Screenshot

[TosaInu]

http://www.totalwar.org/gal/ETW/Empire__Total_War-PCScreenshots15948Rocket_artillery.jpg

[Sheogorath]

Goan blast thum :daisy: ! :gring:

[TosaInu]

http://www.totalwar.org/gal/ETW/Empire__Total_War-PCScreenshots15950steamship.jpg

[TosaInu]

http://www.totalwar.org/gal/ETW/Empire__Total_War-PCScreenshots15949spanish_2.jpg

[Thermal]

sweet

[Haxorsist]

I see you can easily identify on the mini map if a unit is infantry, artillery or cavalry. Nice. I wonder if the little icons on the unit cards in the first picture means that they're hidden.

[Incongruous]

Interesting unit numbers, also, on the minimap the opposing armies look like they are right next to each other, however they clearly are not. This suggests that CA have implemented maps which are truly huge in scale, also, notice the predominace of hills?
This is very good.

[Sir Beane]

Wow! These screens are fantastic. The game looks beautiful,. Especially from long range. Close up the graphics are only slightly better than Med 2. But from far away, wow.

And that last screenshot, Spain vs. Austria. The fields, hills, fences bushes and walls really bring the battlefield to life.

I really, really want to see a demo now. :laugh4:

[Thermal]

The Spanish one looks especially authentic, the mini map has lots of detail and textures in it, if the game is to be released in March, if there is to be a demo it should come out imminently, well we can hope that it does.
Also the battle speed is interesting, it looks like you can have half time as well as pause, incredible visuals too naturally.

[Lusitani]

Nice screenshots, many thanks.

Two things seem odd to me though:

-Cavalry seems too neatly deployed

-The pirate ship is a 15th/16th Centuries Galleon :inquisitive:

Terrain looks great.

[Sir Beane]

Nice screenshots, many thanks.

Two things seem odd to me though:

-Cavalry seems too neatly deployed

-The pirate ship is a 15th/16th Centuries Galleon :inquisitive:

Terrain looks great.

I suppose the cavalry or in quite neat ranks, but the formation may loosen once they get moving.

It was much more common that you might think for Galleons to be around, especially during the early 1700's. Galleons, Caravels and other old styles stuck around in the form of old ships and even some new ones built in the old style. It makes sense for pirates to be using outdated technology, they couldn't afford newer, sleeker designs.

[Mailman653]

I think the US units are, the general, two army units, two minutemen units, four army units, two green units which I can't figure out, two dragoons, one cav unit I can't put a name on, two arty units, two militia and two rocket units (captured from the English maybe?).

That's just speculation on my behalf. The minimap in the screenshot with the Spanish is massive, I can't imagine what it would look like with more armies on the field.

[Sol Invictus]

Majestic!:2thumbsup:

[Sir Beane]

Majestic!:2thumbsup:

Thats a very good way of describing the third screen shot. There's just something... stately and grand about the art style and graphics. Colourful uniforms, fantastic hats and fearsome facial hair, it really captures the spirit of the period. :2thumbsup:

[Nelson]

As good as the screen shots are, my first thought was “Yikes! Turn off all of those unit flags! They ruin the scene!”.

I’ve been turning them off for as long as the option has existed. Do folks usually leave them on during play? They annoy me to no end.

[Sol Invictus]

Yeah, the giant banners are an eyesore. Always the first thing I turn off.



Sir Beane, yeah, if it weren't for the giant banners, I can almost imagine that I'm standing on a hill watching a battle.

[bloodshed]

Where do you go to turn off the banners?

[Megas Methuselah]

I absolutely love the graphics, zoomed in, but particularly zoomed-out! And, moreover, I love how the units are spread across a large swatch of land, much like in NTW. This will be pretty sweeeet!!!! :jumping:


Interesting unit numbers, also, on the minimap the opposing armies look like they are right next to each other, however they clearly are not. This suggests that CA have implemented maps which are truly huge in scale, also, notice the predominace of hills?
This is very good.

Yes, I noticed this! Awesome!


Where do you go to turn off the banners?

Well, I can't really answer for Empires, but in previous total war games, you can turn them off in the preferences.txt document just outside of the RTW main directory. Do a search in the RTW and M2TW forums for it.

[bloodshed]

Thanks med2 is much better.

[Megas Methuselah]

Don't thank me. Thank TosaInu for presenting these fantastic screenies for me, and me alone. :snobby:

Or give me a balloon...

[Fondor_Yards]

Are those 2 units of Colonial Cuirassiers in the first picture? Did they even have such a unit?

[Polemists]

For some reason I can't see the screenshots, but i'l assume it's just some software issue.

I shall assume they are awesome and await the awesome demo soon to come.

[Megas Methuselah]

They are sooo awesome, Polemists. Godly, even. Their glory shines greater than that of even the sun itself, so magnificient are they. All the wonders of bygone days stading together would be nothing in comparison to these miraculous works of art.

It is too bad you cannot view them. :evilgrin:

[sassbarman]

the pocket watch for the timer in the first screenshot is a nice touch. doesn't appear in the others though maybe they where from battles with no time limit.

[Veho Nex]

WHY DO YOU TORTURE ME SO!!! I CANT EVER PLAY THIS GAME ON MY CURRENT RIG!!! WHY TOSA WHYYYYY?!?!?!

*Cries in a cornor pulls hair over to one side and finds razor blade*

[Incongruous]

I really cannot get over the unit numbers, they are so much smaller than I expected, the average unit being 60-120 men. The graphics look very nice, but not in a way which makes my wallet suffer from internal bleeding.

