Getting around in Empire

[Fisherking]

Maybe a bad move on my part, but in looking over the Maps and hearing the explanation of how to get to India, I have been wondering...

Are there going to be transition boxes to sail through between all the various maps?
Will they also be trade areas or just places to go?

I am only guessing but from the Carnie Islands you can go south or west. Maybe there are boxes for the Azores and Bermuda also. In all likelihood there are boxes leading to the Pacific from South America and maybe some from Asia to the Americas…

We don’t know if they are trade areas as Africa is or how long it takes to transit these locations.
I am hoping for instantaneous but I have my doubts. It should not take a turn! You can row to the Indies in that amount of time! It does sound like a bottle neck for lurking fleets to intercept though…

And last but not least by any means, are we going to have Admirals? Not the generic kind when you build a ship, but honest to goodness Seagoing Generals?

It would be a shame only to have Nelson when you build the Victory.

[Sir Beane]

I can definitely answer the admiral question. Yes we will definitely have admirals, with traits, command, loyalty etc.

As for transitions, who knows? I guess they will probably be boxes of sea, some of which are trade theatres. CA haven't really said anything much about them.

I also hope transitions will not take a turn. Boats have been far too slow in previous games.

[Fisherking]

I can definitely answer the admiral question. Yes we will definitely have admirals, with traits, command, loyalty etc.



Do you have a source, or is this super secret inside information?

I’m not saying I couldn’t have overlooked it , ‘cause I could. I just don’t recall seeing it in any thing that I have read.

[batemonkey]

I was wondering if they are going to include the trade winds, so if you sailed the way you would in real life your ships get there quicker than if you just, say, sailed in a straight line across the atlantic?

Using them would mean you get there quicker and they act like the terrain in the land campaign map and help create points in the oceans where your more likley to be found/find the enemy rather than randomly sailing up and down the map untill you bump into someone

[Sir Beane]

I was wondering if they are going to include the trade winds, so if you sailed the way you would in real life your ships get there quicker than if you just, say, sailed in a straight line across the atlantic?

Using them would mean you get there quicker and they act like the terrain in the land campaign map and help create points in the oceans where your more likley to be found/find the enemy rather than randomly sailing up and down the map untill you bump into someone

That is an extremely good idea, but sadly one that is probably too 'complicated' for CA to consider including. If tacking wasn't included in naval battles because people found it confusing then trade winds certainly won't.

On the campaign maps ships will probably act like they have engines, able to sail wherever they want, whenever.

[Sol Invictus]

CA definately mentioned a Transition Zone between the Atlantic and the Indian Oceans.

[pevergreen]

I think it will be just a genereic off screen thing, your ships enter, and travel the distance, but you can't see them. when they have passed the distance, they will appear on the edge of the map you sent them to. It takes out micromanagement and streamlines vast distances. If two opposing fleets use the same area, I believe there will be an option to attack or avoid.

[Polemists]

Well my understanding is your merely move your fleet to the edge of the map and then they go to wherever. At least last I read.

So I don't think it's everyone sail to this specific corner, rather you just sail in that direction and then at a certain point you'll probably be asked where you want to sail.

As for speed, sailing has to take a turn, CA has no other time frames. There are no in between turn actions. I guess they could make ships able to move twice or three times in a single turn but I doubt that.

CA has stated countless times that travel in this game is much faster. So while it's not instanteneous obviously or every nation would be attacking every other in a heartbeat, I think travel may be 2x or 3x faster.

Admirals do have traits and stats, just like generals. It was in a article, I can't remeber which one tho, read through some of the recent previews.

[Fondor_Yards]

There has been a bit of confusion as to how exactly players will get from Europe to India and vice versa, since South Africa is said not to be included in the game. How exactly will players get to India?

There will be transition zones between theatres. You sail into the transition zone, and some time later your ship arrives in the next theatre. To sail from Europe to India, for example, you would sail to the Canary Islands, transition of the Ivory Coast, transition of the Straits of Madagascar, and then transition to India. If you simply select India as target destination, your fleet will do all this automatically, but it can be intercepted on the way.

For you silly folks who don't go to both forums.

[Fisherking]

There will be transition zones between theatres. You sail into the transition zone, and some time later your ship arrives in the next theatre.




Thanks Fondor Yards! I couldn’t remember where I had read it.

I sure hope it is not going to take years to get to India, or any place else for that matter.

Now if someone can point me at the parts about Admirals I would be grateful.

[Sir Beane]

Thanks Fondor Yards! I couldn’t remember where I had read it.

I sure hope it is not going to take years to get to India, or any place else for that matter.

Now if someone can point me at the parts about Admirals I would be grateful.

I'll see if I can find something to confirm Admirals for you Fisherking. I think they wre mentioned in one of the interviews.

