New trailer

[CBR]

http://pc.ign.com/dor/objects/958390/empire-total-war/videos/ETW_081208.html

In-game footage of naval combat. One paddle steamer included.


CBR

[Jack Lusted]

I hope you all enjoy the trailer, you can finally see the beauty of naval battles in action.

[The_Doctor]

WOW, I like.:2thumbsup:

One thing thought, the music and the sound effects where too loud and I couldn't hear the guy.:embarassed:

[Elmar Bijlsma]

Yup, the narrator was very hard to hear, especially later in the video.

I hope the tracer-like effects of the cannonballs can be turned off. There was a screenshot that had a cool blurring effect trailing the cannonballs, but that what was shown in the video was none too pretty.

[rajpoot]

Awesome, absolutly awesome!! I watched the video thrice, because I kept getting lost watching the ships in action, and forgot to hear the narrator.
I just hope that the 2/5 comes soon, can't wait.
And like Elmar said, a toggle option for the tracer would be nice, here, and in the land battles too. No problem if it isn't there, no big issue, but it'll be nice. ~:)
And three cheers for all you guys at CA, specially the man who did the water.

[Mailman653]

Awesome! D/l right now:yes:

Wonder how many posts will be made before someone mentions "where is the land combat?!":laugh4:

[batemonkey]

WOW - can i have it NOW please!

[PBI]

Nice stuff, fantastic looking battles. One thing I wonder though; in all the screenshots and trailers so far, the water seems to be extremely calm. I assume this is just in order to show of all the reflections of the ships in the water, but it would be nice to see a battle in rougher seas.


I hope the tracer-like effects of the cannonballs can be turned off. There was a screenshot that had a cool blurring effect trailing the cannonballs, but that what was shown in the video was none too pretty.

It looked to me like that was a visual aid that just appears when you are zoomed out from the battle, I couldn't see any in any of the zoomed in shots, just a more faint blur as cannonballs go past. I agree that I hope there's an option to turn it off.


Wonder how many posts will be made before someone mentions "where is the land combat?!"

The pattern CA seem to be going with for releasing info is first naval battles, then land battles and then campaign map, so given that this is trailer 1 of 5 it's not too surprising that it's all naval. Makes sense I suppose, since the naval battles are CA's big new showpiece and the campaign map doesn't exactly make for great eyecandy screenshots. Though I hope we do get some campmap pics soon.

[Gustav II Adolf]

WOW! Really beatiful! Good work CA!

I can´t wait for future chapters. If this is the standard then I can only imagine land battles.

:2thumbsup:

[Hosakawa Tito]

Looking good. I'm ready to indulge my inner Nelson.:pirate2:

[Zenicetus]

Well, I guess I'll be the curmudgeon here. Eye candy aside (like guys flying through the air from cannon hits), that "sail combat" looked pretty bad to me. Too many ships moving in improbable directions for square-riggers, like battle lines passing each other at 180 degree opposite angles. Too many ships "fighting" with furled sails.

Maybe the wind and sailing mechanics will be more realistic in the final release, and they're just showing this because the eye candy is running ahead of the sail combat engine. If the tactical maneuver isn't realistic, then I don't know why they'd bother doing a naval combat engine at all? I hope they're not dumbing this down, thinking that people can't figure out how sailing works....

[darrin42]

Unbelievable! Cant describe it any other way. CANT WAIT for some land Battle clips to!

But Im wondering to myself, why this has not been posted on the official total War site.?:2thumbsup:

[Belgolas]

Well I got to say I am impressed! And looks like my rig is powerful enough to run it max judging from the video.

This is going to be an amazing game and probably one of the best strategy games of 2009 and maybe one of the top of all time.

[hoom]

Too many ships moving in improbable directions for square-riggers, like battle lines passing each other at 180 degree opposite angles. Too many ships "fighting" with furled sails.Looked pretty good to me.
Passing at 180 degrees was pretty much standard tactics with all the guns down the sides of the ship.

Possibly a bit much billow in the sails?
The bounce & wind response on the square sails looks pretty good, just to me seems a bit too large movement.
Problems with the Jib & Gaff sails though :inquisitive:

There is impact blood & ragdoll
Destructible rigging
A steam ship in there
Individual ship names (hope that carries over to the land units!)
Cannon trails look a bit silly
Water looks very good

Generally looks very promising.

