Check this out: Imperial Glory - a RTS game about Napaleonic era

[Grand Duke Vytautas]

Hey everybody, check this out http://www.imperialglory.com/ What a game this is gonna be: turned based strategy, like in MTW and RTW, with 3D land battles and even naval combats, but in what times: the beginning of the 19th century - yeah baby ~D , can't wait for this game!!!

[screwtype]

Did you look at the trailer? The graphics look really spectacular. How do they get 3D units to look that detailed?

But while the whole thing sounds promising, I'll wait until I know a lot more about the game. I've grown suspicious of companies that offer spectacular graphics - if they've spent that much time on visuals, how much was left over for working on the gameplay?

There are far too many companies these days offering great graphics and little else. In fact the industry seems to have become obsessed with how a game looks almost to the exclusion of anything else.

[Mikeus Caesar]

In fact the industry seems to have become obsessed with how a game looks almost to the exclusion of anything else.

A certain Total War game is a good example of that...

[Epistolary Richard]

As this thread isn't about a Total War game it should probably have been posted on The Arena.

:bobby:

[Zalmoxis]

I think this is the game I saw on the RTW forums, but you can never be sure. Anyway, if you look at War on Land for Great Britain in their site, you'll see the desert battlefield... Looks just like RTW there, (but with guns). Clones are usually not good, but at least now CA won't make a Napoleonic Era TW.

[Kaiser of Arabia]

I hope it's Moddable!
If so, expect a Capo's Glory (French Revolution to 1815 ubergood campaign with skins)

[Efrem]

its 20 people per unit....

thats just plain rediculous.

[Sethik]

Is that the max or can you increase unit size? Normal unit size in RTW is not much better.

[Pausanias828]

I hope it's Moddable!
If so, expect a Capo's Glory (French Revolution to 1815 ubergood campaign with skins)


I checked out the FAQ's the other day and it doesn't look like it. Here is the quote from them that I posted over at the .com "Many times has been asked why they don’t release an editor for their games, then their answer was that their games are too complex for modding because every mission is unique and one of it’s own. The real reason has been said only once: “to avoid the crappy scenarios that so often appear on the Internet.”
Here is a link to the thread over at the .com http://p223.ezboard.com/fshoguntotalwarfrm3.showMessage?topicID=6232.topic

[Kaiser of Arabia]

its 20 people per unit....

thats just plain rediculous.
Thats probably a base setting, it is probably, howdoyousay, increasable through options.

[Pausanias828]

In their FAQ's they say they are looking at around 2,000 troops to be on screen at any one time. Although it doesn't seem to say if that is just between two factions, or if it is what you would have if all factions were involved in the same battle. If it is what you could have with all five factions involved, then 20 men to a unit wouldn't be far out by the looks of it.

[Kekvit Irae]

The question I ask is...
Is it RTS as in Real Time Strategy (as in MTW), or RTS as in Resource Transit System (as in Warcraft, C&C, and other piece-of-shittake games)?

Granted, I liked C&C: Red Alert 2, Total Annihilation: Kingdoms, and C&C: Generals, but it seems like those genre of games are designed for are 13-year old boys with ADHD. It gives a bad name to RTS.

The world needs more games like MTW. A lot more. :hairpin1:

[Efrem]

Thats probably a base setting, it is probably, howdoyousay, increasable through options.


Why in gods name wouldn't you use the maximum possable number of men for your screenies???


Remember they were boasting of over 10,000 men with Rome.

[lars573]

The last RTS game that the developer of Imperial glory made was praetorians. As you can tell by the title it was set in the Roman era. Also it wasn't that great. It had 3 sides, Roman, Barbarians (think every barbarian faction in RTW rolled into 1), and Egypt. The largest unit was the Roman infantry cohorts and they were 30 men each. It was more of a traditional RTS game you needed to build a base and crank out units. Wrinkle was is that each "base" was a villiage you captured and built your cultures town on top of the villiage. The towns only had a certain population as well. IIRC about 500-1000. I've got the Praetorians unit tree some where I'll dig it out. I'm pretty sure that the unit sizes were carved in stone.

[Kaiser of Arabia]

heh i think they are just gonna let you have a good amount of units per battle.
My estimate is around 30.
and its 40 men units not 20.