It seems that perhaps this time CA have taken the speed off the GFX just a bit, I also like the way the overall look of the game is far more, ummm, limited? minimal? mature? than the previous two titles. Colours look more refrained and realistic, it looks grayer, dare I say it, it is reminding me a bit of MTW...:sweatdrop:

[pdoyle007]

The artillery units do not appear to have an ammunition level, does this mean unlimited ammo for your artillery? (see rockets and cannons on screen 1)

Also on the third ('SPAIN') screenshot there are two units on the bottom row, I presume dragoons, same unit card, one with an ammo level and one without?

[Incongruous]

Also on the third ('SPAIN') screenshot there are two units on the bottom row, I presume dragoons, same unit card, one with an ammo level and one without?

Yes, they are indeed dragoons, I believe they differ in that certain respect because one unit is dismounted, thus the ammo level, and one is still playing the role of cavalry, thus no ammo level as it would be impossoble to shoot from the saddle.

[Martok]

Nice screenies, Tosa. Me likey. :2thumbsup:




The artillery units do not appear to have an ammunition level, does this mean unlimited ammo for your artillery? (see rockets and cannons on screen 1)
Perhaps it was so rare for artillery to run out of ammo in battles that CA decided it was easier to just not include it in the game? Not sure. :shrug:



Also on the third ('SPAIN') screenshot there are two units on the bottom row, I presume dragoons, same unit card, one with an ammo level and one without?
Heh; nice catch. I hadn't even noticed that.

My first guess is that it's a bug of some kind. Unless there are two separate dragoon units, one more focused on skirmishing....

[SwordsMaster]

I don't know if my eyes are deceiving me, but those look like cuirasseurs to me. I can clearly see the brass helmet with horsehair and the cuirasse. I'd say one has drawn pistols while the other is drawn swords or exhausted ammo, but they both look like cuirasseurs. The one next to the second cuirasseur (with the three-corner hat) does look like a dragoon unit.

[Incongruous]

I don't know if my eyes are deceiving me, but those look like cuirasseurs to me. I can clearly see the brass helmet with horsehair and the cuirasse. I'd say one has drawn pistols while the other is drawn swords or exhausted ammo, but they both look like cuirasseurs. The one next to the second cuirasseur (with the three-corner hat) does look like a dragoon unit.

Look alot like a dragoon unit, and their is no cuirasse as far as I can tell, just some deceptive white lining on the coat of the unit.

As I already stated two posts above, I think it can be explained by the ability of dragoons to be used as dismounted infantry with carbines, and a mounted regular cavalry.

[Haxorsist]

Yes, they are indeed dragoons, I believe they differ in that certain respect because one unit is dismounted, thus the ammo level, and one is still playing the role of cavalry, thus no ammo level as it would be impossoble to shoot from the saddle.

Yeah, I think you're right. If you look at the screenshot there appears to be a unit of horses with no banner above and no one is riding 'em.

[Jack Lusted]

Are those 2 units of Colonial Cuirassiers in the first picture? Did they even have such a unit?

First unit is Generals Bodyguard which doesn't have a cuirass, next 2 cavalry units are dragoons, next is a standard regiment of horse.


Yes, they are indeed dragoons, I believe they differ in that certain respect because one unit is dismounted, thus the ammo level, and one is still playing the role of cavalry, thus no ammo level as it would be impossoble to shoot from the saddle.

Bingo.

And yes artillery do not have an ammo limit.

[Martok]

Aha. Yeah, that would make sense. Thanks for the clarification, JL. :bow:

[Fisherking]

Thanks TosaInu for the fabulous screen shots.

And Thanks Jack for the explanations.


I have a couple of questions if someone cares to guess…

Are the units in Buckskins in the first shot Frontier Riflemen or just American Militia?

What type of unit are the Spaniards in the Slouch Hats and not ammo restrictions?

[Jack Lusted]

Are the units in Buckskins in the first shot Frontier Riflemen or just American Militia?

Long Rifle Men.


What type of unit are the Spaniards in the Slouch Hats and not ammo restrictions?

Pikemen

[Sir Beane]

Excellent information Jack, thanks! :2thumbsup:

Also it's good to know that pikemen still make an appearence in game.

No ammo limit for artillery eh? Exellent! Now I can blow things up to my hearts content. :laugh4:

[Praxil]

@ third screenshot.

Droll... on... my keyboard...

Like Homer. :daisy: sweet. Am I imagining things, battle distances have been at least doubled?

[Fisherking]

Wow! Thank you so kindly Jack! Especially for such a speedy reply! :bow:

[Monk]

@ third screenshot.

Droll... on... my keyboard...

Like Homer. :daisy: sweet. Am I imagining things, battle distances have been at least doubled?

I was just thinking that. Those mini-maps cover a huge area.

And those water effects, beautiful. :2thumbsup:

[Tomisama]

Ok; above the right hand artillery flag, on the first rise on the opposition’s side, is a lone horse with a rider. Is that a white horse, or an appaloosa?

:charge:

This is so cool!

Great job Tosa, and thanks Jack :bow:

[Lusitani]

The artillery units do not appear to have an ammunition level, does this mean unlimited ammo for your artillery? (see rockets and cannons on screen 1)

Also on the third ('SPAIN') screenshot there are two units on the bottom row, I presume dragoons, same unit card, one with an ammo level and one without?

