Is RTW modding getting old ?

[Killerbee]

Well , RTW is already 5 years old , and with M2TW and the new E:TW , i wanted to ask a question : Is RTW modding getting old ? Or , in other words : Should we "abandon" the RTW engine (not completely , but partly) , and go for M2TW/E:TW in the future ?

Even though it's (=RTW) the best platform/engine in most player's opinions , we can't deny it's pretty old .. But , it's easy moddable , compared with M2:TW (and with E:TW , although that might change in the future)

[Augustus Lucifer]

I'm going to vote no. I've never modded RTW and have no reason to, but it still has sex appeal. Empire is like that girl down the street who you think might grow up to be a total hottie, but you just aren't sure since she got plastic surgery at 14. M2 is like the chick you see at the club who's been around town a few times but is still a freak. Rome is your friend's mom that always lets you ride shotgun for some reason, a reason you don't come to realize for many years down the road.

[makanyane]

voted no, there's still enough players around, including people coming back to it after trying the other engines, and we now finally know enough on RTW to be able to do most things....

AL - that's the weirdest analogy I've seen for the games

[mikoli]

I'm going to vote no. I've never modded RTW and have no reason to, but it still has sex appeal. Empire is like that girl down the street who you think might grow up to be a total hottie, but you just aren't sure since she got plastic surgery at 14. M2 is like the chick you see at the club who's been around town a few times but is still a freak. Rome is your friend's mom that always lets you ride shotgun for some reason, a reason you don't come to realize for many years down the road.

I see your point and I like it!Nicely explained!
We should never stop modding RTW unless CA release RTW2!

[Axalon]

Hello Aradan and all others who might be interested in this... Some general remarks then....

First of all, the whole “best TW-game of them all routine” is not truly important, it is a curiosity and should be treated as such. This is at least the way I see it. As both Aradan and I have pointed out, people are entitled to personally prefer and enjoy whatever game they like, after all, it only concerns them personally anyways.... Totally regardless if the game is or could be with some credibility considered to be great or not, or whatever preference others may have – it does not matter, nor should it. This is probably the most important part of all this.

As for public claims (of greatness), that’s a whole other ball-game and the terms that applies there are completely different. These are in effect intended to concern others beyond ourselves and as such we are expected to explain on what grounds we have founded our claims on, so the people can get a decent chance to assess that claim, pure and simple (ex. is this true? Does the claim make sense? etc. y/n?). Thus there is a difference between the two circumstances of public claims and personal preferences and if “you” don’t want your stuff to be the subject of scrutiny you add the “to/for me”-clause.

Now, traditionally we usually disregard any claims that have no or little presented basis to it. Because these are by principle considered to be unserious. However, since I was curious on the claims found around here I asked for the basis of these in my previous post and Aradan was kind enough to provide me with some potential reasons for it (rather funny since he was not the one doing any claims here.).


Secondly, I get the impression that Aradan have been reading me all wrong on my 3rd point. The whole “comparison”-thing between MTW and RTW strike me as a rather unfortunate construct by his hands. I did no such thing and if you read it straight up what I actually say there it will probably become pretty clear that no such thing was really attempted from me (as far as I can tell I did mention MTW once to set my argument in perspective). If I had, I would have for sure filled that entry with plenty of strong examples as of how MTW excels over RTW in order to provide strength to my case, no such thing was attempted, all I did was to question the basis as for why RTW (or M2TW) is supposed to be ”the best game of them all” and little else.

You see, I already know that it is utterly pointless to try convincing you “Romans” of the magic of MTW1 – because even if I managed to pull it off – you guys would still not play (or mod) any more MTW anyhow. So, there is little to be gained from such an attempt, so why even bother? All I did here was to ask a warranted question, “What is the basis for this claim?” - Yes, an unpopular move obviously, but I am fully entitled to ask, so I did since I was curious, because this public claim of RTW-greatness actually concerns me as well in effect. Perhaps my doubts are uncomfortable for some, but I feel it was a healthy wakeup call and hopefully it will open up a few eyes and broadened the all too narrow perspective here. At least I, consider this to be a good thing – even if it is just concerns curiosities.


Thirdly, I get that RTW is moddable, I get that there are plenty of RTW-mods around, I get that in a purely quantitative way RTW offer more strategic variables and possibilities to toy around with than STW and MTW – I get all that. And, I also get that I lacked some essential info on RTW-mods and Aradan have been kind enough to fill in some of the blanks for me – which is all good. Hell RTW might even be friendlier place to work in than MTW as well, as insisted upon – I don’t know, since I have never worked with it myself, as stated before. If it really is – excellent! At any rate, RTW is also likely to be a more distributed game than older TW-games, thus a bigger community is to be expected, and that in turn means more modders and so forth - let’s not forget that either, because it probably is a factor here. Anyhow, all this is good and I got little problems with that, its fine.

