View Full Version : You Guys Are Crazy
ArtillerySmoke
03-09-2009, 10:35
Those of you who are disappointed in this game are insane. This is the best TW yet. I haven't even delved into the campaign yet and the play now has purpose now. Unlocking things, keeping stats, etc. My battles on normal are lasting almost 45 min to 1 hour on normal difficulty. The graphics are insane...Zoom up on your units and look at the troops in the distance - they're actually blurry until you're close enough to be realistically in view of them.
Come on guys. This is the best war game ever made. I can't wait to play a campaign.
pevergreen
03-09-2009, 10:39
just to clarify;
the blur is the units turning into sprites to keep the FPS rate up.
ArtillerySmoke
03-09-2009, 11:33
just to clarify;
the blur is the units turning into sprites to keep the FPS rate up.
I don't care what it is...with the camera zoomed just feet behind your troops, it looks photo realistic. It almost looks the way it does when you zoom down the lens of a rifle in Call of Duty.
Either way, this game rocks. I was in love with MTW more than any other TW, and I think the AI in this game is much better.
Better time period now that I've gotten a chance to play it too.
sorry but i'm not sharing your optimism, fire drills are bugged, especially fire by rank, there is a lot of game breaking bugs,that destroyed this game and made it unplayable. hope patches will fix it...
ArtillerySmoke
03-09-2009, 11:56
sorry but i'm not sharing your optimism, fire drills are bugged, especially fire by rank, there is a lot of game breaking bugs,that destroyed this game and made it unplayable. hope patches will fix it...
Unplayable?
What game out on the market today is more playable than this?
I don't know what some of you expect, but come on - You don't think this is the best TW yet?
Those of you who are disappointed in this game are insane. This is the best TW yet. I haven't even delved into the campaign yet and the play now has purpose now. Unlocking things, keeping stats, etc. My battles on normal are lasting almost 45 min to 1 hour on normal difficulty. The graphics are insane...Zoom up on your units and look at the troops in the distance - they're actually blurry until you're close enough to be realistically in view of them.
Come on guys. This is the best war game ever made. I can't wait to play a campaign.
Personally I agree. People who do not like chocolate ice-cream are insane!
:laugh4:
Really, it's all about preference. Some people are quite happy with ETW, while some complain it's just more of the same. Personally I don't regret my buy despite the annoying bugs i've come across. None have killed my interest in the game though and I wouldn't call any game-breaking.
ArtillerySmoke
03-09-2009, 12:19
Personally I agree. People who do not like chocolate ice-cream are insane!
:laugh4:
Really, it's all about preference. Some people are quite happy with ETW, while some complain it's just more of the same. Personally I don't regret my buy despite the annoying bugs i've come across. None have killed my interest in the game though and I wouldn't call any game-breaking.
Come on...
When the units start to skirmish in the middle of the field in Empire - what opening stage of a battle was ever better?
MTW? It was just like this - only no gunpowder.
RTW? Horrid. Both sides charge, one side routes a unit and the chain routes begin.
M2TW? Better than RTW although too predictable and not aggressive enough.
Empire: I think it's the best since MTW. I can't wait to play a campaign. I mean, it's not perfect, nor is it ever going to be, but I think this is the pinnacle of the series thus far.
sorry but i'm not sharing your optimism, fire drills are bugged, especially fire by rank, there is a lot of game breaking bugs,that destroyed this game and made it unplayable. hope patches will fix it...
there is nothing wrong with fire by rank, and most of the gameplay bugs are minor historical inaccuracies and the like, hardly game breakers.
some people just wanna be negative i guess, the game is awesome clearly the most engaging TW game ever, so much to do, takes a good 10-15 minutes to manage your turns and u just wanna keep going !
hehe
cheers Knoddy
Maleficus
03-09-2009, 13:40
If CA hadn't hyped the game up so much, less people would be disappointed.
It's not a bad game, IMO, just not as good as it says on the tin.
Lord of the Isles
03-09-2009, 13:51
Those of you who are disappointed in this game are insane. This is the best TW yet. I haven't even delved into the campaign yet and the play now has purpose now. Unlocking things, keeping stats, etc. My battles on normal are lasting almost 45 min to 1 hour on normal difficulty. The graphics are insane...Zoom up on your units and look at the troops in the distance - they're actually blurry until you're close enough to be realistically in view of them.
