Medieval II - Ask CA some Questions!

[Bob55]

what sort of minimum requirements are there going to be on MTW2? looking at the screenshots they are going to be high.

[Angarah]

Originally Posted by Shaun

Well having the Aztecs thousands of miles away on a different continent is stupid, especialy when the AI will never actually invade over seas. Unless there is a different campaign then the Aztecs will be a wasted faction slot..

What do you think the AI will do on their secluded continent? Build build build.... Then, when you invade America, you will find a huge Aztec army. That would be quite a challenge. But as a playable faction, yes it is a wasted slot.

[Siena72]

Originally Posted by Sidus Preclarum

yeah, I'm not sure where Lithunia fits in the 1100 AD picture

right, try a hundred years later. Then try two hundred years later, and then add another hundred years. And then tell me if you see any difference on European map regarding Lithuania.
Now try to find other country from CA's list that experieced such expansion. Some did, and then some didn't...
Is it more realistic to expand with Scotland (just one of the examples - sorry to pick on it) - who NEVER left its little corner? Or with Lithuania, which expanded like a few other countries did. And involved religious strugle into the bargain. Crusades and all that stuff...

Anyway, I went through this discussion so many times, that I don't want to go through it again...
I am sick of that narrow Medieval Europe's concept that mainstream Western Europeans have.

[PROFESSORPAUL]

Here are some other things I'd like to know:

1. If you assault a province, will the AI determine if they can fight the battle or retreat like in MTW? I liked it when I assaulted a province in MTW, and the enemy army actually decided they couldn't win the battle and retreated to regroup with a larger army and attack and take the province back. I didn't like it much in RTW when I would assault a province with an army three times the size of the enemy army, and they still stood and faught.

2. Will units in Medieval 2 have individual commanders? Like in MTW when each unit had a person commanding the unit and they each had their own loyalty.

3. Will there be more death animations? And will there be more positions a soldier can die? In RTW, there were only like 5 or 6. It'd also be cool if they could make the weapons stay on the battlefield instead of just the body and shield.

[Giedrius]

I agree with Siena72 , I dont understand creators, why they didnt look in history, and I will say again and I will not calm down, until Lithuania will be added. There were no Lithuania in Medieval, and look this:

The pagan Liths, or Lithuanians, may have settled along the Nemen as early as 1500 B.C. In the 13th cent. the Livonian Brothers of the Sword and the Teutonic Knights conquered the region now comprising Estonia, Latvia, and parts of Lithuania. To protect themselves against the Knights, who pressed them from the north and the south, the Lithuanians formed (13th cent.) a strong unified state.

P.s I would like to see that man in live, who said, that there are no room for Lithuania in 1100 AD in Europe, for god damned , Lithuania first time was named in writing 1009, to the 1385 until Union with poland Lithuania made great victories

The grand dukes Gedimin (1316–41) and Olgerd (1345–77) expanded their territories at the expense of the neighboring Russian principalities, which were weakened by the Mongol invasion. Lithuania became one of the largest states of medieval Europe , including all of what is now Belarus, a large part of Ukraine, and sections of European Russia; at its furthest extent it touched the Black Sea.

Christanity was the most important thing in Medieval Europe, so I think it would be right to add Livonian Brothers of the sword and teutonic knights(not as factions, but add their forts). Livonian Brothers had a lot of castles in novadays Latvia's territory, and Teutonic knights were in Prussia (novadays - Russian territory near Lithuania), their task was to convert Pagan to christanity in Lithuania.

"The Sword brethren headquarters were at Viljandi (Fellin) in Estonia. The walls of the Grandmaster's castle are still standin"
From there they attacked Lithuania, but attack was failed 1236 in Siauliai (we lithuanians that battle called "battle of Sun").
The Sword brethren were know at that days as carriers of christianity and peace, but really they killed pagans and looted their cities

Lithuanians had strong military force, and that is most important, it would be nice an event, to unite Lithuania and Poland, but player would have his decision, in history, the most famous battles in Lithuania went as far as Lithuania joined to Poland, that made the son of Olgird (or something like that, we liths call him Duke Algirdas) - Jogaila, he had trobles with other Dukes and so he choosen Poland and Poles joined Lithuania with bad intentions, they polonezed Lithuania and so on.. , But Lithuania was connected to Poland only 1385 , and Lithuania took christianity only in 1387 , The name of Lithuania , first time was known in 1009. So , and after Union of Lithuania and Poland, there were few big battles, at 1410 (Zalgirio musis or battle of Grunwald) , Their armies crushed well armed army of teuton knights.