However, moddability, while being desirable, is hardly a determining factor for a great game as such and Aradan probably know this just as well as I do. In fact, it does not have any bearing at all while we examining the completed result - as in the game as such. It only has a bearing in “what can we do with the game” – which is hardly the same thing. It is a yummy bonus but little else... Kind of the same thing as GFX-thing, you can’t consider a game as such to be great because you can change it – that’s just silly. I’ll rub this in just to make certain that we all are on the same page here; Chess is not a great game because you can change the rules and given circumstances in it, now is it? Same thing applies to RTW...


Lastly, it seems that Aradan have misunderstood me yet again or perhaps I was not clear enough. Either way, he still seems to maintain that it is not possible to go beyond the “tainted” realm of personal preference and evaluate things on another level... Sure we can! I think it is very possible to regard any public claim stated in a public environment as an attempt to establish some level of group preference, and in order for a group preference to exist and work properly - it must have functional standards of some sort. I believe that such standards can be found and applied as potential criteria/tools for assessing, among other things, public claims of greatness in a game and this – regardless of our strictly personal preference. I think it is possible to find some sort of common ground that we can all agree upon and if we do, they cease to be personal - and voila we got our standard. I have no clue how many these might be, but I am fairly certain that there are a few around at least. If we apply the spectra of desirable vs. undesirable it will get easier and more tangible for us.... Here are a few candidates I can think of, and they seem pretty convincing to me....

Buggyness – Nobody wants bugs in their game. Much buggyness is thus clearly undesirable. Regardless what game it is. Thus the fewer bugs we have the better, right?

Stability - Nobody wants a game that crashes or freezes – thus obviously desirable.

Interface - Nobody wants an intricate and cumbersome interface. We all want an easy and smooth one that is handled with little effort, thus allows us to concentrate on the game instead of the interface of the game – regardless what game it is. A good interface is clearly more desirable than a bad one.

Functionality – Nobody wants poor functionality in a game, so it will be harder to play and do things in the game because of it (“poor controls”, “timewastage”, “overview difficulties” are a few functionality problems found in M2TW for instance.) High functionality is desirable in a game so it easy to actually play the game - and we all want it to be so. Obviously desirable then.

Loading/waiting times - Nobody wants to sit around and wait for the game to load up so we can actually play the game – regardless what game it is. The faster loading times is desired since that means less waiting while the opposite of long loadong/waiting times is clearly undesirable. We can measure this in seconds for instance....

I honestly find it very hard to believe that people won’t totally agree upon these simple yet distinct ideas and notions. It is just silly maintaining that we don’t want a more stable game for instance, thus it is indeed possible to go beyond personal preference since these concepts, and how we regard them, are hardly personal, they are universal if anything since we all can agree upon ‘em. Add to that, we can apply them on whatever TW-game we want – it simply does not matter, since we will regard and measure things with these standards all the same anyhow. Also, these concepts/criteria/standards are hardly the only ones either, of that I am pretty certain. Here are some others for instance...

Sound quality - Nobody want poor soundquality (the actual Audio-design as such is not a considered factor here, just sheer quality of the sound as such), we all want excellent soundquality if we have a free choice. This is pretty much just counting KHz and stuff like that - obviously desirable. Higher KHz is more desirable and the same goes for bits (4-bits 8-bits, 16-bits, 32-bits etc.) – so there is little problem in determining these things either.

Great Appearance (GFX) – Eyecandy essentially, nobody wants a game that is needlessly ugly; we all prefer a game that looks as good as possible - if we can choose freely. Clearly desirable then...

Great AI – Well, a good AI is obviously more desirable than a poor one. We all want a good AI I we are allowed to choose - simply because it usually creates a more challenging thus more interesting and entertaining game. For those few who actually want a poor AI – by all means invert the scale.

Now, there are probably more around still, but that is not the point here (I am open to further suggestions of candidates thou), the point is to show that it is indeed possible to travel beyond the borders of personal preference and thus everything regarding assessing games is not stuck in the realm of personal preference while we examine (claimed) greatness in a game. We could settle with such simple staples/grades as low, medium and high and we probably are in business. Hell we could just settle with a simpler grading still; better or worse and draw if need be... We will still be in business all the same and we can’t get much simpler grading than that. Now, is it not striking that out of these 8 mentioned standards/criteria it is highly unlikely that RTW will ever come out on top of all other TW-games? Let’s take a comparison with STW for instance and just apply the simplest version of grades and see what happens. As far as I can tell I came up with these results....