Come on guys. This is the best war game ever made. I can't wait to play a campaign.
But you will probably have to.
Because getting a campaign to 1799 will be an extremely hard thing to do what with all the bugs that will mess up the experience for you or result in repeatable CTDs which mean another 1700 restart.
You haven't played a campaign yet, so your opinion is presumably based solely on battles or RtI. And I can agree with you that the battle engine seems pretty good. Not without its own bugs but I can live with the ones I've come across so far until they get patched. I have had a lot of fun in battles.
But the grand campaign is in a really bad state as released. I still have hopes, since I think the campaign game has been well designed and could be a big improvement on previous TW titles. But as it currently stands, it stinks in terms of actually working well enough to provide a satisfactory game.
As soon as my 24-hour honeymoon period was over it became obvious to me that the AI is no more intelligent than in Rome or Medieval. It's different, of course it is, but it's just as dumb. Units simply do not behave as they should.
I've yet to see the AI once march toward me in a decent formation, line up and open fire, not one single time. Instead the first thing they do is send a single unit of cavalry to my rear, where it is quickly dealt with by mine, because it's on its own. Then they send their line infantry coming at me one at a time. They get in firing range of my line and then they charge without firing their weapons, and since there are no other units with them my cavalry easily smashes them to pieces with a charge from the side. Once they are routed the AI sends another lone unit marching toward its death.
Out of all the battles so far i've seen the AI behave in an intelligent manner only once. This was when i was playing Spain and was invaded by Morocco, i had 4 units of musket armed infantry lined up, they sent two units to keep the right of my line occupied by skirmishing with them, and threw all their weight at my left flank. Once my left flank turned it was goodnight vienna for me and i suffered a crushing defeat while barely killing any of them.
All of these occasions have been on VH/H, because i'm fairly convinced the AI get stat bonuses on VH/VH.
AussieGiant
03-09-2009, 14:13
Well Dayve, I guess you're inaccruate with your statement.
The AI does not get stat bonuses on VH but access to more tactics and strategy options.
I'll say it again to everyone.
Don't hammer the AI unless you play on VH/VH. That's like a Polar Bar complaining it's hot in Australia around February each year.
Crispypaul
03-09-2009, 14:16
I'm a latecomer to the TW games - M2TW was my first - however I believe ETW surpasses that one.
Mainly due to much better AI, despite the claims. The AI isn't randomly blockading my ports to set off a war then immediately suing for peace for one.
I've currently only fought one land battle after 30 or so turns - and that was against the pirates of Antigua who we're chopped to pieces by my line infantry's mustket fire, speared on the newly researched ring bayonets and blow to pieces by canister shot at point blank :smash:
pevergreen
03-09-2009, 14:16
Well Dayve, I guess you're inaccruate with your statement.
The AI does not get stat bonuses on VH but access to more tactics and strategy options.
I'll say it again to everyone.
Don't hammer the AI unless you play on VH/VH. That's like a Polar Bar complaining it's hot in Australia around February each year.
AG is correct.
I've had one battle where the AI didnt out tactics me. They just endlessly reformed.
1 bugged battle in 100. Im happy with that.
They did fine once I moved btw.
Personally I agree. People who do not like chocolate ice-cream are insane!
:laugh4:
You had to ruin it. I am one of the biggest icecream lovers in the world and there is only a couple of flavours I dislike, but one of the flavours which I think is very "meh" and sort of dislike is chocolate flavour.
I love chocolate sprinkles or flakes or brownies or whatever is with the icecream, just not chocolate icecream.
:thumbsdown:
AG is correct.
I've had one battle where the AI didnt out tactics me. They just endlessly reformed.
1 bugged battle in 100. Im happy with that.
They did fine once I moved btw.
I never had a battle where the AI didn't out tactics me. They only won if they did, just due to superior numbers and fire-power. No way to win a situation where they are just vastly superior numbers and fire-power, the game gives you no advantage to do anything against it, where as in real-life, simply sniper the enemy can do it, or using cover, in the game, the AI can see everything and everywhere, so if you tried to sneak a unit around, they can see it, if its on other side of the map.