[Efrem]

Well, my getting this depends on user reveiws on the sea battles.

[Alien of Germania]

Check this out guys...
http://www.imperialglory.com/

Lots of Total War elements and interface
also playable naval battles...
down side in my opinion, is few units to choose, apparently.
what do you think?

[Marshal Murat]

I can't believe the Riflemen are in red! The unhistoric B*sta*rds!

[Reverend Joe]

They only have 3 kinds of ship- Napoleonic Total War has 6. How good can it really be?

[Kaiser of Arabia]

Whoever finds out a way to mod this first if it is unmoddable gets a cookie.

[lars573]

Wait till April 28 and find out for youself.

[Byzantine Prince]

This game is gonna suck. Period. You can't have a Napoleonic era RTS game with a max of 2,000 units. That's like 1/4 of the smallest army in one of the smallest battle in the napoleonic era. Plus 20 people per unit is a lot more risable.

[Shahed]

I played this straight from 19:30 through 04:00 last night at a game cafe. EXCELLENT game with depth.

[Samurai Waki]

admittedly, while I disliked the cheesy battle mechanics of the game, it did give a diplomacy model that MTWII should shoot for. In fact, I liked the diplomacy better in IG than in Civ 4.

[econ21]

There are a couple of other old threads on this game here.

https://forums.totalwar.org/vb/showthread.php?t=49471

https://forums.totalwar.org/vb/showthread.php?t=47755

Napoleonics is my personal favorite period of military history and the game certainly looks pretty. But from what I read this game just goes too far in deviating from what I know of the combat in the era. For example, someone posted that hussars have 65 melee strength compared to 15 for household cav and household cav have 45 fire strength compared to 38 for rifles. In MTW terms, that would be like making steppe cavalry beat chivalric knights and chivalric knights outshoot arbalesters. The mind boggles.

I've also heard the combat is fast (is there a pause) and there's no morale.

[Androo]

Bought it when it came out. Sucked. It needed a patch, bad. So they release a patch after several months. Patch sucked. I tossed it onto my shelf, and it has been collecting dust since.O yeah, definitely. Never even tried the strategic game or the patch. The tactical game:

1) No morale. In a Napoleonic era game. Units fight to the death, always. So battles last until one side has been completely obliterated.

2) Unit movement is fast, particularly infantry. Infantry regiments can form square in seconds. This happened in one of my battles: an enemy infantry unit marched to about 50 yards of a stationary unit of my cavalry, formed line and opened fire. I ordered my cavalry to charge, but well before it reached the infantry they had formed square and easily repulsed my cav. It is impossible for cavalry to charge infantry.

3) Artillery unlimbers and commences fire in about ten seconds, opening up the possibilty for a kind of blitzkrieg tactic about 150 years before it was historically possible.

4) Unit stats are identical for the units of all nations and there are very few different unit types. So French dragoons=English dragoons=Russian dragoons. The only thing that changes are the uniform colours. Boring.

5) There are only three different types of naval vessels (going by memory) and again they are identical. Again, boring.

6) Vessels have the approximate capability for acceleration and maneouverablity of a WWII destroyer, or so it seemed to me.

7)Naval battles could have looked good at least, except that the beautifully rendered water is masked by firing arc indicators etc, which cannot be toggled off. A shame.

The game was a horrible, horrible disappointment to me.

Roll on Histwar and Napoleonic Total War for RTW!

[Divinus Arma]

Why did this get dragged out from its grave? Kill it! Kill it!

Bought this game the day it came it out. It is a total RTW wannabe. RTW could take a lesson from IGs diplomacy model, but overall IG is a complete RTW ripoff.

The hand to hand combat is a joke. The game engine just mixes all of the soldiers into a general blob. No actual soldier to soldier interaction. Just blah.

Control is a nightmare. Forget about the esy set up in RTW. No formation depth decisions, just line, square or column.

I love the idea. Love the time line. This game was a failure and was removed within a week or so. No challenge, no depth, no variety. All battlefields are the same in each country.

If you find it in the bargain bin, go ahead and entertain your curiousity with a few bucks. Worth a movie ticket price. That's about it.