Imperial Glory Demo is Out

[phred]

According to this item at the Wargamer

http://www.wargamer.com/news/news.asp?nid=1869

[Pausanias828]

Thanks for letting us know, I am downloading it now. ~:cheers:

[Nelson]

Thank for the "Heads up", phred. I'm now at 20%.

[Jacque Schtrapp]

Not overly impressed. Camera movement is too restrictive, unable to redraw individual unit formation, H2H combat devolves into these tight little scrums where it is impossible to tell what is going on, artillery range is very limited, and a CTD halfway through the Cyrenacia battle. Nice graphics though, perhaps the finished product will be more polished. I wonder if the diplomacy model actually works.

[Spino]

Just installed and played through the demo. It lasted all of 20-25 minutes on my hard drive. After enduring the lightning fast, mindless combat of the two battles featured in the demo I feel confident enough to say that Imperial Glory truly is...

PURE UNFILTERED RTS CRAP!

And that's all I have to say on the matter...

[PanzerJaeger]

Well i thought it was good, not perfect, and had alot of potential..

[PanzerJaeger]

The naval battles especially..

[Nelson]

Honestly, Spino, what do you really think? :grin:

Here's the good, the bad and the ugly as I see it.

The Good.

It looks nice. The animation is good. Volley firing is very well done. Terrain is decent.

Troops can enter buildings and fight from windows, doorways and rooftops.

Artillery is limbered or not. Cav has column and line. Infantry adds the square. Movement from one formation to the next was smooth and realistic looking.

The demo installed and played without hassle or failure.

Can’t speak to the strategy portion. As with CA, you don’t get playable strategy in a demo. Instead you get a strategy slide show. Neither can you play a naval battle. A naval movie is provided.

The Bad

Unit values are very artificial so that each type is unique. Here are the combat values for the British cavalry, melee followed by fire: Lancers 35,0 Hussars 65,0 Household Cavalry 15,45! So, no Union Brigade corp smashing charges in this game, not with the Brit heavies, anyway. Infantry is similarly hosed up. Line is 6,12 Light is 2,25 and Rifle is 5,38. Ordinary line troops melee three times better than light infantry? I don’t think so. The lights were superior by and large. The developer has chosen to ignore the fact that although an endless variety of names were used for troops, they were all, within their branch of course, far more similar than different. What really separated the men from the boys was morale, which brings us to…

The Ugly

If there is morale Imperial Glory, I couldn’t see it. I played both battles twice and each time the units fought to the last man like little robots. Not one unit ever broke and ran. Believe me, I tried to get my guys to run but the best I could do was kill them all.

Update. Some morale is present after all. I did just witness one of my light infantry units turn about and march off to a safer distance. I could not override it. When it got where it wanted to be I regained control. Cavalry will also retreat from a square. I have yet to see any unit flee a melee and have seen many units get shot to down to a man. Still, things are not so bad as I originally thought.

I thought we could maybe change the combat values. I don’t think fatigue is in either, which I could forgive. But no morale? That is sad.

[PanzerJaeger]

Yea i charged some cav into a box and they fled.. also my inf fled when they got shot to peices. I dont think any units can leave the melee unless all of one team are dead though.

[econ21]

Thanks for the heads-up, Nelson. You've saved me some money and some heartache.

Are you sure about those combat stats? Hussars have 65 melee strength compared to 15 for household cav? Household cav have 45 fire strength compared to 38 for rifles? It's just bizarre. One nice thing about the TW series is that although we can grumble about details, the unit stats and hence match ups by and large "feel" right.

The only upside to this is that it should not rule out CA doing a Napoleon: Total War!

[Templar Knight]

It looks and plays alright, not what I was hoping for, heres to Cossacks 2

[Spino]

What? Nobody mentioned the 'ultra kill' artillery barrages? Hell, even artillery units in Starcraft and WH40K Dawn of War don't kill this quickly!

If people thought the combat was too quick in RTW they'll be pulling their teeth out with Imperial Glory.

[Sethik]

I'm going to give it a chance. I remember everyone having heart attacks over the RTW demo when it first came out. Hopefully the game will be moddable because the diplomacy, research, and economic model of the game looks good. Wouldn't want it to be hampered down by a crappy battle sim.

[Murmandamus]

Can you not rotate the camera? Feels claustrophobic.

It says you can arrange the troops before you start the battle but all I can do is change the unit formation.

Want a few units in a line? In TW games you select them then click and drag. Here you seem to have to move them all individually and I couldn't find a hotkey to show where units will be so it was all very hit and miss.

After much fiddling about I have a nice defensive formation, but when the enemy gets near, they all walk off to where they feel like shooting. Often leading to them getting surrounded and walking so far out that my canon can't defend them from the enemy canon.

The units will flee from a melee battle but they don't run off the field. They just retreat a bit and you can send them in again.

Apart from that. Good unit graphics, nice atmosphear from the unit leaders shouting commands etc and makes me crave an Imperial/Napoleonic Total War. With an improved interface it would be great.

[CBR]

You can use the left/right arrow keys to rotate. You change position in deployment by selecting a unit and then drag it to where you want.


The graphics was nice as it had a nice green color on the grass and easy to spot the units...not like some other game :dizzy2:

But gameplay is very fast and overall it felt too arcade for me. I guess it has potiential but it would need a lot of changes to make me wanna play it.