but Lowlanders (zemaiciai) , that is the nation of Lithuania, Im a lowlander too, they defended theirselves with wooden spears and light cavalry against armed knights, they took christianity only at 1413 ,
How I know, Lithuanians, was the last nations, which took christianity, and that shown it's strong will, couse the most important task of knights were to spread christianity

Im proud that Im samogitia and I my motherland is capital of samogitia , Telsiai

Do u need any more facts about lithuania ? West world even dont know about it , they think , that Lithuania always was a part of Russia , and I say, our language is not russian, our language came from Balts,When lithuanians come to other countries of europe, they dont even know where is Lithuania and baltic states, they think, that we are from Iraq or India, for God jesus christ...
this is the map of lithuania in 15th century:



Understand me, I dont want to add Lithuania to the map and throw out hungary or poland, I just want that people would see deeper into History, we dont want to get entire map, just We lithuanians a lot of times fought to get freedom, vs teotonic knights in Medieval, Vs poles , Vs germans in WWII and vs soviet union , and that is painful, when someone want to delete us from the map, and say, that there is no place under the sun

The suggestion topic is not a place for that discussion, It would be great to mape another topic, with name or something like that: "Why creator should include a faction in M2TW" ...

[Sidus Preclarum]

Originally Posted by King Jim II

perhaps they could be an emerging faction? (like the mongols probably will) :original:

oh, yeah, that's a good point...

Did anyone alreay ask the obvious to ca :
How many faction slots will there be ? and how many possible models/skins ?

[Smoker]

we can go on doing this forever...
i can ask why not have even bulgarians in there?
but whats the point..that way every nation will want some part in this even if it was minor one.
To be fully realistic the game shoud have all the faction there were at that time as the ones who emerged later..
Cos its obvious why they put some factions in and other out....maybe cos the game sells more in scotland ratter lithuania or bulgaria

[Siena72]

Originally Posted by Smoker

we can go on doing this forever...
i can ask why not have even bulgarians in there?
but whats the point..that way every nation will want some part in this even if it was minor one.
To be fully realistic the game shoud have all the faction there were at that time as the ones who emerged later..
Cos its obvious why they put some factions in and other out....maybe cos the game sells more in scotland ratter lithuania or bulgaria

to follow that logic - they included Mongols because game sells better in Mongolia, and Aztecs, because games sells better in... Aztekia ?
I would follow this rule - what makes game more interesting - playing a typical Christian faction, or playing some unusual pagan faction like Lithuania with some unusual political and military decisions to make?
I would not mind having Bulgaria there - sounds better than Sicily for example...

Damn, I am having a dejavu - same discussion as in MTW I time. And just as useless....

[Zenith Darksea]

Sicily's a good one actually. Certainly I'd like to see its wars with Byzantium recreated. But I agree, Bulgaria really ought to be in there. But I can get over these things - they've actually decided to include Scotland this time around! Hurrah!

[lightbringer418]

I think this may have been asked, but not specified.

Will there be a much-needed dismount ability for calvary? Or at least when the horse dies the men should be able to get back up and keep fighting?

[the celt]

Originally Posted by Siena72

to follow that logic - they included Mongols because game sells better in Mongolia, and Aztecs, because games sells better in... Aztekia ?

Mexico dude, Mexico.

[Siena72]

Originally Posted by the celt

Mexico dude, Mexico.

it was a joke dude, a joke.
I just did not want to bother and pick from CA's faction list the most backward regions of today (by the way - most backward regions today ARE NOT the most backward regions in Middle Ages), which are least likely to buy games. So just substitute those for "Aztekia", ok?
My point was that the buying public is not directly tied to the faction list.

EDIT:
Otherwise I would never have bought any of Total War games.... Lithuania is in neither of them.

[JANOSIK007]

With all due respect to Lithuanians, I don't think you will garner much support for your cause by ranting here alone.

Let's say that Scotish appeal on the market makes it a better choice than Lithuania.

