Man, this is going to make those hillie maps a pain to play on.
Everyones going to be hiding their armies behind the hills!
Man, this is going to make those hillie maps a pain to play on.
Everyones going to be hiding their armies behind the hills!
This is indeed a great addition. They will insert though capture points in land battles (with a camp function) that will lead to losing the battle if you lose that point and I do not think that this is such a good thing. How are your thoughts on this?
RTWRM - back to basics
This certainly sounds very interesting, I certainly hope the AI is going to be up for it! I would love to play a proper ambush battle where I have absolutely no idea where the next attack is going to come from. Plus, I've always wanted to be able to send a unit in to a busy battle by surprise without the AI being able to counter it too quickly.
Winning a battle by capturing a point is absolutely ridiculous. I can't honestly pick a battle out of history where capturing a camp won a battle, this just opens the game up to people harassing your camp with cavalry, and possibly winning like this if you're far enough from the camp or devoid of cavalry.
Then the topic of line of sight, it sounds like a great idea on paper, and I'd love to see it work, but it sounds broken. Whats wrong with the restricted camera of past total war games? I don't want to crest a hill, then an army just magically appears out of thin air right in front of me. We all know this would only work if the enemy units stayed completely invisible until spotted with this LOS mechanic, otherwise we would see them with our bird's eye view camera abilities.
Then they would have to implement so many new mechanics to work with this LOS change. We would need scouts, and after the scouts spot someone, does the rest of the army magically know where the enemy troops are? That doesn't seem realistic at all. So are we adding realism only to add more magical telepathy between the troops? Besides, the vast majority of battles in history contained two commanders who had rough estimations of their enemies' numbers.
So now we would have to get rid of the pre-battle screen that shows you the enemy army, and when you double click an enemy army on the map it shows you question marks showing how many unit cards they have, no more of that either. Banners gotta go as well, how colorful they are, or how many bars they have shows how many troops in the army.
How will I even attack enemy armies on the campaign map anyways? Do I just run around until I bump into one? I mean, if I see one on the campaign map, then realistically speaking, my men know there is an enemy army over there, and its approximately has such and such troops, and it's marching in that general direction. So when I tell my army to attack, I already have all this information on them. For this LOS to work, CA is going to have to hand us a completely different game than the one we have.
Enough with negativity, I'll offer a suggestion. How about when on the battle map, if the enemy army is such a distance away, it appears as a mob of people, not allowing you to distinguish which troops are which. That way we're expanding on the mechanic of not giving you the unit information on enemy troops when they're too far away, by also blurring their appearance until they've come within a sensible range of which your men can see.
I agree with what you said and now that I think about it this could cause huge problems unless the AI is better, much better.
edit: also regarding capture point on a field battle.
I dont remember which interview they said this but if I paraphrase it:
"Armies dont face each other in a final battle where its win or die situations. Players have to deal with camps, supply routes and terrain."
he went on to say some other stuff about scouting ahead, battles no longer being entire stacks fighting it out in one giant battle (like now).
I am guessing now that the battles on the field are different now, its not longer 2 huge armies in a random location fighting it out but more like there are camps, supply routes, outposts and etc like a realistic battle.
you cant win a battle if your supply routes are cut, you cant hope to win if your camp is overrun and all of your current supplies are taken.
name me 1 encounter where an army disregarded all of these and still won the day. it just cant be done and I welcome the change, its getting boring fighting in the same scenario for a decade.
edit2: also considering LoS, how about when you spot and enemy they show up on your mini map but it does not move since that was the 'last' time you saw them, I always found the bird's eye view kind of cheap in TW.
LoS sounds fun as long as the AI doesn't go full retard.
Last edited by Toho; February 24, 2013 at 10:13 AM.
Also, if an army was over the crest of a hill, you would be able to hear their footsteps, voices, clanking of armor, clopping of hooves; they would kick up a lot of dust, and you would see the smoke from fires in their camp. It would sound like a stadium on gameday, and you would know exactly where it was for a long distance.
