Thinking of uninstalling the patch!

**Satyr** · 12-24-2006, 19:49

Spark, with a little reading you could have all those answers, but here is my take. Cav is worse. In some ways it is better but it just seems harder to get the cav to work the way you would expect most of the time. I knew how to get a good charge before the patch but now I can get no consistent results. The AI is less passive unless you are breaking a siege then they just stand there and get shot to pieces. Unit cohesion seems worse most of the time with only a few men engaging the enemy while the rest sit back and do nothing. And then because of this cav can't catch routers. CA really needs to start beta testing their stuff with at least a select group of regulars before they embarrass themselves by releasing another crappy patch.

As to M2 vs Civ4, one of the things I really like about Civ4 is that the different AIs have different personalities. I mean Montazuma is quite psychotic, Tokagawa is very defensive, Ghandi is pretty nice, etc. I doubt that is very hard to program, it just takes a desire to offer the best to your customers.

**Bijo** · 12-25-2006, 00:35

What I'm gonna do is, I'm gonna uninstall the whole damn game, and wait for Shogun to be delivered into my mailbox. In the meanwhile I'll enjoy Counterstrike Source, or Sniper Elite.

One time the performance is top-notch, the other time it's messed up. Whatever the case.... I'll put it away and wait until it is totally patched in a couple months, half a year or so, or a year? Then it'll be fresh again to enjoy.

**Barry Fitzgerald** · 12-25-2006, 02:46

Originally Posted by Satyr

Spark, with a little reading you could have all those answers, but here is my take. Cav is worse. In some ways it is better but it just seems harder to get the cav to work the way you would expect most of the time. I knew how to get a good charge before the patch but now I can get no consistent results. The AI is less passive unless you are breaking a siege then they just stand there and get shot to pieces. Unit cohesion seems worse most of the time with only a few men engaging the enemy while the rest sit back and do nothing. And then because of this cav can't catch routers. CA really needs to start beta testing their stuff with at least a select group of regulars before they embarrass themselves by releasing another crappy patch.

As to M2 vs Civ4, one of the things I really like about Civ4 is that the different AIs have different personalities. I mean Montazuma is quite psychotic, Tokagawa is very defensive, Ghandi is pretty nice, etc. I doubt that is very hard to program, it just takes a desire to offer the best to your customers.

I have cavalry problems more now post patch...not sure why that should be.

I agree with the sentiments regarding a Civ 4 personality...back to that though..Civ 4 got a lot of stick for being released too early (and it was really)...but fireaxis did bother to patch it properly...over time. And the AI is pretty good in civ...it doesn't seem to cheat..

I am getting a bit tired of this leave stuff out put it in the expansion pack mentality that seems oh so common nowadays..this appies to civ 4 also..warlords was ok..but really should have been in the original game.

I have a feeling MTW2 will follow this trend...aka the gameplay parts removed from MTW1, faction heir, titles, regional units...glorious achievements...may appear in the new expansion pack sure to turn up sometime next year....

But hey..it isnt as bad as the Sims 2...that really is taking the mick!

**dopp** · 12-25-2006, 03:34

Erm the AI does have distinct personalities (priorities really). Crack open the descr_strat file and you'll see stuff like "expansionist mao" or "trader henry" under each AI faction.

**Satyr** · 12-25-2006, 03:46

dopp, it may say that in the config files, but in reality they all just attack with little clue how and no chance of success. The fact that one AI may build his markets up a little more while the other is building stables up doesn't have a sufficient impact on the game due to the other inherent difficiencies.

**Bijo** · 12-26-2006, 16:27

What I'm gonna do is, I'm gonna uninstall the whole damn game, and wait for Shogun to be delivered into my mailbox.

Ahhhh! I reinstalled again today! My poor heart, lol.

I think CA could learn some things from Civ4. And the makers of Civ could learn some things from CA.

**Barry Fitzgerald** · 12-26-2006, 18:47

Originally Posted by Bijo

Ahhhh! I reinstalled again today! My poor heart, lol.

I think CA could learn some things from Civ4. And the makers of Civ could learn some things from CA.

I think both games suffered from having been released too early. Civ 4 had some notable bugs..and some serious performance issues even on high end machines (lag/slowdowns..memory leaks etc), and got some serious criticisms from users too. Though...and it took a while..the developers did address the issues..and made significant changes to the game, including the AI and balance issues too...they also took the time to add extra bits to it...kind of a sorry we messed up thing. Though it shouldnt be like that in an ideal world.

We can only hope that CA take note of this and not only fix the issues, but enhance the gameplay..to me at present exploration of diplomatic and economic areas are not deep enough..and the game is pretty much flawed by having a tight time limit..and only one way to win (mass conquering of lands)

But whilst MTW2 shines on that battlefield (when it works right)..and it is fun..it pales next to civ 4 on the tactical map and strategic/diplomacy level..badly. Not that CA ever intended to compete with civ 4..but why make a what if game..if you only have one way of winning?

One of 2006's big titles that has been a huge let down....

I really dont mind modders playing about..and they do some good work..but really, it is not good enough to have the current retail release in such poor shape...you don't get paid for your work..the CA team do...

All this talk of not enough cpu power for AI is really smoke and mirrors...this simply isnt the truth at all

**Bijo** · 12-26-2006, 20:34

Barry, I know exactly what you mean and I agree.

Though I was more talking about the general gameplay of both. TW's poor strategy map could be improved by Civ's, and Civ's team could in return learn from TW's battles.
They should simply team up to make the ultimate (PC) strategy game.

Been trying to mod some things myself, learning about those files and their contents, but it's a pain in the ass, takes time: I also want M2 to be in good shape, and I wouldn't have minded if they released it far later than planned - like next year.

I think good production quality in games should be standard nowadays, in terms of code, presentation, etc. Civ4 had that rubbish as you say, and M2 has it too.

I ain't no programmer (though I've been at it many times throughout the years), but I wonder: is it possible for TW's next installment to take an existing superior engine of which we know it works (almost) perfectly - Source comes first to mind now - and adapt it somehow to be a good perfect optimal TW engine?

All this talk of not enough cpu power for AI is really smoke and mirrors...this simply isnt the truth at all

Dunno. Seems to me it should be possible to program good A.I., but I really don't know.

I do know the standard of many games today has become to quickly finish the job, have good PR to work people up to a certain point they want to get your product, and then to take their money, hah hah!

**Bartix** · 01-03-2007, 10:40

Originally Posted by dopp

Erm the AI does have distinct personalities (priorities really). Crack open the descr_strat file and you'll see stuff like "expansionist mao" or "trader henry" under each AI faction.

But none of them can resist tempting ports of long time ally...
must....blockade....

This is more annoying to me than silly acting when chasing routers.

**dopp** · 01-03-2007, 11:33

No the 'personalities' are merely build orders, not true differences in AI. So an expansionist might build more roads, or a trader more ports. Mao might build large armies of peasants, while Henry will be missile-heavy. Henry is possibly the reason why we see so many stacks with like 10 catapults, 5 pavise crossbows and 1 token unit of spearmen.

**Satyr** · 01-03-2007, 20:38

Haha, could you imagine if M2TW had personalities and they gave the Mongols a Monty like personality? Wow, he would sweep over the world in no time! That would be great. Make the Spanish and the English aggressive while the French would obviously be quite whiny and defensive but terrible in actual battle. I guess they would have the worst moral of any faction in the game.

**katank** · 01-03-2007, 21:35

In that case, I'd be trying to kill Spain all the time. Isabella is such a b***h in Civ.

If you bring traits into TW, then valor bonus on units from aggressive trait would just be too sweet to pass up.