I think one of the units is dismounted....doesnt explain the ammo bars though...

[Fisherking]

I think one of the units is dismounted....doesnt explain the ammo bars though...

Well it does, because they can’t load and fire from horseback and don’t have the bar when mounted.

[Zatoichi]

One question about those large maps - are these taken from an MP game, or from a battle fought during the SP campaign? I'm pretty sure in M2TW that the MP maps were bigger than those you fought on during the SP games.

[PBI]

I'm so glad I'm looking at this thread at work and not on my gaming computer. I think my poor graphics card would have a fit if I were to show it the instruments of torture to which I will be subjecting it.:2thumbsup:


And yes artillery do not have an ammo limit.

Excellent news! While it seems a little unrealistic to have cannons which can keep firing indefinitely (or until they explode), it's definitely better than the situation in TWs past, where I would find myself having to abandon sieges because my artilllery had run out of ammo. Would it not make sense for my gun crews to be able to bring up more ammunition faster than the defenders can rebuild their walls, or even better, for my gunners to simply stock up a massive pile of cannonballs before the assault?

[Lusitani]

I suppose the cavalry or in quite neat ranks, but the formation may loosen once they get moving.

It was much more common that you might think for Galleons to be around, especially during the early 1700's. Galleons, Caravels and other old styles stuck around in the form of old ships and even some new ones built in the old style. It makes sense for pirates to be using outdated technology, they couldn't afford newer, sleeker designs.

Indeed Sir Beane, I am aware of that. I know that many robust and sturdy older ships were still available in the early 18th century, but lets face it, if you were a pirate...would you be using such an old and slow vessel when you could have a sloop or a xebeq?

Another interesting detail i noticed on the spanish army screenshot is the dismounted cavalry unit horses lying there on the right side of the screen.

[Sir Beane]

In the third screenshot on the right we can see a unit of riderless horses, presumably those from the dragoons. I must say that they've been incredibly well trained to say in formation even without a rider. :laugh4:

Also I notice that the pirate symbol being used in the second screenshot is the Jolly Rodger of 'Calico' Jack Rackham. It's one of the better pirate flags, in my opinion, good choice CA! I wonder if we might see a variety of flags for pirates?

[Megas Methuselah]

I was just thinking that. Those mini-maps cover a huge area.


Jack Lusted explained a while back in some forgotten thread how the battlemap's dimensions were to be extended by a considerable amount. I suppose we are now witnessing the fruits of that labour. And they look like pretty tasty fruit, too... :smile:

[Alexander the Pretty Good]

I wonder if ammo limits for arty can be modded in...

[Fisherking]

This thread worries me a little.:embarassed:

I only get all three shots to load about 1 of 4 tries…I hope it is the connection…and not my machine…:sweatdrop:

[Sir Beane]

This thread worries me a little.:embarassed:

I only get all three shots to load about 1 of 4 tries…I hope it is the connection…and not my machine…:sweatdrop:

It's probably being caused by either your connection or by high traffic, I wouldn't worry too much about it. :2thumbsup:

I agree with the others who have mentioned the size of the new battlemaps. But we have to remember, it isn't the size of CA's battlemaps, it's how they use them. Until we get a demonstration of their huge battlemaps in action I don't think any of us will be truly satisfied.

(All innuendo in the previous sentance was entirely intentional)

Going purely by the screenshots however the battlemap looks not only larger but also more varied and more 'real' than previous battlemaps.

Great stuff! :2thumbsup:

[ConnMon]

This thread reminds me that not only do I love this game, but that my comp. needs another gig of RAM. I'll probably blow $200 or so updating my comp. for this game. :sweatdrop:

[Sir Beane]

This thread reminds me that not only do I love this game, but that my comp. needs another gig of RAM. I'll probably blow $200 or so updating my comp. for this game. :sweatdrop:

I bought an £800 brand new PC so I could play Empire properly. :sweatdrop:

It will all be worth it though, once I boot it up and see the thing in action. :2thumbsup:

This game had better not suck! Please don't let it suck CA.

[batemonkey]

I bought an £800 brand new PC so I could play Empire properly. :sweatdrop:

It will all be worth it though, once I boot it up and see the thing in action. :2thumbsup:

This game had better not suck! Please don't let it suck CA.

I was gonning to buy a brand new gaming laptop, so i could play for longer with out missus getting mad at me.

"are you coming down for lunch"

"why yes i am" [with my latop in hand ETW still running]:juggle2:

[Sir Beane]

I was gonning to buy a brand new gaming laptop, so i could play for longer with out missus getting mad at me.

"are you coming down for lunch"

"why yes i am" [with my latop in hand ETW still running]:juggle2:

Hahah! Don't get too carried away with that though, or we could be seeing some interesting newspaper headlines.

"Local Man Leaves Wife For Videogame!"

The best thing to do is try and get her into the game as well, that way she'll understand. :2thumbsup:

Of course then she might end up taking over your laptop and ignoring you for the game. :laugh4:

[Sol Invictus]

I hope I can squeek by with my current computer, but I think I will need a better vid card at least. I am close to needing a completely new system so I may bite the bullet and buy a new one. If the game is as good as I hope it is, a new comp will be worth it.

[Sir Beane]

I hope I can squeek by with my current computer, but I think I will need a better vid card at least. I am close to needing a completely new system so I may bite the bullet and buy a new one. If the game is as good as I hope it is, a new comp will be worth it.

