View Full Version : New land battle trailer
The English version is here (http://www.eurogamer.net/tv_video.php?playlist_id=14941).
The German language version can be viewed here (http://www.gamestar.de/).
Marius Dynamite
09-25-2008, 21:16
The graphics look awesome, but I'm only hoping the zoomed out visuals will look better than M2. I always felt RTW looked better zoomed out.
Mailman653
09-25-2008, 21:29
Looks fun. Hope a cannon ball to an elephant isn't too messy.
Megas Methuselah
09-26-2008, 00:40
WOW.... Btw, the zoomed out visuals ARE good in the trailer, and a cannonball to an elephant HAS to be messy. It just HAS to be!!!! Making a cannonball to an elephant look like a clean kill is like trying to make... nvm, it just has to be messy!!
:laugh4: :laugh4:
Veho Nex
09-26-2008, 01:08
Beautiful
But I hope it isn't as much of a let down as Medieval 2 was...
Divinus Arma
09-26-2008, 07:27
Imagine if the TW series ever got, well, bloody. It would be spectacular! Exploding elephants? Severed horse limbs? Entrails and the screams of the-not-yet-dead?
It will never happen. But I can only imagine. :2thumbsup:
Trailer looks good. God I hate those green arrows.
Mount Suribachi
09-26-2008, 07:55
Anyone else think the music at the beginning sounds exactly like the BSG music?
Liked the look of the troops overcoming battlefield obstacles and firing from buildings. 6th February eh? Week before payday/valentines day/annual bonus. Just need a new PC now....
God I hate those green arrows.
Yeah, I've never been wild about them either. I do hope there will an option to disable them.
Anyone else think the music at the beginning sounds exactly like the BSG music?
Oh yeah. I noticed it way back when the first trailers were released. :yes:
pevergreen
09-26-2008, 10:04
There will be options for unlimited fatigue/ammo/morale/no green arrows/no banners etc
Always has been.
In terms of Marius Dynamite's observation, I have found that M2TW had a much shorter draw distance, everything would be sprites until a very close visual range compared to RTW.
Rhyfelwyr
09-26-2008, 16:22
Looks astounding. :2thumbsup:
And we got a first glimpse of elephants!!!
One thing though is that the cannons look like they are firing rockets with those white trails, is that realistic?
Veho Nex
09-26-2008, 16:26
no, Most times unless it was coming right for you, you couldn't it see it. I hope we can turn tracer effects off, its going to remind me of AoE 3.... *Shivers*
darrin42
09-26-2008, 16:44
Anyone else think the campaign map looks crap??? :(
One thing though is that the cannons look like they are firing rockets with those white trails, is that realistic?
It's not, no. CA added the smoke trails so that players could better follow who was shooting whom. They're looking at adding the option to disable them if you wish (which I hope they do).
Anyone else think the campaign map looks crap??? :(
Looks fine to me. But then, I've never been terribly picky about the campaign map in the Total War series. As long it works and functions reasonably well, I'm content.
Mithradates
09-26-2008, 19:20
If that hand to hand fighting is as good as it looks it should be awesome, gameplay aside that is.
Quintus.JC
09-26-2008, 21:23
Anyone else think the campaign map looks crap??? :(
I wouldn't say crap, but it does look very different from the previous two games. Medieval II and Rome felt like two very similar game to me, Empire looks different and revolutionary. Hopfully it will surpress the two games.
Good trailer, but the commentry guy's voice was really boring, or at least in my opinion that is.
Sheogorath
09-26-2008, 22:19
Is it too much to dare to hope that we wont be subject to an AI which expects us to attack through a forest, up a hill, in the rain?
I don't know about you guys, but both the MTW2 and RTW AI seem to love throwing those at me. And I can't STAND forest battles. It annoys me to no end, being unable to see anything without zooming in to the point where all you can see is two guys poking each other with spears.
Sol Invictus
09-26-2008, 22:39
Fighting in the woods gives me a headache. I absolutely hate it.:furious3:
Ibn-Khaldun
09-26-2008, 23:32
Yey.. like the land battles..
It's good to see that elephants are really there..
(A note to myself... Got to use cannons against elephants in my first custom battle!)
tasty campaign map and sexy battles, but they would be much sexier if the soldiers were dismembered and big cannon shots made holes through peoples bodies...
Which would cost them their teen rating. Which would limit there sales. Can't have that now can we.
Megas Methuselah
09-27-2008, 06:31
Good point. Nonetheless, it is a game worth buying 10 times over. :yes:
First post in here :2thumbsup:
Not necessarily. If the engine can allow men to be dismembered and bloody, expect a mod to come out for it...
Gustav II Adolf
09-27-2008, 09:23
Anyone else think the campaign map looks crap??? :(
The earlier screens of the campaign map looked poor to me but i must say after seeing the video I'm astonished how lively it feels. I love it!