STW: 6 better, 2 worse (Great appearance and soundquality)...
RTW: 2 better, 6 worse (Great AI, Loading/waiting times, Interface, Stability, Functionality and Buggyness)

Obviously RTW does not fare too well here.... Now, some of you might protest and say I am biased and my assessment is not fair. Let me assure you that I have no “evil interest” what so ever in dragging down poor RTW in the dirt, simply because there is nothing to be gained for me personally if I did (considering what I said in my 2nd point), thus I have no reasonable motive to do it – pure and simple. Even if I applied a ton of goodwill for the benefit of RTW I would in all honesty still end up with the same result anyway, there simply is little room for doubts here as far as I can tell - and if I can’t clearly decide on some standard/criteria, I will label it as a “draw”. So regardless goodwill or not, it is far from a glorious triumph for RTW-greatness so far, anything but in fact. Oh well, let’s try with the cripple ETW then to cheer up all you “Romans” – This is what I came up with....

ETW: 1 better, (Great appearance) 3 worse (buggyness, stability, loading/waiting times), 4 draw (I can’t tell, too close call for me; functionality, interface, soundquality, great AI)
RTW: 3 better (buggyness, stability, loading/waiting times), 1 worse, (Great appearance), 4 draw. (I can’t tell on these - too close call for me; Functionality, Interface, Soundquality, Great AI)

Ok, with crippled ETW, ‘ol RTW does better but the results hardly strikes me as overwhelmingly superior as one might have expected with a cripple like ETW. Obviously, it does fare better this time but it still does not shine in the way as people claim it to do. So, in a general sense RTW does not fare too well in these two simple evaluations - yet still people are declaring its superiority.... It does not add up very well as “the greatest game of them all”, now does it? Remember, this is just curiosities and should be treated as such I think. Anyway, I take it that some of you will do your best to rip apart these simple ideas in order to defend the honour of Rome. It is to be expected. But before you do, let me be crystal clear on that I don’t claim that these concepts/standards alone will determine greatness in a game – all they do is to provide some interesting and valid parts of it, to also consider beyond blatant personal preference, that’s all.



Ok Aradan, some other remarks/replies directly on what you wrote then....

If the "most unsupported, unrecognised, etc" MTW modding community requires something of TWC, please do feel free to ask, we are not playing favourites here and we'd be more than happy to support you and allow more and younger TW players to get to know and love MTW.”

I did bring that up to broaden the perspectives here, showing that even with circumstances far worse than the RTW-communty ever experienced here at the TWC there still is no reason to give up modding a game. It obviously got your attention Aradan. Ok at least I will. I personally have so far been reluctant to call upon the services of you staff-people since I assume that you are busy anyways. Thus I have tried to avoid it as much as possible so far - I can of course only speak for myself in this regard. While I'm at it....

On general terms I get the impression that things operate a bit slower and less thoroughly in the STW/MTW-section than elsewhere; perhaps this is something to look over? I personally think that staff activities can be stepped up there, moving misplaced topics and subjects (pretty common regarding technical issues and problems for instance. I believe there is place for it elsewhere here at the TWC, so why not use it? As in moving these threads to were they belong), or locking up resurrected threads – which also happens fairly often. Sometimes there are thread doublets as well and little is done about it. Stuff like this can surely be improved upon somehow I think (the general rules seems to support this as well). Just because the traffic is small does not mean that it is supposed to be neglected, now does it? Either TWC have a section for STW/MTW, or it doesn’t. I simply suggest that this section get treated accordingly. I find myself all too often taking matters in my own hands since nobody else seems to do anything about it, and thus I deal with the various issues the best I can as a simple member (far from successfully at that). Maybe I’m just freakish about it – I honestly can’t tell.

Apart from that, some people just find RTW's tile system better than MTW's RISK-style map, where Khazar and Switzerland require the same amount of time to travel through. Etc etc.”

Hehehe, my guess is that you are consciously disregarding the given circumstances of the “Risk-model” as of how it functions in general and how it is set up in STW/MTW to make a rhetorical point in favour of the new model found in RTW (am I wrong? Right?). I’ll return the favour anyhow; is it reasonable that a neutral ship-stack clearly inferior in numbers or strength (or both!) can successfully block all traffic because of its position? In the straits of Gibraltar or the English channel for instance? I think this is rather ridiculous and this gets us nowhere - fast.

In a general sense this kind of reservations can easily be turned against RTW-model as well – as in 3-d agents, ships and armies running around on the stratmap swallowing up time while as their rather pointless animations must have their due…. - Regardless if we speed up the time or not. Structural waste of time or “timewastage” is a very real factor in RTW and onwards while it plays a rather obscure role in STW/MTW for instance. Agents, ship and army movements are undoubtedly far more intricate and time-consuming compared with the highly efficient and straightforward “risk-solution” found in STW/MTW. The Risk-model simply is smoother, faster and easier to move stuff around. While the gains of strategic positioning and an increased level of realism in movement in the new model are a fact, these traits also come at a heavy price; poorer AI, poorer stability, poorer funtionality, worse loading/waiting times, more buggyness etc. Considering these facts it is quite warranted to question if the actual gains won really are worth all the downsides that comes with it. To me personally there is little doubt in the matter, but I am sure that others can and will evaluate these things differently (if at all considered, that is). Both stratmap-models have their strengths and weaknesses...


