting.

How is that "wrong"?


@Tootee: Sorry, I couldn't reply to your post.. Simply, because it was filled of "feelings" No offence intended of course.

[|Heerbann|_Di3Hard]

Edit:

Oh and Simon, my last off-topic input here

And now you tilt a barrel of oil into this thread.

[Eques]

People from all world loved RTW, lots of people keep saying "RTW is the best game ever". Now M2TW is out and again lots and lots of people love the game even more! I loved RTW even more than MTW, and i cant wait to put my hands on M2TW. But here you see, again, these old vets complaining cuz M2TW is diferent, cuz its not like an old game released 6 years ago, bla, bla, bla. Dude, i think we should make a new comunity, cuz this comunity, and the others dont express the voice of the people wich play CA the games anymore. This old comunitys are crowded with people cursing every new release. People with no gratitude. RTW was GREAT! M2TW is even greater!!! But they are upset cuz the game is not like STW, or MTW and keep rejecting every good and incredible aspects of these new games. Every single new and revolutionary feature!
"The game is not like STW, The game is bad, i will leave this comunity and i will never buy a new TW game again!' they say, but they are still here, trowing rocks again, and again, and again. Play STW, play pacman, play Age of Empires. But stop.
Lots of people join the comunity cuz they love the game and then they read this crap "M2TW, AI, i will never buy it again bla bla." Come on. There is not a single purpose on complaining and talking about STW, the game is GONE!
Who cares if they had monks of ninjas!? Play Shinobi!
Help the comunity or leave! Do you know how many posts i readed where people sayd "well, if the game is bad like that i wont buy it". Just because of this.

[tootee]

Precisely, its the feeling. Numbers only quantify.. they do not qualify. How fast is fast? how depth is depth? In the end its all about the gaming experience, a feeling.

I had enjoy STW immensely, MTW greatly, RTW barely.. I only wish that M2TW can be a good game. So far MP reviews has been mixed but biased towards positive so things are hopeful. Hopefully these will bring back the good players I have enjoyed playing with.

Oh yes, if things go smoothly, I should be having my copy of M2TW in 2 hrs time

Will post something that is more relevant to this thread

[|Heerbann|_Di3Hard]

But here you see, again, these old vets complaining cuz M2TW is diferent, cuz its not like an old game released 6 years ago, bla, bla, bla. Dude, i think we should make a new comunity, cuz this comunity, and the others dont express the voice of the people wich play CA the games anymore. These blody and old comunitys are crowded with people cursing every new release. People with no gratitude. RTW was GREAT! M2TW is even greater!!! But they are upset cuz the game is not like STW, or MTW and keep rejecting every good and incredible aspects of these new games. Every single new and revolutionary feature!

At first: The name is MEDIEVAL 2 Total War. Not ROME 2 Total War. It is legitimate to compare MTW 1 and MTW 2. And what are the new features? Please tell me new features MTW Vi <--> M2TW. There are some more factions, a new graphics engine and that's it. Don't forget we discuss about MP!

And MTW isn't a game, that you play 40 hours and then you delete it. It makes sense to fight for it. And the "new" community would also have a benefit, if somebody of CA would listen to the "old vets".

[Ser Clegane]

[rant combined with swearing and personal attacks]

To tell the truth, their complaints seem to be much more constructive and helpful to the community than your post.

Asking other patrons to leave is highly inappropriate in this context.

[R'as al Ghul]

Variety of weather effects which had a significant affect on the units and on visibility conditions.

This is available in RTW 1.5, but no one really uses it.. Also, due to the "restricted camera" option always unchecked, it won't matter at all.

I'm curious x-dANGEr,

are you playing MP battles with unrestricted camera?
Is/was this the norm in RTW?
So you can always scroll over to your allies or the enemy's back to see what's going on without having to move a unit in that area? Seems pretty convenient. For me part of the fun and tactical depth is not to know what's going on at the other end of the field but to guess. That's also where fog and rain come into play. There're many battle reports where fog and rain played immense roles on the outcome of the battle. If I want to know what's going on at the other side I've to go over there with a unit, which is also realistic imho.
BTW, someone mentioned that MTW/VI and STW MP are dead. Well they are not. Both games are still being played online.


R'as

[Tera]

The greatness of a game is relative. Can't you see?

