I want to control my sea battle!!!

[hellheaven1987]

Well, you see the title and that's it.

[therussian]

Words of advice: Keep dreaming

[Fabolous]

Not going to happen. Almost impossible with the current engine. Perhaps in the game after MTW2, but not for this one.

But yea, I think we all do.

[hellheaven1987]

But I saw "Imperial Glory" can?

[Sir Matthais]

But I saw "Imperial Glory" can?

ya I saw that too and it looked okay. Pretty good for what they had to work with. It woudl be nice though to see and control a see battle. Bringing your ship salong side the enemies while a storm of fire is fallign over head and to see the saliors storm onto the enemy boat and then capturing it and then it becomes under your control. The beauty and hope want s to make me cry... Just give me a second.... Okay I'm all good. But back to the point I wish there would be controlable sea battles. In the RTW manual it even says that "sea battles are automatic and indecive" or something like that.

[hellheaven1987]

Ya, I have experience about two ships vs seventeen ships and achieved victory... (I mean the two ships!)

[Fabolous]

But I saw "Imperial Glory" can?

Yes, it has naval battles. Though I didn't enjoy the rest of the game near as much as RTW. Naval battles could be done at this time, but not within the current game engine, and they are not going to build a new engine simply for naval battles. That would a terrible descion business wise.

[Incinerate_IV]

But I saw "Imperial Glory" can?

Imperial Glory and RTW are two very different games with 2 very different engins. Yes in M2TW they can impliment sea battle, if they really wanted. But if you read the FAQs and the interviews they clearly stated that it won't be as refined as the RTW engine isn't built for sea battles and it would take a long time, hence costing more money to develop. So I agree with their decision. If they are going to add sea battle, do it right.

[hellheaven1987]

Imperial Glory and RTW are two very different games with 2 very different engins. Yes in M2TW they can impliment sea battle, if they really wanted. But if you read the FAQs and the interviews they clearly stated that it won't be as refined as the RTW engine isn't built for sea battles and it would take a long time, hence costing more money to develop. So I agree with their decision. If they are going to add sea battle, do it right.

Well, I have read the interview and know it... just feel sad as we have miss so many great sea battles...

[Virgil]

navies played a very samll role in the middle ages - there is almost no reason to include them in this time period.

[Cayo_Julio_Cesar]

FOR CHUCK NORRIS ( just loged frmo wow) , THE NAVAL BATTLES OF IMPERIAL GLORY ARE THE WORST $%·Henry VIII%&·&·$%Stalin&$·&·$%&·$&%·George Bush$%&·$%·$Hitler·&·$%&·%&Arnold Swazheneger(sp?)·$/·$/· EEEEEEVERYONE SKIPS THEM, EVEN THE SPANISH WHO LOVE THAT GAME JUST CUS ITS FROM THERE!!

And i agree it won't go well with rtw engine......unless of corse a genius is wrking for CA ,and he had a great idea.

[z2ei]

Am I the only one not drooling over the thought of controllable sea battles? Yeah, sure..it'd be neat at first, but having to deal with land battles, empire management, and then sea battles on top of that?

I just hope it's not going to push other features for the next TW out of the way, though. I don't care as long as there's a decent autoresolve, and no naval pinball.

[Destraex]

I wish too. Sea battles however were not as important in this era. Not saying they were not important, just not as important as Rome VS Carthage or Britain VS France

[God-Emperor of Mankind]

If they are going to add sea battle, do it right.

Here here.
CA should only add it in if they know it will be great.
I don't think any of us here want TW to turn into Imperial Glory now do we :wink:

[Proximus]

I think that for this time period we’re better of without sea battles. AFAIK sea battles wasn’t that common during the middle-ages.
However if the next TW game is set in the 17th – 19th century I would assume sea battles will be included.

[Yosemite]

I think that for this time period we’re better of without sea battles. AFAIK sea battles wasn’t that common during the middle-ages.
However if the next TW game is set in the 17th – 19th century I would assume sea battles will be included.

And he is right. They better make an excelent land battles rather than normal naval battle and good land battles.

[Valerius Maximus]

i agree with CA's decision, either they do it well or don't do it at all...

[killerxguy]

But we want to atleast contorl our ships in a 2d map where we choose where to move the ships.

[nadjib]

I don't know many things about naval battles in the med perdiod but i think that it was borring ... and certainly more borring if included in a game :sign_war:

[JuanHose]

I think Naval Battles should really be an idea for any expansion. I can totally understand them not wanting to put them in Rome because the ships were very primitive in their attack modes so it wouldn't have been all that interesting. However, towards the end of the Medieval age I think it might be fairly important especially if you are trying to take over the America's to be able to have personal control over your navy. I can understand CA wanting to concentrate on other thing of course, but it would make a very nice add-on. One problem we might encounter though is that naval battles might be very slow as manouvering a ship isn't exactly easy. Its also essentially a war of attrition, which could become a bore-fest and be nothing like the excitement of films like Master and Commander. Besides, with ships theres not exactly a huge amount of variety and it could become pretty uninteresting after the first few battles. I'd still like the option though!