Last remarks
--------------
I would like to remind everybody that this is not about me personally preferring MTW above RTW (I do, but that is hardly relevant here) or anything like that, because it is entirely beside the point here. What all this is about is the public claim of RTW being “the greatest game of them all” and the question “on what grounds is this supposed greatness to be found”? That is what all this fuss is about. And, as far as I am concerned we might as well turn too ETW, M2TW, STW and MTW while we search for, and examine, the substance of these claims. The narrow focus of MTW vs. RTW is simply not big or sufficient enough for the actual context here, because if anything it is RTW vs. all other TW-games – because that is in effect what this claim says and little else....

While I do believe that it is possible to find both strengths and weaknesses in various regards in all TW-games - I still question the notion and claim that RTW is superior in a general sense to all others. Why? Because so far I still fail to see any sufficient basis for it, that’s why....

However, all this is just curiosities and should be treated as such I think. Because of that I am also torn here. Questioning whether or not it is truly meaningful to continue pointing out the rather obvious weaknesses and insufficiencies in the basis for these claims of RTW-superiority. That notions is, as far as I can tell here, hardly driven by traceable reasons, nor built upon some solid or convincing foundation, but relies essentially on personal preference - repeated over and over again, seemingly in a belief that this will somehow make things more true because of it. Traditionally and by principle we usually regard any claims with little or no basis as unserious. Why should RTW be treated differently? No, I think I’ll stick to tradition on this and treat these claims accordingly - making it easier for us all....

- Cheers

[Aradan]

You see, I already know that it is utterly pointless to try convincing you “Romans” of the magic of MTW1 – because even if I managed to pull it off – you guys would still not play (or mod) any more MTW anyhow. So, there is little to be gained from such an attempt, so why even bother? All I did here was to ask a warranted question, “What is the basis for this claim?” - Yes, an unpopular move obviously, but I am fully entitled to ask, so I did since I was curious, because this public claim of RTW-greatness actually concerns me as well in effect. Perhaps my doubts are uncomfortable for some, but I feel it was a healthy wakeup call and hopefully it will open up a few eyes and broadened the all too narrow perspective here. At least I, consider this to be a good thing – even if it is just concerns curiosities.

You somehow assume "we Romans" live and breathe for RTW as if we were fanboys... FYI, I personally first got hooked up with MTW and I consider it a better game than RTW, in its vanilla form, and I still play it (and VI), while I've not touched vanilla RTW for 3+ years.

However, moddability, while being desirable, is hardly a determining factor for a great game as such and Aradan probably know this just as well as I do. In fact, it does not have any bearing at all while we examining the completed result - as in the game as such. It only has a bearing in “what can we do with the game” – which is hardly the same thing. It is a yummy bonus but little else... Kind of the same thing as GFX-thing, you can’t consider a game as such to be great because you can change it – that’s just silly. I’ll rub this in just to make certain that we all are on the same page here; Chess is not a great game because you can change the rules and given circumstances in it, now is it? Same thing applies to RTW...

TWC is a modding-centred community, you are a modder, I am a modder, people posting in this thread are modders or mod-players, and this thread is about whether or not people should stop modding RTW. Therefore "what can be done with this game" is probably the most important aspect of the discussion. Game vs game comaprison came into it almost by accident...

Lastly, it seems that Aradan have misunderstood me yet again or perhaps I was not clear enough. Either way, he still seems to maintain that it is not possible to go beyond the “tainted” realm of personal preference and evaluate things on another level... Sure we can! I think it is very possible to regard any public claim stated in a public environment as an attempt to establish some level of group preference, and in order for a group preference to exist and work properly - it must have functional standards of some sort. I believe that such standards can be found and applied as potential criteria/tools for assessing, among other things, public claims of greatness in a game and this – regardless of our strictly personal preference. I think it is possible to find some sort of common ground that we can all agree upon and if we do, they cease to be personal - and voila we got our standard. I have no clue how many these might be, but I am fairly certain that there are a few around at least. If we apply the spectra of desirable vs. undesirable it will get easier and more tangible for us.... Here are a few candidates I can think of, and they seem pretty convincing to me....

Buggyness – Nobody wants bugs in their game. Much buggyness is thus clearly undesirable. Regardless what game it is. Thus the fewer bugs we have the better, right?