My advice would be to play the demo and see how well your system holds out before commiting the money to buy a new one. Of course if the demo is good enough you might just want to buy a new system anway. :laugh4:

[Belgolas]

The Spanish one looks especially authentic, the mini map has lots of detail and textures in it, if the game is to be released in March, if there is to be a demo it should come out imminently, well we can hope that it does.
Also the battle speed is interesting, it looks like you can have half time as well as pause, incredible visuals too naturally.

Most people don't know this but in M2TW you can go all the way down to .1 speed. Yup you can have .1,.2,.3.4 , etc and even do 1.1 speed. It is somewhat amusing to play at .1 speed and watch a cannon ball or musket shot to fly through the air till they hit their target.


Anyways AWESOME screen shots. I upgraded mainly for this game but some other games too.

[Megas Methuselah]

Most people don't know this but in M2TW you can go all the way down to .1 speed. Yup you can have .1,.2,.3.4 , etc and even do 1.1 speed. It is somewhat amusing to play at .1 speed and watch a cannon ball or musket shot to fly through the air till they hit their target.

How?

[Sol Invictus]

My advice would be to play the demo and see how well your system holds out before commiting the money to buy a new one. Of course if the demo is good enough you might just want to buy a new system anway. :laugh4:






That's the plan.:2thumbsup:




Megas, I think it is holding down Shift and clicking on the - button for speed. I loved this feature and desperately hope that ETW has something similar. I always have thought that the slowest speed in TW games was a bit too fast.

[Incitatus]

I think the small increments of speed and a max of 6x are a Kingdoms feature. Regular M2 has the standard pause/1x/2x/3x.

[Fisherking]

How?

Excellent question!

Let me see if I can reach him.

[Sir Beane]

How?

Like Sol Invictus said, you hold down shift while clicking the buttons in order to adjust time in increments of .1 rather than 1. Slow-mo cavalry charges are fun, as are massed volleys using rocket launchers.

You need Kingdoms in order for this to work however.

[Fisherking]

Like Sol Invictus said, you hold down shift while clicking the buttons in order to adjust time in increments of .1 rather than 1. Slow-mo cavalry charges are fun, as are massed volleys using rocket launchers.

You need Kingdoms in order for this to work however.

Sure! The one I didn’t/haven’t get/gotten because of issues I won’t discuss here…

[Tomisama]

I was just thinking that. Those mini-maps cover a huge area.

Maybe not when you consider the possibility of four armies per side in multi-partner multiplayer?

I hope that this release will be fully playable multiplayer online (eight players).
Our Clan vs. Clan team competitions had to drop to 3v3 with Rome (from Medieval and Viking games), and have never been able to recover the lofty status of the truly “ultimate game contest” of 4v4.

:smile::smile::smile::sad:

[CBR]

Our Clan vs. Clan team competitions had to drop to 3v3 with Rome (from Medieval and Viking games), and have never been able to recover the lofty status of the truly “ultimate game contest” of 4v4.

I can imagine that. 80 units on each side with just 800 meters versus MTW large maps of 1000 meters for just 64 units. That is 10 meters/unit versus 15.5 meters per unit while ETW will have 17.5 meters so at least there is improvement there.

The other problem is missile range with MTW having 100-120 meters while RTW/M2TW boosted that up to 160-180 max. ETW will now have lots of artillery and from the few vids I have seen musket range still seems quite high.


CBR

[Sir Beane]

I can imagine that. 80 units on each side with just 800 meters versus MTW large maps of 1000 meters for just 64 units. That is 10 meters/unit versus 15.5 meters per unit while ETW will have 17.5 meters so at least there is improvement there.

The other problem is missile range with MTW having 100-120 meters while RTW/M2TW boosted that up to 160-180 max. ETW will now have lots of artillery and from the few vids I have seen musket range still seems quite high.


CBR

With the predominance of ranged weaponry on the battlefield I think we will probably have to seriously recalculate what's big enough for a battle or not.

Units can now engage each other at distances of several hundrerd metres (further for snipers and skirmisher units). I'm hoping we will see longer battle lines and a more spaced out feeling to battles.

In previous games units all tended to end up in a big mob somewhere in the middle of the map (in A.I battles at least) because it was usually the best way to win.

I guess we will have to wait for the demo to really get a feel for the flow of the new battles. :2thumbsup:

[CBR]

Well yes, players would most likely want to use units in 2-4 ranks but there is little reason to spread out and have big gaps between individual units. There might be some kind of assault column formation in ETW so you still gonna see big mobs heh.

AFAIK we still don't know how the game handles armies of more than 20 units but singleplayers will no doubt feel they have a lot more room. I fear those of us remembering old MTW 4v4 MP with large custom maps might not be as happy.

I have never understood why CA decided to boost up missile ranges as all it did was to make battlefields feel smaller with less room for maneuver. I certainly do hope we don't see yet another boost in ETW.


CBR

[Sir Beane]

Well yes, players would most likely want to use units in 2-4 ranks but there is little reason to spread out and have big gaps between individual units. There might be some kind of assault column formation in ETW so you still gonna see big mobs heh.

AFAIK we still don't know how the game handles armies of more than 20 units but singleplayers will no doubt feel they have a lot more room. I fear those of us remembering old MTW 4v4 MP with large custom maps might not be as happy.

I have never understood why CA decided to boost up missile ranges as all it did was to make battlefields feel smaller with less room for maneuver. I certainly do hope we don't see yet another boost in ETW.


