PDA

View Full Version : Please Confirm!!!



BARBARIANrome
9th Aug 2005, 12:12
Right i am a big fan of strat games love them to bits got Rome total war day it came out and only stopped playing online about 2 months ago..

Then i heard about a napol type era game with sea battles, great i thought, although im not a fan of that era i thought the game would be pretty smooth...

So i bought it 4 days ago, and can you please confirm the following for me...

I can only seem to get 3 units of men in 1 province is this the case...

i havent yet sussed out great tactics but i find that sumtimes riflemen are useless as militia seem to run 200mph and i only get 1 shot of, is this the norm...

also when militia get so close to my men they engage and fix bayonet and fight hand to hand, but there is no option to retreat or reposition or to pull out rifles during engagement, is this also the case...

i was invaded by the frogs (french) and i found that they stood on top of a hill and thats all and i had 3 riflemen 2 militia they had the same but 1 more militia and i wasnt gunna run up a proper steep hill to my death so i went to a building an objective but they stayed, and stayed so i took a shower came back still 2 minutes to go, after that time i had lost and then it said while i retreated many men where slaughtered army was gone, shouldnt it be if they are invading that they are the attacker surely... i mean thats a big flaw if thats right....

I also think the advane era business where u must choose something to research is a bit naff, as you have them all in no time and its just a case of selectimg in order....

battles seem a little non tactical as well, it all seems to go a little fast, and i dont know whether its cause im new but there dont seem to be any stradegy to it or tactics.

i must say that im very impressed with the sea battles although 1 point that gets me mad, is that i follow the ai ship and they seem to lead me astray then i get the message your leaving the battle u will lose, i mean cmon im fighting on open water there should be no limit to where i can go....

please dont think im been negative to the game as i love the graphics and the map seems cool, and the basic treaties and all that business with quests although i dont understand hat i have to do in half of them are cool, but it seems to lack the battle strength of rome total war...

any thoughts fellow strat gamers....

Barbarian :cool:

Gelatinous Cube
9th Aug 2005, 12:19
Yeah, that's about right.

BARBARIANrome
9th Aug 2005, 12:20
lol..... i see the feelings and thoughts must be shared then... :eek:

Gelatinous Cube
9th Aug 2005, 12:23
lol..... i see the feelings and thoughts must be shared then... :eek:

It's a Mediocre game with the potential to be the best. But as the recent patch shows, they aren't very interested in improvement.

BARBARIANrome
9th Aug 2005, 12:34
make 1 small correction....

Has the making to be the second best game of all time, Rome total war has taken that place for good in strat games in my opinion..

Guns over Swords never....

:thumbsup:

screamingpalm
9th Aug 2005, 17:52
make 1 small correction....

Has the making to be the second best game of all time, Rome total war has taken that place for good in strat games in my opinion..

Guns over Swords never....

:thumbsup:

Have to say I'd disagree there, even with IG's faults it is tactically better IMO than RTW. But then if mass units of inf or all-cav armies are tactics to you then maybe not. IG seems to give benefits to using combined arms and spread out inf using flanking and rear attacks, so is better tactically than RTW for me. Still neither game is as good as Bull Run tactically.

Guns over swords....always :D

edou20_nl
9th Aug 2005, 18:27
maybe , but there is no moralle at all and that is very crap, you can attack from 2 3 or 4 sides they never run away , militia is crap because they have low morale but in this game they attack everything and never run away, you can have good tactics but this is a very bad missing thing in tha game.

screamingpalm
9th Aug 2005, 18:30
maybe , but there is no moralle at all and that is very crap, you can attack from 2 3 or 4 sides they never run away , militia is crap because they have low morale but in this game they attack everything and never run away, you can have good tactics but this is a very bad missing thing in tha game.


Agreed...this is why Bull Run is the best tactical game out right now. Flanking does cause heavy casualties in IG, therefore a benefit and better tactically than RTW IMO. Although it is depicted wrong (should cause morale loss as in Bull Run) it is still better than the masses of inf in RTW duking it out with little in the way of tactics.