[pevergreen]

Historical accuracy just took a back seat for me

There goes my dreams about the girls, now its all on this. Bah.

[Mailman653]

There goes my dreams about the girls, now its all on this. Bah.

Don't you mean :gah:

[Zenicetus]

Looked pretty good to me.
Passing at 180 degrees was pretty much standard tactics with all the guns down the sides of the ship.


Ah, no... it wasn't. Not like that. Do you know anything about sailing?



There is impact blood & ragdoll
Destructible rigging
A steam ship in there
Individual ship names (hope that carries over to the land units!)
Cannon trails look a bit silly
Water looks very good
Generally looks very promising.

That's just eye candy. Is that all we're looking for in a game like this? If the ships don't move like real sailing ships, then what's the point?

Would the hardcore land battle enthusiasts accept a gross distortion in the way armies can maneuver? In sailing terms, what they're showing in some of those clips is the equivalent of infantry having the same movement speed as cavalry.

[Divinus Arma]

It reminds me, control-wise (if that is a word), of Imperial Glory. I would like to see these ships moving slower. Too fast means too hard to control. It's not like they can just stop and change directions.

I also hope that ships are absurdly expensive, so super fleets aren't running around everywhere.

Okay, enough complaining from me.

This does look very very good. I am certainly excited about it now!

And WHOEVER DID THE WATER: This is the best water and relationship of ships to the water (splash and such) that I have ever seen in a game. I also like the sway of the ships in the ocean. Beautifully done! Very impressive. Kudos all around for this programmer. Give him a raise.

[Sheogorath]

It reminds me, control-wise (if that is a word), of Imperial Glory. I would like to see these ships moving slower. Too fast means too hard to control. It's not like they can just stop and change directions.

I'm hoping for some degree of automation in the ships you arent directly controlling. Doesnt have to be anything fancy, just enough to, say, tell a ship to 'form line, fire at will' and prevent them from sailing off the edge of the map and so on.
Essentially make the other ships smart enough to follow a general order and take some of the load off the player.

[PBI]

I'm actually hoping that will be more of an option in land battles as well; a "general advance" button would be fantastic. It would be great if I didn't have to micromanage every cavalry unit to chase down routers, but could just sit back and watch the slaughter unfold.

In fact, I think it would be good if it were near impossible to stop victorious troops from pursuing routers; my understanding is that getting a unit of victorious cavalry to call off the pursuit and reform was quite a feat of discipline.

[Sheogorath]

I've heard stories that Russian officers sometimes had to beat soldiers back with the flats of their swords to stop them from charging the enemy.
Hussars would also probably be especially difficult to control, I imagine, since they were sort of like the 'fighter jocks' of the 18th and 19th century.

As it is, MTW2 seems to have trouble getting troops to follow routers at all >_>;

[hoom]

Do you know anything about sailing?I certainly do.
OK so most battles started out with more or less parallell lines but it was definitely not uncommon for lines to pass 180 degrees opposed or for individual ships to wind up passing in opposite directions.


If the ships don't move like real sailing ships, then what's the point? Most of the shots there show ships 'moving' remarkably realisticly :inquisitive:
Heave, pitch & roll are looking magnificently realistic. (except perhaps one ship near the end with huge windward heel)

CA have said that rather than implementing rigid tacking angles (eg Age of Sail), a ship can sail directly into the wind but with much reduced speed so that someone trying to do that will still get outsailed by the person using the wind properly. It may be a bit weird sometimes but I can understand why they would do this.

The boatspeed & rate of turning might be a bit quick but thats not really surprising for a realtime game.

I definitely hope that steering rate is appropriately related to boatspeed (ie a boat going slowly will also turn very slowly), if its not that would definitely hurt realism.
The other thing that concerns me from this is that it looks like control is very much like the land battles in that you can set a target position/waypoint & the ship goes there then heaves to. (furls the sails & sits there)
I presume that would only be fairly rarely used in practice, with location based clicks mostly being used for pre-engagement maneuvring, with a more general 'attack' command causing the ship to stay in close engagement with a specific target under AI helming?

Edit: BTW, 720p version is up at gametrailers.com (http://www.gametrailers.com/player/38336.html?type=wmv) now :)

[Belgolas]

Hmm. I am now just wondering what would happen in game when 2 ships hit each other head on. Would the just bounce or stop or actually get massive damage.

Also I think this will be hectic in a 8 person navy battle with 20 ships each! 160 ships would be one crazy battle.