CBR

I think we will see a another boost to missile ranges simply because it's historically accurate, especially so for artillery of the time period.

ETW is all about ranged combat. Instead of positioning units for a flank or a charge we will be positioning them for maximum field of fire, or to be able toperform enfilade fire. Cover and height should give units a significant advantage this time around.

Melee won't disappear completely of course. A bayonet charge is still the best way of breaking an enemy army. But missile fire will be the main show, rather than the prelude as it was in Med, Rome or Med 2.

Hopefully the increased range will be counteracted by the increased size of the maps and the new emphasis on being able to use cover.

Another benefit to the ranged combat centric system is that you can't just run your troops wherever you want, or they will get shot to bits. Instead it encourages thoughtful, careful deployment and manouvering. Massed charge tactics (a surefire way to beat the A.I) will hopefully be a thing of the past.

[Fisherking]

There also seems to be a lot of dead space in the battle fields portrayed in the screen shots.

Areas where troop movement is unobserved and covered from direct fire weapons.

Who knows maybe some units like Native Americans and Rangers can low crawl into position.

That could spoil your flank security!

There is so much we don’t know! The vast ignorance we posses is astounding.
:dizzy2:

[CBR]

I think we will see a another boost to missile ranges simply because it's historically accurate, especially so for artillery of the time period.
Yes but realistic compared to what? Individual soldiers, units, overall army size or size of terrain features and battlefields? The armies in ETW will even at huge scale be similar to less than a real life brigade.

If we focus purely on the soldier scale then we still have unrealistic space taken up by soldiers as ETW cannot handle close shoulder to shoulder formation. And Total War games have always had units marching faster than real life. Now obviously I don't know if ETW has improved but earlier games never had a realistic difference between max range and point blank kills either.

If we can accept such unrealistic elements then why focus too much on what realistic missile range should be based on soldier scale.

Cover and firepower will certainly play a big role in ETW and it will be nice addition to Total War games if done properly. But for 4v4 MP we are very much depending on room for maneuver because if not enough room it will just be frontal fighting the whole way.

Just to use some historical examples:

Even assuming a rather long max range for artillery of 1500+ meters some 18th century battlefields were 5+ such artillery shots wide. In M2TW I think some artillery had 500+ meters range. ETW could be perhaps 600 or 700 meters which would make battlefields 2-2.5 shots wide.

An infantry battalion might be around 140 meters wide. ETW infantry units on huge scale in 3 ranks could be perhaps 60-70 meters wide. Since infantry could start firing at 200+ meters (although not very effective fire) then by giving muskets a max range of 100 or 120 meters and you have each ETW unit representing a battalion.

That is really all it takes when looking at battlefield and units for scale instead of individual soldiers.


CBR

[Jack Lusted]

Now obviously I don't know if ETW has improved but earlier games never had a realistic difference between max range and point blank kills either.

We do model firing cones for guns so yes close range fire is more deadly.

Muskets in Empire have ranges of 70-80m, rifles 125m, cannons 400m.

[CBR]

We do model firing cones for guns so yes close range fire is more deadly.

Muskets in Empire have ranges of 70-80m, rifles 125m, cannons 400m.
Now that is good news indeed!

Please tell me you guys have also taken a hard look at movement rates for these lower missile ranges :beam:


CBR

[Fisherking]

We do model firing cones for guns so yes close range fire is more deadly.

Muskets in Empire have ranges of 70-80m, rifles 125m, cannons 400m.

Just guessing that that is not the maximum range but more like primary effective ranges for those weapons.

Yes? No?

[Jack Lusted]

No that is the maximum range, and yes we are fully aware they are not accurate.

[Sir Beane]

Muskets weren't terribly effective at long ranges anyway, so it's no great loss that the range has been shortened. I fully support historical innacuracy if it means better gameplay.

It looks like you got your wish CBR. :2thumbsup:

[Fisherking]

Well thank for the speedy reply Sir!

And I am sure we will live with it!

Develop tactics to fit and go with what you have got!

Thanks again Jack

~:cheers:

[Sol Invictus]

Realizing that completely accurate ranges are not possible, my only quibbles are that I would like Rifles to have a tad longer range and for Artillery to have a moderately longer range. Maybe 150m for Rifles and 600-800m for Artillery.

[Fisherking]

But there isn’t much to be done about it at this point

I am sure it can be moded later by someone.


Edit: I am sure it is a balance issue. The 125 is half again the 70. The cannon doesn’t shoot from side to side of the battle field and so on.

[CBR]

It looks like you got your wish CBR. :2thumbsup:
Indeed. This is IMO a very important design decision for both gameplay reasons as well as the correct feel of this era. And that goes for SP as well as MP.


CBR

[Sir Beane]

Indeed. This is IMO a very important design decision for both gameplay reasons as well as the correct feel of this era. And that goes for SP as well as MP.


CBR

I can understand why it would be important to MP, given the larger number of armies in the field compared to SP (although I know very little about competetive MP in general.)

I'll be waiting for the demo to really give us a feel how the new style of combat will work. :2thumbsup:

[CBR]

Yes there are still several things I'm concerned about. The demo should hopefully provide some answers.


CBR

[AussieGiant]

Interesting information from JL. Thanks for that mate.

While not accurate, it is "indiciative" and within the feel for what is needed for game play.

Rifles being double the range of muskets is excellent, but artillery being only 4x greater than a rifle...hmmm.

Interesting stuff this.

