Time Commanders - Stamford Bridge!
Nats
its going to feature the battle of Stamford Bridge! That will be the first
episode that won't feature the Romans in some way and as such it got me
wondering whether we will be seeing the first elements of Medieval Total War
2 on screen? I can't believe that they would use MTW to do the program as
after seeing the battles with the RTW engine MTW looks so primitive. So that
must mean that CA have been updating the RTW graphics etc to suit medieval
warfare.
This may mean they have actually started working on the next game which must
surely be MTW 2. Great news this as, if its true, I will be much more
interested in playing medieval battles with the RTW engine - the Roman
battles are quite limited in scope/available technology etc
What Im hoping is that CA are working on MTW2, thats its going to use the
RTW engine for campaigns and battles, that the AI will receive more work to
make it a lot smarter, and that there are more achievements/tech tree etc
than was present in RTW. I would also like to see much more advancement in
terms of diplomacy.
I would however also very much like to see a RTW expansion pack that
introduces things that should have been present in the game - such as the
proper Roman formations, the best elements of the realism patch, slower
battles/no time limits, and more interesting enemies to play against the
Romans - at the moment, in the vanilla game, the gauls etc are right boring
to play (this has been radically improved by the realism patch though). It
would also be nice to see more demanding seiges, being able to sally forth
and retire back into a castle several times during a war, etc, etc.
--
Regards
Nats
"It's life, Jim, but not as we know it."
Julian Barker
Nats <nst...@nstutt.freeserve.co.uk> wrote
>
>What Im hoping is that CA are working on MTW2, thats its going to use the
>RTW engine for campaigns and battles, that the AI will receive more work to
>make it a lot smarter, and that there are more achievements/tech tree etc
>than was present in RTW. I would also like to see much more advancement in
>terms of diplomacy.
>
If MTW2 is going to be half as good as MTW - then the less of RTW in it
the better!
Other than the eye candy, I can't think of one thing RTW has going for
it. It is a period I would love to see done well, but MTW is about a
million times better and I have gone back to playing it after the
boredom that is RTW.
What makes you think that Stamford Bridge won't just be two armies of
Gauls with different skins?
--
Julian Barker
"Many battles have been fought and won by
soldiers nourished on beer,and the King does not
believe that coffee-drinking soldiers can be
relied upon to endure hardships in case of
another war."
Frederick the Great, 1777
Nats
seemed to be quite a change from the normal Roman and Gaul game. I noticed
for example that the Huscarles jumped up when they hit the Norsemen in order
to bring their two handed axes down with force - I cant remember seeing this
in the RTW game before but will have a look at some present axemen just to
check.
Nicely textured models of the Saxons though. Rest of the game seemed the
same as RTW - even the music was the same!
And I really laughed out loud at the end of the battle at one of the
comments from the family who had won the battle. One of the 10 year old kids
said that a funny thing happened to the Berserkers he was attacking - his
cavalry had wiped them out in one charge. This made me really laugh as the
main thing wrong with the original game is how overpowered the cavalry
charges are! And here we are with a ten year old kid realising that it was
stupid for a cavalry charge to wipe out a group of Norse Berserkers!
Maybe CA can now stop messing around with Time Commanders and give us the
patch we have been waiting for!
I agree that MTW is more fun than RTW. I personally dont find the campaign
map elements of RTW all that much fun to play. MTW was far better in that
you concentrated on the battles. In RTW you spend far too much time tending
to your armies and cities etc which is just not where the games strength
lies.
--
Regards
Nats
"It's life, Jim, but not as we know it."
"Julian Barker" <Jul...@rodent.demon.co.uk> wrote in message
news:NdwdUlANA$8BF...@gerbillus.gerbils.co.uk...
Aquila
"Nats" <nst...@nstutt.freeserve.co.uk> wrote in message
news:ct12pp$312$1...@newsg3.svr.pol.co.uk...
At the end of the programme they implied that the next show will be about
the Battle of Hastings!
James Cobb
"Aquila" <Aqu...@Aquila.net> wrote in message
news:0bdJd.292$%M4....@newsfe2-win.ntli.net...
> At the end of the programme they implied that the next show will be about
> the Battle of Hastings!
>
>
Platypuss
But it's not, so they were probably just adding a bit of context.
SPECIAL INTEREST: Time Commanders
Channel: BBC 2 102
Date: Sunday 30th January 2005
Time: 19:15 to 20:00 (starting in 5 days)
Duration: 45 minutes.
Military strategy game in which contestants recreate historical
battles, presented by Richard Hammond. It's 326BC and a military team
from the army and RAF steps into the sandals of Alexander the Great as
they take on one of the greatest forces of war elephants ever to take
to the field of battle. Will their Macedonian army have the tactical
edge as they face the superior forces of the Indian tribes?
(Widescreen, Subtitles, 2003)
--
Pete Langdale
At the moment, the net is mostly made up of educated
individuals. What will happen when anyone can login?
J.C. Herz 1994
Nats
--
Regards
Nats
"It's life, Jim, but not as we know it."
"Platypuss" <plat...@DELETEntlworld.THIScom> wrote in message
news:nqocv05nrkek4u7fk...@4ax.com...
Graham Thurlwell
> On looking at whats in store for next Sundays Time Commanders I noticed that
> its going to feature the battle of Stamford Bridge!
ARSE! This is just typical of television in the UK. I've become so used
to there being crap all on on Sundays that I don't even bother reading
the TV listings anymore. What's more annoying is that Sundays are when
I go round my friends house to play our Football Manager 2005 save.
I'll have to make a note to buy a new video tape and timer Time
Commanders up so I don't miss it.
The thing that really pisses me off is the fact that on the days when I
do have time to watch television, and it isn't my turn on the PC, there
will be nothing worth watching. If I actually paid my TV License fee
(rather than my parents doing so), I'd be seriously pissed off.
--
Jades' First Encounters Site - http://www.jades.org/ffe.htm
The best Frontier: First Encounters site on the Web.
nos...@jades.org /is/ a real email address!
Nats
Trek for the last few years, and they dont show star Trek anymore :-(
The programs are almost certainly better on Channel 5 these days than on the
BBC. For those of us who arent interested in Eastenders, Coronation Street,
Xfactor, hospital dramas, police/crime series or Big Brother tv is really
limited and has been for ages. If I could get away without buying a tv
license I would.
Maybe I should get Sky and cancel my tv license - is that legal?
--
Regards
Nats
"It's life, Jim, but not as we know it."
"Graham Thurlwell" <NOS...@jades.org> wrote in message
news:9d887732...@d.thurlwell.btopenworld.com...
Graham Thurlwell
<snip>
> Maybe I should get Sky and cancel my tv license - is that legal?
Nope. TV license is required for /anything/ capable of receiving
television broadcasts. Apparently, this would also include you
downloading programs from a website and watching them on your PC.