Difference between MTW2 + RTW?

[Dalrogad]

I have quickly found that the sea battles set up appears to work the same way in MTW2 as in RTW... Auto resolve. AM I missing a setting that allows to fight sea battles on map?

Also.... I soon nopticed that the max units appears to be pretty much thje same. Basically an army is maxed at about 1,500 units... The same as RTW. I wasa under the impression that MTW2 would allow a grander scale of battle.

Honestly, I am having a hard time noticing any significant diferences between the two games... Can someone give me arun down of what is new in MTW2, or direct me to a thread that will proviide such info?

TY, and GB the almighty creators of TW.

[CrossLOPER]

From what I understand, RTW and M2TW are very similar. Naval battles are indeed auto resolve only. The max. units had remained the same. Mainly, the interface has had a major overhaul obviously the graphics (unit variety especially) have been kicked up. The AI is better too.

Not much in those terms, but impressive none-the-less.

[ByzantineKnight]

From what I understand, RTW and M2TW are very similar. Naval battles are indeed auto resolve only. The max. units had remained the same. Mainly, the interface has had a major overhaul obviously the graphics (unit variety especially) have been kicked up. The AI is better too.

Not much in those terms, but impressive none-the-less.

Don't forget modding!! I cannot wait to get it and explore it's new features!!

[naut]

I have quickly found that the sea battles set up appears to work the same way in MTW2 as in RTW... Auto resolve. AM I missing a setting that allows to fight sea battles on map?

Also.... I soon nopticed that the max units appears to be pretty much thje same. Basically an army is maxed at about 1,500 units... The same as RTW. I wasa under the impression that MTW2 would allow a grander scale of battle.

Honestly, I am having a hard time noticing any significant diferences between the two games... Can someone give me arun down of what is new in MTW2, or direct me to a thread that will proviide such info?

TY, and GB the almighty creators of TW.

Not much difference in Generic terms, as the Engine is almost identical between the two. However, it is the minor changes in game-play that are a godsend .

[econ21]

Honestly, I am having a hard time noticing any significant diferences between the two games... Can someone give me arun down of what is new in MTW2...

Big differences
1. M2TW has knights, RTW has legionnaires (you asked for it)
2. M2TW has slower movement and kill speeds, and higher morale = longer, more tactical battles.
3. M2TW does not have suicidal generals and generally has better battlefield AI.
4. M2TW has better campaign AI (e.g. enemy armies often double team - marching and fighting together).
5. M2TW has a much tighter economy.
6. M2TW does not have castle towers manned by ghost archers and generally has better sieges.
7. M2TW settlements are either castles or cities, giving you a guns or butter choice.
8. M2TW does not have uber cavalry. They are good on the charge; vulnerable at rest.
9. M2TW has reworked diplomacy - your reputation and relations are visible; AI factions are more pliable on lower difficulty levels.
10. M2TW has vastly better graphics - fight a battle on the Scottish highlands and then you can die happy.

If the above differences are not significant, then I don't know what to say.

There are also some relatively insignificant things:

Minor differences
1. M2TW soldiers are not clones.
2. M2TW has armour upgrades that show on the unit.
3. M2TW soldiers bleed.
4. M2TW has princesses.
5. M2TW has merchants.
6. M2TW has guilds.
7. M2TW has inquisitors (although whether that is a good thing, I don't know: you do like anchoives on your pizza, don't you?)
...

Bottomline - I think M2TW is to RTW, what MTW was to STW. Yes, they share the same core engines and elements. But that has allowed a lot more time to be put into content. In MTW, that generally meant more "stuff" than STW - more factions, more possibilities. In M2TW, that has meant better quality stuff than RTW - a more challenging SP game, and also a prettier one.

[andrewmuir]

Minor differences
1. M2TW soldiers are not clones.

I personally think that is a major difference. I playing a demo of Shogun and that put me off TWs. Having now tasted M2TW especially in the close-up clips and I am in awe of the designers and programmers.