[Zenicetus]

Do you know anything about sailing?
I certainly do.

Okay, so if you know something about sailing, then you should know how ridiculous those naval combat clips are. I know a little bit about sailing too. I grew up on the water. I've owned sailboats. I'm ASA certified for bareboat sail charter of anything up to 50 feet, anywhere in the world (monohull, never messed with catamarans). I've also read enough history to know how square-riggers differed from modern rigs, and what pigs they were to maneuver.

You DO NOT SAIL UPWIND, period.

You DO NOT fight at a 180 degree angle to ships with wind in the stern quarter (fast forward to 1:12 in the trailer clip, and notice how both fleets are showing bow wakes, even though only one has full sail with wind at the stern).

You DO NOT fight with furled sails, because that's the only engine you have, and just like a modern fighter pilot, "speed is life".

Turning into the wind is DANGEROUS in combat. You never do that, because it puts you "in irons" and you're a sitting duck against anything with wind advantage. Wind advantage is the WHOLE POINT! You maneuver for wind advantage the minute you get within sighting range, and hope to achieve it before you get within cannon range. Tail chases are possible... drawing close with matching battle lines where both fleets have the wind (more or less) at the rear is possible. If you're lucky, you'll engage upwind where you can zig-zag back and forth, "crossing the T" to rake the enemy with cannon fire... all because you have the upwind advantage. That's what sail combat is all about. Not these silly trailer clips.

Look, I don't WANT total realism in sail combat. That would be a micro-management nightmare, unless the AI captains were really smart about acting under your (presumably Fleet Admiral) orders. And AI hasn't been the strongest suit for CA in the past. But I do want the sailing ships to act like sailing ships, not powerboats. Otherwise I have zero interest in this game. There are many interesting things about tactical maneuver in sail combat. If this is all just eye candy with ships that drive around like powerboats with no dependence on the wind, and no "forbidden zone" where no sailing ship can point upwind, then what's the point? Why play out some arcade game version of what the real sailing ship admirals and captains had to deal with?


CA have said that rather than implementing rigid tacking angles (eg Age of Sail), a ship can sail directly into the wind but with much reduced speed so that someone trying to do that will still get outsailed by the person using the wind properly. It may be a bit weird sometimes but I can understand why they would do this.

Yeah, I can understand it too... they're making this into an arcade game. Judging by the lack of response from people who are noticing what I'm noticing, I guess they know what market they're aiming for.

[hoom]

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/9/9b/PocockBattleOfCopenhagen.jpg

*To be fair, the Dutch fleet is at anchor.

[CBR]

*That is Danish and not Dutch* The Battle of the Nile would be another example.

Well I must say I had hoped for more than what seems to be arcade naval combat. I remember Age of Sail 2 as being a nice game. Maybe CA could include some realism options for naval combat...


CBR

[Zenicetus]

Well yeah, the other fleet at anchor might give you just a wee bit of an advantage in tactical maneuver under sail. :beam:

But you still can't fool Mother Nature. That attacking fleet in the painting would have to be setting up the approach from the advantaged, upwind direction. Even the cartoon-like Sid Meir "Pirates!" game got that right. IIRC, it was vastly simplified, but you still couldn't just ignore physics and sail a square-rigger directly upwind. That's a major immersion-breaker, for anyone who knows this stuff.

Seriously people... this is a massive flaw. Why would y'all accept this in naval combat, if you don't accept similar things (like the shield bug in M2TW) for land combat? Makes no sense to me, unless everybody is just smitten with the eye candy.

P.S. this isn't just "CA bashing".... I had high hopes for this game and it was on my want list. If it plays better than it looks in the trailer, and if doesn't have Draconian copy protection, I'll still buy it and recommend it to friends.

[hoom]

*That is Danish and not Dutch* I'm sorry, I've always gotten confuseled about Dutch, Danish & Netherlands type naming conventions :tomato:

[CBR]

I'm sorry, I've always gotten confuseled about Dutch, Danish & Netherlands type naming conventions :tomato:
Heh no worries, it seems to be a common mistake :beam:


CBR

[ThePianist]

Okay, so if you know something about sailing, then you should know how ridiculous those naval combat clips are. I know a little bit about sailing too. I grew up on the water. I've owned sailboats. I'm ASA certified for bareboat sail charter of anything up to 50 feet, anywhere in the world (monohull, never messed with catamarans). I've also read enough history to know how square-riggers differed from modern rigs, and what pigs they were to maneuver.