Stability - Nobody wants a game that crashes or freezes – thus obviously desirable.

Interface - Nobody wants an intricate and cumbersome interface. We all want an easy and smooth one that is handled with little effort, thus allows us to concentrate on the game instead of the interface of the game – regardless what game it is. A good interface is clearly more desirable than a bad one.

Functionality – Nobody wants poor functionality in a game, so it will be harder to play and do things in the game because of it (“poor controls”, “timewastage”, “overview difficulties” are a few functionality problems found in M2TW for instance.) High functionality is desirable in a game so it easy to actually play the game - and we all want it to be so. Obviously desirable then.

Loading/waiting times - Nobody wants to sit around and wait for the game to load up so we can actually play the game – regardless what game it is. The faster loading times is desired since that means less waiting while the opposite of long loadong/waiting times is clearly undesirable. We can measure this in seconds for instance....

I honestly find it very hard to believe that people won’t totally agree upon these simple yet distinct ideas and notions. It is just silly maintaining that we don’t want a more stable game for instance, thus it is indeed possible to go beyond personal preference since these concepts, and how we regard them, are hardly personal, they are universal if anything since we all can agree upon ‘em. Add to that, we can apply them on whatever TW-game we want – it simply does not matter, since we will regard and measure things with these standards all the same anyhow. Also, these concepts/criteria/standards are hardly the only ones either, of that I am pretty certain. Here are some others for instance...

Sound quality - Nobody want poor soundquality (the actual Audio-design as such is not a considered factor here, just sheer quality of the sound as such), we all want excellent soundquality if we have a free choice. This is pretty much just counting KHz and stuff like that - obviously desirable. Higher KHz is more desirable and the same goes for bits (4-bits 8-bits, 16-bits, 32-bits etc.) – so there is little problem in determining these things either.

Great Appearance (GFX) – Eyecandy essentially, nobody wants a game that is needlessly ugly; we all prefer a game that looks as good as possible - if we can choose freely. Clearly desirable then...

Great AI – Well, a good AI is obviously more desirable than a poor one. We all want a good AI I we are allowed to choose - simply because it usually creates a more challenging thus more interesting and entertaining game. For those few who actually want a poor AI – by all means invert the scale.

Now, there are probably more around still, but that is not the point here (I am open to further suggestions of candidates thou), the point is to show that it is indeed possible to travel beyond the borders of personal preference and thus everything regarding assessing games is not stuck in the realm of personal preference while we examine (claimed) greatness in a game. We could settle with such simple staples/grades as low, medium and high and we probably are in business. Hell we could just settle with a simpler grading still; better or worse and draw if need be... We will still be in business all the same and we can’t get much simpler grading than that. Now, is it not striking that out of these 8 mentioned standards/criteria it is highly unlikely that RTW will ever come out on top of all other TW-games? Let’s take a comparison with STW for instance and just apply the simplest version of grades and see what happens. As far as I can tell I came up with these results....

STW: 6 better, 2 worse (Great appearance and soundquality)...
RTW: 2 better, 6 worse (Great AI, Loading/waiting times, Interface, Stability, Functionality and Buggyness)

Obviously RTW does not fare too well here.... Now, some of you might protest and say I am biased and my assessment is not fair. Let me assure you that I have no “evil interest” what so ever in dragging down poor RTW in the dirt, simply because there is nothing to be gained for me personally if I did (considering what I said in my 2nd point), thus I have no reasonable motive to do it – pure and simple. Even if I applied a ton of goodwill for the benefit of RTW I would in all honesty still end up with the same result anyway, there simply is little room for doubts here as far as I can tell - and if I can’t clearly decide on some standard/criteria, I will label it as a “draw”. So regardless goodwill or not, it is far from a glorious triumph for RTW-greatness so far, anything but in fact. Oh well, let’s try with the cripple ETW then to cheer up all you “Romans” – This is what I came up with....

ETW: 1 better, (Great appearance) 3 worse (buggyness, stability, loading/waiting times), 4 draw (I can’t tell, too close call for me; functionality, interface, soundquality, great AI)
RTW: 3 better (buggyness, stability, loading/waiting times), 1 worse, (Great appearance), 4 draw. (I can’t tell on these - too close call for me; Functionality, Interface, Soundquality, Great AI)

Ok, with crippled ETW, ‘ol RTW does better but the results hardly strikes me as overwhelmingly superior as one might have expected with a cripple like ETW. Obviously, it does fare better this time but it still does not shine in the way as people claim it to do. So, in a general sense RTW does not fare too well in these two simple evaluations - yet still people are declaring its superiority.... It does not add up very well as “the greatest game of them all”, now does it? Remember, this is just curiosities and should be treated as such I think. Anyway, I take it that some of you will do your best to rip apart these simple ideas in order to defend the honour of Rome. It is to be expected. But before you do, let me be crystal clear on that I don’t claim that these concepts/standards alone will determine greatness in a game – all they do is to provide some interesting and valid parts of it, to also consider beyond blatant personal preference, that’s all.