[Sol Invictus]

Yes, the short Artillery range is the most glaring fudge. It should at least be 600m. Not a huge thing in any event.

[Belgolas]

How?

Hold down shift and then click on either the raise game speed or lower game speed button. Very easy to do.


I hope ETW has the same thing but we can only be sure in a DEMO!

[Incongruous]

No that is the maximum range, and yes we are fully aware they are not accurate.

No they are not, however this decision will, I believe, lead to more accurate and historically sound tactics being used by players in both SP and MP. Now that units will have to be so close in order to be effective it will allow us to illustrate the complexity of battlefield manoeuvre in the 18th cen. Clearly it will not be good enough to simply line 'em up and ait till the shooting match is over, what with the low range of muskets and the unmlimeted ammo of artillery in ETW. Staning ound looking pretty in a line will, I suspect, lead to unwanted outcomes.

Oh, the return of battkefield manoeuvre to TW! :bounce:

[AussieGiant]

Yes, the short Artillery range is the most glaring fudge. It should at least be 600m. Not a huge thing in any event.

Yes that would seem better, but I think it might have something to do with the scale issue and map size as CBR has outlined.

It's going to be very important to be able to maneuver without getting your :daisy: cheeks shot to pieces. If the arty range is too great and the map not big enough then this will be a large problem.

Kind of like have a Rottweiler on leash in which he can reach the whole 10 square meter room except the outside 30 centimeters.

Then you're stuck up against the wall trying to skirt around the outside.:beam:

[Sol Invictus]

Yeah, nobody wants to have to contend with being bombarded from the word go.

[Tomisama]

Hahah! Don't get too carried away with that though, or we could be seeing some interesting newspaper headlines.

"Local Man Leaves Wife For Videogame!"

The best thing to do is try and get her into the game as well, that way she'll understand. :2thumbsup:

Of course then she might end up taking over your laptop and ignoring you for the game. :laugh4:

The self-accepted legacy-title for the women who love men, who love Total War games is; “Shogun Widow”.

They are a proud and stalwart spirited lot indeed, and I am as honored to have one at my side.

I only hope your are all as fortunate as I :bow:

[Polemists]

Yes there are still several things I'm concerned about. The demo should hopefully provide some answers.


CBR


mWhahahah....hahahaha..........hahahahaha.............:laugh4:


On to topic....


I'm not sure artillery fire will really be that big a factor range wise so much as accuracy wise.

I would like to accurracy improved.

For instance, in MTW2 your cannons had plenty of range and fire power, I mean as soon as you were deployed you could almost aim at the enemy.

What it lacked was a crew with any sort of skill. Hopefully after a few centuries of using canons there is more reliability to them. :2thumbsup:

[Nelson]

mWhahahah....hahahaha..........hahahahaha.............:laugh4:


On to topic....


I'm not sure artillery fire will really be that big a factor range wise so much as accuracy wise.

I would like to accurracy improved.

For instance, in MTW2 your cannons had plenty of range and fire power, I mean as soon as you were deployed you could almost aim at the enemy.

What it lacked was a crew with any sort of skill. Hopefully after a few centuries of using canons there is more reliability to them. :2thumbsup:

I'm with you , Polemists. The MTW guns were good for siege work but little else as is appropriate for the period. In the 18th century artillery was an established big time anti-personnel weapon. The wildness of field guns should disappear in ETW. Not that a battery should behave like snipers. But they should be a real hazard with round shot out to 400m.

[Sir Beane]

I'm with you , Polemists. The MTW guns were good for siege work but little else as is appropriate for the period. In the 18th century artillery was an established big time anti-personnel weapon. The wildness of field guns should disappear in ETW. Not that a battery should behave like snipers. But they should be a real hazard with round shot out to 400m.

Agreed. Cannons were no longer experimental technology by 1700. like ballista in Med 2 they had been around for a long time and artillery crews of the day should know exactly how to use them. In fact a level of accuracy around that of the ballista in Med 2 would probably be quite good.

On a similar note I really hope muskets are more deadly than archers in Med 2. Because if they aren't virtually every battle is going to be decided with a bayonet charge.

[CBR]

I wonder if bouncing roundshot might be able to hit something beyond 400 meters :beam:


CBR

[Polemists]

On a similar note I really hope muskets are more deadly than archers in Med 2. Because if they aren't virtually every battle is going to be decided with a bayonet charge.

I agree bayonet charges are fun and should be useful but, musket fire should hold the day when two infantry units go at it.

Unfourtnately almost all the videos I see have charges lol :laugh4:

I wonder though if they will have ammo similiar to archers and slingers in rtw, where there is a decent supply but they will run out if they go to long.

If you run out of ammo, or if you greatly out number the enemy, bayonet charges are useful.

I just don't think they should dominate all things.

[Nelson]

The bayonet charge was the dominating tactic for infantry assaults for over 200 years.

From what I’ve read, every serious infantry assault made by any modern power from 1700 to at least 1920 was supposed to culminate in a bayonet charge. The only question was how much firing, if any, would be done by the attackers on the way in. In most cases one side or the other broke before actual contact was made. Very close range shoot-outs were more likely than a brawling melee.

Gunfire did all of the injury but the charge was how you pushed the other guys back.

[Sir Beane]

The bayonet charge was the dominating tactic for infantry assaults for over 200 years.

From what I’ve read, every serious infantry assault made by any modern power from 1700 to at least 1920 was supposed to culminate in a bayonet charge. The only question was how much firing, if any, would be done by the attackers on the way in. In most cases one side or the other broke before actual contact was made. Very close range shoot-outs were more likely than a brawling melee.