G
darrin42
09-27-2008, 13:19
The earlier screens of the campaign map looked poor to me but i must say after seeing the video I'm astonished how lively it feels. I love it!
G
yeah It does look free alright. Its just, it looked very small thats all. It briefly showed Italy, France, and other western European regions all together....it looked as if France would only have one settlement by its size lol. But yeah, it does look free..free Euough that you could easily take all of europe over with one Army!
Discoman
09-27-2008, 15:11
I presume you can view the campaign map in 3D? I think the angle changed at one point.
The game looks great, I would just like to see a video of one full battle, that would be rather awesome to say the least.
Vlad Tzepes
09-27-2008, 15:18
Looks great, I'm counting days till 6 of February.
BTW, I wonder about city battles and how do you gain control. With troops being able to occupy buildings, sounds kinda Stalingrad Total War... Unless the option will be disabled for cities, which would be difficult to understand, as long it will be possible on the battlefield outside towns...
Polemists
09-27-2008, 15:35
City battles
It does look very good but the idea of garrisoning troops worries me. I mean in theory, making your enemy fight building to building in urban warfare sounds very enticing but in practice i'm unsure it won't just make for very very very long drawn out games. I mean if cannons aim anything like they did in MTW2 (horribly) then it will take them forever to hit the building. I suppose you can rush in troops but I don't want to have to rush into 14-24 buildings.
Over all a impressive video. Let us hope they will stick with the themes of last time and Dev Diary 3 will have something to do with the cities.
Gustav II Adolf
09-27-2008, 17:36
yeah It does look free alright. Its just, it looked very small thats all. It briefly showed Italy, France, and other western European regions all together....it looked as if France would only have one settlement by its size lol. But yeah, it does look free..free Euough that you could easily take all of europe over with one Army!
Yeah, I see your point. I also want to have a big european map. It is shown in an angle and it can affect how big it feels. Still, the number of cities and regions worries me too. I would like to take pieces of a country and not just one battle and then win the lot. My guess though is that CA has made the game to work in a somewhat different manner than before. We now have naval battles and a bigger world. Maybe we are directed not to fight as much in core erupean countries.
G
Sir Beane
09-27-2008, 21:33
I've watched that trailer several times now, amazing stuff!
A few interesting things I noticed:
1) Pause the video just as the campaign view of Britain pops up. Look carefully at the top left of the screen and you can see a landmass. This is almost certainly Iceland, and it's nice to see confirmation that it's in the game.
2) The duelling animation for those soldiers is everything they said it would be. Quick, fluid and interesting moves, all while a battle rages around them :beam:
3) On animation again. The bit where the horses leap over the wall is spectacular. Before this CA have never quite managed to have horses move realistically.
4) A nice first look at both flag bearers AND drummers.
5) The animation for dying men is rather good. Ragdoll physics can be awful if done wrong. These look just right, not to unrealistic and not too uniform or boring.
6) Elephants! :laugh4:
are there not ment to be 500 regions on empires? if so i would think eupore will be far denser, perhaps they still have some to add yet...
are there not ment to be 500 regions on empires? if so i would think eupore will be far denser, perhaps they still have some to add yet...
I don't think so. I seem to recall CA saying over at TWC that there's going to be less than 200.
Don't forget that provinces will be less important this time around, since structures (mines, ports, etc.) are no longer tied to cities, and can be captured & controlled separately. Also keep in mind that a region will now have multiple settlements, not just the provincial capital.
Polemists
09-28-2008, 08:54
It makes me wonder though about capitals. Other then the fact you could usually find the Royal family there Capitals in MTW 2 held very little significance. Once you took Venice for example the Venetians just had a new capital and the only penalty was losing the city and a symbolic victory for us as the player. I'm curious though as this is Empire and your cabinet and govermental body would ideally live in the capital, if capitals will have more impact.
Otherwise it looks good, love the combat scenes, and charges. Why are his guys walking into a bayonet charge though, shouldn't they be, i don't know running? :laugh4:
IN my opinion, it should be a major economic and diplomatic blow, literally forcing you to either change your current tactics and army compositions and/or start groveling at your enemies feet.
Ibn-Khaldun
09-28-2008, 09:45
I agree with YLC. Losing your capital should cause a lot of trouble for you. Also I think it would be nice if capturing the capital I could capture enemy royal family/government too and perhaps ransom them or make the other nation to beg for peace?
Sir Beane
09-28-2008, 11:54
During Empire's time period capitals had a lot of significance for a country. They were the centre for administration for a countries entire infrastructure. As well as housing both the monarch and/or parliament.