Except for small groups of elite units, this line of sight feature would not be very realistic.
If you had bothered to read the translation, it says you can leave units to defend your camp. Just like it used to be in RL. Second, we don't know what shape this will have, however I don't think it will be as simple as capture a flag. In fact cavalry would probably be of limited uselefulness for attacking the camp, since you need infantry to scale the walls, dodge traps, etc.
As for battles from history, one interesting example is the battle of Gabiene: the left flank of Eumenes was routed, his phalanx in the center(built around the Silver shields) annihilated the enemy center and iirc the right flank was did not engage. the tipping point was the fact that his camp was attacked and his own men surrendered him for execution in order to get back their families and treasure.
But more importantly, the reason why you don't hear about great battles won due to the successful taking of the enemy camp/cutting their supply routes was because that happened before the battle. Armies which got their supplies cut did not last long. The whole idea was to sever the enemy lifeline and force him to fight on your terms.
Than why the heck would they implement it IN the actual battle, after that phase was already done? That is what we are talking about. Remember that in TW games you play the actual battle and nothing before it? It is certainly new mechanics that are in place here and I eagerly wait for some custom battle gameplay to see how these new stuff work in the game. I am tired of limited historical battles footage from which you can only admire graphics. I want to see mechanics. That is interesting. It is those stuff that make a new TW differ from the older one.
RTWRM - back to basics
well, we need more information to really get into whether mechanics like True LOS and capturable enemy baggage are game-breaking. So far, all we have is one sentence descriptions that are as yet unverified or explained by CA.
Capturable enemy baggage/deployment area: i think this could be very effective. If i've destroyed the enemy army and control the whole battlefield, I no longer have to hunt down that last half unit he's hidden in the trees in a corner.
TRIPTYCK
'Carthago delenda est.'
So they are just going to pop into view when they are close? And as has been mentioned, how will the AI deal with this?
I think that... here CA actually does something bold, to drive their genre onwards. Are we supposed to criticize boldness, or are we supposed to criticize mediocrity. Letting the game remain as it has been - unchanged - that is my personal definition of cowardice and mediocrity. CA is not Blizzard. CA deserves more trust, than simply dismissing these new features outright - a priori. We need more information about them before we can dismiss them as "game breaking." Seriously, I think they've thought about this up until this point, don't you?
At least this once, they've ignored the suggestions of "least common denominator" mediocrity, and surged forth with renewed vigour!
------------------------------VOXIFEX MAXIMVS-------------------------------
------PROUD PARENT OF THE EUROPA BARBARORUM VOICEMOD-------
"To know a thing well, know its limits. Only when pushed beyond its tolerances will its true nature be seen." -The Amtal Rule, DUNE
I love the way people are talking about this being some kind of radical departure from the old TW formula. Ever tried putting soldiers inside a forest? Well, now you can do that but with behind a hill instead. It's not going to be like ****ing starcraft or whatever where your units can see like 50 feet in front of them.
Dominion of Dust. A city of sand. Built your world of nothing. So how long did it stand?
A 100 years? Now wasn't it grand? Built your world of nothing. How long did it stand?
What did you think would happen? When did you think it would all fall down?
Domain of dust in a land of sand. Did yourself right, so let's feel grand.
Domain of dust in a land of sand. Now there's nowhere left to stand.
I'm pretty amazed at the negative reception from some players in this thread. You don't want Total War to be improved and do steps towards more realism for battles? Your conservatism is disturbing.
If I may be so bold, some people seem to be afraid of losing to the AI.
Line of Sight, if implemented properly, means you can't see behind a hill for example. It doesn't mean your units will be myopic, but it means that if you put them in a ditch they won't be able to see the enemy units. So you will have a real incentive to occupy the high ground. It's as simple as that. Get on high ground, send out scouts to check out the blind spots created by folds in the ground. And no, you probably won't be able to see behind forests, so beware
And yes, it would mean that units will "pop out" on the crest of the hill. Check out the battle of Cynoscephalae. If you are forced in such a situation the blame wouldn't lie with the game, but with you, because you failed to scout what lies behind the crest of the hill.