Why then isn't Bohemia in? It is a widely known faction and the purchasing power of the Czech Republic is higher than that of Scotland. It also has great battles, among which is the Battle of Durnkrut (hailed as the biggest knight battle during the medieval history), rich variety of unique units, among which are the unforgetable Hussite War Waggons, and it has a dynasty among dynasties, the Przemyslids, of which Ottakar II (dubbed "the king of steel and gold") was considered as a top monarch of his time.

How could another Italian city (Milan), an Asian empire far to the east tip of the map and entering at a very late date (Timurid), or the Brave Heart Land (Scotland) be put ahead of Bohemia?

This is my question to CA.

[Siena72]

JANOSIK007, I have no illusions of "garnering support". I spent a lof of time and energy during first MTW doing just that - with NO results. If the game is good in its own right I will probably buy it. Especially, if it will be easy to mod Lithuania in.
Or just play with red English and blue French
Or maybe I will wait till game gets cheaper - so I pay less for "medieval" game without Lithuania

regarding your "buying power" research - I don't believe that factions should be directly tied to buying power of today. What kind of "medieval" game would that be?

[Blood Claw Warrior]

This is partially a question and partially something I want.

1. I would like to know if there will be different units between the factions. This is one thing that got me a little bored with the other TW games and this is really the only reason I got bored. I want units to be different for different armies. I don't want you to clone units and just change the colors and call them either this or that like you did in Barbarian Invasion sometimes. I get sick of the units for different armies looking the same. Don't get me wrong I LOVE your games but this would be nice if there were varied units for the armies not just clones. Also, I do know there are mods but personally I just would like to play vanilla for awhile.

Another question I have.

2. Can you give us any information on Mercenaries? Can you give us an example of one of the mercenaries? I really like mercenaries in your other games, except maybe the color of them.

Thanks.

[.zip]

You must understand that the CA guys are not making this game for us, little nations with huge history, they are making it for themselves, the west. They just dont care about our history or the exact history of europe. I personaly think that they would cut out Byzantians to insert another western faction if they could. And who can blame them? If we could make games like this, we would make them better for us, wouldnt we?
I could say that I want a Serbian faction in the game, and i could post some historical facts that proves that it should be there. But in the end it doesnt mean a thing. They will do what they think its best

[Kscott]

Guys, why did Scotland get in?
-Becuase it has a huge fan base, myself included.

Why is Lithuania not in?
-Good question, I for one would like them in, hey lets just hope for the ability to add factions...

Why isnt Bohemia in it?
-Well, again, I personally would like them, but CA has opted for a big united HRE.

[intj_rational]

Some of the things I'd like to know:
1. Is the campaign map totally overhauled? I really dislike the one in RTW; the AI couldnt make use of it much and sometimes, it was annoying. I'd rather have a simplified and more efficient campaign map like the one in MTW, especially when crusades are to be implemented. I cant imagine crusades on the RTW campaign map.
2. Is the campaign AI improved? I wouldnt want to go against hordes of peasants and AI without much strategy.
3. Are the units more varied? In MTW I remembered that there wasnt much difference among units in the western factions.
4. Are there individual commanders for every single unit that can be promoted to become governors like in the system in MTW? It'll be great to have that.
5. How will the crusades be implemented? I pretty much dislike the fact that in MTW, the crusader army drains up troops in my lands when they pass by. Is it possible to implement a system whereby every faction can decide the amount and type of troops it wishes to contribute?
6. Are the heirs in M2:TW predetermined like the one in MTW? I'd really like to set my own heirs.
7. In MTW and RTW, the king/emperor had little influence on the empire itself. Will the MTW system accurately reflect the changes in kings/monarch on the empire itself? This will make the traits system more significant, other than traits that affect the battlefield.
8. Will there be historical characters that will appear in the campaign like in MTW? This will be a really nice feature.
9. Will there be significant historical events such as the Mongol invasion?

That's all. Thanks.

[Libertine]

Scotland got in so the English could beat them down, time after time.

[Ó Cathasaigh]

My big Question, will the units be able to fight ALL over their invironment?
For instance, in the feild when there are large bolders, it would be nice if you could fight in the gaps between them, or if on the edge of a large rock hill, if the dead would roll down or fall from the hill.
Or in a city, units should be able to fight on the steps of large buildings, for instance in RTW there it would have been ideal to fight on the ramps and steps of large temples and Governers mansions.