Let me say again that imho a game is more than a sum of its parts, and I firmly believe a game might be worse in all the 'technical aspects' compared to another, but still be a better one overall in virtue of its gameplay or its atmosphere or its timeframe or a non-defined "mysterious X attribute" that will just make it better for someone and is a matter of personal opinion.

I *agree* that if MTW's engine ideally allowed X, then MTW has achieved 9/10 of this X amount, while if RTW's engine ideally had Y potential, RTW vanilla achieved about 6/10 of it or so (M2TW 5.5/10 and ETW around 3/10 - never played STW). Technically, MTW is the best made TW game so far, because it almost reached the full potential of its engine - if the comparison stops there, MTW wins, yay. However, as I said before, this thread is about whether or not we should stop modding RTW, not whether or not we should stop playing it, so the stress is on "RTW modding" and what can be done with it.

I did bring that up to broaden the perspectives here, showing that even with circumstances far worse than the RTW-communty ever experienced here at the TWC there still is no reason to give up modding a game. It obviously got your attention Aradan. Ok at least I will. I personally have so far been reluctant to call upon the services of you staff-people since I assume that you are busy anyways. Thus I have tried to avoid it as much as possible so far - I can of course only speak for myself in this regard. While I'm at it....

We are Staff exactly in order to provide service; busy is part of the job, people shouldn't avoid bring up matters because they assume we won't bother working on them.

On general terms I get the impression that things operate a bit slower and less thoroughly in the STW/MTW-section than elsewhere; perhaps this is something to look over? I personally think that staff activities can be stepped up there, moving misplaced topics and subjects (pretty common regarding technical issues and problems for instance. I believe there is place for it elsewhere here at the TWC, so why not use it? As in moving these threads to were they belong), or locking up resurrected threads – which also happens fairly often. Sometimes there are thread doublets as well and little is done about it. Stuff like this can surely be improved upon somehow I think (the general rules seems to support this as well). Just because the traffic is small does not mean that it is supposed to be neglected, now does it? Either TWC have a section for STW/MTW, or it doesn’t. I simply suggest that this section get treated accordingly. I find myself all too often taking matters in my own hands since nobody else seems to do anything about it, and thus I deal with the various issues the best I can as a simple member (far from successfully at that). Maybe I’m just freakish about it – I honestly can’t tell.

Some times low member activity means moderators will not look deep into the forum unless there is a breach of the ToS. Maybe we can arrange a local moderator there who knows the STW/MTW community and is interested enough to do the job. Interested?

Hehehe, my guess is that you are consciously disregarding the given circumstances of the “Risk-model” as of how it functions in general and how it is set up in STW/MTW to make a rhetorical point in favour of the new model found in RTW (am I wrong? Right?). I’ll return the favour anyhow; is it reasonable that a neutral ship-stack clearly inferior in numbers or strength (or both!) can successfully block all traffic because of its position? In the straits of Gibraltar or the English channel for instance? I think this is rather ridiculous and this gets us nowhere - fast.

In a general sense this kind of reservations can easily be turned against RTW-model as well – as in 3-d agents, ships and armies running around on the stratmap swallowing up time while as their rather pointless animations must have their due…. - Regardless if we speed up the time or not. Structural waste of time or “timewastage” is a very real factor in RTW and onwards while it plays a rather obscure role in STW/MTW for instance. Agents, ship and army movements are undoubtedly far more intricate and time-consuming compared with the highly efficient and straightforward “risk-solution” found in STW/MTW. The Risk-model simply is smoother, faster and easier to move stuff around. While the gains of strategic positioning and an increased level of realism in movement in the new model are a fact, these traits also come at a heavy price; poorer AI, poorer stability, poorer funtionality, worse loading/waiting times, more buggyness etc. Considering these facts it is quite warranted to question if the actual gains won really are worth all the downsides that comes with it. To me personally there is little doubt in the matter, but I am sure that others can and will evaluate these things differently (if at all considered, that is). Both stratmap-models have their strengths and weaknesses...

My point is that for some people MTW engine's 'flaws' will be more important, while for others the RTW engine's ones will. It's all subject to personal preference; if someone simply likes the RTW/M2/ETW engine better than the old one, he's gonna like RTW more than MTW no matter what, period.