JeromeBaker
03-09-2009, 14:44
But you will probably have to.
Because getting a campaign to 1799 will be an extremely hard thing to do what with all the bugs that will mess up the experience for you or result in repeatable CTDs which mean another 1700 restart.
.
Just finished a campaign, some minor delay bugs and I think my computer crashed out once during the past 4 days of straight playing. I seemed to progress fine, what type of problems were you running into?
Fire by rank has a nice bug, where if any of soldier is stuck somewhere, entire unit will not fire. Another nice buggy is the fire procedure - realistically, first row after fire should start reload, then second, so after third fires, first row should have its muskets reloaded - but not in game - first row fires, then they duck, so does second, and when third fires, entire unit starts to reload....
oh, and btw, if you place line infantry behind cover, only first rank will fire, second and third will just thand there and do nothing...
Sheogorath
03-09-2009, 14:54
I agree. ETW is definitely one of the best TW games yet.
However, that doesn't stop me from being dissapointed in certain aspects of it.
The rather lazy unit design (minor stat variations are nice, but would it REALLY have been THAT hard to give each nation a different line infantry/Guard? Or at least unique units for poor Prussia and the Provinces, when the British have, like, TEN.), the bugs (none 'game-breaking', which seems to be a term people throw around far too easily, but certainly annoying...and the AI does tend to be a bit eccentric at times, such as in its insistence that it can only scale the gate side of wooden forts and, yes, in my experience it seems a bit overeager to get into melee), and, of course some of the strange units.
(A small side note on this matter...has anybody else noticed that Dagistan uses the European unit set? Seems a bit odd to me.)
18th century grenade launchers? Come on, CA. I'd rather have grenadiers be superior line infantry.
Mostly just lazy stuff, really. All of which can be fixed by patches and mods.
It's kind of sad to say, but Empire is a lot better than a number of games which have come out recently in technical terms. It's no MTW, given it's tendency to crash occasionally and its MASSIVE load times, but I can work with that. :gring:
Really, at this point, I'd give it something like 7.5/10, with a potential to be a 10/10 once everything is fixed and somebody has put out a uniform mod for some graphical variety.
Barkhorn1x
03-09-2009, 14:57
Personally I don't regret my buy despite the annoying bugs i've come across. None have killed my interest in the game though and I wouldn't call any game-breaking.
Yes, I agree here. But...I hope (and expect :whip:) that the many bugs are addressed as the game could be much better! :2thumbsup:
I would add that most of the bugs are with the Campaign mode - but CA should really fix the pathing on the battle maps. We all know that siege pathing is horrible but so is the Cav. pathing when hunting down routing units through a settlment. Until that is fixed I hit the end battle button as soon as it comes up as it is a waste of time not to.
Prussia does have Jaegar's.
Hollerbach
03-09-2009, 15:34
Well Dayve, I guess you're inaccruate with your statement.
The AI does not get stat bonuses on VH but access to more tactics and strategy options.
I'll say it again to everyone.
Don't hammer the AI unless you play on VH/VH. That's like a Polar Bar complaining it's hot in Australia around February each year.
I (sadly) don't yet have ETW. However I've been following the discussion of the AI performance closely (since to me this is the single most important aspect of the game). I think the evidence, from those who have look at this closely, is that the AI gets very significant stat bonuses on VH. It is not clear (again from following the discussions) whether it *also* has access to different tactics and options. See this post (https://forums.totalwar.org/vb/showpost.php?p=2163751&postcount=17) and others in that thread for some genuine attempts to look at the AI stat bonuses.
Sir Beane
03-09-2009, 19:45
But you will probably have to.
Because getting a campaign to 1799 will be an extremely hard thing to do what with all the bugs that will mess up the experience for you or result in repeatable CTDs which mean another 1700 restart.
You haven't played a campaign yet, so your opinion is presumably based solely on battles or RtI. And I can agree with you that the battle engine seems pretty good. Not without its own bugs but I can live with the ones I've come across so far until they get patched. I have had a lot of fun in battles.