You DO NOT SAIL UPWIND, period.

You DO NOT fight at a 180 degree angle to ships with wind in the stern quarter (fast forward to 1:12 in the trailer clip, and notice how both fleets are showing bow wakes, even though only one has full sail with wind at the stern).

You DO NOT fight with furled sails, because that's the only engine you have, and just like a modern fighter pilot, "speed is life".

Turning into the wind is DANGEROUS in combat. You never do that, because it puts you "in irons" and you're a sitting duck against anything with wind advantage. Wind advantage is the WHOLE POINT! You maneuver for wind advantage the minute you get within sighting range, and hope to achieve it before you get within cannon range. Tail chases are possible... drawing close with matching battle lines where both fleets have the wind (more or less) at the rear is possible. If you're lucky, you'll engage upwind where you can zig-zag back and forth, "crossing the T" to rake the enemy with cannon fire... all because you have the upwind advantage. That's what sail combat is all about. Not these silly trailer clips.

Look, I don't WANT total realism in sail combat. That would be a micro-management nightmare, unless the AI captains were really smart about acting under your (presumably Fleet Admiral) orders. And AI hasn't been the strongest suit for CA in the past. But I do want the sailing ships to act like sailing ships, not powerboats. Otherwise I have zero interest in this game. There are many interesting things about tactical maneuver in sail combat. If this is all just eye candy with ships that drive around like powerboats with no dependence on the wind, and no "forbidden zone" where no sailing ship can point upwind, then what's the point? Why play out some arcade game version of what the real sailing ship admirals and captains had to deal with?



Yeah, I can understand it too... they're making this into an arcade game. Judging by the lack of response from people who are noticing what I'm noticing, I guess they know what market they're aiming for.

So, I don't know anything about sailing, and I wouldn't have seen the details without reading your comments. What I think is: if the wind is as you describe, then the wind at sea battles should be like the hill inclination on land battles. Each sea battle show start with the wind in a certain direction and certain speed, like how each land battle start with the hill in a certain direction and a certain slope angle.
Just like how on land battle, there was an in-game arcade option of "no fatigue" and "unlimited arrow ammo", so in sea battle there should be in-game arcade option of "no wind effect", and perhaps "self-propelled in all directions". I did notice upon second watching that sailing ships were moving at speed in different directions, when the wind could only be blowing in one direction at a time. So that could be the arcade option of sea battles.

But actual sea battles should be implemented with wind effect as you described, so the sea battle simulation would require a skill level similar to land battles in Total War series. Otherwise, if sea battles required low skill, they would quickly become monotonous and all the same, and people would start doing auto-resolve all the time after they get used to the eye candy.

P.S. and this is not related to ETW, but from a book with the topic of something like Everything about Galleys or something like Evolution of Ships, that I read either in late elementary school or early secondary school, from the library, there is a way of sailing upwind, but impossible with square sails. The book had a curving-one-way-then-the-other diagram. It's when a ship is small, and only has a triangular sail. It was invented either by the Greeks or the Polynesians, and by moving the triangular sail one way, and then the other, it's possible to sail upwind in a zigzagging diagonal manner.
Found a diagram on some random site (http://144.92.9.188/hoofers/sailing/Manuals/tech_manual/fig10.gif):
but this is only possible with a small ship with a triangular/Lateen sail, like the Polynesian-style or Arab dhow ships.
http://www.imagineafrica.co.uk/images/ken-tusitiri---poster.jpg
It is indeed impossible with large ships with square sails.

[Naefen]

I know its what some people love doing on these forums but.... I just gotta say as a gamer (not a historian/sailor/soldier) I love it!!

I dont know anything about wind directions, sails, or actual combat at sea in 1700`s and if I did..I wouldnt expect it to be realistic anyways.
Like I said... I know you guys love discussing how it should be and how it was hehehe. Just as much as I like reading it:)

[Elmar Bijlsma]

Eh? I think you are confused, The Pianist. Square rigged ships tacked like that too, in order to "sail against the wind". The only advantage lateen rigged ships have is that they can sail closer to the wind, thus making more progress while tacking less.

I do find the simplistic model a slight disappointment, but I expected as much and something is better then nothing. The market for fighting sail games isn't exactly crowded these days. And who knows? Maybe there is a .txt somewhere in ETW that allows us to mod sailing parameters to approach reality.

