Monte Carlo

That's ruined my f*****g day. I just hope they see it as a profitable spin-off and don't abandon the TW franchise. I can handle most things being dumbed down for console kiddies, but not TW. Cheers MC

I quite like it; it reminds me of Diablo 2 meets Divine Divinity. I haven't played it on my new uber-rig yet, and on my old system I had some lag when zooming the camera out. I'm sure that won't be a problem now. My plan is to re-install when the expansion comes out and start a new game. If that developer used the engine to create more of a traditional RPG then it would be excellent. As it is, it's still a solid, fun action CRPG. Cheers MC

Ha ha ha, why would I post over at the Codex anymore, when I enjoy Troika-baiting as much as I do? Or get flamed for not agreeing, utterly, with one of the resident uber-trolls? Cheers MC

Congrats to Mr & Mrs U on the new arrival. I don't see why a community manager is vital here. Maybe it's because these forums are too sleepy and it's something else to be compartmentalized and shipped off to Stalag Luft Bioware :: Stands to attention and salutes Von Greg & Ray :: Keep the forums open for god's sake; I thought it was a given that a web presence seldom harms a games developer given the nominal outlay. Cheers MC

Those rebellions in Medieval invariably happened when you had conquered 60% plus of the map and, also, when your King died and a lower influence heir took his place. This was a pain as in Medieval your faction heir was fixed (unless you killed the sucka off). It takes a lot of planning, tax management and troop dispersal but surviving that late game wobble is possible. But I agree that it is a pain. Cheers MC

http://forums.obsidianent.com/index.php?ac...ounce&f=41&id=1 Here we go again. Cheers MC

You see, these differences of opinion (which are perfectly fair) illustrate my point about the original topic. Now, about BG2: I always play very small (four or under) parties, seldom with more than one mage (sometimes Edwin, sometimes gimped Imoen). It is always heavily modded, and I mean heavily (I even use the esoteric mod that restores all the BG1 inventory and paperdoll art) .This means that my BG2/SoA is really very different from anybody else's, which is all part of the beauty of such an enduring game. It's interesting to see consensus (a rare commodity in this community) over IWD1's (excellent) combat. Developers please note. Cheers MC

Well, point 1 (Less "Wargame-ish") is for two reasons: Firstly, the Medieval combat was more challenging. It was more difficult in that the use of terrain, wooded areas and so required forward planning on a level not really equitable with Rome. Units were better balanced; look at archers for example (good at supression but not the scythe that even entry-level archer units are in Rome...let's not even enter a Longbowmen versus Cretan Archer debate!). Enemy AI was more agressive, enemy army composition was more challenging (don't get me wrong, some of the AI in army composition was utterly broken, for example the French would send an army of two peasant units and fifteen archer units agianst your elite force but hey). Secondly, in Medieval the strategy element of the game was far more aggressive; enemy factions would use assassins, crusades and exploit your weaknesses at a level you simply don't see in Rome. If you left a garrison with two units of peasants and a general next door to a stronger faction in Medieval you can bet that you'd be asking for trouble; the oft-dormant AI in Rome means you can. To be fair, in Rome bribery via enemy diplomats is more prevalent and the V1.2 patch has resolved some of these issues. --- Secondly, I think that CA got feedback that altho' the TW concept was really good, casual gamers were frustrated that they couldn't jump straight in AND KONKA TEH WURLD!!! Medieval really required a lot of thought every turn which is great for a grognard like me, but not so great for the more casual gamer. And, respect to Creative Assembly, I think they did a good job of pitching a product that made that compromise: casual gamers want something reasonably challenging and fun, NOT the maelstrom of difficulty that playing, say, France or Germany was in Medieval. Looking at the general feedback, Rome has won over multi-players, casual gamers, wargamers, modders and grognards. No small achievement. But have I re-installed Medieval and Viking Invasion on my new rig? You bet I have. Hope that answers the question. Always nice to chat with a fellow fan. Cheers MC

Sorry, ladies, but the combat in BG2 was pretty good as far as the IE games went. The high-level abilities and general over-the-top uber-ness of it might not be to everybody's taste, but there are some genuinely memorable battles that required a bit of a think (unless, of course, you are one of those people who play every IE game with a hacked dual class Kensai/ Mage called Nightblade Doombolt or something). I had hours of fun with the munchkin battles in Throne of Bhaal, especially solo-ing the fire giant lair with a fighter/ thief. Modded BG2 just gets better. Improved twisted rune? Improved Mae'Var/ Aran Linvail? Improved Sahuagin city? They're all pretty cool. Especially with a hacked Kensai/ Mage called Nightblade Doombolt. Or something. Now, where I agree on IWD1 is the tactical element. You could see that the BIS designers had sat down and tried to bring in a "DM-designed map" feel to the game, pushing the engine to create genuinely tactical challenges that required a bit of thought and understanding of the rules as much as the ability to use a hacked Kensai/ Mage called Nightblade Doombolt (not that you could have a Kensai/ Mage in IWD1, but I digress). Look at the battle in Dorn's Deep where you have to cross that bridge faced with orc archers, infantry and drow wizards, spiders (etc). I played that battle three or four different ways and really enjoyed it. To be fair, IWD2 carried on this tradition. So I'd put IWD1 on a par with BG2, for different reasons. I loved 'em both. Cheers MC