Losing your capital should have huge effects on your ability to control your empire. If your capital was captured while cabinet members or royal family members are still inside they should be captured or killed, presenting a pressing lack of leadership. This could be represented by increased chance of rebellion, etc.
Losing your capital should also lose you a large chunk of your treasury. They have to keep all that gold somewhere, and the capital seems like the best place. Think of all the loot available from taking crown jewels, national treasures and other artefacts.
Also during this time period countries were very strongly nationalistic. Losing your capital to the enemy should really annoy your people. If France takes London, the public all over England would be pretty fired up about it. It would be nice if capitals were paticularly difficult to hold due to nationalistic rebellions, plus a very large effort from the previous owner to get bach their capital.
It would also be great if capitals had some other form of bonus like the ability to build unique buildings. It should be the only city capable of building a parliament/King's palace, as well as other important government buildings (maybe an actual treasury building, or some kind of national bank.)
During Empire's time period capitals had a lot of significance for a country. They were the centre for administration for a countries entire infrastructure. As well as housing both the monarch and/or parliament.
Losing your capital should have huge effects on your ability to control your empire. If your capital was captured while cabinet members or royal family members are still inside they should be captured or killed, presenting a pressing lack of leadership. This could be represented by increased chance of rebellion, etc.
Losing your capital should also lose you a large chunk of your treasury. They have to keep all that gold somewhere, and the capital seems like the best place. Think of all the loot available from taking crown jewels, national treasures and other artefacts.
Also during this time period countries were very strongly nationalistic. Losing your capital to the enemy should really annoy your people. If France takes London, the public all over England would be pretty fired up about it. It would be nice if capitals were paticularly difficult to hold due to nationalistic rebellions, plus a very large effort from the previous owner to get bach their capital.
It would also be great if capitals had some other form of bonus like the ability to build unique buildings. It should be the only city capable of building a parliament/King's palace, as well as other important government buildings (maybe an actual treasury building, or some kind of national bank.)
I second pretty much all of this. Some excellent ideas, Sir Beane -- let's hope that at least some of them are in ETW. :yes:
sassbarman
09-29-2008, 07:22
I also like the idea of greater consequences for losing your capital if the a.i. in turn can properly protect them. however from a gameplay stand point it might turn into an easy exploit for a player to simply drive for the a.i.'s capitals for all the juicy bits inside.
As it stands now the ai suffers very little for losing capital cities which again might not be a bad thing.
justplayon
10-02-2008, 19:08
Looks Totaly Cool.
Garrisoning units!!!
:laugh4:
Can't wait till it comes out
Completely newatempt at completing the gae.
More shooting than close combat lol
(just trying to raise my posts)
:dizzy2:
anyone who says this game is rubbish lies! lies i tell you!:laugh4:
justplayon: A friendly word of advice -- the quality of one's posts count more than quantity. It's better to have fewer posts than to spam a bunch of them that don't say much. ~:)
As it stands now the ai suffers very little for losing capital cities which again might not be a bad thing.
Well often times the AI *does* suffer from losing their capital, if only because it's usually one of their most built-up cities/provinces. Capitals can usually train most -- if not all -- of your faction's best troops, and is often times one of your bigger money-makers as well. For this reason alone, I'm glad that the AI will now (hopefully) fight harder to protect its capital city. :yes:
justplayon: A friendly word of advice -- the quality of one's posts count more than quantity. It's better to have fewer posts than to spam a bunch of them that don't say much. ~:)
one happens to know that he wants a higher post count so he can play mafia in the game room, its already hard enough 4 him with a 150 second wait between posts :laugh4:
edit: i recall needing permission 4 backroom but not gameroom, strange...
also ill probably get hatemail 4 this but i have hotseats 2 access at the twcenter, only the forum wont load, anyone know if its down? im always late 4 my turn as it is:shame:
one happens to know that he wants a higher post count so he can play mafia in the game room, its already hard enough 4 him with a 150 second wait between posts :laugh4:
I'm aware of his motivations -- I've advised him to PM Andres and/or Seamus -- but my point still stands: Quality over quantity (at least outside the Gameroom). ~;)
edit: i recall needing permission 4 backroom but not gameroom, strange...
You don't need permission per se, but junior members normally cannot post in the Org's Miscellaneous sections (including the Gameroom).
And yes, TWC does appear to be down right now.
Now, back to the topic at hand....
Incidentally, justplayon brought up an issue that I've not really seen addressed by CA yet: Garrisons. I'm curious as to whether troops can/will be stationed in cities -- and if so, to what extent. :book:
I thought I could see something like M2. Its an impression of mine.
Baby Boomer
10-03-2008, 00:50
All I can say is; this looks great, amazing even.
I haven't been looking forward to game, like this, since.. I can't even remember! THis looks great! If you don't know, I'm quite the freak when it comes to 18th Century warfare, I love it, and here comes a game promising it with realistic physics, realistic uniforms,etc, and great detail.
