EB comments on Medieval 2

[Xtiaan72]

I am curious what EB players opinions are on Medieval 2 are. ( being the Total War connoisseurs you are!) Have you bought it? Is it holding your interest in it's current form? Are you intrigued with the modding possibilities? I'd like to stress that this thread is not intended to bash CA. Please, only constructive comments.

I bought it but it's not holding my interest in it's current form. I don't find it as addictive as Rome. I can't entirely put my finger on why. This isn't a knock as Rome 1.5 and 1.6 is an entirely better game that it was when it first came out. It might also be that I find the time-frame less compelling than Rome. I'm hoping to come back to it with further patches and I'm looking forward to seeing what the mod community does with it. Until then EB all the way!

Some things I like:

1) The new recruitment system. ( This system would be really awesome in a Rome mod)

2) The princess and merchant characters. They need some work but they definitely add to the game.

3) I think the castle/town option adds to the game

4) The beautiful new models and animations. ( It makes my mouth water to think what some of the EB modders could do with that engine on a Rome mod)

5) I actually like the cavalry changes although it still needs tweaking ( even post-patch)

the things that bother me the most:

1) It is very strange that, most of the time, a very small percentage of a unit
actually fights when they meet another on the field. It looks weird and unrealistic when 10 or 12 guys are fighting on the front line and the rest of the guys are just standing around. Has anyone else noticed that?

2) In addition to that some units are weirdly unresponsive to commands on the battlefield. Also some units stop right before meeting the enemy when they are charging. Very odd to watch a unit charge and then walk the last three yards into the enemy

3) I was really hoping that there would be a giant step forward with the diplomacy AI in the new game. But despite the screen makeover, it just didn't happen. You still end up at war with everyone. The AI still attacks you even if it's in a helpless position. And diplomatic overtures are rejected no matter how sweet they are. The screen is cool though. Hopeful modders or future patches will improve the situation.

[Teleklos Archelaou]

Haven't bought it or played it personally.

As for diplomacy, it was pretty clear that the only real changes were in revealing more to you that was happening with diplomacy - not changing it any. That seemed evident a while back when they released screenshots. Still, revealing more about the process is better than leaving it as is with RTW.

[Boyar Son]

I think the game is a great improvement!

but fighting Romans in castles? I wouldnt want to play that if it's hardcoded

Diplomacy is much better, when you win great victories, your opponent recognizes that and would accept a ceasfire. The AI has improved, maybe their dumb in your game because of VH VH settings.

The AI still can be beaten by a human but will still give you spectacular battles( the French falling back to the 2nd wall when I took the 1st).

Another time, I had an army of even numbers against the French, I clumsily repositioned my army and the French saw their opportunity and attacked, I was amazed and cuaght totaly off guard!

I was just angry about the map, Europe is the only place that got attention and CA moved away a little from the Mid East.

[Zaknafien]

In its vanilla form? Unplayable.

the map, units, and AI are utterly ridiculous. On the other hand, map graphics improvements and battlefield enviroments are very nice, as well as city and castle layouts using terrain.


Moddability? Good possibilities. EB2 will be great, once it gets going..

[Boyar Son]

So much negativity. The game has better improvements from RTW.

Also, I don't want to fight Greek and Roman castles! if thats not moddable then thats a serious dent in gameplay and history.

[abou]

It would be cool to see if we could get citadels in EB2: much like Syracuse.

[Boyar Son]

Ok then maybe citidels for some factions. But you can't build them, only repair.

[Danest]

I just hope that EB 2 will be significantly more than a graphics update - as it's already beautiful. And I wonder if anything would be lost... is there something that medieval 2 _can't_ do as well as RTW?

[Xtiaan72]

Castles no....But maybe fortresses. MASSADA!!!

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

I just hope that EB 2 will be significantly more than a graphics update - as it's already beautiful. And I wonder if anything would be lost... is there something that medieval 2 _can't_ do as well as RTW?

I'm not sure what we can do about the pike phalanx. Unfortunatle I only managed to run the game once. It's not unplayable but I get the sense Rome's engine is really gimped and trying to expand it for MII just threw up more bugs.

The latest one involes shield bonuses nerfing melee combat.

[JeffSteel]

Currently, Medieval TW is not playable by any reasonable standard, there's just too many bugs (shields defensive stat subtracting from defense while in melee, units at lower elevation having the advantage over those at higher elevation instead of visa versa like in reality, and other glaring issues).

It's a shame because other wise it is a great game (where else can you have a Scottish crusade that "liberates" the holy land just in time to have to save it from the ENTIRE Mongol horde! Just where IS clan McCloud when you need them, eh?), but I just cant bring myself to enjoy it as is.

So, i'll just content myself with EB until its fixed.

[Xtiaan72]

I feel the same way... I want to love it but at the moment, because of all the problems, it just doesn't have that "just one more turn" quality.

[russia almighty]

I like it for the most part . It has alot of things in it that would be valuable to EB if you made an EB . From what can be told it has moddable AI.

[Fondor_Yards]

I find lusted lands to conquor helped, but meh, it's still no EB. Too buggy, really stupid bugs that shouldn't have made the final version.

[Tuuvi]

I wonder why they let it get so buggy? I haven't bought it yet but I want to, however if it is that bad I'm not so sure...

[Xtiaan72]

Of course it's worth having. And it will be patched up and modded into shape.

[Omanes Alexandrapolites]

In my opinion you could use the cities/castles system as governments of one sort of another. It probably will not be possible to add more than two, however.