Gelatinous Cube
9th Aug 2005, 18:44
There are little tactics in Vanilla RTW, but with the right mods it becomes challenging, and you have to use more advanced tactics.

BARBARIANrome
10th Aug 2005, 08:53
You cannot be serious...

Your trying to say thats theres more tactics involved in IG than RTW.... omg how wrong you are....

First of in IG its basically who has the longest range gunners as quick as poss with 2 or 3 cav support to clean silly militia..

All units have same stats in IG for differant factions they are all the same wheres the tactics and strat in that in RTW u have over 20 factions all have individual special units archers cav units for causing morale boosts and of cause you have the General who see's the morale in battles increase and decrease when killed he can also rally wavering troops....

to be honest i find cav charges in IG tediuos they dont cause mass effect and i dont think the word flanking can be used in this game, simply cause the AI will charge anything it sees in front of it as an immediate threat, there are no bonuses for hitting militia in the rear as a cav....

In RTW you have differant units for differant causes all have benifits advantages and weaknesses and strengths, for example...

Head Hunting Maidens (cavalry) they are amour pearced so focus on armoured troops....

Chosen Axemen (infantry) great in short bursts vs inf but they are near naked so succeptable to archer fire and roman pila throw...

You have units which have no place in battle but are there for moral such as them women for germania forget name, who scream (screeching Women) i remembered... they add moral while screaming...

All Units are differant with differant attack and moral and defence bonuses...

Rear cav charges own and are vital, flanking can only be used in this game as far as im concerned, these days in war was when cav won battles....

When in battle in RTW and a unit or 2 are under heavy fire and despached from the main army they go threw differant thoughts such as wavering, shaken, routing.... all adds elements into the game about morale...

Choice of land if key in rome and although this may be the case in IG it isnt to the extent in rome, as land choice cuts of flanking disables use of art, stops retreats... many other things they pay divendence in battle

The only thing rome lacks is sea battles but you dont need that with the depth level of battle on land that you have.

its always gunna be down to individual tastes and opinion but if someone states that IG is more tactical and stratedy based than rome im sorry you are very very wrong...

care to prove me wrong im welcome to discussion, but i am very clear in stating rome is the greatest strat game of that sort eva...

and the total war makers can be proud of there achievements....

RTW owns

p.s RTW is 10 times more historically accurate then IG

efthimios
10th Aug 2005, 11:07
Well, at least you are not a RTW fanboy.
If you like it, stick with it.

BARBARIANrome
10th Aug 2005, 11:14
please clarify what rome total war fanboy implements i have no idea what your on about....

But i have outplayed rome now 8 months solid online, waiting for Barbarian Invasion and was looking for a supplement until that time but IG is failing so far...

I am playing as Brits now and decided to have a none attack approach, build up first 18 years has gone past noone has attacked or declared war on me, i did that quest so my sympathy points go up 1.5 a turn with all nation portugal gave themselves to me after newspaper thing built.... and i have near all special units and 20 swoops.... and 8 nations have dissapeared lol...

screamingpalm
11th Aug 2005, 01:37
Sorry but I find none of that to be true for RTW. Maybe when playing vs the moronic AI you can do these things with some success, but in a mp game RTW is one mass vs another mass beating each other to a pulp. Anyone who tries to use tactics of any kind will get drowned in a sea of spammed cavalry or Spartans. In IG I rarely lose when I use good tactics and combined arms. I dont need a lot of long range art to win and ALWAYS beat the piss out of spam cav armies with glee. ;) I do agree with you on the downside of IG having all units with same stats being lame, but it is still better than the moronic RTW spam armies that get the advantage. And really all the armies are the same in RTW mp....with all the same spammed stats if you think about it. Even though neither game is great, IG is still better tactically for me. Sp sucks for both games.