GS Interview

**Wolfcp11** · February 17, 2006, 07:21 PM

http://www.gamespot.com/pc/strategy/...ml?sid=6144512

Some newish info and pics

**Hellenes** · February 17, 2006, 08:28 PM

Originally Posted by Wolfcp11

http://www.gamespot.com/pc/strategy/...ml?sid=6144512

Some newish info and pics

The campaign will feature summer and winter turns as in Rome, but we're trying to get away from the idea that a turn represents a specific amount of time, since it's impossible to reconcile the scale you need for army maneuvers with the scale you need to cover a decent slice of history. The history of the period will unfold in around 225 turns

Will it be 1 time period 1080-1530?
If so how on earth it will have 225 turns with 2 turns per 450 years?

My brain hurts...

Hellenes

**The Kaiser** · February 17, 2006, 08:44 PM

Perhaps there will only be 225 turns, but the years go by on a scale that is not dictated by the turn endings, but by an internal clock? Such as every ten minutes a year goes by on the campaign map?

Seriously though, I don't like the sound of this new idea...

**Hansa** · February 17, 2006, 09:09 PM

If they cant think of a better way to implement turns than this, they should let the player decide or something. 1 turn per year (450), 2 (900), or one turn every two years 225, the new system, or something like that. Whats wrong with the period system of MTW1 again? Seems most fans liked it. Could unlock high and late period after playing a while, like certain factions in RTW. Dont like the way this new system sounds either, but then im a skeptic.

**LegionnaireX** · February 17, 2006, 09:38 PM

Those screens seal the deal. Time to start saving for a new graphics card.

I'm not liking this new campaign system either. Nor do I understand what Mr. Smith is saying. Personally I thought that the amount of movement allowed per turn for an army was too low. If one turn in Rome representated a period of 6 months, an army could certainly travel more than a couple hundred miles.

Perhaps there will only be 225 turns, but the years go by on a scale that is not dictated by the turn endings, but by an internal clock? Such as every ten minutes a year goes by on the campaign map?

But if they are going to make the seasons go by in real time then I would prefer they make everything else go on in real time as well, or things will be strange. Build and training times will get messed up and such.

**lightbringer418** · February 17, 2006, 11:12 PM

It says the turns won't represent a specific amount of time. In no way can that be criticized yet since they just aren't giving enough iformation about it.

What striked me as interesting was...

"Plus, of course, there will be improved artificial intelligence on both the battlefield and the campaign map. "

omg....only one sentence...but still...omg

**HorseArcher** · February 18, 2006, 12:02 AM

Of course, again, no naval battles.
I had an idea about this. What if, when naval battle takes place and we click on to proceed into a naval battle, we would enter a 'mini-turn based' interface?
some small 2D watermap with a given amount of turns and area to navigate around and do our own little turn based mini-naval battle game. Set the boats to a given speed, fire cannons on broadside, ram, or hook the enemy ship and invade, etc? You know how Knights of the old republic has mini games inside (that pak-card game or the racing), and it would be definetely more fun than clicking the auto resolve button.

**Lord Tomyris** · February 18, 2006, 03:00 AM

Originally Posted by lightbringer418

What striked me as interesting was...

"Plus, of course, there will be improved artificial intelligence on both the battlefield and the campaign map. "

omg....only one sentence...but still...omg

Yeah, finally someone speaks out on this one!

**0ldboy** · February 18, 2006, 03:13 AM

well i aint complaining about anything. To me it all sounds bloody fantastic. MTW2 for gods sake!

**Chuffy** · February 18, 2006, 03:48 AM

Originally Posted by Durr durr Bob Smith

There'll be a historical event that unlocks technology that will allow factions to travel across the Atlantic, around the time that people started suggesting that the world might be round

What? The ancient Greeks?

Pffft.

And I really don't care if they including a way to make the game shorter by changing around the turn system, IT'S NOT NEEDED. If you are so concerned with people not playing until 1492 (presumably when this new tech becomes available) then just do multiple ages! Early, High and Late! It's a good system, everyone likes it! Why miss it out!?

**Shigawire** · February 18, 2006, 04:42 AM

You're right of course. Eratosthenes suggested the world was round.

I think a phase-based turnsystem would be best.
First, a system of 4 turns per year..

Then, whenever two armies got right next to eachother, the turn would start to be divided into mini-turns (phases).

**Aristocrat** · February 18, 2006, 12:57 AM

I think they really don't want to go down that route Archer.
They seem to want naval battles to be as good (visually and gameplay wise) as land battles, which I can understand, anything else and at least some people will complain, not that I wouldn't like your idea, and hadn't thought about it for MTW2 myself, though I was thinking more along the lines of the land battles in Side Meier's pirates (which I liked for some odd reason).

And the turn system for the campagin map better not resemble something like Lords of the Realm 3....ewwww.

**Slaxx Hatmen** · February 18, 2006, 01:14 AM

I too am rather sad they droped the Period system, I thought it was a great way to divide such a large chunk of history. Well atleast its not like RTW's campiagn when they tryed to cram the whole history of the Roman Republic into one ahistorical campiagn.

Maybe i'll just make a mod that seperates them, I mean its just the Rome engine with new graphics right? So putting in multiple provincal campiagns shouldint be harder then it was in RTW......right?

**BeastG33** · February 18, 2006, 01:27 AM

The close up of the French? kinghts is one of the best RTS screens I've ever seen.

**lightbringer418** · February 18, 2006, 02:38 AM

anyone take a closer look at this one?

http://img.gamespot.com/gamespot/ima..._screen005.jpg

it looks horrific. those are rtw graphics with some photoshoped gloss.

**LegionnaireX** · February 18, 2006, 05:05 PM

Originally Posted by lightbringer418

anyone take a closer look at this one?

http://img.gamespot.com/gamespot/ima..._screen005.jpg

it looks horrific. those are rtw graphics with some photoshoped gloss.

Your kidding right? Get some glasses cuz you aren't seein well. The visual quality of those screens is atleast twice as good as Rome's. Plus look at the dead bodies, they are actually taking up 3D space.

**BeastG33** · February 18, 2006, 02:41 AM

Umm... what the hell are you talking about?

**God-Emperor of Mankind** · February 18, 2006, 08:47 AM

2 years/turn !!
hhhmm I don't know about that.
I think we need for info about this.

**Lusted** · February 18, 2006, 09:50 AM

CA have stated they wont include naval battles in a TW game until they can get them as good as they want them to be. So we are just going to have to wait until the next one.

**PROFESSORPAUL** · February 18, 2006, 10:31 AM

Did anyone see the soldier in the last pic standing over a knight who fell off his horse holding a lance and sticking it into the knight's throat while he was on the ground?

That'd be pretty sweet to see. A knight falls of his horse, lands on the ground but isnt dead, then some soldier runs up, grabs the knight's lance, and drives it into him while he's laying down.

The new 3D corpses look splendid too. It actually looks like it has some "3d" to it, and actually looks like an obstacle on the battlefield.

Thread: GS Interview

Thread Tools

Search Thread

Display

Hybrid View

GS Interview

Posting Permissions