I wouldn't worry though. It would make no sense for Admirals not to be in game. Afterall CA need some way of having command ability affect naval battles. And since they are hyping up the naval combat side of the game admirals are almost a certainty.

[batemonkey]

That is an extremely good idea, but sadly one that is probably too 'complicated' for CA to consider including. If tacking wasn't included in naval battles because people found it confusing then trade winds certainly won't.

On the campaign maps ships will probably act like they have engines, able to sail wherever they want, whenever.

Too true, thats what i thought as i composed my message

shame though as capturing the leewards was going to be one of the first things i did!

still the transition stages will see some a lot of action

[Fondor_Yards]

Well admiral wise, there is this. In the 3/5 trailer, you can see in the french navy before it attacks the british one, are 3 units. 2 are SOL I think, or some :daisy: I don't know. But the 3rd is the admiral *why isn't he at the front of the stack that he's leading like a general? very odd* by the name of Antoine-Laurent de Costentin. He has 2 stars, which I assume are his total command rating. He has 47 men in his unit, compared to the 37 of the other two.

And now that I'm looking at a big screen of it, you can also see the left side hull health, right side hull health, and sail health of all three units right there on the campaign map. So apparently specific damage done to a ship will carry over between battles.

[Megas Methuselah]

*why isn't he at the front of the stack that he's leading like a general? very odd*

You can probably pick which boat you want to put your admiral on. There's probably more units in his boat 'cuz it's a bigger boat than the other two.

[Polemists]

why isn't he at the front of the stack that he's leading like a general? very odd*

Well since CA has stated that Generals no longer lead armies as a battle unit perhaps it's the same for admiral. Perhaps he works best when his ship is in the back giving orders rather then charging at the fore front.

Plus most screen we've seen are beta, so could be they plan on changing it.

[Megas Methuselah]

Well since CA has stated that Generals no longer lead armies as a battle unit perhaps it's the same for admiral. Perhaps he works best when his ship is in the back giving orders rather then charging at the fore front.

Polemist, old friend! It's good to hear from you again! :yes:

However, I am inclined to point out a fatal flaw in the expanse of your understanding. You must understand what Fisherking meant was that the General was not in the first slot of the unit cards at the bottom of the screen in the campaign map, not that the General was not at the forefront of the battle line on the high seas in the battle map. What the general was not in life was what he was not in death, do you not understand my not-with held Nottingham knowledge was did not originate in Nottingham, as it did not come from England at all!

Enjoy life, my friend! Now, to the drinks and women! Woot woot! :birthday2:

[Fondor_Yards]

Well since CA has stated that Generals no longer lead armies as a battle unit perhaps it's the same for admiral. Perhaps he works best when his ship is in the back giving orders rather then charging at the fore front.

Plus most screen we've seen are beta, so could be they plan on changing it.

Huh? Generals still lead the armies as they always have. They still have their special general guard of various sizes and can die in battles. And I meant he wasn't the first unit in the army when you look at it in the campaign map.

[Polemists]

Well my understanding may not be supberb.

However CA has stated in a interview, and I don't remeber which one. That generals will now not be as useful in combat as in previous games. They will die far easier, they are not as armored, etc.

Basically the idea, that generals are now just a normal unit of soldiers, not a uber unit of elite guards.

There was even a whole topic on these forums about how people were scared that now a few sharpshooters could just randomly kill a general and troops would route.

[Sir Beane]

The idea now is that Generals will not be an unbeatable charging melee unit like they were in previous games. Especially with cavalry being much less effective in Empire.

Instead Generals will boost the combat ability of nearby men, as well as boosting their morale. They will act like a 'buff' class in an RPG. They are there to offer support to allies rather than to get into the thick of it themselves.

I expect Generals will still be harder to kill than a normal unit however, but probably not to the extent they were in Medieval 2 or Rome.

Basically we should be keeping our General close behind our line, protected by a wall of men, using his 'aura' to boost the morale of weak parts of the battle line.

[Polemists]

I assume this will work similiar to the abilities of generals in Kingdoms.

While not one time use, I think the abilities will be things like, better aiming, better in a area, (infantry, Calvary, artillery), or maybe better discipline.

The general will probably not be one shot kill, but I doubt he's going to be able to solo entire units either, if he gets in the thick of it, he's toast with probably a few shots or one cannon shot. Unlike the barrage of arrows you could let hit your general's unit in MTW and RTW again and again

[Sir Beane]

I assume this will work similiar to the abilities of generals in Kingdoms.

While not one time use, I think the abilities will be things like, better aiming, better in a area, (infantry, Calvary, artillery), or maybe better discipline.