[Discoman]

Well that looks awesome. The boarding phase was just great and the animations were smooth and fluid.

[Zenicetus]

But actual sea battles should be implemented with wind effect as you described, so the sea battle simulation would require a skill level similar to land battles in Total War series. Otherwise, if sea battles required low skill, they would quickly become monotonous and all the same, and people would start doing auto-resolve all the time after they get used to the eye candy.


Exactly... .why shouldn't the sea battles be as interesting in terms of tactical maneuver, as the land battles? I mean, isn't tactical maneuver the whole reason we buy these Total War games? If there is no real tactical maneuver involving realistic points of sail and wind direction, then it's not a sail combat game, it's something else entirely. It reduces combat to a question of who has the most firepower, or who can get their boarding parties in range. Maybe that's the point? To re-use soldier animations from the land battles?


P.S. and this is not related to ETW, but from a book with the topic of something like Everything about Galleys or something like Evolution of Ships, that I read either in late elementary school or early secondary school, from the library, there is a way of sailing upwind, but impossible with square sails. The book had a curving-one-way-then-the-other diagram. It's when a ship is small, and only has a triangular sail. It was invented either by the Greeks or the Polynesians, and by moving the triangular sail one way, and then the other, it's possible to sail upwind in a zigzagging diagonal manner.

As noted by Elmar, square-riggers could tack too, but at very wide angles off the wind, to the point where reaching a destination directly upwind wasn't really practical. Trade routes were based on prevailing wind directions, which is why it was so easy for pirates and privateers to jump the Spanish treasure fleets. They had to follow a prescribed route around the Caribbean basin, determined by prevailing wind direction.

That lateen rig is better, but still very inefficient compared to modern designs. A modern racing sloop can point to within something like 35 degrees of the true wind direction, but no closer (aside from exotic designs like autogyros, and wind vanes driving propellers). Nothing used in the time period covered by the game would be remotely that efficient, not even the "pirate sloops" often seen in games. Many sea battles involving square riggers would be tail chases, or parallel engagements between battle lines with the wind at the back of both fleets... unless one fleet could manage to get far enough upwind for a "crossing the T" maneuver. Usually that would happen when one fleet would find itself lucky enough to start the engagement upwind (and I wonder how CA is going to handle that part too... a turn-based game would give huge advantage to the player or AI on the current turn, if the wind direction is known in advance).

The limitations are what make it interesting to deal with, whether it's a historical sea battle or a modern sailboat race. Of course that brings up another issue... maybe they're dumbing down realistic sailing not because they think the players don't want it, but because the AI isn't good enough to handle it? I hope that's not the case, but poor tactical maneuver by the AI was one of the things we always complained about with land battles in the RTW and M2TW games.

Anyway, I'm holding out hope that the trailer is showing something set up just for eye candy graphic impact, and doesn't represent the way actual battles will be fought. I can't believe they'd blow off the Nelson wannabees and the Patrick O'Brian fans with arcade-like sea battles.

[R'as al Ghul]

I wonder if fleet battles are included as an option for Multiplayer battles?

[Martok]

I believe they are, although I can't remember who said that. I'm pretty sure they're in, though.

[hoom]

I can't concieve of naval battles not being an option for multiplayer.

Regarding the tactics/sailing dead upwind: I hope & expect the situation to be that while you can sail directly upwind, the speed & maneuverability penalty for doing it should be severe such that you'd be nearly always better off tacking at more accurate angles.

If you can 'motor' around sailing upwind at good pace & able to quickly fall off onto a different tack, then that would definitely be a bad thing.
CA said that there will be a big speed penalty for going dead upwind.

The shots in this video are not long enough & don't show a continuous battle so I choose to take the cautiously optimistic point of view.

[Sheogorath]

It should also be pointed out that, in the early bits of the game at least, a number of ships should still be able to use oars as propulsion besides your standard galleys.

Speaking of galleys, didnt see any in the trailer. Thats a bit disappointing, considering how important they were in several conflicts.

[hoom]

Galleys & Galleasses pretty much have to be around for the Ottomans to use.

[Pantsalot]

The gameplay seemed like select a ship & right click another to attack so this
should guarentee that it won't be like Imperial glory in ship use, although I guess
that there could be automatic & manual use (select a ship & right click another to attack
& they fight as automatic, tell ur ship do swim along the enemy ship & open fire on ur command
as manual). Well I hope that it is both manual & automatic use anyway, because automatic could
be boring alone if only 2 ships were fighting & they end up spiralling around each other, on the
other hand manual use would be too difficult for the -20+ ships that can be deployed in
Empire, unlike Imperial Glory.

