Multiplayer Campaign Map

[Kanaric]

I havn't been following this game but am wondering are they going to have a multiplayer campaign map? I really do not trust CA's ability to program, ANYTHING, but especially the AI and that would solve my problem with being bored of a easily spanked within 10 turns AI right their.

Dont say "people dont play this sort of game online", they do. The only annoying thing with this, that sets it apart from say Civilization, is the battles can take a long time. Which was what it was like in Master of Orion 2 and that game was really played often online.

[Lusted]

No. There is not going to be a multiplayer campaign, there will be a series of hisotrical battles you can work through online, unlocking one after the other i believe. Personally id much rather Ca focus on getting the singleplayer right before trying to make something like this work properly.

[Kanaric]

No. There is not going to be a multiplayer campaign, there will be a series of hisotrical battles you can work through online, unlocking one after the other i believe. Personally id much rather Ca focus on getting the singleplayer right before trying to make something like this work properly.

meh, they have allready proved they can't get that right so they may as well try something else. Plus its one of the most requested features besides a proper AI.

They seem to enjoy doing the opposite of what they say and what the fans want so idk what to expect from them.

[Lusted]

Well i say give them a chance, given the fact they are focusing on the ai from now till release im certainly looking to see improvements in this area. So thats one of the major request dealt with. As for the multiplayer campaign, i hate to think of the amount of time one of those would take.

[Kanaric]

Well i say give them a chance, given the fact they are focusing on the ai from now till release im certainly looking to see improvements in this area. So thats one of the major request dealt with. As for the multiplayer campaign, i hate to think of the amount of time one of those would take.

Yes about the time in that.

Multiplayer on turn based strategy you have to get together with people you are GOOD friends with and play a game. You play at set times, or whatever, during the week or when people are free. The more people the more you need set times as with just one other person you can just play whenever hes on.

The games take a long while. On Master of Orion 2, Stars, Space Empires 4, Civilization i did this on those always on HUGE maps. On Stars it took 2 years to complete a game, but in that their are THOUSANDS of stars so thats to be expected. MOO2 and the others the average game is about a month. This isn't constant playing btw as well. On stars we submitted a turn twice a week, lol. The others we did as many turns until people had to leave.

People play multiplayer for these just its premeditated, you dont just go with some random person on gamespy as the game will not finish if you do that, lol. You have to play this like others play Warhammer 40k or some pen and paper RPGs.
edit:
BTW you say CA SAYS they are working on the AI. Are they? They said RTW would be moddable out of the box and "one of the most moddable games out" and people had to hack the game to do mods and even then their are severe limits. The game wasn't moddable at all "out of the box". Not to mention that they said the game would have good diplomacy and AI as it is..

[lila-laune-bär]

BTW you say CA SAYS they are working on the AI. Are they? They said RTW would be moddable out of the box and "one of the most moddable games out" and people had to hack the game to do mods and even then their are severe limits. The game wasn't moddable at all "out of the box". Not to mention that they said the game would have good diplomacy and AI as it is..

If I remember correctly, they said that Rome would be the "most moddable Total War ever". Well, Rome isn't too moddable, but it's still more moddable than Medieval.

Other than that, I remain veeery sceptic about Medieval II just as you. I remember Rome's developers' diaries, where they raved about the AI. Being ambushed by the AI intelligently and such crap. I can't remember a single proper ambush by the AI in Rome...

[Kanaric]

If I remember correctly, they said that Rome would be the "most moddable Total War ever". Well, Rome isn't too moddable, but it's still more moddable than Medieval.

Other than that, I remain veeery sceptic about Medieval II just as you. I remember Rome's developers' diaries, where they raved about the AI. Being ambushed by the AI intelligently and such crap. I can't remember a single proper ambush by the AI in Rome...

Did you ever try MTWXL though, if you didn't you should load it. You can't do a mod like that in RTW. Its actually very good and worth loading up MTW again. The AI is a lot better as well.

If anything its equal or less moddable. Equal because you had to hack the files, and less because in RTW you had to hack even MORE files as in medieval more things were in .txt files that you can edit in notepad. A lot of what was in .txt files in MTW they had to make a utility to extract them from the RTW files. Which isn't the out of the box moddability that they promised. Also their are more annoying hardcoded limits in RTW, especially with factions.

Also in MTW you could have a lot more factions. Like in MTWXL practically 100% of the map is covered in faction territory, almost no rebels. In MTW it was easier having province specific units, which is popular in mods.

I just dont know how Firaxis, Stardock, and practically every other company in existance can have good mod tools and how CA hardcodes everything and forces you to hack it yourself.

I consider anything that has severe hardcoded limits and that you have to hack and make tools for yourself to not be moddable. Its only moddable because the community made it so, not CA. That credit should go to Vercengetorix.


My main "beef" i have with M2TW is its representation of time. CA says they want to move away from representation of time completely with its games eventually. Its a historical game where most of the players want more historical gameplay. They should try to make it more like EU2 and less like Knights of Honor. Time is 100% the ambiance and feel of the game. That plus what I think of RTW makes me leary of this game. BI makes me even more afraid. That was CA's most easy and pathetic game to date. Its a far cry from MTW for sure.

