NTW- PC Zone preview (David Brown)

[amritochates]

NTW- PC Zone preview (David Brown)

This includes quite a bit that has already been talked about in previous posts in the NTW thread, but does include a couple of minor points not covered so far. So here goes:

First of all it is an Expand alone campaign, i.e. Empire is not necessary to play NTW but Napoleon will integrate into Empire if present, adding units and new tech trees.
(Well I guess CA finally gave up on empire- doubt it if further patches will be made – pure conjecture on my part)

3 campaigns
Italy (1796-1797)
Middle-East/Egypt (1798 - 1801)
Mastery of Europe (Grand Campaign) (1805 - 1812)
Story based campaign similar to RTW-Alex and RTI
Ends in 1812 with his exile to Elba, the Hundred Days was considered too complex to portray as a campaign.
2 week turns to represent strategic depth

Smaller areas with more emphasis on villages and towns, a conscious de-emphasis on large provinces with single settlements.
3 kinds of settlements – economic/industrial/intellectual

322 unique units, though some custom battles only, with enhanced cinematographic effects (64 different faces on lowest settings) along with larger unit settings.

Finite pool of generals (they are no longer promoted) with unique traits.

AI Upgrade- new AI director system with short term campaign objectives- some of which hopefully it will try and actually achieve.

Rake is converted into spy with option to sabotage.

Lesser emphasis on naval warfare- though option to repair ships at sea added.

Finally a chain of supply has been added particularly for napoleon’s Russian campaign. Though one can mitigate the effects by building supply depots which may be captured or destroyed effectively starving out an army without fighting it- AI exploit anyone??

Finally the best is yet to come:

“CA claims Napoleon is made to appeal to a broader base, in fact the emphasis is on smaller scale campaigns instead of Grand campaigns to appeal to regular strategy players”- read RTS players. Well its official CA no longer wants the Grog nards to play this- nasty nasty Grog nards spreading lies about our precious !!.

If they don’t get the allusion here’s a hint that even the most thick headed amongst us will be able to get from ever so friendly reviewer:

“I can’t help it if the bugs other people experienced didn’t happen to me. Of course that and other issues have since been fixed even if some of us still haven’t had any issues of note”

[gollum]

Originally posted by amritochates
“CA claims Napoleon is made to appeal to a broader base, in fact the emphasis is on smaller scale campaigns instead of Grand campaigns to appeal to regular strategy players”

Really? I always thought that as far as TW was concerned the expansions were more for the "grognard" - at least the best of them like Viking Invasion, Barbarian Invasion and to a certain extent Kingdoms were. They had more strategic depth, were more challenging, more well thought out, more historically plausible (and accurate) had better battlefield balance and were technically better as they constituted the "final" patch for the core game - ok but this last one is not the case with Napoleon other than the visuals and hopefully AI.

Maybe it wouldn't make sense as a marketing declaration to come out and say that it is a product for more dedicated long term TW fans - either that or some very rigorous definitions are needed about what CA means by "broader base" and "regular strategy players". I at least can't tell who they mean from this statement.

Thanks for the info and the interesting reading of the subtext amritochates.

[amritochates]

Thanks for the compliment.

The very fact that NTW is, as noted above an expand alone campaign (the first of its kind) is sufficient to discern the way in which CA is hoping to disassociate NTW from empire so as to avoid the odium that ETW generated.

Expect more of this in the future.

[gollum]

Originally posted by amritochates
The very fact that NTW is, as noted above an expand alone campaign (the first of its kind) is sufficient to discern the way in which CA is hoping to disassociate NTW from empire so as to avoid the odium that ETW generated.

Interesting view. It could be simpler though; maybe they just dissasociate the expansion from the core game in order to charge full price and avoid making it an extra patch for the core game at the same time; two birds with one stone.

Thanks for the compliment.

You're welcome.

[amritochates]

Interesting view. It could be simpler though; maybe they just dissasociate the expansion from the core game in order to charge full price and avoid making it an extra patch for the core game at the same time; two birds with one stone.- gollum

I personally would have believed the same if not for Mike Simpson and his now infamous blog post:

"However overdoing the criticism (For example I think a 67% user score on Metacritic is unfair), has the opposite effect to what is intended. Gamers (and reviewers. retailers, marketeers and publishing execs) will be put off Total War. That could mean fewer sales and less money to spend on adding quality to the games.

