Some Thoughts On MTW/M2TW

[Alex D]

After browsing this forum, I realize this topic has been done before, but I thought I'd add my 2 florins worth...
To start out, MTW's campaign map is just right. It gives you just the right amount of detail to plan and make intelligent decisions( and some not so intelligent one's too :0 ).
I've found M2TW's campaign map gives you far too much info., and alot of it imo is just fluff.
MTW's battles and battle AI is just brilliant. I've found myself saying to myself, wow, I wish I had thought of that manouver to use on the battlefield.
More than a few times I've been 'tricked' by a sly manouver from the battle AI, and have been left 'flat-footed', scrambling to counter the move. (to me, just like on a real battlefield).
In M2TW, no such challenge even on VH.
The 'immersiveness' of MTW as has been stated elsewhere is almost complete.
From the look of the Campaign map, to the music, to the more than compitant, campaign/battle AI. Unfortunately M2TW lacks a great deal of that immersiveness factor. Mind you the battlefield graphics ARE truely outstanding, and I've more than a few times just set up custom battles where only one unit type fights only one unit type, just to watch the beautiful animations...so that is a form of 'immersiveness I suppose.
What I have not found in M2TW that I have in MTW are instances, whether on the campaign portion, or in a battle, where I've been so wrapped up in the goings on that I've truely felt like I was there, and yes this is my kingdom, and how am I best going to defend it, save it,etc...
As an example those nasty Cumans in my present campaign invaded my province of Carpathia. Campaign wise, I had to decide to fight, regroup, retire to the castle and hold on till I could muster an army...to me very realistic, and VERY tense.
In that same campaign I reinvaded Carpathia to save my KING! who was besieged in the castle. I was forced to use his heir, who was an outstanding general to save him( son saving dad, probably just as we would do!). The Cumans had an outstanding defensive postion, and outnumbered me by several hundred troops. It was a desperate gambit. They were not going to budge out of their defensive position, so like in real life I sent my Hung. HA to pepper them till they were forced to come out and play or die. And boy they came out to play. Their Cuman Hvy. Cav. nearly crushed my right wing of Spearmen anchored on a forest edge. I was forced to throw in my reserve of Carska Garda to try and hold the line. Here I am, screaming to myself in my head...hold the line....hold the line!
Wherelse do you get that type of immersiveness/thrill? Unfortunately I've as yet to experience such a thrilling battle in M2TW, even with the superb Stainless Steel mod.
That's not to say that M2TW is a bad game, just that it falls short of it's progenitor...
If M2TW had the MTW campaign style map and the MTW AI, and if MTW had M2TW's battle Graphics well 'what a wonderful world it would be'...
That's my 2 florins worth(or more ;) )
Cheers
Alex

[Kaidonni]

Spot on, Alex. I am not really a fan of M2TW because it is too tedious - and, of course, the AI. I liked RTW, but M1TW takes the bait because it was the first Total War game I played. The nostalgia...THE NOSTALGIA!

The main problems with RTW and M2TW are a) the AI's inability to grasp the mechanics of the 'tiled' 3D map and b) the military AI and diplomatic AI are separate (not to say they aren't in MTW...but then, I don't experience random port blockades and pointless invasions in MTW...and if an invasion ends up pointless, it was because I moved more troops into a province as the AI, and the AI decided it couldn't win and wouldn't risk it). The traits and retinues are just overblown in the mods for M2TW...they were a little more tolerable in RTW. For all it's bugs, RTW was better than M2TW.

And I agree...if M2TW had MTW's campaign map and MTW had M2TW's graphics...and chuck some Civ-style empire management in there...we'd have one heck of an uber game.

We should all boycott Total War and Civ games until they agree to combine the two sagas, and take the best of each game while at it! Yeah...you heard me, CA and Sid Meier...you've done it now, you've got to create the best empire management/battlefield command game EVER! Or face death!

Oh, and welcome to the forums, Alex.

[The Unknown Guy]

Personally, I think that population, together with some other factors, would be able to give a "feudal" feel without making things overcomplicated. AKA: divide population between nobles (which would include mostly medium nobility and hedge knights/hidalgos/eçuivalent), freemen(free labourers, burgoise, whatnot), and serfs (peasants, etc...), with a changing slider allowing you to determine which percentage fits where.
Now, two things: different units would drag people from different manpools (IE: drafting peasants drafts from serfs, drafting town militia from burgoise, and drafting knights from nobility). Also, each segment produces different revenues-such as, nobility producing little of both cash and food, as they would largely not pay taxes and, if anything, petty nobility sell only what exceeded of their crops,whereas gendry would bring up mainly money, and serfs mainly food (and ideally, the people would need a food upkeep, and it´s loyalty/growth/etc would be affected by it, and the army would have both a food and money upkeep, doing the same). Likewise, disbanding an unit makes it´s members join their original population pool. Building new nobility units would just drag from the nobility pool, without adittional cost (as they´d own their own weapons), except the monetary and food upkeep. Drafting militias and "mercenarish" would have some cost, representing their eçuipment, and serf levees would be drafted like nobles, as they would bring their own makeshift weapons.

Therefore, a nation with a huge percentage of the population in the nobility might be able to field at a given moment a greater feudal army, but it´s economy would be ruinous in the long term,

[ULC]

My thoughts

[Martok]

First of all, welcome to the Org Alex D.


Second, I agree that Medieval 2 doesn't match up to MTW, all things considered. Not that I would say the sequel is a bad game per se -- I've played it a few times, and found it to be an enjoyable (if frivolous) romp -- but for me at least, it just doesn't have the same depth, atmosphere, or overall immersiveness of its older sibling.

Medieval 2 is only an "all right" game. MTW, however, is a great game.

[axel]

Same here mates
MTW 1 VI is still the best dont get me wrong MTW 2 and RTW are great also but MTW 1 VI is still the best game ever, for me that is and all the mods been made by fantastic artists make s MTW1 even better.
It would be really great if they make a new MTW, like somme campains from the mongol or china dynasty or other campains but based on the MTW1if they should make MTW 1 games with alot of different campains i would buy them all deff.

[The Unknown Guy]

What they should have done was a rehasal of MTW/VI, with better graphics and AI, and maybe some economic complexnes in the lines I described above. Oh, and an autorresolve button to be able to çuit in the middle of a battle without instalosing. Very often I´ve had to leave MTW aside because I just lack the time to play a series of long battles through (and, furthermore, I realize in the middle of one that I have things to do and I still have to stand around for 60 minutes beating reinforcement waves)
Oh, and on that line, the timer should be shorter...

[Noir]

Welcome to the .org Alex D - there's lots of interesting mods to try in MTW - have fun discovering each:

XL (it seems you playing it)
BKB Supermod
Age of Warlords
Medmod
Pike and Musket
Samurai Warlords
Napoleonic TW
Ancient TW
Pocket Mod
Dark Ages TW (in development)
Hellenic TW
Fall of Rome TW
MIddle Earth TW

All of them have their own flavor both in the campaign and in the battlefield and are worth to try in my experience. They use the engine well and bring out its potential in various ways.