The fact that they could of easily of done it the same way as MTW makes me also think that they didn't make "eras" and whatever because you could probably beat the game quickly. So they dont have to rely on a good AI to take you late into the game to see the late-era units. Or that they are too lazy to create eras, which is as easy as writing a new start file and adding a menu.

I'm HOPING i'm wrong, but if you look at RTW i'm sadly quite possibly right...

Thats my M2TW rant, i could write an essay though believeme.

Its funny how the people who argue that a MP campaign is cheap and easy to do happen to 100% always have nothing to do with making games.

And you do?

I have a computer science degree and program for a living, you?

For one Firaxis can do it, ca makes more money than them and has a simular sized studio? So sorry your factually incorrect. Also they have a LOT of MP features as well, a lot more than i'd expect from a M2TW campaign map.

Looks more likely that you know nothing about it.

Also what else has CA done that the fans wanted? Tell me one thing and i'll applaud you. The only thing that they did is make another game, thats it.

Also yes, it is cheap and easy to do for a multi-million dollar large gaming design studio. Cheap compaired to? Ai, EVERYTHING to do with graphics, design, software engineering, etc. So yes, its cheap. Sorry buddy.

Practically every single turn based strategy game EVER MADE has a multiplayer campaign. With battles or not. Knight Yellow, you need to do some more research. At least since Civ 2 multiplayer gold edition. Even before that many did.

Does it matter?
If two players have EXPERIENCE full stack armies and they both fight you will still have to wait a whole hour and then another battle... until finally its your turn to fight.

Battles can be handled simultaniously against the AI hosted on the players computer so that it doesn't use any bandwidth. That is how it was done on previous games with "battles". Not to mention on a lot of games like this their is usually an option to have all battles autocalced for mp games.

However CA would have to make sure their autocalced battles are close to the results if it was actually played. They have had problems with that in their previous games.


edit:
Also dont say that it will be expensive because of matchmaking and hosting games. TCP-IP, gamespy, and hotseat cost nothing to host. And their mp battles are handled allready like that.

[Constans]

If all battles were auto resolved, it wouldn't take very long at all.

[Ewan]

I think something like a multiplayer campaign might say double the cost of prduction but wont nessesarly double the profit (or doubled the gameplay experence) so i think unless it will give a increase in gross ( which it mostlikly wont sadly) it wont be added

[Ubu Roi]

I doubt that. Look at Paradox games. They all have multiplayer campaigns, play great and the budget for each game is ridiculously small.

Besides CA can't keep selling the same game over and over again. They have to show some inovations and not just new graphics.

[smoke]

Multiplayer campaign would suck. Watching grass grow is more dynamic than waiting for other players to make their move.

PS I'd rather have CA prgram this than you, grumpy smurf. My, what gloomy bizarre game we would get then...

[Ewan]

i would rather CA spend valueable time and money on a worthwhile thing such as A.i or even ship battles then something not worthwhile such as this

[DougyM]

Its funny how the people who argue that a MP campaign is cheap and easy to do happen to 100% always have nothing to do with making games.

It would be like me saying Nasa could easily build a better space shuttle and that they are obviously idiots for not doing that.


Dont pretend to understand things you know nothing about.

If CA thought they could make a MP campaign that was worth the money and effort they would.

And last i checked im more than willing to believe the developers of a 3 multi award winning epic strategy games than some random people with 0 experience hammering away at a keyboard becuase they are bored.

[justabug]

Actually, NASA could build a significantly improved shuttle, but they haven't got the funding for it.

[DougyM]

Actually, NASA could build a significantly improved shuttle, but they haven't got the funding for it.

like i said.

I dont know diddly squat about building space shuttles, nor does anybody else on these forums...

So basicly everything is an unneducated geuss.

And a rather poor one at that.

[justabug]

It is not an uneducated guess. Several private corporations have been building better shuttles for a few years now. These will be capable of atmosphere exit and re-entry without separate fuel tanks, eg. they will operate like modern planes. Much more cost effective. One of these designs has already been launched into space.

[DougyM]

It is not an uneducated guess. Several private corporations have been building better shuttles for a few years now. These will be capable of atmosphere exit and re-entry without separate fuel tanks, eg. they will operate like modern planes. Much more cost effective. One of these designs has already been launched into space.

If you are one of those private companies then yes... yours would be an educated guess... since your not though....

And since nobody who moans about a MP campaign is ANY part of the games industry then they have about as much a clue as a blind rat.

[Lusted]

Can we keep this on topic please, if not i will start deleting posts wth extreme prejudice.

[Kanfoosh]

I dont think a multiplayer campaign will work because battles between people will take alot of time and you will have more than 2 players so you would have to wait like 6 hours if not more to get your turn and actually fight instead of spectating which is enough to make you leave.

[Chuffy]

As it stands, the RTW turn system wouldn't work very well for an MP game.

MTW's however would, everyone takes their turns simultaneously and then the game executes their actions at the same time, it would severely cut down waiting times. Plus the actual nature of MTW's map means you don't spend as long taking your turn.