But the grand campaign is in a really bad state as released. I still have hopes, since I think the campaign game has been well designed and could be a big improvement on previous TW titles. But as it currently stands, it stinks in terms of actually working well enough to provide a satisfactory game.
I've managed to get a campaign to 1799, no bugs at all and no CTD's. My second campaign is at 1730 and I have had no problems.
The grand campaign isn't unstable at all. I have never once had to restart because of a bug. The only bugs I have seen are mild and slightly annoying.
I do sometimes wonder if I am playing the same game as the people who have had problems...
Quickening
03-09-2009, 20:01
I've been playing strategy games since the original Warcraft back in 1994. It's my genre of choice. Now when Empire was announced I was cynical because I was one of those openly :daisy: about the state of Med 2 on release (and indeed for months after) on this very forum. I knew Empire would get rave reviews even when it was announced. It was never in doubt. What was in doubt was whether it was really going to be any good or not. In my opinion, it's simply the greatest strategy game ever made. It's probably not my favourite strategy game ever made but honestly, the Total War games revolutionised the strategy genre and Empire is truly the pinnacle of the series in my opinion. I can't even think about going back to the prequels now and I love those games. Empire just made them obselete and made most other strategy games look foolish by comparision. Look at the generally glowing reception it has received on this forum and cast your minds back to the storm that raged for months over Med 2. The point is that the people of this forum whether history buffs, modders or just people who love Total War are more discerning than your average Joe and if they're impressed, something is being done right. Yeah this ones a true winner in my eyes. I'm so thankful that I'm weak willed and did buy Empire after I'd sworn not to because of the terrible support CA gave Med 2.
Is it perfect? No chance. But it's an amazing game which has only been out for a number of days. Think what it'll be like in a few months. It'll be a long, long time before there is another gem like this released so I'd enjoy it. I always think it must be harder for the historians and modders to enjoy these games because they're prone to notice inaccuracies and I'm sure there are many but as a game, it's superb.
I have to agree with Quickening, ETW is the best strategy game I have played. Sure there are some shortcomings and it isn't perfect, but no game is perfect and even with its shortcomings that some people have mentioned it is still the best strategy game relative to its competition.
ChaosLord
03-09-2009, 20:12
I broke down and bought the Special Forces edition, despite intending to wait. So far i've been happy with it, I can't simply rush through the battles unless its vastly lopsided which is a refreshing change. My main gripe right now is I wish the minor factions were playable, its so much more fun to build up the underdog than it is to use the established empires. I guess i'll stick to trying to colonize Europe with the Marathi for now.
Yes, I agree here. But...I hope (and expect :whip:) that the many bugs are addressed as the game could be much better! :2thumbsup:
I would add that most of the bugs are with the Campaign mode - but CA should really fix the pathing on the battle maps. We all know that siege pathing is horrible but so is the Cav. pathing when hunting down routing units through a settlment. Until that is fixed I hit the end battle button as soon as it comes up as it is a waste of time not to.
Pathing seems to be at its worst on larger unit settings oddly enough, it's definitely something that needs to be looked at. I miss my line infantry having 120 men! :shame:
CA's graphical and crash fix patch is set to be released sometime this week, I've said it before. Since they've pledged to release regular updates there's no reason why any of the bugs found by the community shouldn't be fixed sooner rather than later.
Sir Beane
03-09-2009, 20:18
Pathing seems to be at its worst on larger unit settings oddly enough, it's definitely something that needs to be looked at. I miss my line infantry having 120 men! :shame:
CA's graphical and crash fix patch is set to be released sometime this week, I've said it before. Since they've pledged to release regular updates there's no reason why any of the bugs found by the community shouldn't be fixed sooner rather than later.
It's amazing that we are able to say that about a TW game with confidence. The fans of the series have never had it so good, with post release support, automatic patches and promised downloadable content. :2thumbsup:
CA really do seem to have pulled out all the stops this time around.
For all my talking I've actually never played a campaign passed 1740. I've been far too busy taking notes and mercilessly replaying factions, trying to discover the common trends of the AI... :book:
Barkhorn1x
03-09-2009, 21:12
For all my talking I've actually never played a campaign passed 1740.