STW and MTW are very similar in engine and design. They come from the same branch and appealed to the same type of people. They were highly-rated games, but hardly mainstream. The community was small and hardcore, very serious and overall mature. We miss those times, along with the simple fact that not being very demanding, the STW/MTW engine allowed large games like 4v4s easily. Moreover, the foyer was simply better and the community was so tightly-knit that it was like a big family, and not simply a huge collection of players enjoying the same game from a distance.

RTW and what followed is very different, and so far M2TW is more of a RTW in a medieval skin, rather than a true successor to the original MTW. There are many who say RTW is great and its the "best RTS ever" and that STW/MTW are way too small, ugly and seemingly simplistic compared to the grandeur of the Rome engine. It's a different community altogether, and I doubt we will ever agree or integrate. RTW totally destroyed the old notion of Total War, while creating a new, even bigger community which is very different but still very loyal to this 'new' Total War.

Posts like X-Danger's and others only confirm this feeling. People try to convince the old crowd that RTW 1.5 is "just fine and very enjoyable" when for you it might be so - as you did not taste the old Total War - but for many of the older players RTW 1.5 is simply a complete disaster anyway, just maybe a little better than the utter and complete catastrophe which was RTW 1.0 - which single-handedly destroyed the old community. The rest of these posts focus on Ok, this feature might be missing or different..but see..it's still good!. NO it's not!

Let me just take a simple example. Yuuki observed that RTW/M2TW doesn't have different toggles for Hold Formation and Hold Position. X-Danger's reply to this observation was a simple GAH!. Many other 'replies' to such problems were along the same lines, trying to justify what is - to the old gamer - wrong. My friend, Hold Formation/Position and with it countless of other things like camera and army control, 4v4s, unit balance and so on were just what Total War was all about, and now they're gone, in favour of your lovely 3-D graphics and mainstream controls. Tactically, the game went down in options and size..you can't play huge games anymore and individual control is much less with dissapearing options and very very poor unit sprites when viewed from above. Simply speaking, RTW/M2TW might look cool but they are "dumbed down" versions of the original Total War games. It was done to appease the masses of the traditional RTS players, and the masses have indeed come - although loud, rude and as a result destroyed the old notions of our community.

Conclusion:

This is simply a matter of taste, but the fine wine that the old community used to savor so well is no longer available in the cellar. We thought that M2TW could be a re-discovery of the fine ways of Total War, but in the end it's just RTW skinned in a different way.

Which might please many, but will dissapoint others and there isn't much to do about it, I am afraid. Maybe Palamedes together with CA can solve some nagging MP problems which are annoying even the new community and maybe throw bones to the old crowd...in the faint hopes things can really be better.

[econ21]

Please can the forum moderator rename this thread "STW/MTW vs RTW/M2TW Pissing Contest"?

And then start a new one called "First Impressions on MP"...

[x-dANGEr]

And now you tilt a barrel of oil into this thread.

Yet, nothing off-topic (Since a part of my post was dedicated to M2: TW )

I had enjoy STW immensely, MTW greatly, RTW barely.. I only wish that M2TW can be a good game. So far MP reviews has been mixed but biased towards positive so things are hopeful. Hopefully these will bring back the good players I have enjoyed playing with.

I respect and believe that. I did enjoy MTW Campaign a lot more than RTW's after all.. It is just that, to not like a game is one thing, and to bash it is another.

I'm curious x-dANGEr,

are you playing MP battles with unrestricted camera?
Is/was this the norm in RTW?
So you can always scroll over to your allies or the enemy's back to see what's going on without having to move a unit in that area? Seems pretty convenient. For me part of the fun and tactical depth is not to know what's going on at the other end of the field but to guess. That's also where fog and rain come into play. There're many battle reports where fog and rain played immense roles on the outcome of the battle. If I want to know what's going on at the other side I've to go over there with a unit, which is also realistic imho.
BTW, someone mentioned that MTW/VI and STW MP are dead. Well they are not. Both games are still being played online.


R'as

Sadly, yes! A very great feuture to revive in the new M2: TW is making fog, rain, etc.. worth something by removing the Unrestricted Camera option IMO.. Nothing feels better than surprising your enemy by a couple of cavalry units who went the long way

Yuuki observed that RTW/M2TW doesn't have different toggles for Hold Formation and Hold Position. X-Danger's reply to this observation was a simple GAH!. Many other 'replies' to such problems were along the same lines, trying to justify what is - to the old gamer - wrong.

You must be kidding.. If you find one really wrong, just argue it.