Anyway, I started this by saying I’d rather be fixing the game than talking about it. That’s true, but talking about it is a pretty good second best. I’ll start with the 1.5 patch and AI on the next update, and then go on to talk about Napoleon - what it is, why it’s the size it is, how that affects the price."

[antisocialmunky]

Link to preview:

http://www.gamesradar.com/pc/napoleo...81915535505078

Intersting Bits:

Creative Assembly are claiming that Napoleon will appeal to a broader base than any other game in the Total War franchise. The focus on smaller-scale campaigns instead of distant grand strategy will, they say, make it more appealing to regular strategy players. Ones who like to micro- rather than macro-manage, perhaps. This is the sort of thing we can only determine after playing the game first-hand, so we won’t comment on the validity of these claims just yet.

Having said that, it does make sense that people put off by the sheer scale of the grand campaign will be more likely to embrace a cut-down version. Those who weren’t enamoured with Empire won’t find this expansion changing their minds. However, the smaller scale, extra development, and tweaks made to the engine might be enough to convince you that it isn’t a wreck after all.

There’ll be up to 322 unique units in the game, although some of these will only be usable when playing certain historical scenarios. Interestingly, for those of you who are interested in military history, you might also notice some real-life regiments that are still around dotted about the place. To accommodate so many different varieties of unit, there’ll be an increase in the number of soldiers visible on screen during the battles.




Speaking of the battles, Creative Assembly have been stressing how they’ve wanted to make the battles feel and look more realistic. Smoke, rain and different environmental effects will all have more of a part to play this time round. For example, fight in the rain and there’s the chance that your gunpowder will become sodden, leading to the odd misfire that could have a big impact on the battle. Position the camera near cannons or cavalry charges and you might just see your view juddering about, adding to the cinematic feel of the battles.

As for the units on the field itself, the generals will have been buffed with new abilities. However, Creative Assembly have contradicted themselves a little with this.

The PR folks told us these new abilities will make us want to get the generals involved in combat a lot more frequently, instead of employing the usual tactic of hiding them at the back to make sure they don’t snuff it. However, they also tell us that the method of recruiting generals will be different, as they’ll be drawn from a finite pool instead of just created out of any unit you like.

[gollum]

I dont think that Jack Lusted participated in the hyping, and he is actually all the time around all community forums - probably part of his job is to liaise with the community as he comes from the ranks and he will naturally be more appealing. However he did it in a very dedicated manner - if you drop him a pm about something he'll respond pretty fast in my experience.

The hype happened imo by the marketing people (that's their job) and by senior/veteran Designers mostly ever since Empire was announced. Some of them are fond of the sport and have a longtimeforum experience.

In any case it makes sense for CA not being around when the game was experiencing problems at release and they knew they were serious, there wasn't much that they could do here anyway other than fan the frustration.

In many respects, Mike Simpson's blog was the best they could do at this stage.

PS What happened to your original post antisocialmunky? It makes mine look from outer space

[gollum]

Thanks for the link antisocialmunky, a lot of the concepts sound interesting, but it remains to be seen how they'll be implemented. At best, NTW could be a triumph, at worst RTW:Alexanber

[antisocialmunky]

I was operating under the OP's assessment which I think was spun a certain way so I found the original link.

@ Gollum, I was refering for pre NTW community representation.

[gollum]

Oh i see, well it doesnt surprise me not to see them here a lot these days - i guess they feel apologetic and MS's blog is probably meant to cover that role.

[antisocialmunky]

If they can finally stop making the mistakes they've made then they would enjoy our congratulations instead of our being totally pissed.

[amritochates]

I was operating under the OP's assessment which I think was spun a certain way so I found the original link.- antisocialmunky

If you are referring to me, then I would just like to say my assessment was not so much spun as it involved reading btw the lines in light of my previous experiences with CA in general and ETW in particular- there is a fine difference.

Furthermore I get the first part of the post, but how exactly did I misrepresent what David Brown had said in the next two paras ?? Just curious about that part

However if you were referrring to David Brown, then disregard the above.