Last remarks
--------------
I would like to remind everybody that this is not about me personally preferring MTW above RTW (I do, but that is hardly relevant here) or anything like that, because it is entirely beside the point here. What all this is about is the public claim of RTW being “the greatest game of them all” and the question “on what grounds is this supposed greatness to be found”? That is what all this fuss is about. And, as far as I am concerned we might as well turn too ETW, M2TW, STW and MTW while we search for, and examine, the substance of these claims. The narrow focus of MTW vs. RTW is simply not big or sufficient enough for the actual context here, because if anything it is RTW vs. all other TW-games – because that is in effect what this claim says and little else....

While I do believe that it is possible to find both strengths and weaknesses in various regards in all TW-games - I still question the notion and claim that RTW is superior in a general sense to all others. Why? Because so far I still fail to see any sufficient basis for it, that’s why....

However, all this is just curiosities and should be treated as such I think. Because of that I am also torn here. Questioning whether or not it is truly meaningful to continue pointing out the rather obvious weaknesses and insufficiencies in the basis for these claims of RTW-superiority. That notions is, as far as I can tell here, hardly driven by traceable reasons, nor built upon some solid or convincing foundation, but relies essentially on personal preference - repeated over and over again, seemingly in a belief that this will somehow make things more true because of it. Traditionally and by principle we usually regard any claims with little or no basis as unserious. Why should RTW be treated differently? No, I think I’ll stick to tradition on this and treat these claims accordingly - making it easier for us all....

I think you're taking this "which game is the best one" a bit too seriously. It's all just personal preference; the majority of people simply seem to prefer the 3d engine that RTW, M2TW and ETW have, and because RTW is the simplest (and yet more immersive in its simplicity) of the three, it appears to win the day. Yes, it can get annoying to see people throwing uninformed opinions around, but you can just ignore them.




I wonder if I should split this discussion into a new thread, comparing games is a bit off topic.

[Axalon]

Nah Aradan, don’t split the thread because of silly ‘ol me….

I’m done fussing with you (hell, you did not even make these claims in the first place). I’m done with this. What I have to say has already been said at this point. I’ll just disregard these unserious claims from now on as tradition would have me do, since it is so obvious that they have no solid basis. It is also clear that in some areas here and there you and I simply disagree. It happens. Nothing too it man.

As for MTW/STW-area situation, yeah I might be crazy enough to be interested. I mean, I’m pretty much a vigilante there already, anyhow. Please send me a PM and outline it for me so I get an honest chance to realize and assess what exactly we are dealing with here. Let’s see what happens from that point on, shall we?

Oh, and for record; I would have voted no twice if they ever let me….

- Cheers

[SonOfOdin]

I'm going to vote no. I've never modded RTW and have no reason to, but it still has sex appeal. Empire is like that girl down the street who you think might grow up to be a total hottie, but you just aren't sure since she got plastic surgery at 14. M2 is like the chick you see at the club who's been around town a few times but is still a freak. Rome is your friend's mom that always lets you ride shotgun for some reason, a reason you don't come to realize for many years down the road.

That's a very strange comparison between TW and babes...
I voted Yes...because I really think it is time to move on.
RTW was a smash, the first time I played the demo I was like : WHOA!!!!! I LOVE this
I bought Total War Eras the next day
When MTW 2 was released, I was like : Meh, this sucks(I had a horrible system)
After upgrading my Graphics Card and buying some ram I was like : This is awsome!!!
And I got addicted to MTW2
When ETW was released I was like : Meh, this sucks(I have a horrible system compared to today's games, at least I can rum them well(yes rum) on low(like Far Cry 2 and ETW)
2 years from now I'll be : ETW IS AWSOME!!!!(I would've bought an extremely excelent system since I would've started working)

NOTE : I play ETW alot nowadays but I've still got a horrible system

[Selifator]

No, as you can see with the newest generation of big mods, the RTW engine isn't old. M2 has some advantages over Rome, but Rome is very accessible, and is still really good. It'll last for a couple more years at the least.

[Garlic Jr.]

For me its old. Like wine the older it is the better.

[magpie]

Not in the least, plenty of life left in it yet!
regards, magpie

[DisgruntledGoat]

I don't think RTW modding is going to disappear. Its simpler modelling and texture creation, lower poly counts and low res textures allow beginners to tackle things and not get discouraged by ugly looking results. At the same time many mods are now finally breaking new boundries in terms of the engine. Although sometimes I wish these same great minds would turn their attention to M2TW which has been limited in its game changing discoveries. ETW will take even longer to reach the level of modability M2TW is at now which means RTW and M2TW will still be a haven for modding for sometime to come. They may also be the last bastion of amateur modders. As the skills and talen required to mod ETW and future TW releases will only grow exponentionally.

[Muizer]

They may also be the last bastion of amateur modders. As the skills and talen required to mod ETW and future TW releases will only grow exponentionally.