The general will probably not be one shot kill, but I doubt he's going to be able to solo entire units either, if he gets in the thick of it, he's toast with probably a few shots or one cannon shot. Unlike the barrage of arrows you could let hit your general's unit in MTW and RTW again and again

This sounds like a fair interpretation. I wouldn't mind seeing some Kindoms-esque general abilities in ETW, providing that they were balanced, and made snese within the context of the battle.

It would be nice if the generals speech did something other than offer amusing listening. A great speech could shore up your men's morale, and a poor speech could make them even more depressed and likely to rout.

Keeping your general alive may become quite a problem in this era. After all virtually every man on the field is carrying some form of ranged weapon, we have super mobile horse atillery, super mobile dragoon infantry, and possibly even long range snipers. He could end up as the target for hundreds of guns. Especially in multiplayer.

I wonder how effective bullets will be. I think I remember someone here working out that in Medieval 2 it can take on average several hundred arrows to down an enemy unit. Will bullets be as ineffectve as arrows were? It's this sort of question that really requires a demo and gameplay experience to answer.

[Fisherking]

I wonder how effective bullets will be. I think I remember someone here working out that in Medieval 2 it can take on average several hundred arrows to down an enemy unit. Will bullets be as ineffectve as arrows were? It's this sort of question that really requires a demo and gameplay experience to answer.

They said they are using an actual physical model so I would guess if troops are in front of a bullet it just might hurt.

[Fondor_Yards]

Ah I thought you meant they weren't in the battles at all anymore, my bad Polemists.

Hopefully they will do it like NTW2 did it. Super tiny bodyguard *like 10 men* but their ralley ability and the fact they gave them the eagle thing *boosts all nearby unit's morale and lowers enemy's iirc* made them very important in making sure your units didn't rout in combat. If he died, it became rather easy to route the enemy by sheer musket fire.

[ConnMon]

They said they are using an actual physical model so I would guess if troops are in front of a bullet it just might hurt.

I think bullets with do a lot more than arrows because, although not terribly accurate, they could do more damage than arrows could. If not, I'll probably end up bayonet charging a lot :beam:

[Sir Beane]

I think bullets with do a lot more than arrows because, although not terribly accurate, they could do more damage than arrows could. If not, I'll probably end up bayonet charging a lot :beam:

Bullets from an early musket weren't much more deadly than an arrow. In fact an archer may have been more dangerous than a musketeer, as a well trained archer tended to be more accurate.

From close range you are just as dead whether an arrow or a musket ball hits you.

Bayonet charges are more fun anyway. :laugh4:

[Megas Methuselah]

I'll be ambushing and bayonet-charging at every possible opportunity. The glory and romance associated with it is just too much of a temptation to ignore. :egypt:

[Polemists]

I assume judging by the videos that the musketfire is similar to arrow fire in MTW2. Basically that once a volley goes off 5 or 6 of the enemy's unit goes down from a musket volley. I also assume that some units will be wounded rather then die and have the usual red coloring.

Bayonet charges appear quite often in the videos, so I assume they are useful. However this time each unit seems to have a captain, leader, commander attached to it aside from general. This has always exsisted of course but usually they were little more then the one guy holding the flag.

I am curious to see what happens when someone guns down your drummers and flute players, mass panic? :laugh4:

[Sir Beane]

I am curious to see what happens when someone guns down your drummers and flute players, mass panic? :laugh4:

If they gun down my musicians while I am in charge then I know what will happen.

Revenge!

Swift, brutal crushing!

Sir Beane smaaaaaaaash! Whilst new musicians play tasteful smashing music! :clown:

[Fisherking]

I'll be ambushing and bayonet-charging at every possible opportunity. The glory and romance associated with it is just too much of a temptation to ignore. :egypt:


I am so glad it is just a game!

I do so find it unsatisfactory to be ambushed. Being charged upon can upset the digestion.
And as for being bayoneted or chased with pointy things, well it can ruin a wonderful day.

[Megas Methuselah]

I do so find it unsatisfactory to be ambushed. Being charged upon can upset the digestion.
And as for being bayoneted or chased with pointy things, well it can ruin a wonderful day.

Life is good! :medievalcheers:

[hoom]

You can probably pick which boat you want to put your admiral on. There's probably more units in his boat 'cuz it's a bigger boat than the other two.

The idea now is that Generals will not be an unbeatable charging melee unit like they were in previous games. Especially with cavalry being much less effective in Empire.
Back to this, generally Admirals put their flag on the biggest badass ship in their fleet so we can expect Admirals to be in the thick of the fighting unlike their land based counterparts.
In some cases Admirals did either prefer a faster, smaller ship or wound up transferring to one when their big ship was damaged in battle.

Also the number that shows is the number of guns not the crew strength. You can see this in some of the videos where you can see tooltips showing both number of guns & number of crew.