[Fisherking]

From what I see the side comments were just a little confusing.

While no mag has ever come out and said things like that, some could have thought it.

Grognard is one word. (regardless of what MS and spell check say) Today it is French for a gambler but it once meant and old soldier and more specifically one of the Old Guard.

We know it now, in English, as a hard core war-gamer. That is just for those not familiar with the term.


full text...no pics...

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

Some people, after reading our review of Empire: Total War, wanted to string us up and splice our main brace. We can’t help it if the bugs other people experienced didn’t happen to us. Still, it’s safe to say that there were some problems that perhaps could and should have been sorted out before release – specifically the AI’s total lack of ability to perform invasions over a stretch of water.


Of course, that and other issues have been fixed, tweaked and patched over since release. It’s safe to say it’s a more stable release than it was originally, even if some of us still haven’t had any issues of note. And now comes Napoleon: Total War, the first ‘expandalone’ in the franchise’s history. This English-mangling corporate buzzword means that you don’t need the original Empire to play Napoleon, but if you do own it, some of Napoleon’s whiz-bang new features will integrate into Empire. The stunted Corsican with delusions of grandeur won’t have any restrictions imposed upon his quest for glory, then.


Napoleon will be much more story-driven than Empire, akin to the Alexander expansion for Rome: Total War. The first of the three different campaigns will focus on Italy (1796), detailing the small general’s rise to prominence. The setting then shifts to the Middle East (1798), before moving to the Grand European theatre (1805-1812), where he invites everyone to rumble.

Creative Assembly say they are drawing inspiration, especially for the first two campaigns, from the Road to Independence bit of Empire, while retaining a lot of the core concepts from the main chunk of the game.

Turns have been chopped down to two-week periods in a bid to reflect the more micro-historical aspect of the events in question. This also applies to the way the campaign maps have been drawn up, focusing not so much on large regions with a big city plonked in the middle, but on smaller areas, villages and towns. Three different types of settlement will be available, focusing on either economic, industrial or intellectual pursuits. As you might have guessed, this will also necessitate the introduction of new technology research trees, both to reflect this change in the infrastructure and to cater to inventions and advances that had been made at the beginning of the 19th Century.

There’ll be up to 322 unique units in the game, although some of these will only be usable when playing certain historical scenarios. Interestingly, for those of you who are interested in military history, you might also notice some real-life regiments that are still around dotted about the place. To accommodate so many different varieties of unit, there’ll be an increase in the number of soldiers visible on screen during the battles.

Speaking of the battles, Creative Assembly have been stressing how they’ve wanted to make the battles feel and look more realistic. Smoke, rain and different environmental effects will all have more of a part to play this time round. For example, fight in the rain and there’s the chance that your gunpowder will become sodden, leading to the odd misfire that could have a big impact on the battle. Position the camera near cannons or cavalry charges and you might just see your view juddering about, adding to the cinematic feel of the battles.

As for the units on the field itself, the generals will have been buffed with new abilities. However, Creative Assembly have contradicted themselves a little with this.

The PR folks told us these new abilities will make us want to get the generals involved in combat a lot more frequently, instead of employing the usual tactic of hiding them at the back to make sure they don’t snuff it. However, they also tell us that the method of recruiting generals will be different, as they’ll be drawn from a finite pool instead of just created out of any unit you like.

This indicates that instead of risking him on the frontline, as the developers claim you’ll want to do, you’ll be even less keen to get him stuck in, because losing a general now would impact your chances in the long term far more than it used to. A curious idea this is, so we’ll have to see how this develops and works out in practice.

This indicates that instead of risking him on the frontline, as the developers claim you’ll want to do, you’ll be even less keen to get him stuck in, because losing a general now would impact your chances in the long term far more than it used to. A curious idea this is, so we’ll have to see how this develops and works out in practice.

The primary reason for Napoleon’s first failure to force all Europeans to wear a big string of onions round their necks and constantly consume snails was, of course, the disastrous attempt to conquer Tsarist Russia. The sheer scale of the country stretched the French supply lines to the breaking point, until his soldiers started freezing to death in the hollowed out corpses of their horses.