Gunfire did all of the injury but the charge was how you pushed the other guys back.

Exactly! Which is why I'd like CA confirmation that guns are deadlier and more accurate than archers were in Med 2. Because if they aren't then bayonet charges are going to end up being neccesary to get kills.

Gunfire should cause the damage and get the kills, the bayonet charge should then be used to break the enemy line.

[ClaymanVTW]

Awesome! 2 of em i havnt seen before, thanks! what site ya get these from?

PS-:juggle2:

omg i can juggle!

[Polemists]

Well so far from what i've seen, it's a trade off.


For instance, in the one video you see the charging unit of muskteers/riflemen and vice versa you see the guys firing on the charging unit.

The defender, gets a clear line of fire, takes down quite a few of the enemy, even a drummer (who knows how much morale value hit that is).

The charger on the other hand, gets to hit the enemy with swords and riflebutts while they are still reloading.

So I don't know.

Sure if your in close quaters, I get the point, but I just don't see infantry charging over 400 yards or something, against musket fire.

If the two units are close enough that you can engage quickly then yes, but why charge your men and let the enemy put 5 or 6 rounds in them before they can even engage?

I mean it's pretty clear from videos, your men can't fire while running forward for the charge, other then the officer who has a pistol.

[Fisherking]

Lets remember that artillery is going to have canister and bursting bombs, at least at some point.

400m is a quarter mile. Your poor marching infantry is going to be under fire for a while.
It may take some inventive tactics to close with the enemy’s line.

By the time you are ready to charge you my find that the only thing your army is good for is sausage stuffing.

[Polemists]

Yes I mean once your in range, sure a charge seems valid but assuming your armies will be same distance apart as in mtw 2, it will at least be a few volleys, cannon fire, and a trench or two before you hit the enemy line.

[Sir Beane]

Well so far from what i've seen, it's a trade off.


For instance, in the one video you see the charging unit of muskteers/riflemen and vice versa you see the guys firing on the charging unit.

The defender, gets a clear line of fire, takes down quite a few of the enemy, even a drummer (who knows how much morale value hit that is).

The charger on the other hand, gets to hit the enemy with swords and riflebutts while they are still reloading.

So I don't know.

Sure if your in close quaters, I get the point, but I just don't see infantry charging over 400 yards or something, against musket fire.

If the two units are close enough that you can engage quickly then yes, but why charge your men and let the enemy put 5 or 6 rounds in them before they can even engage?

I mean it's pretty clear from videos, your men can't fire while running forward for the charge, other then the officer who has a pistol.

This all assumes of course that artillery and musket fire are deadly. In Med2 I would be fairly happy to charge over four hundred metres at a combination of cannon artillery and archers or musket troops. Because you don't suffer anywhere near the level of casualties that you probably should.

I'm just hoping CA has fixed that for Empire.

[Polemists]

I'm just hoping CA has fixed that for Empire.

...........THE DEMO


I see your point, but musketfire had a amazing morale power in MTW2, I mean a few canon shots and you could make the enemy run pretty often.

Which raises another question regarding morale, I havn't heard anything about morale really, better, worse, indifferent.

I mean this is the revoultion part of CA I think, so hopefully morale makes a bit more sense. I'm all for breaking the lines, but one calavary charge should not send hundreds of professional soldiers into a dither....you know...unless it's elephants....in a demo:laugh4:

[Sir Beane]

...........THE DEMO


I see your point, but musketfire had a amazing morale power in MTW2, I mean a few canon shots and you could make the enemy run pretty often.

Which raises another question regarding morale, I havn't heard anything about morale really, better, worse, indifferent.

I mean this is the revoultion part of CA I think, so hopefully morale makes a bit more sense. I'm all for breaking the lines, but one calavary charge should not send hundreds of professional soldiers into a dither....you know...unless it's elephants....in a demo:laugh4:

I think the morale penalties thing has been reversed this time around. In ETW musket fire won't have a huge morale effect (people had had time to get used to guns) melee combat however is much scarier now.

And who wouldn't break when they saw elephants heading for them? Especially if they were aware how unbeliavably powerful they are in TW games. I'd be running before the battle even started :tongue:

[Polemists]

Your probably right, as Clansmen charging is much scarier then say a bunch of redcoats.

Still if a cannon takes out eight men next to you, i'd expect some level of, hey maybe we should leave this area.....you know....in my demo anyway...

[Sir Beane]

Your probably right, as Clansmen charging is much scarier then say a bunch of redcoats.

Still if a cannon takes out eight men next to you, i'd expect some level of, hey maybe we should leave this area.....you know....in my demo anyway...

If you'd been properly trained you would shurug off that cannonball like a soldier and get back to the complicated business of marching forwards towards the heavily fortified and defended cannon emplacement!

Namby pamby soldiers these days, worrying about massive friendly casualties and little things like 'certain death'. (These days being the 1700's, I'm in character :tongue:)

I'll not have my soldiers routing because of 95% allied losses!

[Polemists]

Yes, why do that when the other 5% can still be slaughtered...