On elephants: They are one of the few things that make combat against the AI a bit more challenging, but yes, post-V1.1 they are easier to deal with. Libyan javelinmen in ambush are pretty useful, as are mercenary hoplites to soak them up whilst Roman infantry hurl their pila at them. On comparisons with Medieval: Well, when you think about it there is more micromanagement in Rome with settlements and governors. There is no doubt, however, that on default difficulty settings that the AI of Medieval was far more brutal in the non-combat mode of the game. The sheer beauty of Rome, as has been pointed out, sort of carries it through (no matter how rewarding decimating the French from a hill with English longbowmen was, the sheer visceral kick of ramming a wedge of Cataphracts into the back of a phalanx and watching the enemy hurled into the air is much, much better). Do you think that the suits at Activision leaned on CA to make the game a bit less, well, wargame-ish than Medieval to increase it's marketability? I do. As I said, let's hope that the CA adapt M:TW using the Rome engine. Imagine lining up your cannon on the hills overlooking Constantinople.... Cheers MC

You are a level 1 Collector-Savant. If you don't play pen & paper RPGs then you'll possibly progress no further, but it ain't a biggie, is it? Perhaps you have created a new hybrid I was hitherto unaware of, the Computer D&D Crossover Guy. This player loves D&D on the computer. The computer allows you to enjoy P&P without the inconvenience of actually having to mix with real-life D&D players! Extended interest might lead you into the foothills of collector-savantdom (qv), as your pixellated escapades leads you into perusing the source material. Fair enough? I think so, as like many people too busy to schedule pen & paper gaming, I'm verring off into this category myself (albeit with a few levels of the Grognard PrC). Cheers MC

The Warhammer PS1 game was called Shadow of the Horned Rat. It was pretty good, actually, and the combat system was very much like the Total War set-up but with a radial in-game menu. Personally, I invested in a PS mouse. Made life much easier. Cheers MC

You see, whis is why you can't win with gamers. Especially CRPG fans. I'd say the exact opposite; characters who are engaging but who don't get in the way of the gameplay (Planescape, anyone?) and combat that grabs you by the balls and makes you really have to think. And if that means a turn-based tactics-fest then so be it. I'd also add that size does matter; I don't like small games. The chance to explore that evokes that "kid in a sweet shop" feeling is also important: what do I do next? Ooh, I wanna do that, and that and that. Cool. Lastly a hot elf chick/ alien chick/ whatever chick in a chainmail bikini never hurts a great RPG in my humble. Cheers MC

I fondly remember playing multiplayer Command & Conquer 2 on my old Playstation with my flatmate for hours. Ditto Warcraft. My biggest regret about Xbox ownership is the dearth of decent RTS titles; but for the life of me I can't see why you couldn't do a decent one for it? Go for it Obsidian....lead the way with a junk-resource drive PA RTS on the Xbox2! Cheers MC

Hey, let Obsidian make a few console titles. Why not? If a diverse portfolio allows them to release a decent PC RPG now and then it'd be well worth it. Personally, on the console, I'd like to see Obsidian do a post-apocalyptic or science-fiction RTS title, give it the full treatment. The reason I say post-apoc is that I'd love to see you using junk as a resource. You know, you harvest different sorts of junk and...make stuff. Like crazed Mad Max killing machines. Imagine if the hottest loot on the map was, say, an old fridge or an aluminium shopping cart. Ha ha ha. You know, recycling always has this long-haired, Volvo-driving image, but in this game it'd be recycling with a difference. For their original PC title I want to see an all singing, all dancing fantasy game that has a Jagged Alliance 2 style mission/ resource overlay. We discussed it over on the old BIS boards...I think Chris A. chimed in and said he liked it. Or it could have been Mr. Maldonado, in which case it's too bad 'cuz he's at Midway IIRC. Cheers MC

^ Good luck Chemchok with Europa.... I'm looking forward to it immensely. As somebody else pointed out, the actual mechanics of Medieval are better, it just doesn't look as nice. As we discussed in the other RomeTW: What Next? thread, Medieval with the Rome engine would be sublime. I patched to V1.2 this weekend, after getting a friend with broadband to download it for me and burn it. It has some substantial improvements, especially making the use of diplomats less cheesy. Before, you could do this: 1. Blockade Greek port, thereby declaring war. 2. Use diplomat to negotiate ceasefire for 10,000 denari. - Next turn - 1. Blockade Greek port, thereby re-declaring war. 2. Use diplomat to negotiate ceasefire for 10,000 denari. Rinse and repeat. All in all, though, it remains for me the best game released since, well, Medieval. CRPGs are kaput, Kameraden. Cheers MC