In previous Total War games, the only hindrance said expanses would provide was to slow your progress. Now, you’ll have to set up a supply system to stop your guys from dying of hunger. To do this, you can build supply depots as you move along. It isn’t perhaps the most sophisticated way of handling the issue, but it should suffice. It’ll also provide a method for the defending armies to stave off advancing forces by going guerrilla on the supply depots. Cut off the supply and it doesn’t matter how big the enemy’s army is, they’ll soon be whittled down to nothing.

Diplomacy will be trickier, as you can imagine. Play as France and everyone will almost certainly hate you, being that you’re the most powerful, and to win you basically have to bump them all off. Luckily, you’ll be able to play as other factions as well, so it’s not all Francophilia.

A new AI Director system should make the campaign flow better than before, with a substantial raft of improvements to the AI. For example, computer-controlled factions will have more short-term campaign objectives, not just “Kill the player at all costs.” Hopefully, this will mean some of the quirks of Empire’s diplomacy will also be ironed out, like certain factions refusing to trade with you, despite you being on the best possible terms with them.


Civilian units will also change. Gone are the wandering preachers, unrealistic in this particular timeframe, while the Rake has morphed into the Spy, who’s able to slip into enemy camps for purposes of sabotage. Gentlemen are still around, and will be able to distribute pamphlets for propaganda and political destabilisation purposes.

Strangely, naval combat seems to have less emphasis placed on it than in Empire. Whether this is true or not, only time will tell. It would be a strange decision, given the importance navies played in the Napoleonic Wars: Trafalgar, anyone? Some improvements will be made, like the new ability to repair ships while at sea. Again, whether this means completely repaired or just patched up a bit, we don’t know just yet.

Creative Assembly are claiming that Napoleon will appeal to a broader base than any other game in the Total War franchise. The focus on smaller-scale campaigns instead of distant grand strategy will, they say, make it more appealing to regular strategy players. Ones who like to micro- rather than macro-manage, perhaps. This is the sort of thing we can only determine after playing the game first-hand, so we won’t comment on the validity of these claims just yet.

Having said that, it does make sense that people put off by the sheer scale of the grand campaign will be more likely to embrace a cut-down version. Those who weren’t enamoured with Empire won’t find this expansion changing their minds. However, the smaller scale, extra development, and tweaks made to the engine might be enough to convince you that it isn’t a wreck after all.

Creative Assembly have a history of making good expansions for their games, so we can’t see any reason this won’t follow in that grand tradition. And if you’re wondering where Waterloo is, you’ll be able to play that as a historical scenario. The main campaign finishes in 1812, so Napoleon’s final bow will be taken elsewhere.

Oct 15, 2009


.

[gollum]

Originally posted by Fisherking
Today it is French for a gambler but it once meant and old soldier and more specifically one of the Old Guard.

Eeerm... not really, it has been always French for grumbler, ie a person that grumbles, grouches ie show one's unhappiness or critical attitude. Such were the men of the elite imperial napoleonic guard, that because of their grumbling were nicknamed grognards - les grognards. The nickname is applied - for similar reasons and due to obvious connotations - to hardcore strategy gamers (from the era of board wargaming long before pc games were available) initially and later to all hardcore gamers.



PS Les Grognards is also a highly anticipated strategy game for hardcore strategy fans (not the CA kind though http://www.histwar.com/).

[amritochates]

From what I see the side comments were just a little confusing. While no mag has ever come out and said things like that, some could have thought it.- Fisherking

I thought it was self explanatory, all comments in Italics were made by me, isn't that the accepted protocol that to distinguish personal comments from that which is reported italics are used as in the above, or have I erred in doing so ??

[antisocialmunky]

The interview didn't say anything about abandoning the fanbase but rather adding a shorter campaign like every previous expansion. The only thing that's really interesting to me is the supply line thing.

[Fisherking]

Thanks gollum for the corrected.

It is after all a soldiers tendency to complain.

If the men are not complaining then morale is too low.

I am afraid I fit the profile, all but being French.

I was of the Old Guard of the Hexagon when it changed from a square, and also a grumbling, complaining soldier.

I just never knew it was so appropriate.