I mean sure you can come back

Maybe the only thing you have is minutemen and militia, and maybe they have hundreds of dragoons and redcoats, but I saw patriot...

all you need is mel gibson with a big flag pole with a spike...and your set :laugh4:

[Fisherking]

I had relatives at Cowpens and they never said anything about an Australian with a flag!:inquisitive:

The tactics used there might be possible in the game though. Drawing the enemy over a hill…then again if we have physic AI like last time that won’t work…:smash:

[Polemists]

what are you taking about the psychic AI was fannnntastic


"Yes men, we charge into the spikes, they will never see it coming" :laugh4:

[Sir Beane]

what are you taking about the psychic AI was fannnntastic


"Yes men, we charge into the spikes, they will never see it coming" :laugh4:

Charging your best cavalry unit headlong into stakes along with your King and both of your princes is a perfectly sound tactic. Let's face it, the enemy will never expect it. :laugh4:

In fact it's almost as sneaky and unexpected as sitting your 10 star 10 Dread Timurid warlord in front of a rocket launcher as it fires at the advancing English forces. :2thumbsup:

[Fisherking]

Charging your best cavalry unit headlong into stakes along with your King and both of your princes is a perfectly sound tactic. Let's face it, the enemy will never expect it. :laugh4:

In fact it's almost as sneaky and unexpected as sitting your 10 star 10 Dread Timurid warlord in front of a rocket launcher as it fires at the advancing English forces. :2thumbsup:

Did I ever claim the AI was smart?:furious3:

No certainly not! Most of the time it would loose to an eight year old girl. But they did know every unit they were facing and no hiding spot was safe.:inquisitive:

That is a lot different than competent, but if AI has been improved so much then it becomes a problem. It makes ambushes difficult. It makes the kill sack ineffective. Turn around and run like hell is not going to draw a rush. It just takes all the fun out of it…:wall:

At that rate I’ll have to upgrade and just pick on Humans. The trouble with that is that humans learn about their enemy…then there is no one to play!:laugh4:

Besides I had the AI walk through the stakes a lot of times…especially with the darned Super Elephants!:skull:

I like employing tactics (particularly sneaky ones) to defeat the enemy. Not having my men ground up for dog food because there is no surprising the enemy. It makes it sort of like loosing three modern tanks to that hoplite in Civ…just not fun…

[Sir Beane]

Did I ever claim the AI was smart?:furious3:

No certainly not! Most of the time it would loose to an eight year old girl. But they did know every unit they were facing and no hiding spot was safe.:inquisitive:

That is a lot different than competent, but if AI has been improved so much then it becomes a problem. It makes ambushes difficult. It makes the kill sack ineffective. Turn around and run like hell is not going to draw a rush. It just takes all the fun out of it…:wall:

At that rate I’ll have to upgrade and just pick on Humans. The trouble with that is that humans learn about their enemy…then there is no one to play!:laugh4:

Besides I had the AI walk through the stakes a lot of times…especially with the darned Super Elephants!:skull:

I like employing tactics (particularly sneaky ones) to defeat the enemy. Not having my men ground up for dog food because there is no surprising the enemy. It makes it sort of like loosing three modern tanks to that hoplite in Civ…just not fun…

Actually the fact that the enemy knows exactly where you are all the time is explained in game in the form of traits. :tongue:

For instance I know that almost all of my generals acquired a 'Pagan Magician'. I bet he has a crystal ball that lets him know whats what on the battlemap. :laugh4: After all the generals must like hanging out with him for some reason right?

[Polemists]

Yea those pagan magicians got annoying :P


The AI was never overly clever and I'm not asking it to be a genius, but i'd just like to be compotent. There is a difference.

I mean if AI outsmarts us everytime that's to much, but if we build a fort and it just stands there and gets shot cause it lost the one cannon it brought...that gets dull fast.


So a balance...

and maybe this balance could be demonstrated


in a

DEMO

[Oleander Ardens]

First thanks to Jack for his infos and Tosa for the screenshots :bow:

a) That distances matters for accuracy is a fundamental factor for realistic and fun gameplay. Great to see it included.

b) The ranges of the three most important weapons seem to be sound, although I too would have liked a somewhat greater range for rifles and especially cannons.

c) The effectivness of weapons are a complex combination of overall accuracy, change of accuracy in relation to range, damage, rates of fire and the movement speeds. To see this package we must await the demo.

d) The graphics are astonishing and bring the period's battles back to live. Kudos to the team in question.

e) I like the looks of the UI very much, it has style and seems to offer the necessary informations. Especially the mini map with the detailed map and the new symbols are great.

f) We have four symbols so far: Star (General), Horse (cavalry), Soldier (Infantry), Cannon (Artillery). Would it be possible to add two more for two important types, skirmishers and melee infantry? The first ones could be a soldier wich holds a rifle diagonally, the other could be hold a pike overhead, ready to strike. This would make the identification a lot easier, especially in large battles with plenty of infantry.

g) While I will switch off the flags I would also implement a clearer distinction between the unit types on the little flags over them. You can already see if it's an artillery unit or not, but why shoudn't you put the symbols of the mini map into the unit flags?

h) It would be great if you could use than the same or a similar system for seabattles. Already a distinction between flagship, SOL, 4th rate and 5th rate would add much clearity.

j) Regarding c) I too would like somewhat slower movement in general. But of course to make an educated critique I must await the demo.

OA

P.S: Could somebody perhaps explain the blue symbol with a downward pointing arrow in the upper left corner of two ships in the second screeenshot?

[drewthehuter]

http://www.gamespot.com/pages/image_viewer/frame_lead.php?pid=942966&img=1&popup=1



WHO ARE THESE GUYS????

[Haxorsist]

I think the little icon means that the boat is taking in water and going down.