It depends what game we're talking about? Play Any Faction Mod for Rome:TW is pretty good. BG2 is the game I've most experience with, mod-wise. I can't imagine playing it without Weimer's Ease-of-Use and Tactics. Ascension is pretty cool, too. Cheers MC

Haven't they remaindered X-boxes in Kanada, like they have in the UK? X-boxes are dirt cheap here for some reason. Cheers MC

Maybe I'm being old-fashioned, but I see a considerable difference between legitimate marketing/ publicity and hype. If we were being gentlemanly about it, hype in computer gaming terms usually equates to BS. Molyneaux admitted as much apres-Fable. Bioware, apres- Neverwinter, did not. Compare and contrast with JE Sawyer, who apologizes even when his efforts are pretty good ::chuckles:: Cheers MC

Most of the unlockable factions have at least one killer unit...Germany has two (Night Raiders and Gothic Cavalry). The grognards a playing no-hoper factions that you have to unlock manually, like Armenia, Spain and Scythia for a real challenge. Funnily enough, none of those are as annoyingly tough as, say, Gaul and Carthage. Of course, the Roman factions are easiest....Marius event = military powerhouse. Urban Cohorts are like Panzers trundling all over the other ancient-era uber-units. Cheers MC

Bioware aren't aggressively hyping Dragon Age, they really ain't. Where are the drooling fanboi Dragon Age fansites? At the same early point in the NWN development cycle I remember reading at least three decent newsites (i.e. NWN Stratics) picking up NWN tidbits. Where are the reams of concept art and screenies? A modest selection has appeared, with the emphasis being on modest. Where is the relentless hyperbole? Sorry, maybe a bit later, but right now DA doesn't have anywhere near the hype that NWN did. Maybe it's because Bioware are now bigger and have stuff like Jade Empire to concentrate on. I dunno. I like to think it's because they over-egged the NWN process and learnt from that. Cheers MC

"It takes a brave man not be a hero in the Red Army!" Josef Stalin US combat losses since the end of Vietnam, in all conflicts, have yet to reach the level of punishment executions carried out by the Russians of their own troops for "cowardice" at Stalingrad (a whole division of 'em). Julii are not the easiest Roman faction, BTW. Their limited access to coastal regions, and the poor barbarian trade routes they conquer means that they struggle for cash. None of their temples provide any sort of military bonuses. It is, however, a challenging faction to play. Cheers MC

A few things to consider about Baldur's Gate 3. 1. It's Atari's call. They choose the developer. Of course, Bioware is by any objective standard a quality developer with lots of clout....almost too much clout perhaps. Atari seems to like pliable developers they can force to release buggy, unfinished rush-job products. Love 'em or hate 'em, Bioware doesn't fit the criteria there, does it? 2. Bioware is making Dragon Age. Now, almost moving onto a different issue, they ain't hyping it. In fact, it's almost under the radar (I think they've learnt their lesson from NWN, personally). Nonetheless, it is a huge project using an original IP which will no doubt spawn a number of XPs. It's hot property. It'll be a big hit. Not dissing Baldur's Gate as a franchise (I love the games), but would throwing huge resources and assets at a BG3 really fit into the new original IP/ not-afraid-of-consoles/ bullish direction Bioware is travelling in? I don't think it would. 3. There are plenty of developers who would love to take on BG3. Hell, look at what's happened to Fallout. That's the direction I can see BG3 going. 4. Obsidian should be leery if Atari offer it to them, for the reasons described above. Cheers MC

Non-grognards don't know the meaning of 'complicated' until they've had to take into account the weather, supply lines, fatigue, morale, unit strength, and air support of every German division across the length and breadth of the Soviet Union, circa June 1942, before they plan their next attack. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> [/Gorgnard]Ironically, the German divisional commanders were generally ignorant of much of that info during the real thing! Mind you, they got their backsides kicked.[Grognard/]

The learning curve of Rome is reasonable if you play strategy games but I can imagine it being tough for those who, generally, don't. However, people do seem to want games they can just boot up and play ACKSHUN MOAD and Rome certainly isn't one of those. What the game does have is pretty darn good in-game support...more than any other TW title. My advice is: 1. Use (judiciously) the automanage functions for smaller/ out of the way settlements. 2. Click on "Victoria", the strangely antipodean-sounding in-game advisor chick. Especially if you are wondering about what to build next. 3. Play the tutorial: obvious I know but how many people don't bother. The most frustrating thing for the newbie will be creating an empire that is comfortably turning over enough money to do more or less the things you want to do (bribe armies, build cool units etc). It is pretty tough unitl you get the hang of the importance of ports/ markets/ roads/ trade agreements/ selling map info. Anyhow, if anybody wants to start a Q&A help thread for this game I'll happily jump in; I've beaten it with all the Roman factions as well as a few others. Hint: The Seleucids are the wealthiest faction in the game with the most varied and potentially potent troop roster....if you want to blast away and take over the world without worrying about denari, EVAR, then it's the only way to fly. Cheers MC