That is something too few seem to be recognizing: RTW modding has given the community the notion that total conversions (to a different era) are possible, even "normal". This despite the fact that after so many years there are only a handful of such mods about, and several of those have been overtaken in a sense by CA's M2TW and ETW. The complexity and quantity of modding work required means that a team undertaking a conversion for either M2TW or ETW to the classical age has to seriously consider the possibility CA will beat them to a release with their next installment, or even the one after that.

[Amorphos]

There will never be another game like rtw!

Modding will never be as easy, and it will be another 5 years until most peoples pc’s can run empires at high resolution. Even then empires is rubbish, the graphics , gameplay everything, and m2tw has limited appeal ~ especially for those of us who played mtw1 into the ground. Who cares if empires becomes more moddable, it wants too much juice and would take too much to get into an interesting era.

If m2tw was as easy as rtw to mod then rtw would not have been used a long time ago.

[Selifator]

That is something too few seem to be recognizing: RTW modding has given the community the notion that total conversions (to a different era) are possible, even "normal". This despite the fact that after so many years there are only a handful of such mods about, and several of those have been overtaken in a sense by CA's M2TW and ETW. The complexity and quantity of modding work required means that a team undertaking a conversion for either M2TW or ETW to the classical age has to seriously consider the possibility CA will beat them to a release with their next installment, or even the one after that.

Interesting point. I think it depends on the stability of a mod team. If a team can do one mod, and keep mostly the same members, learn and grow in modding, then they can go to another game and perhaps learn how to mod that faster than they did the first.
This would of course need a relatively similar file structure from one game to another.

[DisgruntledGoat]

Interesting point. I think it depends on the stability of a mod team. If a team can do one mod, and keep mostly the same members, learn and grow in modding, then they can go to another game and perhaps learn how to mod that faster than they did the first.
This would of course need a relatively similar file structure from one game to another.

File structure has nothing to do with. Art assets, DX10, high polygon modelling and normal map creation, all sorts of difficult to master art creation techniques. Really take a hard look at this community and you'll see the talent required to produce NEW work (not talking changing colours on ETW units here) in ETW and beyond just isn't there on anything but an incredibly small scale.

[Killerbee]

File structure has nothing to do with. Art assets, DX10, high polygon modelling and normal map creation, all sorts of difficult to master art creation techniques. Really take a hard look at this community and you'll see the talent required to produce NEW work (not talking changing colours on ETW units here) in ETW and beyond just isn't there on anything but an incredibly small scale.

Yea , like 4 skins for 1 unit in Med2:TW .. And when i take a look at Med2 modding , it's twice as complex as RTW modding .. With the stupid db file and such ..

[Shaun]

I haven't played RTW or a mod for it in years. As such, I'm totally not up to date with the RTW mod scene. And as such, I probably stand to give a good representation of what the average TW player thinks. I think RTW looks and feels very outdated compared to newer TW games and mods. It's near five years old, and many features and things we are so used to in M2TW and ETW aren't in RTW.

For your average TW gamer, RTW is just too much of a step back.

[Killerbee]

I haven't played RTW or a mod for it in years. As such, I'm totally not up to date with the RTW mod scene. And as such, I probably stand to give a good representation of what the average TW player thinks. I think RTW looks and feels very outdated compared to newer TW games and mods. It's near five years old, and many features and things we are so used to in M2TW and ETW aren't in RTW.

For your average TW gamer, RTW is just too much of a step back.

Great to see that there are also people that voted yes (although i voted no ) , so that we could have nice discussion ..

As counterpart : Many players don't have Cryisis-term pc's , so they can barely play M2:TW (on highest settings) , let alone E:TW . I am one of those . Other thing : RTW is easiest moddable , wich we can't say for M2:TW (at least atm) , and especially not for E:TW .. Furthermore , there are more (usefull) tuto's for RTW (i suppose) , so that beginners will start with RTW ..

But i think , that later on , RTW mods will slightely dissapear , when M2:TW and E:TW is "easy" (better) moddable , and when everyone has a 8GB-Ram pc ..

I'm going to vote no. I've never modded RTW and have no reason to, but it still has sex appeal. Empire is like that girl down the street who you think might grow up to be a total hottie, but you just aren't sure since she got plastic surgery at 14. M2 is like the chick you see at the club who's been around town a few times but is still a freak. Rome is your friend's mom that always lets you ride shotgun for some reason, a reason you don't come to realize for many years down the road.

That's an interesting approach for explaining the differences in mods

[CAPTAIN LOKI]

i voted no, but RTW is old and fun, M2TW is cool and ETW is awesome, i have a good specs pc can play crysis at highest setting but i like modding RTW its i think the best place to start modding after that you can go to M2TW then ETW but that depends on the modder, but for now i wish i can see a vanilla RTW being modded or exported to ETW afaik RTW2 will never come.