i don't think that there needs to be a separate research forum. i think the Mod forums should be where things like that go, because to mod you have to research the abilities and functions of the game. after you discover as much as you can you start tinkering. so i think all research threads involving how the money works, how battles play out for strategic definition of the AI, and all of that should go in there. if you just NEED to have another forum, that should be the main tab it is under.



as for all the complaints about bugs and such, i am again reminded of my experiences with SWG. when the game came out people complained about the strength of the AT-AT that the Empire faction could buy, and that the straight up fighting between rebels and storm troopers with the AT-AT support were heavily tilted in the favor of the Empire. they saw it as a bug and complained loudly for balance. in the end, an AT-AT wasn't worth anything more than taking a screenie for role playing purposes. they did very little damage, actually hurt you if you grouped with one because they averaged out your combat level if you were higher ranked than they were, and were easily destroyed by anyone with commando skills.

what the people who chose to be rebels were REALLY complaining over was that they were feeling the pressures of oppression. the Empire was stronger and they didn't like that they couldn't just line up 20 on 20 and win. a lot of the bickering i see over what is a bug/isn't a bug may or may not be. i don't know. i'm not a programmer. i just play the game. but isn't "strategy" all about discovery? if X doesn't work, then try Y? yeah, peasants shouldn't be taking out other more elite units so easily. however, in many of the sims i am reading over, you're throwing them in one on one, and straight up. no flanking. no tricks or skills. however, these ar ethe things that are going to have the most effect, aren't they?

consider this. if you take army A against Army B and sim the battle, what do the stats look like? do they look anything remotely like what your own stats would if you fought the battle yourself? my casulaty rates are always higher on one side, the other, or both. the game sims the two armies and finds the quickest way to rout the other army, not decimate it (which would be a nice option). just clashing front to front while on defense of their home i would expect a peasant army to fight better than their stats might suggest. and let's face it... better weapons and armour doesn't mean more heart, more drive, or more skill. obviously the game isn't programmed with such emotions, but it isn't really that hard to imagine for me based on real life circumstances. history is littered with battles where one side should be crushed, but they either created a phyrric victory for the opponent, or actually defeated them. it wasn't supposed to happen, but it did.

and i do agree the AI is too passive under fire. no one is going to stand there and take a shower of arrows until they stop coming. i keep waiting for a front line charge and it never comes. unless you make a tactical mistake (such as putting your general out front for spearman to find, or turning your backs to the enemy) they just won't charge. what that tells me is taht i need to fight every battle as though i am the assaulter and not the defender. if they attacked me and want to let the time run out, fine. if this doesn't stimulate me enough, i either need to stop playing and do something else, or change the way i play so as to challenge myself.

the original idea behind SWG was "player driven content". there were some dungeons, small quests, and POIs, but ultimately you found a group of people to run with and you made your own adventures. the fact people got bored with it shows me the pitiful state of imagination in our country. the Total War series has moved beyond a simple engine created to entertain you. it has become a highly moddable game that you can play vanilla or create your own fantasy world.

in short, it's shallow enough for a newbie to pick it and play immediately, yet moddable to be deep enough that even the hardened veteran can set things in a way that challenges them. maybe the game is too easy for you right now. how many games of this nature are ever greatness BEFORE the first patch? name me a game like this was NEVER patched at all. you knew it would need patching. you bought it anyway. don't complain because Devs just maybe wanted to hold things back a little so that people would play the game THEY CREATED for a few weeks before releasing the tools necessary to go back and change everything. when you think about it, it could actually be taken as a slap in the face to the R&D. you're only interested in the engine, not the body that came with it. their work is inferior to your own, because you can't wait for someone to "make it better" than the 2 years of developement and programming they put into it. a little patience shouldn't be too much to ask.

and when you can make a game that can be modded over and over again, or played just in it's original form, and still enjoyed by millions and millions of people... i'd say you've pretty much created a masterpiece.


Good work, CA. I, along with many of the veterans of this board, appreciate the game you have brought us and look forward to the possibilities it will unlock for future projects. I'm still waiting for a really good American Civil War game (hint, hint).