Nice trailer anyway.

[Herkus]

Galleys & Galleasses pretty much have to be around for the Ottomans to use.

For Russians and Swedes too. Galleys saw some action in Baltic sea during Great Northern War.

[PBI]

I think the factions used for demonstrating naval battles are the UK and America (at least, they are in the screenshots), neither of whom used galleys or galleyasses AFAIK. My understanding is that they were only practical in the relatively calmer seas of the Mediterranean (and apparently, the Baltic).

Oar-powered galleys I would hope must surely be in, for the inevitable Classical Greece mod. :beam:

[Sheogorath]

Galleys & Galleasses pretty much have to be around for the Ottomans to use.

The Ottomans had been using battleships by the early 1600's. Despite being pretty small (considering their position) they usually kept their navy in the right era, at least.
During the 1700's the Russians were probably the greatest users of oar-powered ships, since Peter the Great built several fleets of them in his wars with the Ottomans and Swedes.


For Russians and Swedes too. Galleys saw some action in Baltic sea during Great Northern War.

I know the Russians were using galleys at the very least up until the Napoleonic Wars. Not in major combat roles, but I can certainly see where they could be quite useful in fairly calm waters.


I think the factions used for demonstrating naval battles are the UK and America (at least, they are in the screenshots), neither of whom used galleys or galleyasses AFAIK. My understanding is that they were only practical in the relatively calmer seas of the Mediterranean (and apparently, the Baltic).

Oar-powered galleys I would hope must surely be in, for the inevitable Classical Greece mod. :beam:

Ah, I hope so. I guess they really just arent as impressive as those battleships :P

It'd be really interesting if you could specify the number of guns on your ship. For each particular hull-style, more guns would mean more firepower, but less speed, and a tendency to capsize in bad weather. I gather that, up until the Napoleonic Era, 66 and 74 gun designs were most common, with 74 gun ships being regarded as the best balance.
'Though some crazy Spaniards decided to cram 120 guns onto a ship, which then spent most of its life in a harbor as a floating battery, since it had roughly the speed and maneuverability of your average three-legged, one-eyed, tortoise.

[Elmar Bijlsma]

The Ottomans had been using battleships by the early 1600's. Despite being pretty small (considering their position) they usually kept their navy in the right era, at least.
During the 1700's the Russians were probably the greatest users of oar-powered ships, since Peter the Great built several fleets of them in his wars with the Ottomans and Swedes.
The North African corsairs, nominally Ottomans, still preferred galleys for their manoeuvrability and speed that was quite sufficient to conduct raids and piracy. One of the few operators of rowed warships to actually use galley slaves.




I know the Russians were using galleys at the very least up until the Napoleonic Wars. Not in major combat roles, but I can certainly see where they could be quite useful in fairly calm waters.

Quit the opposite, the Baltic is quite rough. The reason galleys remained in service there for far longer then most places was that it was quite narrow. With little sea room to tack you could spend weeks at anchor waiting for the wind to blow your way. Also, oars allowed you to get to shelter before a storm hit, whereas a sailing-vessel might not be so lucky and had to ride the storm out. The seas being narrow meant you would risk being blown onto shore.

[hoom]

The Ottomans had been using battleships by the early 1600's.Hmm, it seems I was incorrectly thinking Lepanto was later than it actually was ~:confused:

[Sheogorath]

The North African corsairs, nominally Ottomans, still preferred galleys for their manoeuvrability and speed that was quite sufficient to conduct raids and piracy. One of the few operators of rowed warships to actually use galley slaves.

Aye, but pirate ships aren't the same as warships. Pirates want loot and prisoners. A warship is just out there to kill things.


Quit the opposite, the Baltic is quite rough. The reason galleys remained in service there for far longer then most places was that it was quite narrow. With little sea room to tack you could spend weeks at anchor waiting for the wind to blow your way. Also, oars allowed you to get to shelter before a storm hit, whereas a sailing-vessel might not be so lucky and had to ride the storm out. The seas being narrow meant you would risk being blown onto shore.

If I remember correctly, the Baltic is also possessed of a rather large number of fjords and so forth, with lots of swamps and shallow-water areas which would be quite fine for a galley to operate in, while being exceedingly difficult (or impossible) for a conventional warship to follow in.


