Concerns for "Classic Mode"

[Quadro]

I've recently posted a thread on the official Rome 2 forum to discuss basically my frustration with the lack of concern or development towards multiplayer predominately focusing on the classic mode match making system. Disappointingly I didn't receive much of a response from the community, not too sure why. So anyway I'd thought I'd post here and see what some of you think about it. Be warned there are a couple of gripes towards the unlocking/levelling/avatar system.

----------------------------------

Whether you like the Shogun 2's avatar/levelling/veteran system for multiplayer or not. It's clear from the community that there's a split no matter how large or small, between those who like it and those who dislike it. Which is shame because it's sent a rift/split between the multiplayer community to some extent. I've found in recent TW series that classical battles have been a bit skinny in regards to featuring game conditions, in fact they always have lacked a bit if I was completely honest.

None the less there has always been a request for additional options available to a host when creating a match. Whether that be an option to allow artillery or setting one side to defenders (this would allow for defensive land battles) or being able to set different currencies between sides to enable fairer battles for attackers. Some of these fundamental options have appeared and disappeared throughout the run through of the TW series and there seems to be a constant inconsistency in quality regarding this.

I'd love (and others) to be able to make or join matches which display the current conditions set by the host, which most importantly, cannot be broken! No more host names with "No Arty!" in them to only have someone break them. Some may consider this to be a trivial attribute to the game but I'm sure many multiplayer fans would find this to be fantastic feature. Having larger condition choices would not hurt anyone and would only invite creativity in some multiplayer battles. Also being able to check game conditions through the server browser before having to join would be a warm welcome too. A system such as this would make finding your ideal game a less frustrating one. I'd honestly think this would make for an overall more pleasant experience when playing strangers and friends alike.

I haven't mentioned all the features that some of the community have wished for or missed in previous tittles but what some of us want is a more defined multiplayer experience.

You see what my major concern is that with Shogun 2 hardly anyone played classic mode battles and I don't actually think it had anything to do with the fact people just preferred the new leveling/unlocking system in the first place. I think it was because classic mode battles were displayed as a secondary feature on multiplayer. It was like it was deliberately put on the back burner and completely over shadowed by this new system because classic mode undermined the actual concept of unlocking stuff. Just have a look where the option is to switch to classic mode in multiplayer and you'll see it isn't alongside or below the multiplayer conquest or any of the other main MP features. It's put away.

For the average joe multiplayer is probably only a brief experience and I generally believe the new unlocking/levelling system was a direct attempt to increase the multiplayer play time for the average joe. It's a well known strategy that game developers use. By rewarding players as they go along is a direct method that taps into our natural behaviour to wanting to improve ourselves especially if it gives you an edge over others, which makes it into an addictive process. A good example of this system is World Of Warcraft, ok this is a MMORPG and the whole concept is to level up and unlock new weapons but this is very addictive, as I'm sure some of you have first hand experience, like myself.

So, when you've unlocked your units, vetted them up, got all the retainers and have everything the game has gifted you what now? After all it's no different from classic mode and for what? It hasn't directly improved the multiplayer battle ground, it hasn't improved the lobby system, it hasn't improved hosting options, it hasn't improved the very core of what made multiplayer so great in the earlier titles.

New players to the Total War series probably never touched classic mode and probably never will, nor will they really understood the benefits from it. Zero features were implemented into classic mode (I hate calling it classic mode) for Shogun 2 and I fear the same with Rome 2.

[Gaelstrix]

I originally found it impossible to work out how to have a regular match with friends on Shogun 2 because regular mode was so hidden.

I also got Shogun a bit late and had to face people with lots of powerups which was unfair and what made it even worse was people with fall of the samurji gunpowder units were not separated and I remember clearly chasing around mounted-dragoon type units with yari ashigaru and just being decimated, so I gave up mulitplayer on STW:II.

Good idea about a checkbox for no art etc, and the different amounts of currency was definately a plus in Rome + Medieval 2 for sieges or giving yourself a handicap for playing with friends who were new.

[nomercysniper]

I can remember first S2 multiplayer... I had a couple of samurai, ashigaru, archers and horse.... may 1k of men or so... obly to be facing 200 fully vetted heroes, got decimated. I'm no tactical genius, but i peppered with arrows, defended with spear wall, engaged flanks with katana, rear with cavalry... still lost.

[Jungle Rhino]

I can remember first S2 multiplayer... I had a couple of samurai, ashigaru, archers and horse.... may 1k of men or so... obly to be facing 200 fully vetted heroes, got decimated. I'm no tactical genius, but i peppered with arrows, defended with spear wall, engaged flanks with katana, rear with cavalry... still lost.

Haha I remember a similar game - I routed my opponents entire army, and he had a single unit of about 20 Katana heros left who chain routed about 600 of my remaining soldiers.

I didn't play much multiplayer after that.

[Jungle Rhino]

Yes but if CA let you tweak the game settings then you could make the game unbalanced which means the result would not be 'valid' for their telelmetry that they pass on to the US government as part of PRISM... Ok so maybe not that. But my point is that they would need to drop such games out of the 'stat tracking' system which they probably don't want to do as we all know that stats and unlocking acheivements are the only reason anybody plays computer games... Setting up an attack/defend battle with an uneven number of points would be *gasp* 'fun' and 'entertaining' - such concepts as these are very hard to measure with telemetry which is why I think CA tries to keep them out of the multiplayer aspect of the game.

[Swamidude]

You should reward players, by giving points (coins, gold whatever). With these point you could unlock units for the faction your playing with online. Win a lot of battles with one faction will not improve your other factions, so there always be a challenge. You should couple this with the level of the player and match the same levels or at least not to much difference. You could also implement that you can buy techs from the ingame techtree. Improving your skils for all your units (all factions or for every faction seperate, don't know..)

This way you can keep improving your armies. Other option should be to play against eachother free style. You don't get points for this, at least not for the thing I described above, and the host can decide the gameplay. Everything unlocked, everything basic, or certain units unlocked and others not.. So that you can host your own game and it is possible to play with elite units and all techupgrades from the first online game.

Also multiplayer campaign would be very nice, only with friends offcourse, you can't do matchmaking with that