[Digby Tatham Warter]

I plan on switching back to EB as soon as v0.81 is out, not sure how well I will cope with the downgrade in graphics(I play MTW2 on max and I don't understand why some people say the difference between RTW and MTW2 is slight)

I am hoping the depth/immersive history that EB offers and the fact that I think I prefer EB's period will soon suck me in, also the really decent amount of unit variation makes the mod so good.

The bugs in MTW2 have worn me down to the point that I don't want to play it until it is reasonably well sorted.
Issues like Pikemen that grab their secondry weapon far to soon, firelock units which drift backwards and out of line, missing units(interestingly the Gothic foot knights were missing from the original MTW), the 2 handed problem, etc

Shame that EB2 is so horribly far away, it would be nice if at some point they knock up a really nice skin like a Seleucid elite inf, just as a wee taster.

[Dumbass]

Vanilla Med: Unplayable
Road to Jerusalem mod: Fun, but little flaws and bugs still really frustrate. Little roleplay value eg. you can't set faction heir, thus some unknown adopted son becomes faction leader rather than the true bloodline.

Why is the ability to adopt even in med anyway? It should be hire a new general, which doesn't get added to the family tree.

[kalkwerk]

So much negativity. The game has better improvements from RTW.

There are nice battlefield graphics. Thats it. I didnt really believed it as i bought it: that I should like to play vanilla rome so much more. I played for hours trying to convince myself I would actually like it. Tried really hard. Impossible task it turned out. Just the map. The unit icons. The battlefield AI. And the way the new features like merchants (didnt) work. Disappointment of the year next to EU III.

[Ashtart]

I like RTW too. In M2TW, It's so anoying to succeed in conquering far east europa with western faction or other . But it's more realistic with roman, macedonian, seleucid, carthage, egypte...etcetera.

(Glory to EB team )

[I of the Storm]

I was actually reading this thread and making up answers and comments, when I realized that people were talking about long-fixed bugs, and then I looked at the date and then I went



1 year and 3 months!

It's so far the worst case of necromancy I've encountered.
Anyway, now that I'm here: M2 will be fine for EB2, I'm sure. High moddability, even the castles I can imagine to be very useful. The agents might offer great possibilities too.

[General Appo]

Necro!!! Anyway, MTW2 had me hooked for about 3 weeks until I realised it was actaully quite a boring game.

[Bobolicious]

same here. I got through one game as the HRE before i called it quits. It probably had something to do with the fact that my computer isnt really strong enough to run M2TW, so its really laggy with anything but the lowest graphic settings. Even then, I usually end up auto-resolving battles after only fighting one or two. As interesting as Kingdoms sounded, i knew i would only play it for a week or two, so i ended up rediscovering my love for EB.

[Long lost Caesar]

M2TW was alright, but it could have been so much more. Bugs, messed up combat and (again) messed up diplomacy weren't exactly the great step from Rome that I personally expected to see.
All the same, it had good mods, such as Stainless Steel, which extended the map, added factions and units and made the game feel more like an EB of Medieval (not that THAT feeling lasted long either)

[Copperknickers]

Great game, especially with retrofit plus grand unit, or BC.

Of course i can't play RTW now that eb 1.1 completly destroyed my rome total war, so that even efter reinstalling and repatching Rome five times the install still wont work, so Med II's all i've got.

Actually i think SS is less fun than vanilla, and about five times less historically accurate than say, BC. (someone over at SS seems to think that the Hagia Sophia was built in 1200ad)

[Ibrahim]

It's an improvement in many fields: graphics, diplomacy, and AI Are indeed far superior. but the way the battles unfold is not an improvement: units die too quick in my opinion, and formations becaome messy even by historical standards.

[Mithridates VI Eupator]

I think that M2TW was okay. Not good, not bad, just okay. The graphics are way better than in RTW, and the varied apperance of soldiers add to the feeling, but there are a lot of bugs that ruin everything. Without patches, the battle AI was worthless. Sometimes, an enemy army walks up to you and stops in front of your army.
Then they wait.

And wait.

And wait.

Until the time is up, or you have shot them all dead with your archers.
With the patches, it got better, but still, the battle AI was, in my opinion, better in RTW.
Kingdoms helped a bit, but there is still a long way to go to perfection. (Okay, perfection might be pushing it a bit to far, but you get my point.)
Campaign AI, on the other hand, does reasonably well. They use naval landings, and the classical "siege, no siege, siege, no siege"-problem, is almost nonexistent.
So all in all, M2TW is... adequate.

[hellenes]

I think that M2TW was okay. Not good, not bad, just okay. The graphics are way better than in RTW, and the varied apperance of soldiers add to the feeling, but there are a lot of bugs that ruin everything. Without patches, the battle AI was worthless. Sometimes, an enemy army walks up to you and stops in front of your army.
Then they wait.

And wait.

And wait.

Until the time is up, or you have shot them all dead with your archers.
With the patches, it got better, but still, the battle AI was, in my opinion, better in RTW.
Kingdoms helped a bit, but there is still a long way to go to perfection. (Okay, perfection might be pushing it a bit to far, but you get my point.)
Campaign AI, on the other hand, does reasonably well. They use naval landings, and the classical "siege, no siege, siege, no siege"-problem, is almost nonexistent.
So all in all, M2TW is... adequate.

RTW AI is a puke....garbage at best...and since its not moddable (because the engine was new and CA hardcoded the hell of it) the AI in EB is still a joke....
M2TW AI on teh other hand is moddable thus EBII AI will be lightyears ahead EB1....

[brymht]

Honestly, I had a LOT more fun with Kingdoms than with Eol Med 2. Kingdoms really took a lot of cues fomr the modding comminity and did things right.

I'm ecstatic that EB2 is going to be for kingdoms. really looking forward too it. I will probably have to get a new computer to run EB2 on this, actually.