Andrew

[Roman_Man#3]

would it be worth buying for a rtw player, when there are mods out there like crusades total war? the roman era draws me more(although i would like to fight as a heavily armed soldier in the medieval era.)

RM3

ps. the moderators, how can you make a poll? because i dont know how.

[Monarch]

Not to forget cities/castles, very different way of presenting settlements really.

[econ21]

would it be worth buying for a rtw player, when there are mods out there like crusades total war? the roman era draws me more

I am also more drawn to the Roman era. But M2TW is a better game out of the box (e.g. better AI and better graphics). And - big proviso - if modders can edit models, it will form a better basis for mods in the long term.

It's your money, but personally I would be surprised if a RTW player did not also like M2TW.

ps. the moderators, how can you make a poll? because i dont know how.

I think when you are preparing a post, there is a small box at the bottom which you can tick to prepare a poll. Unfortunately, junior members can't vote so the EH may not be the best place to post a poll.

[Roman_Man#3]

ok, thank you.

[geala]

Although RTW was great progress in some aspects, I never liked it so much because of the small tech tree and the boring restrictions to unit diversity. Ok, that was not a fault of CA as there was no similar development of military technology in the antique times compared to the medieval ages.

Apart from that what econ21 rightly said M2TW is RTW with better technical development, more different troops (although not enough) and a special goal at the end (new world).

[Dalrogad]

I have decided that I am quite disappointmed with the battle AI in M2TW. Don't get me wrong, it is probably better than RTW, and it is as good as or better than the AI in most other modern RTS games, but with this being the latest and greatest, I thought they would have taken it to a whole new level.

The fact is, watching my troops try to attack a place where the enemy was 50 feet ago is not impressive. And that's the LEAST of it. Last night I engaged in a non siege battle where I had 750 troops, and was outnumber 2:1, and I was psyched because I knew I could crush them because of the make up of our armies, and guess what... The enemy was on a mountain that I could not get up and they could not get down - so I lost by default.

The worst of all is watching the computer duke it out with itself when you leave a reinforcement army under AI control. It looks like primitive, warcraft-era AI. Everything they do, on both sides, is absolutely screwed up and absurd.

I love the game, and I confess, it consumes my life for at least a couple weeks after the release of a new TW, but I still wish they did (and believe they probably could have done) so much better with the AI... not to mention a whole lot of other quirks in the campaign mode.

My last gripe for now is that there are some situations in the campaign, or in the battle, where some advice would be very handy. Instead, they give you all sorts of advice that I don't need at all. Especially their battle advice - it is all stuff that I knew by the time I was abou 14 years old, which was before the invention of the modern PC. For example (and I paraphrase) "Use spearman against cavalry" or "Charge spearmen from behind". Useless information. Meanwhile, there are countless other little things in the minutia of the game that I don't understand (not battle start stuff) and there is no advice for a lot of it.

Don't get me wrong, I still worship the TW creators, and curse them for feeding my addiction.

[The Spartan (Returns)]

Big differences3. M2TW does not have suicidal generals

exept at Pavia.

[CaesarAugustus]

would it be worth buying for a rtw player, when there are mods out there like crusades total war? the roman era draws me more(although i would like to fight as a heavily armed soldier in the medieval era.)

I am also drawn to the Roman era more than any others. The good people at EB (Europa Barbarorum) are already making plans for EB2, the Roman-Era mod for M2TW for all of us Rome fans. Check out the EB sub-forum here at the Org for more information, although I don't think that they will get started on EB2 right away, but it's nice to know that it will eventually be done.

[Roman_Man#3]

EB 2 eh? sounds cool, i will look out for it.

[Orb]

Minor differences
1. M2TW soldiers are not clones.

I personally think that is a major difference. I playing a demo of Shogun and that put me off TWs. Having now tasted M2TW especially in the close-up clips and I am in awe of the designers and programmers.

Andrew

Absolutely huge difference.

Poor Orbster's computer won't run it.