Hmm, it seems I was incorrectly thinking Lepanto was later than it actually was ~:confused:

Wikipedia says 1571 :p
And goes on to state that the first Ottoman battleship was purchased in 1624.

[rajpoot]

'Though some crazy Spaniards decided to cram 120 guns onto a ship, which then spent most of its life in a harbor as a floating battery, since it had roughly the speed and maneuverability of your average three-legged, one-eyed, tortoise.


Perhaps I'm mistaken, but was under the impression that most of the first rate, larger warships had more than 100 guns......no?

[pevergreen]

I thought so, I remember something about 128-gun ships.

[Sheogorath]

I thought so, I remember something about 128-gun ships.

The Ottomans built a 128-gun ship some time in the 1840's, I believe. The French built the largest ship of the line ever (with 120 guns) in the 1850's. As I recall, it was also essentially useless and ended up as a floating battery or something.
But, for the purposes of this game, the Spanish 'Santísima Trinidad' (built 1769) would be the largest ship. Probably ever at that point. The French built some 120-gun ships later, too though.
And, according to Wikipedia, they decided it'd be a good idea to slap a FOURTH deck on to make it 140 guns. Apparently her nickname was 'El Ponderoso'.


Perhaps I'm mistaken, but was under the impression that most of the first rate, larger warships had more than 100 guns......no?

Yes, but there's a point where you just cant add more guns without sacrificing too much mobility. Hence why 74-gun ships were so popular.

[Pantsalot]

I think the factions used for demonstrating naval battles are the UK and America (at least, they are in the screenshots)

I think I also saw a Monarch-Spanish flag in it. Though I have bad eyesight & I have only watched
this once so any1 is up for correcting me. Who knows if one of those English flags were actually
a Georgian-Russo flag? a bigger question is who cares, although I would prefer if they put another
faction into their videos, getting a bit dull with the Brits vs US even though I know they r trying
to appeal to the American audience they should also keep all of us Europeans on their side. Why
not a Swedish fleet vs Russian?

[Sheogorath]

I think I also saw a Monarch-Spanish flag in it. Though I have bad eyesight & I have only watched
this once so any1 is up for correcting me. Who knows if one of those English flags were actually
a Georgian-Russo flag? a bigger question is who cares, although I would prefer if they put another
faction into their videos, getting a bit dull with the Brits vs US even though I know they r trying
to appeal to the American audience they should also keep all of us Europeans on their side. Why
not a Swedish fleet vs Russian?
The Russian Naval Jack is actually very similar to the 'Stars and Bars' of the Confederacy. Less the stars, of course. Its pretty recognizable. The ensign is a blue 'x' cross on white (Think the Scottish flag, but with the colors reversed). I dont think Georgia even had a navy at the time of this game, since they were an Ottoman protectorate.

They're probably just keeping the other factions 'under wraps' as it were, so they have something else to put out in videos to keep the rabid fanboys strung along ;)

[Dradem]

I know this isn't new but I didn't find a thrread about it.
Intrepid Sidekick said that there was a new video out but didn't find it so went for a look.



Since I made this post there has also been a preview trailer including actual naval battle footage. There are 4 other movies coming.
Anyway I have to get back to the coal face of game development.

http://www.eurogamer.net/tv_video.php?playlist_id=13113&size=large


It looks amazing


Is there a set schedule for the remaining four movies, IS? Or are you just releasing them "whenever they get done"?

[pevergreen]

Egads, but I thought the exact same thing this time two years ago, looking at M2TW.

My fanboy flag will not be raised for trailers, only speculation! (Main reason being all the sites these trailers are on seem to hate me, they wont work most of the time)

From the little I saw, very impressed.

[Monk]

Looks very impressive. :2thumbsup:

[CBR]

Teh old: https://forums.totalwar.org/vb/showthread.php?t=106667


CBR

[Celtic_Punk]

AHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH im giddy like a little school girl!

[Martok]

Threads merged.

[eddeduck]

Yes very nice and i cant wait to play.

I just wish the ship models were as good as in Pirates of the burning sea, compared to that the TW ships are very ugly.

note wanted to post a picture but too nooob trust me my 2ndrate is gorgeous

[Rhyfelwyr]

Looking stunning. :2thumbsup:

Just don't forget about the little matter of land battles CA...