Love the part when they're marching forward and get shot down by the cannons, the way the line fell is exactly how it happened.
Of course; under the cover of all this amazingness, some small slips appeared. I like the ideas discussed so far, capitals defintely did have a major effect. One thing which seemed like a minor problem (I'll still buy the bloody thing) is things like the way they charged with bayonets, some of the battle scenes seemed a bit... not right. All I'm saying that if CA isn't careful they could stuff this up BIG time, and lose some loyal fans forever (Me, for example)
Past the dramtic stage, this seems to be getting great. The Naval warfare will be interesting, as it was a big part in the laterstages of the 18th Century (Seven years War, which coccured across two or three continents demanded a Navy)
We can we Preorder? :D
SpencerH
10-03-2008, 13:17
It looks astounding, but then so did M2TW (which was a huge disappointment for me). I'm very heartened by the comments about terrain, formations, etc that suggest that CA have listened to the comments and complaints from the core players but the proof will be in the pudding (and I'm not tasting first).
Incidentally, justplayon brought up an issue that I've not really seen addressed by CA yet: Garrisons. I'm curious as to whether troops can/will be stationed in cities -- and if so, to what extent. :book:[/QUOTE]
why wouldnt troops be stationed in cities, tought it was pretty common for the era in times of conflict for troops to be garrisoned in a town both to protect it, uphold order, and just because a town/city is a pretty practical place to lodge and feed troops.
regarding loss of capital, in the fantastic napoleonic boardgame "empires at arms" a loss of capitol meant you had to enter conditional surrender to the faction holding your capitol(unless your russian of course), the surrender terms would always include getting the capitol back, but you ususally would ceed some province, disband some units and pay reparations.
My biggest question is...why I did I see a flag of Israel in the trailer?! (its right after the show britain on the world map)
I know the culture and religion existed for thousands of years....but the state of israel is only like 60 years old!
Other than that....cool trailer..too bad ill have to buy a new pc..
Sheogorath
10-12-2008, 00:27
My biggest question is...why I did I see a flag of Israel in the trailer?! (its right after the show britain on the world map)
I know the culture and religion existed for thousands of years....but the state of israel is only like 60 years old!
Other than that....cool trailer..too bad ill have to buy a new pc..
I believe that's a Portuguese historical flag. Since its in what looks like Goa.
Celtic_Punk
10-12-2008, 11:06
*screams like a little schoolgirl* DID YOU SEE HIM PARRY THAT SWORD!!!!! :duel:
Megas Methuselah
10-12-2008, 11:12
Omg, no, but I saw that one guy hit the other dude with the flat-end of his musket. ZOMGZ, I dunno how I'll be able to wait until February!!! :skull:
Polemists
10-12-2008, 12:55
First that is a GIGANTIC siggie
Secondly that whole duel combat thing is awesome. I can only hope it plays out that good in game. I'm sure much like all the litte animations in MTW2, once I see it 1059058 times it will lose it's punch. Still won't take away from how cool it looks that first time.
I wonder if the battle speeches are back in....hmmm....
Ahh I love those battle speeches in RTW and xpacks.........Never much liked the M2TW ones, too short and the guy never put enough voice into it, if you get what mean.
I just hope they have nice and loud ones this time around.........
And remember this above all, our Roman gods are watching; MAKE SURE THEY ARE NOT ASHAMED!!!
Celtic_Punk
10-13-2008, 04:58
thats it... im going to freeze myself... Methuselah, you are to unfreeze me the day it comes out.. do you understand? i better not wake up like 3000 years in the future, and have to deal with some crazy atheist seaotters...
Megas Methuselah
10-13-2008, 07:32
thats it... im going to freeze myself... Methuselah, you are to unfreeze me the day it comes out.. do you understand? i better not wake up like 3000 years in the future, and have to deal with some crazy atheist seaotters...
Are you sure, man? Do you honestly trust me so much as to keep your timeline within my hands?! I mean, look at the proclamation my sig, the way I condemned my own friend! I am a known meanie!
However, I'd be happy to take care of your frozen self! :evilgrin:
*contemtplates writing a new note in my will to have you unfrozen in 3101 A.D.*
I wonder if the battle speeches are back in....hmmm....
Battle speeches were always in... :inquisitive:
I wouldn't say crap, but it does look very different from the previous two games. Medieval II and Rome felt like two very similar game to me, Empire looks different and revolutionary.
Of course, M2:TW and R:TW look the same: they are built off the same game engine. There were some tweaks, but the underlaying flaws are same.
E:TW is the first game of a third generation engine. M:TW and S:TW are from the first engine.
Annie
vBulletin® v3.7.1, Copyright ©2000-2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.