Though, on other basis, as in on-topic:

Up till now, all can be heard is good about the game. Sure, some people are just mad at the lag, but that is a problem that will fix itself. To sum it up, I think the Multiplayer experience will get to it's best in 6 months.. With a couple of patches fixing whatever needs fixing, and the lag problem minimized hugely.

[Puzz3D]

Up till now, all can be heard is good about the game.

That's not true. Lusted's first post indicates there is a problem in M2TW MP morale level.

[Lusted]

Did it? I thought it just showed a very good drawn out fight between 2 weel matched armies.

[Orda Khan]

Let me just take a simple example. Yuuki observed that RTW/M2TW doesn't have different toggles for Hold Formation and Hold Position. X-Danger's reply to this observation was a simple GAH!. Many other 'replies' to such problems were along the same lines, trying to justify what is - to the old gamer - wrong. My friend, Hold Formation/Position and with it countless of other things like camera and army control, 4v4s, unit balance and so on were just what Total War was all about, and now they're gone, in favour of your lovely 3-D graphics and mainstream controls. Tactically, the game went down in options and size..you can't play huge games anymore and individual control is much less with dissapearing options and very very poor unit sprites when viewed from above. Simply speaking, RTW/M2TW might look cool but they are "dumbed down" versions of the original Total War games. It was done to appease the masses of the traditional RTS players, and the masses have indeed come - although loud, rude and as a result destroyed the old notions of our community.

I could not agree more,Tera

to not like a game is one thing, and to bash it is another.

Similarly, to understand and enjoy one game is one thing. To criticise with no foundation, those who experienced all the games is another

.......Orda

[Fenix7]

Please can the forum moderator rename this thread "STW/MTW vs RTW/M2TW Pissing Contest"?

And then start a new one called "First Impressions on MP"...

I agree.

I've read a post from KenchiTib on their forums:
Me trash and another choas member had a good 3v3 versus Elites of boon/fogolin/kakhan...

With other words it seems that this is possible and that MTW 2 offers a good MP experience. I've played few matches yesterday and I have to say that first impressions are very positive. It gives you that ''good feeling''.

[Orda Khan]

I agree.

I've read a post from KenchiTib on their forums:
Me trash and another choas member had a good 3v3 versus Elites of boon/fogolin/kakhan...

With other words it seems that this is possible and that MTW 2 offers a good MP experience. I've played few matches yesterday and I have to say that first impressions are very positive. It gives you that ''good feeling''.

I agree Aonar, there is a 'feeling' there. That feeling would be twice as good if 4v4 once more became possible

......Orda

[|Heerbann|_Di3Hard]

I've read a post from KenchiTib on their forums:
Me trash and another choas member had a good 3v3 versus Elites of boon/fogolin/kakhan...

With other words it seems that this is possible and that MTW 2 offers a good MP experience. I've played few matches yesterday and I have to say that first impressions are very positive. It gives you that ''good feeling''.

I was not online the last 2 days (shortage of time). But at the beginning of the week, I played some games with the Elite clan together. They used small units if they played 3vs3. In my opinion, these size is too litte.

[x-dANGEr]

Similarly, to understand and enjoy one game is one thing. To criticise with no foundation, those who experienced all the games is another

Maybe, but that has got nothing to do with criticizing bashing it

[Puzz3D]

Did it? I thought it just showed a very good drawn out fight between 2 weel matched armies.

If the casualties you reported are typical, I'd say there is too much attrition.

[Orda Khan]

Other than your own perception of bashing and of course, the way you dismiss things you never experienced so therefore do not understand. Since you never played STW online and certain members are making direct comparisons, why do you get the impression that you can convince them differently? A written response to your questions to prove the point is simply not enough is it? From your reply to Puzz3D's post that should be obvious, there is a counter to every argument and this could run and run until next year and longer. The simple truth is, no matter how much he tries to explain you will never agree with him. How could you? You don't know what he is talking about

........Orda

[Lusted]

If the casualties you reported are typical, I'd say there is too much attrition.

The other day i fought a 2v2, and casualty rates were much lower on the winning side as we managed to rout lot of the enemy units early on.

[Stig]

Played a 2v2 yesterday with 3 guys from the Huscarls clan, my side lost, but still I had by far the most kills of us all.
They simply had units with more morale, while I went for Slash and bash type units which do massive damage on charge. But due to their morale they didn't rout (as they would in RTW) they kept fighting, since my cav (and my allies) was defeated they could kill use easely, even tho I killed more.