I've only played Prussia up to 1717 - I keep starting over as I learn new things. And there is much to learn. :2thumbsup:
I've managed to get a campaign to 1799, no bugs at all and no CTD's. My second campaign is at 1730 and I have had no problems.
The grand campaign isn't unstable at all. I have never once had to restart because of a bug. The only bugs I have seen are mild and slightly annoying.
I do sometimes wonder if I am playing the same game as the people who have had problems...
indeed, i cant help but wonder if these people are playin a different game, or if they tried to fix the problems. usually crashes can be caused by anything from a bad install to old drivers but instead they blame the unstability of the GC. ive played halfway through mine never crashed or had any bugs. both my housemates have played a GC's to pretty much the same spot no issues.
oh and my fire by rank is not bugged at all, the only "bug" with fire by rank is that they take longer to reload than it takes for the other 2 ranks to shoot. and im not too fussed that fire by rank doesnt work behind fortifications its not game breaking. almost got platoon firing neway *drooooool*
Well Dayve, I guess you're inaccruate with your statement.
The AI does not get stat bonuses on VH but access to more tactics and strategy options.
I'll say it again to everyone.
Don't hammer the AI unless you play on VH/VH. That's like a Polar Bar complaining it's hot in Australia around February each year.
Jeez, your as bad as people who complain that their favourite game "only" got reviewed 9/10 (unrelated pet peeve. Well kinda related, in that in both cases the top of the scale is seen to be average) To have a challenge one shouldn't have to play on very hard, that should be a difficulty that makes you pull your hair out trying to win - like Civilization's hardest mode (Deity? I think its something like it).
Normal should provide enough challenge to keep things interesting, why is it these days people think normal is a translation for "roll your face on the keyboard and you should get a heroic victory"? I shouldn't be able to take out 2 stacks with 1 stack with still a large army left behind on normal.
Oh, and in other news...it's an AI. If you want a challenge, for god sakes play against a (competent) human.
Sir Beane
03-09-2009, 23:28
Jeez, your as bad as people who complain that their favourite game "only" got reviewed 9/10 (unrelated pet peeve. Well kinda related, in that in both cases the top of the scale is seen to be average) To have a challenge one shouldn't have to play on very hard, that should be a difficulty that makes you pull your hair out trying to win - like Civilization's hardest mode (Deity? I think its something like it).
Normal should provide enough challenge to keep things interesting, why is it these days people think normal is a translation for "roll your face on the keyboard and you should get a heroic victory"? I shouldn't be able to take out 2 stacks with 1 stack with still a large army left behind on normal.
Oh, and in other news...it's an AI. If you want a challenge, for god sakes play against a (competent) human.
Normal is actually quite challenging for many people. I know a few Empire gamers who aren't really strategy gamers and they find the game quite difficult.
Most of the people on the Org are significantly more skilled than the majority of gamers when it comes to TW. It's no suprise that normal doesn't challenge us. :laugh4:
Just wait for the 1 vs. 1 campaign. All the challenge you could ever need :2thumbsup:.
Swoosh So
03-10-2009, 09:35
IF you want a real challenge in battle fire up multiplayer, when i get the game ill give you a nice beating :)
This is why multiplayer campaigns will be so good, the totalwar series always had a nice singleplayer campaign marred by terrible ai and i dont expect this to be any different, mods will be better than the vanilla campaign as usual but wont be anything close to a real mp campaign.
Gaiseric
03-10-2009, 16:53
As soon as my 24-hour honeymoon period was over it became obvious to me that the AI is no more intelligent than in Rome or Medieval. It's different, of course it is, but it's just as dumb. Units simply do not behave as they should.
I agree with you. I thought that this game was awesome the first few days after release. It does have alot of cool new features, but the more I play, the more I notice that this game is very buggy. It seems ETW production was very rushed. The game was shipped with an inadequete, flimsy manual. The naval AI is broken, and there are many annoying campaign and battlefield glitches and bugs that are driving me nuts. Sure the graphics are great, but ETW should not have been released in its beta-like condition. I expected more from CA and I expect more from a game that I payed $50 for. I hope with time and a few patches and mods that this game will be salvageable.
vBulletin® v3.7.1, Copyright ©2000-2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.