Calling BS was just an initial reaction to a flawed feature and just a colourful descriptore . I like it like you said, but I am afraid it is not too much more than we already have. At least archers will not be firing over hills .... or will they remember what they have seen before they retreated over the hill and be able to shoot? Or will a unit 10km away have told them in an instant where the enemy is.
ok true LOS for everybody but the player and the AI.
I hope their are true scouting and skirmishing parties this time around.
Because it still happened in battle. At Magnesia Antiochus tried to take the Roman camp after breaking through the Roman left wing. He didn't, but not for lack of trying. At Gabiene Antigonus won the battle, precisely because he took the camp of Eumenes. I don't remember which battle it was(I think a roman battle), but there was one where one side saw the enemy cavalry in their baggage train and broke ranks to try and save their stuff. It might have been Thracians, but for some reason I'm thinking of Gauls...
The point is, battles in the time period of Rome 2 were often protracted events lasting up to a week - both sides tried to gain the advantage, attacked the enemy foraging parties, water bearers, skirmishes were conducted all the time, etc. It would be quite difficult to simulate that on the main campaign map, so I think and hope CA are trying to implement some of the features on the campaign map and some of them on the battlefield.
I hope we will be able to set forests on fire, so I won't be going into some misty forest to get ambushed. Surround the forest and listen to their screams. I also hope this feature will be optional as it sounds like I will just stay at my camp with most of my infantry, while the cavalry and a few infantry troops deal with their camp as the AI army is marching towards mine.
While LOS would mean you can't see the enemy, marching troops would still make noise. In that case, standing still seems to be the superior option.
Last edited by Aeneas Veneratio; February 24, 2013 at 03:36 PM.
R2TW stance: Ceterum autem censeo res publica delendam esse
Exactly- to me there has to be some mechanic like this for precisely the LoS final enemy units hiding. Also something more to consider if fighting an HA army- they can retreat before an advancing army but if they retreat too far they expose their camp and might lose the battle- on the other hand if they encourage enemy to advance too far they might be able to attack lightly defended enemy camp before the enemy can return adequate reinforcements.
We aren't sure exactly how the camp details work, it might simply be a heavy morale blow similar to death of a general where AI if clearly lost 90%> the final 10% in hiding will flee the field. Or it could be a countdown clock where battle ends when timer is complete, or even possibly some other mechanic.
To me this is positive news overall (only caveat is how AI will handle it) and a welcome change for CA to drive their game forward instead of more of the same battles we've had the past 10 years and more.
I am more curious how this will affect reinforcements- will each army have a camp? Or the direction of reinforcement might be key- currently when fighting multiple armies common is to advance and concentrate force on 1 army at a time- if required to defend camp at the same time battles become much more interesting.
Last edited by Ichon; February 24, 2013 at 03:49 PM.
STAINLESS STEEL Historical Improvement Project (SSHIP) - v0.8.2 Beta released!
Recent AARs/Guides
Norway 180 turn SS/BGR AAR- http://www.twcenter.net/forums/showt...71#post8479471
Lithuania SS/BGR AAR- http://www.twcenter.net/forums/showthread.php?t=369607
1390 SS submod WIP
http://www.twcenter.net/forums/showthread.php?t=479539
Yep, this is going to revolutionise the whole battle system.
Maybe, but please CA don't change anything about this just because the MP mewlers pipe up again - and while you're at it, give the sodding archers back their range bonus when elevated, so they can make use of their new 'line of sight'!
OPEN BATTLEFIELD CAPTURE POINTS AND IMPACT PUFFS HAVE GOT TO GO!
REVERT INFANTRY THROWING PILAE TO ROME TW'S SYSTEM AS IT WAS PERFECT!
Mobo: GA-P35-S3, CPU: Intel Core 2 Quad Q8400 2.66Ghz, GPU: AMD HD 6850 1GB, RAM: 4.Gb Corsair DDR2, Sound: Audigy 4, O/S: Windows 7 64bit Home Premium