CBR

[SwordsMaster]

IT does fel arcade. You cant issue orders during PAUSE! With the killing speed of this game, that is the least they could provide. You cant select multiple units other than dragging a square around them, there is no "defensive" formation. Ranged cavalry units are useless unless some "skirmish mode" is included, and overall control felt as if you tried to write a sentence holding your pen with a boxing glove....

IMO it COULD be good, but needs a LOT of tweaking.

[Nelson]

IMO it COULD be good, but needs a LOT of tweaking.

Bingo. This is a demo after all. It likely has some rough edges.

The combat values do indicate that realism is not a high priority. As a Napoleonic looking semi-arcade battle/strategy game it might be fun.




Are you sure about those combat stats? Hussars have 65 melee strength compared to 15 for household cav? Household cav have 45 fire strength compared to 38 for rifles? It's just bizarre. One nice thing about the TW series is that although we can grumble about details, the unit stats and hence match ups by and large "feel" right.



These are the values the game reports when you mouse over the units. I’ve seen this sort of thing in other designs. When every strength must have a corresponding weakness then units get wacky and unreal. It’s the RPS paradigm run amuck.

[doc_bean]

I just played it, I still need some getting use to the interface ~:)

Not being able to pause or drag your units feel like a major downfall,

the battles seem to follow a similar pattern: use your cav to take out enemy cannons before they do it to you, I can see this getting pretty repetitive.

Still, the strategic portion looks good, I might give it a try, if it gets some good reviews.

[SwordsMaster]

You can pause with the SPACE key


These are the values the game reports when you mouse over the units. I’ve seen this sort of thing in other designs. When every strength must have a corresponding weakness then units get wacky and unreal. It’s the RPS paradigm run amuck.

Exactly.

What I´ve discovered I do like, after playing the demo another couple of times, is that units can cross the water not necessarily using a bridge, or the occupation of buildings. (In fact, to with the second batle, there is nothing more to it other than occupying the buildings with the light infantry and forming squares with the rest...)

Anyway, the other bit are objectives. In any TW game the objective is destroy or rout the enemy army while here, it seems like we are going to be getting objectives to accomplish in each battle which is good and will (hopefully) add some diversity.

[cunobelinus]

looks fun an d great graphics would better if made by total war

[doc_bean]

I've played some more with it, and am now convinced the AI in RTW is great compared to that of IG.
I was playing the second battle, I had 2 light infantry occupying the houses and put the rest of my army on the hill, infantry in squares just before the cannons. The AI tried to attack the buildings with horses ~:eek: of course the unit got shot to pieces, it then tried to take them with several other units, they did manage to kill everyone in one house, but I was in time to send another unit in, so they gained nothing but lost a whole lot. The main force didn't move but rearranged a lot, eventually i got tired of waiting and sent my three units of cav towards their cannons (just to see if they could make it. The AI withdrew it's cannons into it's infantry line ~:eek: After my cav got murdered, partly because they retreaded within cannon range and got blown up, instead of following my orders to retreat back to the main force. The AI decided to send in everything it got, I won of course, but I noticed several of my units didn't follow my orders, they just stood there while behind there backs another unit was getting slaughtered, and they didn't respond when i sent them in :furious3:

This game needs some serious work, it's buggier than RTW before the patch.

I also went by there official message board, we're being VERY nice to the game here compared to them, I'm surprised Eidos keeps all those posts, maybe they've given up on the game already :oops:

[ShadesWolf]

I quite liked it, I was impressed by the graphics and the ability to go into buildings.

I feel the AI seemed quite intellegent and being able to have an objective of a battle is far more realistic than just kill everybody.

I hope the diplomatic side of the game is more live paradox than CA's

[SwordsMaster]

I thought this might interest you:


De tener que compararlo con otro título ya existente, un referente a tener en cuenta sería Rome: Total War, aunque la principal diferencia que existe entre ambos es que el juego de Creative Assembly está muy orientado a las batallas en sí, cuyo nivel de detalle es impresionante, mientras que el juego de Pyro opta por dar más importancia a la gestión de nuestro imperio.

...From a review on a spanish page which loosely translated means:

"If we had to compare this game to other that has already been released, the closest reference would be Rome:Total War. The main difference between the two games is that the game by Creative Assembly is very battle-oriented and achieves an amazing level of detail in this aspect, while Pyro chose to focus on the managing of our empire."

[Marshal Murat]

Holy Mary, this game sucks
I can't wait for NTW.
Then I can jockey for a ford.
The Risk strategy map is one of the things that I loved to miss, yet here it is again!
The whole historical accuracy thing, your appealing to newbies at history! This game is cleary arcady, and meant for a younger audience (of which I am one, and unimpressed)
This is a vague attempt to sweeten up a relativley flapjack game, and the "Real history buffs will be thrilled by the historically accurate units and weaponry" is a bunch of bull manure. How often would you find a Black Watch in Hanover or Cyrencia, and the limited amount of units puts the era to shame (consripts, riflemen in red, line infantry, Black Watch, then a few assorted cavalry, ever heard of the KGL? Ever?)
I can't wait for a honest person from Gamespy to give his spin.

[Longasc]

Amen. Another promising game ran down the ... :dizzy2:

Rumor is they improved the strategic part, but I really cannot get it that both EA and a contender still did or do not get it what was nicer about MTW and in what areas RTW was weaker than MTW and in which it was better...

Are younger players really the retards the gaming industry wants us make to believe... :furious3:

[Husar]

Nobody noticed that there is not even friendly fire? The AI fires into melees with cannons and rifles!
From playing the demo I wouldn´t spend one cent for this...